Role & capabilities
- Underwater survey
- Environmental assessment
- Primary domain
- Underwater
- System type
- Autonomous underwater vehicle
- Developer / manufacturer
- Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
- Origin / production countries
- Japan
- Other names
- No additional names recorded
- Variants / configurations
- Not distinguished in reviewed sources
- Operators / programme customers
- Japan Ministry of Defense — programme customer
Evidence & current status
Unreported specifications and model-specific operator acceptance remain explicit uncertainties.
OZZ-5 is Mitsubishi Heavy Industries' autonomous mine-search vehicle for Japan. Government equipment literature identifies a compact underwater platform using low- and high-frequency synthetic-aperture sonar to examine the seabed. Its purpose is survey and detection; it should not be confused with a disposal vehicle or a conventional torpedo simply because it shares an underwater operating environment.
Japan's published equipment guide supplies an early dimensions and endurance baseline. Those figures are labelled by source vintage here, because later research does not automatically leave every component unchanged. In March 2021, MHI described a Japanese defence contract for a France–Japan project combining sonar and processing technologies with Thales. The aim was improved onboard analysis rather than a wholly interchangeable new vehicle specification.
The 2026 Japanese naval research-centre brochure continues to describe bilateral mine-detection technology work, and a May 2026 notice seeks OZZ-5 interoperability improvements. These are substantive current programme signals. They do not by themselves establish how many vehicles have completed naval acceptance or that every research function is installed on deployed craft. The profile therefore keeps development and customer-service questions separate.
Sourced specifications
Figures apply to the named configuration. Maximum values are not guaranteed operating performance.
| Specification | Reported value | Context & source |
|---|---|---|
| Configuration | Not established in the reviewed public sources. | Public evidence gap. No estimate or neighbouring variant value has been substituted. Source ↗ |
| Hull / propulsion | Not established in the reviewed public sources. | Public evidence gap. No estimate or neighbouring variant value has been substituted. Source ↗ |
| Dimensions | 4 m long; 0.5 m wide | FY2018 equipment-guide baseline, not a guarantee of latest research fit. Source ↗ |
| Displacement / mass | Not established in the reviewed public sources. | Public evidence gap. No estimate or neighbouring variant value has been substituted. Source ↗ |
| Payload | Not established in the reviewed public sources. | Public evidence gap. No estimate or neighbouring variant value has been substituted. Source ↗ |
| Endurance | 9 hours or more | FY2018 baseline; test speed and payload duty cycle not stated. Source ↗ |
| Range | Not established in the reviewed public sources. | Public evidence gap. No estimate or neighbouring variant value has been substituted. Source ↗ |
| Speed | 7 knots or less | FY2018 government wording retained. Source ↗ |
| Operating depth | Not established in the reviewed public sources. | Public evidence gap. No estimate or neighbouring variant value has been substituted. Source ↗ |
| Sensors | Low- and high-frequency synthetic-aperture sonar | Published baseline; configuration and mission conditions affect performance. Source ↗ |
| Communications / control | Not established in the reviewed public sources. | Public evidence gap. No estimate or neighbouring variant value has been substituted. Source ↗ |
| Launch / deployment | Not established in the reviewed public sources. | Public evidence gap. No estimate or neighbouring variant value has been substituted. Source ↗ |
Documented milestones
Bilateral research contract
MHI announced its Japanese defence contract for France–Japan mine-countermeasure technology research.
Read the announcement ↗
Publication history
- — Added in the September 2026 global coverage review, with sources, configuration limits and explicit data gaps.
Suggest a correction to this entry →
Follow the evidence
Source types identify who makes the claim. Programme milestones and supplier statements should be read in context.