Search results

Who design & engineer the ARJ21?

US has killed Japan's chip manufacturing industry decades ago.

The title doesnt say "driving chip", and even if so it is not a mistake nor misleading. Basically driving chip meant is an AI chip with specific AI software for smart driving purpose. This is a common terminology used in the automotive industry to describe specialized hardware and software...

Using same spec with different brand will be no different tech at all.

But Intel 10nm equal to TSMC 7nm in term of number of transistor, doesn't it?

China is already no 1 in many fields of technology now and keep progressing. LOL

Becoz of 2: 1. China defeat US sanctions. 2. China SMIC 7nm / N+ 2 defeat US' Intel 10nm.

So you think commercial shipyard cannot be used to build warship? :laugh: Are you laughing on ONI statement/concern regarding China:US ratio 200:1? :laugh: If so, suggest the warship production ratio China:US to your knowledge with reference.

It is not about can't. It is about 200:1 ;) It is ALREADY now for the ratio and the capability to produce warship.

There are 2 things you have to understand and still miss the point: 1. I am talking about the future when China and US loose so many warship, not current warship inventory. 2. China warship inventory doesn't need to follow US Navy, both have different doctrines in naval warfare. Regarding war...

Which major surface combatant that China lack according to you? Now China can make all of warship including supercarrier, except the nuclear powered carrier. Even if China currently lack some type of warship/carrier, but the capability is there; commercial/non commercial shipyart is not issue...

I indeed overlook the word "commercial" there, my bad; but you obviously are poor of logic dont you? First, this 200:1 ratio is applied both for China:US, therefore this ratio is applied for warship production also, because the warship can be built in commercial Shipyart too. Do not ever think...

You can't read or what? Here I quote for you: The data compiled by the Office of Naval Intelligence says that a growing gap in fleet sizes is being helped by China's shipbuilders being more than 200 times more capable of producing surface warships and submarines. So yes... 200 times is for...

That is said by The Office of Naval Intelligence. Denial is sign of powerless mind, also your knowledge is far oudated.

Where do you get the data that China will loose hundred of ships in the CSIS simulation? The source you gave above doesn't agree with that. The wargame tallied up the total deaths after three weeks of battle: China: 10,000, with nearly 30,000 taken prisoner Taiwan: around 5,000 servicemembers...

The war simulations conducted by the US Air Force and CSIS had different assumptions, methods and objectives. The US Air Force simulation focused on a biological weapon attack by China followed by a surprise invasion of Taiwan1. The CSIS simulation focused on a conventional amphibious invasion...

It is not opinion, it is the result of simulation conducted by US Air Force recently. The other simulation from CSIS that you mention saying China failed to occupy Taiwan, but US will loss most heavily compared to China and will make US and the high losses will damage the U.S. global position...

https://www.globaldefensecorp.com/2020/05/18/russian-glorified-su-35-failed-to-accurately-track-j-16-and-j-10c-in-a-simulated-air-battle-plaaf/ https://www.china-arms.com/2021/12/j10c-beats-j16-su35-winning-most-golden-helmets/

https://news.yahoo.com/were-going-to-lose-fast-us-air-force-held-a-war-game-that-started-with-a-chinese-biological-attack-170003936.html Quoted directly from the news: What many Americans don’t realize is that years of classified Pentagon war games strongly suggest that the U.S. military...

Or 14nm with 3D stack to achieve 5nm performance.