New JMSDF Hyuga

[Jack Ray]

Hello Jack, I am still having problems finding my way about this web-site, so if you're not Jack (sorry). You can't call that ship or any other simular looking ship a destroyer unless you use it in the term it can destroy things, with vast ships like Enterprise and the Big E a prime super large target, the ship in question is clearly a down size scale of an attack craft capable of carrying an aray of winged craft. And I love it, it simply takes us into the 21st centery (spelt that wrong), this is why I also believe the U.S took on the USS Freedom.

Hi Alec, welcome aboard!

It is an elegant little carrier.

Jack

[Gone Asiatic]

Call it Junyo Light.

I`d try a beer by that label!

By the way, Royal Thai Navy was the first Asiatic navy to operate an aircraft carrier....discounting the Soviet Far East and Australia.

[aleccap]

Hello Les, okay so what's "Junyo Light ?" Everyone seems to be rubbishing those new type warships, and I believe no has made any comment on the Charles De Gaulle aircraft carrier, that was a new ship, a strange looking forward island, on-board weapon systems, loads of aircraft - this vast ship had been back and forward to the repair dock more times then I had beer The USS Fredom made by people that normally make jet craft/engines.

[Gone Asiatic]

The USS Fredom made by people that normally make jet craft/engines.

....and won`t be makin` many more hyper-expensive gunboats!

[ASFC]

There is a difference between 'rubbishing' these warships and people saying it can do something they can't. Until I see the Hyuga carry and operate either Harriers or F-35B, then it isn't an Aircraft Carrier in the fixed wing sense, but either a very large ASW Cruiser* or a Helicopter Carrier/LPH, like the Ocean**. I'm not saying its a rubbish warship-it seems it will be a very capable ASW/Command platform that the JMSDF needs. I agree with the consensus on here that it could be easily modified as such (ski-jump etc) but they haven't done it yet. I feel this ship is more of a response to these which are in service with the ROK Navy.

LCS on the other hand is a different matter entirely. Its more a hyper-expensive Toothless tiger than a Warship, and until it proves itself otherwise deserves all the p!sstaking it is suffering.

*I presume the Japanese are following the trend in most World Navies in not calling it a Cruiser, but a Destroyer instead.

**The Ocean can and often does suffer from 'Hyuga's disease' ( )-books and websites often claim it is an Aircraft Carrier because it is built on an Invincible Hull and is the right length. But I don't think it has ever operated Harriers and certainly can't service them either.

[Jack Ray]

There is a difference between 'rubbishing' these warships and people saying it can do something they can't. Until I see the Hyuga carry and operate either Harriers or F-35B, then it isn't an Aircraft Carrier in the fixed wing sense, but either a very large ASW Cruiser* or a Helicopter Carrier/LPH, like the Ocean**. I'm not saying its a rubbish warship-it seems it will be a very capable ASW/Command platform that the JMSDF needs. I agree with the consensus on here that it could be easily modified as such (ski-jump etc) but they haven't done it yet. I feel this ship is more of a response to these which are in service with the ROK Navy.

LCS on the other hand is a different matter entirely. Its more a hyper-expensive Toothless tiger than a Warship, and until it proves itself otherwise deserves all the p!sstaking it is suffering.

*I presume the Japanese are following the trend in most World Navies in not calling it a Cruiser, but a Destroyer instead.

**The Ocean can and often does suffer from 'Hyuga's disease' ( )-books and websites often claim it is an Aircraft Carrier because it is built on an Invincible Hull and is the right length. But I don't think it has ever operated Harriers and certainly can't service them either.

"these" look pretty cool too! Very similar to Hyuga as you said.

Dokdo Assault Ship ROK.jpg

[Lesforan]

Alec,

My reference to "Junyo Light" was simply that this carrier appears to be a modern, lighter version of what was already a light Japanese carrier of WWII.

This ship, and the ships of the South Korean Dokdo Class, are really nifty little carriers despite what they are called or temporarily used for. It wasn't my intention to put this ship down. But if this ship was intended to be merely a helicopter carrier, it wouldn't need the design features it was built with.

Harriers, in a pinch, can operate off many ships with much less of a flight deck than this, even helicopter landing pads. So certainly this ship can operate fixed wing aircraft.

[aleccap]

Hello, sadly my knowledge doesn't obviously go as far as everyone else, the JMSDF ship launched at Yokohama Aug 23rd, apparently from what little I understand she'll displace just 18,000 tonnes fully loaded about the size of the planned U.S destroyer that no doubt everyone also knows about, the Zumwalt class DDG 1000 class, I guess it does matter that a destroyer has to look like a destroyer and not a heil carrier, and obviously off the top of my head the U.S would never launch the BIG "E" 2 and call her a battleship. Having said all that, I honestly believe someone somewhere has mucked up with the description of the JMSDF HYUGA as in 1943 that was also the name of one of their battleship's, therefore I can only conclude by saying she's a good looking ship for a helicopter carrier, and a solid base for all those missile pods she's also carrying.

[ASFC]

The Japanese haven't screwed up their naming of this ship, they are just working around their consititution. Whilst technically only 'Attack' carriers are banned, it can be difficult for Joe public to know the difference (hell if journos struggle.......) so they are playing it safe name wise.

What I would be really interested in seeing/knowing is the size of her Hanger and what aviation servicing facilities she has. Those will be the real limits of how many F-35 she could carry.

Harriers, in a pinch, can operate off many ships with much less of a flight deck than this, even helicopter landing pads. So certainly this ship can operate fixed wing aircraft.

Oh yes, there is quite a famous piccy of one of our Harriers parked on the deck of HMS Fearless, and of course we have ferried the things around on RO-RO vessels like the Atlantic Conveyor. BUT-can they carry a useful (i.e. Combat) load whilst doing this?? I suspect not......

[chuck]

The Japanese haven't screwed up their naming of this ship, they are just working around their consititution. Whilst technically only 'Attack' carriers are banned, it can be difficult for Joe public to know the difference (hell if journos struggle.......) so they are playing it safe name wise.

So for the sake of constitutional propriety, they ought to rename destroyers "creators".

[Gerarddm]

So for the sake of constitutional propriety, they ought to rename destroyers "creators".

Ah yes, the Shiva class.

[ASFC]

The Japanese haven't screwed up their naming of this ship, they are just working around their consititution. Whilst technically only 'Attack' carriers are banned, it can be difficult for Joe public to know the difference (hell if journos struggle.......) so they are playing it safe name wise.

So for the sake of constitutional propriety, they ought to rename destroyers "creators".

I didn't say I agreed with it. Its their constitution not mine.

[Lesforan]

Maybe what the Japanese need is a "truth in labelling " law.

How would you define a defensive weapons system as opposed to an offensive one? Almost all weapons, and certainly warships, can be employed in either role. The true difference is not what the weapon is, but how it is used. Even a ASW ship can be used as an offensive weapon if it is employed to provide screening for a fleet on an offensive mission.

Maybe the Japanese need to call their carrier a carrier and their navy a navy. At least it is better than the Chinese navy's name "People's Liberation Army Navy". It has been 63 years, time to end the charade.

[aleccap]

the F-35 lightning which has a stealth and multi-roll capablity has a wing span of 35 foot with a length just over 50 foot, is actually 4 foot longer then a harrier jump jet, the Hyuga hasn't been constructed with a hanger that won't support this craft, and although everyone appears somewhat excited about this "destroyer" mis-placed word or term, it is designed for combat and not a cruise around the med, ski ramp or not, you really have to look at the stat's, the size of the hanger bay, flat deck, surface to air missiles, I still maintain, harrier, F-35 lightning, attact helicopters, she's no Matkin Island, more a smaller brother.

[aleccap]

Defense News in the US reported shortly after Hy?ga was launched that a Japanese defense analyst with close ties to the Tokyo government suggested the new warship will engage in operations beyond those involving simple helicopters, and may be outfitted with more advanced fighters in the future.[8] Jane's Fighting Ships has classified the Hy?ga class as helicopter carriers[9] and GlobalSecurity.org states that they are helicopter destroyers.[1]

[ASFC]

The Japanese have classed her as a DDH, no point quoting internet websites, because thats what the JMSDF is using for now to describe her.

Now in one way they are right. She is armed like a DDH, carrying a small complement of Helicopters, with a wide variety of self defense armament and a very good combat computer/radar suite.

However, this ship doesn't look like a Destroyer. She is not an Aircraft Carrier yet (ok the JMSDF have a Carrier capability as a well known aim), so the question is how far does she have to go and (therefore) can she get to being an Aircraft Carrier?

Well, lets look at the ship. It is big enough (no denying that), but it is going to need a Ski-Jump if they are to use F-35B's effectively (with a combat load) (and not Harriers-where would they get decent Harriers from?). Flight deck operations might be a PITA with only one lift* capable of taking F-35, but that can be worked around.

What about the Hanger-does the ability to carry 11 Helicopters translate into being able to carry a decent number of F-35B's and Supporting Helicopters. What are the ships aviation servicing facilties like?

Presuming the above is all a 'yes' or 'we can convert to xy&z' then we have the Carrier the JMDSF has wanted for so long. If the answer is 'no' (especially in Hanger size and/or the ability to service fixed wing aircraft) then maybe not.

I know this may seem basic questions i'm asking, but having 'a large enough Flight Deck' or 'looking like a Carrier' doesn't always equal a Carrier.

*Interestingly if this is supposed to be a Carrier, I hope they fired the designer. Whats the point in having two lifts if one of them can't carry the fighter you want to use?