Submarine tech doesn't automatically translate into increased research and construction tech was my point before you went intellectually stupid on yourself over crisscrossed and tripped-over confused argumentation.
PLA Navy news, pics and videos
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Equation
Lieutenant General
Stop lying and twisting my words, I know what I'm saying you're the one that got confused and got your panties all in a bunch for nothing. All new submarine tech requires research and construction method to build it.
I didn't twist any of your words, unlike you with mine. I directly quoted everything you said, including all of your completely unsubstantiated claims that rim drive research has allegedly "enhanced China's capability in submarine research and building", increased China's "software, hardware, production techniques, computer aid design", and that "China closer to using this technology on their subs than any other player". Again, NONE of which you can actually demonstrate to be the case.
Equation
Lieutenant General
Why do I have to need "DEMONSTRATION of what case"? It is just normal that any high tech research done by anyone has come with results! If you don't like the showing of the results to your liking than that's too bad. There isn't a world wide rule where certain criteria of evidence had to be your way.
We are not talking about "results" here. We are talking about your very specific claims of "enhanced China's capability in submarine research and building", increased China's "software, hardware, production techniques, computer aid design", and that "China closer to using this technology on their subs than any other player". These aren't just "results", these are significant and specific claims (which you cannot provide evidence for).
Equation
Lieutenant General
But isn't that ALL connected to RESULTS from those research was my narrative. Lack of proof doesn't lack of existence. Remember naysayers used to have the same narrative about the J-20 back than before it finally showed up?
We can all agree that "results" would be expected from China's rim drive research, specifically rim drive related results. That does not mean we have to agree that China's progress in rim drive is ahead of everyone else, or that China's rim drive research has improved China's general submarine research and construction tech base. Any of those may or may not actually be true; it's just that we don't have any evidence for any of it.
Jura The idiot
General
visiting Latvia wasn't terribly important, but I post it because I haven't heard about them since then (they had been to Helsinki, Finland before that), so I assume they're on their way back; considering
Jul 21, 2017
... they might arrive in mid-SeptemberLOL 13 kn happens to be the default at searoutes.com, and was the average speed:
(of course the departure time was set by default, too; I checked the date in Xinhua article)
You point good let them believe, Imagine what they want, mainly chauvinism not objective points
it is obvious with always... very few or no infos in more for a matter also secret a objective personn can' t affirm, in fact it is eventually a all electric propulsion as USA have begin designed since few years for Columbia Class but for discretion it is not all remains others things whose pump jet than Chinese submarines don' t have the Type 095 can be good/capable but surely not better than a Yasen still inferior for discretion with last US/UK classes in more it is certain the gap is so important to fill with a generation...
Last edited: