China rapidly narrows technology gap with S. Korea

[Martian2]

I am not saying 737 is more advanced than SR71. But I am sure modern Airbus A380 is more advanced than SR-71 despite A380 is much slower than SR71.

Again Poll as "truth seeker"?

Why dont you answer my question. Let me repeat again:

Then look on how ARJ21 was struggling to reach FAA certificate in spite of numerous military aircraft that china has build including the 2.4 mach speed J-11B. Why?

Look on how many years China has to pospone release of Comac 919 in order to meet Stringet Safety standard, in spite of giant Y-20 or faster J-11 that China has master. Why?

Can now Russia build the same advanced, efficient, and safe but "slow" Airbus A380 that is compliant with the very stringent flight safety standard?

Source: China rapidly narrows technology gap with S. Korea | Page 12

You are incredibly dumb.

An SR-71 has to deal with shockwaves from passing the sound barrier.

At 100,000 feet, there is almost no air. The SR-71 needs special engines.

An Airbus 380 is just a fat civilian transport plane.

Many countries can build a civilian turbofan jet engine plane. To date, only one country has built the incredible SR-71 Mach 3 Blackbird. The SR-71 has a titanium fuselage. If you watch a documentary on the SR-71, you would realize how amazing it is. The SR-71 fuselage expands due to the enormous friction at Mach 3.

A stupid fat civilian transport plane has none of these technological challenges.
----------

Let me see if I can explain it to you in terms that you understand.

An SR-71 is the equivalent of a Formula 1 racer (whose pistons cycle 15,000 revolutions per minute).

A family car tops out at 4,000 RPMs.

A Formula 1 race car is a marvel of engineering. A minivan is not.

 

[antonius123]

You are incredibly dumb.

An SR-71 has to deal with shockwaves from passing the sound barrier.

At 100,000 feet, there is almost no air. The SR-71 needs special engines.

An Airbus 380 is just a fat civilian transport plane.

Thats it? only with that and being unaware other people more sound explanation then you said the other people dumb?


Do you understand :

Safety flight compliant to stringent FAA standard?
Very efficient flight?
Complex control system?
Advanced system intergration.

Then you said they are nothing, overcoming supersonic barrier is the most ultimate?

If that is the case, you are demonstrating childish mind who are only astonished with "speed", "giant", "big", "height", but failed to understand the complication and technology barrier in "system integration", "complicated control system", ."reaching very high standard", "reaching very efficient performance", etc. You are the "dumb one" here

I am telling you: SR71 in spite of speed (due to aerodynamic + high TWR jet) may not have the same complexity of Airbus A380 that reach very safe, efficient flight compliant to stringent standard.

SR71 may not have high fuel efficiency or high safety standard the same as AirbusA380.

Many countries can build a civilian turbofan jet engine planet. To date, only one country has built the incredible SR-71 Mach 3 Blackbird.

Many can build civil turbojet engine? Can china build it now?
Can is not the only parameter, performance is the other parameter. This is where you fail to comprehend.

China can build jet engine (WS-10), USA can build engine (F119) does it mean China on par with USA?

 

[Martian2]

Thats it? only with that and being unaware other people more sound explanation then you said the other people dumb?


Do you understand :

Safety flight compliant to stringent FAA standard?
Very efficient flight?
Complex control system?
Advanced system intergration.

Then you said they are nothing, overcoming supersonic barrier is the most ultimate?

If that is the case, you are demonstrating childish mind who are only astonished with "speed", "giant", "big", "height", but failed to understand the complication and technology barrier in "system integration", "complicated control system", ."reaching very high standard", "reaching very efficient performance", etc. You are the "dumb one" here

I am telling you: SR71 in spite of speed (due to aerodynamic + ramjet) may not have the same complexity of Airbus A380 that reach very safe, efficient flight compliant to stringent standard.

SR71 may not have high fuel efficiency or high safety standard the same as AirbusA380.

Wow! Fuel efficiency = high technology (according to your idiocy)

That means a motorcycle has more high technology than an Aribus A380.
----------

The SR-71 flies at the edge of space.

The Airbus A380 is a run-of-the-mill passenger plane.

You're just going to keep claiming the A380 is more technologically complex than an SR-71? You really are a lunatic.

SR-71: Mach 3
Airbus A380: less than Mach 1

SR-71: 100,000 feet maximum altitude (edge of space)
Airbus A380: 39,000 feet (plenty of air for the turbofan engines)

SR-71: Built by only one country to date. (This means it is technologically difficult)
Passenger plane: Boeing, McDonnel Douglas, Bombardier, Airbus, COMAC, Embraer, etc. (This means everybody can build a sub-sonic passenger plane. Hence, a passenger plane is not technologically difficult.)

 

[antonius123]

Wow! Fuel efficiency = high technology (according to your idiocy)

That means a motorcycle has more high technology than an Aribus A380.

You are dumb.

EFFICIENT is not the technology if not pushed into the limit. Same like SPEED (that you are astonished with) - it is not technology if not pushed into the limit.

So - dont talk simply about efficient, we are talking about the passenger plane that designed to be as efficient as possible breaking the prior boundary, not just efficient. This is competition.

The same like thrust, it is not the technology, but very high TWR competing with the ultimate ones is. Otherwise, why China cant build the same performance engine like F-119.

Dont you get it?

Again I am asking you: why china still cant produce the same Boeing 737 like US or Europe? in spite of J11B? And why ARJ21 struggle to meet FAA? this is more simple compared to J-11B right? according to you

 

[Economic superpower]

Let's back to the topic.

This is comparison between China and South Korea.

@antonius123

What technological areas is South Korea ahead of China? Give me a proper list.

Is this already release into the market?

Yes I believe China will surpass Korea in the material technology. T1000 is impressive progress of China.

What did the article said btw? does it claim korea still ahead china in 2015 year?

You can click on the link and read it yourself.

 

[antonius123]

Let's back to the topic.

This is comparison between China and South Korea.

@antonius123

What technological areas is South Korea ahead of China? Give me a proper list.

We have gone through that in front

Semiconductor
Display panel
Robot
Automotive
Pharmaceutical
Shipbuilding (LNG Tanker)

The gap is small, and of course China can surpass in the future

 

[Economic superpower]

We have gone through that in front

Semiconductor
Display panel
Robot
Automotive
Pharmaceutical
Shipbuilding (LNG Tanker)

The gap is small, and of course China can surpass in the future

Be more specific in each of the 6 industries.

Example: What areas of semiconductor? Memory chips? TV chips? 3G/4G chips? Lithography machines? Etching tools?

 

[Tiqiu]

@Martian2
I could't find the relevant English coverage of this new Chinese discovery. Maybe you can?

参考消息网1月11日报道 美媒称，中国的研究人员8日公布了一种实验性可变形材料，这种材料可折叠成各种复杂的形状，将工业折纸术提升至新的水平，为医疗和航天应用提供了广泛的可能性。
　　据美国《华尔街日报》网站1月8日报道，科学家们设计的这种新型聚合物塑料能够根据预设的温度变化而适时改变自身形状。此外，科学家们称，按照设计，这种材料能在不“擦除”之前形状的情况下改变为新的形状，令其适用于难以通过常规手段由机器或模具制造的复杂部件。

　　中国浙江大学(微博)的这个项目小组的科学家谢涛说：“这就能产生极为复杂的永久形状。”

　　报道称，这种聚合物是“可编程物质”的一个最新例子。谢涛博士及其同事8日在美国《科学进展》杂志上报告了他们的研究进展。

　　为展示其能力，研究人员为一小片这种新的聚合物材料预先设定了一系列形状。随着不断加热，这种材料从船的形状变成鸟的形状，再变成风车的形状，然后恢复其最初的形状。

　　虽然这仍然是实验室里的新奇事物，但其潜在的应用十分广泛，包括能够根据体温发生改变的柔韧的医用传感器，被日光加热时展开的太阳能板，以及可变形工具或机器人等。

　 　报道表示，自上世纪40年代以来，研究人员就一直在对可变形的聚合物和金属进行实验，这些聚合物和金属能够被压扁、扭曲或弯曲为暂时的形状，然后在接触 到高温、光线、湿气或磁场的时候恢复至它们原有的形状。在最近几年，美国国防部高级研究项目局已经提供资金，研制适用于工具和武器、可以根据指令被塑形和 再塑形的智能材料。

　　但常规的可变形材料在从一种形状变为另一种形状的时候无法积累变化。每一次连续的改变都会将材料记忆清除干净。据研究人员称，这种新的聚合物材料能够积累满足要求的改变，形成一种新的永久形状。谢涛博士称：“在这项研究中公布的这种方法能够允许循环操作很多次。”

　　报道称，在这项新研究中，科学家们设计了这种聚合物的分子结构，这样它就能够在根据预设的温度变化而发生多次改变时产生记忆并循环。他们称，这种新材料制作起来既简单又便宜。它可以很容易地被改造成3D打印机的墨水。

　　谢涛说：“我们的新研究表明，你可以得到各种各样、复杂得多的永久形状。这创造了新的可能性。”

 

[Economic superpower]

Not really..

Semiconductor, Display tech, Robotic, Medical Equipment, Automotive, Chemicals, Telco, industrial machinery, nano material, ocean, construction, medical care, energy, actually is very ample.

However the gap is small indeed.

Not cherry picking at all.

Based on that data, there are still many field that Korea ahead, though the gap is small or become narrowing.

In this post, you said Korea is ahead of China in 13 industries.

In the other post you said only 6 industries.

Make up your mind.

In display technology, if China has LCD and Korea has LCD, that means China has caught up in LCD. It's up to you to prove HOW Korean LCD is superior to China's LCD. In what way?

 

[antonius123]

In this post, you said Korea is ahead of China in 13 industries.

In the other post you said only 6 industries.

Make up your mind.

I never said ONLY 6.
The 6 is the easier to show, while the rest is more difficult to show especially to you guys who like cherry picking

In display technology, if China has LCD and Korea has LCD, that means China has caught up in LCD.

You share the same logical fallacy that your friend has made infront

Saying that China is already on par with Korea because China can make LCD too is the same as :

Saying that China is already on par with USA in jet engine, because China already can make jet engine.
Saying that Thailand is already on par with Japan in automotive tech, because Thailand already can make car too
Saying that Indonesia is already on par with Korea, Japan, and Germany in shipbuilding, because Indonesia cal already make ship.

And you know those are not true.

It's up to you to prove HOW Korean LCD is superior to China's LCD. In what way?

I did already - in front, but your friends seem to fail to grasp it.

Skyworth and other Chinese TV maker buy LG (Korea) OLED instead using Chinese own OLED. Thats show Korean's OLED quality is still better.

Why are you guys not strong enough in LOGICAL thinking?

 

[j20blackdragon]

We have gone through that in front

Semiconductor
Display panel
Robot
Automotive
Pharmaceutical
Shipbuilding (LNG Tanker)

The gap is small, and of course China can surpass in the future

I've got my own list for China.

1. PCs
2. Servers
3. Supercomputers
4. Machine Tools
5. Real Estate and Infrastructure Construction
6. Heavy Construction and Mining Equipment
7. High-Speed Rail
8. Commercial Aviation
9. Electric Vehicles (BYD)
10. Telecommunications Equipment (Huawei)
11. Solar Panels (Trina Solar)
12. Wind Turbines (Goldwind)
13. Nuclear Reactors
14. Home Appliances (Haier and Midea)

In this post, you said Korea is ahead of China in 13 industries.

In the other post you said only 6 industries.

Make up your mind.

In display technology, if China has LCD and Korea has LCD, that means China has caught up in LCD. It's up to you to prove HOW Korean LCD is superior to China's LCD. In what way?

His list is shrinking because he can't prove most of it. I'll give South Korea the advantage in memory chips and commercial shipbuilding. However, I would love to see him prove the rest of it.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

OK, but you cant set your own criteria by saying Military is the ultimate measurement

Many accept that Japan and Germany are ahead Russia and North Korea in term of overall technology, despite Russia is more advvanced in military.

Why you bring North Korea in a same sentence with Russia?

Do you really think that Russia is just a bigger version of North Korea? LMAO

 

[Jlaw]

I think the better analysis would compare South Korea vs Japan as they are both small countries with limited resources and a technical workforce.

@antonius123 What do you think?

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Can now Russia build the same advanced, efficient, and safe but "slow" Airbus A380 that is compliant with the very stringent flight safety standard?

The Airbus A380 was joint effort between many countries, and it also uses the US/UK turbofan jet engines.

You cannot give the entire credit to one country.

Except the US, no western country can build the Airbus A380 or even A320 alone.

 

[j20blackdragon]

So, for you the faster speed has more technological barriers than safer & more efficient flight for civil passenger?

Then look on how ARJ21 was struggling to reach FAA certificate in spite of numerous military aircraft that china has build including the 2.4 mach speed J-11B.

Look on how many years China has to pospone release of Comac 919 in order to meet Stringet Safety standard, in spite of giant Y-20 or faster J-11 that China has master.

Also by that logic Russia should be able to build very efficient & reliable car, because it is less difficult than Mig-31 Foxhound.

Can now Russia build the same advanced, efficient, and safe but "slow" Airbus A380 that is compliant with the very stringent flight safety standard?

The answer is yes.

Sukhoi Superjet 100 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Irkut MC-21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BTW, this first flew in 1988.