lol America getting scared of the puny Chinese military budget.![]()
No Sir... it was quite unfair to break the surprise of J-20.
This is against the rules of the game.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
lol America getting scared of the puny Chinese military budget.![]()
You are dreaming either way. You speak as if these codes are open for examination. The F-22 international date line screw up? How does that make the aircraft 'deactivatable' from a distance? Been watching too many B-rated action movies to tell the difference between reality and fiction? Oops...Almost forgot am talking to a bunch of conscript rejects...What good is spending $12 billion for a deactivatable fighter. Chinese hackers will find the codes.
Google "f-22 international date line". There are 1,000 ways to shut down a fighter. NSA, British and French intelligence will program every single Indian MMRCA.

You are dreaming either way. You speak as if these codes are open for examination. The F-22 international date line screw up? How does that make the aircraft 'deactivatable' from a distance? Been watching too many B-rated action movies to tell the difference between reality and fiction? Oops...Almost forgot am talking to a bunch of conscript rejects...![]()
Explain to me at least one way to 'shut down' an F-16 from afar. No need to do 1000. Just one will do.If you don't understand my analogy, there's no explaining it to you. My first job out of undergraduate was as an engineer for Lockheed Martin for the non-propulsion electronics (sonar) for NSSN (Virginia class attack subs). I couldn't possibly know as much about military electronics as you, huh??
Explain to me at least one way to 'shut down' an F-16 from afar. No need to do 1000. Just one will do.
The F-16 has several 'computers'. A 'computer' can be alongside several other 'computers' in the same container. Flight control laws cannot be accessed externally, such as a radio signal. You do not know what the hell you are talking about.Sure, that's simple.
1. A military GPS embedded signal that tells the F-16 computer to shutdown
2. Shutdown if weapons are used in this airspace
IF you really did worked for Lockheed like you claimed, then you WOULD KNOW that these line-replaceable-units (LRU) are embedded with their softwares, if any softwares are involved. LRUs for field equipments like tanks, aircrafts, and ships are sealed in the sense that their softwares are non-accessible unless connected to highly specialized test equipments. It is only recently, like within the last ten years or so, that fighter aircrafts can be maintained by laptops and even then, their diags routines are read only. The only time a flight control computer (FLCC) can have its software upgrade or altered in anyway is through depot level maintenance, not in the flightline or 'organizational level', and extremely rare in/at the component level shop where it is connected to a test box.Modern military equipment is networked anyway.
It's easy to shutdown anything from afar or plant logic bombs in the system.
If you build it and design it, you can do anything you want with it.
Why do you think Chinese hackers download F-35 source code, cause it's fun to read?
The F-16 has several 'computers'. A 'computer' can be alongside several other 'computers' in the same container. Flight control laws cannot be accessed externally, such as a radio signal. You do not know what the hell you are talking about.
IF you really did worked for Lockheed like you claimed, then you WOULD KNOW that these line-replaceable-units (LRU) are embedded with their softwares, if any softwares are involved. LRUs for field equipments like tanks, aircrafts, and ships are sealed in the sense that their softwares are non-accessible unless connected to highly specialized test equipments. It is only recently, like within the last ten years or so, that fighter aircrafts can be maintained by laptops and even then, their diags routines are read only. The only time a flight control computer (FLCC) can have its software upgrade or altered in anyway is through depot level maintenance, not in the flightline or 'organizational level', and extremely rare in/at the component level shop where it is connected to a test box.
I busted two of you Chinese boys as frauds when they lied about something they do not have any experience about. Looks like you are the third fraud.
Sure, that's simple.
1. A military GPS embedded signal that tells the F-16 computer to shutdown
2. Shutdown if weapons are used in this airspace
Modern military equipment is networked anyway.
It's easy to shutdown anything from afar or plant logic bombs in the system.
If you build it and design it, you can do anything you want with it.

The pplz who design the Communication system of Nowadayz any aircraft , they also design some GPS based secret protocol , which can be utilize whenever they want to take over the control of the aircraft... I guess Gambit dont know about this kinda stuff cuz he dont look like an Electronics or communication engineer...
Especially the company Lockheed Martin is not so dumb to disclose such kind of secret protocol systems to every engineer within their company or every military professional will know about that kinda secret business.![]()
First...You have nothing but speculation for that charge.I think you missed my logic again. The US can put any code it wants in the F-16 it sells to foreign countries.
Does that even make any sense to you?? That code isn't even hard to put in.
First...You have nothing but speculation for that charge.
Second...Even if it is true, that does not mean the flight control laws, for example, are accessible by someone from the outside at anytime. You do not want such vulnerability.
What you speculate would require two or more distinct production lines for the same aircraft. One 'safe' line designated for 'friendly' forces, and one 'open' or 'unsafe' designated for 'not so friendly' forces. How about I take it even further and say that Intel CPUs designated for overseas sales are designed to snoop and report back to US?
Then considering how I exposed you to be the ignoramus that you are about the semicon industry but have no problems making false praises of the same industry in China, stop using the computer altogether.There is in fact such a problem with microsoft. I don't know about Intel but it is better to assume that the problem exists rather than assume it does not.
cheap radar technicians will never know the theoretical background of solid state devices. market conditions and specific applications can be learned just by picking up a book for a few days or working for a few years in a related company. Theory? Once missed, it will never be learned.Does not matter.My CPU is designed by AMD.
This is from the man who mistook a foundry fab to be the highest level of semicon manufacturer?cheap radar technicians will never know the theoretical background of solid state devices. market conditions and specific applications can be learned just by picking up a book for a few days or working for a few years in a related company. Theory? Once missed, it will never be learned.
You claimed to have a relative as a 'process engineer' for a Chinese semicon foundry fab. I probably know his job better than you do.