Japan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

adeptitus said:

The Akizuki class is "under armed" in the same way that the Izumo class is "not an aircraft carrier". The first is a billion dollar AAW DDG serving the role of a Frigate, and the latter is a carrier serving the role of a helicopter flat-top. The Japanese are demonstrating the capability and potential of their domestic defense industry. Although the XRIM-4/AHRIM was cancelled, we should have no illusion that the Japanese are capable of building their own AAW Destroyers without importing Aegis systems from the US, just as they're capable of building larger aircraft carriers

Click to expand...

I think I understand what you'r saying, that the Japanese are very capable in their shipbuilding industry, and I've never thought otherwise either.

However the analogy between akizuki being underarmed and izumo not being an aircraft carrier is not quite fair.

For one, Izumo isn't an aircraft carrier, it's a very large LHA, with provision for VSTOL fighters. It can be compared quite favourably to other ships, like canberra, juan carlos or the cavour, in terms of displacement, armament/electronics, and carrying capacity.
However, Akizuki lacks 16 VLS that could have been used for 64 ESSM, 16 ASROC, or 16 SM-2s, below the 48 cell VLS of similar sized ships like bazan and hobart, etc, which I've already whipped to death. And there's no provision for akizuki to add more VLS as far as I know, so the fact is, in absolute terms, it is underarmed compared with its contemporaries.

But that's not to say armament is the only thing which is important, for instance, the extra space which akizuki has could go to other important things, that could vary from space for power generation or electronics or even crew comfort, which will also benefit overall warfighting capability or endurance.

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

If you absolutely had to add more VLS cells to the ship, it can be installed where the smaller hanger is in the aft. That would take away space for aviation stuff but the larger hanger can still accommodate ASW helo.

New Maneuver Combat Vehicle unveiled

Ministry of Defense had just announce their new Maneuver Combat Vehicle to the public.

[video=youtube;t7vJ5HotxDc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7vJ5HotxDc[/video]

Some interesting still shots .

It weighs only 26 tonnes, length of 8.45m, width of 2.98m can go over 100Km/h. They started development from 2008 with a total development cost of 17.9 billion yen.
MoD states they will go online in 2016.

Click to expand...

So they finally took the curtain of the MGS. A four man crew 8x8 wheeled chassis. Looks good.

Re: New Maneuver Combat Vehicle unveiled

SamuraiBlue said:

Ministry of Defense had just announce their new Maneuver Combat Vehicle to the public.

[video=youtube;t7vJ5HotxDc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7vJ5HotxDc[/video]

Some interesting still shots

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

Click to expand...

It's a very sound package, given how hard to deploy Type 90 and how expensive the Type 10 is, pairing with the extensive road network Japan has. While they said about island defense scenario, it won't be for a big chunk of a rock that's Diaoyu Islands.

True enough this could suck on the untamed terrain of the barren rocks of the senkaku but then again any armored vehicle would to. Better to just carpet bomb any would be invasion into the Jurassic (place already is stone age).

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

Bltizo said:

...
However, Akizuki lacks 16 VLS that could have been used for 64 ESSM, 16 ASROC, or 16 SM-2s, below the 48 cell VLS of similar sized ships like bazan and hobart, etc, which I've already whipped to death. ...

Click to expand...

I'll also repeat myself by pointing out that 25DD, "a continuation of 19DD", will have 16 VLS only (this was confirmed by SamuraiBlue using Japanese source(s): http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/wor...-military-news-thread-17-2436.html#post245971).

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

Jura said:

I'll also repeat myself by pointing out that 25DD, "a continuation of 19DD", will have 16 VLS only (this was confirmed by SamuraiBlue using Japanese source(s): http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/wor...-military-news-thread-17-2436.html#post245971).

Click to expand...

Yes, and that is a clear and calculated procurement by the Japanese MoD, and I expect them to be excellent vessels and fit for the role they want, which is as an ASW platform.


Let's just say, I would be extremely disappointed if a chinese new generation frigate of 5000 tons displacement and similar in every other regard to 26DD, only yielded 16 VLS, and I would be similarly disappointed if a chinese destroyer of 6800 tons only boasted 32 VLS.

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

Bltizo said:

Yes, and that is a clear and calculated procurement by the Japanese MoD, and I expect them to be excellent vessels and fit for the role they want, which is as an ASW platform.

Let's just say, I would be extremely disappointed if a chinese new generation frigate of 5000 tons displacement and similar in every other regard to 26DD, only yielded 16 VLS, and I would be similarly disappointed if a chinese destroyer of 6800 tons only boasted 32 VLS.

Click to expand...

Yes, but when I consider the roles of these vessels, the clear quad packing capabilities and performance of ESSM, then it is clear that they are going to more than well armed enough to fulfill those roles and missions. And there will be no need to be disappointed in them.


And that is the key...their effectiveness. If they meet and exceed the overall effectiveness to fulfill or ex ceed their mission parameters, then they are sound investments and designs.

Re: JMSDF Akizuki Class DDG (19DD AEGIS-like)

Jeff Head said:

Yes, but when I consider the roles of these vessels, the clear quad packing capabilities and performance of ESSM, then it is clear that they are going to more than well armed enough to fulfill those roles and missions. And there will be no need to be disappointed in them.


And that is the key...their effectiveness. If they meet and exceed the overall effectiveness to fulfill or ex ceed their mission parameters, then they are sound investments and designs.

Click to expand...

If a product can fulfill its missions required for it, then it is effective, agreed.

However, one must also consider the capability of similarly sized products to determine whether it is "competitive," a purely academic view.
That said, despite the relatively lighter armament of 19DD and the forthcoming 26DD, they probably also yield greater crew comforts, endurance, internal electronics, and other aspects which I've mentioned before, that will benefit its warfighting capability as well as its overall fulfillment of the requirements set before it.