Japanese Aircraft Carrier Hyuga

8th November 2007, 16:05
Japan has launched a new Aircraft Carrier in August, the "Hyuga". See http://www.jeffhead.com/worldwideaircraftcarriers/16ddh.htm for details.

However, because of restrictions placed on Japan at the end of WW2, the ship is classified as a Helicopter Destroyer. Who is fooling who! This new ship is approximately the same size as the RN's Invincible class but without ski ramps. When the plans were first approved, they showed the bridge amidships but were later changed to show the bridge as now. Japan insists that the ship is just an expanded model of a DDH and should be still classified as such... This ship is 20,000 tons. Destroyers have never exceeded 10,000 tons!

A sister ship is planned for next year, followed by two more when the first two are operational.

The whole operation seems to be going on behind obvious smoke screens. Why call an aircraft carrier a destroyer when it is so obviously a flat topped aircraft carrier? What happened to the restrictions placed on Japan sixty years ago? It looks rather like a repeat of Japan's way of getting around the Washington Treaty before WW2.

If anyone has brought this subject up before, my apologies but I can't find it anywhere on the site.

Gavin Gait
8th November 2007, 16:21
Hi Alick , I guess its the exact same reason that our 3 Invincible class carriers were first called "Through Deck Cruisers". I have no problem with the Japanese Navy having STOVL Carriers , I don't think we will ever have a time when they could ever repeat their agression in WW2 ( their population is very very much anti-war ). Let them use the JSF that we are buying for our carriers as that way it will allow cross deck operations if needed.

More likely the biggest problem is the Japanese consitution which expressly forbids Carriers. I guess if they ever manage to ammend the constitution they can re-classify them as carriers.


8th November 2007, 23:11
I fear that I cannot share Davie's optimism on modern Japanese culture and pacifism. Japan has not, despite numerous appeals to do so, apologised for any of its war crimes. Senior Japanese politicians attend shrines to people regarded as war criminals elsewhere in the world, and Japanese schools persist in teaching a version of history that portrays Japan as the victim, not the prepetrator of aggression. The rise of Japan throughout the post ww2 era, first economically, and more recently, militarily, has been viewed benighly by the US and its allies for political purposes. This has long been a subject of considerable annoyance to those countries that suffered dreadfully, both attempting to resist Japanese aggression, and under its military occupation. Many of Japan's worst atrocities took place in China, and so it is not surprising that the rise of China as an economic and military power has made them very nervous. That same rise in China's might also causes the US and its allies to look benighly Japanese re-arming. To those of us living in this part of the globe the feeling of, "here we go again," carries a certain chilling of the blood with it. And incidentally, there have been moves to change the Japanese constitution, so far unsuccessfully, but in the future, who know's. They are certainly not spending mega yen on all those floating purveyors of death and destruction for the Emperor to take a fishing trip in Tokyo Bay.

9th November 2007, 16:16
I must agree with you, cboots.

This is why I posted the item in the first place. Although the published aircraft capacity of the carrier is three or four helicopters, they are capable of operating far more than that, plus VTOL aircraft!

I take your point, Davie, but having lived in the era of Japanese treachery and mindless cruelty to all non Japanese people, I am seriously concerned that other governments such as USA and China are not tapping the Japanese on the shoulder over the build up of their current Navy, never mind what they call it.

Best wishes

10th November 2007, 13:21
The Russians did the very trick in the height of the 'cold war'. Aircraft Carriers are banned from travelling though the Straits between Turkey. Yet they built one in one of the Black Sea shipyards. To get it past Turkey, it was classified as a cruiser. They may have got the idea from the Royal Navy with their Invincible class 'though deck cruisers'.

14th November 2007, 19:51
the original HYUGA and her sister ship ISE were enlarged versions of the american wyoming class 31,700 ton battleships after the loss of 4 carriers at midway the two ships were converted to hybrid battleship/carriers the after 2 turrets were landed and a landing deck was erected over the after end, there were 11 aircraft spots connected by rails to 2 waist catapults below deck was space for a further 11 aircraft and an elevator the normal compliment would have been 22 "judys" aichi d4y3 dive bombers but due to shortages of planes the catapults were removed and the ships ended up deploying and recovering float planes over the side by crane both were sunk by US carrier planes during the last weeks of the war will be interesting to seeif the sister ship of the new build is called ISE.

13th January 2008, 07:37
although i agree that this new ship is a v/stol carrier in all but name, considering the situation japan is in, i.e. china's naval expansion and north korea's threatening actions, this class of ship is a logical result. Also, the way these ships are designed, the only fixed wing aircraft they could operate at present would be f-35 vtol, and so far, japan has not expressed an interest in the aircraft.

13th January 2008, 15:43
although i agree that this new ship is a v/stol carrier in all but name, considering the situation japan is in, i.e. china's naval expansion and north korea's threatening actions, this class of ship is a logical result. Also, the way these ships are designed, the only fixed wing aircraft they could operate at present would be f-35 vtol, and so far, japan has not expressed an interest in the aircraft.

Another aircraft capable of VTOL is the Harrier. This aircraft is coming to the end of its service in both the American & British Navy & Air Force, being replaced by the F-35. Perhaps Japan may buy these aircraft on the second hand market or e-bay when they come up for sale.

2nd April 2009, 19:13
Why is it a problem if Japan wish to build such vessels?

25th June 2009, 05:34
I cannot see how the past relates to present day. I can see no point in holding a war that was 65 or so years ago over the Japanese heads. If Japan feel's the ship is in there national security interest, then so be it. Who can blame them with the current event's in the region.

The other point is the article as written states the ship is part of the ASW group. Accordingly the deck of this ship does/will not support VSTOL aircraft, mainly because of the warload weights and associated support equipment not in place.

What would happen if Germany decided to build an Aircraft Carrier? Would the world hold the past over there heads as well?

With the current down turn in the US Navy I would submit the need for all nations to work together is now.


17th July 2010, 17:04
There is really no point in looking too much in the past... Pacific war was a colonial war, and neither of the engaged sides had nothing to do there in the first place. Japan was not attacking free nations of the pacific, but was in war with their colonial masters. I am not saying that Japan would be better, but that is not the point. Japan had Nanking, Batan, alies had Dresden, atomic bomb… and one atrocity does not exclude the other... if we start licitation on past war crimes, UK did the same thing to the chinese in 'opium war', acting as colossal drug dealer killing thousands, but nobody said that Britain doesn’t deserve to have war ships. It is not my intention to protect japanese, but the fact is that there is not a single nation in the world that didn't have it's own dark corner. We must not forget any atrocities done by anyone, but we cannot make whole nations, many generations after, to pay for something that few idiots did.
By the way, the ship looks great :)
Sorry if my english is not great :)

21st February 2012, 20:45
hawkeye, in vtol mode the harrier is to limited in range and payload to really be effective in operations. why do you think all ships designed to operate them, except for the large us lha/lhd, have ski-jumps?

28th June 2012, 21:22
Where in that article does it say the deck can not operate F35s !any ship capable of operating helicopters can operate Harriers and presumably F35s ,the weapons for helicopters are basicaly the same size and weight as for a/c the refueling is standard and how long would it take to bolt on a pre built SKIJUMP

Jeff Taylor
28th June 2012, 21:41
Interesting that the power plant is a pair of GE 25,000 hp gas turbines, which is what the Queen Mary 2 has in standby up in her funnel surround for topping off power, running above 24kts, or when one of the diesels is down for maintenance!

23rd July 2012, 07:16
The ship in question was designed from the start to handle the weight of the current Helicopters of that Navy. And NO it could NOT handle the VTOL aircraft as per the announcement made of the Government when the construction of this ship was approved. The weight of a F-35 fully loaded would and could exceed the weight limit's on the deck. Check out the weight of a F-35 verses a H-60, empty and with a full load of ordnance and you see why. Moreover the the lifts would have to be upgraded to handle the added weight of the aircraft.

Moreover it would have to go before the Japanese Government to approve such an undertaking, which is not likely in the near future, because of the economic's in the recovery from the last major tidal wave.


23rd July 2012, 07:25
Here's a follow up on my post. Follow the link.


The answer to the F-35 question.


23rd July 2012, 20:14
nowhere does it mention the capacity of the lifts and note the new USS AMERICA does NOT HAVE A SKI JUMP and is designed for the F35B!!!

4th August 2012, 01:13
The Ship you mention did in fact allow for that aircraft to operate from that flight deck.......It was designed in to the flight deck!

Look up the information on any aviation site......

Moreover it really does matter what we think the ship can handle, it is up to the Government of Japan who in that body has in it's constitution that NO Aircraft Carriers, mainly fixed wing type will be built.