I posted this on the other thread. But I don't want people to be distracted, so I'll put it in its own thread.


Japan has a very good military - a small sized military for a nation of Japan's size, but very good in quality. At the year 2007, though, several pressing needs demand to be addressed:



Offensive strike missiles. Long-range ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles fitted to submarines, could allow Tokyo to strike at North Korean targets. This would be useful in a pre-emptive scenario (i.e., North Korea has a nuke or bio/chem weapon on the launch pad ready to strike Osaka or Yokohama, etc.) $4 billion over five years.



New fighters Japan's fighter fleet is aging and getting outdated. The F-4s should have been replaced by now and the main fleet of 223 F-15Js is also over 20 years old. The Eurofighter Typhoon is currently the leading candidate to replace the F-4s, but what's going to replace the F-15s? We're talking around 250-300 fighters, which is a huge amount of money. $20 billion over eight years.


More missile defense. Japan right now has only two PAC-3 batteries around the Tokyo region. This is not enough. The government should try to get the licensing rights to co-produce PAC-3 with the USA, and to deploy more around all major cities, perhaps up to a dozen batteries. There should also be more spending on SM-3, and also more C4ISR and radars and comm/integration for the whole national missile defense shield as a whole entity. $9-11 billion over six years.


More submarines. The JMSDF has only 16 submarines. They are capable, but an insufficient number. Furthermore the time may come when Tokyo will need submarines with more capability and range for extended missions (re: UN peacekeeping commitments, energy security, etc.) and nuclear submarines may be called for. Japan should build 8 more Oyashio submarines and do research and development on SSNs. $16 billion over ten years.


P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft. Japan currently has a fleet of over 100+ P-3C Orion aircraft, built under license. These are getting very old and aging despite constant updates. Tokyo should try to either purchase outright, or get the license to build, the Boeing 737-based P-8 Poseidon antisubmarine aircraft. Anywhere between 40 and 70 planes are required to fill the JMSDF's antisubmarine aircraft requirement. $15-20 billion over ten years.

1) Japan will have to wait a LONG time before an offensive tactical missile (much less strategic one) becomes a political option. Honestly speaking, you do not need a ballistic or submarine-launched cruise missile attack capability to handle North Korean threat. Just fit those F-2s with real-time data-link and GPS-guided weapons such as the JDAM, and get a flight kit for it. Launch the F-2 out of Misawa, run air-to-air refueling operations and get the strikes in long before North Korean air defense knows what happened. This is much more viable option than to face criticism from all parties by getting a blatantly offensive weapon.

2) As for fighters, Japan falls into little over 300 tactical fighter fleet in the future. Some 100 F-15Js will be getting MSIP-J upgrade, making it comparable to current line of USAF F-15Cs. It will also vastly improve F-15J's network warfare capability. Production of 94 F-2s is confirmed, and Japan is looking at 80 tactical aircrafts (most likely to be F-15E type or FA-18E rather than the Typhoon I think).

I assume Japan would likely to match newer stealthy fighters that would be entering service with China and South Korea in the future timeline, so 40~60 F-22J or 80~120 F-35s may be added to the fleet in the future. Since this acquisition is most likely to happen around 2020 or so, F-15J Upgrades should begin retirement as stealth fighters enter service.


5) Japan has P-X program already well underway to develop P-3C replacement. They probably will not be buying into the P-8A program unless something goes horribly wrong with their P-X program, and even then it would be a stretch to buy American.

I don't have a problem with Japan's F-15Js quality - they certainly rank among the top tier in technology and avionics. I was thinking more in terms of airframe fatigue and stress hours accumulated; these Eagles are 25 years old. But as you said, they will be phased out in 2020.



America still has strong qualms about exporting the F-22 abroad, and this is not helped by the fact that the Japanese want to build it under license. The F-35 Lightning II does look like a superb stealth fighter for Japan, but it has only one engine. Japan is a territory of islands and vast ocean spaces, and two engines are better in this kind of environment lest one engine should malfunction and the aircraft have no option but to ditch-crash. (This was also another concern about the F-2....it has only one engine.)




Thanks Kjlost. I was not aware of that.





Yes, the Super Hornet, F-15E, and Eurofighter are the main candidates. I'm not sure, but I think Jane's reported that the Eurofighter was in the lead...?

F-22s? Didn't we discuss this on another thread?


http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/2007227221547.asp

Strategypage's guess is as good as mine. It's not like they have better sources. US Congress did put no-sale mark on the F-22, and the planned production of 180 airframes will be completed before that. So people assume F-22 will not be sold abroad.

This relies on the assumption that USAF will not be able to procure further F-22 airframes (unlikely), and that Congress will not reverse the law, or make an exception for key allies under foreign and internal (Lockheed Martin) lobbying.

All things considered, they sold the F-14s and F-15s, so why not F-22s? Maybe not under license, but otherwise...why not?

The main concern, of course, is the possibility that F-22 technology might be leaked into the wrong hands. A Japanese Raptor might defect to China or North Korea. Or moles within Japan in the know regarding F-22 technology might pass on the information to others. Basically, the US Congress wants to keep the Raptor at home.


By 2020, maybe the Raptor will be sold abroad, but no, not now.

Bear in mind that an estimated one-third of the Raptor's capabilities are classified - secrets that we don't know about yet.

try again

Are the Japanese allowed to build Military technology? If not, has it been specifically stated they cannot?

Yes, they are allowed.

Japan cannot export their defense products, which naturally leads to cost overruns--which is the case with just about every Japanese ground equipment--or unreasonable equipment change cycle--Japanese submarines for one.

Actually that law was recently removed I believe. If it isnt gone just yet then it will be shortly.

they should scrap that law and develop their own weapons.