Comments by "David Houseman" (@davidhouseman4328) on "The Empire of Japan 2.0?" video.

  1. You didn't read it then. First paragraph "capable of carrying above 500kg payload for more than 300km". Give it a reread.
    19
  2. What Japan has that China doesn't is access to western military tech and expertise. China isn't close to catching up in that regard (EMALS does not define a good carrier). I would currently take the Japanese navy over the Chinese but it wouldn't be fighting alone.
    12
  3. Did you read the article you tried to use as support? It payloads of over 500kg.
    10
  4. Comments like your first always reassure me. I'm well aware I don't know everything but at least I know your claims are massively exaggerated. Combat experience is still combat experience. I can't imagine and argument about J20 vs F35 is going to be very productive. Needless to say I don't think a country with no experience of stealth and very little of original aircraft production is going to produce the superior aircraft. I agree there won't be a trade war over rocks, there probably won't be one and if there is it'll be about something we're not currently considering. But the US will get involved in a shooting war against China if one breaks out.
    4
  5. Ha, do you recon tug boats can get the Kuznetsov all the way to Japan?
    3
  6. 2 ASRAAM will be internal the second 2 internal were scrapped (though that seem weird anyway). It's been a good talk, you've not convinced me but you've certainly raised my opinion of the J20.
    2
  7. For Category II (ie less than 500kg) the determining factor is if it will be used to the deliver or develop delivery systems for WMD's. Japan has shown no interest in WMD's and is a big advocate of nuclear disarmament. It also has a space program and would have no problems creaing it own delivery system. It is perfectly proper for the US to have sold these systems. Also it's not a treaty so even if it wasn't correct they wouldn't be breaking a law. http://mtcr.info/frequently-asked-questions-faqs/
    1
  8. I don't think authoritarian states tend to have their police complaining about budgets cut and not having enough space in there prisons.
    1
  9. The access I was refering does include straight purchases it also about transfer, components and building in country. It allows you to looks for the best done by other countries to improve your own. The expertise is just as important. China is new to having a capable navy as well as (to it's credit) having little to no war fighting experience. This can't be said of the US, Britain or France. Carriers are just enablers, if EMALS means you can fly better planes at higher sortie rates then it's useful otherwise it's irrelevant. Show me the plane its enabling and I'll concede the argument. My knowledge is based on the US where it is a vanity project. Of course the sky's are very important (though if you're russian you might just dive under the sea) it was only the navy where I would take Japans. That said your J20 argument is a bit pointless as with lack of numbers and experience you might as well bring in the F35. Realistically you're looking at some kind of 90's battles between SU27 variants and F15's The Falklands conflict has many differences differences don't look to that and assume no US intervention. The US had an anti colonial stance particularly in the Americas (ie Monroe Doctrine), there were cold war politics, Argentina was irrelevant rather than the main long term threat. The only war I see (other than something weird in Korea) would be trade war, sanctions and finally blockade. This would involve the US from the beginning. All very unlikely but you prepare for the worst.
    1
  10. Off the top of my head combat stress, logistics, and integrated command structures. By my logic the F22 would be a good plane because the US had previous experience of stealth and fighter plane design. You spent a number of line explaining stealth and then didn't use it in your argument. You start of saying the two planes both are stealthy and have good sensors and then dismiss the subject as if there equal. The key to success are these two points, how stealthy and how good are the sensors. Who sees who first. And that why i's a pointless argument because we're talking about two classified planes.
    1
  11. You gave a long list of why the J20 is better WVR. The F35 is designed to fight BVR so it's mostly irrelevant. As I think you understand stealth is not visible or invisible it see more or see less. The quality of your shaping and materials (and radar on the other side) will therefore help decide who sees who first. This is the all important factor and is classified. For example from what I've heard the front profile of the J20 is very good but the rest not so much but this could be early prototype or complete internet rubbish.
    1
  12. I understand your point about WVR, it might be true, I don't think stealth is good enough. I also think that if true it is more likely to lead to two set of air to ground warfare using long range weapons. If the gun becomes key I'll eat my shorts. Will China export the J20? I think a major powers war is very unlikely so was wondering if the theory will see real world results.
    1
  13. Just been doing a spot of reading and F35 can take ASRAAM internally and it's LOAL.
    1