It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Reverse Engineering by the Chinese

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2006 @ 11:14 PM
link   
Chinese Theft

So, let's face it. There is a severe problem with the Chinese, through spy-networks and 'Deniably distant' arms-traders in the West, buying off protected military goods. This is evident particularly in the nuclear Arena, but also in their Aegis knock-offs and most recently, attempted smuggling of Air-to-Air sound-reduced processor chips.

Do any of you see a way to halt or prevent the reverse engineering of a product? Despite what books or movies might have you believe, the few which deal with this issue, you simply can't put a 'tamper-proof' bit inside of military hardware, since they have to be maintained by crew, and any lock that can be broken by crew, can most likely be cracked by the Chinese given time, and collective brain power they are slowly unleashing.

While I do respect that China would wish you modernize it's previously enormous, though primatively-armed military -- That they would steal from other countries to do so, then sell the hardware to enemies of said countries is a bit beyond tolerance.

Recently, upon the unveiling of a new line of jets, the jaws of Pentagon officials clenched when they saw their engines were, as mentioned, knock-offs of the F-16's own turbine. We're talking the Ferrari, the Formula - One of jet propulsion, and they acquired it through illegitimate means from a friendly state.

Whaddya' say.




posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 12:01 AM
link   
Subjectively speaking, I think it's a sign that their engineering base is very lacking, and not free thinking enough to come up with their own unique solutions to common problems. They don't seem to be breaking any new ground or coming up with any revolutionary ideas. But they don't need to - if their technology is only 1/2 to one full generation behind US tech, but built in significantly greater numbers at significantly reduced cost (due to lack of R&D?) - that's a major military problem. I think it was Stalin that said that quantity is a quality of its own.

Objectively speaking - it's a great tactic/strategy to upgrade or maintain your armed forces and industrial infrastructure. Why should you put out any more effort than you need to when the society with the most advanced weapons on the planet is also one of the most open? A lot of the technology can either be freely purchased in the US or, simply put together from parts that US defense (sub)contractors have already outsourced production of to China (or other Asian countries).



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Recently, upon the unveiling of a new line of jets, the jaws of Pentagon officials clenched when they saw their engines were, as mentioned, knock-offs of the F-16's own turbine.


Hard to believe since chinas new engine for its J-10 is a russian AL-31FN which has nothing to do with or look anything like the F110 or F100. I'll just assume that their jaws dropped for no reason. And before you make anymore claims about "knock-offs" provide some edvidence of ANYTHING



Originally posted by Cruelapathy
nuclear Arena


Name ONE chinese warhead that is the same as a american wearhead?

Also, if your refering to the Cox report, im happy to inform you that their only edvidence of ANY intelligence gathered or gained by china was released without being charged for spying.



Aegis knock-offs


Really?.

Name one system on chinas AEGIS destroyer which is found on the Arleigh Burke Class destroyer

Let me list the differences.

- Ship/hull
- Radar
- Missile
- CWIS
- C4I system
- main cannon
- propulsion
- Dimensions
- Displacement



attempted smuggling of Air-to-Air sound-reduced processor chips.


Never heard of this one, but i would like a source



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 02:44 AM
link   
Well, reverse engineering is a smart strategy...particularly when your opponents have access to more advanced technology and you need access to it quickly what do you do? Take it, and even make it better.

Though the countries that these technologies are taken might not appretiate it, it's not a bad idea.

Now about China selling weapons...well the US can't say much, they've done it too for years...



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 05:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
Name ONE chinese warhead that is the same as a american wearhead?

Also, if your refering to the Cox report, im happy to inform you that their only edvidence of ANY intelligence gathered or gained by china was released without being charged for spying.


Hmm it is widey known that CHina did steal blueprints for the US W-88 warhead which gave them a giant leap towards minaturisation of warheads as well as allowing them to design advanced warheads for MIRV missiles.

ALso US companies have helped CHina indirectly in improving the reliability of their ICBM's. I think it was Hughes which had to help the CHinese redesign their rockets because they kept on losing satellites on top of faulty CHinese launch vehicles. Therefore they lent their expertise and knowlege in improving CHinese rocket technology which has now been used for tehir ICBM's.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
Hmm it is widey known that CHina did steal blueprints for the US W-88 warhead which gave them a giant leap towards minaturisation of warheads as well as allowing them to design advanced warheads for MIRV missiles.


Name ONE chinese warhead which uses or even looks remotely similar to any american missile

There wasn't ANY blueprints of the W-88, there was only a diagram of the warhead sourced from some overcover american spy in china. Although thats the american case


Therefore they lent their expertise and knowlege in improving CHinese rocket technology which has now been used for tehir ICBM's.


???

Hughes helped china fix the payload fairing on the LM-2E missile which was their principle investment in china so they could enjoy cheap lanuches. They did not help in inproving chinas missile technology but the way the payload fairing was made. Considering chinas DF-5 never had any problems to being with the problem was only in the commerical lanuch vehicles.

The other one was the codes which they told chinese scientist, thus far. There is NO edvidence that their codes were used or even looked over age.


According to the report, completed on Monday, Hughes scientists helped Chinese engineers in 1995 to improve the sophisticated mathematical models necessary to predict the effects of wind, high-atmosphere buffeting and other natural forces on a rocket launching.

These formulas are important to designing nuclear missiles and launching satellites that do not explode or break apart. They help technicians calculate the appropriate angle of launch, the shape of the nose cone of the rocket, the tolerable limits of weather and other factors.

The Chinese, the Pentagon said, had been using an "oversimplified" mathematical analysis, resulting in a series of failed satellite launchings. Hughes pointed out that shortcoming to the Chinese in 1995, when its scientists helped investigate the failed launching of a Hughes commercial communication satellite atop a Chinese rocket.

www.pulitzer.org...



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 06:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
Hmm it is widey known that CHina did steal blueprints for the US W-88 warhead


Did steal??

Maybe you would like to back that up with edvidence considering that is extremely strong wording which could be easily confirmed



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by rogue1
Hmm it is widey known that CHina did steal blueprints for the US W-88 warhead


Did steal??

Maybe you would like to back that up with edvidence considering that is extremely strong wording which could be easily confirmed


LOL, well they weren't given the plans by the US governemnt were they



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
LOL, well they weren't given the plans by the US governemnt were they


Do you even know the background of the Cox report?


There wasn't any plans. Only a diagram reference to the confriguration of the W-88 warhead.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 06:03 PM
link   
Grabbing author's once I get home-- Or you can look the book up, either way.

'Looking the Tiger in the Eye'
'A History: Weapons of Mass Destruction'
September issue for 'Popular Mechanics'.

The first two describe nuclear and ICBM thefts, both successful and failed, the latter was referenced for Anti-Air processors, AEGIS.

And, I said AEGIS system. Why the hell are you referring to hull? Do you realize what the Aegis sytem is?



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
Do you even know the background of the Cox report?


LOL. obviously you don't. As ususal you did a quick google and didn't read or used someone elses comments from another website, then try and pass it off as though you know what you're talking about.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 06:13 PM
link   
What the greedy dummy elite in the first world do not understand is this:

china now content to be the outsourcing of western products and making pennies on the dollar for western wholesalers and retailers will want more of the action in future.

When the Chinese learn WESTERN STYLED MARKETING TECHNIQUES then they will not need NIKE, Walmart, Apple and a score of other clients to move their goods.

When that day comes many of the elites in the first world will not even have a job.



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 12:40 AM
link   
^^^
Huh?

What's all this about the F-16, Ferraris?
Could you elaborate?



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 01:18 AM
link   
Put some more smoke screens up to confuse people. Making loud nosies for nothing

All you do here is try to attack people instead of the information . You dont even try answer anything. Your previoius post did not address anything about the subject.


You made a claim about chian stealing W-88 warheads
You made a claim that america assited chinas ICBM program

Why dont you back anything up?


Originally posted by rogue1
LOL. obviously you don't.
.

I read it beforehand when i had a discussion with Daedalus3. Read chapter two and ten

When your done with that. You can quote any edvidence used. Ill some myself

The suspect name was Wen Ho Lee. He wasn't charged with spying. This extract took the majority of the theft of W-88 warhead section. The whole basis was the allegations againest him which was dropped.

There is no other claimed edvidence there

Chapter 2.

Under the
"Investigation of Theft of Design Information
For the W-88 Trident D-5 Thermonuclear Warhead"


One individual who had hosted PRC visitors in the past emerged from this inquiry as a suspect by the spring of 1995.

Even after being identified as a suspect, the individual, who still had a security clearance, continued to work in one of the most sensitive divisions at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Division X, which handles thermonuclear weapons designs and computer codes. In this position, the suspect requested and received permission to hire a PRC graduate student who was studying in the U.S. for the summer.

In December 1998, the suspect traveled to Taiwan. Following his return from Taiwan in December 1998, he was removed from Division X.

The FBI initiated a full investigation in the middle of 1996, which remains ongoing. At the date of the Select Committee's January 3, 1999 classified Final Report, the suspect continues to work at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and continues to have access to classified information.



As ususal you did a quick google


Who uses google?. I coined that expression to describe you. You also touted the american party line by just repeating american allergations while you did not read any reports but press released which are summerized by the CNN or mass-media garbage. You have nothing original nor do you read actual reports

Thats the reason why i refered to you as the googler



[edit on 8-9-2006 by chinawhite]



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 01:21 AM
link   
This thread alone has made god kill 10000 kittens, good job.

www.sinodefence.com...

Check this place out, ATS has gone from 4/5 stars to 3/5 stars in my mind after seeing this sad example of the supposed A+ research threads.

[edit on 8-9-2006 by trIckz_R_fO_kIdz]



posted on Sep, 8 2006 @ 01:59 AM
link   
Double post: Put it in the same post above

[edit on 8-9-2006 by chinawhite]



posted on Sep, 9 2006 @ 04:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
Put some more smoke screens up to confuse people. Making loud nosies for nothing

All you do here is try to attack people instead of the information . You dont even try answer anything. Your previoius post did not address anything about the subject.


LOL you love to play the victim HAHA.


You made a claim about chian stealing W-88 warheads
You made a claim that america assited chinas ICBM program


I never said they stole W-88 warheads, that would be impossible, DUH. They did steal technology to miniaturse warheads, such as the configuration of the W-88.

AS for missile tech transfer :

www.fas.org...
www.washingtonpost.com...

I'm sure you found articles like these with your incredible google skills, but failed to post them as they contradict your statements




Thats the reason why i refered to you as the googler


You did where ?


[edit on 9-9-2006 by rogue1]



posted on Sep, 9 2006 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
LOL you love to play the victim HAHA.


Why dont you address the question instead of making a personal attack?.


They did steal technology to miniaturse warheads, such as the configuration of the W-88.


What technology?????


How would that help in miniatursing warheads?. The offical american stance is that no technology was transfered, only "susposed" papers from a Mr Wen Ho Lee who was not charged with spying

How is a simple piece of paper a piece of technology?. And what other technology. You seem to ahve left big chunks of information out..... Only a piece of paper?



AS for missile tech transfer :
www.fas.org...


You do realise that this PDF is titled

Possible Missile Technology Transfers from US. Satellite Export Policy?

Look under the Military Benifit section. You might be pleasantly surprised.

You missed that when you just googled some random important looking sites aye?


I'm sure you found articles like these with your incredible google skills


I'm sure you have read the sources you have provided, because with those articles i can debuke the 100% of you factual post (which so far equates to nothing). The articles you did post added nothing to what i already stated based on the findings of the cox report

I'll simply put it to the fact that you haven't read the Cox report and making vague references to journalist interupptation of the situation?


You did where ?


Ignorance is Bliss, while stupidty might be a blessing in your case.




[edit on 9-9-2006 by chinawhite]



posted on Sep, 9 2006 @ 07:51 AM
link   
www.newsmax.com...

Have a read, and see why China didn't need to steal any tech at all.

President Clinton gave it to them in return for campaign funding. Have a read, and use it as a base to dig up other stuff about miniture nuclear weapons ect.

As i dig it up from 95 / 96 i'll post it here. Chinas a very smart enemy - they knew that the weakness of America was and is money -they got what they wanted with out having to even work hard for it. All in all you could say Clinton was just a paid spy.



posted on Sep, 9 2006 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Your quoting NewsMax,

That is roughly the equivalent to quoting Geogre Bush about iraqi WMD's



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join