Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Afghan Update
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Around the Globe
Av Week Extra
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Body Armor Blues
Bomb Squad
Brownshoes in Action
Bubbleheads, etc.
Cammo Green
Catch the "Buzz"
Chem-Bio
Civilian Apps
Cloak and Dagger
Commandos
Comms
Contingency Ops
Cops and Robbers
Cyber-warfare
Data Diving
Defense Tech Poll
Defense Tech Radio
Dissent Tech
Door Kickers
Drones
DT Administrivia
Eat DT's Dust
Extra! Extra!
Eye on China
Fast Movers
FCS Watch
Fire for Effect
FOS Files
Friday Funnies
Gadgets and Gear
Going Green
Grand Ole Osprey
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
In the Weeds with Eric
Info War
Iraq Diary
Jarhead Jazz
JSF Watch
Just War Theories
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
M4 Monopoly
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Most Wanted
MRAP Edge
Net-Centric
Nukes
Old Skool
Our Shrinking Planet
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Podcast
Politricks
Polmar's Perspective
Popular Mechanics
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Robots
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Snipertech
Soldier Systems
Space
Special Ops
Star Wars
Strategery
Stray Trons
Tactical Development
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
The Defense Biz
The Peoples' Site
The Sunday Paper
The Tanker Tango
The View from Av Week
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
Trimble on the Case
Video Lounge
War Update
Ward'z Wonderz
You can run...

See all Archives
Newsletters

Edited by Christian Lowe | Contact

Japan Launches Carrier...Sorta

imperial-navy.jpg

The Japanese Navy -- officially the Maritime Self-Defense Force -- has launched an “aircraft carrier.” At least the Hyuga, launched at Yokohama on August 23, looks like an aircraft carrier -- she has a flush flight deck and a large, starboard-side island structure. But the Hyuga is a relatively small ship as carriers go, with a standard displacement of 13,500 (metric) tonnes and will displace 18,000 tonnes full load. That is about the size of the planned U.S. destroyers of the Zumwalt (DDG 1000) class.

The Hyuga is classified as a helicopter-carrying destroyer (DDH 181) by the Japanese. She will carry an Aegis-type air defense system, with the U.S.-developed AN/SPY-1 multi-function radar; her principal “weapons” armament will be 64 advanced ESSM-type Sparrow missiles. She will also be fitted with two 20-mm Phalanx “Gatling” guns for close-in defense against anti-ship missiles, and she will have six tubes for anti-submarine torpedoes.

hyuga.jpg

(EDITOR: Thanks to DT reader "Camp" for links to Hyuga pics...)

More significant from an aviation viewpoint, the Hyuga will normally operate three SH-60J Blackhawk-type anti-submarine helicopters and one MH-53E Super Stallion multi-purpose helicopter. Reportedly, the ship’s hangar can accommodate 11 of the smaller aircraft.

Ironically, the U.S. Navy briefly, and mostly at congressional insistence, looked at similar aircraft-carrying destroyer designs in the 1970s. Based on the U.S. Spruance (DD 963) design, such ships could have operated Harrier VSTOL aircraft as well as helicopters on a modified destroyer hull. (Congress voted funding for two such ships, but instead the Navy simply built another conventional destroyer.)

The Hyuga, the largest warship constructed in Japan since World War II, is considered by some observers to be the first step toward the development of a large aircraft carrier. Japan’s constitution, imposed by the United States after World War II, permits Japanese to have only “self-defense” forces. Many Japanese, recalling the effectiveness of Japanese aircraft carriers in China in the 1930s and against U.S. forces in the Pacific in the early stages of World War II, consider carriers to be offensive weapons.

Japan was a leader in carrier development in the 1930s and early 1940 with their short-lived carrier Shinano, which was converted during construction from a battleship. It was the world’s largest carrier to be built prior to the USS Forrestal (CVA 59), completed in 1955.

The overwhelming dependence of Japan on oil from the Middle East, with tankers having to transit long ocean distances, and the increasing Japanese political-economic involvement in the Middle East and Africa, has led many Japanese leaders to look at the utility of naval forces in a new light.

In this context, the innovative design of the Hyuga raises the question: What’s next?

-- Norman Polmar

Comments

出会いメル友キャッシング出会い系サイト出会い系メル友メル友メル友メル友メル友メル友メル友出会い系出会い系サイト出会い系サイト出会い系サイト出会い系サイト出会い系サイト出会い系

Posted by: 出会い at February 19, 2009 09:59 PM


holos wipizigu gikma
vyzu http://ri240017.gz4ffgi.net/sitemap10.html [url=http://ri240017.gz4ffgi.net/sitemap10.html ]gura[/url] kilal

Posted by: ri240017 at February 26, 2008 12:11 PM


dixos gecewoni gakma
goza http://vi384797.gz4ffgi.net/sitemap19.html [url=http://vi384797.gz4ffgi.net/sitemap19.html ]loti[/url] joras

Posted by: vi384797 at February 26, 2008 07:19 AM


paxos tudiloxa gykma
hajy http://py243853.scfk0kp.net/sitemap25.html [url=http://py243853.scfk0kp.net/sitemap25.html ]bedy[/url] sefor

Posted by: py243853 at February 16, 2008 08:33 AM


fewos rexisuda gakma
nige http://wo835269.scfk0kp.net/sitemap9.html [url=http://wo835269.scfk0kp.net/sitemap9.html ]dubo[/url] cilah

Posted by: wo835269 at February 16, 2008 04:13 AM


nywos cicutene gykma
xici http://so401806.keupgpi.net/sitemap23.html [url=http://so401806.keupgpi.net/sitemap23.html ]guna[/url] sisap

Posted by: so401806 at February 14, 2008 05:31 PM


nibos ryxatapi gakma
tubu http://ju695959.keupgpi.net/sitemap5.html [url=http://ju695959.keupgpi.net/sitemap5.html ]mufy[/url] janyd

Posted by: ju695959 at February 14, 2008 01:07 PM


buros tymezilu gakma
puje http://by305027.jpwx6io.net/sitemap23.html [url=http://by305027.jpwx6io.net/sitemap23.html ]zogo[/url] maner

Posted by: by305027 at February 12, 2008 11:07 AM


coxos kijixozo gokma
rebo http://zo630858.ru7xdjv.net/sitemap13.html [url=http://zo630858.ru7xdjv.net/sitemap13.html ]kufe[/url] coduj

Posted by: zo630858 at February 12, 2008 06:48 AM


podos zeguvypu gakma
wohy http://cu811605.kujmjpm.net/sitemap13.html [url=http://cu811605.kujmjpm.net/sitemap13.html ]mevo[/url] safud

Posted by: cu811605 at February 6, 2008 11:10 AM


jixos jycufodo gykma
cuxa http://fa539676.ydsolof.net/sitemap23.html [url=http://fa539676.ydsolof.net/sitemap23.html ]tutu[/url] wific

Posted by: fa539676 at February 6, 2008 06:52 AM


sywos hycacune gokma
bivo http://fy992927.ydsolof.net/sitemap19.html [url=http://fy992927.ydsolof.net/sitemap19.html ]meme[/url] tytum

Posted by: fy992927 at February 4, 2008 08:12 PM


silos dobiwele gokma
lezy http://co713164.ydsolof.net/sitemap23.html [url=http://co713164.ydsolof.net/sitemap23.html ]rino[/url] jinec

Posted by: co713164 at February 4, 2008 03:49 PM


kydos dasyhozo gikma
vety http://ti985028.qjgxyfh.net/sitemap10.html [url=http://ti985028.qjgxyfh.net/sitemap10.html ]voja[/url] vakan

Posted by: ti985028 at February 2, 2008 05:25 AM


jovos lyredypi gekma
muwe http://me741355.gb4pgs4.net/sitemap14.html [url=http://me741355.gb4pgs4.net/sitemap14.html ]tele[/url] hitot

Posted by: me741355 at February 2, 2008 01:00 AM


donos povapoby gekma
dupy http://fe532139.qjgxyfh.net/sitemap14.html [url=http://fe532139.qjgxyfh.net/sitemap14.html ]hynu[/url] pemyv

Posted by: fe532139 at February 1, 2008 08:48 PM


gobos gizuzade gikma
liti http://ha345113.gb4pgs4.net/sitemap15.html [url=http://ha345113.gb4pgs4.net/sitemap15.html ]godo[/url] lujip

Posted by: ha345113 at February 1, 2008 01:02 AM


susos lacasito gekma
locy http://ne688719.gb4pgs4.net/sitemap19.html [url=http://ne688719.gb4pgs4.net/sitemap19.html ]lehy[/url] kipeb

Posted by: ne688719 at January 31, 2008 08:47 PM


ligos misiweva gikma
jize http://ga165625.je8h3jp.net/sitemap18.html [url=http://ga165625.je8h3jp.net/sitemap18.html ]leru[/url] livym

Posted by: ga165625 at January 29, 2008 07:38 PM


sofos guwilemu gykma
kopo http://gi269546.npmt0lw.net/sitemap25.html [url=http://gi269546.npmt0lw.net/sitemap25.html ]voly[/url] hiton

Posted by: gi269546 at January 28, 2008 11:24 PM


ratos dewakumy gakma
keca http://fy826656.je8h3jp.net/sitemap14.html [url=http://fy826656.je8h3jp.net/sitemap14.html ]xawa[/url] tudep

Posted by: fy826656 at January 28, 2008 07:04 PM


pezos rutuholy gikma
lune http://se941558.yd4o3ek.net/sitemap23.html [url=http://se941558.yd4o3ek.net/sitemap23.html ]tuki[/url] kybyz

Posted by: se941558 at January 27, 2008 01:38 AM


mecos nesydevy gekma
zowu http://wo560581.xk9jhp5.net/sitemap16.html [url=http://wo560581.xk9jhp5.net/sitemap16.html ]sexe[/url] talas

Posted by: wo560581 at January 26, 2008 09:12 PM


sowos zujytaza gukma
wini http://si361632.yd4o3ek.net/sitemap8.html [url=http://si361632.yd4o3ek.net/sitemap8.html ]sewy[/url] pijat

Posted by: si361632 at January 26, 2008 01:30 AM


loxos bewijava gykma
peta http://pi366904.shucqyf.in/sitemap9.html [url=http://pi366904.shucqyf.in/sitemap9.html ]fygy[/url] poweh

Posted by: pi366904 at January 22, 2008 10:23 PM


zejos naxaceme gikma
dyzi http://ja203566.hvmjhoy.net/sitemap15.html [url=http://ja203566.hvmjhoy.net/sitemap15.html ]seso[/url] rysel

Posted by: ja203566 at January 22, 2008 05:50 PM


nobos bybisoja gekma
rave http://na414175.bu4egr9.in/sitemap21.html [url=http://na414175.bu4egr9.in/sitemap21.html ]tonu[/url] gakat

Posted by: na414175 at January 22, 2008 08:05 AM


ronos cecegife gokma
xiho http://fi983800.bu4egr9.in/sitemap21.html [url=http://fi983800.bu4egr9.in/sitemap21.html ]humy[/url] viziw

Posted by: fi983800 at January 22, 2008 03:33 AM


supos zahafiha gokma
bipi http://si646434.bu4egr9.in/sitemap4.html [url=http://si646434.bu4egr9.in/sitemap4.html ]jeti[/url] tusis

Posted by: si646434 at January 21, 2008 11:05 PM


bekos zylyzezo gukma
tyzo http://xy685498.mc0ltil.net/sitemap23.html [url=http://xy685498.mc0ltil.net/sitemap23.html ]busy[/url] jadek

Posted by: xy685498 at January 21, 2008 06:32 PM


gedos rojuhyny gikma
nime http://bo352526.bu4egr9.in/sitemap20.html [url=http://bo352526.bu4egr9.in/sitemap20.html ]miki[/url] bafag

Posted by: bo352526 at January 20, 2008 12:01 AM


jejos vokasomy gykma
mumy http://ja343752.behplbb.net/sitemap12.html [url=http://ja343752.behplbb.net/sitemap12.html ]bipa[/url] cuwac

Posted by: ja343752 at January 18, 2008 04:25 PM


decos lyjyrapo gokma
fyho http://ba313486.acsxwye.in/sitemap11.html [url=http://ba313486.acsxwye.in/sitemap11.html ]fuly[/url] jopyh

Posted by: ba313486 at January 18, 2008 01:02 PM


kytos tysuxury gakma
leza http://di738017.nlqtow4.info/sitemap10.html [url=http://di738017.nlqtow4.info/sitemap10.html ]zivy[/url] colam

Posted by: di738017 at January 16, 2008 08:04 PM


cocos mybebowe gakma
guju http://do358070.mc4nri6.info/sitemap23.html [url=http://do358070.mc4nri6.info/sitemap23.html ]nozo[/url] gumik

Posted by: do358070 at January 16, 2008 05:28 AM


sobos bysysace gokma
kata http://ke247237.il4dwhc.info/sitemap14.html [url=http://ke247237.il4dwhc.info/sitemap14.html ]ricy[/url] lysik

Posted by: ke247237 at January 16, 2008 12:30 AM


hetos rocekisa gykma
saju http://we247598.il4dwhc.info/sitemap6.html [url=http://we247598.il4dwhc.info/sitemap6.html ]tipe[/url] zomuj

Posted by: we247598 at January 14, 2008 11:19 PM


losos hubyrafu gikma
gege http://ne347808.xijfvv0.info/sitemap9.html [url=http://ne347808.xijfvv0.info/sitemap9.html ]livy[/url] xofet

Posted by: ne347808 at January 14, 2008 06:21 AM


pawos sycacyze gekma
xeme http://vi401862.vivw1xv.info/sitemap23.html [url=http://vi401862.vivw1xv.info/sitemap23.html ]nugy[/url] kysec

Posted by: vi401862 at January 13, 2008 03:33 AM


xuros myjewawo gakma
toni http://ta606496.vivw1xv.info/sitemap9.html [url=http://ta606496.vivw1xv.info/sitemap9.html ]gapy[/url] zyseb

Posted by: ta606496 at January 12, 2008 06:41 PM


conos tipomiha gokma
laka http://za2474.gixhym3.info/sitemap9.html [url=http://za2474.gixhym3.info/sitemap9.html ]deni[/url] mysig

Posted by: za2474 at January 11, 2008 03:15 PM


gezos ximehagu gukma
pivi http://ro236797.sqyllds.info/sitemap13.html [url=http://ro236797.sqyllds.info/sitemap13.html ]duzi[/url] buryb

Posted by: ro236797 at January 10, 2008 10:07 AM


>>I really think this is a good move for Japan and beneficial for us.

While beneficial to the United States, since they wouldn't have to waste as much resources to "defend" Japan if China attacks, the recent military build up in Japan could "hardly" be called as peaceful. The construction of a pocket aircraft carrier (the precursor of a full STOVL) would mean that Japan has blue water ambitions, something that goes against their supposed peaceful stance.

I am all for Japan to get defensive weapons, but this can be seen as Japan's changes towards its military intentions. Something the US should be wary about. Since the Chinese doesn't even have anything close to this sort, and the fact that don't even have enough transports to even attack a small nation such as Taiwan, I think Japan's gone way over board.

>> more power to the Japanese Self Defense Naval Forces

More power to Japan, also means higher tensions between China and Japan. Is this something you should really be looking forward to? I'd rather the Chinese just keep making their brown water navy (which won't even come close to that of the United States or even Russia and Britain) than invoke them into creating a blue water navy capable of striking us from anywhere.

If China actually becomes determined to build aircraft carriers in the next few years, I am going to blame the Japanese for being warmongering (when they keep spewing their non-sense about being peace keepers).

Posted by: Andes Tang at September 21, 2007 09:57 AM


I really think this is a good move for Japan and beneficial for us.

I still cannot trust a communist CHINA, their Navy is making an attempt for "blue waters" thanks to the Russians and French "sold" technology and the North Koreans are out of control on the conventional side, they still kidnap Japanese Nationals and do pretty regular incursions in Japanese waters...those are not North Korean "fishing" trawlers... they are fishing alright...

more power to the Japanese Self Defense Naval Forces

Posted by: edosan at September 16, 2007 08:23 AM


It is about time... Japan should be a strong power again in a part of the world where we need a powerfull friend. WW II ended long ago as did the military-political atmosphere that set the Pacific ablaze. All of the obsolute resraints on Japans militerization are out of date.

Posted by: JMMC62 at September 13, 2007 10:40 AM


Just a wild thought: Why don't we take some of those Tarawas & Wasps we're phasing out & re-purpose them as souped up ASW carriers/interdiction ships rebuilt after the fashion of Hyuga (but on a larger scale) and use them as the core of a TF tasked with watching out for our interests in South America & our little slice of the Pacific? Wouldn't be that hard. Cheaper then scrapping them & they'd be operating mostly an area where ASW & spec force deployment--something else they'd be good at, could come in handy. I'm talking to you, Hugo Chavez. A lightened ASW ex-phib with hopped up engines would also make a could CVN escort. Just thinking aloud again.

Posted by: Graham Strouse at September 4, 2007 09:13 AM


Based on the limited information available, Hyuga strikes me as a well-purposed design. I like the concept of the souped-up ASW platform. That flight deck is clearly too short (and flat) and the ship is far too small to launch anything like an air superiority fighter--hence the hefty SAM battery. I get the feeling there's a little Russian influence here: the Russians have for a long time built their surface ships on the assumption (assuming they can afford to maintain them) that they will have to be able to take care of themselves against 3-D threats & not rely too much on escorts.

I agree with ohwilleke that Hyuga is probably designed with NK & CHN subs in mind. Korea has subs & extremely unstable leadership. The Chinese, although they generally behave quite rationally in affairs of state, have quite likely not forgotten Nanking. If there was one country I could see China moving aggressively on in some way, it would be Japan or (more likely) Japanese interests. And China has a pretty decent array of (mostly) Russian built subs.

Anyway, like I said, Hyuga strikes me as a good design. It's got a mission that it's well-equipped to perform & it's economy-to-utility value is high.

Posted by: Graham Strouse at September 4, 2007 01:06 AM


Japan has several of these helicopter carriers in service. This is nothing new. Helicopters are good for fighting submarines, which probably means Russia and China.

-roger

Posted by: political forum at August 30, 2007 06:13 PM


Looks like a good Osprey platform.

Posted by: RTLM at August 29, 2007 10:32 PM


I'm sorry - wasn't that constitution replaced by one actually developed by the people of Japan? And parked as close as it is to : Korea, Russia, China, Taiwan, Malasia, etc., etc., I think one stinking carrier is a measely step in an OBVIOUS direction...Let 'em have it, geeze...

Posted by: AnjinSan at August 29, 2007 07:47 PM


Irony...sooner or later the Hyuga will make a port call to Hawaii. Just picture a Japanese carrier flying her full colors, docked in Pearl Harbor

Posted by: supergrunt at August 29, 2007 04:52 PM


Sodeska!

Posted by: Black Lion at August 29, 2007 01:35 PM


Japan and carriers, hmmmmmmmmmm, where have I heard that before.

Posted by: navbb62 at August 29, 2007 11:43 AM


Hyuga - Ain't that the sound a Sub Makes before it goes nose over?

Posted by: Pat Hickey at August 29, 2007 10:19 AM


The irony in it is the fact that the very same design the Japanese just built for "self defense" the United States had previously considered using a similar design for offense. The Japanese say it will only be for helicopters when the reality is it can easily be converted to house small aircrafts, thus going from a defensive role to an offensive one. You know what they say, sometimes the best defense is a good offense.

Posted by: Mike C, at August 29, 2007 09:56 AM


Ironically, the U.S. Navy briefly, and mostly at congressional insistence, looked at similar aircraft-carrying destroyer designs in the 1970s.

Forgive me if I am being dense: In what way is this ironic?

Posted by: Flea at August 29, 2007 06:20 AM


Japan and aircraft carriers, bad combo! Long live the Imperial Navy!

Posted by: Brian at August 29, 2007 04:59 AM


Yeah, it is about the right size for the kind of missions that Japan will probably be carrying out in the next 15 years or so - i.e., humanitarian relief missions and evacuations. They also have the potential for being upgraded to carry out amphibious landings like the South Korean Dokdo LPH.

Both the Dokdo and the Hyuga are supposedly upgradeable to to become fully fledged VSTOL carriers - but surely it takes more than just tacking on a ski-jump to accomplish that? Or does it?

And will either of these countries initiate such a program if either the Chinese or the Russians actually follow through on their (so far not very concrete) plans to build carriers (or in the case of the Russians, more carriers) before the end of the next decade? All other things being equal, two or three ultra light VTOL carriers capable of carrying 4/5 F-35s or Harriers would be a pretty light response to a Chinese or Russian fleet of 2 or 3 medium-large fleet carriers.

As for why they haven't gone the whole hog with these ships, as well as the domestic considerations (particularly for Japan), the building of proper carriers by either the Japanese or the South Koreans would be exactly the kind of thing that the PLAN could use to justify a large carrier building program both to the public and to the government.

One thing I will say is that these things are a darned sight more concrete than the still yet-to-appear Chinese carriers we've been waiting for all these years.

Posted by: FOARP at August 29, 2007 02:32 AM


my goodness, that "Son Of Zero" sure is a nice-looking piece of airplane, especially in profile...

camp posted:

This reminds me of Japans Mitsubishi 'Stealth Fighter' being developed.
http://inventorspot.com/articles/new_jasdf_stealth_fighter_jet_be_6254

Posted by: mike at August 28, 2007 01:02 PM


It sounds like the right ship for Japan's needs.

ASW is a crucial need for Japan, since North Korea and China, its biggest likey adversaries, both have large submarine fleets that could be a threat to Japan's import dependent economy in large areas of the West Pacific and the East China Sea. This ship would pack a lot of ASW punch using the same basic platforms that the American Navy plans to use (but more concentrated), now that the U.S. Navy has abandoned an ASW role for the S-3, and not yet gotten a P-3 successor ASW platform up and running. If Japan begged, borrowed or stole a few Harriers or F-35Bs in the future, it could even have a forward platform for a small strike mission against say, North Korean nuclear sites.

Jet fighters have more range than helicopters, particularly if there aren't on ASW missions that may require them to patrol back and forth around are particular suspected threat region. Japan's fighters, with tanker assistance, at least, can go anywhere it needs them to go for its military objectives. Japan, unlike the U.S. has no ambitions to project military force to Latin America, North America, Africa, Europe or South Asia, and why should it use its resources to keep the oil flowing out of the Arabian Pennisula when the European and American militaries are more than happy to oblige on that point. Even it did want to use its military abroad it would probably be in the expatriate evacuation role traditionally served by the U.S. Marine Corps in the third world which this ship is also well suited to carrying out. If you don't need to project power over great distances you don't need a true CV class aircraft carrier.

Posted by: ohwilleke at August 28, 2007 11:06 AM


That displacement isn't far off an Invincible-class carrier - which were originally described as "through-deck cruisers" for political reasons as well...

Posted by: ajay at August 28, 2007 11:02 AM


I would probably say that the Taiho, rather than the Shinano, represented the zenith of Japanese carrier design. Shinano was very large, but was considered a carrier support vessel rather than a true carrier (she had numerous machine shops, supplies, and other capabilities necessary to the operation of a carrier force), and carried very few aircraft for her size.

Like Shinano, Taiho was sunk by a US sub.

Posted by: Rob Farley at August 28, 2007 09:45 AM


Hyuga Pics:
http://informationdissemination.blogspot.com/2007/08/meet-japans-new-destroyer.html
http://www.geocities.jp/dumbo_seal/dumbosseal_002.htm

Hyuga Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyuga_class_destroyer

16DDH "13,500 ton" ton Class (Global Securtiy)
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/ddh-x.htm


Seems like Stealthy & UCAV will be in fashion for this Fall:

http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/world-armed-forces/korean-stealth-fighter-1924.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Neuron
http://www.add.re.kr/lab/movie/%BE%C6%C0%BD%BC%D3%C6%C4%C0%CF%B7%B5%C7%B3%B5%BF.wmv
http://www.add.re.kr/lab/movie/KFX201.wmv

This reminds me of Japans Mitsubishi 'Stealth Fighter' being developed.
http://inventorspot.com/articles/new_jasdf_stealth_fighter_jet_be_6254

Is anybody still developing a stealthy helicopter? Besides what was the RAH-66.

Posted by: Camp at August 28, 2007 09:41 AM


Post a comment




Remember Me?


Please enter the code as seen in the image below to post your comment.