| Submit your comments on this article | |
| China-Japan-Koreas | |
| Japan to build fleet's biggest "helicopter destroyer" | |
| 2009-11-27 | |
| The nation's Maritime Self-Defence Force is reportedly planning to construct a new 284 metre long destroyer capable of transporting 14 helicopters, 4,000 people and 50 trucks. ..as well as transform itself into a giant robot The purchase is part of a wider military build up in which the Defence Ministry has sought funds to purchase around 40 F-35 fighter jets which will become the future mainstay of the nation's air force, according to Kyodo News. The new destroyer, which will become the largest in the nation's fleet of 52 vessels in the class, will also provide fuel to other carriers, transport servicemen and assist with emergencies and international peace keeping missiles. "Helicopters are needed to seek out and keep an eye on submarines as well as to patrol surface ships from as far away as possible outside the range of enemy missiles," a defence ministry official told the Asahi Shimbun. "For those reasons, a large destroyer that can carry many helicopters is necessary." Its primary function will be to patrol seas contested by China. Japan's neighbour has strengthened its naval capabilities and advanced destroyers armed with cruise missiles have been spotted near gas fields in the East China Sea. Japan's defence expansion is also believed to be fuelled in part by growing tensions with North Korea over its nuclear weapons and refusal to rejoin multi-party disarmament talks.
| |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #17 The Japanese saw how useful US carriers were in typhoon cleanup and sure would love to have a peace of that good PR for their Navy. Also historically destroyers and destroyer escorts were anti-sub (frigates in the US are anti-air). Anti-sub appears robe the primary mission. If you aren't gonna call it a helicopter carrier you might as well go with destroyer. |
| Posted by: Rjschwarz 2009-11-27 23:13 |
| #16 Yee hawwww!! I actual got feedback from the Joebot! Once in 8 years! |
| Posted by: Frank G 2009-11-27 22:25 |
| #15 PAKISTANI DEFENCE FORUM > TEN REASONS NOT TO FEAR CHINA'S [future]SIX AIRCRAFT CARRIERS. * OTOH WMF > seems CHINA = PLAN, + CPC's CMC etc., still are intent on having at least FOUR CV's by 2020 [2 conventional, 2 nukulaar exclud improv ex-Russ VARYAG which wil be used by PLAN as a training CVT]. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2009-11-27 22:09 |
| #14 Nippon becoming more assertive? ...Excellent! |
| Posted by: Asymmetrical Triangulation 2009-11-27 21:19 |
| #13 Speaking of #11's "RETAKE THE KURILS", WMF > RUSSIAN COMMUNIST PARTY [RCP Vice-Chair Victor Illyushin]:CLAIMS OF SOVEREIGNTY BY JAPAN OVER KURILES IS A "DECLARATION OF WAR" AGZ THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION [Russia]. Response to MSM-NET Repors that TOKYO = JAPAN'S GOVT. intends to adopt legislation formally reasserting Nippon sovereignty oer Kuriles taken by the USSR = Stalin at the end of WW2. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2009-11-27 19:12 |
| #12 ..the Japanese are dependent upon foreign trade and imported oil. You need to protect those shipping lanes. If you perceive the big guy isn't going to be around to carry the load for free much longer, you'd better be prepared to do it yourself or in concert with others who will. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-11-27 17:46 |
| #11 "Retake the Kurils!" |
| Posted by: Frank G 2009-11-27 16:55 |
| #10 I think in the end it's a heavy amphibious assault ship -- it can bring an army/marine expeditionary unit to a given location with its equipment, transport it all to shore, and then provide at least some air support. Now why the Japanese think they need to carry expeditionary units around is something I don't quite get -- they don't have any claims to the small oil-bearing islands in the South China sea, and it would be easier to air-lift an expeditionary unit to South Korea if the need ever arose. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2009-11-27 16:46 |
| #9 Or they might be going all inscrutable again. |
| Posted by: Perry Stanford White 2009-11-27 15:23 |
| #8 Yes. |
| Posted by: lotp 2009-11-27 14:39 |
| #7 Akagi or Koga would be more Japanese, ZF. I don't know, they don't seem to get too many birds off of these modern flattops. You could fit a hundred prop planes on something the size of these new "helicopter destroyers" back in the era of Midway. As for transporting trucks... sounds more like an expeditionary platform than a true carrier. Now that I look closer at it, this thing is supposed to play ASW nursemaid, CAP mommy, serve as a tanker, equipment freighter, and carry the better part of an expeditionary brigade. Presumably not all at the same time. Is this a warship or a design platform for an entire series of warship classes? |
| Posted by: Mitch H. 2009-11-27 13:50 |
| #6 Another reason to respect the Japanese. That opening line in the article could be rewritten as: The nation's Maritime "Self-Defense" Force is reportedly planning to construct a new 284 metre long "destroyer" capable of "transporting" 14 helicopters, 4,000 "people" and 50 "trucks." |
| Posted by: Free Radical 2009-11-27 12:03 |
| #5 I hope they give this destroyer a name with a pedigree. Something like Hiryu, for instance. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2009-11-27 08:22 |
| #4 Interesting reclassification. They've creatively made battlecarriers conversions before. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-11-27 07:44 |
| #3 Meh, it's not a destroyer... it's a humm.... let's see.... thru-deck cruiser yeah, that's it. |
| Posted by: Perry Stanford White 2009-11-27 06:16 |
| #2 |
| Posted by: gromky 2009-11-27 01:47 |
| #1 Could it be that the nation's in that region don't trust the US under Obama to come to the rescue or support them over China (our banker)? |
| Posted by: tipover 2009-11-27 00:51 |