Spearhead. The real number of aircraft carriers in Japan and their capabilities

110
Considering the build-up of military power by Japan, it is necessary to clearly understand two things. The first is that in military matters the Japanese are lying. And second, they know how to show things not as they really are. The military programs of Japan are an excellent illustration of both theses.





The format of a single article does not allow for a detailed analysis of what the Japanese really have and what they can get for themselves in a short (several months) timeframe if they remove political restrictions on military development. You also have to leave behind the framework of the material social prerequisites for what the Japanese do and what they hide.

Nevertheless, for the sake of interest, the difference between the reality of the Japanese military construction and the “dust” that Japan truly ingeniously lets into the eyes of allies and opponents can be seen on the example of the Japanese aircraft carrier program.

In the modern world it is almost impossible to hide meaningful facts. It is impossible in a society where everyone has a phone with a camera and the Internet, to hide the aircraft carrier or the transfer of the airborne division. Therefore, in order to mislead the adversary, the so-called cognitive distortion is initiated — a situation where the adversary sees reality, but his mind refuses to perceive it objectively. Examples in stories a lot. So, in June 1941 of the year, many Soviet commanders of units and formations did not just know that the war would begin literally the other day, but also knew the numbers of the German divisions opposing them, the names of their commanders, heard the uniquely identifiable noise from mechanized units being transferred to the border at night. , saw reconnaissance groups of Germans - and still the enemy managed to achieve surprise. In 2015, all the summer on the Internet were filled with photos of Russian UAVs and soldiers in Syria, then a video with the transfer of aircraft, but the open intervention of Russia in this war was a surprise to the world. Everyone saw everything ... but did not believe.

As a result of cognitive distortion supported by the Japanese, cliches are born: "Japanese self-defense forces are an appendage to the US Armed Forces, incapable of independent actions," "anti-submarine fleet," and the like. For these cliches, the tests of medium-range ballistic missiles (under the guise of ultra-light launch vehicles) are lost, as well as the already achieved technical superiority over the United States in light anti-ship missiles, the second largest anti-submarine aviation in the world, the surface fleet, in terms of the number of warships in the oceanic zone, is almost twice as large as all Russian fleets combined, preparation for the production of long-range cruise missiles and much more. The ability to build weapons-grade plutonium-producing reactor is also there, behind a veil of stereotypes. Although specialists here know how it really is, the topic is still sensitive, and “about nine months before the bomb” were sounded where it has been for a long time ...

Japan's aircraft carrier program is the clearest example of such cognitive distortion. The opinions that both ordinary people and even specialists have about it, as a rule, completely disagree with reality and reflect not its own, but that of its simulacrum, with which the Japanese are trying to cover up their preparations. The brightest example of what point of view on the fleet Japan is trying to push into the masses is the fresh article by Dmitry Verkhoturov "Japan already has an aircraft carrier". She certainly deserves to be acquainted with her - this is the very distorted version of reality that the Japanese have forced Dmitry Verkhoturov to believe in and, frankly, most of humanity.

And now let's look at what reality looks like.

Back in the late nineties, the “elites” of Japanese society became clear that the Japanese as a people fell into the most severe systemic crisis. And it was not about economics. The idea was that the development of the Japanese as a nation had stopped, that society as a whole had taken the path of degradation, at the end of which there was death. Infantilism, degeneration, demographic crisis, unwillingness to fight for a better life were just some of the particular symptoms. If for the Japanese youth of the past, quality education, work, and family were valuable, and earlier, in the days before World War II, military service was also, then by the end of the twentieth century, the fire had gone out, the forces of the nation had ended. Young people are mired in children's entertainment, the average age of the population is growing rapidly, the birth rate has fallen. This, in general, is still the case.

One of the consequences of all this was the emergence of a curious document - “Goals of Japan in the XXI Century”, from which it clearly followed - in order not to lose competitiveness in the future (and not only industrial), the Japanese need to raise the quality of their human potential. Improve people. People were considered by the authors of the report as that “crucial link”, by pulling which you can pull out the whole chain.

And then began the rapid militarization. It is hard to say what was the mechanism for making decisions by the Japanese, but let us give them their due - without militarization from people who have completely lost their desire to live, the fighting nation cannot be done. And without a fighting spirit there are no victories, no achievements, only defeats and not necessarily military ones. The military threat, like military romance, stimulates emotions, generates self-confidence, and, as a result, makes a person stronger and more active. What was and is necessary.

One of the aspects of the beginning militarization was the beginning of work on the revival of the carrier fleetbegun at the end of the nineties. Indeed, for an island state, military force is a fleet, but what kind of fleet is without aircraft carriers? Everything was natural.

However, here it was necessary to somehow circumvent the factor of the American "gentlemen". The Gaidzins, who defeated the Yamato country and occupied its entire territory at one time, called themselves “allies,” but they were more masters than allies. The Americans perfectly remembered how many problems they had with technologically inferior to them Japan. It is difficult to say how they would appreciate the full-scale renaissance of the Japanese military machine, and the Japanese did not take risks. There are areas of armaments in which the Americans not only do not interfere with their allies, but openly help and stimulate them. One of these types of weapons are light escort aircraft carriers.

In 70, US naval operations commander Admiral Elmo Zumwalt suggested re-creating the concept of an escort aircraft carrier at a new technical level. It was the famous project Sea Control Ship - a ship of sea control. His tasks were simple - to guard convoys with military cargo and troops from Soviet submarines in the Atlantic with the help of deck anti-submarine helicopters, and if the Tu-95 RC, or a hypothetical long-range bomber (it appeared later), will appear on the horizon, then the deck "Harriers" should have dealt with him. The congress did not give Zumvaltu money for this undertaking, but the elaborated project went to Spain, which built on its base its “Prince of Asturias”. Before that, back in 1967, the Americans handed over to Spain the light aircraft carrier Cabot of the Second World War, which served the Spaniards until the 1989 of the year. By the eighties, the British had built a series of light aircraft carriers, and the Italians were similar to the Garibaldi SCS, so who could work in the Atlantic without SCS.

At the beginning of the 2000-s mass shipments weapons to China from Russia was already a fact, China’s reinforcement was already quite visible and the construction of a light anti-submarine ship, declared as a helicopter-destroyer - a helicopter-carrying destroyer, did not arouse any concern among the “owners”. And about the fact that it did not cause any fears of potential enemies, the Japanese took care of very peculiar.

The 2006DDH “Hyuga” (“Hiyuga”) lead ship was laid in 16. And in 2009, he was brought into service in the Naval Self-Defense Forces.



The Japanese said the air group in the helicopter 4. This caused a lot of confusion on the part of observers - the ship with a full displacement of 18000 tons, through-deck, two helicopter lifts and only four helicopters in the form of the main weapon looked strange. The Japanese, however, shrugged their shoulders and said something like the following: “We are a peaceful country, and refused to resolve issues by force. Therefore, it is not surprising that we have only four helicopters on such a ship. For peacetime tasks, there is no need anymore, and in case Japan is attacked, we can add a certain number of helicopters. Maybe twelve and maybe fourteen - depending on which helicopters. Yes, and you need to understand that we have a squadron for troops there, and they require internal volumes. In general, do not worry. This is a small ship, it cannot threaten anyone, although indeed, it will be able to carry more helicopters if necessary. ” Approximately this point of view literally spread from the Japanese specialized press further, according to English-speaking directories and then everywhere. Yes, and the ship had no springboard, and Japan did not have and did not intend to buy vertical takeoff and landing airplanes.

A year later, the Japanese showed a picture of their future larger ship - the class "Izumo" ("Izumo"). And immediately they started a rumor that this particular project might be able to carry airplanes, and “Huyug” is so, a training session. Will insure the ships with their anti-submarine helicopters. This distracted attention from Hiyugi and his sistership Ise.



Approximately the public and evaluates this ship so far. The Japanese have achieved that this point of view on their “destroyer” has become dominant, they even make all the photos of this ship from such a angle that its dimensions are rather difficult to estimate. Although they are even on Wikipedia, but who will watch them there ...

But we will try to estimate the sizes and we will look at reference materials. See the picture.

Spearhead. The real number of aircraft carriers in Japan and their capabilities


And the veil falls down! "Hiyuga" - quite a big and full-fledged aircraft carrier ship. In this image, it is perceived exactly the same as the British “war hero” in the Falklands - “Invincible-class”. The same type of ships that provided the Britons with the possibility of a transcontinental war on another, relative to their home territory, side of the planet. And, really, “Hiyuga” is just a bit smaller than “Invincible”. But in the last considerable air group can be based.



For comparison, in the previous image added Thai "Chakri Narubet" - the last reincarnation of SCS. Here it is - a small, eight aircraft all carries. "Hiyuga" significantly more.

So, it turns out, these ships were built as full-fledged aircraft carriers? Nearly. In order to start the F-35B with the Hiyugi, they need to cover the deck with a heat-resistant coating, as the Americans had to do at the “Wasp” class UDC, and mount the springboard, as the British did. After that, the F-35B will calmly and without problems start from this ship, and board it. Ideally, a gas pusher is still needed at the starting position, then the aircraft parking behind the starting position will not interfere with taking off. But how many such aircraft can the ship carry?

To do this, pay attention to his hangar. According to Western sources, the dimensions of the Hiyugi hangar are approximately 350x60x22 (feet 0,3048 meters) in feet. This is almost the same as on the Wasp. Of these, about 60% of the area is available for storing aircraft outside the lifts, that is, an area about 66x18 meters in size (exact dimensions are unknown). The F-35B wings do not fold, their span is slightly less than 11 meters. The length of the aircraft - 15,6 meters. In the rectangle 22X18 meters you can put 2 of such aircraft in a checkerboard pattern, “nose to wing”. At the same time, there will be enough space around for walking and carrying tools and equipment, including cumbersome ones. More dense layouts are possible. Total, outside the lifts, you can put a minimum of 6 F-35. However, in the west (and technologically Japan - "West"), so-called is practiced. deck parking. With her on the ship takes more aircraft than is placed in the hangar, and some of the aircraft is always on deck. On the deck of the Hiyugi, you can “register” up to four F-35B, and another two or three helicopters with folded blades will remain (in front of the island). Or on the F-35B and a helicopter.

Thus, after installing the springboard and the gas pusher (which is never a problem for the Japanese shipbuilding industry) and the rebuilding of the deck covering (the destructive force of the F-35B exhaust was a surprise for everyone at one time), Hiyuga can carry fighters and 10 to 11-2 -3 helicopter. It is a fully-fledged escort, and even with 16 th rocket cells, GUS, torpedo tubes and phalanx anti-aircraft installations. One such ship will be able to cover the trans-ocean crossing of a rather big convoy, depending on the composition of the air group (proportions between PLO helicopters and fighters), and can intercept enemy patrol airplanes, fight with air reconnaissance, drown with air strikes from single ships or their small groups. For KPUG from Chinese corvettes project 056, this ship will be just a scourge of God. Its firepower is enough to support a small landing operation, say, a battalion scale. A pair of such ships is already integral half of the Russian air group in Syria in terms of air power.

“Hiyuga” entered into service in 2009 year, sisership “Ise” in 2011. It was during these years that Japan actually acquired a carrier fleet. Just did not tell anyone about it. After all, it is not long - to put the springboards and rewrite the deck. Yes, and the vial is easy to do. The question was only in the purchase of aircraft in essence, but where were they in a hurry in 2011?

It's funny, but the first who could not “keep their mouths shut”, were toy manufacturers. In the picture below, the joint image of Hiyugi with the F-35B and the British Harrier at the right scale was made for advertising purposes. Toy, but appreciate the scale, as they say.



Nevertheless, these were “test balloons” - it is inconvenient and difficult to wage a serious war with such ships, we need more.

A year after the delivery of the Ise, the Japanese laid the lead ship of the new class Izumo. This time the ship was much bigger. The lead aircraft carrier was handed over to the customer at 2015, and its Kaga sistership went under the flag with the rising sun in 2017. According to Jane's (now shabby from everywhere), the ship could carry up to 28 aircraft of various types. But the Japanese again declared that there would be nine of them, and that they would only be helicopters. And again, the same song: “we are a peaceful country ...”, photos on 3 / 4 on which it is difficult to assess the size of the ship.

But you can't hide the truth.



The ship is already really big, and it is possible that the Japanese lied about the displacement. Purely a helicopter deck for such a giant is ridiculous.



And this year, quite recently, the Japanese finally admitted that, yes, they would be transformed into an aircraft carrier. Up to ten, the F-35B will allegedly be able to carry the ship ... but we have already heard about four helicopters on the Huyge, right?

Enjoying a hangar on Izumo. In feet about 550X80X22. This is twice as large as that of the Wasp. In this case, the aft lift is made on board and does not occupy the place where the aircraft is stored. Having measured the hangar as well as on “Huiyug”, we conclude that at least 14 F-35B can be placed in its hangar, and again without crowding. And if you fill them there with a wing to the wing, then perhaps more. A quick glance at the deck speaks about another 6-ti or 8-mi aircraft and 4-6-ti helicopters. This is approximately the same as for “Wasp” and this is logical, since ships are almost the same in size, only “Wasp” on the deck will have to store more equipment.

Thus, even a superficial analysis shows that Japan is preparing right now to get a pair of aircraft carriers, each of which will have twenty fighters and a certain number of helicopters, and has two more potential aircraft carriers of auxiliary classes in reserve.

It is worth noting that forty fighters with a short takeoff / vertical landing, announced by Japan to purchase, are just two air groups for the Izumo pair, while the Japanese are not talking about Hiyugi. They are a peaceful country. After a while, when everyone gets used to Izumo ...

So the Japanese have potentially four aircraft carriers, including two light ones and a pair, relatively speaking “medium”. The latter will appear in their present guise very soon.

However, we must understand that two or four Japanese aircraft carrier, it is only the tip of a spear of Japanese air power. The lance itself on the islands, and the deck aircraft is not reduced. Currently, the Self Defense Forces Air Force has more than seventy deeply modernized Phantom F-4 fighter-bombers, each of which is capable of carrying a pair of ASM-1 or ASM-2 Japanese anti-ship missiles, the first of which is approximately the same as the Russian X-35 or American anti-ship missiles "Harpoon", and the second is similar to the first except for the guidance system, instead of the HL of the RL-range, infrared guidance is used. Recently, the Japanese demonstrated a new generation of rockets in the same dimensions and with the same range - experienced supersonic "three-winged" XASM-3. In the near future they should begin to arrive in combat units.

There are also sixty-two newer Mitsubishi F-2 multi-purpose fighters, which are a further development of the American F-16. These aircraft are capable of carrying up to four anti-ship missiles, a pair of outboard fuel tanks simultaneously with air-to-air missiles for self-defense.



When waging an offensive war over the sea, air groups from aircraft carriers are able to conduct air reconnaissance over a large water area, detect enemy ship strike groups (in the case of China - aircraft carrier groups), destroy ships deployed in the radar patrol, and provide continuous target designation for coastal aircraft, which will hit on target with their hundreds of anti-ship missiles. And the deckers will record the result of the strike and finish off the surviving bombs if necessary. For the mosquito fleet, a couple of dozen F-35Bs would simply be a terrible threat, the Iranian operation Pearl in 1980 showed well what a terrible danger to the small fleet is even a small number of aircraft. Amphibious ships, supply transports, individual warships, outdated warships, unmanned airborne troops on the coast, stationary objects - all this for the aviation group of a couple dozen fifth-generation fighters - light targets, even without looking at the flaws of the F-35B as a combat aircraft .

In addition, you can not underestimate the ability of this machine to hover missiles, and interception of air targets (for example, attacking the Japanese CCG strike aircraft, hung with missiles and unable to maneuver). And for strikes on surface targets, coastal planes, which are suggested by the air group, are quite suitable. In the course of their attacks, the packers may well conduct a false attack, drawing off aviation or the attention of the enemy, and strengthen their attack from a different course, and carry out an escort and take on the enemy interceptors. They are also able to “cover up” their missile salvo from URO ships or close the sky over the water area for anti-submarine aviation of the enemy, providing comfortable conditions for the actions of their submarines.

And, of course, its anti-submarine aviation will work quite calmly over the areas of deck fighter action. Closer to the shore, the base fighters would escort it, but at a great distance this is inconvenient, refueling is needed in the air, and there are few tankers in Japan, and more important work will be enough for them. And then decks, very helpful.

In fact, even with a pair of reconstructed Izumo, Japan is already capable of conducting an operation comparable to the British Falkland War. What is lacking is only supply ships, and one or two more landing ships are necessary. Or, to land troops on the "Khiugi" and deploy combat helicopters to support it - there is a place there. And that's all, you just need to retrofit both "Izumo" as promised.

And we still fantasize about the fact that "they can not do anything without the Americans."

That is how reality is different from Japanese mirages. Militarism in Japan, by the way, is slowly growing. So, manga (do not laugh) gained serious popularity about the battles of the Japanese carrier strike group against the Chinese. They even make a film on it. And the central “hero” is the DDH-192, a fictional Izumo-class aircraft carrier, re-equipped to base the F-35B.



However, the real aircraft carrier "Izumo" may look something else.

Of course, such militarism still causes laughter. True, the Japanese have already participated in military operations abroad, and Abe recently took a very large-scale military parade ... but the Japanese are doing all this very slowly, without attracting attention. After all, they need others to not see all these changes, but continue to see that old reality, which will soon begin its "departure." So that no one is worried. "We are a peaceful country ..."

They do everything quietly. Not attracting attention, diverting others' views in the direction they want, and skillfully using cognitive techniques to influence people's consciousness. Are you taking into account four Japanese aircraft carriers? And they are. And so in everything. And the Americans are no longer opposed to the country of the rising sun revived the samurai spirit. After all, ahead of the fight with China. And in her such an ally would be very appropriate.

But our analysts can still fantasize about the future battles of the Japanese with the Chinese over the Senkaku Islands. After all, the maximum tension between Japan and China, is precisely the question of the islands. And the Japanese are clearly preparing for confrontation with them.

Unless you take into account a couple of important facts. First: the Japanese lie in military matters. And second: they know how to show things not as they really are.
110 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    7 December 2018 05: 51
    Yeah, it seems the Japanese threw their Constitution into the history archive, and they begin quietly and most importantly to arm themselves effectively, building a powerful fleet. Thank you.
    1. +7
      7 December 2018 07: 17
      They do everything quietly
      They can also squeeze out the quiet Small Kuril ridge!
      And then, try take it away! Samurai ...
      1. +8
        7 December 2018 07: 58
        The Pacific Fleet is tight with ships and submarines. In 2019, the fleet will receive the second project 20380 corvette of the Amur shipyard. In 2020, the project 20385 corvette "Thundering" and a pair of "Varshavyank". And that's all you can count on.
        Construction of diesel-electric submarine B-274 “Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky” of the 636.3 project “Varshavyanka” for the Pacific Fleet.
        1. +6
          7 December 2018 08: 04
          Shikotan - one of the islands that someone there was going to give to Japan



          1. +6
            7 December 2018 09: 07
            No one has gathered anywhere yet.
            1. +1
              7 December 2018 11: 20
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              Nobody is going anywhere yet

              Price not agreed
            2. +1
              7 December 2018 14: 20
              KEY EXPRESSION - STILL YET ...
      2. +4
        7 December 2018 13: 47
        The problem is pretty real. There are too many rumors and speculations.

    2. 0
      8 January 2019 14: 36
      What jaundice,)) And this is published.
      1. -1
        6 March 2019 12: 08
        What's wrong? The Japanese really have a very powerful navy.
  2. +4
    7 December 2018 06: 45
    And I agree with the author. Create a more or less adequate TTX aircraft for GDP and any ship with a through flight deck (or angular, like pr.1143) becomes an aircraft carrier. Yes request
    1. +1
      7 December 2018 07: 43
      Without an adequate aircraft AWACS. as well as PLO aircraft, the combat value of an aircraft carrier will be small.
      1. +8
        7 December 2018 09: 09
        If not very far, then they can be basic. If the enemy also does not have DRLO planes, then DRLO helicopters will fit.
        1. -1
          6 March 2019 12: 10
          If we are the enemy, then we do not have AWACS aircraft. More precisely, but there are only 7
      2. 0
        7 December 2018 11: 21
        Much more than from any other surface ship
      3. 0
        7 December 2018 14: 58
        Quote: gunnerminer
        Without adequate aircraft AWACS

        I agree!
        and even VTOL loses to a conventional fighter.
        1. +2
          7 December 2018 22: 23
          Quote: NEOZ
          and even VTOL loses to a conventional fighter.

          Here are just ordinary fighters in the middle of the ocean are rare. Long away. And yes, VTOL aircraft are usually a ground attack aircraft in the first place.
    2. 0
      7 December 2018 09: 08
      Yes, subject to the availability of it for home basing and air traffic control systems.
    3. 0
      7 December 2018 11: 26
      Quote: Rurikovich
      And I agree with the author. Create a more or less adequate TTX aircraft for GDP and any ship with a through flight deck (or angular, like pr.1143) becomes an aircraft carrier. Yes request

      How is everything simple with you ... Any barn is a hangar? You need to maintain an airplane, for which you need the appropriate infrastructure.
      1. +2
        7 December 2018 14: 18
        And you were in the hangars of Hugo or Izumo. There maybe all of this is there initially.
  3. +3
    7 December 2018 07: 08
    Here for stopping this threat in the Kuril Islands and strengthen the coastal defense. And it is right.
    1. +6
      7 December 2018 07: 42
      Coastal defense is a complex concept. Coastal defense consists of half the strike potential of the naval ships. With the naval and aviation components of the coastal defense at the KTOF, the worst of all fleets. Regarding the size of the operational zones of the fleets.
      1. +1
        7 December 2018 08: 35
        And where are we good with the fleet? This is an expensive pleasure. RCC is much cheaper, even with a carrier aircraft, if it is in the air.
      2. 0
        7 December 2018 12: 10
        Quote: gunnerminer
        Coastal defense is a complex concept. Coastal defense is half composed of the strike potential of the ships of Aviation.

        After the termination of the INF Treaty, a new missile arms race will begin. The surface combat fleet and combat aircraft will die as a class. Of those ships, only those who go under water will survive, and from planes who go into space.
        1. +2
          7 December 2018 14: 21
          They won’t die anywhere. The INF Treaty connects only the Russian Federation and the USA. everyone else could develop them. Without accurate target designation, the rocket will not get anywhere. During her flight, the ships will either leave the affected area or intercept her. Therefore, constant illumination of the target is needed.
          1. +2
            8 December 2018 19: 55
            Quote: Eremin AV
            Therefore, a constant target illumination is needed.

            If there are missile PKR, then we can recall the shooting at the training center. In this case, the main thing is that the target during the flight of the anti-ship missiles does not exceed the military command station. And then the struggle of technology: who will whom. The only drawback of the high flight level of the RCC flight is the long-range detection of the threat of an EHV. If the CRP is made according to the technology of low visibility, then its chances increase. And if it also carries a multi-channel GOS, then only the AIA can stop it.
            So, everything is possible in this world. After all, no one believed that the Argentine Skyhawks would drown the British with "cast-iron" OFAB ...
            IMHO
            1. 0
              11 December 2018 16: 10
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              If the RCC is made using low visibility technology, then its chances are increased.

              Recently, a very interesting exercise was held in the Black Sea with the firing of Kalibr cruise missiles at sea targets.
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              After all, no one believed that the Argentine Skyhawks would drown the British with "cast-iron" OFAB ...
              IMHO

              by the way, you recalled this war. one of the most ridiculous lol there the aircraft carrier was very interesting. whipped up from a container ship. this is the question of the danger of the construction of aircraft carriers by Japan. in the event of a real threat to the Japanese, there is something to solve this problem.
              the question arose, what for Japan aircraft carriers to exert pressure on Russia in the Kuril chain? they have Hokaido there nearby. Like a fish needs a bicycle? if they cannot ensure dominance in the air with Hokaido, then it will not help them even if they have as many aircraft carriers as the United States sets up.
              IMHO do not build for Russia wink
    2. +2
      7 December 2018 09: 09
      It is not enough for anything.
  4. -6
    7 December 2018 07: 37
    Ford is compared with Kuznetsov in the picture. Especially subtle naval humor. The picture will endure. The pictures also do not compare the main type of operational support for ships - intelligence. They do not compare rear support, in the broadest sense of the word, but it affects the overhaul periods, on the duration of repairs. Compare the size of the ships, not taking into account other important parameters and the fleet's ability to provide support, affect the level of unarmed men.
    1. +12
      7 December 2018 09: 11
      A picture about the dimensions, and an article about the possibility of physically basing aircraft on specific Japanese ships. Do not flood.
  5. +1
    7 December 2018 07: 46
    -And the Americans are not at all against the land of the rising sun reviving the samurai spirit. After all, ahead of the battle with China. And in her such an ally will be very out of place. -

    The weakest ones begin to beat. The CTOF at this naval theater is the weakest. The Eastern District is also with insignificant mobilization opportunities. It is not possible to quickly replenish populations and reservists from the western part of Russia with a small transport aircraft worn by flights to the Syrian bridgehead.
    1. +1
      7 December 2018 08: 55
      Gunka, everyone already knows from which textbooks you copy-paste. But you are lying badly, the troops are not being transferred by airplanes, which are stored before the hell, but by railways.

      However, the war for the Kuril Islands, and for some of them, All-Kaku, is something from the category of fiction, they enter the war only for something valuable, and not a pile of rocks. Otherwise, Japan would have attacked the USSR in 1941, but it needed resources and the most important infrastructure for their extraction and processing. And all this was in the West Indies, and not in some place under the mounds of Manchuria.
      1. +2
        7 December 2018 21: 46
        What does Japan need now, do you think? Not resources, of course, you can simply buy resources. But what?
        1. 0
          11 December 2018 16: 21
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          Not resources, of course, resources can simply be bought.

          if allowed wink and in 1942 it didn’t work to buy anything ... remember?
    2. +4
      7 December 2018 09: 12
      Well, yes, they hit us faster than anyone.
      1. 0
        11 December 2018 16: 25
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Well, yes, they hit us faster than anyone.

        but then why do they need aircraft carriers ????
        next to the Kuril ridge of Hokaido. Why are there aircraft carriers? your assumptions about "distracting maneuvers" are comparable to the idea of ​​drilling a wall with a punch at midnight, and to mask the noise, beat the crystal from a holiday set.
        1. +1
          11 December 2018 18: 52
          You ask the wrong question.
          We must not ask "why are aircraft carriers." We must ask "why planes."
          Understanding why we need combat aircraft, you will understand why we need aircraft carriers. Though we, even the Japanese, without a difference.
          1. 0
            12 December 2018 14: 25
            well so! they buy the B version with vertical takeoff. are going to use it on their helicopter carriers. in my opinion it is quite obvious. if they were planning to replenish the ground bases, they would buy the F15-16. Or am I wrong about something?
            1. 0
              12 December 2018 18: 54
              You think orthogonal to reality.
              An aircraft carrier is a means to have planes "here and now" and not to wait two hours for them to arrive from the shore on request.

              Accordingly, in order to understand why the Japanese need aircraft carriers, it is necessary to answer the question - why do they need planes over ship groups "here and now"?
              1. 0
                13 December 2018 12: 58
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                An aircraft carrier is a means to have planes "here and now" and not to wait two hours for them to arrive from the shore on request.

                Do you remember my household example with a punch and a crystal set? from Hokaido do not fly 2 hours. a ground-based aerodrome provides significantly greater launch intensities than an aircraft carrier. a ground airfield does not sink after a bomb or missile hits. ground airport is hundreds of times cheaper than an aircraft carrier.
                in addition, introducing aircraft carriers into the coverage area of ​​the island's coastal defense and the active zone of the submarine fleet is a great stupidity that Japanese admirals will not do for sure.
                Quote: timokhin-aa
                Accordingly, in order to understand why the Japanese need aircraft carriers, it is necessary to answer the question - why do they need planes over ship groups "here and now"?

                hmm. and you did not think that aircraft carriers are needed not where aviation is needed "here and now", but where there is no normal ground airfield nearby? the aircraft carrier does not operate where complete domination in the air and at sea is not ensured. too expensive toy.

                PS
                for reference, let me remind you how in the same Falkland war the British blocked enemy ships in the port. submarines did this and no one dared even take the old cruiser to sea, not like an aircraft carrier!
    3. 0
      7 December 2018 15: 01
      Quote: gunnerminer
      transport aviation.

      at the initial stage will be the BTA, then Russian Railways ....
    4. +1
      7 December 2018 17: 37
      Well, the weak are beaten, but only Japan is essentially an aircraft carrier itself, and with the prospect of a strike against it, the strike will be powerful so that Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem like a prank.
      There will be no one to let white paper cranes.
    5. 0
      7 December 2018 18: 43
      And what, civil aviation can not carry reservists?
      1. +4
        8 December 2018 00: 15
        "Victory" .. with its calibrators ??
  6. -2
    7 December 2018 08: 50
    So, in June 1941 of the year, many Soviet commanders of units and formations did not just know that the war would begin literally the other day, but also knew the numbers of the German divisions opposing them, the names of their commanders, heard the uniquely identifiable noise from mechanized units being transferred to the border at night.


    It is not even funny. Tanks located in 10-15 km from the border you will not hear, but they will reach the line of attack in half an hour. About numbers or names. Intelligence is largely a fortune telling.

    and if the Tu-95 RC, or a hypothetical long-range bomber carrier (they appeared later) turns out to be on the horizon, the deck "Harriers" should have dealt with it


    Either Zumvalt did not see the Harrier, although they understand what they are in the navy in aviation, or the author considers Zumwalt an idiot.

    The same type of ships that provided the Britons with the possibility of a transcontinental war on another, relative to their home territory, side of the planet.


    Is it true? And what did he provide? "Harriers" who, in the absence of the enemy's fighters, only had time to shoot at the fleeing strike vehicles and failed all the air defense missions? It's ridiculous about the support of the landing, there a battleship with a capacity of 20 tons would be distributed from cannons so that the raids of the Harriers would seem like a child's prank.

    And yes, it would be time for the Japanese to liberate the islands, the Ally no longer needs them, you can put them on ships and feed them to China.
    1. +6
      7 December 2018 09: 15
      It amazes me with the heat with which you cling to your delusions. Zumwalt didn't just see the Harriers. The concept was tested physically on the Guam helicopter carrier. The harriers didn’t bring down a lot of Argentines, but they knocked off a mass of their attacks, see the statistics. Battleships are from another opera at all, now nobody has them in fact.
      Etc.
  7. +4
    7 December 2018 09: 15
    The helicopter carrier is the aircraft carrier. According to the world classification, it has always been so. The only question is the main purpose of the ship. The Americans, with their Nimitzes and Fords, defend the theory of "clean" aircraft carriers, that is, platform ships for the deployment of a mixed aviation group, which provides reconnaissance and anti-aircraft and anti-submarine defense of the ship itself and the entire warrant. The main purpose of "clean" aircraft carriers is the projection of force with the possibility of delivering massive air strikes against enemy territory. UDC America and Wasp - are expeditionary in nature and they can also host (and are) a significant number of aircraft, including the F-35B on UDC America, which also makes them aircraft carriers. Nevertheless, the United States does not consider them as aircraft carriers due to a different concept of application. With which one cannot but agree. The United States has the same attitude towards Japanese-made aircraft carriers and the Russian aircraft-carrying cruiser Kuznetsov - they do not consider them to be aircraft carriers. Meanwhile, Kuznetsov is good at providing air defense orders for ships or controlled areas. Here, the only advantage of "clean" aircraft carriers will be the availability of AWACS aircraft, which can be offset by the capabilities of the Aerospace Forces. At the same time, in terms of anti-ship and anti-aircraft strike capabilities, Kuznetsov will look much better than any American aircraft carrier (the experiment using Kuznetsov in Syria should not be taken into account - this is a clear example of what will happen if the ship is not used for its intended purpose. Kuznetsov was built). As for the Japanese alterations, for the United States these are also not aircraft carriers. And the alterations indicated by the author will also not make them "clean" aircraft carriers. Without a catapult, there is nothing to say about the takeoff of AWACS aircraft from such ships. Small number of vertical aircraft will not be able to provide full-fledged air defense for ordering ships (especially in the zone of responsibility of the PLA Air Force or the Russian Aerospace Forces), and will not provide strike functions on land at all. The only thing that such "aircraft carriers" can really be applied to is to support the landing force, that is, for expeditionary functions when completing the F-35B and for anti-submarines when equipped with anti-aircraft defense helicopters.
    1. 0
      7 December 2018 11: 40
      Small number of "verticals" will not be able to provide full-fledged air defense for ordering ships (especially in the zone of responsibility of the PLA Air Force or the Russian Aerospace Forces), and will not provide strike functions on land at all. The only thing that such "aircraft carriers" can really be applied to is to support the landing force, that is, for expeditionary functions when completing the F-35B and for anti-submarines when equipped with anti-aircraft defense helicopters.

      The presence of fighters in the air defense warrants will strengthen it many times, especially against scouts. And if there are also coastal AWACs, then even more, especially if we are talking about relatively short periods of time. In such situations, aviation from aircraft carriers is an operational reserve for the rapid strengthening of the air defense group. An AWACS flies there and a certain number of coast-based fighters with refueling in the air, and in the event of the appearance of an enemy aircraft rises from aircraft carriers. Similarly, when striking along the shore, it allows you to respond quickly.
      Support for the landing is also a huge deal, the Argentines understood this in the 80s.
    2. +1
      7 December 2018 21: 03
      UDC America and Wosp are expeditionary in nature and a significant number of aircraft, including F-35B in UDC America, can also be placed (and are located), which also makes them aircraft carriers. Nevertheless, the United States as aircraft carriers do not consider them because of a different concept of application.


      Google what the UDC "Kirsarj" was doing during the wars in Yugoslavia and Libya.
      Then discuss.

      In addition, the tasks that can be solved with such ships are listed in the article.
  8. -4
    7 December 2018 09: 40
    He hoped to read an objective article about the state of the Japanese fleet, its capabilities and its capabilities in comparison with the most probable opponents.
    The place of this half-article is devoted to what kind of cunning this people is and without militarism, chauvinism and xenophobia, the country of the rising sun bends and falls apart. Is it the case of the DPRK.
    1. +7
      7 December 2018 10: 05
      Duc bent. Slowly only. Objectively article about aircraft carriers.
  9. +3
    7 December 2018 10: 25
    If for the Japanese youth of the past, quality education, work and family were valuable, and earlier, before the Second World War, also military service, then by the end of the twentieth century the fire went out, the strength of the nation was over. Young people are mired in children's entertainment, the average age of the population has grown rapidly, the birth rate has fallen.
    In fact, there are many where it is. And the point here is not in degradation, but in the fact that after having fought to their fill in a significant part of the population, there is no desire to behave aggressively. It's hard to say what the mechanism is, but it is. Maybe all the militant passionaries simply died, and the pacifists survived. Or it's just a genetic mutation of a people tired of killing. In any case, there is a good grain in it. People do not want to die for candy wrappers and fictional ideas of politicians. People want to live happily, go to picnics on weekends, sit in pubs in the evenings, and not die in the trenches. Many nations have been burned out. French, British, Turks - in WWII, Germans, Japanese and Russians - in WWII. The Swedes, who were once a thorn in civilization, like the United States is now, snapped even earlier, in the 17-18 centuries. Before that, the Spaniards, the Portuguese, all sorts of Macedonians and the Byzantines overwhelmed. This does not mean that there are no "violent" machoes left in society, but in general, the bulk of people do not want war. And by the way, in our country, too, the masses have no desire to go to some kind of liberation war in Ukraine or Syria, well, he nafig. As for the Japanese, I think their politicians, as elsewhere, incite aggression in people artificially, for the sake of their careers and the possible benefit from weapons contracts. By and large, Japan does not need any army - they have arranged their life in the best possible way, live and be happy, no one would think of attacking them.
    1. 0
      7 December 2018 12: 00
      to attack, no, but to squeeze something, completely.
      1. 0
        7 December 2018 14: 22
        Quote: Avior
        and squeeze something completely.
        What to squeeze out and why? The question of the Kuril Islands is being conducted exclusively on the populist plane, and only in this form finds support among the average Japanese. But I think that if the question is put to these same people differently - not a hypothetical "we need to return the northern territories", but specifically you, dear friend, tomorrow you will go to war with the Russians and die for these islands. And in such a formulation of the question, I am sure, 90% will merge, because I want to live, now Japan is not the same as in the 40s. It is better to watch manga with hentai on your computer while drinking sake, rather than fertilize the shores of deserted rocks. The small number of stoned samurai ready for this can be ignored - there are such in any society. So, purely economically, Japan does not need to squeeze anything out, they have built such a model of well-being that everything is already in abundance. What is missing today is easier to buy than to win back. But politicians need a rating - this is their air. And one of the ways to build up a reputation is to send ships to someone there, to show Kuzkin's mother, and to say "look what a tough defender of the nation I am". Actually, what was most openly done recently by one southern neighbor, an alcoholic near the Kerch Bridge - this is it. The samurai only have a different scope, in proportion to the scale of statehood. Not a tug, but an aircraft carrier.
        1. +2
          7 December 2018 22: 36
          Quote: Alex_59
          What to overcome and why? The issue of the Kuril Islands is conducted exclusively on a populist plane, and only in this form does it find support from the average Japanese.

          What to squeeze? For example, a large piece of the market. Who needs? For example, some kind of Mitsubishi, Sumitomo, Mizuho .. Do the Japanese, for the most part, want this? And who will ask them then it will be ... Russian peasants also did not think that they would have to die in large numbers in Manchuria for the forest concessions of the Empress and some Mr. Bezobrazov on the then unknown, Korean river Yalu.

          By the way, we have just an anniversary. On December 8, at 02-15, Japanese troops attacked the British at Kota Bharu in Malaya. At 03-20 that same day, Japan launched an air strike on Pearl Harbor.

          It's time to discuss why Japan aircraft carriers.
          1. +1
            9 December 2018 14: 31
            Quote: Saxahorse
            for forest concessions

            Not for concessions, but for the Yellow Russia. The idea was geopolitically true - while the empires in Europe sway among themselves, spread their influence over the strategically empty Far East, seize markets, get ocean freezing ports and get rid of the curse of the Straits controlled through the British by the British, reinforce all this with the unprecedented construction of a railway network and solve the land issue by the development of new territories, forever neutralizing the peasantry as a revolutionary force. It is a pity that the performers of the plan were unsuitable.
    2. 0
      7 December 2018 17: 52
      "... an unwillingness to behave aggressively has formed. It's hard to say what the mechanism is, but it is." /////
      ----
      You outlined these processes very, very competently. Respect! good Indeed, there is no theory that would universally explain these historical turns from militarism to pacifism and vice versa. One hypothesis says that you have to fight all the time (once every N-years), but - little by little, avoiding big losses. And not to escalate the general military propaganda among the people, but to recruit only guys with a natural excess of adrenaline for war.
      1. 0
        9 December 2018 00: 46
        Quote: voyaka uh
        One of the hypotheses says that all-time (once in N-years) must be fought, but - little by little, avoiding large losses.

        One respected French politician called the war "a cleansing wind over the swamp of life." This is apparently because they have never fought with France for complete destruction, as it happened with Russia ...
        Apparently, following your hypothesis, Israel cannot put an end to an endless series of military adventures ... fighting "little by little, avoiding great losses."
        And if it suddenly ends one day. What then?
        1. 0
          9 December 2018 01: 19
          This is not my hypothesis. I read about her. England was held there as an example.
          They often fight, but never suffered heavy losses. Therefore, there militarism does not grow, it is not fostered by propaganda, but it does not fade. And there is always a small number of adventurer volunteers sufficient for small wars.
        2. 0
          10 December 2018 21: 55
          One respected French politician

          One respected politician made this far-reaching conclusion on the basis of European history for either 100 or 200 years, and this period is not enough for analysis and generalized conclusions, especially for those that could have been used 150 years after they were made.
    3. 0
      28 February 2019 12: 09
      If for the Japanese youth of the past, quality education, work and family were valuable, and earlier, before the Second World War, also military service, then by the end of the twentieth century the fire went out, the strength of the nation was over.
      Everything is so, but only the author of the article does not say that before the war, Japan was an independent occupying country and now Japan is a dependent and occupied country !!! And for those who occupy Japan, it is certainly beneficial to calmly control the nation of pacifist vegetables and not fight the nation of samurai warriors !!!
      The Japanese, under the guise of building helicopter carriers, are building full-fledged aircraft carriers - this is not surprising since aircraft carriers are building China !!! And the United States and with them the rest of the world turns a blind eye to this !!!
      1. 0
        28 February 2019 12: 23
        As for aircraft carriers as a type of armament - I think that this type of armament is outdated but the whole world has not yet understood this - or rather, practice has not yet confirmed it !!! By the way, aircraft carriers in this sense completely repeat the fate of battleships !!! Over the past half century, aircraft carriers fought exclusively against an unequal enemy and NEVER fought against an enemy with serious missile weapons !!!
        Therefore, the whole world does not really know how much aircraft carriers are able to effectively solve their combat missions during the modern missile war at sea !!!

        Aircraft carriers are more a modern weapon of intimidation and a weapon of punishment of an UNEQUALED adversary than a real combat weapon !!! Speaking as a metaphor, I will say that - Aircraft carriers are some kind of "knightly armor" inherited from the era of edged weapons, but the whole world has already "switched to firearms" !!!
  10. +5
    7 December 2018 11: 21
    I think the author will be interested.
    As the ILC, the United States represents the actions of an expeditionary strike group with 16 F-35B offshore.


    It all starts with flights to the ISR mission (reconnaissance, surveillance, reconnaissance), for this, a link of four F-35s is used. They carry out additional reconnaissance of targets, and the same control the surrounding space.
    + 20 minutes departure 4 F-35. Their goal is to control and destroy priority objects discovered by the previous link of F-35.
    + 2 hours. The purpose of the control of airspace and the destruction of new exposed air defense facilities (including aviation) of the enemy. As soon as 2 F-35b head for UDC. Their place is occupied by the following 2.
    + strike group of 4 F-35b take off after 20-30 minutes. The flight takes place in the same scenario as the air defense suppression unit, F-35 deuces succeed each other.
    On average, from 4 to 8 aircraft are constantly in the air.
    In such a scenario, 16 F-35s with UDCs ensure the continuous presence of their aircraft for 14 hours.

    PS

    100 F-35b ....
    1. 0
      7 December 2018 11: 44
      Quote: iwind
      In such a scenario, 16 F-35s with UDCs ensure the continuous presence of their aircraft for 14 hours.


      I understand that in this scenario, the loss of aircraft is not provided ...
      1. 0
        7 December 2018 12: 00
        Quote: DimerVladimer
        Quote: iwind
        In such a scenario, 16 F-35s with UDCs ensure the continuous presence of their aircraft for 14 hours.


        I understand that in this scenario, the loss of aircraft is not provided ...

        Why?
        This is for 16 aircraft. The staff of 20, with amplification, may be more.
      2. 0
        7 December 2018 12: 18
        it's from here
        https://www.slideshare.net/tomlindblad/2017-us-marine-corps-aviation-plan
        286 slides in full detail.
        1. 0
          7 December 2018 21: 04
          Thank. I'll take a look.
  11. +1
    7 December 2018 11: 30
    Now let's talk about unsinkable Chinese aircraft carriers ...

    1. +1
      7 December 2018 11: 38

      Why does an aircraft carrier need an open sea? A small pond is enough.
  12. +5
    7 December 2018 11: 32
    well-known project Sea Control Ship - ship marine control. His tasks were simple - to protect convoys with military cargo and troops from Soviet submarines in the Atlantic with the help of carrier-based anti-submarine helicopters, and if the Tu-95 RC or a hypothetical long-range missile carrier (they later appeared) appeared on the horizon, then the carrier-based Harrier should have dealt with him.

    In fact, the armament of these ships was not supposed to be Harrier, but a supersonic fighter Conveyor model 200, the project of which was developed, but after abandoning the Sea Control Ship in favor of catapult aircraft carriers they covered it. Later, this project was practically implemented one-on-one in the USSR in the form of the Yak-141.
    after the installation of the springboard and gas baffle (which is never a problem for the Japanese shipbuilding industry)

    A springboard for take-off of SKVP aircraft is not a mandatory element; they are able to take off without a run.
    As for the AWACS on light aircraft carriers, the natural option for him is the Osprey convertiplane.
    It has quite comparable characteristics with Hokai (although inferior), and is incomparably superior to helicopters for these purposes. It is clear that for this it is necessary to solve some problems, such as sealing the cabin and more, but the Americans are ready to implement this if there are orders. As light aircraft carriers multiply in the world and the F-35v spreads, the likelihood that such orders will begin to arrive will increase. Again, India, for example, wants to have one if it is developed and produced.
    1. +1
      7 December 2018 15: 09
      That's just your model 200 and the engine for it in the metal was not, unlike the 141 and its predecessor, the Yak-38. About atoroy can say that the 200 model is licked from it.
  13. +2
    7 December 2018 11: 35
    It was about the fact that the development of the Japanese as a nation stopped, that society as a whole took the path of degradation, at the end of which death. Infantilism, degeneration, demographic crisis, unwillingness to fight for a better life were just some of the particular symptoms.

    Is Japanese society on the path to degradation? Was the author even in Japan? For example, I did not notice any degradation, if it is degradation, then what we have ... A beautiful country with kind, somewhat naive people. If the passion for games is infantilism, then it’s possible to blame them, multi-storey buildings clogged with slot machines (in the sense of video games) at every step are surprising.
    The author repeats someone’s not-so-smart opinion, passing him off as the ultimate truth.
    1. +1
      7 December 2018 12: 05
      unwillingness to fight for a better life

      they have it, why fight for it laughing
      1. 0
        7 December 2018 21: 05
        There is not so simple.
    2. 0
      7 December 2018 15: 05
      If the passion for games is infantilism, then it is possible to reproach them for this, multi-storey buildings clogged with slot machines (in the sense of a video game) are surprising at every turn.


      And all this is crammed with thirty-year-old children. And thirty-five years old. If this is not a problem, then I do not know then.
      1. 0
        7 December 2018 17: 44
        There are two theories of state development:
        1) continuous growth. Population, GDP, industry are growing ... If there is no growth, it’s a panic.
        2) pulsating development. The population changes (pulsates) in the case of Japan, for example, between 80 and 120 million. Accordingly, both GDP and industry. There is a decline, there is a rise - no panic.
        1. +1
          7 December 2018 18: 55
          The trick is that while some have a recession, others may start to rise and some may suffer in such conditions.
          1. 0
            7 December 2018 19: 22
            That's for sure. This has often happened.
      2. 0
        10 December 2018 22: 08
        And all this is crammed with thirty-year-old children. And thirty-five years old. If this is not a problem, then I do not know then.

        This is not a purely Japanese problem, it is inherent in almost all Western countries (including Russia). This is a feature of the modern postmodern world. Perhaps some manifestation of a general unconsciousness of what is happening.

        As I see the world becoming harder and harder, a person simply does not keep up with it. And if you add to this a well-fed and comfortable existence for many years, then we get the result you describe.
        1. 0
          11 December 2018 18: 58
          In 26, I was already the head of the production unit. Married. And it was no longer under the USSR, I am not an old man. In two years, he rose from chumazika in a robe.

          And when I look at the Yapov, who in their 30's hair dye in a multicolored strip and sit for video games for whole days, I understand that these people need a good shake, or they will die out.

          Japan's demographic statistics confirm this. Their helmsmen can not see this.

          At the same time there is a militarization, while a "toy" one, but it is actually GOING ON.

          Further understandable?
  14. 0
    7 December 2018 12: 02
    It would be very quickly necessary to upgrade the Volna ZGRLS to the capabilities of the Container. Well, the Hunter shock drone would be finished in the Onyx carrier. The hunter must at least for part of the way accompany the Su-34 with the Tarantula ...
    1. +2
      7 December 2018 22: 59
      Quote: Tektor
      It would be very quickly necessary to upgrade the Volna ZGRLS to the capabilities of the Container. Well, the Hunter shock drone would be finished in the Onyx carrier. The hunter must at least part of the way to accompany the Su-34 with the Tarantula ..

      "I know Karate! Judo! Kung Fu! And many more scary words!" (from) :)
  15. 0
    7 December 2018 13: 51
    There is one BUT! The war, which the author outlined constantly citing the Anglo-Argentine conflict as an example, is possible only if the conflicting powers do not have nuclear weapons. China is not the power with which such tricks will creep through, otherwise the United States would have actively intervened in the dispute over the Shinjuku Islands on the side of Japan. On the demonstration of the flag and other maneuvers of the Yankee fleet, China spat from a high bell tower.
    PS: In my opinion, the role of aircraft carriers in modern warfare is greatly overestimated. One hit with something powerful on the flight deck and a powerful aircraft carrier turns into a large floating useless canned food with aviation. This was clearly shown by kamikaze attacks, whose modern counterparts are anti-ship missiles or dagger systems.
    1. +3
      7 December 2018 18: 56
      The war that the author has outlined is constantly citing the example of the Anglo-Argentine conflict, is possible only if the conflicting powers do not have nuclear weapons.


      So the Britons had it after all. Come to your senses!
      1. 0
        8 December 2018 07: 45
        Argentina didn’t have it, and the advantage of the Britons was one to four. Here and draw conclusions.
        1. +2
          8 December 2018 10: 42
          That is, a weaker non-nuclear country attacked a stronger (but not having troops in the region) nuclear, yes?

          None of the modern alignments of forces does not resemble?
    2. +1
      9 December 2018 01: 17
      Quote: shinobi
      One hit of something powerful in the flight deck and a mighty aircraft carrier turns into a large floating useless canned food with aircraft

      You can't even imagine how tenacious modern AVMs are! And what their repair and restoration teams are capable of. The only bottleneck is catapults and aerofinishers. That is why they were "taken out of the brackets" by VTOL aircraft and springboards ... on the new British AVM. The issue with AWACS is solved by the network-centric methods of the control center: space, KNS, PLA, any other Linck-16 carrier is capable of aiming the anti-ship missile carrier, which, even without going on the air, will see the entire battlefield with someone else's eyes ...
      In my opinion, in the future, AVMs will become smaller, more versatile, and with drones. For in the open sea, in the far ocean zone, without them, it will be extremely problematic to carry out a modern maritime operation to destroy the enemy military command ship / KUG / KPUG ...
      That is why we are so worried because of their absence in our fleet.
      1. 5-9
        0
        11 December 2018 16: 07
        I'm afraid to ask where and what kind of "modern AV" was tested for survivability using at least one "standard" Soviet warhead of 750 kg, which flew into it on a 2M?
      2. 0
        12 December 2018 15: 28
        Yeah, tell this to McCain’s spirit! I don’t know why the Zurni NURS launched from the attack aircraft, but the aircraft carrier Forestall on which he stood was half a month after that for repairs. Think about what will happen if 4 kg of explosives in a penetrating shell gets into the deck of an aircraft carrier.
  16. +3
    7 December 2018 14: 13
    In principle, I agree, but there is one thing. Not Senkaku is the target of the Japanese but the Kuril Islands. and not 4, but yes, plus Sakhalin. There the shelf on the shelf gas oil is what the Japanese need. And the Senkak needs the Americans more. The reality of the war with Japan is great. Abe himself said we will return the islands to the end of this generation. In what way did not say. Apply strategic nuclear forces against Japan in the war for the islands of Vova will not dare. So think for yourself. You say they are dusting their eyes. So senkaku is dust. And if you follow the further logic, then in a couple of years another type of helicopter carriers SuperIzumo will be lowered by 60 thousand. Now this will be serious. And while the Japanese are dependent on American fighters, their aircraft carriers will not be full-fledged in any tonnage. Since there will be no replenishment of losses, but there will be losses. And here comes their 5th generation fighter project. Also some kind of Mitsubishi. Further more. Winter Is Coming. So hold on.
  17. +5
    7 December 2018 14: 23
    For 3 !!!! (THREE) years, you hear, Carl, for just 3 years !!!! built.
  18. 0
    7 December 2018 14: 24
    Another addition. The terms of laying the construction and commissioning of ships with such tonnage in operation are shocking. and we are against this for 8 years. It's a shame.
    1. +1
      7 December 2018 15: 42
      It may be insulting, but quite logical. Because they want to build, in this case, an aircraft carrier. But we want another. And we do it.
    2. 0
      7 December 2018 21: 09
      In the USSR, more complex ships were built in comparable periods, and we, too, after restoring order in this area, could also.

      There is nothing special about it.
  19. +2
    7 December 2018 18: 47
    Test article.
    That is why China will never give up medium-range missiles. And, taking into account the WWII experience, during the first attack on its territory it will send a couple of pieces to Tokyo or Hiroshima. In nuclear performance.
    1. +2
      7 December 2018 21: 35
      The Japanese have already received nuclear strikes on their territory, and have recently received a nuclear catastrophe. They know that life after this does not end.
      1. +1
        7 December 2018 23: 06
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        The Japanese have already received nuclear strikes on their territory, and have recently received a nuclear catastrophe. They know that life after this does not end.

        And there is. They write that this is a fresh look of the new generation. Today, many are beginning to believe that a nuclear conflict is not so terrible as ancestors write about it. After all, not everyone has died .. The threshold for rejecting a nuclear conflict has decreased very strongly.
        1. +2
          8 December 2018 06: 55
          This is the case all over the world. The ultra-long military cycle of Tsymbursky is coming to an end, there is a transition from "dominance of destruction" to "dominance of mobilization" since the early 90s.
          The ball will soon be divided again.
      2. +1
        9 December 2018 01: 27
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        They know that life after this does not end.

        But the economic and industrial-defense potential of the territory and the state as a whole is being undermined. And how to continue to fight, if the production capacity is taken out of circulation. How will you replenish your army, where do you need to produce weapons for the front, for victory?
        1. 0
          11 December 2018 19: 00
          They don't care, they either win quickly, or quickly lose and surrender. The specificity of the position of Japan now is that the profit will be the same both in one scenario and in another. War is needed by itself, without regard to the result.

          That's what's dangerous.
  20. +2
    8 December 2018 16: 16
    All that is needed is supply ships, and one or two landing ships are needed.

    There are supply vessels: three types of Towad and two types of Masu. Landing ships, too: dvkd Shimokita, Kunisaki, Osumi.
    1. 0
      8 December 2018 22: 46
      They are few for such an operation.
  21. 0
    8 December 2018 18: 14
    Russia needs to develop a submarine fleet and ground facilities.
    1. +2
      8 December 2018 22: 45
      Why do you have more than a hundred PLO airplanes in your US or Yap? Did they just do them? Or maybe these planes something can still?

      There are no superweapons, and there are no one-armed soldiers either. We need both surface forces, submarine forces, aviation, and "ground means"
  22. 0
    10 December 2018 23: 16
    Alexander, take off my hat. As far as I did not like your previous (many) articles, so specifically this article = reference. Thank you very much for your work. It is a pity that the topic of very serious support in the form of destroyers and the submarine fleet was not disclosed - it would be more obvious that Japan today is ready not only for a local conflict with China ...
  23. 5-9
    0
    11 December 2018 15: 56
    Yes, everyone understands about everything at the sight of these ships or their performance characteristics. On the other hand - so what? Which of us and China is going to fight with them without nuclear weapons? Is it "worse" than the American AUG with a half-spoiled Nimitz? Yes, even the DPRK shmal'not vigorous-loaf on the base sweats and will float on a thousand boats to land troops. It is not worth mentioning the PRC and us at all. No, without a state roof - "Not a tenant".

    PS: A proclamation about the Falklands. If the Args had not 5 Exosets, but as many as 10, or, horror, 15, then the kirdyk to Her Majesty's fleet. The bombs exploding during the discharge from the WWI from the Shaikhokov could also radically change the situation. Or the islands are 100-200 km closer to the mainland. Although without AB, the islands would certainly be lost ...
    1. 0
      11 December 2018 19: 02
      Without AV, they would have lost, and Exosetras would fall only with EW turned off. Something like this.

      Well, we do not compare the air defense of the Britons with what is on the "Atago" or "Congo".
  24. 0
    12 December 2018 21: 57
    There is nothing surprising, given the close neighbors: formally in a state of war with the Russian Federation (no peace treaty), with the PRC there are a lot of territorial issues (islands), the DPRK has nuclear weapons and means of delivery (they can certainly fly to Yapov). Well, and how should they be in a similar situation? Hoping for the States? And the United States, in the event of some kind of military conflict, God forbid, may declare that the conflict is local and let them figure it out themselves. So what do Yapam do? I will not be surprised that in the near future, despite all international protests (including the UN), they will amend their constitution accordingly. Public opinion in Japan is already on the side of militarization. Something like this.
  25. 0
    17 December 2018 07: 19
    The author’s key misfortune has not disappeared - he still considers himself a GENIUS, no less than Einstein, one of a kind, thereby knowing and understanding everything, unlike miserable plebeians. How long is he still going to give in to this? ..
  26. 0
    24 December 2018 00: 18
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    If the passion for games is infantilism, then it is possible to reproach them for this, multi-storey buildings clogged with slot machines (in the sense of a video game) are surprising at every turn.


    And all this is crammed with thirty-year-old children. And thirty-five years old. If this is not a problem, then I do not know then.

    This is the same as the appearance and further presence in primitive societies of a large number of young and old people with limited legal capacity: life is so good that you can’t survive in it - it’s not only given to everyone, you need to be extraordinary as a hero of a special type and bite your teeth .
    At such moments, societies of society move to a new level of development and prosperity.
    Surely something like this is happening now, only being inside the process, contemporaries do not understand what is happening and they have "lost the FSE, old people are no longer eaten! ..". For example, it may be another dramatic increase in the duration of active life: there are specialties that need to be mastered for decades and for this you need to maintain children's flexibility; old problems will go away as insignificant - for example, demography, can afford to take into account not one family with children in the calculations, but several consecutive family periods for an individual, etc.