For smaller JMSDF combat vessels, there is the successor to the Type 1 missile boat (the PG02’s class), which is the 240-ton Hayabusa-class, which carries the Type 90 SSM, as well as a 76-mm Otobreda, and 2x 12.7mm MGs.
This class is set to be reinforced by the new, as-of-yet constructed 1900-ton patrol ship, an OPV-type vessel, supposedly starting this year.
Japan Coast Guard ships are also fair game, I think. Tonnage from a little more than a 100 tons to nearly 7400 tons can be seen throughout their past and current fleet.
Armament ranges from a single 12.7mm MG mount on their oldest and one of their smallest vessels,
to 2x20mm JM61s and 2x35mm Oerlikons/40mm Bofors on their largest and newest.
While I am not a particular fan of using wikipedia sources, using these lets one see how many ships the JMSDF and JCG actually fielded, and allows for further research using more trustworthy sources. Please use the Japanese language version of Wikipedia to see more ships. The English version is sorely lacking.
One of the last World War II era ships to ever been decommissioned. DE-169 or USS Atherton is a Cannon-Class Destroyer Escort laid down in January 14, 1943. She was first sent for ASW patrol duties around the waters of the Caribbean and then was transferred to Task Force 62 for escort duties for transatlantic convoys. It was with this that she earned her famous kill when she destroyed U-853 close to Rhode Island using depth charge attacks with the newly developed Hedgehog mortars. This was credited as the sinking of the last German submarine attack in American waters in WW2.
Before being decommissioned, her crew received these awards:
Post-war she was decommissioned and transferred as a loan to the newly formed JMSDF as the JDS Hatsuhi (DE-263) in 1955 to bolster its capabilities while the ships of the JMSDF were still being built under the terms of the Mutual Defense Assistance Program. She was joined with JDS Asahi (USS Amick / BRP Datu Sikatuna) where they both served until being decommissioned from JMSDF service in 1975.
Philippine Navy Service
Remained laid-up in Japan, she was transferred to the Philippine government on 13 September 1976 and was Transferred as an Excess Defense Article on 23 December 1978. She was then towed to South Korea where she received an extensive refit and modernization in 1979 and was then commissioned as BRP Rajah Humabon (PF-6) classifying it as a frigate under the new Philippine Navy Standards. She served as the backbone of the Philippine Navy with her sister ship BRP Rajah Sikatuna where she served as the Navy’s flagship. She served until 1993 but was recalled and overhauled back into service in 1996 with a new hull number (PF-11) where she served until being decommissioned in March 15, 2018. Planned to be placed as a museum ship, she was sadly sunk during a storm on October 30, 2022.
Cannon Class Specs Drawing based on sister ship USS Swearer (DE-186)
Specifications
Now the specs and armaments of the ship vary mostly in 2 overall stages. Before and After its overhaul and refit in 1979 with more minor refits during its recommissioning in 1996. As such I will split this section in 2 main parts.
Mk.52 GFCS with Mk.41 Rangefinder for 3-inch (76 mm) guns
3 × Mk.51 GFCS for 40 mm guns
How will it function in-game?
There have been multiple proposals for the Canon Class Destroyer Escorts to be placed in the game as 3.7 Destroyers. In the Siam-Japanese proposal however, HTMS Pinklao which is a sister ship was placed as a coastal ship so it could still work at a max of 4.3.
What I envision it in the game however is to be some sort of prototype to give developers a feel if they should implement dynamic BR based on installed modifications (and dynamic vehicles based on installed modifications as well). If the player chooses to remove the radar and sensor suite, in exchange of having ASW weaponry, and inferior AA guns - players could play it as a 3.7 destroyer but if it chooses to have the radar and sensory suite, in exchange for not having ASW weaponry, and superior AA guns, they could get the vehicle upped in BR to 4.0. Whatever modifications were chosen though could also change the name of the ship with it either being the JDS Hatsuhi or BRP Rajah Humabon.
How will it fit in the Japanese Tech Tree?
Even though it is basically an American ship, it has a unique history of being under the service of three different navies and is the longest active service WW2 ship iirc. However my original intention had always been that it should be a part of a Siam subtree as a premium sidegrade of its sister, HTMS Pinklao. Anyways if the BRP Rajah Humabon post 1979 refit is chosen as the basis of its model, it can still be quite a fun vehicle that has radar on WW2.
More Photos:
USS Atherton
* USS Moberly conducts a Hedgehog attack on U-853, USS Atherton in distance. HH-NH48872*
This could be an interesting vehicle to have as an event vehicle for the Japanese Navy and it relates to Project Hula - the Soviet’s invasion of Japan in WW2. Dont need it now just a suggestion for the future. Dont even know if it fits best here.
Introducing
Kusu-Class, JDS Nara “Oak” (1959) Ex Project Hula Soviet EK-4, and Ex Tacoma-Class USS Machias
US Navy Service
Spoiler
USS Machias was launched in August 22, 1943 after which it participated in convoy escort duties in the Mid-Atlantic. It was then sent to Bora-Bora to convoy escort Royal Navy landing ships in the Solomon Islands Campaign. She then participated in convoy escort duties in the Philippine Campaign as well as commencing ASW operations off the coast of Mindanao. For her actions she was awarded with the American Campaign Medal, Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with two battle stars, and World War II Victory Medal.
Project Hula and Soviet Navy Service
Spoiler
USS Machias was decommissioned in July 12, 1945 as well as her sister ships to be transferred to the Soviet Union as part of Project Hula, the planned Soviet attack on the Japanese to bolster the Soviet Pacific Fleet. It was in here that EK-4 (now her new designation) performed her duties with notable distinction participating in the amphibious landings at Chongjin and Maoka (Sakhalin) as well as in the Kurile Islands Landing Operation. For her actions, she was awarded with the Medal “For the Victory over Japan” (Soviet Union).
JMSDF Service
Spoiler
In February 1946, the United States began negotiations with the Soviet Union for the return of ships loaned to the Soviet Navy for use during World War II. The Soviets however tried to keep the ships for themselves but negotiations continued until the Soviets relented and agreed to transfer back 480 of the 585 ships that the US Navy loaned to the Soviets for Project Hula. From here it was then transferred to the newly created Safety Security Force (which became the JMSDF) along with her sister ships in 1953. In 1966 she became a pierside training ship then in 1969 was sold for scrap.
Notes and Sister Ships
Spoiler
It is important to note that her sister ships notably the lead ship JDS Kusu (USS Ogden) had a much more colorful career singlehandedly defended a convoy of tugs and a tanker from kamikaze attacks killing 2 torpedo bombers in the process in her Leyte convoy runs. She also became an experimental ship for the JMSDF becoming a mother ship for drones (probably Firebee I).
Specifications
Spoiler
This is basically going to essentially be a copy of the USS Hoquiam in the US Tech Tree but with a bit of cosmetic changes.
USS Hoquiam, a sister ship
Displacement 1,430 t.
Length, 303’ 11"(oa)
Beam 37’ 6"
Draft 13’ 8"
Speed 20.3 kts.
Complement 190
Armament:
Three 3"/50 dual purpose gun mounts
Two twin 40mm gun mounts
Nine 20mm guns, one Hedgehog projector
Eight Y-gun depth charge projectors
Two depth charge tracks
Propulsion: Two 3-drum express boilers, two 5,500 iHP J. Hendy Iron Works steam engines, two shafts.
How will it function in-game?
Spoiler
While I understand that it is essentially a copy-paste vehicle, it is exactly for that reason why I recommend this ship to be an event vehicle specifically for the history pages. It could work as Gaijin essentially just has to cosmetize the existing USS Hoquiam to its Japanese design. Aside from that its a pretty interesting vehicle, I do agree that we do not need this ship anytime soon. I just posted it here just in case.
More Photos:
Spoiler
EK-4 Line Drawing
JDS Nara (PF-2)
Photo courtesy of Lieut-Commander G.R.G. Murray, RN from the 1959/1960 edition of Jane’s Fighting Ships
USS Machias at anchor
Sister Ships of JDS Nara that eventually formed that 1st Fleet Group of the Safety Security Force JDS Shii and JDS Ume
USS Gallup, a Tacoma-Class sister ship that eventually served with the Royal Thai Navy as HTMS Prasae and was part of the transfer of ships in Project Hula
I see your Idea for the Cannon class DDE & it looks good But man I’d rather walk off a bridgewing into frozen seas before researching yet another Tacoma class FF.
The only reason I say this is due to the metal safety railings directly front of the 3"/50 Mk.10 guns as they block all firing directly ahead or astern making that class an incredibly painful ship to play having to show heavy broadsides to just unsheath the cannons but taking considerable damage due to it (doesn’t help with current post rank based economic repairs either), Looking at the Cannon the metal plates look slightly smaller than the bars so it might be a better option for japan IMO.
But if it had the same blindspots they would be terrible addition with the only positive being the use of them as flak lighters since they’re slow yet packed with decent amounts of LAA & HAA guns that’ll swat aircraft out of the skies & blast PT boats from distance.
Looking at a post 1979 refit Cannon class the armament would be best favourable to BR 3.7 no doubt for any higher would run the risk of being obsolete due to pitiful armament
Nice, didnt see your proposal but good thing you already did lol. Its not exactly the same though as the USS Amick became the BRP Datu Sikatuna but they did receive the same refits. BRP Datu Sikatuna retired earlier than BRP Rajah Humabon though to become a parts hulk and BRP Rajah Humabon served as the Philippine Navy’s flagship.
Still great that you already have the proposal though, wish they do implement my suggestion of changing the name depending on the weapons package you use.
I had my reservations about the Tacoma too, its not exactly the best one and not that great. I had my eyes on JDS Ariake (1959) which was the lead ship (and namesake) of JDS Yugure in game - problem is that from what I can gather, only JDS Ariake was fitted with the RUR-4 Weapon Alpha rocket ASW that replaced its number 2 turret iirc.
How I wish they stuck with the JDS Ariake instead which wouldve made it possible to submit a bug report, now I think we are stuck with only the JDS Isuzu that had that unique armament.
If we sidestep away from the Japanese TT for a moment the Mitscher class Destroyer Leader has the Mk.108 Alfa weapon as well, Two on USS Mitscher DL-2 & one on the USS Wilkinson DL-5 just both are more cheaper & superior than JDS Isuzu DE-211 (I kinda wish the Mitscher class were put in the coastal TT due to their light armament heh, Kinda would’ve been helpful for the US TT ntm been close to similar ships in costs (rp/sl requirements, Repairs & ammunition costs)).
TBH the alfa weapon is ehh imo for it’s incredibly short range an only a salvo of one & before it became a loadout option alongside torpedoes it was 90% of my deaths in JDS Isuzu since if you caught fire you would never put the fire out as it would find the rocket magazine & see you explode like the USS Mount Hood AE-11).
This is also a reason I would like to see later DDE’s for Japan as I’ve mentioned in my first comment the Yubari class which has the m/50 Bofors 375 mm rockets like off the Köln class Frigate an those rockets in a full salvo can sink some heavy targets, Basically dreadnought HE shells lobbed up to 4.5km down range.
Or the JDS Ishikari DDE-226 which also has the same m/50 rockets, Or the Takatsuki class DD as well.
Any of those would give a good punch to post war japan in game including all their armament especially that last ship I’ve mentioned with two 5" cannons.
Having seen Godzilla Minus One recently (four times actually, yes it’s that good), it really highlighted for me just how many iconic WWII ship classes are missing in WT. Not just individual ships, whole classes.
For fun, here’s all the military vehicles featured, most of which we should really see in WT (some are long overdue).
Takao, Takao-class heavy cruiser
Yukikaze, Kagerou-class destroyer
Hibiki, Akatsuki-class destroyer (half sister to Ayanami-class)
Yuukaze, Minekaze-class destroyer
Keyaki, Matsu-class destroyer
Ikuno, Ukuru-class frigate
Katashima, Sokuten-class minelayer
several unnamed No.13-class subchasers (in WT)
unnamed No.101-class landing ship (listing for completion’s sake)
USS Redfish, Balao-class submarine (class in WT Mobile)
A few of those destroyer classes are pretty similar to each other and don’t offer anything new. Also, I wouldn’t list a landing ship, that’s a bit misleading since it has no place in WT whatsoever. And why did you list the classes already in WT? But yes, I think the Takao class are long overdue
This is War Thunder, having something historical that’s “pretty similar” simply because that thing is cool is the bread and butter of this game and its several thousand vehicle options. Having at least one of every class is the minimum I’d consider to be a fully fleshed out tech tree.
One could just as easily claim we don’t “need” a Takao because we have a Myoukou. :P
Erm, all of these questions are clearly explained in the comment? It’s a list of everything that appears in the film, with emphasis on both what is and what isn’t in the game yet; I even added a caveat to the landing ship and cargo ship to make it clear they’re not being suggested for WT.
Well on the note of having similar classes of ships, can we get the Fubuki-class ships with their different sub-classes. We have Ayanami already (which I think should be a later fit of her armament instead of the current one), but there’s another 2 sub classes within the Fubuki class that could be nice as premiums or early fit like Ayanami currently is, and at a lower BR.
This is War Thunder, having something historical that’s “pretty similar” simply because that thing is cool is the bread and butter of this game and its several thousand vehicle options. Having at least one of every class is the minimum I’d consider to be a fully fleshed out tech tree.
One could just as easily claim we don’t “need” a Takao because we have a Myoukou. :P
Not to be pedantic, but The Myoko and Takao are completely different ship designs. Whereas most of the Japanese fleet destroyers are minor iterations on the class preceding it.
Also, I just misinterpreted what you said, I thought you meant everything in the film should be in WT.
The Takaos/Myoukous are slightly more different than some of the destroyers compared to each other, though in the context of WT stats/values/etc they’re still extremely similar. The Fubukis through the Yuugumos are definitely rather iterative, yes.
The other two would be the base Fubuki class, and the Akatsuki (sub)class which followed the Ayanami (sub)class. A standard Fubuki-class definitely deserves inclusion, ideally Fubuki herself; this class was the first of all modern (as in '30s/'40s) destroyers, a massive design change from the world’s previous designs, not dissimilar to what the FT was for tanks.
