8 ms·

It's already obvious. 230x ship building advantage, more dry tonnage per year than entire 5 year US ship building program in WW2... US advangage over JP in WW2

It's already obvious. 230x ship building advantage, more dry tonnage per year than entire 5 year US ship building program in WW2... US advangage over JP in WW2 aws charitably 20:1. That's just in one "mature" industry, PRC isn't just better in US, it's magnitude better than US ever was relative to peers. Another example is their revelation of _one_ gigafactory for 1k cruise missile components a day. JP is buying 400 tomahawks over next few years for 1.5B. PRC indicating they can do that in one shift. US has 4000 stockpiled, replacing at ~100 per year. Some of the production figures are very lopsidded. Meanwhile they're addding about as industrial robots/automation than RoW, and industry is going to get increasingly cheap renewable inputs. The advantages are snowballing. US still ahead in aviation due to committing to mature tech, but PRC knocking out their 5th J20 already 100+ per year. SpaceX is next as PRC pursues their mega constellation. I think people are prematurely jerking to SpaceX payload lead, they have a short term competitive advantage in doing high capacity launches on "small/medium scale", read: American scale with ~40 resusable rocket fleet. It the economics justified it, no reason PRC wouldn't have 400 falcon 9s. The TLDR is once indigenize tech matures, PRC can pursue incredible economies of scale, and build up enough production capacity to exceed aggregate production of others in 5-10 years.

NotSammyHagar 2y ago
I don't think you can just copy SpaceX's falcon 9 reusibility and landing just by wanting to do it. Even once you've got the basic system it takes years and years of iteration to make it better step by step. Only one company in the west has really done any of that, and if spacex wasn't around no one would believe it could be done. I'm sure it can be done eventually by China though, they are just as smart as anyone else. Can they organize their scientific and engineering forces as well? Knowing it can be done is a huge help.
- maxglute 2y ago
  They've got a multiple PRC commercial companies with successfuly reusable tests. We'll know more in next few years. TLDR is state level "direction" to pursue reusable lauch + mega constellations only started last few years (probably saw value in UKR war). I think SpaceX tech is probably easier to copy vs military, once idea proven to work as you said, PRC pretty good at iterating and replicating, and scaling, provided there's reason for it, i.e. no idea how much payload demand outside of megaconstellations. US uniquely advantaged because they work with a lot of developed countries with their own launch needs that US provides. Some initial estimates for PRC mega constellation(s) is IIRC putting up 1500 before 2030, and 13000-26000 by 2035 to show the projected launch curve. Which TBF is like 30-40 rocket tier of demand. Question is if they find something to justify spamming magnitude more launch capabilities, and pertinent to this article, if they did, it's probably going to be weaponinizing space.
aidenn0 2y ago
Some context for US/Japan WW II: In 1943, the US built more than half as many Fleet carriers as Japan fielded over the entire war (15 vs 28), while also producing an absurd number of escort carriers. In the last year of the war, the US built about as many F6F (Hellcat) fighters as Japan built A6M (Zeros) in the previous 5 years (the F6F is generally considered far superior to the A6M; the F4F is the older contemporary of the A6M).
hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago
The US must come to terms with ceding its monopoly on superpower status because other countries have caught up, but it also has correctable problems on multiple fronts due to: - Lack of infrastructure investment - Civic infighting - Political divisions, distractions, and corruption - Social regression - Gender disparity in undergraduate education - Declining standards of living
- surfingdino 2y ago
  Power will be projected in the future through alliances with Australia, Japan, and Great Britain. The problems you listed are real, but they are solvable.
  - jopsen 2y ago
    Yeah, it's important to remember that the US has friends. - and the list of friends is very long! My favorite example of how good friends the US has is that the primary objective for Norway in Afghanistan was quote: "The first and most important objective throughout was the Alliance dimension: to support the US and safeguard NATO’s continued relevance." source: https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/09faceca099c4b8bac85ca8495e12d2d/en-gb/pdfs/nou201620160008000engpdfs.pdf https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/09faceca099c4b8bac8... You have good friends if their primary war objective is to support you. I think that these days, a lot of Europeans are being reminded that the US is a friend. So long as US politics can avoid undermining NATO the US won't be short on friends.
    - surfingdino 2y ago
      "America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests" -- Henry Kissinger. The same applies to other countries. Those who subscribe to the democratic principles, rule of law, and individual freedoms will typically align themselves with US interests, at least where it is beneficial to them.
      - hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago
_DeadFred_ 2y ago
Yes, a missle gigafactory is impressive pre war. The USA will remove that single factory within the first weeks of any conflict. China better have large stockpiles if their strategy includes gigafactories.
- maxglute 2y ago
  Of course they'll have stockpiles, they didn't build all these factories to sit idle and have capex depreciate pointlessly, just like they'll have stockpiles for prompt global strike to hit US plants/energy infra on CONUS. Then what? This isn't the 50s-90s anymore, advanced rocketry ended Fortress America, PRC developing conventional strike to hit CONUS strategic targets precisely to deter mainland strikes. This is also ignoring US stockpiles, i.e. 4000 TLAMs... PRC installed ~300k industrial robots LAST YEAR. They have essentially accumulated near bottomless amount of industrial capex that can be redeployed/reconstituted to keep industrial base running, more than the US military was designed / currently designed to meaningfully degrade. There's a reason US military doctorine when from fighting 2 major wars when all potential US adversaries were medium powers, to one major war + hold another war in place, to PRC now a major pacing peer power and US might not even be able to fight major IndoPac war. PRC isn't a 4000 tomahawk conflict, it's a 400,000 one if not more. PRC recognizes regional war with US+CO is at least a 1000 missile per day problem.
  - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
    Anything going on with Chinese missile forces staff and corruption lately? Just asking :)
    - maxglute 2y ago
      Being efficiently punished, as they should be, unlike how fat leonard trials going ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. BTW corruption in PRC linked to getting more things built, the side effect is turbo procurement.
      - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
hollerith 2y ago
The Soviets had 40,000 nuclear warheads, which didn't enable them to achieve any kind of dominance over the US or Europe.
- maxglute 2y ago
  Nukes aren't meant to used in conventional war unless things go dire, cruise missiles are. Advanced munitions are bread and butter in peer war. USSR had doctorine for tactic nukes but it never got to that and it certainly effected US/EU esclation strategies even now.
chrobic743001 2y ago
> fleet. It the economics justified it, no reason PRC wouldn't have 400 falcon 9s. The economics clearly justify mass production of widebody aircraft, yet China is unable to produce their own. And you expect China to mass produce Falcon 9 rockets? How about they start with a simple airplane first.
- maxglute 2y ago
  Military Y20 reached 80+ now within a few years - they have indigenous tech to apply to domestic wide body, and can scale up production of large aircrafts if they want. But taking 929 slow because civilian aviation is _harder_ than space, more international requirements etc, why C919+929 needs to use foreign components for easier certification. The global economics justify it, the regulation/geopolitics makes it hard but they're diligently pursing it. But economics also don't CLEARLY justify domestic wide body when they can focus on electrified HSR without fossil inputs, AND PRC pop density / geographic concentration limits future of civilian air due to air corridor congestion. I expect PRC to mass produce domestic F9 if the economics clearly justify it. LM5 already estimated at F9 $3000 per kg, so hard to say how much mass producing PRC F9 tier reusable can drive down cost + add capability. If it's there's clear significant demand for more than sustaining mega contestallations past 2035s, I'd expect them to spam F9 for domestic use, before civil wide body that's going to take longer due politics of international aviation.

NotSammyHagar 2y ago

I don't think you can just copy SpaceX's falcon 9 reusibility and landing just by wanting to do it. Even once you've got the basic system it takes years and years of iteration to make it better step by step. Only one company in the west has really done any of that, and if spacex wasn't around no one would believe it could be done. I'm sure it can be done eventually by China though, they are just as smart as anyone else. Can they organize their scientific and engineering forces as well? Knowing it can be done is a huge help.

maxglute 2y ago
They've got a multiple PRC commercial companies with successfuly reusable tests. We'll know more in next few years. TLDR is state level "direction" to pursue reusable lauch + mega constellations only started last few years (probably saw value in UKR war). I think SpaceX tech is probably easier to copy vs military, once idea proven to work as you said, PRC pretty good at iterating and replicating, and scaling, provided there's reason for it, i.e. no idea how much payload demand outside of megaconstellations. US uniquely advantaged because they work with a lot of developed countries with their own launch needs that US provides. Some initial estimates for PRC mega constellation(s) is IIRC putting up 1500 before 2030, and 13000-26000 by 2035 to show the projected launch curve. Which TBF is like 30-40 rocket tier of demand. Question is if they find something to justify spamming magnitude more launch capabilities, and pertinent to this article, if they did, it's probably going to be weaponinizing space.

aidenn0 2y ago

Some context for US/Japan WW II: In 1943, the US built more than half as many Fleet carriers as Japan fielded over the entire war (15 vs 28), while also producing an absurd number of escort carriers. In the last year of the war, the US built about as many F6F (Hellcat) fighters as Japan built A6M (Zeros) in the previous 5 years (the F6F is generally considered far superior to the A6M; the F4F is the older contemporary of the A6M).

hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago

The US must come to terms with ceding its monopoly on superpower status because other countries have caught up, but it also has correctable problems on multiple fronts due to: - Lack of infrastructure investment - Civic infighting - Political divisions, distractions, and corruption - Social regression - Gender disparity in undergraduate education - Declining standards of living

surfingdino 2y ago
Power will be projected in the future through alliances with Australia, Japan, and Great Britain. The problems you listed are real, but they are solvable.
- jopsen 2y ago
  Yeah, it's important to remember that the US has friends. - and the list of friends is very long! My favorite example of how good friends the US has is that the primary objective for Norway in Afghanistan was quote: "The first and most important objective throughout was the Alliance dimension: to support the US and safeguard NATO’s continued relevance." source: https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/09faceca099c4b8bac85ca8495e12d2d/en-gb/pdfs/nou201620160008000engpdfs.pdf https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/09faceca099c4b8bac8... You have good friends if their primary war objective is to support you. I think that these days, a lot of Europeans are being reminded that the US is a friend. So long as US politics can avoid undermining NATO the US won't be short on friends.
  - surfingdino 2y ago
    "America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests" -- Henry Kissinger. The same applies to other countries. Those who subscribe to the democratic principles, rule of law, and individual freedoms will typically align themselves with US interests, at least where it is beneficial to them.
    - hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago

_DeadFred_ 2y ago

Yes, a missle gigafactory is impressive pre war. The USA will remove that single factory within the first weeks of any conflict. China better have large stockpiles if their strategy includes gigafactories.

maxglute 2y ago
Of course they'll have stockpiles, they didn't build all these factories to sit idle and have capex depreciate pointlessly, just like they'll have stockpiles for prompt global strike to hit US plants/energy infra on CONUS. Then what? This isn't the 50s-90s anymore, advanced rocketry ended Fortress America, PRC developing conventional strike to hit CONUS strategic targets precisely to deter mainland strikes. This is also ignoring US stockpiles, i.e. 4000 TLAMs... PRC installed ~300k industrial robots LAST YEAR. They have essentially accumulated near bottomless amount of industrial capex that can be redeployed/reconstituted to keep industrial base running, more than the US military was designed / currently designed to meaningfully degrade. There's a reason US military doctorine when from fighting 2 major wars when all potential US adversaries were medium powers, to one major war + hold another war in place, to PRC now a major pacing peer power and US might not even be able to fight major IndoPac war. PRC isn't a 4000 tomahawk conflict, it's a 400,000 one if not more. PRC recognizes regional war with US+CO is at least a 1000 missile per day problem.
- _DeadFred_ 2y ago
  Anything going on with Chinese missile forces staff and corruption lately? Just asking :)
  - maxglute 2y ago
    Being efficiently punished, as they should be, unlike how fat leonard trials going ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. BTW corruption in PRC linked to getting more things built, the side effect is turbo procurement.
    - _DeadFred_ 2y ago

hollerith 2y ago

The Soviets had 40,000 nuclear warheads, which didn't enable them to achieve any kind of dominance over the US or Europe.

maxglute 2y ago
Nukes aren't meant to used in conventional war unless things go dire, cruise missiles are. Advanced munitions are bread and butter in peer war. USSR had doctorine for tactic nukes but it never got to that and it certainly effected US/EU esclation strategies even now.

chrobic743001 2y ago

> fleet. It the economics justified it, no reason PRC wouldn't have 400 falcon 9s. The economics clearly justify mass production of widebody aircraft, yet China is unable to produce their own. And you expect China to mass produce Falcon 9 rockets? How about they start with a simple airplane first.

maxglute 2y ago
Military Y20 reached 80+ now within a few years - they have indigenous tech to apply to domestic wide body, and can scale up production of large aircrafts if they want. But taking 929 slow because civilian aviation is _harder_ than space, more international requirements etc, why C919+929 needs to use foreign components for easier certification. The global economics justify it, the regulation/geopolitics makes it hard but they're diligently pursing it. But economics also don't CLEARLY justify domestic wide body when they can focus on electrified HSR without fossil inputs, AND PRC pop density / geographic concentration limits future of civilian air due to air corridor congestion. I expect PRC to mass produce domestic F9 if the economics clearly justify it. LM5 already estimated at F9 $3000 per kg, so hard to say how much mass producing PRC F9 tier reusable can drive down cost + add capability. If it's there's clear significant demand for more than sustaining mega contestallations past 2035s, I'd expect them to spam F9 for domestic use, before civil wide body that's going to take longer due politics of international aviation.