Guest Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 https://armedservices.house.gov/index.cfm/2015/1/a-case-for-reform-improving-dod-s-ability-to-respond-to-the-pace-of-technological-change Testimony Before the House Committee on Armed Services - Witness Statement of The Honorable Frank Kendall, Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, & Logistics)When I left the Pentagon in 1994, the intelligence estimates suggested that, while China might be a concern in the future because of its accelerating economic growth, it would take 15 to 20 years for China to become a peer competitor. It is now 20 years later and the intelligence estimates were accurate. China has developed and fielded advanced weapons designed to defeat U.S. power projection forces. Many more are in development. These systems include a range of capabilities but foremost among them are accurate and sophisticated cruise and ballistic missiles designed to attack high value assets; particularly the aircraft carriers and airfields that we depend upon for power projection. These missiles, fielded in large numbers and coupled with advanced electronic warfare (EW) systems, modern air-to-air missiles, extensive counterspace capabilities, improved undersea warfare capabilities, fifth generation fighters, and offensive cyber weapons pose a serious and growing threat. Anybody care to comment? Also, this made me chuckle.After over 40 years of various cycles of acquisition reform, I’ve concluded that there is no single reform or even package of reforms that will dramatically change our outcomes.
Masshole Posted January 29, 2015 Posted January 29, 2015 https://armedservices.house.gov/index.cfm/2015/1/a-case-for-reform-improving-dod-s-ability-to-respond-to-the-pace-of-technological-change Testimony Before the House Committee on Armed Services - Witness Statement of The Honorable Frank Kendall, Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, & Logistics) Anybody care to comment? Also, this made me chuckle. We are still very far ahead of China and Russia, who have very serious innovation and development problems of their own. There have been many articles and testimony about the inevitability of conflict with China and they say that is what the increase in technology is about, but no one takes into account the people that would be fighting this conflict. Neither American nor Chinese constituencies have appetite for conflict. There is no doubt that the Chinese do want to become the main power in the Pacific but that hugely depends on economic predominance that they would forego by starting a conflict with the U.S., especially because of the still present gap in capabilities between China and America.
17D_guy Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 We are still very far ahead of China and Russia, who have very serious innovation and development problems of their own. Sure, but they just steal our plans. Actually, I'm hesitant to discount Chinese capabilities that much. Perhaps they don't value the hardware tech edge as much and are throwing their money in other directions.
SurelySerious Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 Sure, but they just steal our plans. Actually, I'm hesitant to discount Chinese capabilities that much. Perhaps they don't value the hardware tech edge as much and are throwing their money in other directions. Valid consideration.
11F Posted January 30, 2015 Posted January 30, 2015 This has little to do with fighting China and more to do with fighting the people who buy their stuff. China and Russia aren't the only A2/AD environments anymore.
Masshole Posted February 13, 2015 Posted February 13, 2015 Sure, but they just steal our plans. Actually, I'm hesitant to discount Chinese capabilities that much. Perhaps they don't value the hardware tech edge as much and are throwing their money in other directions. What do you mean by throwing their money elsewhere? There is not much I can say but there are many defense officials speaking of how China is allocating its money and you can look at their budgets. The Chinese are currently not capable of producing the top-of-the-line stuff, they rely on others to export their technologies. As 11F has mentioned, China has reckless abandon regarding export partners and could definitely proliferate technologies to third parties. That is the serious threat.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now