China can not develop weapons without Russian technology

56
After 10 years after Moscow decided to put an end to copying technology, it returns to deals on military aircraft and missiles.

Moscow has quietly resumed selling advanced military technologies to Beijing, a move that suggests that Russia puts geopolitical and economic problems above its own concerns with Chinese attempts to clone Russia’s weapon.



China can not develop weapons without Russian technology


The Chinese and Russian officials who attended this week’s air show in Zhuhai City jointly announced that Russia this year will deliver the first batch of four modern Su-35 fighters to Beijing.

“We are currently fulfilling the terms of the contract,” signed last November, said Vladimir Drozhzhov, deputy director of the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation, noting that China had signed an agreement to protect Russian intellectual property.

According to the Russian media, Chinese pilots are studying in Russia, and then after some time will return by plane to China. The two-billion-dollar 24 aircraft deal is expected to be completed within three years. As China introduced its own newest stealth fighter this week, large-scale deployments of these aircraft are not expected over the next few years.

According to the International Institute for the Study of Peace in Stockholm, China ranks second in the world in defense expenditures, its military budget last year was 215 billions of dollars. Between 2011 and 2015, the country was the third largest importer of arms, while Russia was the second largest exporter.

The Su-35 deal, along with the X-NUMX agreement on the sale of C-2014 Russian ground-to-air missiles that could arrive in China by 400, indicates the cancellation of the informal ban on selling advanced systems to China from about 2018.

In general, according to Drozhzhova, countries bind contracts totaling eight billion dollars.

Vasily Kashin, an expert on the Chinese military industry at the Higher School of Economics (Moscow), believes that these deals are "a clear sign that China is once again becoming one of the leading importers of Russian weapons."

According to experts, Russian technologies will significantly increase the potential of Chinese air defense systems against the backdrop of Beijing’s deteriorated relations with the United States because of maritime disputes in the western Pacific.

“Considering Russia's current practice of doing everything possible to make strategic planning for the United States and its allies more difficult, it’s not surprising that Russia is ready to provide a number of its latest weapons developments to China,” said Allan Behm, a security analyst at Canberra. , previously in charge of strategic planning in the Australian Department of Defense.

The period of Beijing’s highest dependence on Moscow’s technologies was the 1990s, when China modernized its armed forces, and the internal military budget of Russia was exhausted.

“In 1990, the Russian defense industry survived thanks to two scuba diving: China and India,” explains Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Moscow Center for the Analysis of Strategies and Technologies and editor of Shooting Star, a book devoted to the Chinese defense industry.

However, the relationship between Moscow and Beijing deteriorated after the latter copied several Russian armament complexes - the case of the Su-27 / 30 fighter, which turned into J11, is best known. Initially, the aircraft were made in accordance with the license agreement, in violation of which Russia accused China when it released its own version of the aircraft.

“This is what the Chinese do all the time and in any sector of the economy,” says Kashin. - Just need to calculate the risks.

After that, starting with 2004, “there was a pause,” says Ruslan Pukhov. "We were fed up with their reverse engineering, and local developers were also able to convince the political leadership that they did all this themselves."

However, the prevailing situation for 2014 year brought the two countries together again.

China concluded that it still needs Russian technology. According to Song Zhongping, a Chinese military expert in Beijing, although Russian assistance to China in the field of defense is not comparable to the “powerful impulse” of 1980's and 1990's, “Russian weapons significantly improve the combat capabilities of the PLAH.”

In addition, after Russia's annexation of the Crimea in 2014, economic sanctions and low oil prices forced Moscow to feel an acute shortage of foreign currency. “Suddenly [Russia] finds itself in a de facto situation of the Cold War with the West, and we needed China’s political support,” says Ruslan Pukhov.

Although negotiations on C-400, the most advanced Russian air defense system, and Su-35 began even before the events in Ukraine, final agreements were reached after. According to Kashin, the risk of cloning the Su-35 or C-400 is small, since the agreement does not authorize the transfer of technology.

“People tend to exaggerate,” he says. - It is impossible to copy the aircraft engine, and even copying electronics takes so much time that the other side ,. as a rule, manages to develop a new system. ”

In the near future, Russia plans to launch a new, improved 2-500 ground-to-air missile and the T-50 fighter.

True, Russia does not intend to sell some things to China: for example, the technology that allows Iskander cruise missiles to maneuver at extremely high speeds and thus makes it difficult to intercept them. Moscow will also not supply Beijing with satellite systems to track ballistic missile launches.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

56 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    9 November 2016 15: 08
    If the Russian Federation sells technology to China, then most likely we already have more advanced technologies. I do not see any other explanation.
    1. +6
      9 November 2016 15: 24
      Is the aircraft a new one, which Russia has only in 3D, while the Chinese fly?
      1. +4
        9 November 2016 15: 26
        Quote: Dr. Sorge
        Is the aircraft a new one, which Russia has only in 3D, while the Chinese fly?

        One can only rejoice at such cooperation, at least in the sense that Russia, I am sure, will also borrow some technologies from the Middle Kingdom.
        1. +4
          9 November 2016 15: 30
          Well that would be good.
      2. +1
        9 November 2016 15: 33
        They drive tanks, only the tracks are torn and the hodovka is cracking at the seams.
        1. +3
          9 November 2016 15: 53
          And where to read about it? :) Not that malevolent, but still :)
          1. +2
            9 November 2016 16: 12
            It is hard to remember, but it seems that something was about Chinese tanks in the VO. Well, a recent example of biathlon.
      3. +14
        9 November 2016 16: 27
        Quote: Dr. Sorge
        Is the aircraft a new one, which Russia has only in 3D, while the Chinese fly?

        Oh, how bad it is to smack nonsense! It hurts after all !!!! (with)
        On business.
        If you are talking about the T-50, then we already have 9 "prototyapov" pass exams for aptitude for flying in a cocoon, using avionics and weapons ... What nafig 3D ???
        By dviglami.
        Amy - 10 thousand hours, we - 4 thousand, on the way is the engine of the 2nd stage; hunfuz - 1 thousand - that's all! And where do they "fly" here?
        About weapons, especially the RVV, even the Amy look at us with envy. Zircons on the way ...
        A new plant was built for the T-50 production, the production was updated, the Korean processing centers bought up ...
        It has to move forward, oh, it must!
        And from your koment it turns out that we are empty bells, and hunfuzy are patsanyyyyyyy ....
        And this is clearly not the case. Yes
        1. +2
          9 November 2016 17: 38
          Alexander, put everything on the shelves.
          Thank you. hi

          Already nauseous from sweeping highwayers.
          1. +2
            9 November 2016 17: 45
            Hailing and the desire for news not to be in the subjunctive mood are different concepts.
            This is not to nauseous :) I explain to you what it is about :)
        2. +2
          9 November 2016 17: 42
          Thanks for the sensible answer! :)
      4. 0
        10 November 2016 19: 45
        Is it like a creepy modern "Belarusian" Polonaise?
        Which 3D airplane in Russia do you mean that its counterpart would fly in China? I can assure you that the same MiG-35, not to mention the Su-35, is superior in all respects to any of the Chinese stealth
        1. +1
          14 November 2016 08: 57
          Yes, I figuratively wrote about 3D, referring to pictures, pictures, pictures.
          I believe you that ours is better :)
    2. +1
      9 November 2016 17: 04
      China can not develop weapons without Russian technology

      Is this news to anyone? laughing
    3. +1
      9 November 2016 17: 51
      If the Russian Federation sells technology to China, then most likely we already have more advanced technologies. I do not see any other explanation.
      -------------------------------------------------
      ---------

      A deal for 24 aircraft worth $ XNUMX billion is expected to be completed within three years.
      ------------------------------------------
      But where will these two lard go?
      Nexus, you are a very informed person, I have always read your comments with interest. But in this case, I think that you are also naive, probably, like all decent people ...
      It seems to me that if earlier, the transfer of advanced technologies, as an initiative of individual individuals, was regarded as a betrayal, now this fraud has been put on stream under the auspices of o-very large people, in the guise of the interests of the state ...
      1. +7
        9 November 2016 18: 02
        Quote: guzik007
        It seems to me that ... now, this fraud has been put on stream under the auspices of o-very large people, in the guise of the interests of the state ...

        - so ... you think ... this is, however, a symptom request
        - Have you read the article to the end?
        - so, if you read it - the production technology of these aircraft under this contract is NOT transferred
        - to say that "the Chinese will copy everything anyway" is silly. I am telling you as a person who has a certain concept of metals and materials science (metal)
        - even in this the Chinese will ... well ohhh very serious difficulties
        - Why do you think their aircraft engines still could not be copied? That is - they copied, of course ... that's just the resource of these engines .. um ... leaves much to be desired ...
        - Duc just because: the production technology for the finished product is not just difficult to guess. It's impossible.

        That's all Yes
        1. +2
          9 November 2016 19: 51
          I agree with you Cat ...! I always read you, although you are a harmful dude ..)))) Technology, Resistance of materials, etc. I also studied at one time ... The concept of copying a fighter (you can only externally) ... In this design, thousands of grades of alloys and composite materials ... One rivet or screw will be of the wrong alloy and everything will start to vibrate (well, like that) Everyone knows Chinese quality! In general, the Chinese still can achieve their goal, the nation is very efficient and unpretentious ... But they do not have the Flight of the soul and the Russian "You can't take a lie ..!" hi
          1. +5
            9 November 2016 19: 56
            Quote: STARPER
            One riveting or screw will be of the wrong alloy and everything will begin to vibrate (well, like that)

            - I'll tell you more - one detail in the engine is not so heat-treated - and tryndets engine ...
            - it is necessary not only to reproduce the composition, but also the structure of the material of critical details
            - and the structure is already the processing modes. To "guess" them by the thin sections of the parts from the finished engine is easier to kill yourself right away. Against the wall, for example laughing

            Quote: STARPER
            mischievous you dude

            - I useful stop
            - I’m not naughty, I’m not bothering anyone, I’m fixing the stove ... (c) Bulgakov
            1. 0
              9 November 2016 20: 15
              Quote: Cat Man Null
              i'm a useful stop
              - I’m not naughty, I’m not bothering anyone, I’m fixing the stove ... (c) Bulgakov

              Well, if you write something like that ... Okay, sometimes I start kicking the "stoves" ... No offense, it happens! hi Write, it’s interesting with you! crying
          2. +1
            9 November 2016 21: 26
            > Everyone knows Chinese quality! In general, the Chinese still can achieve their goal, the nation is very efficient and unpretentious ... But they do not have the Flight of the soul and the Russian "You can't take a lie ..!"

            told immediately about everything
            Speaking of the flight of the soul
            In Armenian, one of the words meaning wonderful in direct translation means ChineseAs porcelain means chinese glass. Both words are quite ancient.

            As smart people said - everything is hot, everything is changing. You just need to be able to correctly assess the pace of change.
            :-)
      2. +3
        9 November 2016 20: 13
        Quote: guzik007
        Nexus, you are a very informed person,

        No more than others.
        Quote: guzik007
        that you, moreover, are also naive, for sure, like all decent people ...

        Decency in my opinion has not yet been canceled.
        Quote: guzik007
        It seems to me that if earlier, the transfer of advanced technologies, as an initiative of individual individuals, was regarded as a betrayal, now this fraud has been put on stream under the auspices of o-very large people, in the guise of the interests of the state ...

        Well, let's figure it out ... we have a T-90 and Armata with a whole new line of armored vehicles. The T-90 has been exported for a long time and there is nothing secret in addition to the super-duper. Therefore, I believe that there is nothing to worry about, and all the more so since the technologies used in Armata remain at home. The same applies to the T-50 with the SU-35S.
        At the same time, while the Chinese will try to repeat everything that is laid down in the cut-down SU-35th, we will already have a serial PAK FA, and this is a completely different machine.
        Sincerely.
        1. 0
          9 November 2016 20: 48
          Nexus ---------------
          ..Not more than others.
          ----------------------------------
          modest ... do not shuffle a leg: =))
          -------------------------------------------
          .. In my opinion, no one has yet canceled ..
          -------------------------------------------------
          --------------------
          Nowadays, decency and naivety go foot and foot ....

          guzik-kotu:
          --------------------------
          so, if you read it, the production technology of these aircraft under this contract is NOT transferred
          --------------------------------
          From her, an ingenious excuse from businessmen from the military, such as: we do not sell technology, only beads. Only earrings ...
          --------------
          .... to say that "the Chinese will copy everything anyway" is silly. I am telling you as a person who has a certain concept of metals and materials science (metal) ...
          -----------------------------------
          Here it is, an ingenious excuse from the corresponding organs. And indeed, it works! For the technology of creating turbine blades is a priority that belongs only to us and the Americans, and whoever has the priority, this is another thing to think about ...
          And under this sauce, to drive finished products to a "potential ally" with the highest signature can be considered a traitor to the motherland without fear.
          1. +3
            9 November 2016 20: 53
            Quote: guzik007
            For the technology of creating turbine blades is a priority that belongs only to us and the Americans, and whoever has the priority, this is another thing to think about ...

            A turbine blade is not a toaster ... I don’t think that we will ever transfer the technology of alloying and manufacturing this part of the engine to the Chinese at all ..
            Quote: guzik007
            modest ... do not shuffle a leg: =))

            I am modest, but not so much. hi
            1. +1
              9 November 2016 21: 38
              A turbine blade is not a toaster ... I don’t think that we will ever transfer the technology of alloying and manufacturing this part of the engine to the Chinese at all ..
              ---------------------------
              Did I say the opposite? = (
              1. +5
                9 November 2016 21: 43
                Quote: guzik007
                Did I say the opposite? = (

                No, they didn’t say ... but I don’t think that "driving" finished products to the side that shares technologies with us and invests in our economy is a betrayal. This is mutually beneficial cooperation, in which somewhere we are better, and somewhere the Chinese. Everything is fair.
          2. +1
            9 November 2016 21: 55
            Quote: guzik007
            From her, an ingenious excuse ...

            Quote: guzik007
            Here it is, an ingenious excuse from the corresponding organs ...

            - This ... dear ... you are in life, EMNIP, resuscitator, no?
            - so why the hell are you getting into things that are ... unusual for you?
            - I repeat: even knowing the composition of the alloy (chemical analysis is a simple thing), guess the modes of processing the part according to the finished part (we look at the structure under the fine microscope, measure viscosity-hardness-etc) - NOT-RE-A-LINO
            - ALL
            - without technology transfer, copy the product, naturally, it is possible, BUT -
            - with the inevitable loss of quality. Until the receipt of an inoperative product Yes

            Examples - darkness:

            - "Chinese" Kalashnikov
            - "Chinese" copies of aircraft engines
            - ...

            And where does (censorship), any "excuses" ?!

            I do not understand request
    4. +1
      9 November 2016 20: 06
      Moscow quietly resumed sales of advanced military technologies to Beijing, a move that indicates that Russia puts its geopolitical and economic problems above its own concerns about Chinese attempts to clone Russian weapons.


      Against the background of the T-50 and S-500, the Su-35 and S-400 no longer look so advanced. + Until the time passes that the Chinese will spend on the study of these samples, ours will already produce more advanced weapons.
      1. +2
        9 November 2016 21: 29
        The Chinese on their AFAR fighters put serial ...
        1. +1
          10 November 2016 20: 08
          AFAR serial - it's great, the question is what they can do. For a long time they could put the MIG on the MIG, but what good is that AFAR if it is worse in characteristics than a conventional pulsed radar with a slot antenna and in resolution and reliability?
          On American Ticondirogs, Spy is already so cool, but he does not take low-altitude targets.
          And the show-off is above the roof!
          1. +1
            10 November 2016 23: 03
            - And why do you think that the Chinese AFAR is the same as the BEETLE? We have problems with all the electronics wherever you stick, not them.
            - Why not? And took and takes?
            1. +1
              12 November 2016 15: 02
              Enlighten me about the performance characteristics of the "Chinese AFAR"?
              As for your statement about the good low-altitude qualities of Spay against the background of the water surface, then ... I do not know about you, but I would not want to be present on the ship with air defense at the base of Spay at the time of repelling the attack of Russian anti-ship missiles
              1. +1
                13 November 2016 10: 36
                How do I know her? You are claiming that she is "worse than usual".

                I would not want to be present on any ship during any RCC attack. But that doesn’t mean anything.
                1. +2
                  14 November 2016 01: 36
                  Knowing about the quality of the "Chinese development" of engines, as well as those assembled from the world on a string (that is, stolen from different sources and assembled on the same platform), "Chinese" smartphones, tablets, and what, there, cool cars, whose developers know that the climate control should be, but not knowing what he should control - I can imagine the quality and efficiency of the Chinese AFAR.
                  You do not know why the Turks refused to purchase the Chinese clone S-300? Because the iron there is very high quality, it is copied very accurately, but with mathematics, trouble. Our yellow-faced brothers have not yet mastered the algorithms for processing radar signals. Accordingly, everything in the complex is, but really does not work. Actually, like the Chinese clone Su-27. The Chinese only work what they got on a full cycle, and drawings, and technology, and algorithms. This is for example: clones GAZ-51, ZiL-158, AN-12, MiG19, Tu-16, KK Vostok ... they can upgrade these mechanisms, in fact, at the factories built by Europeans and Americans, microelectronics and cars. They can even improve some parameters of this microelectronics on the basis of these production capacities, but alas, there is no school there to create something new.
                  That is why their latest stealth at the same time looks like the Raptor and the ever-memorable Fy-35 at the same time, the latest transporter on the S-5 and Il-76 at the same time, and the air defense system is either the S-300 with a missile from Patriot, or vice versa.
                  Convince me if I'm wrong. Give an example of something original Chinese, but that would work.
                  1. +1
                    14 November 2016 18: 37
                    Well, judging by the Russian smartphones and tablets with cars, it’s very bad - China is in the same smarts, demonstrating leadership technologies in some places. It is interesting that as soon as the Chinese talk quite openly about their problems - for example, the resource of engines (which they are gradually increasing, because the problem is in the materials, and you can’t fix this in the shortest possible time) they echo everything - when they talk about successes, no one believes . Just with the electronics, the Chinese are doing quite well - and the serial production of AFAR elements (unlike us, they mastered about 7 years ago) and offer us help in the production of space electronic elements. Not we to them, but they to us.
                    Everything is simple with the Turks - NATO openly declared to them that they would not integrate Russian or Chinese systems into a single air defense system. Therefore, at first we left, and then kicked out the Chinese. Of course, the Chinese are moving along the path of copying and improving the samples, but it’s so simpler and so everyone who is able to do is trying to do it. Moreover, “similarity” does not automatically mean “buzzing”) - you can take the best.
                    Offhand - the Chinese already have long-range UAV strike complexes and trade them. We have this matter of the future. They just flew their own Chinese heavy launch vehicle (and indeed, Chinese rocket technology is completely independent), like all kinds of medium medium tanks are baked cakes. The most powerful computer in the world, like that, too ... And what’s important, they quickly type in “Commodity” quantity in almost all directions. And whose it is there initially with whose ideas the tenth business.
                    1. +1
                      15 November 2016 09: 04
                      You are completely misinterpreting the Turkish tender. We were not allowed to him. It is for the reasons that you are writing about. And with China, it’s quite the opposite - his technique was presented, tested and ... rejected, due to the inability to confirm the claimed characteristics. And then they found a harmonious excuse in the form of NATO policy.
                      As for the Chinese microelectronics. Which of what the Chinese are now releasing is developed by themselves? Just one example? NOTHING! The factories are really Chinese and the equipment is of quite decent quality. Moreover, they can shove two transceivers for two SIM cards and a 50 megapixel camera into an iPhone. But! All these elements are not designed by them. They only rearrange them from model to model, compose and lick the appearance. But even with drivers that determine the functionality of the entire device, there are already problems. What AFAR are you talking about? The French started producing modules in China 10 years ago. 10 years ago! They are trying to make an "ultramodern" lattice on them. Despite the fact that no one gave them mathematics.
                      The same story with the space elemental base. Naturally, there is a technology for its production in China - factories are built and work. But only employers are able to develop new processors for these plants, and by no means collectors.
                      Yes, at the moment, China has everything in chocolate. But they don't develop. A striking example is the "newest" strategic bomber based on the same Tu 16, on which, again, everything that could be assembled from the manufactured electronics was stuck. But the Tu16, as it was, remained so, with its range of 6000 and a combat load of 12 tons. And examples of such - a cart and a small cart. The same Gaz-51 is still being produced, of course, "modernized" to the eerie, but, excuse me, Gaz-51.
                      1. 0
                        15 November 2016 19: 08
                        You are completely misinterpreting the Turkish tender. We were not allowed to him. It is for the reasons that you are writing about. And with China, it’s quite the opposite - his technique was presented, tested and ... rejected, due to the inability to confirm the claimed characteristics. And then they found a harmonious excuse in the form of NATO policy.


                        As for the Chinese microelectronics. Which of what the Chinese are now releasing is developed by themselves? Just one example? NOTHING! The factories are really Chinese and the equipment is of quite decent quality. Moreover, they can shove two transceivers for two SIM cards and a 50 megapixel camera into an iPhone. But! All these elements are not designed by them. They only rearrange them from model to model, compose and lick the appearance. But even with drivers that determine the functionality of the entire device, there are already problems. What AFAR are you talking about? The French started producing modules in China 10 years ago. 10 years ago! They are trying to make an "ultramodern" lattice on them. Despite the fact that no one gave them mathematics.
                        The same story with the space elemental base. Naturally, there is a technology for its production in China - factories are built and work. But only employers are able to develop new processors for these plants, and by no means collectors.
                        Yes, at the moment, China has everything in chocolate. But they don't develop. A striking example is the "newest" strategic bomber based on the same Tu 16, on which, again, everything that could be assembled from the manufactured electronics was stuck. But the Tu16, as it was, remained so, with its range of 6000 and a combat load of 12 tons. And examples of such - a cart and a small cart. The same Gaz-51 is still being produced, of course, "modernized" to the eerie, but, excuse me, Gaz-51.
                        - you know the Turkish tender poorly. And participated and were expelled and defeated HQ-9.
                        “Three years ago, the Russian S-300 complex was removed from the competition due to too high a cost, and in September 2013, the HQ-9 SAM manufactured by the Chinese company CPMIEC was declared the winner. China's offer was then valued at $ 3,44 billion. Subsequently, however, this choice was annulled by Turkey under pressure from NATO countries, which threatened Ankara to exclude it from the alliance’s unified air defense system. https://life.ru/t/%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%8F/
                        916049 / turtsiia_priedlozhila_rossii_uchastvovat_v
                        _tiendierie_na_sistiemy_pvo »
                        “Sunway TaihuLight in the Linpack test shows 93.014,6 TFLOPs, but theoretically, performance can reach 125.435,9 TFLOPs. For comparison, with Tianhe-2 we received 33.862,7 and 54.902,4 TFLOPs in these two categories. Computing performance was achieved thanks to specialized processors that are not supplied by Intel, but are a proprietary product of the Chinese National Research Center of Parallel Computer Engineering & Technology (NRCPC). The processors in the Sunway TaihuLight supercomputer have their own ShenWei name. ”
                        You, for some reason, think that China stands still, if something was sold to them there. We bought a Christie tank and, by your logic, with something similar, and entered the war. No T-34s. )
                        I would look better at the J-20 and modern Chinese missiles than at the H-6. And certainly not on the Ga-51 - in China there are a lot of newer trucks. We are buying them.
                    2. +1
                      15 November 2016 09: 25
                      Sorry, but "Chinese" UAVs are nothing more than "adapted" American ones with Israeli ones. Nothing new, but a lot. Is the self-propelled launch vehicle P7 with increased launch accelerators, and even with the calculation of resonant vibration frequencies in Baumank? Well, you made me laugh with mountain tanks. At the last biathlon, in this case, they had a "biathlon" tank - lightweight to a complete disgrace, with a Kamaz engine squeezed into Zaporozhets. That's about it. I would like to see this tank in battle, somewhere near Gudermes or Palmyra, and not in one attack, but at least for a week.
                      1. +1
                        15 November 2016 20: 27
                        Well, so who sold them their technology? We somehow failed to “adapt”, but they are completely. ) And it is their electronics that we buy for the same UAVs and we sharpen them on their machines. In Russia, heavy machines are still not produced, but in China they are. Yes, these are copies, clones, borrowings, but they are there. And we do not.
                        I don’t remember something that the Chinese would fly on some altered “sevens”. Do you judge by the pictures?
                        Chinese tanks generally perform well. And the battles, well, once upon a time, the torn 72-tower towers poked under our nose.
    5. +2
      9 November 2016 20: 16
      Damn, well, it's written in Russian - "... since the agreement does not give permission for the transfer of technology." Everything is a point. No technology - only finished products!
      PS bliiin! And how they tear their ass to buy "Armata" !!!!!!!!
    6. 0
      9 November 2016 21: 30
      Or nowhere to go.
    7. +4
      12 November 2016 13: 12
      Quote: NEXUS
      If the Russian Federation sells technology to China, then most likely we already have more advanced technologies. I do not see any other explanation.

      In Russia, unlike the USSR, all advanced technologies are pompously announced, before they are put into service! We all know for many years about PAK FA, S-500, Sarmatia, Zircon, etc., although they are not yet in service.
  2. +3
    9 November 2016 15: 27
    That’s why China’s already in the series, and about Russian developments, advertising is only ahead of the rest and words will be planned, launched, delivered, verbs in the future tense.
    It is not good. China does not advertise, but quietly makes and flies into space at its station station, yes, even if it is Russian drawings.
    Let the messages be better as before, "a satellite has been launched for national economic purposes." And everyone knew what these national economic goals were, and there was confidence.
    1. +2
      14 November 2016 01: 48
      And what does the Chinese have in the series that we don’t have? No need in general, you give specific examples. The space station is immediately past. She is not, but we have it. And without us they cannot build their own. Aircraft carrier? So he is again ours, moreover, outdated and not a fact that is vital. In addition, we have the original. Let's give some more examples.
      The production of processors and memory in a cycle of 0, hell tenths of a nanometer? So it’s not Chinese, to improve their parameters or develop new circuitry options - alas, this requires an external developer. In addition, we also have this, albeit not in large quantities, but in series. What else? Or do not la la.
      1. +1
        14 November 2016 09: 09
        Convinced, la-la take it back :)
        Although, if you look at the pace of development of the construction industry (this is not a frill, but still), it is worth considering. Yes, with concrete mixers "not everything is so difficult", but they cost a lot and are very interesting.
        1. +1
          15 November 2016 09: 14
          I agree, I can’t argue against concrete. A lot of it is used there very competently. The benefit of working hands for a bowl of rice - just whistle.
          True, China's records on steelmaking during the cultural revolution come to mind, but I agree, these are values ​​of different orders.
          What the Chinese lack is education and ... the breadth of flight of thought. Well, maybe a little laziness, oddly enough. She is an engine of progress. And in the Chinese, driving the need to plow for millennia, you can’t change it quickly. So we still have a chance to overcome them.
  3. +5
    9 November 2016 15: 34
    It is better to sell weapons than to make cheesy pans at aircraft factories, as Gorbach managed to arrange. As a result, no weapons, no normal pans.
    1. +1
      10 November 2016 16: 21
      Right! As a result, Sukhoi receives US $ 2 billion (whether they are wrong) to work on new aircraft models. For R&D, etc., money is also needed.
  4. +1
    9 November 2016 16: 55
    WINGED ISKANDER missiles! And are we discussing this?
    1. 0
      15 November 2016 18: 45
      Wing is not to your liking ?? So the equipment of Iskander includes 2 types of missiles. One is ballistic (well, quasi-ballistic), the second is WINGED.
      So there is no mistake.
  5. +1
    9 November 2016 17: 10
    - Yes, Russia ... as always, it will supply China with everything it needs ... -Engines are needed ... and it will deliver engines ... how much is needed ... -What for China to worry about ...
    1. Amr
      +2
      9 November 2016 19: 31
      Yes, China still needs to go on the Russian impassability to the Urals)) And here Russia offers its developments)) How on time))) Russians Do not forget that in China there is a Museum of One Treaty)) In which only Russians are not allowed)) -What for China worry ....))))
      1. 0
        10 November 2016 03: 26
        Quote: Amra
        Yes, China still needs to walk along Russian roads to the Urals))

        What do you rejoice in wretchedness?)) Poke around here.
        1. +1
          14 November 2016 09: 11
          It is unlikely that Armagh rejoices, Kytatsi Uzho is building a technology park near Minsk. Got it, damn it ...
    2. 0
      9 November 2016 20: 18
      You are both naive!
    3. +1
      9 November 2016 21: 32
      Quote: olena
      - Yes, Russia ... as always, it will supply China with everything it needs ... -Engines are needed ... and it will deliver engines ... how much is needed ... -What for China to worry about ...

      Apparently there will be a compromise option - the Chinese will copy what they can, and the engines will be purchased from us.
  6. 0
    10 November 2016 06: 59
    Quote: guzik007
    n ...
    And under this sauce, to drive finished products to a "potential ally" with the highest signature can be considered a traitor to the motherland without fear.



    Podniki began a blizzard of revenge - along the way, they did not like this deal.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"