• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Japan to convert helicopter carrier Izumo into aircraft carrier

Tangmo

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Messages
17,537
Reaction score
3,415
Location
VPN @ PRC/HKG/SPORE/JPN/LA/UK/CANADA/INDIA/ EU
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Japan is living these days in a bad neighborhood. Japan is in fact living in a horrendous neighborhood given its historic neighbors are North Korea, the CCP Boyz in Beijing, Putin's Russia. So Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is taking necessary steps to protect the country from predators. Specifically and as recently as last week, one aircraft carrier and 100 F-35 on order from the US.


Japan to convert helicopter carrier Izumo into aircraft carrier

The government's latest defense plan calls for the vessel to be converted to carry F-35 jets.

Plan to be included in new defense program, raising constitutional questions.


DECEMBER 11, 2018
Reuters

japan-navy-1-768x495.jpg

Japan helicopter carrier Izumo and ships of Japan Maritime Self Defense Force join with US aircraft carrier strike force during exercises in the East Sea.


TOKYO -- Japan plans to convert the Maritime Self-Defense Force's helicopter carrier Izumo into an aircraft carrier under a new basic defense program to be adopted later this month.

The plan was revealed in an outline of the program presented by the government at a national security meeting at the prime minister's office on Tuesday. The outline states that the Izumo will be converted into an aircraft carrier, enabling Japan to deploy the U.S.-built, short-takeoff and vertical-landing F-35 fighters on the vessel.

Critics warn that if the ship is converted it will give Japan the ability to strike military bases overseas, despite the government's repeated denials. The current interpretation of Japan's pacifist constitution limits the country's military capabilities to self-defense.

The outline stresses the importance of defense in new areas including space, cyber and electronic warfare. At the start of the meeting, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said the government should "abandon the existing concept of ground, maritime and air defense and carry out reforms at an unprecedented speed."

The government intends to adopt the new defense program at a cabinet meeting on Dec. 18. The ruling Liberal Democratic Party and its junior coalition partner, Komeito, will hold a working-level meeting later Tuesday to discuss the program outline.

Komeito, historically a dovish party, has called on the government to give a full explanation as to why the Izumo needs to be converted into an aircraft carrier, and to eliminate contractions between that policy and the government's remarks on the matter in parliament.


https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Japan-to-convert-helicopter-carrier-Izumo-into-aircraft-carrier



Japan has 20 of the F-35A in the pipleline and wants 100 more of 'em to include both the A and the vertical takeoff B. Tokyo wants the F-22 Raptor too but can't get it at this point due to its shrouded technology, i.e., confidential and protected. Japan would do well to get the whole of the package they want given the monstrous neighborhood they are in geostrategically and in terms of their national security. Fact is you can't successfully fight off an attacker or attackers indefinitely. You must have some offensive capacity and capability.
 

OrphanSlug

A sinister place...
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
25,492
Reaction score
22,192
Location
Atlanta
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I am not surprised, nor should anyone else be. The continued and likely never to be resolved territorial disputes in the south china sea is reason enough.
 

PoS

Minister of Love
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
Messages
24,108
Reaction score
17,706
Location
Oceania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Well the effectiveness would all the depend on the F-35, which is the most expensive warplane ever built and still full of problems.
 

DaveFagan

Iconoclast
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
10,090
Reaction score
5,056
Location
wny
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
The whole ball of wax revolves around Japan building an MIC like the US. That's not a good thing. The USA uses Japan as a forward operating base as well. An strong MIC, military industrial complex, is not a good thing. As Eisenhower warned, ti can usurp policy and exert control over the Nation. Why do you think we always have so much military action going. If you're naive enoug to think we are the World's policemen, the MIC/NeoCon/Corporate narrative is resident and working within your cerebellum. I don't see Japan threatened by NKorea, China or Russia, but I do see Japan threatened by an ascendant MIC.
/
 

Fledermaus

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Messages
84,437
Reaction score
16,543
Location
Peoples Republic of California AKA Taxifornia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
The whole ball of wax revolves around Japan building an MIC like the US. That's not a good thing. The USA uses Japan as a forward operating base as well. An strong MIC, military industrial complex, is not a good thing. As Eisenhower warned, ti can usurp policy and exert control over the Nation. Why do you think we always have so much military action going. If you're naive enoug to think we are the World's policemen, the MIC/NeoCon/Corporate narrative is resident and working within your cerebellum. I don't see Japan threatened by NKorea, China or Russia, but I do see Japan threatened by an ascendant MIC.
/

MIC - Everybody drink!
 

Tangmo

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Messages
17,537
Reaction score
3,415
Location
VPN @ PRC/HKG/SPORE/JPN/LA/UK/CANADA/INDIA/ EU
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
The whole ball of wax revolves around Japan building an MIC like the US. That's not a good thing. The USA uses Japan as a forward operating base as well. An strong MIC, military industrial complex, is not a good thing. As Eisenhower warned, ti can usurp policy and exert control over the Nation. Why do you think we always have so much military action going. If you're naive enoug to think we are the World's policemen, the MIC/NeoCon/Corporate narrative is resident and working within your cerebellum. I don't see Japan threatened by NKorea, China or Russia, but I do see Japan threatened by an ascendant MIC.
/

Japan is to the USA now what Britain has been. The two are same or similar to USA national security and global stability.

That is, just as Britain the island nation is the US closest ally off the continent of Europe and the Atlantic, Japan is the island nation closest ally of US off the continent of Asia and the Pacific. The western Pacific most specifically but also at the East Sea through the South China Sea on out to India. India is now a US strategic defense partner btw. SK is the US close ally peninsula nation situated next to Japan, Russia, NK, China. Then there's Taiwan which is well self-defended and prepared to burn CCP Boyz on their own land should they attempt and invasion.

Don't look now Fagan but Woodrow Wilson promised to make the world safe for democracy yet we're still at it. The reason can be found by looking around the world from then to now, to include Russia for a hundred years now and China, NK plus Iran. A major reason you're not a prosperous man Fagan is that you keep going short. And coming up shorter.
 

DaveFagan

Iconoclast
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
10,090
Reaction score
5,056
Location
wny
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Japan is to the USA now what Britain has been. The two are same or similar to USA national security and global stability.

That is, just as Britain the island nation is the US closest ally off the continent of Europe and the Atlantic, Japan is the island nation closest ally of US off the continent of Asia and the Pacific. The western Pacific most specifically but also at the East Sea through the South China Sea on out to India. India is now a US strategic defense partner btw. SK is the US close ally peninsula nation situated next to Japan, Russia, NK, China. Then there's Taiwan which is well self-defended and prepared to burn CCP Boyz on their own land should they attempt and invasion.

Don't look now Fagan but Woodrow Wilson promised to make the world safe for democracy yet we're still at it. The reason can be found by looking around the world from then to now, to include Russia for a hundred years now and China, NK plus Iran. A major reason you're not a prosperous man Fagan is that you keep going short. And coming up shorter.

I haven't seen CCP threaten anyone. Why didn't Woodrow Wilson install democracy in the USA? The World's not safe from the USA. Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Panama, Haiti, Honduras, Guatamela, Philippines, Vietnam, Chile, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, just to name a few. You need to take a look at the Real World.
/
 

Tangmo

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Messages
17,537
Reaction score
3,415
Location
VPN @ PRC/HKG/SPORE/JPN/LA/UK/CANADA/INDIA/ EU
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I haven't seen CCP threaten anyone. Why didn't Woodrow Wilson install democracy in the USA? The World's not safe from the USA. Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Panama, Haiti, Honduras, Guatamela, Philippines, Vietnam, Chile, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, just to name a few. You need to take a look at the Real World.
/

You first Dave.

Take your phone with you cause you'll need to hit 911.
 

OrphanSlug

A sinister place...
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
25,492
Reaction score
22,192
Location
Atlanta
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Well the effectiveness would all the depend on the F-35, which is the most expensive warplane ever built and still full of problems.

There is a whole lot to talk about with that subject, the most expensive "most advanced" warplane ever built... but still problematic (that was as nice as I could put that.)
 

Lord Tammerlain

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
21,603
Reaction score
9,514
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I fail to see the value in just two rather small aircraft carriers compared to the dollar value they represent in comparison to say something like A Burke Destroyers. In small conflicts, they will do ok (ie vs countries like Vietnam, Malaysia) the probable lack of anti ship missiles and aircraft will allow the small carrier a freedom of operation. But in a conflict with a larger major power these carriers would be prime targets, and will have to operate quite a distance from threats which will limit the effectiveness of the F35B which will have the lowest op range of the F35 variants. Japan would be better served by focusing on land based fighters and expanding its stockpile of missiles (ie getting lots of long range cruise missiles)
 

Fledermaus

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Messages
84,437
Reaction score
16,543
Location
Peoples Republic of California AKA Taxifornia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I fail to see the value in just two rather small aircraft carriers compared to the dollar value they represent in comparison to say something like A Burke Destroyers. In small conflicts, they will do ok (ie vs countries like Vietnam, Malaysia) the probable lack of anti ship missiles and aircraft will allow the small carrier a freedom of operation. But in a conflict with a larger major power these carriers would be prime targets, and will have to operate quite a distance from threats which will limit the effectiveness of the F35B which will have the lowest op range of the F35 variants. Japan would be better served by focusing on land based fighters and expanding its stockpile of missiles (ie getting lots of long range cruise missiles)

Carriers as cool... Chicks dig them.

Perception of power rather than power.
 

uptower

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
11,152
Reaction score
7,156
Location
Behind you - run!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
That was always the intention: they had their eye on the F 35 for a while

It also seems to be the plan with Australia's ski ramp carriers, though I'm not sure it's been announced yet.
 

uptower

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
11,152
Reaction score
7,156
Location
Behind you - run!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Carriers as cool... Chicks dig them.

Perception of power rather than power.

'Reach' is probably a better word than 'power'. They can be used as a tool of policy but are not a deterrent to terrorists who are itching for martyrdom, or dictators with their backs against the wall. They just make it easier to do the job once a fight has started already.

To country with a robust air defence system it's not much different from the enemy parking at an airfield in a neighboring country, the only difference is the airfield can move. So it's kinda like parking at several airfields in neighboring countries.

But for the country doing the parking, it's a lot easier than securing permission to park at all those airfields. But that's as I said, 'reach', not 'power'.
 

PleasantValley

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
4,098
Reaction score
1,991
Location
Henderson, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Happy I had a personal hand in Japan deciding to remain carrier-free back in the late 80's.
Almost forty years with no main carriers.
I can go to my grave with a smile knowing this little ol' squid personally made public policy for them back then and they voted down building any main front-line carriers.
Bravo Zulu, PV...Bravo Zulu.
 

PoS

Minister of Love
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
Messages
24,108
Reaction score
17,706
Location
Oceania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I fail to see the value in just two rather small aircraft carriers compared to the dollar value they represent in comparison to say something like A Burke Destroyers. In small conflicts, they will do ok (ie vs countries like Vietnam, Malaysia) the probable lack of anti ship missiles and aircraft will allow the small carrier a freedom of operation. But in a conflict with a larger major power these carriers would be prime targets, and will have to operate quite a distance from threats which will limit the effectiveness of the F35B which will have the lowest op range of the F35 variants. Japan would be better served by focusing on land based fighters and expanding its stockpile of missiles (ie getting lots of long range cruise missiles)

With reports of the Chinese developing an anti-carrier long range missile Im beginning to wonder if the carrier itself has gone the way of the battleship.
 

uptower

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
11,152
Reaction score
7,156
Location
Behind you - run!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
With reports of the Chinese developing an anti-carrier long range missile I'm beginning to wonder if the carrier itself has gone the way of the battleship.

There have always been surface to surface anti-ship missiles. What makes one especially 'anti carrier' I don't know.
 

Lord Tammerlain

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
21,603
Reaction score
9,514
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There have always been surface to surface anti-ship missiles. What makes one especially 'anti carrier' I don't know.

The DF21-D is an antiship ballistic missile that has been characterized as a "carrier killer" in western media. It is the only well known Chinese missile that has that term associated with it. The Russian Sunburn, a supersonic cruise missile that is also anti ship has in the past been given that terminology as well but the range is much less than that of the DF21D
 

SMTA

Ketsu no anna
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
34,036
Reaction score
8,348
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Japan is to the USA now what Britain has been. The two are same or similar to USA national security and global stability.

That is, just as Britain the island nation is the US closest ally off the continent of Europe and the Atlantic, Japan is the island nation closest ally of US off the continent of Asia and the Pacific. The western Pacific most specifically but also at the East Sea through the South China Sea on out to India. India is now a US strategic defense partner btw. SK is the US close ally peninsula nation situated next to Japan, Russia, NK, China. Then there's Taiwan which is well self-defended and prepared to burn CCP Boyz on their own land should they attempt and invasion.

Don't look now Fagan but Woodrow Wilson promised to make the world safe for democracy yet we're still at it. The reason can be found by looking around the world from then to now, to include Russia for a hundred years now and China, NK plus Iran. A major reason you're not a prosperous man Fagan is that you keep going short. And coming up shorter.

Anyone who trusts the Japanese is a fool.
 

Tangmo

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Messages
17,537
Reaction score
3,415
Location
VPN @ PRC/HKG/SPORE/JPN/LA/UK/CANADA/INDIA/ EU
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I fail to see the value in just two rather small aircraft carriers compared to the dollar value they represent in comparison to say something like A Burke Destroyers. In small conflicts, they will do ok (ie vs countries like Vietnam, Malaysia) the probable lack of anti ship missiles and aircraft will allow the small carrier a freedom of operation. But in a conflict with a larger major power these carriers would be prime targets, and will have to operate quite a distance from threats which will limit the effectiveness of the F35B which will have the lowest op range of the F35 variants. Japan would be better served by focusing on land based fighters and expanding its stockpile of missiles (ie getting lots of long range cruise missiles)

Pentagon has established the Third Offset Strategy which is predicated in 6th Generation Warfare. Pentagon devised the Strategy in 2014 to address successfully the matters you discuss. The previous two offsets were MAD initiated in the 1950s and as we saw in the second offset of Desert Storm were successful. We can accept that the Pentagon knows what it is doing in the 21st century as well. Most specifically, the world has entered a condition of state to state confrontation and brinkmanship which is similar to the time and circumstance of the Cold War.

The point of Japan getting "lots of long range cruise missiles" is a viable point however. All the same, the Third Offset and 6GW enable the F35 and the carriers against the A2/D2 systems of, primarily, China and Russia also (anti-access, area denial). So let's do this from A2/AD 101...


Japan Prepares for Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) in the East China Sea

japan-navy-1-768x495.jpg

Japan helicopter carrier DDH Izumo and ships of Japan Maritime Self Defense Force join with US aircraft carrier strike force during exercises in the East Sea.

Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) is designed to deny maritime spaces to superior naval forces via the asymmetric use of land-based and sea-launched missiles, thereby providing strategic depth to a defensive force. The islands where Japan is currently in the process of deploying forces constitute part of the First Island Chain. This line of small islands 1,400 km (870 miles) in length stretches from Kamchatka in the north Pacific towards Taiwan and South East Asia, forming a natural maritime barrier between Mainland China and the rest of the Pacific. This strategic fact is not lost on defence planners in Tokyo.

The move by Japan seeks to turn the tables on China as a rising naval power. Under current conditions, vessels from the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) would have to traverse the East China Sea and enter the Pacific under the knowledge that Japanese missile batteries are situated within the First Island Chain. In the event of a Sino-Japanese conflict, China would not be able to enter the East China Sea without risking significant losses of ships, aircraft and personnel. Thus in effect, this move by Japan is denying Beijing the ability to operate militarily in disputed waters relatively close to the Chinese mainland.

The Japanese Self Defence Forces are experienced players in the field of maritime and homeland defence. Throughout the Cold War, Japan was faced with the very real prospect of the Soviet Pacific Fleets launching an amphibious assault on Hokkaido, the northernmost of the home islands. Defence planners in Tokyo sought to counter superior Soviet maritime power with a similar strategy of overlapping defences based on long-range anti-air and anti-ship missiles. We are now seeing a substantial transfer of equipment and attention from the North Pacific to the East China Sea with the PLAN’s East Sea Fleet rapidly replacing Russia’s Pacific squadron as the principal source of concern.

Through the implementation of this doctrine in the East China Sea, Japan now joins a growing list of Asian nations who have developed their own A2/AD strategy in maritime spaces. The most notable of these is China itself, whose eyes remain firmly fixed on the role of the US 7th Fleet and the US Pacific Command.


Japan Prepares for Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) in the East China Sea – NAOC


Hence the Third Offset Strategy of the Pentagon predicated in 6GW.
 

Tangmo

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Messages
17,537
Reaction score
3,415
Location
VPN @ PRC/HKG/SPORE/JPN/LA/UK/CANADA/INDIA/ EU
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
That was always the intention: they had their eye on the F 35 for a while

It also seems to be the plan with Australia's ski ramp carriers, though I'm not sure it's been announced yet.


Australia To Buy 58 More F-35 Fighter Jets For $11.6 Billion

Australia will purchase 58 more F-35 Joint Strike Fighters at a cost of Aus$12.4 billion ($11.6 billion), the government said.

The new aircraft will bring Australia's total JSF force to 72 aircraft, with the first due to arrive in Australia in 2018 and enter service in 2020.

"The F-35 will provide a major boost to the Australian Defence Force's intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities," Prime Minister Tony Abbott said in a statement released late Tuesday.

The deal is in addition to 14 F-35s Australia already approved in 2009.

https://www.businessinsider.com/australia-f35-purchase-2014-4


This is in addition to the 11 new subs Oz is purchasing from France for $50 bn in the single largest purchase in Aus history. The focus and emphasis of democratic countries in the present geostrategic environment going forward is state to state confrontation and brinkmanship. This is fact and true like it or not among the ordinary peoples of the world.

Donald Trump is btw inconsistent with the loyalties of the sides involved.



Australia Is Getting Aircraft Carriers, Sort Of

Amphibious ships are flattops by another name

The Canberras wouldn’t make great carriers or even good carriers. But in the right circumstances, Australia might only need a mediocre carrier.


https://medium.com/war-is-boring/australia-is-getting-aircraft-carriers-sort-of-294519a756ca
 

Tangmo

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Messages
17,537
Reaction score
3,415
Location
VPN @ PRC/HKG/SPORE/JPN/LA/UK/CANADA/INDIA/ EU
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
With reports of the Chinese developing an anti-carrier long range missile Im beginning to wonder if the carrier itself has gone the way of the battleship.

China hasn't ever tested its "carrier killer" missile over the open sea. Tests have been done only over lakes where the wreckage of the missiles is scooped up shortly afterward. Carriers don't spend much time if any on lakes however.
 

Tangmo

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Messages
17,537
Reaction score
3,415
Location
VPN @ PRC/HKG/SPORE/JPN/LA/UK/CANADA/INDIA/ EU
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
There have always been surface to surface anti-ship missiles. What makes one especially 'anti carrier' I don't know.

Ostensibly ballistic. The CCP-PRC "carrier killer" missile is a ballistic missile which makes it different from the generation of typical anti-ship missiles. However, testing the missile over lakes is obviously not the same as testing it over the open sea and its area beyond the horizon. So in Beijing there's a strong element of psychological warfare in advertising its insufficiently tested anti-ship ballistic missile. After all the missile is inadequately tested for a reason(s).
 
Top Bottom