# Japan is getting back into the aircraft carrier game **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [November 27, 2018, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japan-is-getting-back-into-the-aircraft-carrier-game/825171 "2018-11-27T19:31:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japan-is-getting-back-into-the-aircraft-carrier-game/825171/61 "2018-11-28T22:13:46Z")
> [@XT](#): > > … a few hundred meters isn’t going to cut it with a conventional warhead and a maneuvering ship with active defenses. Yup. Here’s a pretty good article discussing the sort of shock testing our ships undergo to test their survivability against near misses: [Navy to Explode Bombs Near New USS Ford Carrier & Finalize Weapons](https://defensemaven.io/warriormaven/sea/navy-to-explode-bombs-near-new-uss-ford-carrier-finalize-weapons-Q2R91cWqzEuwVmsbLq3B0g/) ---
**Author:** ![MichaelEmouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/michaelemouse/32/101_2.png) [@MichaelEmouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelEmouse)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japan-is-getting-back-into-the-aircraft-carrier-game/825171/62 "2018-11-28T22:40:43Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > For anti-submarine warfare they’re extremely valuable. Against fighters, they’d get smoked. You’re right. Perhaps navies will increasingly move towards using aircraft carriers and submarines while traditional ships comparatively decrease in importance and mainly used for supply, coastal and low-intensity situations. > [@XT](#): > > The DF-21D (the DF-26 is the supposed real carrier killer, but I don’t think it’s in even theoretical production), which is their anti-ship variant supposedly has an over the horizon radar system. Assuming you could get targeting data to it to get it close it could, in theory, guide itself in to the target and chaff wouldn’t work…but you could spoof it electronically. Why would chaff not work if you put it between the target and the missile’s onboard radar sensor in terminal phase? OTH radar would not be impeded by chaff but it also wouldn’t give you a weapons-quality track. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2018, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japan-is-getting-back-into-the-aircraft-carrier-game/825171/63 "2018-11-28T23:07:20Z")
> [@MichaelEmouse](#): > > … Perhaps navies will increasingly move towards using aircraft carriers and submarines while traditional ships comparatively decrease in importance and mainly used for supply, coastal and low-intensity situations. … A single _Arleigh Burke_ could probably splash the _Liaoning_’s entire air wing. That’s the best non-allied carrier in operation today. I still see a place for “traditional ships”, and so do most of the world’s navies. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2018, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japan-is-getting-back-into-the-aircraft-carrier-game/825171/64 "2018-11-29T15:18:33Z")
> [@XT](#): > > The DF-21D (the DF-26 is the supposed real carrier killer, but I don’t think it’s in even theoretical production), which is their anti-ship variant supposedly has an over the horizon radar system. Assuming you could get targeting data to it to get it close it could, in theory, guide itself in to the target and chaff wouldn’t work…but you could spoof it electronically. But, yeah, it’s a tough problem to solve to fire something that high, going that fast and targeted on something moving that far away that also has defensive capabilities (let alone our offensive capabilities that would almost certainly be going after the launchers if they started lobbing big as hyper velocity rockets at our carriers). I think with a conventional warhead it’s going to be a pretty unlikely event that has it actually hit a carrier. I know they did a test of the system and hit, within a few hundred meters IIRC, a test target in the Gobi…but that target wasn’t moving and it’s the only live test I know of of the full up system. And a few hundred meters isn’t going to cut it with a conventional warhead and a maneuvering ship with active defenses. I always wondered about that too; seems to me that an incoming ballistic missile would use radar homing, which would have to scan a 2D grid and plot the differing returns in some kind of resolution high enough to determine what’s a ship, a small island, a bloom of chaff at 9000 feet, or a big-ass mylar reflector floating out in the water. The other option I saw was IR homing, which would make more sense, in that a ship would definitely stand out vs. ocean water, but would be equally spoofable (we’ve been doing it for aircraft for 50 years). ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2018, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japan-is-getting-back-into-the-aircraft-carrier-game/825171/65 "2018-11-29T15:33:12Z")
> [@MichaelEmouse](#): > > Why would chaff not work if you put it between the target and the missile’s onboard radar sensor in terminal phase? OTH radar would not be impeded by chaff but it also wouldn’t give you a weapons-quality track. I’m not a radar guy, but I think it’s because these things are coming in on ballistic trajectories at very high speeds. It’s also why traditional interceptor missiles wouldn’t work unless you took these things down in the boost phase. It also has a MIRV warhead (not sure how many independently maneuvering MIRVs one of these things has, but probably 2-4 would be my WAG). Also, it has radar AND optical targeting. It’s a very complex beast. Of course, that’s probably why it won’t work the way they plan either. In order to even get it in the ballpark it takes constant updates of the carriers position in real time, especially during the boost phase. It needs to get pretty close before it can lock on for it’s final run in. And it’s coming in so fast that it’s got to put all that together for an attack picture extremely quickly. Maybe chaff would be a benefit…I based what I said on something I read years ago about the Russian’s determining that only electronic countermeasures would work against the things, but that might have had more to do with traditional counter missile tech (we also have the new laser systems coming into the fleet in the next few years). They also said the kill chain was way too complex to make this thing a reliable system (at that time). ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2018, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japan-is-getting-back-into-the-aircraft-carrier-game/825171/66 "2018-11-29T16:36:28Z")
> [@XT](#): > > … It also has a MIRV warhead (not sure how many independently maneuvering MIRVs one of these things has, but probably 2-4 would be my WAG). Also, it has radar AND optical targeting. … Where did you read all of this? I’ve read a lot of speculation about what it _MIGHT_ have, but never anything like this confirmed. ---
**Author:** ![sps49sd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@sps49sd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sps49sd)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2018, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japan-is-getting-back-into-the-aircraft-carrier-game/825171/67 "2018-11-29T17:36:05Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > [Japan to order 100 more F-35 fighters from US - Nikkei Asia](https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-Relations/Japan-to-order-100-more-F-35-fighters-from-US?fbclid=IwAR1Cm7Sl9hbsOPWpwuYjKMhmy97tyCJydcKcKK5vlvfOm375T4RgJ-XOTkc) > > That’s going to cause China some heartburn. Screw China. Their first carrier was supposed to be a floating casino. Not that anyone believed it when announced in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![sps49sd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@sps49sd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sps49sd)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2018, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japan-is-getting-back-into-the-aircraft-carrier-game/825171/68 "2018-11-29T17:46:18Z")
> [@DinoR](#): > > Mostly, it’s the wrong time of year for major reactions from North Korea. The life cycle of the Korean peninsula saber rattle is closely tied to the calendar and agriculture. In the spring the US and South Korea traditionally start the cycle with a major exercise. I recall Team Spirit taking place in February when I was in. Not sure about Key Resolve, the current exercises. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japan-is-getting-back-into-the-aircraft-carrier-game/825171.md?page=3)