In any case, the US would have weaponized those so called chokepoints if the vulnerabilities were that serious.
Natsec guys read these reports too
News on China's scientific and technological development.
- Thread starter Quickie
- Start date
In any case, the US would have weaponized those so called chokepoints if the vulnerabilities were that serious.
Natsec guys read these reports too
Weaponize how?
The same way they weaponized advanced IC equipment
You gotta wonder at how truthful any self declared weakness points really are lol but let's give it the benefit of the doubt and China often is unironically candid more often than people realise and are comfortable admitting. Let's say the fields China says they are weak are indeed still heavily dependent. This allows the US to apply pressure in mentioned fields. They have in several. After all many of these are semiconductor related.
When it comes to Lidar, China's own HESAI supplies most of China's car makers. Perhaps certain tools and equipment required for manufacturing of Chinese components are dependent though. The US has not put any known pressure in this field at least. If we focus only on actual tech war fields where the US is actively waging war in, it really is only the semiconductor ecosystem. Banning and working against Huawei in non semiconductor fab related areas doesn't count since that isn't a "cut them off from accessing products necessary for manufacturing". Basically cutting off Chinese fabs from EUVL is the main high profile effort. They will probably expand similar efforts to civil aviation - C919 imported components and so on. In just about everything else, they can't. If they did, all it would do is push Chinese into buying from Chinese suppliers and hence improving them.
When it comes to Lidar, China's own HESAI supplies most of China's car makers. Perhaps certain tools and equipment required for manufacturing of Chinese components are dependent though. The US has not put any known pressure in this field at least. If we focus only on actual tech war fields where the US is actively waging war in, it really is only the semiconductor ecosystem. Banning and working against Huawei in non semiconductor fab related areas doesn't count since that isn't a "cut them off from accessing products necessary for manufacturing". Basically cutting off Chinese fabs from EUVL is the main high profile effort. They will probably expand similar efforts to civil aviation - C919 imported components and so on. In just about everything else, they can't. If they did, all it would do is push Chinese into buying from Chinese suppliers and hence improving them.
And in doing so kick indigenous development into overdrive? Go ahead.
If the west wanted to stump China's tech development they are about 20 years too late.
The US doesn't hit at China's current "weak" points because it wouldn't have the effect of destroying those industries of China. What they have is good enough for application and to get by with... US attacks would only cause those fields to enjoy massive mobilisation of engineers and resources to develop. It would also force Chinese businesses to buy only Chinese products whatever the piece of technology is. China has 99 things out of 100 already these days. A few are a generation or two behind and what better way to mobilise a faster catch up than forcing China to catch up.
Any wonder why the US does NOT dare cut China off from basically everything other than EUVL as part of IC fab? Why don't they attack? Because these attacks would have the opposite desired effect.
Can we instead of compiling lists of new tech innovations, achievements, and masteries of technology in this thread (which is hard to keep up with already and only so little flow through to this thread... it's like China's weekly tech progress = India's annual tech progress ... and then some we've yet to see India create a DJI equivalent let alone something like HESAI or Loongson and thousands others), sometimes once in a while compile a summary of specific pieces of technology China has none of??
EUVL.
That's all I've got. I'm sure there's dozens more but that's nothing. There are entire fields of technology (not only specific ones) that China has which science and tech superpowers like Japan and Germany have 0 (zero) of.
Make no mistake, the US has looked long and hard to search for genuine weakness and have only got IC fab to pick at and even there, China's got total in house mastery of DUV processes that allow for 14nm fab on commercial scale. Womp womp for USA. Sure banning Huawei phones from using Google ecosystem killed Huawei's international phone market pretty much but honestly that's smartphones. There's nothing strategic. Huawei's bottom line has made comebacks not that the attack even managed to halve it in the first place. So US' best performance attack managed to take a small fraction of Huawei's bottom line in a non-strategic subsector of its tech tree.
At most I see similar tech war on civil aviation projects to cut supply of western components but for each one, China has its own. They most likely are not anywhere as good as western ones but it's a matter of investment and effort and time to evaluate and improve to acceptable levels. For everything critical, there already are Chinese ones which while not as competitive or competent as the best western ones, may be more than acceptable. It could simply be a matter of the western one resulting in 15% greater efficiency (which is monumental for civil aviation) or 100 hour service interval replacement vs 500 hours. Big effing woop when you have a captive market like China and access to cheaper energy and state run airlines or at least airlines which would receive state subsidies to help protect a developing new civil aviation industry. Honestly safety is the only real matter when it comes to civil aviation. Competitiveness after that. If safety standards have to take too much of a reduction then such a tech war would indeed hurt China's civil aviation ambitions. The details here are not available for the public, exactly how good and ready Chinese alternatives are. As we know, Chinese strategic planning always wants multiple layers of redundancy and to have foreign and domestic projects, comparing, evaluating, reverse engineering, studying and so on. The Chinese alternatives could be pretty much just as good or require years more of testing and evaluations if the US decides to pursue that route by cutting some profit just to slow China down by a few years in one tiny, relatively unimportant industry.
Countries can get by buying Airbus and Boeing and not having their own civil aviation designers and manufacturers. It's a nice to have and wouldn't really stop China at all. Barely a grain of sand on the road in terms of obstacle. Hyperinflation in the USA and social conflicts though do put a stop to a country. The same stuff the US have attempted (sometimes successfully) to perform on others have come back to undermine themselves.
Any wonder why the US does NOT dare cut China off from basically everything other than EUVL as part of IC fab? Why don't they attack? Because these attacks would have the opposite desired effect.
Can we instead of compiling lists of new tech innovations, achievements, and masteries of technology in this thread (which is hard to keep up with already and only so little flow through to this thread... it's like China's weekly tech progress = India's annual tech progress ... and then some we've yet to see India create a DJI equivalent let alone something like HESAI or Loongson and thousands others), sometimes once in a while compile a summary of specific pieces of technology China has none of??
EUVL.
That's all I've got. I'm sure there's dozens more but that's nothing. There are entire fields of technology (not only specific ones) that China has which science and tech superpowers like Japan and Germany have 0 (zero) of.
Make no mistake, the US has looked long and hard to search for genuine weakness and have only got IC fab to pick at and even there, China's got total in house mastery of DUV processes that allow for 14nm fab on commercial scale. Womp womp for USA. Sure banning Huawei phones from using Google ecosystem killed Huawei's international phone market pretty much but honestly that's smartphones. There's nothing strategic. Huawei's bottom line has made comebacks not that the attack even managed to halve it in the first place. So US' best performance attack managed to take a small fraction of Huawei's bottom line in a non-strategic subsector of its tech tree.
At most I see similar tech war on civil aviation projects to cut supply of western components but for each one, China has its own. They most likely are not anywhere as good as western ones but it's a matter of investment and effort and time to evaluate and improve to acceptable levels. For everything critical, there already are Chinese ones which while not as competitive or competent as the best western ones, may be more than acceptable. It could simply be a matter of the western one resulting in 15% greater efficiency (which is monumental for civil aviation) or 100 hour service interval replacement vs 500 hours. Big effing woop when you have a captive market like China and access to cheaper energy and state run airlines or at least airlines which would receive state subsidies to help protect a developing new civil aviation industry. Honestly safety is the only real matter when it comes to civil aviation. Competitiveness after that. If safety standards have to take too much of a reduction then such a tech war would indeed hurt China's civil aviation ambitions. The details here are not available for the public, exactly how good and ready Chinese alternatives are. As we know, Chinese strategic planning always wants multiple layers of redundancy and to have foreign and domestic projects, comparing, evaluating, reverse engineering, studying and so on. The Chinese alternatives could be pretty much just as good or require years more of testing and evaluations if the US decides to pursue that route by cutting some profit just to slow China down by a few years in one tiny, relatively unimportant industry.
Countries can get by buying Airbus and Boeing and not having their own civil aviation designers and manufacturers. It's a nice to have and wouldn't really stop China at all. Barely a grain of sand on the road in terms of obstacle. Hyperinflation in the USA and social conflicts though do put a stop to a country. The same stuff the US have attempted (sometimes successfully) to perform on others have come back to undermine themselves.
Last edited:
This is outdated. there are at least 3 local scanning electron microscope producers.
If they cut Chinese civil aviation that would be the stupidest own goal. Not only does China have the capability to produce own planes and parts thereof including OEM replacement parts, to fill the short term gap for anything China can't make immediately there's only 1 other supplier: Russia.
