BattleRaptor wrote:Not the best Idea to use The Technogly Industry as a example when it has shown consistantly over the last 40 years that no new advancements made by one company no matter how revoloutianry wont in some way be copied by the others, and done so rather rapidly.
That whole thing is a cultural problem, too.
Todays aircraftindustry is a good "bad" example: They invented nothing new in the last 40 years, and today they totally get lost on the wrong way trying to implement those "new" compounds, see Boeings "Nightmareliner". They totally misinterpreted how to apply new materials properly, and so they ended up substituting duralumin with compounds. But that´s totally wrong because they use compounds
against their technical nature. They should have made a compound-spaceframe cladded with reinforced duralumin (e.g. GLARE(tm)), but they can´t, because all those universities and the whole expensive and connected industry only teach the old way and simply can´t be changed.
They´re on a one-way-track without return, and only a cataclysm like war or a total industry-wide breakdown can accelerate or even start the change.
We need new pioneers, new
Kelly Johnsons or Hugo Junkers.
BattleRaptor wrote:Kinda disproves your point.. as it suggests humans are quite capable of reverse engineering things quickly if they are given a working prototype to study rather then just the theory behind it.
This only works if the tech is not too advanced to understand.