Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.

26 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
1,422 posts
38 battles

So with the new commission helicopter destoryer ship Izumo, i decide to make a post about her~

i kinda like her since she is a big ship and Japan even make her with the not friendly eye looking from China~

here are some basic info about her from wikipedia

 

Japan+Unveils+Izumo+Class+Helicopter+Des

8uFWo3y.jpg

 

 

 

 

Name:        Izumo-class helicopter destroyer
                                                                 Builders: IH Marine United
 
                                                                   Type: ASW Carrier
 Displacement: 19,500 tonnes empty
27,000 tons full load
Length: 248 m (814 ft)
Beam: 38 m (125 ft)
Draft: 7.5 m (25 ft)
Depth: 33.5 m (110 ft)
Installed power: 112,000 hp (84,000 kW)
Propulsion: COGAG, two shafts
4 × GE/HL LM2500IEC gas turbine
Speed: 30 kn (56 km/h)
Complement: 970 including crew and troops
Sensors and
processing systems:

OYQ-12 combat direction system

FCS-3 fire control system

OPS-50 AESA radar

OPS-28 surface-search radar

OQQ-23 bow sonar

Electronic warfare
and decoys:

NOLQ-3D-1 EW suite

Mark 36 SRBOC

Anti-torpedo mobile decoy (MOD)

Floating acoustic jammer (FAJ)

Armament:

2 × Phalanx CIWS

2 × SeaRam CIWS

Aircraft carried:

 

 

 

 

 

 

7 ASW helicopters and 2 SAR helicopters
28 aircraft maximum

Since she is a new ship so there not much source page about her from my search, if anyone know more about her please~ do share

 

and if anyone wonder, her size is close enough to Yamato (Yamato is 263 meters, Izumo is 248 meters)

 

MxAiDgN.jpg

Edited by CrimsonGabri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
149 posts

 

Never will any aircraft carrier in the present or future surpass the legendary Enterprise CV-6, the most historically significant ship of her era. Even though scrapped, her legacy lives on in Naval Warfare history. Hope WG will turn USS Enterprise into a tier 8 premium ship :honoring:

Edited by Marisp17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
265 posts

Yeah....

 

Let's stop before this thread get derailed into a China vs Japan crap.

 

Opinion on the ship....... She is beautiful.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,422 posts
38 battles

Use Japan, not jap.

 

fixed

Yeah....

 

Let's stop before this thread get derailed into a China vs Japan crap.

 

Opinion on the ship....... She is beautiful.....

 

argee, although i hope she doesnt get seen carrying jets or something~~~

or somebody gonna get real mad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,725 posts

 

argee, although i hope she doesnt get seen carrying jets or something~~~

or somebody gonna get real mad

 

Ehem. Kai & Kai Ni, soon™ nyahahaha XDDDDD

 

Maybe Izumo will get VTOL Jet.

Edited by Mingfang47

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SIF]
Senior Moderator
2,562 posts

looking at her structure, I doubt she will carry F35's. The deck is too short for unassisted take offs, and there is no ski ramp on the front. Although you do not need aircraft these days to make an impact, Helo's with the right gear can also leed the fight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
523 posts
217 battles

looking at her structure, I doubt she will carry F35's. The deck is too short for unassisted take offs, and there is no ski ramp on the front. Although you do not need aircraft these days to make an impact, Helo's with the right gear can also leed the fight

 

F35s have VTOL capacity. Shes more than large enough to accommodate VTOL fighters, and might even be large enough to convert to a full blown aircraft carrier. 

 

Loving that "War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression" bit in the infographic. Is that a Chinese term?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SIF]
Senior Moderator
2,562 posts

 

F35s have VTOL capacity. Shes more than large enough to accommodate VTOL fighters, and might even be large enough to convert to a full blown aircraft carrier. 

 

Loving that "War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression" bit in the infographic. Is that a Chinese term?

 

was not aware of that Karl, Thank you. (pays to keep up to date). I note Japan is not a signatory to the project, however, like most things in the JMSDF, they will most likely build them under license .

Very nice addition to the JMSDF. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
6,604 posts
2,477 battles

its size make every intel doubt about it actually a Helicopter Destroyer,

 

....

Went did you become Abyssal, Gabri?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
11 posts
576 battles

Impressive ship, certainly capable of operating the F-35B.  Would be surprised if she didn't end up with some as Japan has already ordered the F-35A (maybe some of the Royal Navy's new AEW copters in the future as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
71 posts
502 battles

The Izumo's would suffer from the same problems already identified with trying to put F-35B's on the RAN's new Canberra's. 

 

1) detracts from main role ie ASW, containment of PLAN SSN, SSK and SSB/N forces. China maintains only a minimal nuclear deterent force so it is in the interest of Japan and the US to keep track of their subs as best they can. Japan can operate very capable surface ASW groups to back up its SSK's and LRMP aircraft. Built around one Izumo and a Kongo these groups would be quite potent. (In the case of the RAN and the Canberra class using the ships as aircraft carriers means we once again have no amphibious capability)

 

2) the ships would need significant remodeling to operate, house and maintain high performance fixed wing aircraft. Things like maintenance spaces, additional munitions storage and fuel bunkerage are costly. IIRC the numbers quoted to modify the Canberra's was $A1billion, then add however many extra billions for the aircraft. 

 

3) Why? what exactly are they supposed to do? The sort of airgroup that could be carried by such a vessel (12-18 F-35B) is not enough for meaningful sustained combat operations. Opposed by the Liaoning or its follow on vessels on the open seas even two of these would probably struggle while attempting to project power into area's under Chinese land based fighter cover would be suicidal.

 

 

Japan may build carriers again, they are moving towards stretching the definitions of the current laws and limitations and may even change them entirely in the next decade or so. China is showing no signs of going away and as it continues to rapidly close the qualitative gap the equation for Japanese defence planners is changing rapidly. I doubt Japan relishes the idea of its defence forces become as irrelevant as those of Taiwan have in the last ten years.

 

DanJar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
11 posts
576 battles

It wouldn't have to be a permanent full load out of F-35Bs, even a handful would be useful, especially given Japan is developing a Marine Corps at the moment.  It would also provide great experience for a more dedicated type of carrier (if, or more likely when it becomes available).  With this Marine Corps being built mainly for recapturing certain Islands, have some B's available in the area at all times would be of benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ST Coordinator
2,325 posts
2,196 battles

I think though limited in numbers compared to a standard carrier, VTOL F35 can be usefu on Izumo not as a air superiority force but as a support for landing of troops (marines) much like the Harrier Jump Jet, perhaps.

Edited by Windforce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SIF]
Senior Moderator
2,562 posts

I think though limited in numbers compared to a standard carrier, VTOL F35 can be usefu on Izumo not as a air superiority force but as a support for landing of troops (marines) much like the Harrier Jump Jet, perhaps.

 

Why would you want to though? Helicopters give you more flexibility in amphibious operations, can use multiples in close proximity to each other, carry loads, carry munitions depending on fit out. If your aircraft can not gain air superiority over the landing, then they are useless, and are not required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
71 posts
502 battles

As Leng points out unless you can achieve local security then no landing will occur. Any targets that require the sort of payloads and capability of an F-35 class aircraft (MR/LR SAMs, enemy surface combatants etc) would need to have been dealt with by the JMSDF and JASDF before any landing could go ahead. Once those threats are removed then helicopters can proved sufficient support against lower level threats in direct support of a landing. Some supporters of the idea of operating F-35s from vessels such as the Izumo or the Canberra class point to the results of the Falklands War without ever considering the disparity of the OPFOR's. There are one, maybe two potential opponents where the F-35 capability might be called for but both have significantly more capability extant or inline than would be represented by two light carriers.

 

DanJar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
295 posts
501 battles

F35 use half VTOL on takeoff, they will use the front fan ans turn the nozzle at the end 45 degree down to make a short takeoff.

US already done that on their amphibious assault ships

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
760 posts
6,921 battles

Problem with F-35 is that while its payload is similar to that of the Harrier, both being small, at least the Harrier had manoeuvrability, while the F-35 is sluggish in comparison, as this is a compromise design, that tries to fit the VTOL, strike, stealth and fighter roles all into 1 package, hence has really average stats for all its flying aspects. While the Harrier is much slower than the F-35, it is more manoeuvrable and can dogfight well - my guess is that the US will retain the harrier a lot longer until the F-35 can find a proper niche

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
423 posts
3,175 battles

I do agree that the F-35 is an overambitious project, and the result it turns out to be, well, less than expect. Indeed the Harrier would still be in use for quite a while, but sooner or later that design would become obsolated, and changes is unavoidable. I personally consider the F-35 is a prototype for a better V/STOL in the future...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
295 posts
501 battles

Problem with F-35 is that while its payload is similar to that of the Harrier, both being small, at least the Harrier had manoeuvrability, while the F-35 is sluggish in comparison, as this is a compromise design, that tries to fit the VTOL, strike, stealth and fighter roles all into 1 package, hence has really average stats for all its flying aspects. While the Harrier is much slower than the F-35, it is more manoeuvrable and can dogfight well - my guess is that the US will retain the harrier a lot longer until the F-35 can find a proper niche

 

 

 

lol no, can't find any stats about F35B's carrier takeoff weight, but I am sure they got way better engine than AV8-B, and they can carry 2 2000lbs JDAM (instead of 4 500 lbs GBU-12 for harrier).

F35 is not yet in action and most of the fight/ practice is in a limit and not yet having her full potential. And also, F35 have stealth ability that they can take out enemy jet before any jet spot her on radar, getting close in dogfight is rare, but I am sure F35 can do that better with it's technology, time will prove that, but I am still not sure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
760 posts
6,921 battles

 

lol no, can't find any stats about F35B's carrier takeoff weight, but I am sure they got way better engine than AV8-B, and they can carry 2 2000lbs JDAM (instead of 4 500 lbs GBU-12 for harrier).

F35 is not yet in action and most of the fight/ practice is in a limit and not yet having her full potential. And also, F35 have stealth ability that they can take out enemy jet before any jet spot her on radar, getting close in dogfight is rare, but I am sure F35 can do that better with it's technology, time will prove that, but I am still not sure

 

Yeah, that logic isn't always going to bade well for the US, remember Vietnam when the US thought cannons and dogfighting was obsolete with their new space age missles, yeah their Phantoms missed a few opportunities because the designers neglected added cannons and the AIM-7 Sparrows often malfunctioned and misfired. Topgun fighter pilot school was created to retain the dogfight capability. The  Navy may still keep the F-18 Superhornet yet

 

 

 

 

Edited by Blitzkreig95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
295 posts
501 battles

 

Yeah, that logic isn't always going to bade well for the US, remember Vietnam when the US thought cannons and dogfighting was obsolete with their new space age missles, yeah their Phantoms missed a few opportunities because the designers neglected added cannons and the AIM-7 Sparrows often malfunctioned and misfired. Topgun fighter pilot school was created to retain the dogfight capability. The  Navy may still keep the F-18 Superhornet yet

 

they got 220 founds of 25mm GAU22/A, but it's just to little for any dogfight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×