Why Izumo-class and F-35B is a great couple ?

[Soryu]

You stated at the thread that you refered as above.
catapult as your stated above.

Anyway, I leave some room for others to discuss with more logical argument



DDH would bring F-35B, Japanese love that idea. Alternative is buying USS Wasp LHD.
Both solution in their plan already.

No point to speak with this idiot and troll poster ... but if you want to play with him, well ...

 

[antonius123]

@SvenSvensonov

according to experts,Izumo can't launch F-35B as it can't handle the heat of the F-35B's exhaust,as WASP class needed some serious modifications to handle it.could you please clarify the point???

Exactly.

This is the good article explaining that.

DISGRACE: NAVY’S NEW PURPOSE BUILT “F-35B CARRIER” CANNOT WITHSTAND CONTINUOUS F-35B OR MV-22 OPERATIONS | AviationIntel.com

 

[BoQ77]

Could you show us F-35B taking off from Izumo with full load? If you could then I will shut up.

LOL. Don't shut up. Keep continue.

 

[antonius123]

Wasp class lasts decades, while Izumo-class is in running development.
So Wasp need some modifications, while Izumo created with F-35B in mind.
It's much easier.

Another empty claim without evidence. LOL.

Have you read this:

Early indications suggest that the ships structural features will limit this capacity, even assuming that Japan decides to acquire the vertical and/or short take-off and landing (VSTOL) variant of the Joint Strike Fighter. For example, the elevators on Izumo are not particularly well-suited to operating the F-35, especially at any kind of high intensity.
Is Any Ship Not an Aircraft Carrier Anymore? | The Diplomat

It was already given to u before, but as usually ignored.

No point to speak with this idiot and troll poster ... but if you want to play with him, well ...

LOL. Even the US' LHD designed to handle F-35B from the beginning still have problem with it, while u call somebody else idiot

DISGRACE: NAVY’S NEW PURPOSE BUILT “F-35B CARRIER” CANNOT WITHSTAND CONTINUOUS F-35B OR MV-22 OPERATIONS | AviationIntel.com


SNA 2014: Heat From F-35, MV-22 Continue to Plague Big Deck Amphibs - USNI News

 

[BoQ77]

Have you read this:

Early indications suggest that the ships structural features will limit this capacity, even assuming that Japan decides to acquire the vertical and/or short take-off and landing (VSTOL) variant of the Joint Strike Fighter. For example, the elevators on Izumo are not particularly well-suited to operating the F-35, especially at any kind of high intensity.
Is Any Ship Not an Aircraft Carrier Anymore? | The Diplomat

check again the date of that article.
It's good for Japan if every opposers have good dream about the "helicopter carrier".
It's good, undeniable !!!

 

[antonius123]

check again the date of that article.
It's good for Japan if every opposers have good dream about the "helicopter carrier".
It's good, undeniable !!!

Why u think Izumo is already better than current American's LHD? dont u read that even US LHD still encountering problem with F-35B and Osprey? It seems useless giving u any article or evidence as u keep being ignorant.

See .. It is clear that there is no value debating with you. People give u evidence while you counter with delusion.

From the first page I am expecting any evidence that you can bring, but nothing.
Empty claim, pure assumption, delusion, evasion, ignorance and failure to read/comprehend people argument that you consistently show.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

The question should be "could F-35B ( with max payload ) take off at short distance 550 feet on flat top?"
The answer "Lockheed Martin must fulfill that need" as designed. And the take off distance for ski jump is 450 feet.

@SvenSvensonov

Sorry I'm late with this, the F-35b on board Izumo will have the same launch capabilities as those launched from the US Wasp Class, or as Lockheed states:

F-35B SPECIFICATIONS
Length 51.2 ft /
15.6 m
Height 14.3 ft /
4.36 m
Wingspan 35 ft /
10.7 m
Wing area 460 sq ft /
42.7 sq m
Horizontal tail span
21.8 ft /
6.65 m

Weight empty 32,300 lb
Internal fuel capacity 13,100 lb
Weapons payload 15,000 lb /
6,800 kg
Standard internal weapons load
Two AIM-120C air-to-air missiles

Two 1,000-pound GBU-32 JDAM guided bombs

Maximum weight 60,000 lb class
Propulsion*(uninstalled thrust ratings)
F135-PW-600
38,000 lb Max.
26,000 lb Mil.
40,500 lb Vertical


Speed (full internal weapons load) Mach 1.6 (~1,200 mph)
Combat radius(internal fuel) >450 nm /
833 km
Range (internal fuel) >900 nm /
1,667 km
Max g-rating 7.0

This F-35b will take off conventionally, but land vertically, so its payload can be increased and arrestor cables wont be needed on the Izumo, the F-35b is a Stovl variant. The USN's F-35c will retain arrestor hooks for conventional us onboard USN Catobar carriers.

This video of an F-35b shows its ability to take off from an Izumo-type (not class, this is a US ship) ship, in this instance a US Wasp Class:

these ones demonstrates the F-35b's take-off capabilities from a short-deck carrier - USS Wasp LHD-1:

This one demonstrates the F-35b's landing capabilities:

The F-35 will have more capability than the A/V-8 Harrier in payload.

To answer your question in a short way, yes, the F-35b can take-off from the short distances on Izumo thanks to its Stovl configuration.

The videos prove this.

Which aircraft are u referring - regarding F-35B designed to take off with full load?

If Nimitz, of course.
If modified Wasp LHD, maybe?
If Izumo ..... ? probably not - unless you modify Izumo first.

You need bring evidence for your claim instead of basing it on mere assumption.

The C variant will operate from USN carriers - not the B, the F-35b will be used by the USMC on board amphibs, it was designed to be a short take-off variant for use on smaller decks.

Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The USMC will also operate the F-35c as part of its deployment on US carriers, but the Navy will not use the B

 

[Armstrong]

@SvenSvensonov - I hope everything is alright now and that your hospital visit wasn't a cause for much concern !

On Topic: Why don't the Japanese produce proper carriers like the Nimitz; why this helicopter-esque carrier ?

 

[Armstrong]

Relax, it wasn't me that was the problem. I work at Mary Washington University Hospital, partially as a behavioral psychologist, partially as a biomechatronic research for the US military - I'm on 24 hour emergency call. Had a situation last night, my help was needed.

If I ever write that I heading to the emergency room/hospital, it's most likely work related, though I am accident prone.

You are Freud Magnusson ?

You know I dunno if most of these 'isms' and 'disorders' we've labelled exist as we think they do or are we just in a way rationalizing why some people are just plain idiotic lazy arsed basterds while others are just socially degenerative products of a failed experiment by Mother Nature !

What would be next ? A rapist is a rapist because of some evolutionary hormonal imbalance and its effects etching on to his psyche ? Instead of someone who needs to be castrated so that the next time he so much as looks at a women he winces from the memory of what happened to him last time ?

What do you say @Nihonjin1051 ?

They don't really have the capabilities to do so (neither do the Russians for all their talk about building new carriers the size of US ones) - the infrastructure isn't there, and it does differ from amphib production, especially if you go with nuclear propulsion. Add the high cost of production and maintenance and a lack of dedicated carrier aircraft and trained crews and this will not be too possible or likely in the near future.

Best still with subs and amphibs.

Why don't you share the tech with the Japanese ? I mean I understand that you guys are still riled up about the beating the @Nihonjin1051 's Yammamotto san gave you guys but let the past be the past and lets move forward !

I've always wanted Pakistan to have a carrier sized missile frigate thats practically the size of an island sized armed to the teeth bunker floating in water !

Though I know we can't have one !

I hope we get more Subs so as to put India's carriers out of commission in case of war !

But we do have that carrier killer missile that the Chinese came up with !

I just hope it works !

 

[Armstrong]

Other peoples idiotic laziness is my financial wind-fall... so I'm not complaining. Bring on the idiots.



View attachment 198151

Oh come on the Chinese have come a long...long way; they're producing some very fine goods now !

 

[BoQ77]

USS Wasp and F-35B, V-22 are for USMC. When Japan adopt that idea with Izumo and F-35B, mV-22b, we could guess they use those as similar purpose.

F-35B as air cover for the fleet and mV-22b for fast deployment of troops to remote islands.

This is older design.

This is new idea

MV-22B with max payload 9 tons or 32 troops and speed from 446 km/h to top speed 565km/h and combat radius 722 km; range 1,627 km
could do many things which other design unable to do or do with less effective. It could transport the troops or cargos to nearly anywhere offshore of Japan.

 

[antonius123]

Other peoples idiotic laziness is my financial wind-fall... so I'm not complaining. Bring on the idiots.



View attachment 198151

Yeap, but made-in-usa LHD is also facing trouble with F-35B and Osprey.
While there is kid here delusioning that Izumo already has been able to operate F-35B to face Liaoning effectively.

 

[hans]

why are you arguing with these Vietnamese members?
They are not talk about facts here..
They are just trying every post to say something bad for China or praise the competitor of China...
You are never going to persuade them...

Yeap, but made-in-usa LHD is also facing trouble with F-35B and Osprey.
While there is kid here delusioning that Izumo already has been able to operate F-35B to face Liaoning effectively.

 

[BoQ77]

Yeap, but made-in-usa LHD is also facing trouble with F-35B and Osprey.
While there is kid here delusioning that Izumo already has been able to operate F-35B to face Liaoning effectively.

why are you arguing with these Vietnamese members?
They are not talk about facts here..
They are just trying every post to say something bad for China or praise the competitor of China...
You are never going to persuade them...

You guys derailing the thread. Pls on topic
1. I never mentioned anything relate to Liaoning here
2. I never mentioned anything relate to China here

 

[antonius123]

The C variant will operate from USN carriers - not the B, the F-35b will be used by the USMC on board amphibs, it was designed to be a short take-off variant for use on smaller decks.

Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The USMC will also operate the F-35c as part of its deployment on US carriers, but the Navy will not use the B

It seems F-35B will have limited capability compared to F-35C with larger wing and launched by catapult.

Probably F-35B will be limited as attack a/c?

USS Wasp and F-35B, V-22 are for USMC. When Japan adopt that idea with Izumo and F-35B, mV-22b, we could guess they use those as similar purpose.

F-35B as air cover for the fleet and mV-22b for fast deployment of troops to remote islands.

This is older design.

This is new idea

MV-22B with max payload 9 tons or 32 troops and speed from 446 km/h to top speed 565km/h and combat radius 722 km; range 1,627 km
could do many things which other design unable to do or do with less effective. It could transport the troops or cargos to nearly anywhere offshore of Japan.

There is no new designed of Izumo/Hyuga that is able to operate F-35B at the moment.
In fact it is still long way to go if Japan want to convert the Izumo so that it can operate F-35B effectively.

This is for you to wake up from day dreaming:



F-35 conundrum

Let’s get this straight: yes, the Izumo is long enough for launching planes with short take-off and vertical landing (or STOVL) capabilities, and yes, Japan is purchasing the F-35 which has a STOVL-capable F-35B. These two facts have driven rumors of Japanese intentions to convert the Izumo into a conventional carrier. These rumors are ignorant and deluded.

First, let’s look at the F-35 that Tokyo is actually buying: the conventional take-off and landing F-35A, not the STOVL-capable F-35B or even catapult-compatible F-35C you’d expect to see gracing an aircraft carrier. Furthermore, these jets will be going the Air Self-Defense Force rather than the Maritime Self-Defense Force.

Even were the MSDF to buy some F-35Bs for their boat, the purchase will take several years to grow fruit. The selection process for the ASDF purchase of 42 F-35As began in July 2009 following the U.S. Senate ban on exports of the F-22; and only four U.S.-made planes will enter service by 2017 while the other 38 will be built domestically for completion by 2021 at the earliest. Any attempt to pick up the F-35B would require a few years lead time in order to adequately meet Japanese government bidding requirements.

Leaving aside the airframes, several other hurdles remain before F-35s can take off from the Izumo’s deck.

One of these is the lack of carrier operation skills within the MSDF itself. Japan has not operated naval fighters since 1945. Pilots will need training in combat flight and carrier operations, so will all of the the support staff who safely help get the birds in the air. While the MSDF would surely be able to cross-train with the ASDF and U.S. Navy, it adds more time, effort and money into the conversion process.

There are also numerous hurdles. Japan’s military will have to jet-proof the deck, as well as to arrange and fit the equipment necessary to support a jet.

Critics are viewing the Izumo as a de facto strike carrier — bringing to mind Japan’s supposed “latent” or “virtual” nuclear capability in which Japan has the technology and know-how to build a nuclear weapon at very short notice. While they may be technologically capable in both regards, such views of Japanese capabilities ignore public resistance to having a combat-ready fighter-carrying aircraft carrier, as well as the budgetary restraints faced by the MSDF. It also ignores the immediacy and enormity of a threat that would be required to force Japan’s hand, particularly while it is able to benefit from the carrier-borne protection provided courtesy of the U.S. Navy.

Is It a Duck? Is It an Aircraft Carrier? No! It’s Japan’s ‘Helicopter Destroyer’ — War Is Boring — Medium