Japanese Hypersonic Missiles

how can you say it's a hypersonic missile, that you can't see anything and even the original post x speaks generically of a vehicle?
 
Login the X and the author acknowledges in those replies, use Google Translate if necessary
 
That should be the 2 tubes per truck, the line should be the centre line rather than 8 shots per truck
 
Scott Kenny said:
Am I parsing that correctly, 2 blocks of 4 birds per HEMTT-size truck?
Click to expand...
Sorry, I should've added context. Japanese military enthusiasts were confused when they saw this drawing since they've mistakenly assumed that the drawing indicated a rectangular canister. Obviously, it was just a round canister, and as SK2 have noted, that line in the middle is the centre line going through the canister.
 
Maro.Kyo said:
Sorry, I should've added context. Japanese military enthusiasts were confused when they saw this drawing since they've mistakenly assumed that the drawing indicated a rectangular canister. Obviously, it was just a round canister, and as SK2 have noted, that line in the middle is the centre line going through the canister.
Click to expand...
I would assume that the square Stands for the volume the canister takes.
 
kqcke for you said:
I would assume that the square Stands for the volume the canister takes.
Click to expand...
No, there was another tweet which was discussing why the canisters that have been spotted on the road has a round canister unlike what they thought is a rectangular canister stemming from the wrong interpretation that I've mentioned above.

The post I've linked adresses exactly that misinterpretation ("高速滑空弾のキャニスターが円柱型なのに驚かれている方がいるようですが")
 
https://www.mod.go.jp/j/press/news/2025/02/07b.html
Recent flight test was confirmed successful. Mass production already began last year, 4 test launches have been conducted in California, development will be completed this year.

I hope they make a ship-launched version of it too.
 

Attachments

  • GjL0GYMawAAASjM.jpg
    GjL0GYMawAAASjM.jpg
    14.5 KB · Views: 56
  • GjL0GYLaQAA7Gk1.jpg
    GjL0GYLaQAA7Gk1.jpg
    12.5 KB · Views: 50
  • GjL0GYMa0AAIAr8.jpg
    GjL0GYMa0AAIAr8.jpg
    7.1 KB · Views: 53
Last edited:
Be this open for export or license?
 
Scott Kenny said:
Unlikely.
Click to expand...

Given the deteriorating situation between Taiwan and the PRC (Along with its massive build up of the PLA:N) that may change in the near future also there's the situation between the Koreas given all of the help North Korea has been giving Russia in Ukraine.

Scott Kenny said:
It's at least legally possible now that Japan has revised their Arms Export laws.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought, the likely short-list of countries Japan would export weapons to IMO is Taiwan, South Korea, Phillipines, Australia and Ukraine.
 
I cannot think of any country in the market or that Japan would sell to. I doubt ROK will ever buy anything from Japan for pure domestic political reasons, and the U.S. tends to not buy foreign. I suspect Japan is not willing to stir the pot with a direct Taiwan sale. Ukraine - Japan is not getting involved. Australia does not real need a coastal defense weapon..
 
Josh_TN said:
I cannot think of any country in the market or that Japan would sell to. I doubt ROK will ever buy anything from Japan for pure domestic political reasons, and the U.S. tends to not buy foreign. I suspect Japan is not willing to stir the pot with a direct Taiwan sale. Ukraine - Japan is not getting involved. Australia does not real need a coastal defense weapon..
Click to expand...
Well, Japan is building Standard Missiles in-house, which I'd assume are mostly for their internal use but could be sold to anyone using Standards if needed. The single most likely option is for US 7th Fleet to use as reloads. South Korea seems to be working towards divesting themselves from Standards.

And the US has bought foreign-designed weapons before. Penguin antiship missiles, OTO 76mm, Bofors 57mm, etc. Basically, when there's not really a US weapon in that class.

If Japan's hypersonic missile fits into a Mk41 cell, I could definitely see the US wanting to buy some!
 
Scott Kenny said:
It's at least legally possible now that Japan has revised their Arms Export laws.
Click to expand...
Strictly speaking, the export of ammunition, missiles, cannons, and other deadly arms is still illegal under Japanese domestic law.
Therefore...uh...They must be "co-development". If a country were to co-develop a new HGV with Japan, and the missile looked very similar to HVGP, that would be perfectly legal.

But even if it were allowed under Japanese law, it would violate MTCR (HVGP block1 range is estimated to be at least 700 km).
 
GHH said:
But even if it were allowed under Japanese law, it would violate MTCR (HVGP block1 range is estimated to be at least 700 km).
Click to expand...

I think there are many reasons that this weapon will not be exported, but doesn’t MTCR only include to countries who do not already have such a capability?
 
GHH said:
Strictly speaking, the export of ammunition, missiles, cannons, and other deadly arms is still illegal under Japanese domestic law.
Therefore...uh...They must be "co-development". If a country were to co-develop a new HGV with Japan, and the missile looked very similar to HVGP, that would be perfectly legal.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that's correct, else Japan would not be shopping their Soryu/Taigei subs around to sell.


GHH said:
But even if it were allowed under Japanese law, it would violate MTCR (HVGP block1 range is estimated to be at least 700 km).
Click to expand...
MCTR only applies to nations that do not already have weapons with those ranges.

Plus I expect the MCTR to collapse pretty soon.
 
GHH said:
Strictly speaking, the export of ammunition, missiles, cannons, and other deadly arms is still illegal under Japanese domestic law.
Therefore...uh...They must be "co-development". If a country were to co-develop a new HGV with Japan, and the missile looked very similar to HVGP, that would be perfectly legal.

But even if it were allowed under Japanese law, it would violate MTCR (HVGP block1 range is estimated to be at least 700 km).
Click to expand...
Well you know we could develop a new version with a iveco / man truck and eh a european GPS system. Now its european xD
 
Scott Kenny said:
I'm not sure that's correct, else Japan would not be shopping their Soryu/Taigei subs around to sell.
Click to expand...
There are some exceptions like for "patrol, surveillance, and maritime security systems". For things like Mogami, subs, P-1 there has been a very loose interpretation applied for their sales. However an SRBM likely sits outside of justifiable loose interpretation. The only true exception was for GCAP to be sold to non-partner nations.

I don't see Japan ever getting rid of the policy as it was an especially useful tool for IP protection in the 80s and 90s to stop the US from pressuring Japan into providing pretty much any technology. Japan could say it would have a potential defense application no matter how simple and completely stop the US from being able to push the matter further.
 
Josh_TN said:
Either the U.S. is in the fight or it isn’t. Aus coastal defenses are not going to matter much either way.
Click to expand...

Earlier this year a PLA:N unit made an unannounced sortie south through the middle of the Tasman Sea and had a live-fire exercise, it rattled both New Zealand especially Australia, Australia I strongly suspect WILL get coastal-defence AShMs in the near future.
 
Josh_TN said:
I think there are many reasons that this weapon will not be exported, but doesn’t MTCR only include to countries who do not already have such a capability?
Click to expand...
I thought MTCR basically regulated trade between all countries, but I guess I was wrong. In any case, the countries that would want to go out of their way to import missiles from Japan would be those that cannot develop their own. The PrSM program seems to be going well, so I don't think the US and Australia will want HVGP.

Kota said:
There are some exceptions like for "patrol, surveillance, and maritime security systems". For things like Mogami, subs, P-1 there has been a very loose interpretation applied for their sales.
Click to expand...
The planned exports of Soryu, Mogami, and P-1 were all nominally co-developments.
 
zen said:
License build in the UK, is export of design and technology. But not actually weapons.
This would fit UK needs and be entirely free of European delays.
Click to expand...
Would Japan be interested in that level of tech transfer though? They are collaborating heavily on other aerospace projects, but this seems iffy.
 
Josh_TN said:
Would Japan be interested in that level of tech transfer though? They are collaborating heavily on other aerospace projects, but this seems iffy.
Click to expand...
I believe Japan would permit the licensed production of missiles. After all, missiles are consumables, so if the UK were to manufacture components for them, it could be a great help to Japan in the event that its own production network suffered serious damage. Moreover, they (the Japanese side) likely want the “track record” of having their missiles earn trust and recognition abroad.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom