Correctly understand and learn from the experience and lessons of no chip crisis in Russia

category:Military
 Correctly understand and learn from the experience and lessons of no chip crisis in Russia


- and expose plagiarism in some online articles -

Guo Yanying, Second Academy of Aerospace Science and Engineering

1u3001 It will become the new normal for the United States to use chip sanctions to suppress and contain China

After Trump came to power, he publicly declared that China and Russia were strategic rivals of the United States. And use chip sanctions to launch a series of suppression and containment measures against China. Under this new situation, on August 9, 2018, I published the article viewing the current chip issue from the perspective of weapons and equipment on the global network, and was the first to raise the issue of why there is no chip crisis in Russias sophisticated weapons on the Internet. On May 8, this year, I published chip crisis on the global network. Will it make a comeback? Why is there no chip crisis in Russias sophisticated weapons u300bOne article. The author predicts that after the outbreak of the new coronavirus, a new round of economic friction and stricter chip sanctions will be staged again. And the new sanctions are bound to involve military chips. Later, trump, regardless of the outbreak in the United States, couldnt wait to sanction and crack down on Huawei and its 5g products, a private enterprise in China. On May 15, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced a total restriction on Huaweis purchase of semiconductors manufactured with us software and technology. After that, severe restrictions were added many times. Trump mobilized the government to sanction and suppress the development of 5g chip by a private enterprise in China. The mean was unprecedented.

As for military chips, the United States has long prohibited its military and aerospace products from entering China for some important and key chips. After trump took office, he intensified his efforts to expand the scope of prohibition in an attempt to suppress the development of Chinas military power. In 2017, the US Presidential Commission on science and technology released a report entitled how to ensure the long-term leadership of the United States in the semiconductor industry.. China strictly forbids the supply of semiconductor products above military level (including aerospace grade) to strategic rivals of China and Russia. This task is supervised by a leading group led by the presidents technical assistant. In the United States, chip operators are often arms dealers, or closely related (such as Loma, which was recently sanctioned by China). Its chip cooling technology has been adopted by many chip companies in the United States. So the will of the government soon turned into the arms dealers action.

Here are some of the most common military chips in the United States. As we all know, the first key chip of any digital electronic equipment is ADC / DAC chip. The general ADC / DAC chip has low precision and low sampling rate. Therefore, the dynamic range of digital receiver can not keep up with that of analog receiver. But later, ADI company of the United States and national semiconductor made a breakthrough in technology. They claim to be 20 years ahead of the rest of the world in AD core technology. It is said to have quoted $200000 for a space class ADC chip. Moreover, China and Russia are strictly kept confidential and embargoed.

Lets talk about FPGA chips. According to information, Xilinxs FPGA chip has been developed to level 10, namely virtex-10. But only in China. This is the military and civilian grade, and then there are military and aerospace grade, which have never been exposed in the Chinese market. Two years ago, Xilinx promoted a new military grade substitute for virtex-7, called the kinex-7 (16nm chip). But it was quickly cut off. And even the virtex-7 is hard to buy right now. As for all levels below virtex-7, they are civilian and of little military significance. DSP, another important chip of signal processing, is similar to FPGA, but it has a larger proportion in the civil market.

According to the analysis of insiders, as long as China and the United States are not completely decoupled economically, the United States will not completely ban semiconductors. Because these companies still need to sell and make money in the Chinese market. Therefore, as a military power without its own chip industry chain, if coupled with poor basic science, it can not design chip substitutes like Russia, so it can only be controlled by people everywhere.

2u3001 Summary of my comments on why is there no chip crisis in Russia? Understanding of

In 2005, several other retired comrades and I applied to work as technical consultants in the army overhaul plant, and had the opportunity to get in touch with some weapons and equipment imported from abroad. The master worker of the overhaul factory once put forward a very interesting question to us: Russias economy is depressed, and it has been repeatedly punished by the West. But why is it that the level of weapons he has developed is always world-class? Can you sum up a few for the younger generation of designers. The professionalism and patriotism of the masters moved us. I have been collecting information and thinking about the questions raised by the masters since I left my job. I published an article on why Russian weapons research and development always stand in the forefront in the military column (now closed) of Beijing Daily on June 17, 2015. After Trump came to power, there was a chip crisis. I published two articles before and after the global network, explaining my views on why there is no chip crisis in Russia.

Why is there no chip crisis in Russias research and development of sophisticated weapons? To sum up, I think, first, his basic science is strong, and he can creatively design analog circuits to replace chips. This substitution is not a simple correspondence from digital to analog, but an innovation. Taking the realization of pulse Doppler signal processing as an example, Russian scientists and technicians creatively use a relatively simple other excited crystal oscillator to realize if coherent integration (with a group of analog filters, it is theoretically completely equivalent to FFT). See my article on the world wide web on May 8. I also draw a schematic diagram to illustrate its working principle.

Second, we should make full use of our own advantages and make bold innovations to make up for the lack of chips and make the overall level of weapons world-class. Although the level of microelectronics technology in Russia is low, it has great advantages in many other aspects, such as microwave millimeter wave technology (including modules), microwave electric vacuum technology, automatic control technology and so on. Let alone aerodynamics, engines, missiles and other aspects have always been Russias strengths. Russian scientific and technological personnel give full play to their intelligence and intelligence, develop their strengths and avoid their weaknesses, and make up for the defects caused by the weak microelectronic technology. There is a Chinese saying that the loss outside the dike and the compensation within the dike is what it means. For example, S-300 radar system has been praised as high performance, low cost and low power consumption by some famous radar experts in the United States. Because it dares to use the X-band first, and the Patriot of the United States is still C-band. Russia has microwave high-power electric vacuum devices, so dare to boldly adopt high pulse repetition rate pulse Doppler system (close to continuous wave). This system has excellent ability to deal with high speed maneuvering target and clutter jamming in large airspace. However, this scheme has long been regarded as not recommended by classical radar theory. Now it has been successfully adopted by Russia, and the chief engineer has sent it to the international radar Conference for a report. Several old experts from the United States expressed their congratulations and great appreciation after understanding it.

Whether the combination of the two can be understood in this way: a military power must have a strong chip industry, or a strong basic science. If there is neither, youll have to wait.

What needs to be emphasized here is that what I said is that we should learn from the Russian experience, not to advocate that everyone should use analog circuits instead of chips. Chip technology represents the future development of electronics. Therefore, the radar system of the United States is particularly compact, not as big and thick as Russia. We mainly study the spirit of independent innovation in Russia and the design idea of developing advantages and avoiding disadvantages. It is indeed worthy of our admiration and reference for the Russians to skillfully replace chips with innovative analog circuit technology. But Russia has never boasted about how good its analog circuits are than their chips. Frankly speaking, they are also out of helplessness. But they can fight for the best results in frustration. Their innovative spirit and the design idea of developing strengths and avoiding weaknesses are really worthy of our study.

Compared with Russia, China has many advantages. First of all, Chinas microelectronic technology, including chip technology, has a good foundation in both design and mass production. However, the level of analog circuit technology in China is not as good as that in Russia due to the lack of emphasis on basic education for a long time. Therefore, we should not abandon or slow down the development of chip technology and go back to study how to replace chips with analog circuits (of course, we should not exclude the use of ingenious analog circuits in some occasions to optimize the combination of digital and analog).

3u3001 Expose the plagiarism of some Internet articles on the Internet

I hope to discuss these points with you on the Internet. But recently, when I checked the Internet data, I found that some articles on the Internet copied some of the main points of my articles published on the world wide web. They say its plagiarism because they dont follow the minimum ethical standards (state the source of these arguments and get the agreement of the global network). Of course, they changed their methods and only copied a few paragraphs, which made it difficult for ordinary readers to find out. But what they copy is the main point (argument) of the original article, that is, the original part of the article. And the most important paragraphs (a few sentences). Then he changed his face and changed to a topic that attracted the readers attention . and so on), plus some groundless and grandiose words (such as to make the United States sigh, make the United States admire, admire. The United States has no way to deal with him Some of them are also made into video programs, some with advertisements in the middle. The purpose is to make money under the cover of high-tech propaganda. What I said in the original website article is: Russian scientists and technicians use special heterodyne crystal oscillator circuit to complete the purpose of intermediate frequency coherent accumulation. Some plagiarized articles say that the reason is that Russia invented the crystal oscillator (with the note that it is the oscillator with quartz crystal as the element) to replace the chip; the other part of the plagiarized article said that it was due to the Russian invention of the crystal oscillator to replace the chip. Both of them are plagiarism of my original argument, and they are also copied wrong, and they are the same. It seems that these plagiarized articles were written by one or two people, or were misrepresented. The first one. General crystal oscillator can replace chip, is a big joke. The second is that Russia invented the excitonic oscillator. No one can figure out what it is? All Chinese and foreign radio dictionaries may not have this word and term.

What I said in my online article is a formal term for other oscillator; oscillators can be divided into self-excited and hetero excited. I quote it here to make it easy to understand. In fact, in the Russian S-300, and namelessly known as the other excitation crystal oscillator combination or components. The open name of the actual combination is intermediate frequency integrator (mm u0427 - mm u0427 - mm u0427u0427 u0441u0442u043e u0440 u041fu0440u043eu043cu0435u043du0442u043eu0447u043du043eu0439 u0427u0430u0441u0442u043eu0442). I introduced the first mock exam to the relevant units in 2011. It was also published in the air force journal ground air defense weapons, issue 2, 2011, p.33-35, and the Journal of the Ministry of electronics, radar and detection technology trends, issue 7, P.6, 2011. Both articles said that the coherent integration of intermediate frequency can be accomplished by using other oscillator. It seems that the plagiarists did not understand my article. They were just eager for quick success and instant benefit, and took it out of context, regardless of whether the content was reasonable or not. Then they spread the wrong message, and several articles were all the same. Finally, it misleads readers and the masses.

By the way, I would like to introduce some information: in 2103, when I was the consultant of the overhaul department, I had the opportunity to investigate a well-known private enterprise of crystal oscillator in China, and asked whether it could develop this special type of other excitation crystal oscillator as RF pulse integrator; I also investigated a Research Institute (public institution) to ask whether it could use foreign chips to develop FFT signal processor. According to the calculation results of the two companies, the cost of analog chips is 50% more than that of digital chips, and the total volume is at least one third larger. This is one of the bases that I mentioned in the article: if the Russian signal processing cabinet is replaced by a chip, the total volume will be reduced by at least one third (the other basis is the estimation of the data on the Russian public information). A plagiarism article also said that the volume can be reduced by one third. I dont know where he came from?

(function(){( window.slotbydup=window .slotbydup||[]).push({id:u5811557,container:ssp_ 5811557, async:true }Another misleading thing about these plagiarized articles is that Russia invented a new method to replace chips, so he never worried about being stuck in the neck of chips, and made the United States have no way to take it, let the United States sigh, make the United States convinced The method is worth learning from China. As far as I know, S-300 is familiar with a group of American scholars. For example, skolnick, who wrote the radar manual, and Baden, the author of radar system analysis, are familiar with and respected by Chinese colleagues. But I never heard the first mock exam of Russias analog circuit. I dont know where these plagiarists got this information. Making something out of nothing can only make a fuss. In addition, I have never said that I advocate using analog circuits instead of chips. I repeat in my article that Russia has no choice but to use these plans. I have repeatedly called for the development of our own military chip industry chain. We should learn from Huaweis victory, no retreat spirit when developing 5g chips, and build Chinas own military chip industry chain. Finally, I hope that the plagiarized comrades will correct their mistakes immediately and then participate in the normal discussion with the readers. This is my sincere hope. Source: global network editor: Yao Wenguang_ NN1682

Another misleading thing about these plagiarized articles is that Russia invented a new method to replace chips, so he never worried about being stuck in the neck by chips, and made the United States have no way to take it, let the United States sigh, make the United States convinced The method is worth learning from China. As far as I know, S-300 is familiar with a group of American scholars. For example, skolnick, who wrote the radar manual, and Baden, the author of radar system analysis, are familiar with and respected by Chinese colleagues. But I never heard the first mock exam of Russias analog circuit. I dont know where these plagiarists got this information. Making something out of nothing can only make a fuss. In addition, I have never said that I advocate using analog circuits instead of chips. I repeat in my article that Russia has no choice but to use these plans. I have repeatedly called for the development of our own military chip industry chain. We should learn from Huaweis victory, no retreat spirit when developing 5g chips, and build Chinas own military chip industry chain.

Finally, I hope that the plagiarized comrades will correct their mistakes immediately and then participate in the normal discussion with the readers. This is my sincere hope.