What's new

Japan unveils largest warship since World War II

Status
Not open for further replies.
that is why I said you are only marginally better that the joke!
get your medication presciptions ready when you try to debate with me
You are correct. I do not need to even try to debate you. Without even trying, I can make you look the fool anyway. :lol:

I fully understand it will big ask of the F-35B and the Harrier to operate with full load for combat missions

In my earlier comment, I said : (check above post)

why is wrong with this statement? Are F-35B and Harrier not capable of vertical take offs?

I guess according to both: you and the other wikipedia professional that the comment from this newspaper is not up to your class:



I wonder what the aircraft that the "experts" stated in the media have in mind! Even disregards of the vertical take-off options,
what is the length of the japanese warship? what is the min runway length for the aircraft (in the experts mind) to take offf?

Is there a difficult pict who is the real experts and who are the fake professionals? Do you know what is "visionary" assessment than a cut-and-paste from wikipedia or marginally better other sources!

Now take your pills!
No. You got busted.

Post 207 (jhungary) was clearly talking about a combat loaded F-35B on a helo carrier -- as in NOT CAPABLE.

The man said it does not matter what you can carry, it is about what you can LAUNCH. Smart people, and this does not include you in this group, would understand that if you are going to launch a combat aircraft, you MUST be able to launch it WITH WEAPONS. Else why bother to 'carry' the combat aircraft if you can only launch it empty or with far less weapons?

http://defensetech.org/2013/05/20/video-f-35b-conducts-first-ever-vertical-take-off/
The vertical take off is not a combat capability, however, it is a requirement for the fielding of the F-35B fleet. The vertical take off capability will used rarely, likely only to move the aircraft’s position on a flight deck. The majority of the time, the F-35B will complete a short take off.

So for you to try to weasel out of your spectacular gaff by saying you know that the F-35B cannot launch vertically with a combat load is hilarious. Your goal all along have been trying to bust post 207 as technically incorrect and you failed. Again and again and again...:lol:
 
.
You are correct. I do not need to even try to debate you. Without even trying, I can make you look the fool anyway. :lol:


No. You got busted.

Post 207 (jhungary) was clearly talking about a combat loaded F-35B on a helo carrier -- as in NOT CAPABLE.

The man said it does not matter what you can carry, it is about what you can LAUNCH. Smart people, and this does not include you in this group, would understand that if you are going to launch a combat aircraft, you MUST be able to launch it WITH WEAPONS. Else why bother to 'carry' the combat aircraft if you can only launch it empty or with far less weapons?

http://defensetech.org/2013/05/20/video-f-35b-conducts-first-ever-vertical-take-off/


So for you to try to weasel out of your spectacular gaff by saying you know that the F-35B cannot launch vertically with a combat load is hilarious. Your goal all along have been trying to bust post 207 as technically incorrect and you failed. Again and again and again...:lol:

@gambit

dont rush

I havent finished writing (with subsequent edit)

now read again take your pills
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
As of this second:
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 9 users browsing this thread. (4 members and 5 guests)
shuttler, USAHawk785, Mytharyan, Wholegrain
 
.
You missed the point. No surprise there. :lol:

The point is that not one of you ever gotten close to a bullet, let alone a nuclear weapon, so how can any of you Chinese ever know what it is like to be in fear of and in war and combat? You do not. It is no wonder that you guys talk so easy about 'nuking' someone.

War is not even an intellectual abstraction for you because the word 'intellectual' imply an objective and impartial analyses of why we fight each other, how we fight each other, and the consequences of conflicts, national and personal level. Do you know any Chinese soldier who suffers from PTSD or lost a limb? Have you ever attended a military funeral for a combat death? I will answer for you: No.

I have no problems saying that if ever a PLA missileer officer meet you or any of the Chinese members here the way you are, he would laugh in your face for the pathetic way you guys carry yourselves on the Internet about 'nuking' people, if he is kind.

First of all, you're wrong about that, second, it was you and your gang who were being the internet warriors and boasting about Japan "teaching China a lesson" with this new warship. Everything you said also applies to the Japanese and their new ships as well.

I reminded you guys that China retains an absolute supremacy in even conventional warfare and can bombard Japan with its conventional missles and strategic bombers regardless if it even has a navy, after you people started acting as if this new ship meant Japan could attack China and "teach it a lesson".

As for not letting people near the guns, conscription in mainland has ended but conscription is mandatory for all males in Taiwan. The government ensures almost everyone except the sons of officials get to hold a rifle at least once in their life and get subjected to the worst abuses by the officers. Almost everyone hates it and does their best to avoid it if they can. My father, all of my uncles on both sides of the family served as conscripts and some of them were stationed at Jinmen (not during the battle) and my great uncle served at Jinmen (Kinmen) during both of the battles over the island (the so called "strait crises"). People would shoot themselves while stuck there even during peacetime. I'm pursuing my higher studies here, nobody can drag me into the ROC military as long as I'm staying here and there is plenty of civilians with guns and bullets in America so I've been near a few.
 
.
First of all, you're wrong about that, second, it was you and your gang who were being the internet warriors and boasting about Japan "teaching China a lesson" with this new warship. Everything you said also applies to the Japanese and their new ships as well.

I reminded you guys that China retains an absolute supremacy in even conventional warfare and can bombard Japan with its conventional missles and strategic bombers regardless if it even has a navy, after you people started acting as if this new ship meant Japan could attack China and "teach it a lesson".

As for not letting people near the guns, conscription in mainland has ended but conscription is mandatory for all males in Taiwan. The government ensures almost everyone except the sons of officials get to hold a rifle at least once in their life and get subjected to the worst abuses by the officers. Almost everyone hates it and does their best to avoid it if they can. I'm pursuing my higher studies here, nobody can drag me into the ROC military as long as I'm staying here and there is plenty of civilians with guns and bullets in America so I've been near a few.

You have no supremacy whatsoever. Your nation lives under the shadows of the Mighty USN 7th Fleet , which has the capability to annihilate the PLAN. You do understand that the USN 7th Fleet , supported by the JSDF's Marine Force can take control of the entire eastern seaboard in 1 weeks' time, right?

Your manner of speech is quite interesting, its spoken as if PRC has a history of trumping the Japanese Navy. When history has proven time and time again of China's inability to challenge the Japanese in naval warfare. In two wars, your navy was wiped out by the Imperial Japanese Navy [Nihon Kaigun] despite numerical advantage on your part.

I would caution you to be weary in testing the Japanese. You might awaken a sleeping giant.

:azn:
 
.
Battle of Yalu River (1894)

800px-Battle_of_the_Yellow_Sea_by_Korechika.jpg


The Battle of the Yalu River (simplified Chinese: 黄海海战; traditional Chinese: 黃海海戰; pinyin: Huáng Hǎi Hǎizhàn; Japanese:Kōkai-kaisen (黃海海戰 lit. Naval Battle of the Yellow Sea)), was the largest naval engagement of the First Sino-Japanese War, and took place on September 17, 1894, the day after the Japanese victory at the land Battle of Pyongyang. It involved ships from the Imperial Japanese Navy and the Chinese Beiyang Fleet. The battle is also known by a variety of names: Battle of Haiyang Island, Battle of Dadonggou, Battle of the Yellow Sea and Battle of Yalu, after the geographic location of the battle, which was in the Yellow Sea off of the mouth of the Yalu River and not in the river itself. There is also no agreement among contemporary sources on the exact numbers and compositions of each fleet.


Admiral Sukeyuki Ito had his flag aboard the cruiser Matsushima with two dispatch vessels as escort; the converted-liner Saikyo Maru, British Captain John Wilson commanding; and the gunboat Akagi. The Japanese Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Kabayama Sukenori was on a tour of inspection and aboard Saikyo. The rest of the main body consisted of the cruisers Chiyoda, Itsukushima, Hashidate, Fusō and Japanese corvette Hiei. A flying squadron, composed of the cruisers Yoshino, Takachiho, Akitsushima and Naniwa, led the Japanese vessels. The Japanese advanced on the Beiyang Fleet in a column with the flying squadron leading in line astern formation with the dispatch vessels off to the port of the second squadron where the flagship was sailing.

Admiral Ding attempted to form his fleet into a southward facing line abreast with the strongest ships (Dingyuan, Zhenyuan) in the center. Newer Jiyuan, Guangjia, Chih Yuen, Jingyuan, Laiyuan, Jingyuen, and obsolete Chaoyong, Yangwei, lined from left to right. The 4-ship group led by Pingyuan had to catch up from having escorted a convoy upriver and only joined around 14:30, in time to chase off the Saikyo.

With his main squadron to the left of the Chinese, Admiral Itoh ordered the Japanese flying squadron to strike at the weak right Chinese flank. Observing his enemy's tactical movements, Admiral Ding realized that his formation prevented the Chinese battleships in the center from firing, because their smaller cruisers were between them and their opponents, and also exposed the smaller, more lightly armored ships to prolonged fire from the larger Japanese warships. In addition, with the Japanese squadrons split, the Chinese were forced to divide their fire between the two groups.

Several different explanations have been put forward as to why the Beiyang fleet did not change their formation to react to the Japanese tactics more effectively. Per Royal Navy Lieutenant William Ferdinand Tyler, stationed on Dingyuan, Admiral Ding ordered his ships to change course in such a way that would have exposed his ship, the flagship, but put the rest of the squadron in a good position to fire on the Japanese fleet; however, that Dingyuan’s captain out of cowardice deliberately did not acknowledge this order or pass it on to the rest of the fleet. Instead, he ordered Dingyuan to fire its main guns before the Japanese were in range. As captain, he was aware of the consequences – when the German Navy took Dingyuan out for gun trials in 1883, it was discovered that firing the main battery directly forward resulted in the destruction of the flying bridge. In what is now known as fragging, Admiral Ding’s legs were crushed under the wreckage of the flying bridge from the opening shot of his own vessel, and was thus out of combat for the remainder of the battle.[1] Most of his staff officers on the bridge were likewise injured or killed. The situation was worsened when the Japanese destroyed Dingyuan’s foremast, making it impossible for the flagship to signal the rest of the fleet. The Chinese fleet, with some foresight, had anticipated something like this happening and formed into three pairs of mutually supporting vessels to carry the fight on.

According to an account from James Allan, an officer aboard the U.S.-flagged supply ship Columbia, who witnessed the battle, rumors abounded that Admiral Ding deferred command to Major Constantin von Hannecken. He opined that it was not surprising that the Chinese had suffered such losses if an Army officer was directing a Naval fleet.[3]

The Chinese fleet opened fire on the Japanese fleet as they passed from port to starboard, across the bows of the Chinese vessels. They failed to score any significantly damaging hits on the Japanese with their 12 inch (305 mm) and 8.2 inch (208 mm) guns. At about 3000 yards (2700 m) (the Chinese had been steadily closing the range), the Japanese concentrated their fire on the right flank of the Chinese line, with devastating barrages poured into the Chaoyong and Yangwei. Both those vessels burst into flames, because of their heavily varnished and polished wooden surfaces[4]. Burning fiercely, both tried to save themselves by beaching.

As the Japanese ships opened fire, the Jiyuan turned and fled, followed by the Guangjia. The Jiyuan was hit only once, while the Guangjia got lost, ran aground and was scuttled a few days later by its own crew.

The Japanese had intended on swinging the flying division around the right flank of the Chinese line in an encirclement but the timely arrival of the Kuang Ping and Pingyuan and torpedo boats Fu Lung (built at Schichau) and Choi Ti, a Yarrow built vessel diverted this maneuver.

The Japanese fast cruisers veered to port and were then dispatched by Admiral Itoh to go to the assistance of Hiei, Saikyo and Akagi which had been unable to keep up with the main line, and had then been engaged by the left-hand vessels of the Chinese line when Saikyo tried to finish off the beached Yangwei.

The Japanese fleet had a numerical and tactical advantage in their more reliable, better-maintained ordnance over the Beiyang fleet, which fought with limited stocks, consisting of older foreign ammunition and shoddy domestic products.[5] Japanese shells set four Chinese vessels ablaze, destroying three. However, firefighting was well organized on the Chinese vessels. For example, the Laiyuan burned severely, yet kept firing[6]. Dingyuan stayed afloat and had a casualties of 14 dead and 25 wounded, but a total of about 850 Chinese sailors were lost in the battle with 500 wounded.

The remnants of the Beiyang Fleet retired into Lüshunkou for repairs, but was withdrawn to Weihaiwei to avoid a second encounter with the Japanese fleet during the Battle of Lushunkou. The Japanese did not pursue the retreating ships, as Dingyuan and Zhenyuan were only slightly damaged, and the Japanese had no way of knowing that the battleships suffered from a lack of ammunition.[1] The Beiyang Fleet was finally destroyed by a combined land and naval attack during the Battle of Weihaiwei.

The defeat of the Beiyang Fleet at the Battle of Yalu River was a major propaganda victory for Japan, with many major European newspapers, including the London Times, Le Temps and Sankt-Peterburgskie Vedomosti providing front page coverage and crediting the Japanese victory to its rapid assimilation of western methods technology.[1] Many credited the prompt action of foreign advisers in the Beiyang Fleet (most notably McGiffin) from keeping the fleet from total annihilation, and for keeping even the most heavily damaged Chinese ships fighting till the very end of the engagement. Some military analysts, notably U.S. Secretary of the Navy, Hilary A. Herbert called the battle ‘nearly a draw’ – although the Chinese had lost several warships, the Japanese had suffered considerable damage, and if the Chinese ammunition had been of higher quality, the outcome might have been different.[1]

The Qing dynasty government, after initially denying that its fleet had been defeated laid the blame for the Chinese defeat on the shoulders of Viceroy Li Hongzhang and Admiral Ding Ruchang, both of whom were demoted and stripped of honors. Their subordinates and relatives also suffered from the same fate. However, both men remained in their posts, and would oversee the final destruction of the Beiyang Fleet at Waihaiwei. While it was not the first battle involving pre-dreadnought technology on a wide scale (the Battle of Foochow in the 1884 Sino-French War predated it), there were significant lessons for naval observers to consider.


RESULT: Decisive Japanese victory


Reference: Wikipedia
 
.
Battle of Weihaiwei (1895)

800px-Battle_of_Weihaiwei_%28land%29.jpg



Ogata_Gekko_General_Major_Odera_Yasuzumi_in_the_Battle_of_Weihaiwei.jpg



Following its victory at the Battle of Lushunkou on 21 November 1894 the next strategic objective of the Japanese campaign was to neutralize the Qing naval base at Weihaiwai on Shandong Peninsula. This would give Japan total control over the entrance to the Bay of Bohai, and the seaward approaches to Beijing. It would also eliminate any possible threat to Japanese supply lines by the remnants of the Beiyang Fleet.[1]

The Qing naval base at Weihaiwei had been designed with the assistance of German military advisors, and was regarded by western observers as superior to Hong Kong. Captain William M. Lang, a British military advisor seconded to the Beiyang Fleet had boasted that the base was impregnable as late as autumn 1894, and had scoffed at rumors that the Japanese were planning to attack it.[1] The defenses consisted of a series of twelve land fortifications overlooking the entrances to the harbor, equipped with Krupp and Armstrong cannons, as well as two fortified islands in the bay. The entrances to the harbor were closed off by booms to prevent attacks from outside, and the remaining ships of Beiyang Fleet were anchored inside. These included some 16 warships, led by the battleship Dingyuan, protected cruisers Jingyuan and Pingyuan, and 13 torpedo boats.

RESULT:

With the fall of Weihaiwai, Prince Gong ordered that the Admiralty Board in Beijing be abolished, as China no longer had a navy. The Japanese had gained their strategic objectives of securing the seaward approach to Beijing, as well as their supply lines, and had received praise from foreign observers for the speed of the campaign.

The Battle of Weihaiwei is regarded as the last major battle of the First Sino-Japanese War, since China entered into peace negotiations in earnest with Japan shortly thereafter. However, the Battle of Yingkou and a number of minor battles would take place before the Treaty of Shimonoseki ending the war was signed.


800px-Weihaiwei_surrender.jpg


Ukiyo-e, by Mizuno Toshikata, depicting Chinese forces surrendering to Admiral Ito at the Battle of Weihaiwei.



Reference: Wikipedia
 
.
You have no supremacy whatsoever. Your nation lives under the shadows of the Mighty USN 7th Fleet , which has the capability to annihilate the PLAN. You do understand that the USN 7th Fleet , supported by the JSDF's Marine Force can take control of the entire eastern seaboard in 1 weeks' time, right?

Your manner of speech is quite interesting, its spoken as if PRC has a history of trumping the Japanese Navy. When history has proven time and time again of China's inability to challenge the Japanese in naval warfare. In two wars, your navy was wiped out by the Imperial Japanese Navy [Nihon Kaigun] despite numerical advantage on your part.

I would caution you to be weary in testing the Japanese. You might awaken a sleeping giant.

:azn:

I was obviously talking about conventional supremacy over JAPAN.

And if the USN takes China's eastern seaboard and threatens China's existence, America will get the entire world sent back to the stone age because nuclear tipped ICBMS will be flying very fast.

And your expeditionary force on Taiwan was humiliated by spear throwing aborigines.

Rover incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Formosa Expedition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

:omghaha:

China's Beiyang fleet was advised by American, British, and German officers. The entire fleet was drilled by the British officer Captain William Lang and also by Major Constantin Von Hannecken. The shells for the artillery were filled with sand and junk due to corruption and apparently Mr. Lang didn't catch note of this since he claimed that the technically superior Beiyang fleet would annhiliate the Japanese fleet. Lang was the commander of the Beiyang fleet and left just a few months before the war.

The Spectator - Google Books

The Beiyang fleet was technologically superior to the Japanese navy. Captain Lang boasted about annihilating Japan, just like your gang here is boasting about how this Japanese ship outclasses all PLAN ships
 
.
You have no supremacy whatsoever. Your nation lives under the shadows of the Mighty USN 7th Fleet , which has the capability to annihilate the PLAN. You do understand that the USN 7th Fleet , supported by the JSDF's Marine Force can take control of the entire eastern seaboard in 1 weeks' time, right?

Your manner of speech is quite interesting, its spoken as if PRC has a history of trumping the Japanese Navy. When history has proven time and time again of China's inability to challenge the Japanese in naval warfare. In two wars, your navy was wiped out by the Imperial Japanese Navy [Nihon Kaigun] despite numerical advantage on your part.

I would caution you to be weary in testing the Japanese. You might awaken a sleeping giant.

:azn:

forget about you us navy or 7th fleet blah blah blab, indian!

if you drag usnavy into real war conflict, Russia will get involved too. It will be WW3

Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 13 users browsing this thread. (6 members and 7 guests)
shuttler, szft517, faithfulguy, USAHawk785, Kiss_of_the_Dragon, Wholegrain

What's Going On?
Currently Active Users

There are currently 73 members online at the Pakistan Defence Forum.
• Administrators • Senior Mods • Mods • Int'l Mods • Think Tanks • Jr. Think Tanks • Professionals • Elite Members • Senior Members • Members

shuttler, cloud_9, culivert, INDIC, Takaavar, Alphacharlie, Thorough Pro, Aegis DDG, Icewolf, krash, Alshawi1234, ELTurco, srshkmr, Doritos11, cb4, genmirajborgza786, A.Muqeet khan, RiasatKhan, +4vsgorillas-Apebane, Jamaal Yelmaaz, Esc8781, The SC, joekrish, JAT BALWAN, saumyasupratik, balixd, shazyx, TruthSeeker, darkinsky, cabatli_53, Roby, Kiss_of_the_Dragon, khail007, indianrabbit, Strigon, faithfulguy, szft517, That Guy, SenLin, xenon54, eastwatch, hinduguy, USAHawk785, Bang Galore, rAli, Sugam, naveen mishra, Mech, Desi Guy, Armstrong, Thirdfront, Aka123, sur, Wholegrain, Yzd Khalifa, karan21, SOS Brigade, Chinese-Dragon, smuhs1, Dasboot42, arihant, Gentelman
Pakistan Defence Forum Statistics
Threads 175,966 Posts 4,096,775 Members 52,561
Welcome to our newest member, Kh_wyne
 
.
forget about you us navy ior 7th fleet blah blah blab, ndian!

if you drag usnavy into real war conflict, Russia will get involved too. It will be WW3

No, the spear wielding aboriginals will tear the USN a new hole. :omghaha:

Missles weren't around 100 years ago. Just as cavalry (horses) were rendered usless by machine guns, naval fleets are essentially rendered usless in the face of missle bombardment.
 
.
I was obviously talking about conventional supremacy over JAPAN.

And if the USN takes China's eastern seaboard and threatens China's existence, America will get the entire world sent back to the stone age because nuclear tipped ICBMS will be flying very fast.

And your expeditionary force on Taiwan was humiliated by spear throwing aborigines.

Rover incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Formosa Expedition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

:omghaha:

China's Beiyang fleet was advised by American, British, and German officers. The entire fleet was drilled by the British officer Captain William Lang and also by Major Constantin Von Hannecken. The shells for the artillery were filled with sand and junk due to corruption and apparently Mr. Lang didn't catch note of this since he claimed that the technically superior Beiyang fleet would annhiliate the Japanese fleet. Lang was the commander of the Beiyang fleet and left just a few months before the war.

The Spectator - Google Books

The Beiyang fleet was technologically superior to the Japanese navy. Captain Lang boasted about annihilating Japan, just like your gang here is boasting about how this Japanese ship outclasses all PLAN ships


The Untied States Navy does not fear or even is intimidated by your nation's navy. It is of inferior fire power and capability, 3 strike groups of the 7th Fleet, alone, is enough to send the entire PLAN to the bottom of the sea.

The Russians ? Why should we fear the Russians, we could sink their navy at whim. The Russians are not stupid knowing and understand that Japan's Naval SDF is capable of sinking their Baltic Fleet as it did back in 1905. This time, it would be backed by the Supreme Power of the 7th Fleet.
 
.
You have no supremacy whatsoever. Your nation lives under the shadows of the Mighty USN 7th Fleet , which has the capability to annihilate the PLAN. You do understand that the USN 7th Fleet , supported by the JSDF's Marine Force can take control of the entire eastern seaboard in 1 weeks' time, right?

Your manner of speech is quite interesting, its spoken as if PRC has a history of trumping the Japanese Navy. When history has proven time and time again of China's inability to challenge the Japanese in naval warfare. In two wars, your navy was wiped out by the Imperial Japanese Navy [Nihon Kaigun] despite numerical advantage on your part.

I would caution you to be weary in testing the Japanese. You might awaken a sleeping giant.

:azn:

We're not scare of your so call 7th fleet, we're looking forward for the collision course. our pass failure doesn't mean that we will foever fail: In ancient time, we were defeated numenious times by other surrounding barbarians such Hun,Khitan...Mongols...and we still prevail at the End.
 
.
No, the spear wielding aboriginals will tear the USN a new hole. :omghaha:

Missles weren't around 100 years ago. Just as cavalry (horses) were rendered usless by machine guns, naval fleets are essentiallt rendered usless in the face of missle bombardment.

Taiwan is and remains an American pawn. A client state and a partner. :azn:

We're not scare of your so call 7th fleet, we're looking forward for the collision course. our pass failure doesn't mean that we will foever fail: In ancient time, we were defeated numenious times by other surrounding barbarians such Hun,Khitan...Mongols...and we still prevail at the End.

We don't even consider you a threat, your naval fire power is so inferior and is not even equivalent to 1 Carrier Strike Force of the USN 7th Fleet.
 
.
The Untied States Navy does not fear or even is intimidated by your nation's navy. It is of inferior fire power and capability, 3 strike groups of the 7th Fleet, alone, is enough to send the entire PLAN to the bottom of the sea.

The Russians ? Why should we fear the Russians, we could sink their navy at whim. The Russians are not stupid knowing and understand that Japan's Naval SDF is capable of sinking their Baltic Fleet as it did back in 1905. This time, it would be backed by the Supreme Power of the 7th Fleet.

when you are talking about a full scale war where major nuke powers are involved it will not just be conventional warfare - delusional indian!
 
.
Taiwan is and remains an American pawn. A client state and a partner. :azn:



We don't even consider you a threat, your naval fire power is so inferior and is not even equivalent to 1 Carrier Strike Force of the USN 7th Fleet.

I'm waiting for the USN to try another "punitive expedition" against the Paiwan again. They killed an entire crew and defeated the USN marines and suffered no casualties.

Paiwan people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom