PDA

View Full Version : OT: Look what China is building



lazlo
01-10-2011, 06:41 PM
Saw this on DailyTech today:

The Chengdu J-20. Developed by Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group for the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF).


Sec. Gates Says China May be "Somewhat Further Along" in J-20 Program Than Previously Thought (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=20610)

The Chinese military is using the money generated by its growing economy to invest heavily in military technology and new weapons systems. China continues to insist that it is not a threat, but many analysts believe the move to beef up its military is an effort to make the U.S. and allies think twice about intervening in any potential future conflict over Taiwan.

One of the new weapon systems that China is developing is a new fifth-generation jet fighter aircraft called the J-20. Photos and video of the aircraft have been surfacing over the last month and many of the photos are from what is thought to be a runway taxi test of the prototype. The Pentagon stated previously that it thought China was years away from putting the aircraft into production and getting it into the air.

http://cencio4.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/j20-pic-3.jpg
http://cencio4.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/j20-pic-1.jpg

Look familiar? :)

Here's ours:

http://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircraft/Misc/RedFlag0702/Highlights/F22Taxying12oClock.jpg

John Stevenson
01-10-2011, 06:55 PM
I don't think the US has anything to fear from this.
China can take over the US just by dumping currency if it wants to.

lugnut
01-10-2011, 06:58 PM
It would not be surprised to find out that "ours" was built in China:eek:

lazlo
01-10-2011, 06:59 PM
I don't think the US has anything to fear from this.

The other problem they'll have is they tend to paint their machines red or orange, so copying the F-22's stealth frame isn't nearly a useful :D

.RC.
01-10-2011, 07:01 PM
I don't think the US has anything to fear from this.
China can take over the US just by dumping currency if it wants to.

The US is in a better position then the UK though which is totally stuffed economically..

The plans for the F-35B were stolen a couple of years ago..

This would be a propaganda model....Probably does not fly and even if it did would certainly not have the capabilities of the real F-35B

tdkkart
01-10-2011, 07:01 PM
I don't know why this surprises anyone??
We've been sending them all the infornmation on damn near everything in our country for the last 40 years. We send them the ideas, the blueprints, the materials, the engineering etc etc, everything they need to manufacture everything we want, all they have to do is supply the people to do it.

So why is it such a mystery that they shouidl build somethig for themselves that we already have, and lo and behold, guess what, it looks just like the one we have.

Who'da thunk!!

lazlo
01-10-2011, 07:07 PM
This would be a propaganda model....Probably does not fly and even if it did would certainly not have the capabilities of the real F-35B

The pictures were intentionally leaked. They took the J-20 prototype out to a public airport and had it taxi around over and over, in front of a bunch or press that "happened" to be there.

So China's trying to make some kind of point -- I don't know if this is the time of year for Taiwan's annual military exercises?

gary350
01-10-2011, 07:26 PM
It is no suprise to me if you read the bible it wouldn't be a suprise to you either.

Tony Ennis
01-10-2011, 07:32 PM
I don't think the US has anything to fear from this.
China can take over the US just by dumping currency if it wants to.

+1. In addition, and more insidiously, China can influence policy around election time.

Didya ever wonder how China got off the 'Spy List'?

wierdscience
01-10-2011, 08:00 PM
It doesn't have thrust vectoring capability,so it ain't the same,least not yet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjqTAyuX7Mo&feature=related

Evan
01-10-2011, 08:07 PM
There is nothing surprising about that aircraft. It is about on par with the F22. That makes it 20 year old technology.

oldtiffie
01-10-2011, 08:08 PM
China can afford to build it - if it wants to?

Can the USA afford - or will it be allowed to build (or continue) to build them?

Its a good tactical ploy by China to give US law-makers with constituent military establishments and contractors/builders/designers - as well as the military - to start some solid arm-twisting for either more funds or for the current proposed cuts in funds to be eliminated or drastically reduced.

If the US needs more funds it is going to have to issue more government bonds and have to accept what ever conditions and interest rates are set by the lender/s (China and other sovereign wealth funds).

Sovereign wealth funds can be for funding otherwise unfunded liabilities that might otherwise have to funded on an on-going basis from consolidated revenue. Those funds can also be used to strategic and tactical advantage.

China is not fighting any wars and with its technology is well able to see how the US uses its weapons, people, infrastructure, technology, tactics, diplomacy and the associated costs and benefits at least cost.

China can well afford to - it may be argued that it cannot afford not to.

Can the US keep going with these incredible expenditures, deficits and unfunded liabilities - or can't it afford not to either?

It seems that the US has a tiger by the tail (and can't let it go!!) while the big Asian tigers watches and waits and bides its time.

If the US military and others causes the US economy to "tank" and default on all or parts of its debts it will be much worse than when Russia and Argentina defaulted.

If the US "Fed" chooses to deliberately inflate the US$ to reduce its debt burden it may well have other unintended or not made publicly known consequences.

The UK has quite a history of buckling under the costs of their military over time and that have made some pretty drastic cuts lately with more coming.

Many other countries have been badly burdened by war and military debt.

Asians are master negotiators and tacticians and of using their strengths to their own advantage.

Perhaps while the Chinese are "showing off" their taxi-ing stealth fighter-bomber on the ground, they are also flying some pretty sophisticated "kites" as well.

lazlo
01-10-2011, 08:08 PM
There is nothing surprising about that aircraft. It is about on par with the F22.

Nobody knows, because it doesn't fly :)

Evan
01-10-2011, 08:10 PM
It will fly. There is no reason to doubt that.

lazlo
01-10-2011, 08:11 PM
The US is in a better position then the UK though which is totally stuffed economically..


The World's Biggest Debtor Nations (http://www.crossingwallstreet.com/archives/2010/02/the_worlds_bigg.html)

20. United States External debt (as % of GDP): 95.9%
19. Australia External debt (as % of GDP): 108.8%
18. Hungary External debt (as % of GDP): 124.2%
17. Italy External debt (as % of GDP): 154.6%
16. Greece External debt (as % of GDP): 175.3%
15. Spain External debt (as % of GDP): 184.7%
14. Germany External debt (as % of GDP): 189.4%
13. Finland External debt (as % of GDP): 205.7%
12. Norway External debt (as % of GDP): 208.9%
11. Hong Kong External debt (as % of GDP): 218.8%
10. Portugal External debt (as % of GDP): 231.5%
9. France External debt (as % of GDP): 247.2%
8. Austria External debt (as % of GDP): 268.9%
7. Sweden External debt (as % of GDP): 275%
6. Denmark External debt (as % of GDP): 315.2%
5. Belgium External debt (as % of GDP): 345.6%
4. Switzerland External debt (as % of GDP): 390%
3. Netherlands External debt (as % of GDP): 395.6%
2. United Kingdom External debt (as % of GDP): 427.6%
1. Ireland External debt (as % of GDP): 1,352%

John Stevenson
01-10-2011, 08:12 PM
The US is in a better position then the UK though which is totally stuffed economically..



That works inversely.

If China dumped the US dollar it would cripple the US.

Our pound is worth sod all so dumping it wouldn't hurt :D
.

lazlo
01-10-2011, 08:12 PM
It will fly. There is no reason to doubt that.

It didn't take off, so how do you know "it's about on-par with the F-22"?

For all we know, it's a guy in a rickshaw driving a fiberglass F-22 mock-up around the tarmac :)

J.Ramsey
01-10-2011, 08:14 PM
I see a couple Chevy pickups in the back ground.

I thought the Chinese only liked Buick's.:)

oldtiffie
01-10-2011, 08:15 PM
To paraphrase a previous US Secretary of Defense - the big worry is the worrying about what we don't know we don't know (or similar).

The US seems to be always "jumpy" where-as the Asians seem quite relaxed and laid back.

Evan
01-10-2011, 08:19 PM
Nobody knows that it will "equal" the F22. However, it must be similar for it to fly at all because of the contraints imposed by the aerodynamic design. Note the significant anhedral. It must be fly by wire since that shape and planform is inherently unstable. That sort of aircraft handles about like a streamlined brick under manual control so it also need sufficient engine power to keep it aloft.

The Chinese aren't stupid. They aren't going to show off something like that if it doesn't have reasonable performance to go along with the looks. That's something North Korea would do.

RB211
01-10-2011, 08:43 PM
It is already obsolete as it is designed to carry a human.

Black_Moons
01-10-2011, 09:24 PM
Don't worry, its chinese. If the joystick does not brake off and the autopilot freeze up, The lead/arsonic based stealth paint will kill the pilot before he gets outta chinese skys.

Ries
01-10-2011, 09:26 PM
I dont get the "dump the dollar" line of reasoning.

The chinese are owed money for bonds they bought.

I suppose they could tear up the bonds, and not get repaid by the US government, but I dont see how that benefits the Chinese, or hurts us.

Or, they could sell the bonds at a discount, and lose money- which would hurt the Chinese, but wouldnt affect us one bit, as we would still pay the bondholder the exact same amount.

Beyond that, the main economic weapon they have would be to STOP buying US bonds- is that what you mean by "dump the dollar"?

That would not affect any of our current debt, or the bonds they have already bought, but if they really stopped buying dollar denominated debt, cold turkey, it would hurt the US economy because we would probably have to pay a higher rate of interest to get other people, (including american citizens) to buy our T Bills and bonds.

But having to pay a bit more interest would hardly ruin the US economy. And I heard the republicans now in power are going to reduce the deficit anyway, which means they wont need to sell as many bonds to the Chinese.

The Chinese may be the single largest buyer of US debt, but they are far from the only ones- so even if they stopped buying we would still sell bonds to the Number 2 buyer, Japan, as well as to Korea and Taiwan, both of whom buy billions worth of our bonds.

Remember, during WW2, we financed the worlds largest deficit to date, along with the worlds largest stimulus program, by selling bonds to US CITIZENS! We could do that again, and not have to worry about the chinese at all- but that would mean actually saving money, rather than blowing it all on big screen TV's, and I am not sure americans can do that.

Anyway, the actual "threat" the chinese have is not that much. They could make things more expensive here, sure, but I dont think they could bankrupt us- we have to do that ourselves.

Liger Zero
01-10-2011, 09:35 PM
The Chinese aren't stupid.


I find some of the disparaging remarks against china in this thread hilarious.

If they were as stupid as people seem to think, they wouldn't rule the world economy and more importantly OUR economy.

China had sophisticated military hardware while Europe was duking it out with sharp sticks.

The rest of the world imposed itself on China during a weak dynasty, and now they are showing us how it's done.

Right now, China calls the shots around the world, we don't. If we step on someone's toes and make China unhappy, they can cripple us with sanctions, they can **** our economy over other ways as well.

Over the next decade as they shove their fist farther up our collective ass we're going to be nothing more than a tool of china's policy, an extension of their will.

This is what 50+ years of entitlement and greed has bought us. We weren't conquered by military might, our own greed brought us to this position.

J Tiers
01-10-2011, 10:00 PM
It is no suprise to me if you read the bible it wouldn't be a suprise to you either.

More people do that in china than do that here.

RB211
01-10-2011, 10:06 PM
More people do that in china than do that here.
Everything is done more in China, except suing. Maybe I should become a pilot in China...

lazlo
01-10-2011, 10:16 PM
Everything is done more in China, except suing.

That's true. The Communist government didn't sue the factory manager responsible for spiking infant formula with melamine, or the Chinese FDA official found "responsible" for millions of tons of fake cancer pharmaceuticals sold to the West, or the factory manager "responsible" for the lead painted toys.

Shame we don't have that form of justice here -- there'd be a lot less lawsuits :)

Tony Ennis
01-10-2011, 10:53 PM
And I heard the republicans now in power are going to reduce the deficit anyway, which means they wont need to sell as many bonds to the Chinese.


You're funny!

Ries, the Chinese can 'call in their markers.' Or they can stop loaning us money. Either would hurt is both but they could choose the time of the hurting, and it would not be to our benefit.

RobbieKnobbie
01-10-2011, 10:54 PM
Here's a pretty good write up on China's new fighter. Worth reading if you're going to postulate on China's military capabilities.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-090111-1.html

I heard somewhere along the line that China's purchase of Lenovo netted them a large portion of the F-22's electronics suite. We sold them the plans - all they had to do was build a plane around it.

lazlo
01-10-2011, 11:03 PM
Here's a pretty good write up on China's new fighter. Worth reading if you're going to postulate on China's military capabilities.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-090111-1.html

There's no technical content in that article? He's conjecturing on it's capabilities based on the fact that they copied the F22 and some of the F-35 features? WTF??


I heard somewhere along the line that China's purchase of Lenovo netted them a large portion of the F-22's electronics suite. We sold them the plans - all they had to do was build a plane around it.

LOL! Lenovo was IBM's personal computer line. Has nothing to do with avionics.

Rathyeon builds the CIP (Common Integrated Processor) -- its a cluster of PowerPC and i960 processors.

http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/f22_cip/

x39
01-10-2011, 11:05 PM
We weren't conquered by military might, our own greed brought us to this position.
Exactly right.

oldtiffie
01-10-2011, 11:13 PM
China's "spheres of interest and influence" extend way beyond Asia in general and includes a lot of countries in Africa, South America, Micronesia and Polynesia.

They are buying/mining lots of stuff as well as constructing big infrastructure - roads, rail, air-ports, gas, oil, common and rare minerals etc. etc. and are apparently appreciated and thought well of. It gives them a huge psychological and tactical advantage over "others". It provides huge improvements in employment and opportunities for otherwise poor and under/non-developed/impoverished countries.

Sure there are conditions and strings attached but which "aid" from any country doesn't have it?

It certainly is not "democracy" as we know it but its one helluva lot better than the local tyranny some were under.

Those that were exploited as colonies have long memories and neither like nor trust "white faces" and China fills the gap in many cases.

So China is not just (about) building military air-craft.

I am not a fan of China but I certainly would not write them off as retarded peasants as some seem to do.

RobbieKnobbie
01-10-2011, 11:26 PM
There's no technical content in that article? He's conjecturing on it's capabilities based on the fact that they copied the F22 and some of the F-35 features? WTF??

http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/f22_cip/

A strategic assessment is invalid if it doesn't contain all possible technical details? No, that article was written for a different audience than us nut-and-bolt types.

So stop being mean to me, mister!

lazlo
01-10-2011, 11:31 PM
Here's an Aviation Week article about the J-20. First technical information I've been able to find, but still educated guessing based on cell phone pictures.

Secretary Gates is travelling to Beijing this week to discuss re-establishing "stable communication" after China severed ties last year because the US approved a $6 billion arms contract to Taiwan.

The J-20 program started in 2006, and the Chinese government are projecting it to be operational in "2017 - 2019"


Chinese J-20 Stealth Fighter In Taxi Tests
(http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/awst/2011/01/03/AW_01_03_2011_p18-279564.xml&headline=null&next=0)
"The J-20 is a single-seat, twin-engine aircraft, bigger and heavier than the Sukhoi T-50 and the F-22. Comparison with ground-service vehicles points to an overall length of 75 ft. and a wingspan of 45 ft. or more, which would suggest a takeoff weight in the 75,000-80,000-lb. class with no external load. That in turn implies a generous internal fuel capacity. The overall length is close to that of the 1960s General Dynamics F-111, which carries 34,000 lb. of fuel.

The engines are most likely members of the Russian Saturn AL-31F family, also used on the J-10. The production version will require yet-to-mature indigenous engines.

One question that may go unanswered for a long time concerns the degree to which cyberespionage has aided the development of the J-20. U.S. defense industry cybersecurity experts have cited 2006—close to the date when the J-20 program would have started—as the point at which they became aware of what was later named the advanced persistent threat (APT), a campaign of cyberintrusion aimed primarily at military and defense industries and characterized by sophisticated infiltration and exfiltration techniques.

Between 2009 and early 2010, Lockheed Martin found that “six to eight companies” among its subcontractors “had been totally compromised—e-mails, their networks, everything,” according to Chief Information Security Officer Anne Mullins."

sansbury
01-10-2011, 11:33 PM
In the 80s Japan was going to own the US within a decade or two. How did that work out?

If you think the US banking system is rotten, you haven't spent much time looking at China's. The one thing they may have going for them is their government is even more willing (and able) than ours to pump air into a leaky balloon.

The vast majority of the population remains not far above desperately poor and barely educated. The millions of engineers they turn out annually include some thousands who are the equal of their peers at MIT or Caltech, and hundreds of thousands called "engineers" who *might* qualify for an AS degree here.

Another really interesting issue looming a few decades down the road is that China's population is already starting to age due to the one-child policy. It's been said that China is set to become the first country to get old before it gets rich.

And of course, many of the giant prestige projects we see might well turn out to be boondoggles. China's own National Academy of Sciences has written a report questioning the commercial viability of much of the planned high-speed rail system currently getting so much attention. Of course it is easier for the Party to get things done over there! The government, media, banking system, etc., are all run by the same bunch of insiders. If you think that's what goes on here in the US and stinks, you should see it there! Corrupt officials do get shot sometimes, but the justice system is very capricious and built to maintain the Party as much as any broader ideal of law and order. To steal from the people is bad, but to steal from the Party--now that will get you shot.

None of this is meant as China-bashing--I can still speak and read a bit of Mandarin and spent a semester in Beijing in the mid-90s. Their achievements up to and since then are amazing and there will be many more. The US military has not had a real challenge in some quarters (like air superiority) in some time so the brass are understandably a bit twitchy. But those who think the Chinese have got the whole game figured out ought to spend some time talking to Chinese people, nearly all of whom still see their country as poor, struggling, and riven with serious problems beyond those I've mentioned here. They certainly do not feel they are calling the shots around the world....

saltmine
01-10-2011, 11:49 PM
Wouldn't be anything new. Foreign countries are always stealing our ideas, and copying our stuff.

During the second world war, the Japanese captured a Chevrolet bomb truck, took it apart, and shipped it back to Japan....After a few Japanese modifications it became the Toyota Land Cruiser.

1911 Caterpillar crawler tractors abandoned by the US Army in China were disassembled by the Chinese and, to this day, are being manufactured by the "Red Tractor Factory" in China. (Oh yeah, aside from a coat of red paint, they're exact copies of the old Cats.)

In Europe, Russian tank crews traded their T-34's for American 2 1/2 ton GMC trucks, and took them back to Russia...Where they eventually became the world famous Ural Truck.

B-29 crews, lost and low on fuel landed in Russia. They were locked up, and their planes were taken to several Russian aircraft factories, where "nut&bolt" copies were manufactured, by the Russians....The Douglas DC-3s(C-47) met the same fate in Russia.(But, the Russian copies had a machine gun turret on
the top.) Funny thing...the Russians were never able to copy the Pratt&Whittney and Wright radial engines, so their copies never performed as well as the American originals.


They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery....I guess we should be flattered..

oldtiffie
01-11-2011, 12:15 AM
Irrespective of whether China or Russia or Japan or anyone else copied American designs - they certainly did and just as certainly still do and will continue to do.

They may even add a few "tweaks" of there own.

I think that many are convinced that all China-made stuff is junk at best and are quite surprised and dismayed to eventually find out just how good some of that stuff really is.

It may surprise some but Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Formosa are far from being democracies but they have to and do work with China and each other as its in all their best interests.

All in all there is a hugely large and skilled work-force in Asia and the manufacturing capability and capacity and potential are staggering.

It would be folly to sneer at and under-estimate Asia.

boslab
01-11-2011, 12:21 AM
Aside from the Chinese and others attempts to flatter, which i'm sure is all that its intended, the Chinese may well be buying one or two small trinkets from the rest of the world as well, many of these ideas may well be stolen from the US and others, youll have to decide for yourself.
But how on Earth do you steal by paying for it over the ever willing shop counter?
http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.61/pub_detail.asp
regards
mark

Evan
01-11-2011, 12:25 AM
The vast majority of the population remains not far above desperately poor and barely educated.

Not any more. Latest stats show that China has more internet users than the US has people. Figure that each internet address probably averages at least 2 users that means the majority of Chinese are online. When you look at Chinese average wages you also need to look at the cost of living. Both are low compared to North America. The Renminbi buys as much in China as a dollar buys here but the exchange rate is around 15 cents per RMB.

PeteF
01-11-2011, 12:28 AM
However, it must be similar for it to fly at all because of the contraints imposed by the aerodynamic design.

Actually a fly-by-wire aircraft will handle the way the software engineers decide they want it to fly. There is no particular reason it should be "similar" to anything to fly; the engineers can take two identical aircraft and make them totally dissimilar to fly. Alternatively they can take two very different aircraft and make them virtually identical to fly. In fact that is precisely what Airbus does, as the entire range of aircraft in their range fly almost identically despite a massive difference in size.

Pete

Evan
01-11-2011, 12:30 AM
Wouldn't be anything new. Foreign countries are always stealing our ideas, and copying our stuff.


Well, sort of. The saying in the US research establishment during WWII was "Our German rocket scientists are better than yours".

The Artful Bodger
01-11-2011, 01:48 AM
Wouldn't be anything new. Foreign countries are always stealing our ideas, and copying our stuff.

During the second world war, the Japanese captured a Chevrolet bomb truck, took it apart, and shipped it back to Japan....After a few Japanese modifications it became the Toyota Land Cruiser.

1911 Caterpillar crawler tractors abandoned by the US Army in China were disassembled by the Chinese and, to this day, are being manufactured by the "Red Tractor Factory" in China. (Oh yeah, aside from a coat of red paint, they're exact copies of the old Cats.)

In Europe, Russian tank crews traded their T-34's for American 2 1/2 ton GMC trucks, and took them back to Russia...Where they eventually became the world famous Ural Truck.

B-29 crews, lost and low on fuel landed in Russia. They were locked up, and their planes were taken to several Russian aircraft factories, where "nut&bolt" copies were manufactured, by the Russians....The Douglas DC-3s(C-47) met the same fate in Russia.(But, the Russian copies had a machine gun turret on
the top.) Funny thing...the Russians were never able to copy the Pratt&Whittney and Wright radial engines, so their copies never performed as well as the American originals.


They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery....I guess we should be flattered..

An intriquing list but I fear there is little truth in it.

jatt
01-11-2011, 02:05 AM
I wonder if the bolts they used in it are better than the crap they sell here in OZ.

oldtiffie
01-11-2011, 02:05 AM
Aside from the Chinese and others attempts to flatter, which i'm sure is all that its intended, the Chinese may well be buying one or two small trinkets from the rest of the world as well, many of these ideas may well be stolen from the US and others, youll have to decide for yourself.
But how on Earth do you steal by paying for it over the ever willing shop counter?
http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.61/pub_detail.asp
regards
mark

Mark.

That link you posted should be essential reading as it may surprise some, worry others, and see how "Business" does "business" - and usually with the tacit if not the explicit approval of Governments.

Add Iran and North Korea and you have quite a Devil's brew which may be well able to make the US hesitate and think twice as operating in Asia presents some unique problems - logistics not being the least of them.

MuellerNick
01-11-2011, 02:26 AM
If it looks like a jet, it doesn't have to be like one.
This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5SRyG6UR2A) looks like a car, but, well ...


Nick

Evan
01-11-2011, 03:11 AM
Actually a fly-by-wire aircraft will handle the way the software engineers decide they want it to fly. There is no particular reason it should be "similar" to anything to fly; the engineers can take two identical aircraft and make them totally dissimilar to fly. Alternatively they can take two very different aircraft and make them virtually identical to fly. In fact that is precisely what Airbus does, as the entire range of aircraft in their range fly almost identically despite a massive difference in size.


Yes, of course. That wasn't what I was getting at. When I said similar I meant similar in absolute performance. Even fly by wire systems cannot give more performance than the design rules allow. A flying brick is a flying brick regardless of the computer controls. To make a flying brick fly requires a minimum power to weight ratio, wing loading etc. Fly by wire is wonderful tech when it works but it can't change basic parameters of the design.

MuellerNick
01-11-2011, 03:30 AM
Not any more. Latest stats show that China has more internet users than the US has people. Figure that each internet address probably averages at least 2 users that means the majority of Chinese are online

Population China: 1300 Mio
Population USA: 310 Mio

Why do you multiply the addresses by two to get users, when the number already states "users" and not "address".
"has more internet users".


Nick

Alan in Oz
01-11-2011, 04:41 AM
Just to amplify Saltmine's comment, Russia sure did copy the P&W 1830 engine and used it successfully in the Mil helicopter and I can assure that a number of parts were good enough to be interchangeable, except for the metric bolts/studs they used.

Evan
01-11-2011, 04:52 AM
Why do you multiply the addresses by two to get users, when the number already states "users" and not "address".
"has more internet users".


Just to confuse you nick.

MuellerNick
01-11-2011, 05:01 AM
Just to confuse you nick.


I'm not the one of us two who is confused.

Joe Average would have answered "Oh, I'm sorry, that was nonsense".
But Mr. Neverfail could not admit an error.


Nick

John Stevenson
01-11-2011, 07:13 AM
Anyway it's flown now so it can't have been a mock up.

http://video.sina.com.cn/v/b/44929492-1622669611.html#44667541

Evan
01-11-2011, 09:02 AM
I'm not the one of us two who is confused.


Only a confused person would deny it. I won't bother explaining it to you. You wouldn't understand.

MuellerNick
01-11-2011, 09:15 AM
Only a confused person would deny it. I won't bother explaining it to you. You wouldn't understand.


Ah, the resident troll getting up to speed again!


Nick

Evan
01-11-2011, 09:25 AM
So, how fast can you go?

Your confusion lies in the fact that you somehow assumed that when I said the number of users exceed the US population you thought that equated to addresses. It doesn't. work out the rest for yourself, if you can.

Metalmelter
01-11-2011, 09:39 AM
Back on topic :rolleyes:

That picture looks photo shopped ....

Now I'll admit I've never been to China but why would a Chinese Airstrip have English signs (the yellow 2000 and the large B letter with arrow), unless this was at an International Airport? I'm assuming for a moment this is a military installation but could be wrong. And then we have the 2001 seen on the side of the aircraft too. If you you look at the red star, it also seems nice a very bright coloring compared to everything else in the photo which is nowhere as bright and slightly grayed out. It just doesn't look right...

moe1942
01-11-2011, 09:46 AM
I retired from the USAF in 82. That's old technology. Looks like an F-14 Tom Cat. It's the warfare electronics that count plus speed and manuverability, payload, etc.

oldtiffie
01-11-2011, 10:01 AM
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/01/12/3110922.htm

mike os
01-11-2011, 10:09 AM
I retired from the USAF in 82. That's old technology. Looks like an F-14 Tom Cat. It's the warfare electronics that count plus speed and manuverability, payload, etc.


I would disagree.... numbers plays a big part ;) the above helps 1:1, but at 50:1 they dont count for much:D

My guess it will work quite well enough for 99% of its purpose, which is political

lazlo
01-11-2011, 10:25 AM
The vast majority of the population remains not far above desperately poor and barely educated.
Not any more. Latest stats show that China has more internet users than the US has people.
Population China: 1300 Mio
Population USA: 310 Mio

More than 3/4's of China's population are rural peasants -- as Sansbury says, desperately poor and barely educated.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,511476,00.html

CHENGDU, China — To see the Chinese countryside in the western Sichuan Province in spring is a chance to behold some truly spectacular scenery. The yellow flowers in the fields blaze across the landscape and farmers turn the earth by hand.

But the beauty belies the hard life of China's peasants.

Some 800 million people live much the way they have for centuries, with few of the amenities of modern life.

MuellerNick
01-11-2011, 10:26 AM
Not any more. Latest stats show that China has more internet users than the US has people. Figure that each internet address probably averages at least 2 users that means the majority of Chinese are online.


that when I said the number of users exceed the US population you thought that equated to addresses. It doesn't.

No, I simply thought about users and population. I gave the numbers (in case you can read and understand numbers).

No boy, YOU suggested that the number of users overall has to be multiplied by the number of users per address.
310 Mio is clearly NOT the majority with an overall population of 1300 Mio.
Even multiplied by your mysterious 2 times (just to give credit to make some sense of your posting) that would be 620 Mio users. Still not the majority.

But maybe there are 5 usersPerAdressUsersPopullation? That makes exactly one Evanillion (a number that always fits and is accurate to every digit).

Ahh well. Numbers, logic and Evan ...



work out the rest for yourself, if you can.

See above!


Nick

lazlo
01-11-2011, 10:44 AM
Originally Posted by saltmine
Wouldn't be anything new. Foreign countries are always stealing our ideas, and copying our stuff.

During the second world war, the Japanese captured a Chevrolet bomb truck, took it apart, and shipped it back to Japan....After a few Japanese modifications it became the Toyota Land Cruiser.

1911 Caterpillar crawler tractors abandoned by the US Army in China were disassembled by the Chinese and, to this day, are being manufactured by the "Red Tractor Factory" in China. (Oh yeah, aside from a coat of red paint, they're exact copies of the old Cats.)

In Europe, Russian tank crews traded their T-34's for American 2 1/2 ton GMC trucks, and took them back to Russia...Where they eventually became the world famous Ural Truck.

B-29 crews, lost and low on fuel landed in Russia. They were locked up, and their planes were taken to several Russian aircraft factories, where "nut&bolt" copies were manufactured, by the Russians....The Douglas DC-3s(C-47) met the same fate in Russia.(But, the Russian copies had a machine gun turret on
the top.) Funny thing...the Russians were never able to copy the Pratt&Whittney and Wright radial engines, so their copies never performed as well as the American originals.


They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery....I guess we should be flattered..
An intriquing list but I fear there is little truth in it.

That list is actually completely true.

The B-29 story was particularly interesting. Roosevelt asked Stalin for permission for B-29's bombing Japan to be allowed to land in Russian during emergencies. Ultimately, 4 B-29's landed in Vladivostok, exactly as Sansbury described.

Stalin had no strategic bombers, and the B-29 was a marvel of technology. So Stalin had the B-29's stripped, and copied them, rivet for rivet. Boeing used 1/16" sheet metal (1.58 mm), and the Russians used Metric, so they had to use 2mm aluminum sheet, so the copy was much heavier.

The result was the TU-4 Bull.

http://www.rb-29.net/html/03RelatedStories/03.03shortstories/shortstoryscans/RussianB-29.jpg



How Russians copied captured B-29
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/1319691/How-Russians-copied-captured-B-29.html)

FRESH details showing how Stalin's engineers stripped a B-29 Superfortress bomber "rivet-by-rivet" and copied it to produce their own aircraft capable of carrying a nuclear bomb to New York were published by an American historian yesterday.

The impounded plane, one of three United States Air Force bombers that made forced landings in the Soviet Far East port of Vladivostok in 1944, was reduced to its 105,000 component parts and each one was copied by engineers working for the aviation pioneer Andrei Tupolev.

Von Hardesty, a curator of the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, said that the capture of such a technologically advanced aircraft by the relatively primitive Soviet aviation industry could be compared to America getting its hands on an alien spacecraft.

Mr Hardesty said: "One Russian general called it dar Bozhii [a gift from God] when it arrived, and it completely changed the Soviets' standing in the post-war world. Stalin had no aircraft that could be used as a strategic bomber and nothing near it. He realised how vulnerable this made him, so he made copying these planes a top priority for his military."

By 1946, Tupolev had produced the Tu-4, a fully working version of the B-29, plugging a gap in Stalin's arsenal. Mr Hardesty said: "The British and the Americans were flabbergasted when Stalin rolled this out at an air show in the West in 1947 and they hurried to find out how it had been produced."

saltmine
01-11-2011, 12:22 PM
There's a lot of this thieving and copying going on all of the time. When I was just a kid, I worked for an American Motors/Datsun dealer out on the "left coast". Since I was "the new guy" they stuck me in the Datsun service department....the old guys worked on the Ramblers and such.

Most of my time was spent pulling engines and replacing crankshafts of the Datsun "Fair Lady" sports cars, to correct a factory defect.
Word had it that the Japanese engineers had somehow gotten the blueprints transposed for the crankshaft and several hundred crankshafts were machined with the spiral groove oil control on the rear of the crank cut in reverse. Instead of pushing the oil back into the crankcase, it merrily pumped it out in alarming amounts. The engine appeared to be a copy of the 1.6L Morris Garage four-cylinder push rod engine that normally lurked beneath the hood of an MGB or any number of other English automobiles.
The engines, true to British design, had no rear main oil seal, but relied on the spiral groove to attempt to keep the oil inside the engine. The carburators, instead of being labeled Amal, were cleverly badged Mikuni, but, leaked, and performed exactly like their Amal counterparts. In fact, many Datsun engines were direct copies of British engines. A good example was the Austin four that American Motors used in their dubious little Nash Metropolitan. Years later, a friend had one with a bad engine. We picked up a Datsun 1200cc out of a wrecked car, and bolted it in without any trouble, even using the original Austin manifolds and accessory brackets.

When computer technology started out in the early 1980's, the Japanese were caught flat footed.They sent agents to the USA and had them purchase American computer components for automobiles, and ship them back. Where they were studied and copied to use in Japanese cars.

The Chinese have been good at exporting American goods and copying them, to import and sell in the USA. I remember a friend of mine who was working on his son-in-law's truck. He needed a "torque angle gage" to properly stretch the head bolts during the cylinder head installation. He went to one of our "VatoZone" auto parts stores, and purchased a reasonably priced Chinese copy of a "Torque angle gage" and took it home. After half a day of messing around with it, he called me, and told me that for the life of him, he couldn't figure out how it was supposed to work, and would I help him....

Well, it didn't take long to figure out that there was a piece of the gage assembly missing. I sent him back to the parts store, to get a complete tool.
He soon returned, with another gage...the same piece missing from it's package...Fortunately, I have an American made "torque angle gage" and with it in hand, we finished up his repair quickly. He took the one he had bought back. We later found that a Chinese purchasing agent had bought a "Torque angle gage" and not knowing there was a part missing from the "kit", sent it back to China where they copied, packaged, and shipped thousands of them back to the USA....of course, all of them were completely useless.

Evan
01-11-2011, 12:43 PM
Ahh well. Numbers, logic and Evan ...


I see you still haven't figured it out. Of course you resort to insult and obfuscation to cover your lack of understanding. Typical.


310 Mio is clearly NOT the majority with an overall population of 1300 Mio.


Me="Latest stats show that China has more internet users than the US has people."

I never gave 310 as a limit. Now do you see your mistake? Probably not. Do you know the difference between "equal to" and "greater than"? Obviously not.

You sure do like to waste people's time nick.

The point was actually about literacy in China. The literacy rate from ages 15 to 24 is 99 percent and for all adults is 93%. Of course that completely escaped your attention.

Ries
01-11-2011, 12:47 PM
You're funny!

Ries, the Chinese can 'call in their markers.' Or they can stop loaning us money. Either would hurt is both but they could choose the time of the hurting, and it would not be to our benefit.

What are you talking about?

As I said above- they CANNOT call in any markers- they bought bonds. The bonds have due dates, and, in some cases, interest payments, with specified dates- but the Chinese cant, any more than you or I, tell the US government they want their money NOW. They are due when they are due.

Bonds dont work that way.

There are NO "markers" to call in- they arent loan sharks.

Evan
01-11-2011, 12:53 PM
More than 3/4's of China's population are rural peasants -- as Sansbury says, desperately poor and barely educated.



According to the Unicef scorecard the literacy rate is 93% for all adults, and that is a couple of years ago. School is mandatory and the literacy rate for 15 to 24 is 99%, probably better than the US.

43% of the population is urbanized so your numbers on that are way out of date.

http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/china_statistics.html

The Artful Bodger
01-11-2011, 01:20 PM
That list is actually completely true.



The B29 item is widely accepted but that does not make the list "completely true".

lazlo
01-11-2011, 01:22 PM
According to the Unicef scorecard the literacy rate is 93% for all adults, and that is a couple of years ago. School is mandatory and the literacy rate for 15 to 24 is 99%, probably better than the US.

The Unicef definition of "literacy" for a farmer is recognizing 1500 Kanji characters. They won't be reading the Beijing Times.

In any event, China is ranked 83 in the world in literacy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_literacy_rate


43% of the population is urbanized so your numbers on that are way out of date.

That's a current article from Fox News. Here's another:


RURAL LIFE IN CHINA (http://factsanddetails.com/china.php?itemid=152&catid=11&subcatid=72)

Rural population: 56 percent, compared to over 95 percent in the 1920s. There are 800 million rural peasants--roughlly 600 million farmers and 200 million to 300 million excess unskilled rural laborers.

The are around 1 million villages in China, about one third of the world's total. Each village has an average of 916 people.

The rural population has declined from 82 percent in 1970 to 74 percent in 1990 to 64 percent in 2001 to 56 percent in 2007 and is expected to drop below 50 percent by 2015.

There is a wide gap between the wealth of the impoverished countryside and the booming cities, with the income of rural residents less than a third of that of urban residents. The annual per capita disposable income of or rural residents was 2,762 yuan (around $300) in 2006 compared to 8,799 yuan for urban dwellers. For every 100 household in the countryside there are 89 color televisions, 22 refrigerators and 62 cell phones. By contrast, for 100 every household in the cities there are 137 color televisions, 92 refrigerators and 153 cell phones.

Evan
01-11-2011, 01:33 PM
The Unicef definition of "literacy" for a farmer is recognizing 1500 Kanji characters. They won't be reading the Beijing Times.


Kanji characters are Chinese characters that have been imported into the Japanese written language centuries ago. Chance are pretty good that most people in China couldn't read the Beijing times if it were written in Kanji.

Stop making stuff up.

The Artful Bodger
01-11-2011, 01:35 PM
The carburators, instead of being labeled Amal, were cleverly badged Mikuni, but, leaked, and performed exactly like their Amal counterparts. Amal carbs on an MG motor? I thought they used SUs, which I have not known to be prone to leakage..



In fact, many Datsun engines were direct copies of British engines. A good example was the Austin four that American Motors used in their dubious little Nash Metropolitan. Years later, a friend had one with a bad engine. We picked up a Datsun 1200cc out of a wrecked car, and bolted it in without any trouble, even using the original Austin manifolds and accessory brackets. This does not suprise me as Datsun started out making Austins for the Japanese market under licence.




When computer technology started out in the early 1980's, the Japanese were caught flat footed.They sent agents to the USA and had them purchase American computer components for automobiles, and ship them back. Where they were studied and copied to use in Japanese cars. Fortunately the Japanese seem to have improved them somewhat.




The Chinese have been good at exporting American goods and copying them, to import and sell in the USA. This of course is common practice and American companies are just as adept as anyone anywhere else at doing this.



I remember a friend of mine who was working on his son-in-law's truck. He needed a "torque angle gage" to ................of course, all of them were completely useless. A friend of yours working on someone elses truck? I think that makes it hearsay. Maybe the story is true though I do have to wonder at an American importer who did not check what he was importing.

lazlo
01-11-2011, 01:35 PM
they CANNOT call in any markers- they bought bonds.

There are NO "markers" to call in- they arent loan sharks.

It's the way it's portrayed in by the mass media.

The Chinese have about $840 Billion in US Bonds. The Japanese are actually the largest holder of US bonds at the moment: around $870 Billion. The UK is third at around $500 Billion. The amounts fluctuate as the various sovereign wealth funds buy and sell bonds.

That's out of a total debt of $14 Trillion. So the Chinese hold about 6 percent of our outstanding debt :rolleyes:

The Chinese have massive investments of bonds in all Western Countries. So do the Russians and the Arabs. China has massive holdings in Australian debt, for example:

"Market insiders believe China is buying 15 to 20 per cent of the $2 billion in [Australian] Treasury securities being issued every week." (http://www.news.com.au/china-bankrolling-rudd-stimulus-plan/story-0-1225699555756)

The US has a lower debt ratio than any EU country, but for some reason the worldwide attention on national debt is focused on the US. :confused:

MuellerNick
01-11-2011, 01:35 PM
I see you still haven't figured it out. Of course you resort to insult and obfuscation to cover your lack of understanding. Typical.
Nice try! VERRRRY nice try!



Me="Latest stats show that China has more internet users than the US has people."

Trick #1, leave out important context:



Latest stats show that China has more internet users than the US has people. Figure that each internet address probably averages at least 2 users that means the majority of Chinese are online.

Thats what the nonsense is in your statement. But you instantly try to detract from that. That trick of your's is so lame, even I recognize it.


Now do you see your mistake? Probably not. Do you know the difference between "equal to" and "greater than"? Obviously not.

Haha! That's the number (http://www.internetworldstats.com/asia.htm):
"420,000,000 Internet users as of Jun/10, 31.6% penetration, per CNNIT"
Now, are those 420 Mio the majority of 1200 Mio?

What does the number of users per IN-access have to do with that at all?


The point was actually about literacy in China.

The point was, that 31% are not the majority. Period. Nothing more, very simple, a child could understand that. I wrote that in my first answer re that "fact" you stated.
Whatever you make out of your statement, however you bend and twist, it's nonsense. Plain BS, just trying to mangle facts and tell further nonsense, quote out of context ... the complete Evan-bag-of-tricks.

Evanology


Nick

lazlo
01-11-2011, 01:37 PM
Kanji characters are Chinese characters that have been imported into the Japanese written language centuries ago. Chance are pretty good that most people in China couldn't read the Beijing times if it were written in Kanji.

Stop making stuff up.

Yah, Dr. Google. "Kanji" characters are the Chinese characters used in the Japanese alphabet. Since most folks know what Kanji characters are, but likely wouldn't know "Han" characters (the same Kanji characters in Chinese), I used the more familiar term.

In any event, we've established that the vast majority (800 million out of 1.3 Billion) of the Chinese population are poor peasants who are barely literate.

Evan
01-11-2011, 01:41 PM
Yah, Dr. Google. "Kanji" characters are the Chinese characters used in the Japanese alphabet. But since most folks here wouldn't know "Han" characters (the same Kanji characters in Chinese), I used the more familiar term.



Nice try. I speak some Japanese. Most of the Kanji characters are not recognizable by the Chinese. They have changed over time.

Evan
01-11-2011, 01:44 PM
Published stats on Chinese internet access don't include the number of people that must use the internet at work. Add that to the total and it (and the implied literacy rate) is much larger. You really don't have much imagination nicky.

lazlo
01-11-2011, 01:49 PM
This is fun Nick! We need to get John to play too :)
Oh wait, McGyver will feel left out...

MuellerNick
01-11-2011, 02:36 PM
Published stats on Chinese internet access don't include the number of people that must use the internet at work.

That is absolutely right (because you pulled that out of thin air). Also, they count one-eyed users just half. Unfair! And then, they didn't count those who could access the internet, but don't want to (read Evan's postings for example). Not to forget those that know someone who has access.

OTOH, there is a Canadian expert in Chinese language (and a zillion of other undiscovered fields) that is counted for 1 Mio Chinese IN-users, because he googles so much. :eek:



Evanology!

Nick

mike os
01-11-2011, 04:43 PM
zzzzzzz zzzzz ZZZZZZ ZZZ z zzz:mad:

Mcgyver
01-11-2011, 05:40 PM
haven't been following.....what is Evan right about this time? :D

on the bonds, the potential threat from a large bond holding is them going short....because the US is increasing its debt it needs to keep issuing more and more bonds. An entity holding lots of US bonds who wanted to mess them up could sell lots of into market creating a supply/demand imbalance and financial crisis in the US...frankly I can't see China doing it, they seem more interested in taking technology and gaining market share.....slowly strangle your customer as your domestic market takes over a greater share of production is more likely than an alley-way mugging, imo.

airsmith282
01-11-2011, 05:54 PM
as long as they dont start building the F117A your all safe , but should they start well you know how it goes WWIII will likey begin and end rather fast but the winners wont be who you want them to be..lolololololololololo


sorry not be be rude but i told you guys before you didnt want to know how much stuff was really built over there..

x39
01-11-2011, 06:21 PM
The B-29 story was particularly interesting. Roosevelt asked Stalin for permission for B-29's bombing Japan to be allowed to land in Russian during emergencies.
One would think our Soviet "Allies" would have allowed us to bomb Japan from their territory, think how it might have shortened the war. Communist filth.

oldtiffie
01-11-2011, 06:29 PM
A lot of you guys in the USA will do almost anything to side-track or hi-jack or close any thread the makes China look good as it seems that may be seen to make the USA look bad.

Nick and Evan's dick-slapping contest isn't helping much either.

The OP was and is:


Saw this on DailyTech today:

The Chengdu J-20. Developed by Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group for the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF).


Sec. Gates Says China May be "Somewhat Further Along" in J-20 Program Than Previously Thought (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=20610)

The Chinese military is using the money generated by its growing economy to invest heavily in military technology and new weapons systems. China continues to insist that it is not a threat, but many analysts believe the move to beef up its military is an effort to make the U.S. and allies think twice about intervening in any potential future conflict over Taiwan.

One of the new weapon systems that China is developing is a new fifth-generation jet fighter aircraft called the J-20. Photos and video of the aircraft have been surfacing over the last month and many of the photos are from what is thought to be a runway taxi test of the prototype. The Pentagon stated previously that it thought China was years away from putting the aircraft into production and getting it into the air.

http://cencio4.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/j20-pic-3.jpg
http://cencio4.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/j20-pic-1.jpg

Look familiar? :)

Here's ours:

http://www.richard-seaman.com/Aircraft/Misc/RedFlag0702/Highlights/F22Taxying12oClock.jpg

sansbury
01-11-2011, 06:55 PM
Actually the Chinese are helping us to solve the problem of loss of manufacturing jobs by trying to get us back into a Reaganite cold-war aerospace building frenzy.

Evan
01-11-2011, 07:26 PM
haven't been following.....what is Evan right about this time?

It's real and not a mockup.


On the side thread about literacy I came across this sad example of what is wrong with the US. This is from a site that is promoting literacy in the US. It is painful to read.



Literacy Rate -
How Many Are Illiterate

The literacy rate in the US has many educators in search of answers about this problem that has plagued our country for decades. Instead of decreasing, the numbers of literacy has steadily increased over the years. This raises a lot of questions about our education system, how it is ran, and why there is such a problem with illiterate people in our country.

The NAAL (National Assessment of Adult Literacy) administered tests which revealed that an estimated 14% of US residents would have extreme difficulty with reading and written comprehension. These people can legally be defined as illiterate. This could lead to numerous problems for these people now and in the future. When looking to apply for a job, there are forms that have to be filled out. Adults with literacy issues are unable to fill out these forms which decrease their chances of getting a job and raises unemployment issues.

According to international charts has a literacy rate of 21.8%. Education completion among males and females is drastically low. There are six years of primary level education and seven years of secondary level education offered. The United States requires six years of primary level education and seven years of secondary level education.

Greenland has fallen in the number one spot for literacy rates which is defined as anyone over the age of fifteen years old that can read and write. Both males and females have are at 100% literacy. In the US, adults with a high level of literacy are at 19%, a low level of literacy are at 49.6% and a moderate level of literacy at 31.4%. That difference in literacy rates are outstanding.


http://www.caliteracy.org/rates/

JCHannum
01-11-2011, 07:29 PM
I wouldn't give an account on literacy much credibility if it contains a sentence such as this;

This raises a lot of questions about our education system, how it is ran,

Evan
01-11-2011, 07:32 PM
Neither would I. So, it must be a Chinese plot. :rolleyes:

lazlo
01-11-2011, 08:12 PM
Actually the Chinese are helping us to solve the problem of loss of manufacturing jobs by trying to get us back into a Reaganite cold-war aerospace building frenzy.

If you were just a tad suspicious, you'd wonder if Lockheed-Martin leaked the F-22 plans themselves, so they can petition Congress to resurrect the program.

Lockheed stock jumped $1.30/share on Thursday, the day the cell phone pictures were "leaked."

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u15/rtgeorge_album/LMT.png

boslab
01-11-2011, 08:22 PM
Heres an interesting bit of info, did you know that china has increased its steel production at the astounding rate of 5 million tons per anum consistently over the last 11 years?, that effectivly means building a sttlplant every year [which they have been, some that ive seen], most of the steel, if we were to use the product as a key performance indicator is for home use, ie conversion within china from secodary product [primary=raw material, secondary= converted material, tertiary =end product] to tertiary or end product, or export!, they still cant satisfy thir own manufacturing demand for steel.
Several new plants on order for 2011,2012,2013.
they are absorbing the world output of heavy machinery to produce steel completely, as they are absorbing raw materials at the same rate.
the demand for power to achive this is staggering, each rolling mill sucks up 100 Mw, there does not appear to be a saturation point.
It is interesting to note that while National pride in your own country is a good thing, I'm immensly proud of the acheivements of Brits in the past, but times change and whilst more than a small amount of invention occured where i live, that was then, not now. It would seem that a long time ago it was Britain at the front if the history books are right, then America got a shot at it, it would now seem that the wheel has gone full circle and China has the reins AGAIN, its not new, they had a manufacturing base 1000 years BC, mass production of say belt buckles in bronze started in China [lost wax process] along with a lot of other things, and an infrastructure to match.
The best thing to do is loose the Xenophobic element completely as it only results in denial, a bad thing in manufacturing.
The competition will ALWAYS get as good as you, and as a natural concequence EXCEED what you can do, its just the way it is.
They will end up with better planes than the US/Europe weather we like it or not, so too will they end up with better ships and tanks and whatever.
They do have competition in the form of India, also a country not to be dissmissed, i dont think either country needs to make cardboard areoplanes to impress the US or Europe, if you look carefully you will find they already own most of the factories anyway.
regards
mark

lbhsbz
01-11-2011, 08:23 PM
I wouldn't give an account on literacy much credibility if it contains a sentence such as this;

This raises a lot of questions about our education system, how it is ran,

Well for starters, those who are literate know that they don't end a sentence with a comma.

The WHOLE sentence was:

"This raises a lot of questions about our education system, how it is ran, and why there is such a problem with illiterate people in our country."

....which looks OK to me.

RB211
01-11-2011, 08:26 PM
I do not doubt for one second that our F22 is superior to the Chinese airplane.
However, with that said, both the Chinese knockoff and the F22 are already seriously obsolete.
If thats the best the Chinese have to offer, thats great. The F22 is not even close to the best we have behind curtains, and any airplane that carries a human is obsolete technology.
So it seams the Chinese experimenting with fly by wire and advanced flight control computers. That is really great, perhaps Burt and Virgin Galactic can buy one of the more affordable Chinese computers for their space ships in the future.
Air Superiority will be fought from space, or near space, and most certainly not from a manned vehicle. He who has the most kinetic energy will win.

RB211
01-11-2011, 08:26 PM
I do not doubt for one second that our F22 is superior to the Chinese airplane.
However, with that said, both the Chinese knockoff and the F22 are already seriously obsolete.
If thats the best the Chinese have to offer, thats great. The F22 is not even close to the best we have behind curtains, and any airplane that carries a human is obsolete technology.
So it seams the Chinese experimenting with fly by wire and advanced flight control computers. That is really great, perhaps Burt and Virgin Galactic can buy one of the more affordable Chinese computers for their space ships in the future.
Air Superiority will be fought from space, or near space, and most certainly not from a manned vehicle. He who has the most kinetic energy will win.

boslab
01-11-2011, 08:31 PM
They wont have to worry about air supiriority if they own your country anyway, the next war will be on the stock exchange for a bet
mark

lazlo
01-11-2011, 08:50 PM
I do not doubt for one second that our F22 is superior to the Chinese airplane.
However, with that said, both the Chinese knockoff and the F22 are already seriously obsolete..

The F-22 program (the Advanced Tactical Fighter program, pitting the YF-22 against the YF-23) started development in 1981, and delivered the first production model in 1997.
The Chinese just started development of the J-20 prototype in 2006, and according to the Chinese government, it's scheduled for production in 2017 - 2019.

So even at the most optimistic Chinese timeline, the F-22 is 20 years ahead of the J-20.

But the F-22 program was highly controversial from the start, since there really wasn't any compelling adversary (in any substantial numbers) to the aging F-15, so many in Congress were puzzled why we were spending trillions developing a 4th generation air superiority fighter.

It took a veritable Act of God to cancel the F-22 program, since Lockheed is one of the largest political contributors on Capital Hill, and they carefully distributed the F-22 program so there were components made in literally every state in the Nation.

But you can bet the Lockheed execs are clinking the champaign glasses now :)

lazlo
01-11-2011, 09:04 PM
They wont have to worry about air supiriority if they own your country anyway, the next war will be on the stock exchange for a bet
mark

You realize China is buying-up all the EU debt, right?

Ireland benefits as China backs our bailout package
(http://www.independent.ie/business/european/ireland-benefits-as-china-backs-our-bailout-package-2487584.html)
Ireland's bailout package from the EU is being funded in part by China, it has emerged, after Asian countries piled into EU debt issued to rescue the Irish economy.

China vows to buy more European debt (http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/UPDATE-1-China-voices-faith-in-Europe-vows-to-buy--CVD2U?opendocument&src=rss)

China ready to buy Spain's $7.9bn debt (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/international-business/China-ready-to-buy-Spains-79bn-debt/articleshow/7233661.cms)

Evan
01-11-2011, 09:12 PM
"This raises a lot of questions about our education system, how it is ran, and why there is such a problem with illiterate people in our country."

....which looks OK to me.


"How it is" is present tense. The word "ran" is past tense. The correct usage is "how it is run". The word "run" is also used unchanged in the pluperfect tense when in agreement with the word "was" as the past of "to be".

I don't expect perfect grammar from the people I meet here or anywhere else but on a site about literacy the standard must be very high. There is also a sentence in the part I posted that doesn't even have a subject. That is a very basic error.


According to international charts has a literacy rate of 21.8%.

What does it mean? There isn't even a clue from the context.

Arcane
01-11-2011, 09:24 PM
Well for starters, those who are literate know that they don't end a sentence with a comma.

The WHOLE sentence was:

"This raises a lot of questions about our education system, how it is ran, and why there is such a problem with illiterate people in our country."

....which looks OK to me.


Well for starters, those who are literate know that they don't end a sentence with a comma.

The WHOLE sentence was:

"This raises a lot of questions about our education system, how it is ran, and why there is such a problem with illiterate people in our country."

....which looks OK to me.

However,
That difference in literacy rates are outstanding. doesn't exactly inspire confidence that the writer has a high level of literacy.
One would expect better from somebody who earns their living by being a writer.

Me? I know my grammar sucketh..but I ain't a writer either! :D

oldtiffie
01-11-2011, 09:43 PM
I'd be more concerned about functional numeracy and literacy - or to put it in context, at least English Expression and Comprehension 101 (or better) and Applied Finance 101 (or better) and Shop Math (including geometry, trigonometry, indices, math etc.) 101 (or better).

JCHannum
01-11-2011, 10:11 PM
Well for starters, those who are literate know that they don't end a sentence with a comma.

The WHOLE sentence was:

"This raises a lot of questions about our education system, how it is ran, and why there is such a problem with illiterate people in our country."

....which looks OK to me.

I understand the whole sentence, just ended it at "how it is ran. Improper use of tenses does not speak well of the literacy of the author.

x39
01-11-2011, 10:16 PM
Heres an interesting bit of info, did you know that china has increased its steel production at the astounding rate of 5 million tons per anum consistently over the last 11 years?, that effectivly means building a sttlplant every year
A great leap forward from the "Great Leap Forward". ;)

oldtiffie
01-11-2011, 10:29 PM
Some here may be quite concerned at the levels of education achieved as pretty well the norm in China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan and others in Asia where education is highly prized.

Try the USA:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIMSS

RB211
01-11-2011, 11:26 PM
Some here may be quite concerned at the levels of education achieved as pretty well the norm in China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan and others in Asia where education is highly prized.

Try the USA:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIMSS
Education in USA has two major problems.
1. They do not teach you how to make money and survive
2. The attitude of students is horrendous and lazy. Only a few "get it"

Throwing money into education does nothing but create bigger schools and fatter wallets for the administration. The teachers are just pawns.

This no child left behind thing is a crock. I say raise the standards, and leave behind all the lazy bums.

gmatov
01-12-2011, 12:38 AM
By now I have no idea who said this.

"This raises a lot of questions about our education system, how it is ran, and why there is such a problem with illiterate people in our country."

"how it is ran" makes you sound ignorant, uneducated, kinda like a girl I dated 30 some years ago who said she "runned over" some shrubs, "ran over?", "no, runned over.

You might be part of the reason we are in such a pickle.

lazlo,

As far as China buying Irish debt, Ireland is hurting, and if they can sell their debt to China, at ANY return, they will, probably be ahead of the game.
US debt floats, as to the bonds themselves. 1 /10 percent rise in interest rates knocks down the price that that bond is trading at, though it will always be at par at maturity.

China can't "dump" US Notes. They have "maturity" dates. They can sell into the secondary markets, but the price will be less than waiting for them to mature. They buy our notes because they think they are the safest in this world and pay the best return.

Well more than half of the US Debt is held by US Citizens and US investment Banks. They love that guaranteed return, and they wish we would issue more debt for them to buy up.

Where in the World can you borrow from the FED at Zero interest rate, and buy US Treasuries paying something like 5%? Guaranteed to make you millions, if not billions. Kinda seems to me like the FED is in cahoots with them who are screwing us all over, but that is a bad thing to say, what with the PC **** we have, today.

Can't even say that BANKERS, for Christ's sake, could be, and probably are, crooks.

Figure that out.

Cheers,

George

Evan
01-12-2011, 02:47 AM
By now I have no idea who said this.


Nobody here George. Go back a bit and look where it came from. It's a very sad commentary on the state of affairs.


They buy our notes because they think they are the safest in this world and pay the best return.


They don't think that any more. They were burned badly by the subprime mortgage debacle. They lost over ten billion dollars.

dp
01-12-2011, 03:05 AM
They don't think that any more. They were burned badly by the subprime mortgage debacle. They lost over ten billion dollars.

Only if they sell or have sold for less than they paid. The peak value was paper value and what they could have gotten if they'd have sold at that level. Their actual value today is what they paid plus what their investments are worth today (negative numbers apply). If they don't sell or haven't sold then they haven't lost a dime, yet.

beanbag
01-12-2011, 03:05 AM
They don't think that any more. They were burned badly by the subprime mortgage debacle. They lost over ten billion dollars.

What do US treasury notes have to do with securitized mortgages?

Evan
01-12-2011, 03:59 AM
You cannot unwind the two corporations from the Treasury. They were created by the government and there is an implied guarantee that the Treasury will back them. So far the Treasury has not made good on the ~14 billion that is owed to investors by the two corps. Since the Treasury now owns 1.4 trillion in FM+FM, Treasury bonds and bonds in FM*2 are effectively the same.

Allan Waterfall
01-12-2011, 04:01 AM
I wouldn't give an account on literacy much credibility if it contains a sentence such as this;

This raises a lot of questions about our education system, how it is ran,
I thought it should be "run",not the past tense "ran".

Allan

John Stevenson
01-12-2011, 04:29 AM
I thought it should be "run",not the past tense "ran".

Allan

If it's going on performance then the past tense is correct :D

aboard_epsilon
01-12-2011, 07:17 AM
By now I have no idea who said this.

"This raises a lot of questions about our education system, how it is ran, and why there is such a problem with illiterate people in our country."



Well, i think you've got this bird to thank for that .

http://www.nypost.com/rw/nypost/2010/06/20/news/photos_stories/cropped/big_bird--300x300.jpg


not forgetting this guy

http://www.go.com.mt/files/billeder/Press%20Releases/BARNEY_PR_IMAGE_resized.jpg



all the best.markj

moe1942
01-12-2011, 08:30 AM
I would disagree.... numbers plays a big part ;) the above helps 1:1, but at 50:1 they dont count for much:D

My guess it will work quite well enough for 99% of its purpose, which is political



With our current technology even a 100:1 would be good odds...What goes on between the headsets is the make or break factor too....:)

mike os
01-12-2011, 08:46 AM
With our current technology even a 100:1 would be good odds...What goes on between the headsets is the make or break factor too....:)

so we wont mention one or two little incidents in Asia where exactly that mental state caused more than a little grief.....

John Stevenson
01-12-2011, 09:02 AM
Originally Posted by gmatov
By now I have no idea who said this.

"This raises a lot of questions about our education system, how it is ran, and why there is such a problem with illiterate people in our country."


All boils down to two words, "The Simpsons"
50 % of America think they are funny and 50% think they are real.
And not the same 50% :D

Mcgyver
01-12-2011, 09:33 AM
US debt floats, as to the bonds themselves. 1 /10 percent rise in interest rates knocks down the price that that bond is trading at, though it will always be at par at maturity.


right, all debt floats, but it doesn't matter, you're no better ahead to keep than sell it from a time value of money perspective.....the value of any debt is basically its coupon + maturity payout discounted at the current interest rate so its only worth what its worth on any given day; whether you sell or not its still only worth that. You'd go long or short on bonds not because of what the value was today vs maturity, but because of what you thought the bond was going to be worth tomorrow......or to serve some other strategic need like spanking a trading partner for some behaviour you didn't like. Of course the math is such that the closer to maturity you are, the less a diference between coupon and prevailing rates has on the bond's value


China can't "dump" US Notes. They have "maturity" dates. They can sell into the secondary markets, but the price will be less than waiting for them to mature. They buy our notes because they think they are the safest in this world and pay the best return.

not sure why the word 'dump', but they can sell them whenever they choose...whether the price they sell them at is higher or lower than the face value is entirely a function of prevailing US debt interest rates at the time but is largely irrelevant. On any given day, they're worth what they're worth based on their term, coupon and market interest rates - ie you'd go long or short because you wanted more or less bond exposure.....also as a net buyer of bonds slowing down or stopping what they're buying as the same effect as selling; its still a bias change from long to short.

Where they could cause a lot of pain, I like i said i don't think there's a win it for them to do so, is to flood the market which would depress bond prices. This will make it a lot more expensive for the US to issue debt, something it has to keep doing to survive. Its a big stick they carry that doesn't have to be used to be affective....do you think they are powerless or wouldn't react if we say imposed some large duties?

Keep in mind, China will do this or not do this as they see it serving a larger strategy, not just what the best bond trading tactics are. For compelling evidence of that, look at what they've done for years with an artificially low pegged exchange rate....something that was against their (immediate) financial interests but strategically allowed for huge growth and market share gains

moe1942
01-12-2011, 09:52 AM
so we wont mention one or two little incidents in Asia where exactly that mental state caused more than a little grief.....


I spent a fair share of time in SEA. Would you care to be more specific??

lazlo
01-12-2011, 10:10 AM
As far as China buying Irish debt, Ireland is hurting, and if they can sell their debt to China, at ANY return, they will, probably be ahead of the game.

No kidding, most of the EU is in such bad shape debt-wise, they're begging the Chinese to buy their debt.

The big stories this month were China buying-up Spain, Portugal, Greece, and Ireland's debt, but they have heavy


China can't "dump" US Notes. They have "maturity" dates. They can sell into the secondary markets, but the price will be less than waiting for them to mature. They buy our notes because they think they are the safest in this world and pay the best return.

Quite true -- it's bee said several times in the thread, but people seem to think we sold $14 Trillion in debt to Vinne the Loan Shark :)


Well more than half of the US Debt is held by US Citizens and US investment Banks. They love that guaranteed return, and they wish we would issue more debt for them to buy up.

...and the Chinese only hold 6% of our debt, so even if they could "dump" the bonds, it's a drop in the bucket.


Where in the World can you borrow from the FED at Zero interest rate, and buy US Treasuries paying something like 5%? Guaranteed to make you millions, if not billions.

If people aren't familiar with what George is saying, we dumped $1.4 Trillion dollars in taxpayer bailouts in TARP I and II to "bail out" Wall Street from the sub-prime mortgage Ponzi scheme. But instead of using the bailout money to divest the "toxic" Credit Default Swaps like they were supposed to, they invested the money in T-bills and made 5% return on $1.4 trillion dollars.

Oh, and they paid themselves executive performance bonuses with the taxpayer bailout, but that's another story that has nothing to do with the J-20 :)

lazlo
01-12-2011, 10:11 AM
Picture's worth a thousand words :) World literacy rate:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Literacy_rate_world.svg/800px-Literacy_rate_world.svg.png

mike os
01-12-2011, 10:43 AM
I spent a fair share of time in SEA. Would you care to be more specific??

one "little nation".. about the size of CA?...took what? 4-5 years?
Korea, 'nam.......? or have you forgotten? ( & have alook at why us planes were reequiped with guns;) )

The amount of "debt" any country holds on another is almost irrelevant, if china decided to sell that 6% or whatever as a big loss the other nations & institutions are almost forced to try to sell to avoid taking a big hit themselves. If enough is "dumped" to use the vernacular, it can destroy confidence in the product or what it is backed by on the world stage....if that happens it does not matter what any country or government does your economy takes a major hit.... just one of the reasons no one can afford to piss off china. (the other one being currency trading, no surer way to destroy an ecconomy that sell cheap & no longer accept as a form of payment) OK so it might be hundreds of billions... so what? It is war... on a different field, so the real cost is not the current one but how it pans out in the end, and given teh current financial shift I dont think they can loose.

Arcane
01-25-2011, 07:49 PM
A little more about China's new stealth jet.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/23/china-stealth-fighter-us-technology

.RC.
01-25-2011, 07:57 PM
All boils down to two words, "The Simpsons"
50 % of America think they are funny and 50% think they are real.
And not the same 50% :D
Under Australian law the Simpsons are classed as real people...

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/simpsonsstyle-cartoon-is-child-porn/2008/12/08/1228584707575.html

But Justice Adams agreed with the magistrate. He found that, while The Simpsons characters had hands with four fingers and their faces were "markedly and deliberately different to those of any possible human being", the mere fact that they were not realistic representations of human beings did not mean that they could not be considered people.

aboard_epsilon
01-25-2011, 07:58 PM
On the TV news a few years ago...i saw footage of firemen putting out a fire on a crashed stealth that had landed in a residential area In the USA. happend at an airshow i think.. ..i could clearly see that it was built of plywood...you could see the underside of the panels as it was broke up ..and you could see the yellowy Douglas fer facing on the panels..and the red stamped manufacturers logo on them ..

Ive never seen that footage since .

all the best.markj

John Stevenson
01-25-2011, 08:03 PM
That was the red Chinese star :D

wierdscience
01-25-2011, 09:13 PM
On the TV news a few years ago...i saw footage of firemen putting out a fire on a crashed stealth that had landed in a residential area In the USA. happend at an airshow i think.. ..i could clearly see that it was built of plywood...you could see the underside of the panels as it was broke up ..and you could see the yellowy Douglas fer facing on the panels..and the red stamped manufacturers logo on them ..

Ive never seen that footage since .

all the best.markj

Cunning that CIA,they built the plane from wood and the houses from radar absorptive coated aluminum so you couldn't see them burn once the plane had crashed into it:D

lazlo
01-25-2011, 09:48 PM
A little more about China's new stealth jet.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/23/china-stealth-fighter-us-technology

Yeah, I saw that -- pretty interesting:


"China may have bought parts of US F-117 Nighthawk shot down over Serbia in 1999, say experts"

There's all kinds of urban legends on how the Serbs managed to shoot down the F-117... :)

wierdscience
01-25-2011, 09:57 PM
Yeah, I saw that -- pretty interesting:


"China may have bought parts of US F-117 Nighthawk shot down over Serbia in 1999, say experts"

There's all kinds of urban legends on how the Serbs managed to shoot down the F-117... :)

If you can hear it,then the Golden BB works,stealth or not.

recoilless
01-25-2011, 10:40 PM
Yeah, I saw that -- pretty interesting:


"China may have bought parts of US F-117 Nighthawk shot down over Serbia in 1999, say experts"
There's all kinds of urban legends on how the Serbs managed to shoot down the F-117... :)

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?193074-Chinese-used-technology-from-downed-F-117-for-J-20