Next plan of warship of Japan maritime self-defense force

[YoucanYouup]

destoryer
no AMDR, no sea RAM

firgate

@Nihonjin1051

 

[Aepsilons]

 

[ni8mare]

destoryer
no AMDR, no sea RAM

firgate

@Nihonjin1051

YEAH NOW YOU BOTH WRITE IN ENGLISH ............WE DON'T UNDERSTAND BOTH CHINESE AND JAPANESE

Edit : post picture in english @C130

 

[C130]

YEAH NOW YOU BOTH WRITE IN ENGLISH ............WE DON'T UNDERSTAND BOTH CHINESE AND JAPANESE

write and post a picture in another language are two different things, but you can get the jist of what's it armed with

Mk41 VLS with 32 tubes
Mk45 autocannon
assuming 8 SSM missiles
2 Phalanx CIWS

Japan’s New Destroyers Are Intentional Missile-Magnets — War Is Boring — Medium

 

[Penguin]

destoryer
no AMDR, no sea RAM

RAM block 2 can be quadpacked into Mk41 via Extensible Launch System (ELS)

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/ms2/documents/launchers/ExLS Fact Sheet.pdf
Naval Launchers and Munitions · Lockheed Martin
Lockheed Martin’s New Standalone Launching System Significantly Reduces Weapons Integration Costs · Lockheed Martin

firgate

@Nihonjin1051

What's this exactly?

YEAH NOW YOU BOTH WRITE IN ENGLISH ............WE DON'T UNDERSTAND BOTH CHINESE AND JAPANESE

What does your signature read?

ОРУЖИЕ ОТЕЧЕСТВА, ОТЕЧЕСТВЕННОЕ ОРУЖИЕ И ВОЕННАЯ ТЕХНИКА (ОВТ)ВООРУЖЕНИЯ, ВОЕННАЯ ТЕХНИКА, ВОЕННО-ТЕХНИЧЕСКИЙ СБОРНИК, СОВРЕМЕННОЕ СОСТОЯНИЕ, ИСТОРИЯ РАЗВИТИЯ ОПК, БАСТИОН ВТС, НЕВСКИЙ БАСТИОН, ЖУРНАЛ, СБОРНИК, ВПК, АРМИИ, ВЫСТАВКИ, САЛОНЫ, ВОЕННО-ТЕХНИЧЕСКИЕ, НОВОСТИ, ПОСЛЕДНИЕ НОВОСТИ, ВОЕННЫЕ НОВОСТИ, СОБЫТИЯ ФАКТЫ ВПК, НОВОСТИ ОПК, ОБОРОННАЯ ПРОМЫШЛЕННОСТЬ, МИНИСТРЕСТВО ОБОРОНЫ, СИЛОВЫХ СТРУКТУР, КРАСНАЯ АРМИЯ, СОВЕТСКАЯ АРМИЯ, РУССКАЯ АРМИЯ, ЗАРУБЕЖНЫЕ ВОЕННЫЕ НОВОСТИ, ВиВТ, ПВН ?

 

[ni8mare]

What does your signature read?

it means IT WILL EAT YOU RAW

 

[Penguin]

it means IT WILL EAT YOU RAW

So why isn't it in English?

 

[ni8mare]

So why isn't it in English?

its in hindi..........to make a better tag line

 

[Indian Patriot]

@military experts - Why is that destroyers/frigates regardless of tonnage and size are limited to only 8 surface to surface missiles as standard armament?

 

[YoucanYouup]

displacement ：8,200 T
127mmL62 cannon,radar SPQ-9B,20mm CIWS，Aegis，CEC，VLS，coglag ,new type of SSM,sonar,mfta
no specific type( except spq9b)

What's this exactly?

Next generation of frigate called DEX and disned by MITSUBISHI
displacement ：4000 T

 

[Echo_419]

Any comparison with other ships in its class

 

[Penguin]

@military experts - Why is that destroyers/frigates regardless of tonnage and size are limited to only 8 surface to surface missiles as standard armament?

They are not. There are more than a few example with 16 SSM. And a VLS could hold any number of VL SSMs (e.g. Tomahawk antiship when that was still around, or coming version of NSM). There are ships with just a pair or two pairs of SSM. That is pretty much the minimum. 8 or 16 is just a reasonable number, balancing platform vulnerability and platform capability.

 

[Indian Patriot]

They are not. There are more than a few example with 16 SSM. And a VLS could hold any number of VL SSMs (e.g. Tomahawk antiship when that was still around, or coming version of NSM). There are ships with just a pair or two pairs of SSM. That is pretty much the minimum. 8 or 16 is just a reasonable number, balancing platform vulnerability and platform capability.

Indian navy destroyer INS Delhi has 16 SSM but modern ones would be holding only 8. US/Western naval ships have 64 cell VLS or even more but the VLS seems more concerned with air defense missile capability rather than surface attack.

I don't know, maybe my knowldge is limited but practically every modern ship - destroyer class - seem to limit the anti-ship missile capability to 8 missiles. One possible theory could be that many modern navies do not have more than 30 odd Principal Surface Combatants (excluding USA of course). So 8 missiles per boat, provided like there are 10 boats, is a very reasonable number.

 

[Penguin]

Indian navy destroyer INS Delhi has 16 SSM but modern ones would be holding only 8. US/Western naval ships have 64 cell VLS or even more but the VLS seems more concerned with air defense missile capability rather than surface attack.

I don't know, maybe my knowldge is limited but practically every modern ship - destroyer class - seem to limit the anti-ship missile capability to 8 missiles. One possible theory could be that many modern navies do not have more than 30 odd Principal Surface Combatants (excluding USA of course). So 8 missiles per boat, provided like there are 10 boats, is a very reasonable number.

When you look at South Korea's main destroyers (Burke variations), they carry 16 ssm. It is a matter of choice.
Kongsberg's NSM will become available in VLS compatible version. The US's Harpoon replacement LRASM-A will be VLS compatible.
The number 8 gives a good balance: fewer missiles and you have limited capability (e.g. an expendable vessel) or staying power (one salvo and done). The number 16 applies to missiles which are likely to be used in streaming attacks, or that rely on multiple simultanous axis of attack on a targeti.e. overwhelming the air defences through rate of fire rather than e.g. stealth..

 

[Narendra Damodar Modi]

When you look at South Korea's main destroyers (Burke variations), they carry 16 ssm. It is a matter of choice.
Kongsberg's NSM will become available in VLS compatible version. The US's Harpoon replacement LRASM-A will be VLS compatible.
The number 8 gives a good balance: fewer missiles and you have limited capability (e.g. an expendable vessel) or staying power (one salvo and done). The number 16 applies to missiles which are likely to be used in streaming attacks, or that rely on multiple simultanous axis of attack on a targeti.e. overwhelming the air defences through rate of fire rather than e.g. stealth..

Tomahawk can be used for ASuW, no?