B-2 Stealth Bomber Compromised?

Status
Not open for further replies.

watchman

New Member
B-2 Stealth Bomber Compromised?

http://thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=2725

Classified B-2 Stealth bomber technology was leaked to China, say U.S. officials. A Hawaii-based spy allegedly obtained critical technology that will allow Beijing to copy and counter one of America’s most advanced weapons systems. Investigation reveals that U.S. Stealth technology may have been leaking since 1999.

In the November 15 grand jury indictment, Indian-born engineer Noshir Gowadia is charged with 18 counts of spying. Besides providing China with classified technology relating to the B-2’s engine exhaust system, he is also charged with several other counts of selling top-secret information.

Justice Department officials claim that Gowadia was paid approximately $2 million for the B-2 secrets. If true, China got a true bargain—paying pennies on the dollar for technology that took many years and probably cost hundreds of millions or more to develop.

U.S. experts familiar with the case say “the compromise of the B-2 technology is extremely damaging because it will give China key secrets on the bomber” (Washington Times, November 23).

B-2 bombers are part of what the Pentagon is calling its “hedge” strategy: to have forces in position and with the ability to swiftly defeat China in any future conflict. China’s procurement of this technology severely compromises that strategy.

Gowadia is also accused of providing China with extensive technical assistance to help it develop and test a radar-evading Stealth cruise missile, and also showing China how to modify the cruise missile to lock on to U.S. air-to-air missiles.

If what prosecutors say is true, the Stealth genie may be out of the bottle. Gowadia is also charged with divulging “secret” and “top secret” U.S. Stealth technology-related data pertaining to the th-98 Eurocopter and other foreign commercial aircraft to Germany, Switzerland and Israel between 2002 and 2004. All told, he is accused of offering classified defense information to as many as eight foreign nations.

Earlier this year, another espionage case involving China occurred, where two brothers (Chi and Tai Mak) were accused of being unregistered agents for the Chinese. Authorities accused the Mak family of trying to pass on restricted naval warship technology concerning the advanced ddx destroyer.

As one defense official pointed out, commenting on the Gowadia case, these recent incidents illustrate “China’s intelligence efforts to counter key weapons systems that give the United States strategic advantages over Chinese forces.”
 

rjmaz1

New Member
By the time China can develop a B-2 type aircraft it mission will be outdated.

Everyone is playing catch up with the US. The US is further in front of the rest of the world than ever before.

The B-2 10 years ago had a radar cross section small enough that it could only be detected at very short range. E.g 5 miles away.

Radar today is 100 times more powerful and can now detect the B-2 easily at say 20 miles away.

In 20 years time, radar will be so powerful that it could detect the small radar cross section of the B-2 100 miles away.

The B-2 in the future would then be a sitting duck against a well equiped enemy.

That is why the US is are now going higher and faster and the next bomber will have more in common with the 50 year old YB-70 Valkyrie than a B-2 stealth bomber.
 

dioditto

New Member
By the time China can develop a B-2 type aircraft it mission will be outdated.
China doesn't have to.
All they doing it seems is to develop counter stealth technology (missiles), which is a lot cheaper than to develop a fully working B-2. Another thing I noticed is that, they are probably opting for the much cheaper option of utilising the acquired stealth technology to incorporate into their cruise missiles.


Everyone is playing catch up with the US. The US is further in front of the rest of the world than ever before.
5, 10, 20, even 50 years infront of everyone is only marginal in the eyes of history. There were many advanced civilizations and empires in the past, that had technologies that were hundreds of years more advance than rest of the world. Most of them inevitably get caught up by their rivals and got destroyed or simply crumbled by itself.
 

Big-E

Banned Member
5, 10, 20, even 50 years infront of everyone is only marginal in the eyes of history. There were many advanced civilizations and empires in the past, that had technologies that were hundreds of years more advance than rest of the world. Most of them inevitably get caught up by their rivals and got destroyed or simply crumbled by itself.
Hundreds of years ahead of the dark ages meant practically nothing. The technological coefficient of today is hundreds of times higher than it was pre-industrial revolution.
 

mehdi_mu

New Member
Big-E you should not respond in this way. How come someone like you who is a so called Defence Professional / Analyst come up with an answer like this. You should from now on read more about History. Try to find out about the Romans the Egyptians etc.... They also were more advanced that civilisations before them but they are no more. Modesty is the key never overestimate these facts. This World is much more than 300+ million people.
 

USNavySEAL3310

New Member
Germany built some of the most advanced tanks, Panzers, Tigers, and the King Tiger which could go through Allied tanks like a hot knife through butter. Japan had the Zeros which easily outmaneuvered most of the Allied planes (chiefly American) that they came across. Romans had lots of power and great technology and they were still defeated by 'guerrilla' type groups that started eating away at their empire. The U.S. has the most advanced technology on earth and that technology was used against them on 9-11-01.

Point is you don't need advanced technology to attack an enemy. 9-11 was terrorists turning U.S. technology on its creator, the U.S. The Romans were defeated mainly because they couldn't control their vast empire and they were growing in debt. Germany was greatly outnumbered and they had to result to old men and young boys to run their army. America couldn't easily defeat Japan in the skies so they destroyed Japanese carriers so there were no more planes, logical.

There are many ways to attack an enemy if he is superior to you in technology. Outnumber him, use guerilla tactics, get strong allies, etc.

Sure, technology plays a large part. But you can't rely solely on technology to win wars.
 

Big-E

Banned Member
Big-E you should not respond in this way. How come someone like you who is a so called Defence Professional / Analyst come up with an answer like this. You should from now on read more about History. Try to find out about the Romans the Egyptians etc.... They also were more advanced that civilisations before them but they are no more. Modesty is the key never overestimate these facts. This World is much more than 300+ million people.
Was it a response or an observation? I don't think it directly corraleted with diodittos remarks. I was simply pointing out the difference of todays technological gaps that he mentioned. How you read into any of the accusations you have placed on me is rather going out on a limb. My statements were not conclusive in any way and to take them out of context and insult me is rather low brow.
 

SATAN

New Member
We all know that the hindustanian immigrant stole B-2 secrets and sold them to China for a few Million Dollars....but does anyone know if he sold the same secrets to his home country of Hindustan/Bharat ??
 

Ths

Banned Member
Mehdi mu:

Big E brought in a very clear insight:

The roman soldier of 300 b.C. could without difficulty use the equipment of the roman soldier of 300 a.D. As far as I recall the only difference was that the helmet had a ring on top of it - or not.

It took power infantry weapons several hundred years to oust bow and arrow.

It took 50 year for the Battleship to develop and loose importance all together.

The prop-fighter lived 30 years.

Technological development has slowed down a bit over the last couple of decades; but not much.

In all it means that - militarily speaking - the parallels to the roman empire - and to the long chinese history for that matter also - are irrellevant.

we are talkin not only different technologies; but (and I think this was Big E's point) the rate of change of technology is violently different.
 

dioditto

New Member
Hundreds of years ahead of the dark ages meant practically nothing. The technological coefficient of today is hundreds of times higher than it was pre-industrial revolution.
I would also like to point out to you that the technological coefficient of today is far less than you think it is. The US is perhaps more advanced in certain area, but Europe and Japan also excel in other areas, not to mention Russia, and perhaps even China and India also have certain (however minute) area who excels over US technologically. US does not have "full spectrum" technological dominance as you might think it has.

Another point is that technology are far easier to acquire than ever before. No matter how much technological advantages you think you have.... as this thread starter have stated, it can be acquired through "other means". It could very easily be acquired by opposing nation nowadays more so than in the past due to the proliferation of communication technologies. It become increasingly harder (if not impossible) to detect or intercept leak of vital technology. The speed of transmission is now at lightspeed. (However, to decern, and build up manufacturing base to reproduce or improve the acquired technology is another matter)
 
Last edited:

Big-E

Banned Member
The US is perhaps more advanced in certain area, but Europe and Japan also excel in other areas, not to mention Russia, and perhaps even China and India also have certain (however minute) area who excels over US technologically. US does not have "full spectrum" technological dominance as you might think it has.
For example... :unknown
 

dioditto

New Member
Mehdi mu:

Big E brought in a very clear insight:

The roman soldier of 300 b.C. could without difficulty use the equipment of the roman soldier of 300 a.D. As far as I recall the only difference was that the helmet had a ring on top of it - or not.

It took power infantry weapons several hundred years to oust bow and arrow.

It took 50 year for the Battleship to develop and loose importance all together.

The prop-fighter lived 30 years.

Technological development has slowed down a bit over the last couple of decades; but not much.

In all it means that - militarily speaking - the parallels to the roman empire - and to the long chinese history for that matter also - are irrellevant.

we are talkin not only different technologies; but (and I think this was Big E's point) the rate of change of technology is violently different.


I don't think the rate of change is at all relevent. You need to ask, rate of change of WHICH SIDE and WHO? The internet brought on the flattening effect globally - and now the world is flat. The knowledge and information are now easily acquirable, it can now jump start any nation if they have the right information, and right infrastructure for it (the later is a matter of political will)
 
Last edited:

dioditto

New Member
For example... :unknown
I think I have read that, the EU (and to some degree - the Chinese and Indians) have advantages in biological-related technologies. And ofcourse, the Japanese have advantages in nano-research, electronics, and fusion research. The EU have generally surpassed the US in many areas of science, if not, achieved parity in most fields.
 

Big-E

Banned Member
I think I have read that, the EU (and to some degree - the Chinese and Indians) have advantages in biological-related technologies. And ofcourse, the Japanese have advantages in nano-research, electronics, and fusion research. The EU have generally surpassed the US in many areas of science, if not, achieved parity in most fields.
And what military application do these technologies posses?
 

rabs

New Member
Well, a lot of these applications do have military uses, unfournatetly all i could find was US developments.

(MIT, nanotechnology)

http://web.mit.edu/ISN/

(Northwestern, bio-tech)
http://www.innovationmagazine.com/innovation/volumes/v5n2/coverstory3.shtml
A group of US scientists at Northwestern University
From what I've seen almost all progress in those feids is being funded and developed here in the US.

With MIT being by far the most advanced area of research in the are of nano-technology.
 

merocaine

New Member
Biology - Biological warfare/medicine
Nano tech - Survalience
Robotic's - Drones
Fusion - power generation

I'm sure you could think of more!
Food for thought, China and India produced millions of engineers and researchers last year, europe and the US less than 100'000....

If the Japan ever spent the same percentage as the US on defence the US advantage would be wiped out in a short space of time, the same could be said for the EU, its economy is larger as it stands, if it pooled its resources in defence again it would mean the end of american dominance in military affairs.
America stands so tall today only because its closest allies crouch.
 

eckherl

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Biology - Biological warfare/medicine
Nano tech - Survalience
Robotic's - Drones
Fusion - power generation

I'm sure you could think of more!
Food for thought, China and India produced millions of engineers and researchers last year, europe and the US less than 100'000....

If the Japan ever spent the same percentage as the US on defence the US advantage would be wiped out in a short space of time, the same could be said for the EU, its economy is larger as it stands, if it pooled its resources in defence again it would mean the end of american dominance in military affairs.
America stands so tall today only because its closest allies crouch.
Well - considering the last 10 years why hasn`t the gap been narrowed, why does China need to steal it`s military technology. Considering what we have come out with in the last twenty years that is flying around, I think we are all going to be shocked on what the Airforces skunk works has flying around at the present time, they haven`t let us down yet.
 

Big-E

Banned Member
If the Japan ever spent the same percentage as the US on defence the US advantage would be wiped out in a short space of time, the same could be said for the EU, its economy is larger as it stands, if it pooled its resources in defence again it would mean the end of american dominance in military affairs.
America stands so tall today only because its closest allies crouch.
There are a bunch of what ifs in these statements. The fact is the US is the one with the industrial complex which can't just be created overnight by other nations. It is the only nation with the ability to take this research and apply it to weapon systems and get them integrated into the force structure in a respectable fashion. There is a reason the US forward deploys it's forces worldwide. The status quo with Japan is kept in place to keep it from doing this very thing.

There are a few countries that are on some cutting edge stuff, like Australia/Israel, but they are CLOSE allies and also funded by the US government because they work with and for us. The fact that the US accounts for half of global defense spending should tell you that. ;)
 

eckherl

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
There are a bunch of what ifs in these statements. The fact is the US is the one with the industrial complex which can't just be created overnight by other nations. It is the only nation with the ability to take this research and apply it to weapon systems and get them integrated into the force structure in a respectable fashion. There is a reason the US forward deploys it's forces worldwide. The status quo with Japan is kept in place to keep it from doing this very thing.

There are a few countries that are on some cutting edge stuff, like Australia/Israel, but they are CLOSE allies and also funded by the US government because they work with and for us. The fact that the US accounts for half of global defense spending should tell you that. ;)
So true in regards to the industrial complex issue, right now my company is in the process of setting up manufacturing facilities in China and South Korea for automotive castings, both countries sent representatives to our facilities to see our set ups and now they are paying us to set up the same operations in both of their countries.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top