Tag Archives: Nuclear

Did Elon Musk Just Call For More Oil + Gas?!

Did Elon Musk Call For More Oil + Gas Production?!

Did Tesla CEO Elon Musk just call for more oil and gas, instead of renewable energy?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Elon Musk Is Calling For More Oil + Gas Production!

The worldwide media has gone ga-ga over Elon Musk calling for  oil and gas producers to increase supply at an energy conference in Norway.

This comes after the Tesla CEO asked oil producers to drill for more oil earlier this year, in March.

So the implication is that Musk is reversing his stance on renewable energy. At least, that’s what the headlines suggest:

Wall Street Journal : Elon Musk Says World Needs More Oil and Gas

Wall Street Journal : Elon Musk: Go Nukes and More Oil, Please

CNBC : Elon Musk says world still needs oil and gas

TechSpot : Elon Musk says the world needs more oil, gas and babies

The Times of Israel : Elon Musk, who has fathered 10, says world needs more babies and oil exploration

TheStreet : Elon Musk Calls for More Oil and Gas Drilling to Avert Human Disaster

 

Elon Musk Is Calling For More Oil + Gas… For Now

The press is correct in saying that Elon Musk just called for increased production of oil and gas. However, many of the news reports did not include the full quote.

The full quote is important, because it makes it clear that Musk was not reversing his stance, but merely stating the obvious – it takes time to migrate to renewable energy.

The world is in an energy crisis right now, thanks to the Russian invasion of Ukraine; and it is impossible for renewables to make up for the deficit caused by sanctions on Russian oil and gas.

The full quote of what Elon Musk said at that energy conference in Norway makes that very clear:

I want to thank the leaders and the people of Norway for their long-standing support. I do think we actually need more oil and gas for civilization to function. But simultaneously moving fast to a sustainable energy economy.

He obviously still believes that renewable energy is the future, but that the world will need more oil and gas in the short term due to the invasion of Ukraine.

This is consistent with what he said earlier this year, in March 2022, when he first called for increased oil and gas production:

Hate to say it, but we need to increase oil and gas output immediately. Extraordinary times demand extraordinary measures.

Obviously, this would negatively affect Tesla, but sustainable energy solutions simply cannot react instantaneously to make up for Russian oil and gas exports.

Honestly, this is all pretty much common sense. You don’t need to be Elon Musk to understand the urgent need for more oil and gas to replace sanctioned Russian gas and oil.

 

Elon Musk Not Only Called For More Oil + Gas, But Nuclear Power Too

Some of the press went with the nuclear angle, which is also true. Elon Musk did call for more nuclear power, but only in the context of maintaining existing plants that are well-designed.

While nuclear plants are far less polluting. than oil- and gas-fired power plants, they produce nuclear waste that pose long-term storage and security risks.

If you have a well-designed nuclear plant, you should not shut it down — especially right now.

As you can tell – he did not call for more nuclear plants to be built. Just that the world should retain existing plants that are well-designed and working well.

It does not make sense to shut them down in the middle of a massive energy crisis. You really don’t have to be Elon Musk to know that too…

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Business | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Why Crashed Osprey Did Not Have Nuclear Material Onboard!

A US Marine Osprey aircraft crashed in the California desert, with “early reports” of nuclear material onboard.

Find out what happened, and why there could not have been nuclear materials onboard!

Updated @ 2022-06-10 : Added confirmation of casualties from the crash.
Originally posted @ 2022-06-09

 

US Marine Osprey Crashed, No Nuclear Material Onboard!

An MV-22B Osprey aircraft belonging to the US Marine crashed in the California desert on 8 June 2022, and “early reports” that it carried nuclear material sparked fear.

The crash was announced and then confirmed by Naval Air Facility El Centro :

EMERGENCY ALERT! #NAFEC has just received reports of a downed aircraft in the vicinity of Coachella Canal Road and the 78. Installation Federal Fire, and Imperial County Fire Department are responding.

We can confirm that an aircraft belonging to 3d Marine Aircraft Wing crashed near Glamis, CA. Military and civilian first responders are on site.

The Osprey belonging to the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing headquartered in Miramar, San Diego, was flying with a Marine unit of five onboard.

It crashed at around 12:25 PM local time in Imperial County, near Highway 78 and the town of Glamis. That’s about 50 km from the Mexican border, and 240 km east of San Diego.

On June 9, 2022, Marine Corps Air Station Miramar announced that all five Marines onboard the MV-22B Osprey were confirmed dead.

Press Release: 5 Marines dead in MV-22B mishap

MARINE CORPS AIR STATION MIRAMAR, Calif. – (June 9. 2022) Five Marines with Marine Aircraft Group (MAG) 39, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing (MAW), have been confirmed deceased following an aviation mishap involving an MV-22B Osprey during a training mission near Glams, CA on the afternoon of June 8. 2022.

Maj. Gen. Bradford J. Gering, commanding general of 3rd MAW issued the following statement, “We mourn the loss of our Marines in this tragic mishap. Our hearts go out to their families and friends as they cope with this tragedy.

As a matter of policy, identities of deceased service members are not released until 24-hours after all next-of-kin notifications have been completed.

Equipment recovery efforts have begun and an investigation is underway.

While military service is inherently dangerous, the loss of life is always difficult. 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing is committed to providing support to the families, friends, and fellow service members of the fallen Marines.

While the US Marines has not announced the names of the five dead, family and friends confirmed that 21 year-old Nathan Carlson from Illinois was one of them.

 

Why Crashed Osprey Would Not Have Nuclear Material Onboard…

It is unknown who started the rumours that the Osprey had nuclear materials onboard, but even content aggregator / fake news websites like Vancouver Times jumped on the bandwagon, claiming “Military aircraft believed to be carrying nuclear material crashes in California, multiple people killed“.

Naval Air Facility El Centro refuted the rumours of nuclear materials on the Osprey, stating :

Contrary to initial reports, there was no nuclear material on board the aircraft. More information will be made available as we receive it.

The Boeing MV-22B Osprey is a tilt-rotor aircraft that can land or take off as a helicopter, and “transform” into a turboprop aircraft once it’s airborne.

The US Marines use the Osprey used primarily to carry troops and supplies, as well as for medevac and rescue missions.

There is no Osprey mission tasking that would involve the transport of nuclear materials, or the use of nuclear weapons. In fact, there is no history of any Osprey in service ever doing so.

The US Marines do not have nuclear weapons in its inventory, and the Osprey has a history of reliability issues resulting in multiple crashes and 46 deaths :

  • July 1992 : Pre-production Osprey crashed after its right engine failed. All seven people onboard died.
  • April 2000 : An Osprey crashed in Arizona, killing all 19 people onboard.
  • December 2000 : An Osprey crashed in North Carolina, killing all four people onboard.
  • April 2010 : An Osprey crashed in Afghanistan, killing four people and injuring 16.
  • April 2012 : An Osprey crashed in Morocco, killing two people and seriously injuring two more.
  • June 2012 : An Osprey crashed in Florida, injuring all five onboard.
  • May 2015 : An Osprey crashed in Hawaii, kill two people and injuring 20 others.
  • December 2016 : An Osprey crashed in Okinawa, injuring two crew members.
  • August 2017 : An Osprey crashed in Australia, killing three people with 23 survivors.
  • March 2022 : An Osprey crashed in Norway, killing all four crew members.

It would not have been safe or prudent to transport nuclear materials using the Osprey, particularly on the continental United States, where there are other safer options.

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > MilitaryTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Was US Nuclear Submarine Damaged By Chinese Planes?!

Was the US nuclear submarine, USS Connecticut, attacked and damaged by Chinese planes?

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the FACTS really are!

 

Claim : US Nuclear Submarine Was Damaged By Chinese Planes!

There have been several blogs claiming that the US nuclear submarine, USS Connecticut, was actually attacked and damaged by Chinese planes.

Here is an example that is being eagerly shared on WhatsApp. It’s really long, so just skip to next section for the facts…

Dear Good People, (MP) This is the real story behind USA nuclear submarine incidence near to China’s Paracel Islands. The nuclear sub was tracked and China jammed all its electronic system. The submarine moved aimlessly and hit by China’s submarine trap wall. The nuclear submarine was damaged and know no direction. It has to emerge to China satisfaction. China of course, knew USA has learned a lesson. Next time, in a real war, the nuclear sub would be sunk….

RED ALERT

Only a handful of geopolitical gbstrategic analysts have fully understood the significance of the damage and humiliation suffered by the Pentagon, the US Navy and the British Empire Dreamers, when it was belatedly reported by the Pentagon that the USS NUCLEAR ATTACK SUBMARINE, USS Connecticut limped home, and rendered totally useless, after the disastrous attempt to provoke China into a War.

 

Truth : US Nuclear Submarine Was Not Damaged By Chinese Planes

This is yet another example of Chinese propaganda / fake news, which attempts to overwhelm the reader by sheer volume of misinformation.

The creator intentionally writes such a long, rambling story to make it appear more convincing to readers who are likely not very knowledgeable about military technology.

Here’s another example : US Withdraws After Chinese Jamming Attack?

Here is a quick summary of the facts, which prove that the writer is a liar and the “article” is simply FAKE NEWS.

  1. It is incredibly difficult to detect and track USS Connecticut.
  2. It is not possible to jam a submarine’s electronics system.
  3. China does not have a submarine trap wall.
  4. The USS Connecticut was not crippled, and did not require assistance to return to Guam.
  5. China was not holding any war games at that time of the collision.
  6. China did not attack the USS Connecticut.
  7. China did not know about the collision until 5 days later.
  8. There is no evidence of any mutiny aboard the USS Connecticut
  9. Only 11 sailors were injured, not 15
  10. Submarines do not have radar, they only have sonar.
  11. There are no fixed sea or air lanes over international waters.

For those who want the details, here are the reasons why this is just Chinese propaganda / fake news.

Fact #1 : USS Connecticut Is Super Hard To Detect

The USS Connecticut is a Seawolf-class submarine, which is noted for being extremely quiet and hard to detect.

Thanks to a slew of advanced noise suppression design features and technologies, including pump jet propulsion, it has an operational noise level of only 95 decibels – just 5 decibels above the background ocean noise.

That’s why the United States uses one of the Seawolf submarines – the USS Jimmy Carter – to conduct clandestine missions.

It would be a major feat to detect the USS Connecticut underwater, much less track it. Unless the writer can back up his/her claim, it is hogwash.

Fact #2 : China Did Not Jam Its Electronics System

With only a few exceptions, submarines like the USS Connecticut are made of high-tensile steel.

The strong steel hull not only protects the submarine from the crushing pressure when it dives, it literally works as a Faraday cage – protecting the submarine against electromagnetic fields.

Therefore, it is not possible to jam the electronics system of any submarine. That is complete and utter nonsense.

Fact #3 : China Does Not Have A Submarine Trap Wall

The writer appears to believe that it would be possible to build some kind of underwater Great Wall of China.

There is no such thing as a submarine trap wall. What does that even mean???

Fact #4 : USS Connecticut Was Seaworthy

The crew of the USS Connecticut did not lose their sense of direction. Neither was the submarine crippled.

They surfaced after the collision, because it was their standard operating procedure after any non-combat collision.

According to the US Pacific Fleet, the submarine was in a “safe and stable condition” :

The submarine remains in a safe and stable condition. USS Connecticut’s nuclear propulsion plant and spaces were not affected and remain fully operational. The extent of damage to the remainder of the submarine is being assessed. The U.S. Navy has not requested assistance. The incident will be investigated.

It should be noted that the USS Connecticut sailed to Guam for 6 days, without assistance.

Fact #5 : China Was Not Holding Any War Games At That Time

When the USS Connecticut collision happened on 2 October 2021, China was in between two naval war games :

  • 23-27 August : Seaborne assault war game in Vladivostok, Russia
  • 14-17 October : Russia and China held naval drills in the Sea of Japan.

So the writer’s claim that China was conducting naval war games at that time is completely false.

The only war game being conducted around that time involved the HMS Queen Elizabeth and the USS Ronald Reagan and USS Carl Vinson carrier groups in the Philippine Sea on 4 October 2021.

Fact #6 : China Did Not Attack USS Connecticut

The claim that China sent out waves of over a hundred attack aircraft to hunt for the submarine is false.

So many flights would have raised concerns by surrounding countries, and unless they are anti-submarine warfare (ASW) aircraft, they would be useless in the hunt for a submarine.

China certainly would not be so stupid as to attack the USS Connecticut, which would have been considered an act of war against the United States.

Fact #7 : China Did Not Know Until 5 Days Later…

China was not even aware of the collision until the United States Naval Institute (USNI) reported on the accident FIVE days later on 7 October 2021.

By then, the USS Connecticut was just a day away from reaching Guam for inspection and repairs.

The Chinese think tank SCSPI only located the USS Connecticut on 8 October – in a 5 day-old satellite photo that showed it sailing on the surface.

At that time, the USS Connecticut was about 43 nautical miles (79 km) southeast from the Paracel Islands, and about 454 km away from Hainan Island.

Fact #8 : No Evidence Of Mutiny

The writer claimed that there was a mutiny onboard the USS Connecticut because the Commander refused to surface the submarine.

How does he know that? What evidence has he proffered? None at all. It’s all one big fantasy.

It doesn’t even make sense – why would the sailors mutiny? Why would the submarine commander or his XO (Executive Officer) refuse to surface a submarine in trouble?

The SOP for any submarine in trouble is to surface, and that’s what the USS Connecticut did. That very fact proves that there was no mutiny, and the writer lied.

Fact #9 : Only 11 Sailors Injured

The writer even made up the claim that 15 sailors were injured in the mutiny. That’s nonsense.

11 sailors aboard the USS Connecticut suffered mild to moderate injuries, none life-threatening.

If the writer can lie about a simple fact like that, you have to ask yourself – what else is he lying about?

Fact #10 : Nuclear Submarines Do Not Use Radar Underwater

The writer falsely claimed that a nuclear attack submarine like the USS Connecticut would be able to avoid obstacles because it would have the most sophisticated radars.

The truth is – submarines do not use radar systems underwater, they use sonar systems. Even then, military submarines rarely use active sonar, as it exposes their positions.

It is not possible for USS Connecticut to “see” undersea structures using its passive sonar system. Instead, the crew relies on underwater charts and inertial navigation systems to avoid underwater obstacles.

But unless they regularly fix their position using GPS, small errors in their position will compound over time, potentially placing the submarine hundreds of metres out of position. This could be the reason for the collision.

It is shocking that the writer is unaware of such basic military / scientific facts.

Fact #11 : No Fixed Sea / Air Lanes Over International Waters

The writer falsely claimed that commercial ships and airliners have to strictly travel in fixed international lanes.

In reality, commercial ships and planes use routes that are best for fuel economy and/or safety over international waters. Ships and planes are also free to adjust their bearings to avoid bad weather, for example.

Countries can only control movement of ships and planes within their territorial waters and airspace.

It is therefore false for the writer to claim that ships or planes that deviate from fixed international sea / air lanes will be shot down or sunk.

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | MilitaryTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did China Threaten West With Waterloo In South China Sea?

Did China threaten the West with a repeat of the Battle of Waterloo in the South China Sea?

Find out what is this Chinese threat going viral on social media, and what the FACTS really are…

 

Claim : China threatens West with Battle of Waterloo in South China Sea!

In the viral poster being shared on social media, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying is seen warning Western powers – Don’t Let It Become Your Waterloo! with a hypothetical scenario.

It was originally posted sometime in July 2020, but was “reactivated” in May 2021 during heightened tensions with the West.

WARNING ISSUED TO WESTERN ALLIES IN SOUTH CHINA SEA

Don’t Let It Become Your Waterloo!

The scenario :

  • An attack by US, UK, Australia & Japanese naval forces will be met with electronic disabling of all ships and planes making them sitting targets…
  • US & allies missiles will fail to fire & if they do may explode mid air or re-directed to return to base!
  • The Chinese will give them one warning to withdraw or be sunk!
  • WATERLOO REPLAYED IN 60 MINUTES OF LESS

 

China threatens West with Waterloo in South China Sea : Complete BS

While it may excite pro-China netizens, this is yet another piece of “fan fiction”, like US Navy withdrawing from South China Sea or Mark Zuckerberg’s Not Pretty China Wife.

Fact #1 : Hua Chunying Never Threatened Waterloo

Anyone who checks Hua Chunying’s official Twitter account can confirm that she never posted such a threat.

She may be sarcastic and controversial in her remarks, but she is the official spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

Such an overt threat of military action against the US, UK, Australia and Japan, will be seen as an official declaration of hostile intent by China.

It would certainly free the West to ramp up their support of Taiwan, and to actively prepare for hostilities with China.

Fact #2 : Chinese Censors Would Not Have Allowed Such Fake News, Unless…

Such a fake post would not be allowed to be shared on social media, especially Chinese microblogs, without the expressed permission of the Chinese government.

Chinese censors actively and quickly remove all references to anything remotely critical of the Chinese government, like the 1989 Tiananmen Square protest and massacre, or the Hong Kong protests.

We should also not forget that they quickly clamped down on Dr. Li Wenliang when he tried to warn his fellow doctors about COVID-19, forcing him to sign a letter promising not to do it again.

So it would only be possible for any Chinese-related fake news to be spread so widely, with the tacit approval of the Chinese government.

Fact #3 : EMP Weapons Can Disable Ships + Planes, But…

EMP (Electromagnetic Pulse) weapons can be used to disrupt or destroy electronics on ships and planes, but they are not magical weapons as claimed in the post :

  • High-Altitude EMP (HEMP) weapons detonate nuclear warheads in the stratosphere to disrupt electronics in a wide area.
  • Non-Nuclear EMP (NNEMP) weapons that use high explosives to deliver a much smaller electromagnetic pulse.
  • High-Powered Microwave (HPM) weapons like magnetrons and vircators – think of them as primitive versions of the ion cannons you see in Star Wars.

A Chinese HEMP weapon would destroy electronics in a very large area (including their own), so it won’t be deployed close to their own coast. This is something they would deploy against the US homeland.

An NNEMP missile would be something the Chinese would use against a carrier group, affecting a relatively small area – several dozen kilometres. However, these missiles would require constant targeting data, or the carrier group could simply move out of danger in mere minutes.

HPM weapons are still rather primitive with very short range. They also cannot target mass targets like EMP weapons.

Fact #4 : Disabled Missiles Won’t Return To Base

We applaud the writer for his/her creativity, but unlike regular mail, missiles don’t come with a return address.

Missiles disabled by EMP weapons, or electronic jammers, will just lose direction or fall harmlessly out of the sky.

They won’t, however, fly back to their base like homing pigeons. Neither can the Chinese reprogram them to return to base…

Fact #5 : China Is The Aggressor Here

While the writer warns of reprisals if the US, UK, Australia and Japan attack, the fact of the matter is – China is the aggressor in the South China Sea.

Whatever may have happened in the past, the US, UK, Australia and Japan are not the ones illegally building artificial islands, or militarising them, or threatening harm to passing ships and planes.

There is no danger of the US, UK, Australia or Japan attacking China. No one in the right mind would believe in such nonsense.

Rather, the danger lies in Chinese overreach in the South China Sea sparking a war, like how Hitler’s overreach with the invasion of Poland started World War 2.

Arguably, only an attack on Taiwan would draw the Western powers (sans Japan) to intervene militarily, and a military occupation of the Senkaku Islands would force Japan and the US to respond militarily.

Fact #6 : China Would Be The French At Waterloo

It’s not certain why China would warn the Western powers and Japan that they would face their own Battle of Waterloo.

In the Battle of Waterloo, it was Napoleon who attacked the allied forces from Prussia, the UK, the Netherlands, Hanover, Brunswick and Nassau.

In this fan fiction, China would be the French at Waterloo, fighting against the allied forces from the US, UK, Australia and Japan.

Is the writer suggesting that China is bound to lose against the allied forces? Interesting…

 

Help Support My Work!

If you would like to support my work, you can do so via bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card.

Name : Adrian Wong

Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)

Thank you in advanced! ❤️

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Checks | MilitaryTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!


El Capitan Supercomputer : AMD Selected As Node Supplier!

It’s official – AMD has been selected as the node supplier for the El Capitan supercomputer, which is projected to be the world’s most powerful supercomputer when it is fully deployed!

 

El Capitan Supercomputer : A Quick Primer!

El Capitan is a supercomputer funded by the Advanced Simulation and Computing (ASC) program at the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) from the Department of Energy.

When it is fully deployed in 2023, it will perform complex and increasingly predictive modelling and simulation for the NNSA’s Life Extension Programs (LEPs), which addresses nuclear weapon raging and emergent threat issues.

This will allow the United States to keep its nuclear stockpile safe, secure and reliable, in the absence of underground nuclear testing.

“This unprecedented computing capability, powered by advanced CPU and GPU technology from AMD, will sustain America’s position on the global stage in high-performance computing and provide an observable example of the commitment of the country to maintaining an unparalleled nuclear deterrent,” said LLNL Director Bill Goldstein.

“Today’s news provides a prime example of how government and industry can work together for the benefit of the entire nation.”

Besides supporting the nuclear stockpile, El Capitan will perform secondary US national security missions, including nuclear nonproliferation and counterterrorism.

NNSA laboratories – Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia national laboratories – are building machine learning and AI into computational techniques and analysis that will benefit NNSA’s primary missions and unclassified projects such as climate modelling and cancer research for DOE.

To that end, it will use a combination of CPUs and GPUs to exceed 2 exaFLOPS in performance – that’s two quintillion floating point operations per second. That will make it the world’s most powerful supercomputer!

 

El Capitan Supercomputer : AMD Selected As Node Supplier!

El Capitan will be powered by the next-generation AMD EPYC processors, codenamed Genoa and featuring the upcoming AMD Zen 4 processor cores, as well as the next-generation AMD Radeon Instinct GPUs based on a new compute-optimised architecture.

The nodes will run on the AMD Radeon Open Compute (ROCm) heterogenous computing platform, with most of their floating point computing power delivered by the Radeon Instinct GPUs.

Not only will the El Capitan nodes offer significantly greater per-node performance than any current system, they will also offer dramatically better energy efficiency.

El Capitan will also integrated advanced features that have not yet been widely deployed, including :

  • HPE Cray Slingshot interconnect network, which will enable large calculations across many nodes
  • new HPE optics technologies to deliver higher data transmission rates with better power efficiency and reliability
  • new Cray Shasta software platform, with a new container-based architecture

“El Capitan will drive unprecedented advancements in HPC and AI, powered by the next-generation AMD EPYC CPUs and Radeon Instinct GPUs,” said Forrest Norrod, senior vice president and general manager, Datacenter and Embedded Systems Group, AMD.

“Building on our strong foundation in high-performance computing and adding transformative coherency capabilities, AMD is enabling the NNSA Tri-Lab community — LLNL, Los Alamos and Sandia national laboratories — to achieve their mission-critical objectives and contribute new AI advancements to the industry.”

“We are extremely proud to continue our exascale work with HPE and NNSA and look forward to the delivery of the most powerful supercomputer in the world, expected in early 2023.”

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Computer Hardware | Home

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!