Ideal chinese carrier thread

[Jeff Head]

They don't actually have the capability to build the aircraft they want. The F-2 is not a carrier fighter by far and the carrier F-16 project have been tanked decades ago. Furthermore, the plane requires import of vital components from the US. For the cost of developing a new carrier fighter, they might as well buy JSF VTOLs.

My point is simply that I believe that the Japanese have the capacity to build the aircraft...both technologically and manufacturing wise. They may not have the desire or will due to cost and political ramification, but I believe if they were sufficentlly motivated that they could do it.

Changing the Constitution would be difficult because there is a lot of opposition to this, although the topic has been brought up. Before they can even begin the Constitutional changes that would allow them to build a full carrier, they have to make the Constitutional changes that would even allow the Navy to participate in long distance missions. So far they're already gritting their teeth by the fact they cannot even go to a Somali mission. Eventually you also have to make another change in the Constitution to allow for the use of nuclear power, because eventually that's what a carrier would lead to.

See above. They simply have not been put into a position where they have the will to do it...but they certainly have the capability, and have been known to bend the rules a boit when necessary. I believe the 16DDH or Hyuga is one such example. That vessel, could easily carry the JSF if necessary on it's flight deck with refitting for VTOL blast, and I believe the lifts are large enough to take them below decks. If that is so, with some refitting they could service a small wing of them on the Hyuga.

Now, whether they have the motivation and the will to do such a thing economically and politically is another matter.

 

[crobato]

My point is simply that I believe that the Japanese have the capacity to build the aircraft...both technologically and manufacturing wise. They may not have the desire or will due to cost and political ramification, but I believe if they were sufficentlly motivated that they could do it.

See above. They simply have not been put into a position where they have the will to do it...but they certainly have the capability, and have been known to bend the rules a boit when necessary. I believe the 16DDH or Hyuga is one such example. That vessel, could easily carry the JSF if necessary on it's flight deck with refitting for VTOL blast, and I believe the lifts are large enough to take them below decks. If that is so, with some refitting they could service a small wing of them on the Hyuga.

Now, whether they have the motivation and the will to do such a thing economically and politically is another matter.

But even so, developing a carrier fighter on their own on scratch is going to take a development cycle that dwarfs even developing a complex ship like a carrier. And the engine for that takes even longer.

Having the capability and manufacturing ability does not equate to a timely or cost effective delivery. In the end, unless you plan on building a large number of these fighters, you're better off getting the JSF or making the JSF in partnership. If Japan had made a serious effort on a fifth generation fighter and considered carrier use for it (navalization has to be considered right from the start), then they would have a head start. But it does not appear, aside from drawings and mockups, that there is a seriously funded effort on this, otherwise it would be quite public. Japan lacks many things like a large capacity indigenous turbofan, this is what allowed the US to dictate terms since the US can easily pull the plug on any fighter project that it deems a financial competitor to their own. Darn pretty sure the US wants to sell the JSF to Japan. The technological and manufacturing know how is there, just not the time, unless you're looking at dates like 2020 to 2030 for a prototype of the engine and plane. Nor the infrastructure, since you still need a dedicated military-industrial complex, something that really never took much root in Japan due to its dependencies to the US.

And if you don't decide now, then the date falls even further behind. The F-2 didn't do much to improve the Japanese aeronautical industry, rather, it may have stunted it since it didn't allow them to exercise their technological abilities and gain vital experience---and this in fact, ironically, may have been the US intention's all along to prevent the rise of a competitor to their Boeing and Lockheed Martin.

An indigenous fighter is simply out of it unless Japan turns around politically and say I will do it now. You cannot divorce the political and economic from the technological. The best Japan can do is a co production agreement on a carrier JSF for the JSMDF and use a VTOL style small to medium carrier.

 

[Engineer]

My point is simply that I believe that the Japanese have the capacity to build the aircraft...both technologically and manufacturing wise. They may not have the desire or will due to cost and political ramification, but I believe if they were sufficentlly motivated that they could do it.

Actually, I agree with crobato in that Japan doesn't have the ability to build fighter aircraft. Otherwise, they would have stretched the constitution and built them already. As for needs, they don't need helicopter carriers either, but they built them nevertheless. As you can see, need is not such a big reason as you are making it out to be.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

not likely IMHO for S. Korea...but a possibility for Japan in a few years.

Why do you say that? Korean shipyards are outproducing Japanese yards by a significant margin these days.

 

[Jeff Head]

Actually, I agree with crobato in that Japan doesn't have the ability to build fighter aircraft. Otherwise, they would have stretched the constitution and built them already. As for needs, they don't need helicopter carriers either, but they built them nevertheless. As you can see, need is not such a big reason as you are making it out to be.

Sorry...we disagree.

Japan definitely can see the need for helicopter carriers to help in ASW operations. In fact, without stretching their constitution at all they can, and now have, built such carriers.

The Hyuga is not an amphibious or OTH assault carrier. The Osumi Class fills that role already, and they have built three of them. The Hyuga is strictly a helo carrier, principally for ASW and C&C work and that role is a very critical role for the Japanese as an island nation, and one they have been doing for a long time. Now they have a new, capable tool to help their destroyer flotillas in that regard.

Their problem is that these carriers "appear" much more like typical flat tops with a potential use for offensive aircraft and I persoinally believe that they could be relatively easily refitted to carry them.

That is where the problem would come in on their constitution...but again, stretching it or changing it is a matter of will...principally political will because they have the capacity technologically to make it happen as far as the vessel itself is concerned.

That's all.

As to fighter aircraft, I believe it is the same issue. Japan has the technological and manufacturing capabnility of building their own...they just haven't seen the need to do sustain such production yet, though they have made some starts.

Understand, I am not talking about some immediate, design it in a year and your done...I am talking about developing the infrastructure and experience to do so...which would take several years. Just like the Chinese are doing with their Aircraft carrier and fighter development programs. Japan could do the same if they were sufficiently motivated.

 

[Jeff Head]

Why do you say that? Korean shipyards are outproducing Japanese yards by a significant margin these days.

I feel that S. Korea has less motivation than the Japanese to build true aircraft carriers and the aircraft to deploy on them. That is all.

That is why I said it was less likely (not impossible by any means) for them to do so. I believe they have the production capability and the technology, particularly for the shipping, to do so, if they were willing to economically and politically make the effort. I just feel it is less likely that they will do so for those reasons so than the Japanese.

...but, who knows? if the Japanese were to do so, that may well give them the motivation nationally to do it.

 

[adeptitus]

South Korea's area of concern is immediate to its border. In comparison, Japan's ocean territory and EEZ is probably more than 10 times larger. The Japanese is an island nation and thus has far greater incentive to develop its navy and naval aviation. S. Korea's "blue water navy" plans (strategic mobile fleet) is more limited in scope.

Recently, S. Korea wanted to install the Vixen 500E AESA radar on its FA-50 aircraft, but the US shot it down because of technology transfer issues. The T-50/FA-50 was co-developed by Lockheed Martin and they didn't want to open the source code for integrating European made AESA radar. Instead, they'd prefer if the S. Koreans used AN/APG-67. To put it bluntly, they didn't want the FA-50 becoming a competitor to future F-16 acquisitions.

Licensing technology from the US is both good and bad. You're getting good quality, proven technology, but comes with various restrictions. The Japanese understands this and it should be noted that the Mitsubishi ATD-X model was ground-tested in France and not US.

Looking ahead, the 3 East Asian powers (plus Russia) all have next generating aircraft R&D programs. China has J-XX, S. Korea has KFX, Japan has ATD-X, and Russia has PAK-FA. Some of them will make it to production, others will end up as technology prototypes.

The Dokdo and Hyuga class ships are not fixed wing aircraft carriers. If Japan wanted fixed-wing carrier, they'd simply build a real one instead of converting a DDH into some small gimpy light carrier.

 

[Semi-Lobster]

South Korea's area of concern is immediate to its border. In comparison, Japan's ocean territory and EEZ is probably more than 10 times larger. The Japanese is an island nation and thus has far greater incentive to develop its navy and naval aviation. S. Korea's "blue water navy" plans (strategic mobile fleet) is more limited in scope.

Recently, S. Korea wanted to install the Vixen 500E AESA radar on its FA-50 aircraft, but the US shot it down because of technology transfer issues. The T-50/FA-50 was co-developed by Lockheed Martin and they didn't want to open the source code for integrating European made AESA radar. Instead, they'd prefer if the S. Koreans used AN/APG-67. To put it bluntly, they didn't want the FA-50 becoming a competitor to future F-16 acquisitions.

Licensing technology from the US is both good and bad. You're getting good quality, proven technology, but comes with various restrictions. The Japanese understands this and it should be noted that the Mitsubishi ATD-X model was ground-tested in France and not US.

Looking ahead, the 3 East Asian powers (plus Russia) all have next generating aircraft R&D programs. China has J-XX, S. Korea has KFX, Japan has ATD-X, and Russia has PAK-FA. Some of them will make it to production, others will end up as technology prototypes.

Sorry to go off topic but Lockheed Martin may not want AESA on the F/A-50 but Northrop-Grumman sure does.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Jeff Head]

The Dokdo and Hyuga class ships are not fixed wing aircraft carriers. If Japan wanted fixed-wing carrier, they'd simply build a real one instead of converting a DDH into some small gimpy light carrier.

I agree. I believe they are capable of doing it too. I also believe, if they wanted to, they could refit one of the Hyugas to help them to prepare for such an eventuality with training, but of course it would only be for VTOL aircraft.

Not that they will do so, just that they are certainly capable of doing so.

 

[crobato]

As to fighter aircraft, I believe it is the same issue. Japan has the technological and manufacturing capabnility of building their own...they just haven't seen the need to do sustain such production yet, though they have made some starts.

No they don't. Not unless they are willing to put in another 15 to 20 years or so. They already tried to do so before and had to approach the US, which attached some strings. That led to the debacle known as the F-2. You sure don't have any idea how long it would take to develop an indigenous gas turbine for fighters, this being the crucial part because otherwise, the country of the engine supplier is capable of pulling strings on you.