1. Actively develop dual-use technologies. When developing military economy, the United States and Britain attach great importance to giving key support to dual-use technologies with high compatibility. The United States has formulated a number of development plans, such as the dual-use application plan of the Ministry of National Defense (DUAP), the high-tech plan of the Ministry of Commerce (ATP) and the technology reinvestment plan (TRP) led by the Ministry of National Defense. The most typical one is the technology reinvestment plan, including the dual-use key technologies of defense plan, integration of defense and civilian technologies cooperation plan, national defense advanced manufacturing technology cooperation plan, manufacturing engineering education funding plan, expert teaching plan, manufacturing technology promotion plan, national defense dual-use technical assistance promotion plan, regional technical alliance assistance plan and other major plans 12. The lead agency consists of the Ministry of National Defense, the Ministry of Commerce, the Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of Energy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Science Foundation. The British Ministry of Defence has not only formulated two military-to-civilian conversion plans, namely "out-of-department research plan" and "private fund plan", but also specially formulated a pioneer plan for developing dual-use technology. 2. Establish various consortia to develop dual-use technologies, including government and enterprises sharing funds and joint military-civilian investment. The principle adopted in the development of dual-use technology in the United States and Britain is that the Ministry of National Defense, enterprises, academia and other government departments form various consortia to carry out cooperative research and development in accordance with the principles of complementary advantages, capital sharing, risk sharing and achievement sharing. The cost-sharing partnership between American government and enterprises has become a standard strategic model to promote the development of microelectronics industry and regain market share and technological leadership. The British Ministry of Defence has set up a series of dual-use technology centers, a structural materials center and a high-performance computer, software engineering, information technology, electronics and fluid mechanics center. 3. The main measures to reduce the institutional obstacles in integration of defense and civilian technologies are: increasing the scale of military procurement, simplifying and reforming the complicated legal and regulatory system; Further expand the product range defined as "civil engineering"; Analyze the various departments of the military industry, so that the possible military needs of each department can adapt to the capabilities of existing enterprises as much as possible; Introducing civil norms and standards into the design and manufacturing activities of weapons and equipment; Cancel or reduce the special catch-up restrictions on terminal supporting enterprises and reduce the unique catch-up requirements for main contractors; Promote the practice of contractors undertaking military logistics support. Relying on commercial practices, civil products, commercial facilities and "dual-use" technology, we should promote the wide integration of national defense industry and national economy as much as possible. So that the national defense industry can produce the most advanced equipment at a lower cost and play a positive role in promoting the national economy. By analyzing the measures taken by the United States and Britain to promote defense industry integration of defense and civilian technologies, we can see that promoting defense industry integration of defense and civilian technologies at the national level is the same development strategy and policy orientation, from which we can draw the following enlightenment: 1 Formulating a reasonable long-term development plan and an effective implementation plan is related to national security and has considerable particularity. Therefore, some national defense projects cannot be simply decided by the market, but must be formulated and implemented by the state, so that national and local industries can jointly invest. In addition, a solid and competitive national defense project should be infiltrated into local projects, closely integrated and developed together. During the integration of national defense and civil technology, both the United States and Britain made corresponding long-term plans and a series of practical implementation plans, and provided corresponding financial guarantee. 2. In the process of promoting integration of defense and civilian technologies's technology, the government should actively develop integration of defense and civilian technologies's technology and dual-use technology like the United States and Britain. The government and enterprises should share the burden and achievements, so as to optimize the allocation of resources such as funds, personnel, technology and equipment and promote the extensive development of civil industries. An important measure for the United States to develop national defense and civil technology integration and dual-use technology is to "support the cooperation between government research institutions and industry." Its "technology reinvestment plan" is that the government provides half of the funds and the other half is provided by other sources (including state government and enterprise investment), and the civil industry can also benefit from it. 3. We must attach great importance to the reform of production mode to guide enterprises to carry out the reform of management mechanism and promote the combination of military and civilian. The production mode of one product, one factory, one component and one line cannot meet the requirements of the competent military industry and is not conducive to accommodating high-tech factors. Therefore, we must actively promote the continuous adjustment of enterprise management mechanism to adapt to the development of information technology and the business model of market economy. At the same time, we should constantly revise and improve the procurement laws and regulations related to weapons and equipment to guide enterprise reform. Speaking of China's military strength, everyone thinks that its economic strength restricts its development, but this idea can be stopped when we see the advanced South African armed helicopter, Sweden's Eagle Strike -4. What restricts the development of China's military industry is that China's industrial system cannot develop itself.

The system problem is not technology. You may not agree with it, but it is. A small group of ordinary people in Cixi, Zhejiang, used the technology of western joint blockade of China to figure out the bulletproof vest, and took out the finished product in two years. The products were exported in large quantities, and British soldiers used it to get dozens of shots in Iraq, but they survived. In Baoji, Shaanxi, township enterprises hit an armored vehicle and exported it to South Asia. Finally, China sent peacekeeping troops to Haiti to purchase, and the arms industry invested heavily by technologically advanced countries could not find a better one. Therefore, it is suggested that Haier manufacture missiles, and powerful and dynamic private enterprises in China invest in arms design and manufacture. On the other hand, looking at the United States, Barrett, a little-known company, made great efforts to study sniper rifles. Only by being determined to innovate can we obtain excellent military orders, and what forces it to innovate is the desire for wealth and survival, which is the real source of the equipment innovation ability of the US military. It is the pressure of life and death that forces American small and medium-sized enterprises to be determined to innovate. When we see an endless stream of incredible American military equipment, we should see the real motivation after this enterprising. When you can get great wealth by taking out a new thing, new things keep emerging.

On the other hand, looking at China, the Army complained that the scientific research department could not make its own research projects due to lack of funds. The development of China's military equipment is a form of order. Place an order somewhere and it will do it. Without it, it wouldn't do it. You can't do it if you really want to. If you don't push, you can't push. What can you talk about in this case? This scientific research system restricts the development of advanced productive forces. Tens of thousands of researchers and millions of workers stood there dizzy. In fact, there are countless potential design masters, but unfortunately there is no chance to show them.

At present, private enterprises should be allowed to develop the arms industry freely under supervision. In recent years, South Korea has invested heavily in this area, but it is limited by the slow development of its technological base. However, the arms industry is a profiteering industry, so don't let others surpass it. With China's technical reserves, China will have a creative ability beyond that of the United States, at least in the field of conventional weapons. If we think of the miracle of China enterprises in the field of home appliances, we can get a glimpse of China's future military equipment. I hope it helps you.