Japan is converting its 2 biggest warships into aircraft carriers, and US Marines are helping it train to use them

[DJ_Viper]

These ships are smaller than Type 075.

These will host about 35 -35's and a few combat / SAR helicopters. Is there a Chinese analogue to these too? Any VTOL projects in the pipes?

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

These will host about 35 -35's and a few combat / SAR helicopters. Is there a Chinese analogue to these too? Any VTOL projects in the pipes?

Type 076 is much bigger and carries attack drones like GJ-11 which are jet powered and have heavier strike power compared to F-35B.

Hongdu GJ-11 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[LeGenD]

Is this training similar to Afghan Nation Army that Amreekans provided... LOL.... Trust me in the face of formidable opponent you Amreekans are/will be reduced to Internet warriors ONLY with lots of CGI because way things are unfolding I am 100% certain your run of the mill strategy of proxies & terrorists will not work.... PEROID....

Apples and Oranges comparison. If you do not understand difference between Afghanistan and Japan then do not comment on this topic. Let us have informed members have conversations in this thread instead.

China is bigger then all these countries combined

This does not makes an iota of difference in Pacific waters.

The thing is that F-35 force will need a base or ACC to fly from and Chinese A2D capabilities are very robust which can keep ACCs & aircrafts far from their EEZ.

This remains to be seen. Yes, Chinese defenses have improved a lot in recent years. However, ACC do not operate in isolation*, and F-35A/B/C are designed to operate and deliver results in heavily defended spaces**. These jet fighters are not developed for Afghanistan.

*Each ACC is granted a suitable escort when involved in a military operation.

JMSDF is one of the best equipped forces in Pacific waters.

Japan's New Super-Sized Destroyer Will Help Defend Against Ballistic Missiles And More

The pair of ships could shoot down North Korea missiles, as well as challenge Chinese claims and aid Japan in projecting power beyond its shores.

www.thedrive.com

Japan commissions 12th and final Soryu-class diesel-electric attack submarine

The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) commissioned its 12th and final Soryu-class diesel-electric attack submarine (SSK) in a ceremony held on 24 March in Hyogo...

www.janes.com

Japan Submarine Capabilities

Overview of Japan's submarine capabilities and import-export behavior.

www.nti.org

**F-35A/B/C = VLO + incredibly advanced sensor systems + significant EW capabilities in single package.

What Chinese can do to USN in it's backyard US knows it well that is why US will not fight a direct war with China, Agis is not what it was in 80s that tech can be overwhelmed with saturated strikes and jammed too

FYI

"Appendix B. U.S. Navy’s Ability to Counter Chinese ASBMs

This appendix provides additional discussion of the issue of the U.S. Navy’s ability to counter China’s ASBMs.

Although China’s projected ASBM, as a new type of weapon, might be considered a “game changer,” that does not mean it cannot be countered. There are several potential approaches for countering an ASBM that can be imagined, and these approaches could be used in combination.

The ASBM is not the first “game changer” that the Navy has confronted; the Navy in the past has developed counters for other new types of weapons, such as ASCMs, and is likely exploring various approaches for countering ASBMs.
Countering China’s projected ASBMs could involve employing a combination of active (i.e., “hard-kill”) measures, such as shooting down ASBMs with interceptor missiles, and passive (i.e., “soft-kill”) measures, such as those for masking the exact location of Navy ships or confusing ASBM reentry vehicles. Employing a combination of active and passive measures would attack various points in the ASBM “kill chain”—the sequence of events that needs to be completed to carry out a successful ASBM attack. This sequence includes detection, identification, and localization of the target ship, transmission of that data to the ASBM launcher, firing the ASBM, and having the ASBM reentry vehicle find the target ship.

Attacking various points in an opponent’s kill chain is an established method for countering an opponent’s military capability. A September 30, 2011, press report, for example, quotes Lieutenant General Herbert Carlisle, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for operations, plans, and requirements, as stating in regard to Air Force planning that “We’ve taken [China’s] kill chains apart to the ‘nth’ degree.”

To attack the ASBM kill chain, Navy surface ships, for example, could operate in ways (such as controlling electromagnetic emissions or using deception emitters) that make it more difficult for China to detect, identify, and track those ships. The Navy could acquire weapons and systems for disabling or jamming China’s long-range maritime surveillance and targeting systems, for attacking ASBM launchers, for destroying ASBMs in various stages of flight, and for decoying and confusing ASBMs as they approach their intended targets. Options for destroying ASBMs in flight include the SM-3 midcourse BMD interceptor missile (including the new Block IIA version), the SM-6 terminal-defense BMD interceptor missile, and accelerating development and deployment of the hypervelocity projectile (HVP), electromagnetic rail gun (EMRG), and solid state lasers (SSLs).

Options for decoying and confusing ASBMs as they approach their intended targets include equipping ships with systems, such as electronic warfare systems or systems for generating radar-opaque smoke clouds or radar-opaque carbon-fiber clouds, that could confuse an ASBM’s terminal-guidance radar."

Learn more in following source:

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/row/RL33153.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiH4POrwcfzAhVlDmMBHWpRAk0QFnoECAUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0EEiPTtOYd38IrVfL2tvxJ

Expansion of the Chinese PLAN in both quantitative and qualitative respects posit greatest threat to USN in Pacific waters. China understands this deep down.

China is up against AUKUS and Japan in the Pacific, however.

Defense and Diplomacy shall proceed hand-in-hand. One cannot outfight an entire alliance of well-equipped countries in conventional warfare.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

So what's their classification now? Still destroyer or changed to aircraft carrier?

 

[Basel]

You seem to know all about Aegis, care to tell us how it's saturated? I hope you can comprehend mathematics before answering. A CBG can have about 30 ships. If 10 of those are Aegis ships, each one of these is interlinked yet has it own compute processing capacity. So if one ships can track 300 targets, combined it would be 3000! This is obliviously an example I'm giving out. But this isn't just a SAM system. It's internetwork of various anti-missile systems in layers. Also, don't forget the counter attack scenario if a CBG is attacked.

USN CSG don't have enough SAMs to stop the barrage of Chinese Missiles, it will be hell for ISN in Chinese backyard no matter how power you claim USM is, even they know it's not possible to defeat China in it's backyard, there is a reason US military Chief talked with Chinese Military to avoid war during Trump Administration time.

Apples and Oranges comparison. If you do not understand difference between Afghanistan and Japan then do not comment on this topic. Let us have informed members have conversations in this thread instead.

This does not makes an iota of difference in Pacific waters.


This remains to be seen. Yes, Chinese defenses have improved a lot in recent years. However, ACC do not operate in isolation*, and F-35A/B/C are designed to operate and deliver results in heavily defended spaces**. These jet fighters are not developed for Afghanistan.

*Each ACC is granted a suitable escort when involved in a military operation.

JMSDF is one of the best equipped forces in Pacific waters.

Japan's New Super-Sized Destroyer Will Help Defend Against Ballistic Missiles And More

The pair of ships could shoot down North Korea missiles, as well as challenge Chinese claims and aid Japan in projecting power beyond its shores.

www.thedrive.com

Japan commissions 12th and final Soryu-class diesel-electric attack submarine

The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) commissioned its 12th and final Soryu-class diesel-electric attack submarine (SSK) in a ceremony held on 24 March in Hyogo...

www.janes.com

Japan Submarine Capabilities

Overview of Japan's submarine capabilities and import-export behavior.

www.nti.org

**F-35A/B/C = VLO + incredibly advanced sensor systems + significant EW capabilities in single package.


FYI

"Appendix B. U.S. Navy’s Ability to Counter Chinese ASBMs

This appendix provides additional discussion of the issue of the U.S. Navy’s ability to counter China’s ASBMs.

Although China’s projected ASBM, as a new type of weapon, might be considered a “game changer,” that does not mean it cannot be countered. There are several potential approaches for countering an ASBM that can be imagined, and these approaches could be used in combination.

The ASBM is not the first “game changer” that the Navy has confronted; the Navy in the past has developed counters for other new types of weapons, such as ASCMs, and is likely exploring various approaches for countering ASBMs.
Countering China’s projected ASBMs could involve employing a combination of active (i.e., “hard-kill”) measures, such as shooting down ASBMs with interceptor missiles, and passive (i.e., “soft-kill”) measures, such as those for masking the exact location of Navy ships or confusing ASBM reentry vehicles. Employing a combination of active and passive measures would attack various points in the ASBM “kill chain”—the sequence of events that needs to be completed to carry out a successful ASBM attack. This sequence includes detection, identification, and localization of the target ship, transmission of that data to the ASBM launcher, firing the ASBM, and having the ASBM reentry vehicle find the target ship.

Attacking various points in an opponent’s kill chain is an established method for countering an opponent’s military capability. A September 30, 2011, press report, for example, quotes Lieutenant General Herbert Carlisle, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for operations, plans, and requirements, as stating in regard to Air Force planning that “We’ve taken [China’s] kill chains apart to the ‘nth’ degree.”

To attack the ASBM kill chain, Navy surface ships, for example, could operate in ways (such as controlling electromagnetic emissions or using deception emitters) that make it more difficult for China to detect, identify, and track those ships. The Navy could acquire weapons and systems for disabling or jamming China’s long-range maritime surveillance and targeting systems, for attacking ASBM launchers, for destroying ASBMs in various stages of flight, and for decoying and confusing ASBMs as they approach their intended targets. Options for destroying ASBMs in flight include the SM-3 midcourse BMD interceptor missile (including the new Block IIA version), the SM-6 terminal-defense BMD interceptor missile, and accelerating development and deployment of the hypervelocity projectile (HVP), electromagnetic rail gun (EMRG), and solid state lasers (SSLs).

Options for decoying and confusing ASBMs as they approach their intended targets include equipping ships with systems, such as electronic warfare systems or systems for generating radar-opaque smoke clouds or radar-opaque carbon-fiber clouds, that could confuse an ASBM’s terminal-guidance radar."

Learn more in following source:

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/row/RL33153.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiH4POrwcfzAhVlDmMBHWpRAk0QFnoECAUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0EEiPTtOYd38IrVfL2tvxJ

Expansion of the Chinese PLAN in both quantitative and qualitative respects posit greatest threat to USN in Pacific waters. China understands this deep down.

China is up against AUKUS and Japan in the Pacific, however.

Defense and Diplomacy shall proceed hand-in-hand. One cannot outfight an entire alliance of well-equipped countries in conventional warfare.

China may not be strong far from it's EEZ but in it's backyard it is force to reckon with, also you think that China is not prepared to tackle USN in it's backyard then you have not studied what China is doing.

 

[Abid123]

Why does Japan even need a aircraft carrier?

 

[DJ_Viper]

USN CSG don't have enough SAMs to stop the barrage of Chinese Missiles, it will be hell for ISN in Chinese backyard no matter how power you claim USM is, even they know it's not possible to defeat China in it's backyard, there is a reason US military Chief talked with Chinese Military to avoid war during Trump Administration time.

China may not be strong far from it's EEZ but in it's backyard it is force to reckon with, also you think that China is not prepared to tackle USN in it's backyard then you have not studied what China is doing.

I get the "backyard" part and I think everyone else too. However, do you know the vertical launch capability that USN has? There are 8 CBG's assigned to Pacific region and usually a full CBG can have up to 30+ ships. I'm not counting aircrafts. However, again, we all understand that in China's backyard, it would be a tough fight but "in" China's backyard to limit China.

 

[8888888888888]

This isn't WW2 where SAM doesn't exist. And Chinese SAM are advance enough to shot Stealth planes so it doesn't matter how many CV they have if their planes get destroyed in the sky and then ASM can track and sink them.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Why does Japan even need a aircraft carrier?

To fight Korea, Russia, China?