What's new

A Super Power without Allies ?

just for the record... electro magnetic rail guns are so revolutionery new that they are already on display at the WTS Museum (Wehr Technische Studiensammlung/ Defence Technology Studycollection) in Koblenz Germany.... there are since years two prototype guns on dislplay ....

Elektro-Kanone.jpg


to mount this on a ship is no big achivment... Germany could have done that 20 years ago...

German_railgun_Bild_1-2.gif


Railgun function diagram Germany from 1945... in 1944 Germany has sorted out all work priciples for a modern electro magnetic railgun... they wanted to use them as FLAK against allied bombers... problem was power supply and the avaible electric power at that time.

Germany´s Rheinmetal installed a 30 megajoul gun in 1994 in their EZU testrange and did tonnes of testing, thats almost 15 years befor the USA installed their first 32megajoul gun.. just to get that in the right context... the USA installed their first 32 megajoul gun in the late 2000´s and thir first 64megajouls gun in 2016.

USA and China are not even close to lead in this field... they are just the two making big noise about it...


Yes, railgun is revolutionary weapon.

See this: https://phys.org/news/2015-01-railgun-revolutionary-weapon-debut-future.html

Has Germany been successful to fit her tiny railgun (9MJ) on ship?
 
.
I am working in tech field,...
Yeah...Sure you are...:rolleyes:

...thats why I can say you are fraud
So what was your 'aviation studies' again?

I am not talking about deployment when I said China is ahead US in 5G race, etc. I am talking about technology mastery.
You are still wrong. China is not ahead of the US in anyway in the wireless communication field. Mastery is too vague enough of a word.

https://www.comsoc.org/blog/latest-update-5g-ieee-communications-society
As far as frequency, the 5G test network used a 15 GHz frequency band, which is higher and shorter range than current 3G/4G cellular frequencies that top out at around 2.6 GHz, i.e. 2600 MHz LTE Band 7. The choice of short-range would make deployments of this technology suitable for densely populated urban areas, where many base stations could be deployed to offer super-fast speeds over a small area.
Chinese cities being much younger technologically than American cities, and are still growing, naturally would give 5G deployment flexibility American cities do not have. Another factor is that any technology in the US and Europe are more even spread throughout the countries whereas in China...

https://www.akamai.com/us/en/products/web-performance/china-content-delivery-network.jsp
...expansive geography, fragmented Internet infrastructure and peering delays between the ISPs make it difficult to provide consistent experiences.
What this mean is that for wireless communication of any kind, the more established the infrastructures that must deliver consistent performance level, the more difficult it is to upgrade it. That is the US and Europe.

If you really do 'work' in the tech field, vague as your claim is, you should have exercise some measures of investigation about the issue before you post. China is not 'ahead' the US in 5G technology in any meaningful way.

First you claim to have 'aviation studies' which we never know what it is, now you claim to 'work' in the 'tech field' without telling us what it is. You are a fraud. :lol:
 
.
Allies are important if you want to become a global power ..

Is there any evidence to support your statement above? Allies can be the icing (decoration), but never the cake (substance) itself.
 
.
Is there any evidence to support your statement above? Allies can be the icing (decoration), but never the cake (substance) itself.
The US and the Soviet Union. But on the other hand, Japan became a superpower thru sheer military might. The alliance with Nazi Germany do not count.

So the issue has three major factors: What kind of superpower, the scope and depth of influence, and the duration of said status.

The more allies there are, the higher the status, the greater the scope and depth of influence, and the longer the duration of said status.

When it comes to allies, there are the ideological and the pragmatic. US and UK are ideological. US and Saudi Arabia are pragmatic.
 
.
The US and the Soviet Union. But on the other hand, Japan became a superpower thru sheer military might. The alliance with Nazi Germany do not count.

So the issue has three major factors: What kind of superpower, the scope and depth of influence, and the duration of said status.

The more allies there are, the higher the status, the greater the scope and depth of influence, and the longer the duration of said status.

When it comes to allies, there are the ideological and the pragmatic. US and UK are ideological. US and Saudi Arabia are pragmatic.

The rise of a power happens first, and allies join the bandwagon later as opportunistic players in geopolitics, as I said before, as icing, not the cake. No new power is created merely by having allies.
 
.
Yeah...Sure you are...:rolleyes:


So what was your 'aviation studies' again?


What is your real qualification?

You are still wrong. China is not ahead of the US in anyway in the wireless communication field. Mastery is too vague enough of a word.

https://www.comsoc.org/blog/latest-update-5g-ieee-communications-society

Chinese cities being much younger technologically than American cities, and are still growing, naturally would give 5G deployment flexibility American cities do not have. Another factor is that any technology in the US and Europe are more even spread throughout the countries whereas in China...

https://www.akamai.com/us/en/products/web-performance/china-content-delivery-network.jsp

What this mean is that for wireless communication of any kind, the more established the infrastructures that must deliver consistent performance level, the more difficult it is to upgrade it. That is the US and Europe.

If you really do 'work' in the tech field, vague as your claim is, you should have exercise some measures of investigation about the issue before you post. China is not 'ahead' the US in 5G technology in any meaningful way.


Seems you have no clue what you are talking about, confirming you are fraud.

As I said I am not talking about deployment, I am talking about tech mastery and it is clear China is ahead US in 5G race as China lead in setting standard and patent.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/07/technology/china-huawei-5g-standards.html


First you claim to have 'aviation studies' which we never know what it is, now you claim to 'work' in the 'tech field' without telling us what it is. You are a fraud. :lol:


What is your tech field, that make you are so sure about your capacity in technical discussion?
 
Last edited:
.
What is your real qualification?
USAF veteran, F-111 and F-16. And I know what the world look like from 30,000 ft from the cockpits of both jets. I have been to Red Flag. On the F-111, we TDY-ed with NATO members, from Ramstein, Spangdalhem, Aviano, Incirlik, to Zaragoza. On the F-16, it was Desert Storm.

So what was your 'aviation studies' again? :lol:

Seems you have no clue what you are talking about, confirming you are fraud.

As I said I am not talking about deployment, I am talking about tech mastery and it is clear China is ahead US in 5G race as China lead in setting standard and patent.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/07/technology/china-huawei-5g-standards.html
There is no 'mastery' by China here. Did China came up with wireless communication in the first place?

As for setting standards, you should read your own source carefully instead of just reading for what you want...

It has hired experts from foreign rivals and pushed them to guide international groups that are deciding the technical standards for tomorrow’s wireless gear.
There we have it. All Huawei did was used mercenary engineers to act as agents for Huawei. In China, every major company in every major industry must have Party members on their boards. Huawei is not trusted to set any standards.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/pol...efs-spearhead-communist-party-push-chinas-top
Many internet companies on the mainland have set up party committees within their organisations in line with the top party leadership’s desire to strengthen its presence and implementation of its policies in business.
This policy is not news. The Chinese government does not speak about it but does not deny it either.

What 'mastery' are you talking about? :lol:

What is your tech field, that make you are so sure about your capacity in technical discussion?
I am currently in semiconductor manufacturing. Used to be NAND, now with Intel's new phase change memory (PCM) brand 3DXP or 3D Crosspoint. I work in the Probe area, specifically Functional and Parametric testing, occasionally I cross path with the Yield Analysis and Enhancement (YA/E) group. I have done competitor's product research and analyses.

So what are you doing in 'tech field' again? :lol:
 
.
USAF veteran, F-111 and F-16. And I know what the world look like from 30,000 ft from the cockpits of both jets. I have been to Red Flag. On the F-111, we TDY-ed with NATO members, from Ramstein, Spangdalhem, Aviano, Incirlik, to Zaragoza. On the F-16, it was Desert Storm.

So what was your 'aviation studies' again? [emoji38]

If that is true why dont you focus on topic about flying an aircraft, that kind of discussion may help show your quality.

I was studying aerodynamics, have working background in controll system and bussiness including finance.

There is no 'mastery' by China here. Did China came up with wireless communication in the first place?


So who is the leader? And on what parameter according to you?

As for setting standards, you should read your own source carefully instead of just reading for what you want...


There we have it. All Huawei did was used mercenary engineers to act as agents for Huawei. In China, every major company in every major industry must have Party members on their boards. Huawei is not trusted to set any standards.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/pol...efs-spearhead-communist-party-push-chinas-top

This policy is not news. The Chinese government does not speak about it but does not deny it either.

LOL. Whats wrong with hiring foreign expert including from competitors? The technology belong to Huawei no matter the origin of the engineers that work for Huawei.

Your argument is so funny [emoji38]

So the China leadership in 5G is not only as the first launcher but also in patent and standard. Is the article not clear enough for you?

What 'mastery' are you talking about? [emoji38]


Technology.

Parameter: patent and standard.

It seems difficult for you to grab?

I am currently in semiconductor manufacturing. Used to be NAND, now with Intel's new phase change memory (PCM) brand 3DXP or 3D Crosspoint. I work in the Probe area, specifically Functional and Parametric testing, occasionally I cross path with the Yield Analysis and Enhancement (YA/E) group. I have done competitor's product research and analyses.

So what are you doing in 'tech field' again? [emoji38]


I doubt it, judging from the argument you are demonstrating; not to mention your clueless regarding semiconductor industry segmentation that you demonstrated in a debate in another thread.
 
Last edited:
.
diverted all its resources to military like Pakistan does today

:lol: ... Hallucinating Hindu, our ruling elite looted $350b (stashed overseas) plus a lot more internally. Military spend in Pakistan is less than that of India, % wise.
 
.
:lol: ... Hallucinating Hindu, our ruling elite looted $350b (stashed overseas) plus a lot more internally. Military spend in Pakistan is less than that of India, % wise.
Good luck with those 350 billion $ . U may also try to get a unicorn.
 
.
This shows that collapse of a nation requires only wrong decisions and wrong ideology. We often analyse economic and strategic aspects for the failure. Other soft reasons are also very important which are often ignored.

USSR did not have the wrong ideology. Socialism/Communism were a bit wrongly implemented in USSR.

Let us look at the basis. USSR was a single-party dictatorship just like how USA is a multi-party dictatorship and the rest of "Representative democracies" are multi-party dictatorship.

Real communism is a government of the people and this was realized in Libya despite Gaddafi saying that he doesn't support Soviet communism perhaps because it having the background of atheism.

@Starlord
 
.

America Is Losing the Race for This Key Technology to China


China’s advances in fifth-generation wireless systems, or 5G, are surpassing those of the United States.

by Asia Times
From US regulatory action and proposed legislation it has become clear that America is worried about China’s advances in fifth-generation wireless systems, or 5G, and new research shows they have good reason to be.

China holds a narrow lead over its competition in 5G readiness, according to telecoms research firm Analysys Mason. Their new study , released on Monday, found that China’s proactive government policies along with “industry momentum,” contributed to their current advantage.

“When countries lose global leadership in a generation of wireless, jobs are shed and technology innovation gets exported overseas,” Recon Analytics founder Roger Entner was quoted by trade association CTIA as saying . “Conversely, leading the world in wireless brings significant economic benefits, as the US has seen with its 4G leadership. These are the serious stakes that face American policymakers in the escalating global race to 5G.”

CTIA also played up the importance of findings, urging the policy makers in Washington to wake up to the importance of the technology.

“The United States will not get a second chance to win the global 5G race,” Meredith Attwell Baker, CTIA President and CEO was quoted as saying. “I’m optimistic we will leapfrog China because key leaders in the Administration, on Capitol Hill, and at the FCC are focused on the reforms needed to win the race,” she added.


Despite her optimism, the report found that the US has fallen behind nearly all the potential early adopters in one area of preparedness.

“At the end of 2018, the US will rank sixth out of the 10 countries in mid-band (3–24GHz) spectrum availability, a critical band for 5G,” CTIA summarized from the report. “The US joins Russia and Canada as the only countries currently without announced plans to allocate mid-band spectrum on an exclusive basis to mobile by the end of 2020.”

Meanwhile, “all major Chinese providers have committed to specific launch dates and the government has committed to at least 100 MHz of mid-band spectrum and 2,000 MHz of high-band spectrum for each wireless provider.”

While falling behind in spectrum availability, the US ranked just behind South Korea in third place thanks to wireless provider investment in the area, with many firms committing to launch 5G service by the end of 2018. The study ranked Japan fourth in terms of preparedness.

While the American wireless industry plays catchup in the fast-paced and high-stakes race to lead in the area, Washington is trying to play defense. In addition to locking Chinese 5G leader Huawei out of the US, government agencies are also trying to form a united front with allies against Beijing.

Last February, during a visit from Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull to Washington, US intelligence agencies briefed the leader on Beijing’s cyber espionage, deemed among the “top two” risks on the allies’ security agenda.

“When you control telco networks, you can control everything,” one intelligence official said, according to a person present at the briefing.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/america-losing-the-race-key-technology-china-25418


US is left behind both in advancement and adoption
 
.
Is there any evidence to support your statement above? Allies can be the icing (decoration), but never the cake (substance) itself.

Look at US for example , US become Industrial and Military power after the End of WW2 , everyone wants to be on the Winning side ..US used its allies in almost every war or sanctions they want to put .
 
.
Look at US for example , US become Industrial and Military power after the End of WW2 , everyone wants to be on the Winning side ..US used its allies in almost every war or sanctions they want to put .

Not really. The allies only did what was in their own respective national interests, as did USA. USA merely did what everyone else does - use every means at its disposal to pursue national interests. A lack of allies would do nothing to change that basic rule of international geopolitics for USA, or any other country.
 
.
Not really. The allies only did what was in their own respective national interests, as did USA. USA merely did what everyone else does - use every means at its disposal to pursue national interests. A lack of allies would do nothing to change that basic rule of international geopolitics for USA, or any other country.

What was UK interest to join Iraq war ?
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom