But when the helicopter carrying ships in the Japanese grow large enough that they could easily launch fixed wing aircraft, as is the case with the JASDF’s plans for a new “helicopter destroyer,” which, at 248 M (813 ft) and a displacement of 19½ thousand tons, it’s an aircraft carrier.
By comparison, the Invincible Class CVLs that the UK deployed Harriers, normal detachment was 9, from during he Falklands campaign displaces about 17 thousand tons, and was 210m (689 ft) long.
The juxtaposition of the Japanese and aircraft carriers makes me vaguely uneasy.
The Harriers are knows as the 'Jump Jets' for a reason, and are the only modern fighter planes capable of taking off on such a short deck, but…
They have a 'ski jump' at the end, to help them into the air. (a fully loaded Harrier would use too much fuel if it tried to do a vertical take-off)
Unless they also mount arrester cables on the deck, there's not much chance a modern jet(or even some propeller aircraft) can land on the deck. and if you can't land, it's a good bet that you won't be taking off again. (disposable fighters is a bad idea)
Now, what I would worry about is WHICH choppers will they be operating from the carrier…
I'm actually thinking about the F-35C, which is also STOVL, or will be whenever it actually hits deployment.
I can't seem to get the [Respond](or whatever, it's translated into Norwegian) link to work…
Anyway…
The F-35C?
you mean the bl**dy thing that no one ever thinks will ever be able to perform?
Besides, if they want to use those, they better make the deck solid. I believe the russians experienced some buckling of the decks of their carriers when they experimented with their Yak-38 V/STOL fighters.