Except they didn't.
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/japans-converted-izumo-class-carriers-will-not-feature-a-ski-jump-ramp-for-f-35b-operations
Pic is Kaga underway in September with its renovated deck.
>Well yeah, you got VTOL capable 5th gen stealth aircraft to operate from your small not-carriers...but you will have slightly less payload and shorter range!!!!
And the goalpost shifts on I see.
These morons underestimate the value of VTOL. When all your carriers are dead because of some attritional world war with losses halfway across the world, VTOL starts looking a hell lot more viable.
I'm actually shocked the chinks don't have some clone of the F-35B or even the AV-8B in the pipeline
You would think going from "4 carriers in 2030" to "12 carriers* in 2030" would be great for their egos, they'd practically be breathing down America's neck
3 months ago
Anonymous
VTOL tech is difficult enough that the Americans decided to buy British to bootstrap the F-35B rather than go it alone
3 months ago
Anonymous
Not to mention the material science and in-house knowledge needed for all the different alloys and components. Just a reminder, China still struggles with building relatively basic jet engines to modern standards. You can copy a design, but duplicating an entire multi-stage production process isn't that easy.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>buy British
wtf f-35s are british?
3 months ago
Anonymous
the British contributed significantly to developing the F-35B tech, a good part of which involves automating the landing and takeoff procedure - this is another subtle advantage the F-35 has over the Harrier, it is much easier to pilot
dont they have to change their constitution to even allow carriers to be built and operated? hence the chicanery with these current ones? I would probably be cheaper and easier to make more of these current classes? Or even just make amphibs like the America class, call it the Japan class.
>dont they have to change their constitution
not at all
they just have to change the way they've marketed the interpretation of its constitution
the Japanese Constitution technically forbids a standing military AT ALL
so Cope #1 is "the JSDF is actually a self-defence force, not a military per se"
also, the Constitution forbids an offensive war
so Cope #2 is the Japs have avoided certain weapons, characterising them as "offensive weapons". this includes amphibious assault forces, cruise missiles, and aircraft carriers. other weapons somehow are "not offensive"
China's rearmament however has pushed them to the point that they need these capabilities
which brings us to Cope #3: Japan is now getting amphibs, Tomahawks and these carriers, but they're "only to be used defensively"
it's all a load of pointlessly self-imposed bullshit to me, but that's the Japs for you
3 months ago
Anonymous
>but they're "only to be used defensively"
actually they have a further cope that is defense can now extend to mean attacking in-advance of an imminent attack on them or an ally.
So if china is posturing to frick up taiwan/korea/etc japan, under the new interpretation of "defense" can send a few dozen tomahawks to hit Chinese equipment and supply dumps that are being used to prepare for an attack against a Japanese ally (or japan itself).
3 months ago
Anonymous
You could even argue that existence of commie china is a threat not just to japan, but entire world, therefore sankō sakusen policy would fit in certain definitions of defense
3 months ago
Anonymous
I guess if you want to realistically defend all the Japanese islands you need a navy, now with China saber rattling they need an effective navy, and an effective navy is by definition offensive. I guess that will be their cope.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>this is another subtle advantage the F-35 has over the Harrier, it is much easier to pilot
The F-35 in general is noted to be extremely easy to pilot, and this is one of those 'soft' advantages that works immensely in its favor.
3 months ago
Anonymous
No, but the British did a lot of work in VTOL with the Harrier and the US decided to buy that and build upon it instead of having to start from scratch by themselves.
Argentina is getting uppity again, so it could be a flashpoint region for the UK again
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68329181
> Last month Argentina's President Javier Milei called for the islands in the South Atlantic Ocean to be handed over. >Lord Cameron reiterated the UK government's longstanding position the islands' sovereignty is non-negotiable while its residents wish it to be British.
Though President Milei has previously said war is "not a solution" so this could just be more political blustering than anything else.
The Argentinians have made demanding the falklands back a rite of passage for any senior politician just as the Greeks have for asking for the marbles back. It doesn't mean either of them are serious about it, it's a statement for domestic consumption more than it is an actual demand.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>the British did a lot of work in VTOL with the Harrier and the US decided to buy that and build upon it instead of having to start from scratch by themselves
Just like the brits do with submarine reactor and nuclear warhead designs from the US.
Being part of the Anglo club has its perks
3 months ago
Anonymous
Because both the F-35B and Harrier essentially run off the aviation version of dark magic. You need extremely high technical and mechanical expertise to make working VTOL fighters that don't sacrifice performance to the point of uselessness.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>would be great for their egos
Chinese don't care about that.
055 and 076 are their main focus rn
3 months ago
Anonymous
cause they recognize they're still 40-50+ years from being able to challenge US fixed-wing naval aviation.
No need to pour resources into STOVL/VTOL tech when it's a nice-to-have, not the main area of concern.
3 months ago
Anonymous
NTA but the J-15B is also about to enter service anyway. I don't think it would make sense to invest yet a few more billions just to get some notion of "parity" with the US.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Chinese military procurement is all about looking good on paper. If it doesn't have longer range, faster speeds, more payload, and can do the best stunts at an airshow then the CCP isn't interested. The problem is that VTOL and STOVL require trade offs. Less speed, less range, less payload. In exchange for less overall performance you get a massive increase in versatility.
3 months ago
Anonymous
they're going the other way by adding small catapults to their next class of LHD's
3 months ago
Anonymous
For UAVs, not for carrier-based fixed-wing fighters like the J-15/31s or the new XJ-600 (Chinese copy of the American E-2 Hawkeye)
3 months ago
Anonymous
hasn't been confirmed either way
3 months ago
Anonymous
Nah, you can't get all the gear required for arresting larger planes like the J-15/J-31 on a small LHD
so you're saying that the primary purpose of this naval vessel is to transport and launch military aircraft?
I wonder if there's some term for such a ship.
The Burgers have been encouraging the Nips since the Korean war to drop their pacifist constitution. They probably celebrated in Washington when the Nips built the Izumo.
They don't really need to circumvent anything, they just need to agree to a reinterpretation of the current way it is written, which they've done several times before already when it suited their needs.
And even then they can basically just ignore it for a while if they don't want to acknowledge it, if it became enough of a public issue it would then probably get reinterpreted and MAYBE reworded if needed.
Even looking in that photo you can immediately see some differences between the ships, e.g. the carrier behind the frontmost foreground one has an overall differently shaped hull and gun arrangement, whilst the foreground one has a very different tower and a whole bunch of little pulpitlike mounts for weapons the second does not appear to have. The background carrier also looks to be a good deal wider.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Weird I see about 6ish identical aircraft carriers
3 months ago
Anonymous
The machines behind the second carrier all appear to be combat ships, not carriers, you can see that they don't have flight decks and the very closest behind the second carrier has a notable real gun turret and central tower.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I'm surprised you can function in regular day to day life with that level of eyesight.
Sorry I am not a naval engineer graduate
3 months ago
Anonymous
I'm surprised you can function in regular day to day life with that level of eyesight.
3 months ago
Anonymous
An aircraft carrier has giant fricking 16" guns and a huge central superstructure?
>we really don't want to name ships after carriers that were sunk
They were all sunk, that's their main characteristic. But it makes me wonder, how did the japanese name their carriers and what are some possible carrier names that were never taken?
Your image is a bit misleading, since it's the Izumo-class of "helicopter destroyers" that are being converted to operate the F-35B, not the Hyūga-class in the picture.
No one actually believed it though. Everyone knew what the Nips were doing, they just don’t care because A) Japan is never going to be a threat to anyone, and B) it’s a mostly self-imposed restriction anyway, and C) even if they did care, it’s too much trouble to argue about.
Yeah. I should probably have said that the West supports rearmament, most of the irrelevant little countries (Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea) don’t care, and it would make China and North Korea shit themselves in rage.
Pretty sure all China's neighbours would prefer Japan be armed to the teeth. Even Korea. They might hate Japan, but they also know that Japan has no expansionist designs, while China does.
The only people they were trying to fool with the designation were pacifistic Japanese civilians. The US wants Japan to remilitarize, it’s been that way for decades now.
You have to consider that they aren't called destroyers (駆逐艦) in Japanese but escort ships (護衛艦).
Kind of like all USCG ships are named cutter.
Somebody decided to translate 護衛艦 as destroyer and it stuck at that.
Destroyers were originally escort ships meant to protect battleships from torpedo boats. "Destroyer" is just a short hand for "Torpedo boat destroyer".
That also makes it funny in languages where the original term is still in use. For example, in Italian, they're called "Cacciatorpedinere" (Torpedo boat hunters), so Air-Defense Destroyers become Anti-Air Torpedo Boat Hunters, implying the existence of aerial torpedo boats.
It doesn't need a full fuel load as it can be arial refuelled once in the air.
Give it a full weapon load, a few thousand pounds of fuel, and then fill it up when you're in the air.
Japan has one of the largest tanker fleets in the world
>Yet >just like when they were first built, the JMSDF said they wouldn't operate F-35 >yet
So you think they're gonna install a ramp on it in ~15 years? They already have the next decade planned out and it doesn't include a ramp, and by that time they'll probably be looking to build a replacement class and if they're REALLY doubling down on fixed-wing aviation they'll go for a medium-sized catapult carrier and stop hiding behind the "destroyer" moniker.
>what CAN it launch with?
two 1000lb weapons, two AMRAAMs, and enough fuel for a combat radius of 450nm
(edited)
It doesn't need a full fuel load as it can be arial refuelled once in the air.
Give it a full weapon load, a few thousand pounds of fuel, and then fill it up when you're in the air.
Japan has one of the largest tanker fleets in the world
[...]
So you think they're gonna install a ramp on it in ~15 years? They already have the next decade planned out and it doesn't include a ramp, and by that time they'll probably be looking to build a replacement class and if they're REALLY doubling down on fixed-wing aviation they'll go for a medium-sized catapult carrier and stop hiding behind the "destroyer" moniker.
>you think they're gonna install a ramp on it in ~15 years?
I think they're going to leave their options open, but yes, more likely they will build either two catapult carriers or two ramped carriers
dont they have to change their constitution to even allow carriers to be built and operated? hence the chicanery with these current ones? I would probably be cheaper and easier to make more of these current classes? Or even just make amphibs like the America class, call it the Japan class.
I mean they can very easily just ignore it or change the constitution, it's not like the US is going to step in to stop them, the US has been asking them to take a larger role in the security of the region for what 60 years now?
>the US has been asking them to take a larger role in the security of the region for what 60 years now?
Call it something harmless like a... mutual-prosperity semi circle?
>Under MacArthur, they lost every primary source available.
Yeah, and he forced all the porn to have mosaics.
Pull the other one, it has bells on.
The notion that a temporary foreign military administration can totally erase recent history when there are thousands of living primary sources in a country with a non-trivial language barrier doesn't even remotely pass the sniff test for anyone except the most motivated of reasoner
No, That is the thing. They DIDN'T have plenty to go on. Under MacArthur, they lost every primary source available.
They had to rediscover most of the information by cooperating with overseas historians. That's why it took them until the 1980s to get a good picture of what happened. They needed help from Chinese and Korean historians who actually had found evidence.
One of the biggest myths is that they continually deny what happened and refuse to teach it in schools. In reality, of dozens of history textbooks used in high schools, only two fairly unpopular ones give a beautified account of the war.
I never said they totally erased it. But when you take away the documentation and offer many immunity from prosecution so that they never get their day in court. All that remains are personal eyewitness testimony or physical evidence. The physical evidence was in mainland Asia, and the eyewitnesses on the Japanese side were either dead or unwilling to share what happened for obvious reasons.
Under your way of thinking, nothing can ever be hidden and it is all out in the open unless if every single last person and shred of evidence is erased from existence. And let's suppose a couple of guys say "yeah, our unit lined up a load of civilians and shot them." what do you do with that information? Almost no Soviets, Brits or Americans sat in the dock despite us knowing that some among them committed war crimes in Europe from personal accounts, because we all too often have no idea of the true scale and have often lacked information of who, where, and when it happened, and that's often without concerted cover-up attempts.
It's an absolute, ironclad fact that Doug ordered virtually all documentation to be confiscated after the war and actively covered it up. Some of the Allied Command were pretty mad about it but he didn't budge. He fricked up a critical chance to confront the Japanese public with the full scale of the crimes and missed a crucial chance for reshaping the existing society.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I believe you, but it's just not something that could happen without active Japanese collaboration. Great excuse, just like the porn mosaics, but at some point you're doing it because you want to, not because Doug made you do it.
>be America >allow Japan to sweep all their warcrimes under the rug >allow Japan to just memoryhole all the warcrimes the previous generation has committed >but not allow Japan to have a real armed forces despite rearming them to the teeth as early as the mid-late 50s
>>be America
Japan to sweep all their warcrimes under the rug
Japan to just memoryhole all the warcrimes the previous generation has committed
They didn't just "let Japan memory hole" that. They actively suppressed it. MacArthur held a few token trials and confiscated most the information related to Japanese war crimes.
Japanese historians didn't know about the war crimes until foreign historians started uncovering the evidence. >>but not allow Japan to have a real armed forces despite rearming them to the teeth as early as the mid-late 50s
"Allowing" is a red herring. Every current restriction is self-imposed.
They didn't. Imagine you're a professor in Japan trying to research Unit 731. Oh wait, you can't, because MacArthur had all the information confiscated and you wouldn't even know what Unit 731 is if you weren't there.
No, That is the thing. They DIDN'T have plenty to go on. Under MacArthur, they lost every primary source available.
They had to rediscover most of the information by cooperating with overseas historians. That's why it took them until the 1980s to get a good picture of what happened. They needed help from Chinese and Korean historians who actually had found evidence.
One of the biggest myths is that they continually deny what happened and refuse to teach it in schools. In reality, of dozens of history textbooks used in high schools, only two fairly unpopular ones give a beautified account of the war.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>every single jap warcrimer literally died or was hidden by Doug Mac so the historians had literally zero Japs to interview
>unit 731
More chinese lies just like nanking
You even said it here:
No, That is the thing. They DIDN'T have plenty to go on. Under MacArthur, they lost every primary source available.
They had to rediscover most of the information by cooperating with overseas historians. That's why it took them until the 1980s to get a good picture of what happened. They needed help from Chinese and Korean historians who actually had found evidence.
One of the biggest myths is that they continually deny what happened and refuse to teach it in schools. In reality, of dozens of history textbooks used in high schools, only two fairly unpopular ones give a beautified account of the war.
Japanese historians needed to get shilled by lying chinks and asiatics in order to "discover" evidence of the wrongdoings at unit 731, which was a simple medical and sanitation unit. Fricking wartime villager rumors wrought large.
>allow Japan to sweep all their warcrimes under the rug
There was a good reason for that. After the surrender of Japan in 1945; the US had to sell Japan as an ally to the US Public. With the nazis, it was actually a lot easier because all you had to do was shuffle the leadership around and say you did some denazification, especially since they didn't bomb pearl harbor and there actually was some sympathy for Germany during the war.
Japan didn't have such luxuries, and the US had to face selling a bunch of crazy frickers who did some inhumane shit to pretty much everyone they had in their possession (including US POWs) to the US population. Basically the only way to even hope for that to happen was to crack down and hide all the evidence of 731 and Nanking they could.
not like the koreans are doing any better with the schizo KVLS on their newer vessels, whats the point of slbm for second strike if they dont go big spicy boom?
>Japan is two faced and untrustworthy, no country believes that those things are helicopter """destroyers""".
Good thing they don't call the converted ones helicopter destroyers any longer.
You just made up a situation and got mad over it.
>Korean navy is honest, Japan navy are liars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Japan%E2%80%93South_Korea_radar_lock-on_dispute >ROKN makes contact with NK vessel (illegal) >In Japanese waters without flying their naval ensign (illegal) >ROKN claims they were responding to a distress call from the NK vessel >Japan sends a plane to investigate an unknown vessel making illegal contact with a sanctioned country >Hails the ROKN vessel on multiple distress channels with no reply >ROKN claims their radios weren't working except they heard the NK distress call >ROKN points FCR at the plane and irradiates it >ROKN claims it was just a multipurpose Search radar >Japan releases the wavelength and frequency of the radar irradiation and tells Korea to prove it wasn't their FCR >Korea claims that they can't release data to Japan because it would compromise their classified technology (The radar used wasn't even made by Korea) >Claims the plane was flying too low and it's Japans fault because ICAO regulations only apply to civil flights(doesn't constitute the act of war that is using an FCR) (Almost every nation uses ICAO standards in peace time including the US) >France and the UK have to coincidentally increase patrols in the Sea of Japan because "some nations" (South Korea) were violating maritime sanctions and acting hostile towards allied nations
>lost in Afghanistan
Well chinks have reduced hearts and minds due to generations of communism and low-scruples rat race competition, so the US will probably do fine enough. >losing in Ukraine
No other nearby power they risk empowering to parity by taking out China. Should be fine. >losing in the Middle East
China actually has buildings to bomb.
Oh no how could the Japanese do this! I hope they dont build an extended helicopter carrier with a longer runway, that would be bad. I also hope that my penis doesnt accidentally fall into a Japanese vegana
>Japan doesn’t only build but also designs its own naval vessels and has since the 1880s. Japan’s navy is easily the second-most powerful expeditionary force in the world…the entire Japanese fleet is blue-water capable.
>It is Japan, not China, that boasts the world’s second most capable navy. It is that navy that is second only to the United States in the number of aircraft carriers floated (Japan claims those carriers are only for helicopters but that is, if you’ll forgive the repeat, just some more PR bullshit).
>Japan…has four aircraft carrier battle groups that can make it that far. The point is less that the Japanese would use carriers for convoy duty, and more that the Japanese could scrub Chinese naval power out of existence from Hormuz to Malacca with a minimum of fuss.
Zeihan on the RN: >At each step the Queen Elizabeth carrier program had to re-justify itself and fight for funding anew. And now, with Brexit looming, they’re having to slim the rest of the naval force to keep their supercarrier program on track.
>Which means the Brits no longer have sufficient ships to protect their new supers once they are fully operational.
>The British Navy has atrophied so much for so long that it can no longer assemble two credible battlegroups and still defend Great Britain itself.
>For the Queen Elizabeths’ deployments, this is nothing short of a Charlie Foxtrot. The new British supercarriers dare not venture further away from shore than the reach of British air power, whether that air power be launched from the United Kingdom itself or from the territory of a trusted ally. Support ships can certainly be built up more quickly (and cheaply) than the supercarriers themselves, but ships don’t grow on trees. This will be the state of the British Navy for at least a decade. Probably two.
Zeihan has been predicting China is two weeks from collapse since 2005.
He’s the Alex Jones of geopolitical analysis. Bizarro fan base memoryholing the 95% of the time he’s hilariously wrong because they /wanttobelieve/.
He goes a little too far into the insane dick sucking, but just because he's insane doesn't mean we should ignore reality. The QE class has shit readiness and it's basically taking everything they have to keep 1 operating. While an Izumo isn't better than a QE on paper, the pure fact that the JMSDF can keep 4 flat tops on the water without much issue is just flat out better than a statistically better ship that has to sit in port 90% of the year. On top of that the JMSDF has 4 escort flotillas that follow 1 of the 4 flat tops they have in service. Each individual JMSDF flotilla has more destroyers than the entire RN escort fleet. The only thing the RN has over the JMSDF at this point is the massive RFA, but they are basically bleeding ships with over a dozen decommissioned in the last couple years and its only expected to get worse.
Going purely off of the ability to muster and deploy an escort fleet along with an amphibious force, I would say the JMSDF is better than the RN atm. Even if the RN could get both QE out of port and onto the water, they don't even have enough destroyers and frigates to create 2 escort flotillas, let alone keep an amphibious force safe from attack.
>Each individual JMSDF flotilla has more destroyers than the entire RN escort fleet
Bullshit >they don't even have enough destroyers and frigates to create 2 escort flotillas, let alone keep an amphibious force safe from attack.
Leaving one frigate at home, they can muster 3 destroyers and 4 or 5 frigates at any time
If anything, it's the JMSDF flattops that don't have any experience at all operating away from home waters, which will be critical when somebody forgets to bring something important, or when maintenance issues crop up that were previously unreported because a quick fix in port sorted it out. Already the nascent Jap marine force has revealed some splendid systemic frickups. No doubt they can be solved in due course, but right now the situation is nearly the exact opposite of Zeihan's moronic rambling
>Bullshit
Each JMSDF flotilla has 7 destroyers across 2 squadrons + the flattop. This means 28 destroyers across the 4 flotillas. Then there are the 5 escort squadrons at the district level with another 8 DDs and 6 DEs for assignment. The RN has 6 destroyers and 11 frigates. >Leaving one frigate at home, they can muster 3 destroyers and 4 or 5 frigates at any time
The JMSDF has the same capability except across 4 flotillas, not 2 and they can leave another 8 DDs and 6 DEs at home. There is also the Mine Warfare fleet with a bunch of multipurpose DDs and Frigates too. >If anything, it's the JMSDF flattops that don't have any experience at all operating away from home waters
They regularly do joint stuff with India in the Indian ocean, they go to RIMPAC and IFR. >when maintenance issues crop up that were previously unreported because a quick fix in port sorted it out
We are talking about the JMSDF and not the RN right? >Already the nascent Jap marine force has revealed some splendid systemic frickups
Such as? >the situation is nearly the exact opposite of Zeihan's moronic rambling
So the RN isn't having major staffing issues, decommissioning a bunch of ships, failing to have 2 escort flotillas active at the same time? I can agree on the JMSDF not being #2 in the world as that is stupid, but if the task was to meet half way for the 2 then I have more confidence in the JMSDF deploying a larger fleet of combat capable ships.
3 months ago
Anonymous
So what's the plan for the RN? Never operate independently from the USN?
3 months ago
Anonymous
Pretty much the RN has no REAL capability to sustain long term blue water operations without European or US assistance.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>the RN has no REAL capability to sustain long term blue water operations
source? it came to me in a dream
Please ignore the RFA and other RN logistics since they weren't in my e-girl animes.
3 months ago
Anonymous
In the context of Japan they have less oilers and replenishment (and they are half the size of British and American AORs) and no RO-RO ships like Britain has. Not to mention STUFT which I don't think Japan has their own version of.
Also I don't really understand using Japan operating in the Indian Ocean as a W for Japan while handwaving the UK operating in the South China Sea as not counting due to operating with partners (I'm sure the japanese ships that went to India did so with no US assistance)
>its true in my head
[...] >This means 28 destroyers across the 4 flotillas
so one flotilla has 7 escorts amirite
the RN has more than 7 escorts operational amirite
so like I said: BULL. SHIT. >They regularly do joint stuff with India in the Indian ocean, they go to RIMPAC and IFR.
and we don't know how smoothly those went, they don't have as close coverage as the RN receives, in English sources at least >hurr durr muh QE
QE and POW have completed long missions without major breakdowns
this shaft problem was unexpected but showed the value of having two carriers, POW has taken QE's place >So the RN isn't having major staffing issues, decommissioning a bunch of ships, failing to have 2 escort flotillas active at the same time?
two Type 45s, two Type 23s is a credible battlegroup, and the RN can indeed field two of those if the balloon goes up
yes, there are problems, but this doesn't at all translate to: >The new British supercarriers dare not venture further away from shore >This will be the state of the British Navy for at least a decade. Probably two.
Zeihan is a colossal fricking moron
p.s. the entire fricking globe can be covered by British or American airpower if necessary. where the frick does Zeihan want the QEs to deploy? outer space?
>p.s. the entire fricking globe can be covered by British or American airpower if necessary. where the frick does Zeihan want the QEs to deploy? outer space?
the Falklands again I guess since that was the only time since WW2 when a carrier group has completed an amphibious operation without being in range of land based air power but there is no reason to suggest it's not possible and several very important political reasons why the UK isn't going to inflame the situation by sending a carrier to the region.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Falklands
now garrisoned by four Typhoons, an aerial tanker, a SAM battery, an infantry battalion and an OPV >the UK isn't going to inflame the situation by sending a carrier to the region.
if they need to they fricking will, but there are far more important places for the carriers to be, and given the state of Argentina, that truly won't be a problem for >at least a decade. Probably two.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Argentina is getting uppity again, so it could be a flashpoint region for the UK again
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68329181
> Last month Argentina's President Javier Milei called for the islands in the South Atlantic Ocean to be handed over. >Lord Cameron reiterated the UK government's longstanding position the islands' sovereignty is non-negotiable while its residents wish it to be British.
Though President Milei has previously said war is "not a solution" so this could just be more political blustering than anything else.
3 months ago
Anonymous
it's probably bluster
Milei has actually done a fiscally sensible thing, and slashed government budgets in order to eliminate deficit spending
there's no room for any kind of major rearmament in that
3 months ago
Anonymous
it's probably bluster
Milei has actually done a fiscally sensible thing, and slashed government budgets in order to eliminate deficit spending
there's no room for any kind of major rearmament in that
https://i.imgur.com/wuZKmzY.jpg
[...]
I forgot to address another point.
>The British Navy has atrophied so much for so long that it can no longer assemble two credible battlegroups and still defend Great Britain itself.
The point of the carriers wasn't to operate 2 CSGs it was to operate a single carrier group.with 1 carrier at sea and one in port in normal operations then able to operate a carrier group with both carriers (maybe with one operating as a commando carrier) during a war.
[...]
Argentina is always getting uppity especially around elections and any political frickups (no idea why...) but their navy has nothing bigger than a corvette/aviso and their once mighty airforce is now on par with the Republic of Ireland (although they might get some 40 year old F-16s with monopulse shitheap radars).
Argentina was unironically much more of a peer to the UK during the Falklands than it is now
If Britain has lost 50% of its military capacity since then, Argentina has lost 95%
Their entire functioning air force right now is six A-4s, their Navy has ~13 corvette sized vessels, at least five of them totally unseaworthy
3 months ago
Anonymous
https://i.imgur.com/SzwhK0y.png
In the context of Japan they have less oilers and replenishment (and they are half the size of British and American AORs) and no RO-RO ships like Britain has. Not to mention STUFT which I don't think Japan has their own version of.
Also I don't really understand using Japan operating in the Indian Ocean as a W for Japan while handwaving the UK operating in the South China Sea as not counting due to operating with partners (I'm sure the japanese ships that went to India did so with no US assistance)
[...] >p.s. the entire fricking globe can be covered by British or American airpower if necessary. where the frick does Zeihan want the QEs to deploy? outer space?
the Falklands again I guess since that was the only time since WW2 when a carrier group has completed an amphibious operation without being in range of land based air power but there is no reason to suggest it's not possible and several very important political reasons why the UK isn't going to inflame the situation by sending a carrier to the region.
I forgot to address another point.
>The British Navy has atrophied so much for so long that it can no longer assemble two credible battlegroups and still defend Great Britain itself.
The point of the carriers wasn't to operate 2 CSGs it was to operate a single carrier group.with 1 carrier at sea and one in port in normal operations then able to operate a carrier group with both carriers (maybe with one operating as a commando carrier) during a war.
Argentina is getting uppity again, so it could be a flashpoint region for the UK again
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68329181
> Last month Argentina's President Javier Milei called for the islands in the South Atlantic Ocean to be handed over. >Lord Cameron reiterated the UK government's longstanding position the islands' sovereignty is non-negotiable while its residents wish it to be British.
Though President Milei has previously said war is "not a solution" so this could just be more political blustering than anything else.
Argentina is always getting uppity especially around elections and any political frickups (no idea why...) but their navy has nothing bigger than a corvette/aviso and their once mighty airforce is now on par with the Republic of Ireland (although they might get some 40 year old F-16s with monopulse shitheap radars).
3 months ago
Anonymous
>although they might get some 40 year old F-16s with monopulse shitheap radars
Uhh no.
The Danish F-16s are F-16AM, which is a Block 50 equivalent upgrade package for the F-16A. > Key upgrades include a modular mission computer with faster data processing, an advanced IFF system that allows "BVR weapons delivery in excess of radar limits," and an improved radar—the APG-66(V)2A—with increased range and the ability to track and engage more targets.
Beyond that the Danish F-16s were updated in the early to mid 2000s with the M3 tape software upgrade which provides software integration with modern GPS guided smart munitions.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>AN/APG-66(V)2 with a new combined signal and data processor that provides seven times the speed and 20 times the memory of the older radar computer and digital signal processor line replaceable units. In this new variant, the displayed resolution in ground-mapping mode is quadrupled, and is reported to be close to that offered by SAR techniques. Used for modernization of F-16A/B fleet of Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Portugal and the Netherlands in the mid-1990s.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Well iirc originally the deal was for some old Block 15 aircraft and I didn't realise the new deal with block 50s.
>AN/APG-66(V)2 with a new combined signal and data processor that provides seven times the speed and 20 times the memory of the older radar computer and digital signal processor line replaceable units. In this new variant, the displayed resolution in ground-mapping mode is quadrupled, and is reported to be close to that offered by SAR techniques. Used for modernization of F-16A/B fleet of Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Portugal and the Netherlands in the mid-1990s.
This is all very interesting and I'm sure it will be useful for basic air policing but aside from better IFF and ground mapping its still a 1970s radar (although a PD one not a pulse one) somewhere between an AWG-11 from a phantom and an AWG-9. Does it even have multi-track TWS? I'm guessing it is cleared to use AMRAAMs but will the deal include them.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Does it even have multi-track TWS?
Yes
> AN/APG-66(V)2 is an upgrade of the basic radar which is matched to the US/NATO F-16A/B mid-life update programme. The enhanced radar is reported to offer greater detection range (increased from 65 to 83 km in the presence of heavy clutter and jamming); improved reliability (an MTBF figure of 210 hours); improved protection against electro-magnetic interference; enhanced operational performance (including an improved mapping capability and a reduced false alarm rate) and the ability to support a colour display. AN/APG-66(V)2 has the following operating modes: > Air-to-Air: Combined search and track; Track-While-Scan (TWS); air combat search and automatic tracking. > Air-to-Surface: Real beam mapping; 64:1 Doppler beam sharpening; scan freeze; ranging; beacon homing; sea search and combined ground-map and air target track.
> AN/APG-66(V)2A is an AN/APG-66(V)2 with a new combined signal and data processor that provides seven times the speed and 20 times the memory of the older radar computer and digital signal processor line replaceable units. In this new variant, the displayed resolution in ground-mapping mode is quadrupled, and is reported to be close to that offered by SAR techniques. Used for modernization of F-16A/B fleet of Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Portugal and the Netherlands in the mid-1990s.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Does it even have multi-track TWS?
Yes
> AN/APG-66(V)2 is an upgrade of the basic radar which is matched to the US/NATO F-16A/B mid-life update programme. The enhanced radar is reported to offer greater detection range (increased from 65 to 83 km in the presence of heavy clutter and jamming); improved reliability (an MTBF figure of 210 hours); improved protection against electro-magnetic interference; enhanced operational performance (including an improved mapping capability and a reduced false alarm rate) and the ability to support a colour display. AN/APG-66(V)2 has the following operating modes: > Air-to-Air: Combined search and track; Track-While-Scan (TWS); air combat search and automatic tracking. > Air-to-Surface: Real beam mapping; 64:1 Doppler beam sharpening; scan freeze; ranging; beacon homing; sea search and combined ground-map and air target track.
> AN/APG-66(V)2A is an AN/APG-66(V)2 with a new combined signal and data processor that provides seven times the speed and 20 times the memory of the older radar computer and digital signal processor line replaceable units. In this new variant, the displayed resolution in ground-mapping mode is quadrupled, and is reported to be close to that offered by SAR techniques. Used for modernization of F-16A/B fleet of Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Portugal and the Netherlands in the mid-1990s.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>were updated in the early to mid 2000s with the M3 tape software upgrade
Pretty sure they updated to at least M5.2 or even M6
3 months ago
Anonymous
wait why aren't those going to Ukraine?
[...]
[...]
Argentina was unironically much more of a peer to the UK during the Falklands than it is now
If Britain has lost 50% of its military capacity since then, Argentina has lost 95%
Their entire functioning air force right now is six A-4s, their Navy has ~13 corvette sized vessels, at least five of them totally unseaworthy
they never recovered from 82
salutary lesson in the cost of war (especially losing)
3 months ago
Anonymous
>its true in my head
>Bullshit
Each JMSDF flotilla has 7 destroyers across 2 squadrons + the flattop. This means 28 destroyers across the 4 flotillas. Then there are the 5 escort squadrons at the district level with another 8 DDs and 6 DEs for assignment. The RN has 6 destroyers and 11 frigates. >Leaving one frigate at home, they can muster 3 destroyers and 4 or 5 frigates at any time
The JMSDF has the same capability except across 4 flotillas, not 2 and they can leave another 8 DDs and 6 DEs at home. There is also the Mine Warfare fleet with a bunch of multipurpose DDs and Frigates too. >If anything, it's the JMSDF flattops that don't have any experience at all operating away from home waters
They regularly do joint stuff with India in the Indian ocean, they go to RIMPAC and IFR. >when maintenance issues crop up that were previously unreported because a quick fix in port sorted it out
We are talking about the JMSDF and not the RN right? >Already the nascent Jap marine force has revealed some splendid systemic frickups
Such as? >the situation is nearly the exact opposite of Zeihan's moronic rambling
So the RN isn't having major staffing issues, decommissioning a bunch of ships, failing to have 2 escort flotillas active at the same time? I can agree on the JMSDF not being #2 in the world as that is stupid, but if the task was to meet half way for the 2 then I have more confidence in the JMSDF deploying a larger fleet of combat capable ships.
>This means 28 destroyers across the 4 flotillas
so one flotilla has 7 escorts amirite
the RN has more than 7 escorts operational amirite
so like I said: BULL. SHIT. >They regularly do joint stuff with India in the Indian ocean, they go to RIMPAC and IFR.
and we don't know how smoothly those went, they don't have as close coverage as the RN receives, in English sources at least >hurr durr muh QE
QE and POW have completed long missions without major breakdowns
this shaft problem was unexpected but showed the value of having two carriers, POW has taken QE's place >So the RN isn't having major staffing issues, decommissioning a bunch of ships, failing to have 2 escort flotillas active at the same time?
two Type 45s, two Type 23s is a credible battlegroup, and the RN can indeed field two of those if the balloon goes up
yes, there are problems, but this doesn't at all translate to: >The new British supercarriers dare not venture further away from shore >This will be the state of the British Navy for at least a decade. Probably two.
Zeihan is a colossal fricking moron
p.s. the entire fricking globe can be covered by British or American airpower if necessary. where the frick does Zeihan want the QEs to deploy? outer space?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>so one flotilla has 7 escorts amirite >the RN has more than 7 escorts operational amirite
Read what I posted again moron. I said more destroyers than the entire RN escort fleet. The RN has 6 destroyers total. Also again a JMSDF escort flotilla is flexible and can call on the other 8 destroyers that are district forces to bolster their flotillas. At max strength the JMSDF could have 4 flotillas operating with 10 escorts each and still have their Mogami Frigates at home. >and we don't know how smoothly those went, they don't have as close coverage as the RN receives, in English sources at least
Navalnews and the english versions of Japanese newspapers regularly cover JMSDF stuff. Like they say, no news is good news. The JMSDF just operating normal with 0 issues isn't news. >QE and POW have completed long missions without major breakdowns
But never at the same time because they have to cannibalize one to keep the other even functioning until spares arrive. >this shaft problem was unexpected
With all the shit this class has gone through it was more of an inevitability and hardly unexpected. >two Type 45s, two Type 23s is a credible battlegroup, and the RN can indeed field two of those if the balloon goes up
Yeah a battle group and not an escort flotilla. If we are just talking about a battlegroup consisting of 2 DDs and 2 FF then the JMSDF can deploy over a dozen. You keep trying to say that the UK can do the bare minimum of a blue water navy as if it's impressive when we are comparing it to the JMSDF who has more DDs than the entire surface combatant force of the RN. >>This will be the state of the British Navy for at least a decade. Probably two.
Yeah it won't stagnate like this for the next decade. It will literally only get worse with the delays, large scale decommissioning and further lack of manpower.
3 months ago
Anonymous
You're still moronic because your moronic counting method includes ALL JMSDF escorts as destroyers whereas you specifically exclude RN frigates
reality is that what you call "destroyers" includes what the RN would call frigates, so you're comparing apples with oranges here, dipshit
the JMSDF fields 14 air warfare capable destroyers and 30 frigates against the RN's 6 and 10 respectively >no news is good news
then the PLA is history's most perfect military, eh, moron >But never at the same time
wrong
just a few months ago POW and QE were simultaneously on major exercises on opposite sides of the Atlantic >Yeah a battle group and not an escort flotilla
semantics >You keep trying to say that the UK can do the bare minimum of a blue water navy as if it's impressive
I'm showing you that you are exaggerating the problem, butthole >the JMSDF who has more DDs than the entire surface combatant force of the RN
notice: when it's the Japs he claims "DDs", when it's the RN he says "surface combatant"
the bias is obvious
I wouldn't pretend that the JMSDF doesn't have the numbers
but I wouldn't go as far as you in wienersucking the JMSDF to that extent
>It will literally only get worse with the delays, large scale decommissioning and further lack of manpower
you're wrong and you will always be wrong, Zeihan
3 months ago
Anonymous
>You're still moronic because your moronic counting method includes ALL JMSDF escorts as destroyers whereas you specifically exclude RN frigates
I didn't though. The first time I was comparing purely DDs. When you wanted to include frigates is when I applied the DEs which really only make up around 4 of the actual ships. >reality is that what you call "destroyers" includes what the RN would call frigates
Maybe under the moronic classifications of the Type 26 and Type 31, but those don't exist yet and the Type 23 is thoroughly within frigate tonnage and capability. >JMSDF fields 14 air warfare capable destroyers and 30 frigates against the RN's 6 and 10 respectively
Aegis Destroyers >4 Kongo >2 Atago >2 Maya
AAW Destroyers >9 Murasame >5 Takanami >4 Akizuki >2 Asahi
Literally anything firing ESSM is mogging anything firing CAMM and equal to the Aster 15. The sensors and Link 11 at a minimum on all those ships help too. UK AAW missiles are a fricking joke compared to something like the SM-6 and the chart doesn't even include the SM-3 >then the PLA is history's most perfect military, eh, moron
Oh yeah the famous communist country known as Japan known for silencing journalism. >just a few months ago POW and QE were simultaneously on major exercises on opposite sides of the Atlantic
Wow there was a couple of months where one wasn't stuck in port. That is conducive of a healthy operational capability. >semantics
2 destroyers and 2 frigates isn't enough to be an escort for a carrier. It's not semantics. >notice: when it's the Japs he claims "DDs", when it's the RN he says "surface combatant"
What are you talking about? I'm saying that Japan's DD fleet ignoring frigates and others outnumbers the RN when counting all of their CVs, their DDs, their FFs, and Corvettes. I'm being generous to the RN here by including all of their surface combatants. How is it biased against the RN? >wienersucking the JMSDF to that extent
You have it wrong. I'm shitting on the RN.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>9 Murasame >5 Takanami >4 Akizuki >2 Asahi
These are all frigate-sized
3 months ago
Anonymous
No, you are still a dumb frick and your classification is wrong. RN has much more combat vessels than JMSDF.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Dude. I'm not the other guy but give it up. You got schooled.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>responding unironically to bait
even the other other guy didn't bite
3 months ago
Anonymous
It wasnt a bait, and I was right.
3 months ago
Anonymous
i always liked the little JMSDF DDs, especially the new Asahi class. Cool ships.
No nukes, JMSDF sinks and goes on kill streak vs USN. JMSDF newest Lithium Diesel Electrics are spooky.
Within a month, all SSNs and CVNs are not able to be in Pacific safely. Sweden and JMSDF currently have most silent attack subs. And Japan has it in numbers.
Also USN has debuff. Our high schoolers are unironically 89iq
>No nukes
Have you ever heard of the "Japan Option" in regards to nuclear latency?
They're literally the poster child example of a nation that is fully technologically nuclear-capable and possesses the nuclear material needed to construct a weapon, it is theorized japan even has a warhead design and the piece-parts needed to assemble a functional bomb, including the core, they just have never ACTUALLY assembled the thing and can therefore claim to be a non-nuclear armed nation.
Plus their solid fuelled rocket, designed to launch at short notice with minimal crew.
Why do they need that capability? For science satellites of course.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_(rocket)
3 months ago
Anonymous
You never know when you'll wanna launch a satellite
3 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah it's pretty clearly an ICBM that has never been tested as such but has performed basically identical operations that would be required for delivering a warhead if japan just happened to find one laying around one day.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>if japan just happened to find one laying around one day
You can't be suggesting that Japan used some of it's (civilian purposes only, swear on me mum) plutonium stockpiles to make nuclear pits
3 months ago
Anonymous
Noooooooo, that would be crazy talk, no one would ever be that sneaky...
The USMC and Royal Marines should amalgamate into the United States Marine Corps of His Majesty's Royal Marines. Only then will they have the numbers to challenge the People's Liberation Army Navy Marine Corps
The baka gaijin don't give a shit, it's the nips that the nip navy has to fool. They are welcome to adjust their constitution and start a WNC-worthy naval arms race but they don't have the votes.
The carrier exists as a loitering threat, gunboat diplomacy in 2024.
This is the only reason they aren't made redundant by missiles. Yes as air superiority fighter the f35 can contest missiles, theoretically it could be used as extended air defence for a fleet at sea.
But if a hypersonic missile from a h114 is coming in at your group, and you've got f35b in the air, what are your odds? H114 hypersonic is nuclear capable, big nuclear capable.
It's such a shame JMSDF doesn't have any other types of destroyers, especially air defense destroyers with AEGIS and missiles they co-developed with USA
>>and then we said "it's a destroyeru" and they berieved it! ahaha baka gaijin-kun
Ah no blut flunnier. So he said 'Is that an aircraft clarrier' and I saw 'Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooit is clarrier for helclopter!". So flucking flunny
>helicopter destroyer has helicopters on it
truly a long con
They already paid for the F-35Bs, it's a done deal.
>have shit flight range and utter shit weaponry in that configuration
Vertical meme is just that, a complete meme
good thing the Japs are putting in ramps then you fricking idiot
Except they didn't.
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/japans-converted-izumo-class-carriers-will-not-feature-a-ski-jump-ramp-for-f-35b-operations
Pic is Kaga underway in September with its renovated deck.
Yet
just like when they were first built, the JMSDF said they wouldn't operate F-35
yet
It doesn't need a ramp, the ramp only adds a bit of help, not a massive amount, the important part is the deck length for the run up to take off.
>the ramp only adds a bit of help, not a massive amount
it adds at least another 100nm of range
I'd take it
That's great, the japanese decided it wasn't worth the effort.
They just spent a bunch of time and money redoing the deck on the kaga and it goes in for internal modifications that will last 2 years from 2027-2029
It will not be getting a ramp.
>Yet
>just like when they were first built, the JMSDF said they wouldn't operate F-35
>yet
>100nm
100 nanometers isn't that much. I believe it.
using the ramp ("ski jump") improved Harrier payload by 33 to 50%
the F-35 is more fuel efficient than the Harrier
+100nm is just the stat I heard
>Pic is Kaga
let me guess, the sister shit is called Kugu
No, Izumo and Kaga.
>Well yeah, you got VTOL capable 5th gen stealth aircraft to operate from your small not-carriers...but you will have slightly less payload and shorter range!!!!
And the goalpost shifts on I see.
These morons underestimate the value of VTOL. When all your carriers are dead because of some attritional world war with losses halfway across the world, VTOL starts looking a hell lot more viable.
I'm actually shocked the chinks don't have some clone of the F-35B or even the AV-8B in the pipeline
You would think going from "4 carriers in 2030" to "12 carriers* in 2030" would be great for their egos, they'd practically be breathing down America's neck
VTOL tech is difficult enough that the Americans decided to buy British to bootstrap the F-35B rather than go it alone
Not to mention the material science and in-house knowledge needed for all the different alloys and components. Just a reminder, China still struggles with building relatively basic jet engines to modern standards. You can copy a design, but duplicating an entire multi-stage production process isn't that easy.
>buy British
wtf f-35s are british?
the British contributed significantly to developing the F-35B tech, a good part of which involves automating the landing and takeoff procedure - this is another subtle advantage the F-35 has over the Harrier, it is much easier to pilot
>dont they have to change their constitution
not at all
they just have to change the way they've marketed the interpretation of its constitution
the Japanese Constitution technically forbids a standing military AT ALL
so Cope #1 is "the JSDF is actually a self-defence force, not a military per se"
also, the Constitution forbids an offensive war
so Cope #2 is the Japs have avoided certain weapons, characterising them as "offensive weapons". this includes amphibious assault forces, cruise missiles, and aircraft carriers. other weapons somehow are "not offensive"
China's rearmament however has pushed them to the point that they need these capabilities
which brings us to Cope #3: Japan is now getting amphibs, Tomahawks and these carriers, but they're "only to be used defensively"
it's all a load of pointlessly self-imposed bullshit to me, but that's the Japs for you
>but they're "only to be used defensively"
actually they have a further cope that is defense can now extend to mean attacking in-advance of an imminent attack on them or an ally.
So if china is posturing to frick up taiwan/korea/etc japan, under the new interpretation of "defense" can send a few dozen tomahawks to hit Chinese equipment and supply dumps that are being used to prepare for an attack against a Japanese ally (or japan itself).
You could even argue that existence of commie china is a threat not just to japan, but entire world, therefore sankō sakusen policy would fit in certain definitions of defense
I guess if you want to realistically defend all the Japanese islands you need a navy, now with China saber rattling they need an effective navy, and an effective navy is by definition offensive. I guess that will be their cope.
>this is another subtle advantage the F-35 has over the Harrier, it is much easier to pilot
The F-35 in general is noted to be extremely easy to pilot, and this is one of those 'soft' advantages that works immensely in its favor.
No, but the British did a lot of work in VTOL with the Harrier and the US decided to buy that and build upon it instead of having to start from scratch by themselves.
The Argentinians have made demanding the falklands back a rite of passage for any senior politician just as the Greeks have for asking for the marbles back. It doesn't mean either of them are serious about it, it's a statement for domestic consumption more than it is an actual demand.
>the British did a lot of work in VTOL with the Harrier and the US decided to buy that and build upon it instead of having to start from scratch by themselves
Just like the brits do with submarine reactor and nuclear warhead designs from the US.
Being part of the Anglo club has its perks
Because both the F-35B and Harrier essentially run off the aviation version of dark magic. You need extremely high technical and mechanical expertise to make working VTOL fighters that don't sacrifice performance to the point of uselessness.
>would be great for their egos
Chinese don't care about that.
055 and 076 are their main focus rn
cause they recognize they're still 40-50+ years from being able to challenge US fixed-wing naval aviation.
No need to pour resources into STOVL/VTOL tech when it's a nice-to-have, not the main area of concern.
NTA but the J-15B is also about to enter service anyway. I don't think it would make sense to invest yet a few more billions just to get some notion of "parity" with the US.
Chinese military procurement is all about looking good on paper. If it doesn't have longer range, faster speeds, more payload, and can do the best stunts at an airshow then the CCP isn't interested. The problem is that VTOL and STOVL require trade offs. Less speed, less range, less payload. In exchange for less overall performance you get a massive increase in versatility.
they're going the other way by adding small catapults to their next class of LHD's
For UAVs, not for carrier-based fixed-wing fighters like the J-15/31s or the new XJ-600 (Chinese copy of the American E-2 Hawkeye)
hasn't been confirmed either way
Nah, you can't get all the gear required for arresting larger planes like the J-15/J-31 on a small LHD
No one operates the F-35B as a VTOL, it's always been STOVL.
so you're saying that the primary purpose of this naval vessel is to transport and launch military aircraft?
I wonder if there's some term for such a ship.
rotorcraft tender
>helicopter destroyer
>primary role isnt the destruction of helicopters
>submarine destroyer
>destroys submarines, but can't submerge itself
>gun owner
>owns guns, but isn't a gun
>seaplane tender
>is in fact quite hard
>helicopter destroyer
>does not destroy helicopters
Maybe they push the helicopters off the deck.
>~oh no dont build carriers that would violate your constitution what ever will we do~
t.Westerners
>Implying that the US didn't implicitly approve of this if not actively encouraged it.
That is exactly what the image and post is implying. Look again
The Burgers have been encouraging the Nips since the Korean war to drop their pacifist constitution. They probably celebrated in Washington when the Nips built the Izumo.
acshually it's their way of circumventing nip laws
They don't really need to circumvent anything, they just need to agree to a reinterpretation of the current way it is written, which they've done several times before already when it suited their needs.
And even then they can basically just ignore it for a while if they don't want to acknowledge it, if it became enough of a public issue it would then probably get reinterpreted and MAYBE reworded if needed.
The US wants Japanese rearmament. Japanese autism to their constitution is the problem.
>names them after WW2 ships to dab on chinks
I want the twin terrors to come back.
imagine modern JMSDF Kaga and Akagi operating in the pacific, pulling up on Midway again.
Nah. Kaga and Akagi are good names for light carriers.
When Japan builds actual super carriers, they should call them “Yamato” and “Musashi”
Shinano
Sure.
But realistically Japan is never going to be able to support three full-size carriers.
Pic is Shokaku and Zuikaku.
like i can tell apart all those asiatic ships from the bottle of the ocean
Are there people IRL who can tell these ships apart? They all look the same
Even looking in that photo you can immediately see some differences between the ships, e.g. the carrier behind the frontmost foreground one has an overall differently shaped hull and gun arrangement, whilst the foreground one has a very different tower and a whole bunch of little pulpitlike mounts for weapons the second does not appear to have. The background carrier also looks to be a good deal wider.
Weird I see about 6ish identical aircraft carriers
The machines behind the second carrier all appear to be combat ships, not carriers, you can see that they don't have flight decks and the very closest behind the second carrier has a notable real gun turret and central tower.
Sorry I am not a naval engineer graduate
I'm surprised you can function in regular day to day life with that level of eyesight.
An aircraft carrier has giant fricking 16" guns and a huge central superstructure?
WW2 was a time of experimentation in ship design
NTA but we really don't want to name ships after carriers that were sunk. It's very defeatist.
No, it's inspirational, and offers a chance to redeem the name.
Weren't almost all jap CVs sunk? What are they're gonna name the new ones, Katsuragi 1, Katsuragi 2 and Katsurage 3?
Don't be stupid. We'll call them the Naruto, the Pikachu, and the Son Goku.
/jk
>During the last battle in WW3, the Kusnezov was sunk by the Japanse carrier Pikachu
What a time to be alive
>we really don't want to name ships after carriers that were sunk
They were all sunk, that's their main characteristic. But it makes me wonder, how did the japanese name their carriers and what are some possible carrier names that were never taken?
http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijnnames.htm
enjoy, anon
if you think about it logically the F-35B is the platonic ideal of a helicopter
>Plato says "A helicopter is that which can vertically take off and land."
>Diogenes rushes in with pictures of the F-35B. "Behold, a helicopter!"
>Helicopter destroyer?
>I HARDLY KNEW 'ER
>german humor
grim
Your image is a bit misleading, since it's the Izumo-class of "helicopter destroyers" that are being converted to operate the F-35B, not the Hyūga-class in the picture.
It will be pretty funny when JS Kaga arrives at Pearl Harbor flying a rising sun flag
Imagine how many weebs will be out flying boatfricker flags in response.
Even better will be operating with CV-80 Enterprise
>Chinks try shit in Taiwan
>Essex, Enterprise, Kaga based F-35s combine forces and do another nanking
>Banzai heard across all coms
This time together brothers.
does it have a soapland or JAV girl comfort women
nah but the officer's mess is a maid cafe
No one actually believed it though. Everyone knew what the Nips were doing, they just don’t care because A) Japan is never going to be a threat to anyone, and B) it’s a mostly self-imposed restriction anyway, and C) even if they did care, it’s too much trouble to argue about.
That and the West is actively encouraging Japan to arm up in expectation with a war or confrontation against China in the near future.
Yeah. I should probably have said that the West supports rearmament, most of the irrelevant little countries (Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea) don’t care, and it would make China and North Korea shit themselves in rage.
>Korea) don’t care
and is in fact tacitly encouraging it, in order to counter China and North Korea
Pretty sure all China's neighbours would prefer Japan be armed to the teeth. Even Korea. They might hate Japan, but they also know that Japan has no expansionist designs, while China does.
The only people they were trying to fool with the designation were pacifistic Japanese civilians. The US wants Japan to remilitarize, it’s been that way for decades now.
You have to consider that they aren't called destroyers (駆逐艦) in Japanese but escort ships (護衛艦).
Kind of like all USCG ships are named cutter.
Somebody decided to translate 護衛艦 as destroyer and it stuck at that.
Destroyers were originally escort ships meant to protect battleships from torpedo boats. "Destroyer" is just a short hand for "Torpedo boat destroyer".
That also makes it funny in languages where the original term is still in use. For example, in Italian, they're called "Cacciatorpedinere" (Torpedo boat hunters), so Air-Defense Destroyers become Anti-Air Torpedo Boat Hunters, implying the existence of aerial torpedo boats.
kinda
You win this round, seaplane. Now what about Land Attack Torpedo Boat Hunters?
Best i have is Land Attack Torpedo
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww1-gb-simms-land-torpedo/
They only adopted that naming for the maritime self defense force. The imperial navy used the regular terms.
Yeah, I know, but I meant that if the JMSDF calls them "Escort ships", then translating that to "Destroyer" isn't too bad of a translation.
>t.kamchatka
So….without a ramp the F-35 can’t carry a full combat load + fuel — then, what CAN it launch with?
It doesn't need a full fuel load as it can be arial refuelled once in the air.
Give it a full weapon load, a few thousand pounds of fuel, and then fill it up when you're in the air.
Japan has one of the largest tanker fleets in the world
So you think they're gonna install a ramp on it in ~15 years? They already have the next decade planned out and it doesn't include a ramp, and by that time they'll probably be looking to build a replacement class and if they're REALLY doubling down on fixed-wing aviation they'll go for a medium-sized catapult carrier and stop hiding behind the "destroyer" moniker.
>Japan has one of the largest tanker fleets in the world
A few submarines later they'll have none again.
As long is it isn't comic sans refuelled.
>what CAN it launch with?
two 1000lb weapons, two AMRAAMs, and enough fuel for a combat radius of 450nm
(edited)
>you think they're gonna install a ramp on it in ~15 years?
I think they're going to leave their options open, but yes, more likely they will build either two catapult carriers or two ramped carriers
>Air submarines then.
I kneel
dont they have to change their constitution to even allow carriers to be built and operated? hence the chicanery with these current ones? I would probably be cheaper and easier to make more of these current classes? Or even just make amphibs like the America class, call it the Japan class.
I mean they can very easily just ignore it or change the constitution, it's not like the US is going to step in to stop them, the US has been asking them to take a larger role in the security of the region for what 60 years now?
>the US has been asking them to take a larger role in the security of the region for what 60 years now?
Call it something harmless like a... mutual-prosperity semi circle?
>Under MacArthur, they lost every primary source available.
Yeah, and he forced all the porn to have mosaics.
Pull the other one, it has bells on.
The notion that a temporary foreign military administration can totally erase recent history when there are thousands of living primary sources in a country with a non-trivial language barrier doesn't even remotely pass the sniff test for anyone except the most motivated of reasoner
>mutual-prosperity semi circle
Co-prosperity Hypercube
mutual benefit tesseract
Intercontinental Cooperative Icosahedron
A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats Klein Bottle
Unity makes strength Möbius Strip
I never said they totally erased it. But when you take away the documentation and offer many immunity from prosecution so that they never get their day in court. All that remains are personal eyewitness testimony or physical evidence. The physical evidence was in mainland Asia, and the eyewitnesses on the Japanese side were either dead or unwilling to share what happened for obvious reasons.
Under your way of thinking, nothing can ever be hidden and it is all out in the open unless if every single last person and shred of evidence is erased from existence. And let's suppose a couple of guys say "yeah, our unit lined up a load of civilians and shot them." what do you do with that information? Almost no Soviets, Brits or Americans sat in the dock despite us knowing that some among them committed war crimes in Europe from personal accounts, because we all too often have no idea of the true scale and have often lacked information of who, where, and when it happened, and that's often without concerted cover-up attempts.
It's an absolute, ironclad fact that Doug ordered virtually all documentation to be confiscated after the war and actively covered it up. Some of the Allied Command were pretty mad about it but he didn't budge. He fricked up a critical chance to confront the Japanese public with the full scale of the crimes and missed a crucial chance for reshaping the existing society.
I believe you, but it's just not something that could happen without active Japanese collaboration. Great excuse, just like the porn mosaics, but at some point you're doing it because you want to, not because Doug made you do it.
Admiral Fukyu homieh is smiling down on them
I was waiting for this comment. I was not disappointed.
Air submarines then.
>be America
>allow Japan to sweep all their warcrimes under the rug
>allow Japan to just memoryhole all the warcrimes the previous generation has committed
>but not allow Japan to have a real armed forces despite rearming them to the teeth as early as the mid-late 50s
Japan to sweep all their warcrimes under the rug
japan paid out something like $500B worth of territory, assets, etc in post war reparations.
>>be America
Japan to sweep all their warcrimes under the rug
Japan to just memoryhole all the warcrimes the previous generation has committed
They didn't just "let Japan memory hole" that. They actively suppressed it. MacArthur held a few token trials and confiscated most the information related to Japanese war crimes.
Japanese historians didn't know about the war crimes until foreign historians started uncovering the evidence.
>>but not allow Japan to have a real armed forces despite rearming them to the teeth as early as the mid-late 50s
"Allowing" is a red herring. Every current restriction is self-imposed.
>Japanese historians didn't know about the war crimes
ror
rmao
They didn't. Imagine you're a professor in Japan trying to research Unit 731. Oh wait, you can't, because MacArthur had all the information confiscated and you wouldn't even know what Unit 731 is if you weren't there.
>Unit 731 is the only Jap warcrimes ever
they had plenty of other material to investigate
No, That is the thing. They DIDN'T have plenty to go on. Under MacArthur, they lost every primary source available.
They had to rediscover most of the information by cooperating with overseas historians. That's why it took them until the 1980s to get a good picture of what happened. They needed help from Chinese and Korean historians who actually had found evidence.
One of the biggest myths is that they continually deny what happened and refuse to teach it in schools. In reality, of dozens of history textbooks used in high schools, only two fairly unpopular ones give a beautified account of the war.
>every single jap warcrimer literally died or was hidden by Doug Mac so the historians had literally zero Japs to interview
>unit 731
More chinese lies just like nanking
You even said it here:
Japanese historians needed to get shilled by lying chinks and asiatics in order to "discover" evidence of the wrongdoings at unit 731, which was a simple medical and sanitation unit. Fricking wartime villager rumors wrought large.
>allow Japan to sweep all their warcrimes under the rug
There was a good reason for that. After the surrender of Japan in 1945; the US had to sell Japan as an ally to the US Public. With the nazis, it was actually a lot easier because all you had to do was shuffle the leadership around and say you did some denazification, especially since they didn't bomb pearl harbor and there actually was some sympathy for Germany during the war.
Japan didn't have such luxuries, and the US had to face selling a bunch of crazy frickers who did some inhumane shit to pretty much everyone they had in their possession (including US POWs) to the US population. Basically the only way to even hope for that to happen was to crack down and hide all the evidence of 731 and Nanking they could.
Is it really a war crime of it's committed against the Han plague?
I can't blame them. Currently it's good the Japanese are arming up. War is coming soon. Russia is crippled. China needs land. North koreA lol.
which one of these things is you?
Korea has helicopter carriers, they don't need to LARP them as something else.
Japan is two faced and untrustworthy, no country believes that those things are helicopter """destroyers""".
Korean navy is honest, Japan navy are liars.
not like the koreans are doing any better with the schizo KVLS on their newer vessels, whats the point of slbm for second strike if they dont go big spicy boom?
>Japan is two faced and untrustworthy, no country believes that those things are helicopter """destroyers""".
Good thing they don't call the converted ones helicopter destroyers any longer.
You just made up a situation and got mad over it.
>Korean navy is honest, Japan navy are liars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Japan%E2%80%93South_Korea_radar_lock-on_dispute
>ROKN makes contact with NK vessel (illegal)
>In Japanese waters without flying their naval ensign (illegal)
>ROKN claims they were responding to a distress call from the NK vessel
>Japan sends a plane to investigate an unknown vessel making illegal contact with a sanctioned country
>Hails the ROKN vessel on multiple distress channels with no reply
>ROKN claims their radios weren't working except they heard the NK distress call
>ROKN points FCR at the plane and irradiates it
>ROKN claims it was just a multipurpose Search radar
>Japan releases the wavelength and frequency of the radar irradiation and tells Korea to prove it wasn't their FCR
>Korea claims that they can't release data to Japan because it would compromise their classified technology (The radar used wasn't even made by Korea)
>Claims the plane was flying too low and it's Japans fault because ICAO regulations only apply to civil flights(doesn't constitute the act of war that is using an FCR) (Almost every nation uses ICAO standards in peace time including the US)
>France and the UK have to coincidentally increase patrols in the Sea of Japan because "some nations" (South Korea) were violating maritime sanctions and acting hostile towards allied nations
Dokdo will forever be Korea.
>lost in Afghanistan
Well chinks have reduced hearts and minds due to generations of communism and low-scruples rat race competition, so the US will probably do fine enough.
>losing in Ukraine
No other nearby power they risk empowering to parity by taking out China. Should be fine.
>losing in the Middle East
China actually has buildings to bomb.
Should be fine anon.
Oh no how could the Japanese do this! I hope they dont build an extended helicopter carrier with a longer runway, that would be bad. I also hope that my penis doesnt accidentally fall into a Japanese vegana
Peter Zeihan, the most respected thinker on /k/, considers these to be more capable than the two QE-class carriers
this HAS to be bait
>right? RIGHT?!
Zeihan on the JMSDF:
>Japan doesn’t only build but also designs its own naval vessels and has since the 1880s. Japan’s navy is easily the second-most powerful expeditionary force in the world…the entire Japanese fleet is blue-water capable.
>It is Japan, not China, that boasts the world’s second most capable navy. It is that navy that is second only to the United States in the number of aircraft carriers floated (Japan claims those carriers are only for helicopters but that is, if you’ll forgive the repeat, just some more PR bullshit).
>Japan…has four aircraft carrier battle groups that can make it that far. The point is less that the Japanese would use carriers for convoy duty, and more that the Japanese could scrub Chinese naval power out of existence from Hormuz to Malacca with a minimum of fuss.
Zeihan on the RN:
>At each step the Queen Elizabeth carrier program had to re-justify itself and fight for funding anew. And now, with Brexit looming, they’re having to slim the rest of the naval force to keep their supercarrier program on track.
>Which means the Brits no longer have sufficient ships to protect their new supers once they are fully operational.
>The British Navy has atrophied so much for so long that it can no longer assemble two credible battlegroups and still defend Great Britain itself.
>For the Queen Elizabeths’ deployments, this is nothing short of a Charlie Foxtrot. The new British supercarriers dare not venture further away from shore than the reach of British air power, whether that air power be launched from the United Kingdom itself or from the territory of a trusted ally. Support ships can certainly be built up more quickly (and cheaply) than the supercarriers themselves, but ships don’t grow on trees. This will be the state of the British Navy for at least a decade. Probably two.
>least deluded polisci grad
thanks
I thought my respect for this guy could not be any more in the negative
I thought wrong
>tfw no respect from poster on website for unsocialized outsiders
zeihan in shamble!!!
begone, ESL
not your thirdie boogeyman. try again
Zeihan has been predicting China is two weeks from collapse since 2005.
He’s the Alex Jones of geopolitical analysis. Bizarro fan base memoryholing the 95% of the time he’s hilariously wrong because they /wanttobelieve/.
He goes a little too far into the insane dick sucking, but just because he's insane doesn't mean we should ignore reality. The QE class has shit readiness and it's basically taking everything they have to keep 1 operating. While an Izumo isn't better than a QE on paper, the pure fact that the JMSDF can keep 4 flat tops on the water without much issue is just flat out better than a statistically better ship that has to sit in port 90% of the year. On top of that the JMSDF has 4 escort flotillas that follow 1 of the 4 flat tops they have in service. Each individual JMSDF flotilla has more destroyers than the entire RN escort fleet. The only thing the RN has over the JMSDF at this point is the massive RFA, but they are basically bleeding ships with over a dozen decommissioned in the last couple years and its only expected to get worse.
Going purely off of the ability to muster and deploy an escort fleet along with an amphibious force, I would say the JMSDF is better than the RN atm. Even if the RN could get both QE out of port and onto the water, they don't even have enough destroyers and frigates to create 2 escort flotillas, let alone keep an amphibious force safe from attack.
>Each individual JMSDF flotilla has more destroyers than the entire RN escort fleet
Bullshit
>they don't even have enough destroyers and frigates to create 2 escort flotillas, let alone keep an amphibious force safe from attack.
Leaving one frigate at home, they can muster 3 destroyers and 4 or 5 frigates at any time
If anything, it's the JMSDF flattops that don't have any experience at all operating away from home waters, which will be critical when somebody forgets to bring something important, or when maintenance issues crop up that were previously unreported because a quick fix in port sorted it out. Already the nascent Jap marine force has revealed some splendid systemic frickups. No doubt they can be solved in due course, but right now the situation is nearly the exact opposite of Zeihan's moronic rambling
>Bullshit
Each JMSDF flotilla has 7 destroyers across 2 squadrons + the flattop. This means 28 destroyers across the 4 flotillas. Then there are the 5 escort squadrons at the district level with another 8 DDs and 6 DEs for assignment. The RN has 6 destroyers and 11 frigates.
>Leaving one frigate at home, they can muster 3 destroyers and 4 or 5 frigates at any time
The JMSDF has the same capability except across 4 flotillas, not 2 and they can leave another 8 DDs and 6 DEs at home. There is also the Mine Warfare fleet with a bunch of multipurpose DDs and Frigates too.
>If anything, it's the JMSDF flattops that don't have any experience at all operating away from home waters
They regularly do joint stuff with India in the Indian ocean, they go to RIMPAC and IFR.
>when maintenance issues crop up that were previously unreported because a quick fix in port sorted it out
We are talking about the JMSDF and not the RN right?
>Already the nascent Jap marine force has revealed some splendid systemic frickups
Such as?
>the situation is nearly the exact opposite of Zeihan's moronic rambling
So the RN isn't having major staffing issues, decommissioning a bunch of ships, failing to have 2 escort flotillas active at the same time? I can agree on the JMSDF not being #2 in the world as that is stupid, but if the task was to meet half way for the 2 then I have more confidence in the JMSDF deploying a larger fleet of combat capable ships.
So what's the plan for the RN? Never operate independently from the USN?
Pretty much the RN has no REAL capability to sustain long term blue water operations without European or US assistance.
>the RN has no REAL capability to sustain long term blue water operations
source? it came to me in a dream
Please ignore the RFA and other RN logistics since they weren't in my e-girl animes.
In the context of Japan they have less oilers and replenishment (and they are half the size of British and American AORs) and no RO-RO ships like Britain has. Not to mention STUFT which I don't think Japan has their own version of.
Also I don't really understand using Japan operating in the Indian Ocean as a W for Japan while handwaving the UK operating in the South China Sea as not counting due to operating with partners (I'm sure the japanese ships that went to India did so with no US assistance)
>p.s. the entire fricking globe can be covered by British or American airpower if necessary. where the frick does Zeihan want the QEs to deploy? outer space?
the Falklands again I guess since that was the only time since WW2 when a carrier group has completed an amphibious operation without being in range of land based air power but there is no reason to suggest it's not possible and several very important political reasons why the UK isn't going to inflame the situation by sending a carrier to the region.
>Falklands
now garrisoned by four Typhoons, an aerial tanker, a SAM battery, an infantry battalion and an OPV
>the UK isn't going to inflame the situation by sending a carrier to the region.
if they need to they fricking will, but there are far more important places for the carriers to be, and given the state of Argentina, that truly won't be a problem for
>at least a decade. Probably two.
Argentina is getting uppity again, so it could be a flashpoint region for the UK again
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68329181
> Last month Argentina's President Javier Milei called for the islands in the South Atlantic Ocean to be handed over.
>Lord Cameron reiterated the UK government's longstanding position the islands' sovereignty is non-negotiable while its residents wish it to be British.
Though President Milei has previously said war is "not a solution" so this could just be more political blustering than anything else.
it's probably bluster
Milei has actually done a fiscally sensible thing, and slashed government budgets in order to eliminate deficit spending
there's no room for any kind of major rearmament in that
Argentina was unironically much more of a peer to the UK during the Falklands than it is now
If Britain has lost 50% of its military capacity since then, Argentina has lost 95%
Their entire functioning air force right now is six A-4s, their Navy has ~13 corvette sized vessels, at least five of them totally unseaworthy
I forgot to address another point.
>The British Navy has atrophied so much for so long that it can no longer assemble two credible battlegroups and still defend Great Britain itself.
The point of the carriers wasn't to operate 2 CSGs it was to operate a single carrier group.with 1 carrier at sea and one in port in normal operations then able to operate a carrier group with both carriers (maybe with one operating as a commando carrier) during a war.
Argentina is always getting uppity especially around elections and any political frickups (no idea why...) but their navy has nothing bigger than a corvette/aviso and their once mighty airforce is now on par with the Republic of Ireland (although they might get some 40 year old F-16s with monopulse shitheap radars).
>although they might get some 40 year old F-16s with monopulse shitheap radars
Uhh no.
The Danish F-16s are F-16AM, which is a Block 50 equivalent upgrade package for the F-16A.
> Key upgrades include a modular mission computer with faster data processing, an advanced IFF system that allows "BVR weapons delivery in excess of radar limits," and an improved radar—the APG-66(V)2A—with increased range and the ability to track and engage more targets.
Beyond that the Danish F-16s were updated in the early to mid 2000s with the M3 tape software upgrade which provides software integration with modern GPS guided smart munitions.
>AN/APG-66(V)2 with a new combined signal and data processor that provides seven times the speed and 20 times the memory of the older radar computer and digital signal processor line replaceable units. In this new variant, the displayed resolution in ground-mapping mode is quadrupled, and is reported to be close to that offered by SAR techniques. Used for modernization of F-16A/B fleet of Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Portugal and the Netherlands in the mid-1990s.
Well iirc originally the deal was for some old Block 15 aircraft and I didn't realise the new deal with block 50s.
>AN/APG-66(V)2 with a new combined signal and data processor that provides seven times the speed and 20 times the memory of the older radar computer and digital signal processor line replaceable units. In this new variant, the displayed resolution in ground-mapping mode is quadrupled, and is reported to be close to that offered by SAR techniques. Used for modernization of F-16A/B fleet of Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Portugal and the Netherlands in the mid-1990s.
This is all very interesting and I'm sure it will be useful for basic air policing but aside from better IFF and ground mapping its still a 1970s radar (although a PD one not a pulse one) somewhere between an AWG-11 from a phantom and an AWG-9. Does it even have multi-track TWS? I'm guessing it is cleared to use AMRAAMs but will the deal include them.
>Does it even have multi-track TWS?
Yes
> AN/APG-66(V)2 is an upgrade of the basic radar which is matched to the US/NATO F-16A/B mid-life update programme. The enhanced radar is reported to offer greater detection range (increased from 65 to 83 km in the presence of heavy clutter and jamming); improved reliability (an MTBF figure of 210 hours); improved protection against electro-magnetic interference; enhanced operational performance (including an improved mapping capability and a reduced false alarm rate) and the ability to support a colour display. AN/APG-66(V)2 has the following operating modes:
> Air-to-Air: Combined search and track; Track-While-Scan (TWS); air combat search and automatic tracking.
> Air-to-Surface: Real beam mapping; 64:1 Doppler beam sharpening; scan freeze; ranging; beacon homing; sea search and combined ground-map and air target track.
> AN/APG-66(V)2A is an AN/APG-66(V)2 with a new combined signal and data processor that provides seven times the speed and 20 times the memory of the older radar computer and digital signal processor line replaceable units. In this new variant, the displayed resolution in ground-mapping mode is quadrupled, and is reported to be close to that offered by SAR techniques. Used for modernization of F-16A/B fleet of Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Portugal and the Netherlands in the mid-1990s.
>were updated in the early to mid 2000s with the M3 tape software upgrade
Pretty sure they updated to at least M5.2 or even M6
wait why aren't those going to Ukraine?
they never recovered from 82
salutary lesson in the cost of war (especially losing)
>its true in my head
>This means 28 destroyers across the 4 flotillas
so one flotilla has 7 escorts amirite
the RN has more than 7 escorts operational amirite
so like I said: BULL. SHIT.
>They regularly do joint stuff with India in the Indian ocean, they go to RIMPAC and IFR.
and we don't know how smoothly those went, they don't have as close coverage as the RN receives, in English sources at least
>hurr durr muh QE
QE and POW have completed long missions without major breakdowns
this shaft problem was unexpected but showed the value of having two carriers, POW has taken QE's place
>So the RN isn't having major staffing issues, decommissioning a bunch of ships, failing to have 2 escort flotillas active at the same time?
two Type 45s, two Type 23s is a credible battlegroup, and the RN can indeed field two of those if the balloon goes up
yes, there are problems, but this doesn't at all translate to:
>The new British supercarriers dare not venture further away from shore
>This will be the state of the British Navy for at least a decade. Probably two.
Zeihan is a colossal fricking moron
p.s. the entire fricking globe can be covered by British or American airpower if necessary. where the frick does Zeihan want the QEs to deploy? outer space?
>so one flotilla has 7 escorts amirite
>the RN has more than 7 escorts operational amirite
Read what I posted again moron. I said more destroyers than the entire RN escort fleet. The RN has 6 destroyers total. Also again a JMSDF escort flotilla is flexible and can call on the other 8 destroyers that are district forces to bolster their flotillas. At max strength the JMSDF could have 4 flotillas operating with 10 escorts each and still have their Mogami Frigates at home.
>and we don't know how smoothly those went, they don't have as close coverage as the RN receives, in English sources at least
Navalnews and the english versions of Japanese newspapers regularly cover JMSDF stuff. Like they say, no news is good news. The JMSDF just operating normal with 0 issues isn't news.
>QE and POW have completed long missions without major breakdowns
But never at the same time because they have to cannibalize one to keep the other even functioning until spares arrive.
>this shaft problem was unexpected
With all the shit this class has gone through it was more of an inevitability and hardly unexpected.
>two Type 45s, two Type 23s is a credible battlegroup, and the RN can indeed field two of those if the balloon goes up
Yeah a battle group and not an escort flotilla. If we are just talking about a battlegroup consisting of 2 DDs and 2 FF then the JMSDF can deploy over a dozen. You keep trying to say that the UK can do the bare minimum of a blue water navy as if it's impressive when we are comparing it to the JMSDF who has more DDs than the entire surface combatant force of the RN.
>>This will be the state of the British Navy for at least a decade. Probably two.
Yeah it won't stagnate like this for the next decade. It will literally only get worse with the delays, large scale decommissioning and further lack of manpower.
You're still moronic because your moronic counting method includes ALL JMSDF escorts as destroyers whereas you specifically exclude RN frigates
reality is that what you call "destroyers" includes what the RN would call frigates, so you're comparing apples with oranges here, dipshit
the JMSDF fields 14 air warfare capable destroyers and 30 frigates against the RN's 6 and 10 respectively
>no news is good news
then the PLA is history's most perfect military, eh, moron
>But never at the same time
wrong
just a few months ago POW and QE were simultaneously on major exercises on opposite sides of the Atlantic
>Yeah a battle group and not an escort flotilla
semantics
>You keep trying to say that the UK can do the bare minimum of a blue water navy as if it's impressive
I'm showing you that you are exaggerating the problem, butthole
>the JMSDF who has more DDs than the entire surface combatant force of the RN
notice: when it's the Japs he claims "DDs", when it's the RN he says "surface combatant"
the bias is obvious
I wouldn't pretend that the JMSDF doesn't have the numbers
but I wouldn't go as far as you in wienersucking the JMSDF to that extent
>It will literally only get worse with the delays, large scale decommissioning and further lack of manpower
you're wrong and you will always be wrong, Zeihan
>You're still moronic because your moronic counting method includes ALL JMSDF escorts as destroyers whereas you specifically exclude RN frigates
I didn't though. The first time I was comparing purely DDs. When you wanted to include frigates is when I applied the DEs which really only make up around 4 of the actual ships.
>reality is that what you call "destroyers" includes what the RN would call frigates
Maybe under the moronic classifications of the Type 26 and Type 31, but those don't exist yet and the Type 23 is thoroughly within frigate tonnage and capability.
>JMSDF fields 14 air warfare capable destroyers and 30 frigates against the RN's 6 and 10 respectively
Aegis Destroyers
>4 Kongo
>2 Atago
>2 Maya
AAW Destroyers
>9 Murasame
>5 Takanami
>4 Akizuki
>2 Asahi
Literally anything firing ESSM is mogging anything firing CAMM and equal to the Aster 15. The sensors and Link 11 at a minimum on all those ships help too. UK AAW missiles are a fricking joke compared to something like the SM-6 and the chart doesn't even include the SM-3
>then the PLA is history's most perfect military, eh, moron
Oh yeah the famous communist country known as Japan known for silencing journalism.
>just a few months ago POW and QE were simultaneously on major exercises on opposite sides of the Atlantic
Wow there was a couple of months where one wasn't stuck in port. That is conducive of a healthy operational capability.
>semantics
2 destroyers and 2 frigates isn't enough to be an escort for a carrier. It's not semantics.
>notice: when it's the Japs he claims "DDs", when it's the RN he says "surface combatant"
What are you talking about? I'm saying that Japan's DD fleet ignoring frigates and others outnumbers the RN when counting all of their CVs, their DDs, their FFs, and Corvettes. I'm being generous to the RN here by including all of their surface combatants. How is it biased against the RN?
>wienersucking the JMSDF to that extent
You have it wrong. I'm shitting on the RN.
>9 Murasame
>5 Takanami
>4 Akizuki
>2 Asahi
These are all frigate-sized
No, you are still a dumb frick and your classification is wrong. RN has much more combat vessels than JMSDF.
Dude. I'm not the other guy but give it up. You got schooled.
>responding unironically to bait
even the other other guy didn't bite
It wasnt a bait, and I was right.
i always liked the little JMSDF DDs, especially the new Asahi class. Cool ships.
No nukes, JMSDF sinks and goes on kill streak vs USN. JMSDF newest Lithium Diesel Electrics are spooky.
Within a month, all SSNs and CVNs are not able to be in Pacific safely. Sweden and JMSDF currently have most silent attack subs. And Japan has it in numbers.
Also USN has debuff. Our high schoolers are unironically 89iq
>No nukes
Have you ever heard of the "Japan Option" in regards to nuclear latency?
They're literally the poster child example of a nation that is fully technologically nuclear-capable and possesses the nuclear material needed to construct a weapon, it is theorized japan even has a warhead design and the piece-parts needed to assemble a functional bomb, including the core, they just have never ACTUALLY assembled the thing and can therefore claim to be a non-nuclear armed nation.
Plus their solid fuelled rocket, designed to launch at short notice with minimal crew.
Why do they need that capability? For science satellites of course.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_(rocket)
You never know when you'll wanna launch a satellite
Yeah it's pretty clearly an ICBM that has never been tested as such but has performed basically identical operations that would be required for delivering a warhead if japan just happened to find one laying around one day.
>if japan just happened to find one laying around one day
You can't be suggesting that Japan used some of it's (civilian purposes only, swear on me mum) plutonium stockpiles to make nuclear pits
Noooooooo, that would be crazy talk, no one would ever be that sneaky...
Lol, wtf is this rambling? USN would absolutely fricking oblitherate the JMSDF, and American subs are much better than Jap ones.
The USMC and Royal Marines should amalgamate into the United States Marine Corps of His Majesty's Royal Marines. Only then will they have the numbers to challenge the People's Liberation Army Navy Marine Corps
pretty sure Shandong CBG could take on all 4 jap flat tops
Here we go again.
Nanking didn't happen, but it should've.
East asian are so tiresome.
We could do with less of them.
Regardless of what they get on their deck, we better get itasha weaponry.
>itasha
Those are not cars, dumb Black person.
Itaheri for helicopter.
The baka gaijin don't give a shit, it's the nips that the nip navy has to fool. They are welcome to adjust their constitution and start a WNC-worthy naval arms race but they don't have the votes.
Can you put F-35s on it though? Good on the he nips for building some real weapons.
the specific class in OP's image no, but they have a pair of bigger ones that are being adapted to run STOVL planes as we speak
The carrier exists as a loitering threat, gunboat diplomacy in 2024.
This is the only reason they aren't made redundant by missiles. Yes as air superiority fighter the f35 can contest missiles, theoretically it could be used as extended air defence for a fleet at sea.
But if a hypersonic missile from a h114 is coming in at your group, and you've got f35b in the air, what are your odds? H114 hypersonic is nuclear capable, big nuclear capable.
>H114
What schizo dream did you make this up from?
Also Japan is working on a 40mm rail gun specifically designed to intercept ballistic and hypersonic missiles.
> your aircraft carrier is useless if we fire a nuclear hypersonic missile at it
Wow, I'm shocked the military strategists were able to develop such a nuanced plan of attack.
It's such a shame JMSDF doesn't have any other types of destroyers, especially air defense destroyers with AEGIS and missiles they co-developed with USA
Fricking helicopters
>>and then we said "it's a destroyeru" and they berieved it! ahaha baka gaijin-kun
Ah no blut flunnier. So he said 'Is that an aircraft clarrier' and I saw 'Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooit is clarrier for helclopter!". So flucking flunny
It's almost as though we really couldn't give a shit