Even the journey of one thousand begins with the first step.

38

The attention of experts and the public around the world was attracted by the event of November 23, 2012. Dai Minman, deck pilot aviation China, became the first in stories a Chinese pilot taking off and landing on the deck of an aircraft carrier. Some observers have called this event a turning point in the Chinese aircraft carrier component program. fleet. Others, on the contrary, stated that the November trials were exaggerated and could not have a significant impact on regional stability. In fact, take-off and landing on an aircraft carrier mark one of the many stages that China went through on its way to becoming a full-fledged maritime power. The future of the carrier component of the Chinese fleet depends, first of all, on what place it will take in Beijing’s military-political strategy.

From Melbourne to Nimitz?

Back in 1928, Mr. Chen Shaoguan, who at that time served as Minister of the Navy, proposed to allocate 20 million yuan for the creation of the first Chinese aircraft carrier. However, this plan was not implemented. Since then, the military and political leadership of China has repeatedly stated the need to build aircraft carriers, but each time these plans remained only on paper.

The first real steps towards the creation of aircraft carriers are associated with Liu Huaqing, who led the Navy of the People’s Liberation Army of China (PLA) in 1982 – 1988. It is believed that it is Liu Huaqing who is the "father" of the modern Chinese fleet. Back in 1970, as deputy chief of staff of the Navy, he organized a feasibility study for the construction of an aircraft carrier. In 1985, Australia sold the light aircraft carrier Melbourne to China. Chinese sailors and shipbuilders received a unique opportunity to explore the ship, which breathed new life into the program of creating the Chinese Navy.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, China was able to purchase decommissioned Soviet aircraft carrying cruisers of the project (hereinafter) 1143 “Kiev” and “Minsk”, as well as the unfinished aircraft carrying cruiser of the 11436 avenue Varyag. After the conversion to the shipyard in Dalian, the Varyag was renamed the Liaoning in September 2012 and joined the fleet in October, becoming the first Chinese aircraft carrier. In August, 2011 performed its first sea trip to the sea trials of Liaoning.

In parallel, China was implementing a program for the creation of carrier-based aviation. In 2001, the T-10K-3 aircraft, the prototype of the Russian carrier-based fighter Su-33, was acquired from Ukraine, which became the basis of the program to create a Chinese carrier-based fighter. The J-15 fighter made the first flight in August 2009, and the two-seater J-15S fighter - in November 2012.

Information on the current state of the Chinese program to create aircraft carriers is contradictory. According to some estimates, by the middle of the 2020-s, the Chinese fleet plans to receive up to four own-designed aircraft carriers, including two non-nuclear ships X-NUMX, etc., which are similar to Liaonin, and two larger-sized nuclear aircraft carriers, X-NUMX. The implementation of such a program will require significant investments from China, the concentration of a large number of highly qualified personnel, and the solution of a number of complex technical problems.

Among the most important unresolved problems is the construction of a sufficient number of destroyers of air defense and supply vessels, the creation of appropriate infrastructure, and the training of a large number of seamen and pilots of deck aircraft. If China decides to build multipurpose atomic aircraft carriers comparable to the American type "Nimitz", then it will have to create a deck radar detection (DRLO) aircraft, catapults, as well as decide on the choice of a nuclear power plant.

China is actively fighting with South Korea for the title of the leading shipbuilding power in the world. So, in 2011, China accounted for 29% new orders and 39% built ships. Chinese shipbuilding has achieved impressive success: the program for the creation of the modern destroyer of the air defense of the 052C Ave. is being successfully implemented, and despite numerous technical problems, the program for the construction of the third-generation multipurpose nuclear submarines of the 095 Ave.

China's military budget in 2000 – 2011 annually increased by almost 12% (adjusted for inflation). According to estimates by the US Department of Defense, in 2011, total PRC military spending significantly exceeded the officially announced 90 billion dollars and amounted to 120 – 180 billion dollars. Expenditures for the purchase of weapons and military equipment are estimated at about a third of the military budget. It can be assumed that approximately 20 – 30% accounts for the purchase of weapons for the fleet, which is 8 – 18 billion dollars.

The cost of building an aircraft carrier strike group (AUG), including an aircraft carrier similar to Liaonin, a full-fledged air wing and tracking ships, is about 10 billion dollars. Thus, the construction of four AUG over 12 years will require approximately 3,5 billion dollars annually. If the current growth rates of the PRC's military spending continue, the PLA Navy will be able to afford such expenses.

Fight without fighting

The Chinese leadership has repeatedly pointed out that Liaoning will be used exclusively for testing and training. Such statements can be perceived skeptically, but in any case, it will take China at least five years to create a full-fledged AUG headed by Liaoning. This time will be needed to refine and build the required number of deck-based aircraft and helicopters, train sailors and pilots, and ensure sufficient interconnection of AUG ships. But even turning Liaonin into the flagship of a fully combat-ready AUG will not pose a serious military threat to the US Navy, China’s main enemy in the World Ocean.

It should be understood that for the implementation of the Chinese plans to "break through" the First Island Chain, the creation of AUG is redundant. Even in the apocalyptic scenario of J. Kraski, the role of Chinese aircraft carriers is secondary, and the key threat to US naval power comes from anti-access / area denial systems: cruise and ballistic anti-ship missiles, non-nuclear submarines, mines, etc.

At the same time, even two or three AUGs built around ships similar to Liaoning are not enough to confront the United States on the high seas. The qualitative superiority of the American supercarriers, deck aircraft and submarine fleet, the vast experience gained by American sailors and pilots of deck aircraft, will turn the Chinese AUG into easy prey. That is why Admiral R. Willard, the former head of the US Pacific Command, noted that the threat of Chinese aircraft carriers is of a purely "symbolic" character. "Liaoning" and aircraft carriers similar to it will be deprived of DRLO aircraft and significantly limited by the maximum take-off weight of the aircraft. This limits their ability to secure dominance at sea and project power in operations “against the shore” in comparison with American superravianos.

In the event of a military collision in the oceans with virtually any state other than the United States, the aircraft carrier is capable of giving China a significant advantage. This explains the fact that, unlike the United States, many states in the Asia-Pacific region are expressing concern about the Chinese aircraft carrier program. The most likely form of use for Chinese aircraft carriers in conflict with a comparable or weaker adversary will be to provide an air defense system for the ship group, which will allow other ships in it to use their missile weapons effectively to combat surface and coastal targets.

One of the ways to combat the use of Chinese aircraft carriers could be conducting transient military operations of limited scale and with limited political and military objectives. The implementation of the fait accompli policy in local conflicts can lead to China being able to achieve a military victory relatively quickly, achieve its political goals and avoid third-party armed intervention. However, China is likely to use aircraft carriers in order to achieve its political goals without a real military clash.

In the face of a reduction in the US military budget and Washington’s unwillingness to go into a serious conflict with Beijing, aircraft carriers can become an important element of China’s political pressure on Taiwan and those countries with which the PRC has territorial disputes in the East China and South China seas. At some point, China’s power may reach such a level that any attempt to preserve the balance of power will either be doomed to failure in advance or incur costs that will force Beijing to make concessions.

Such a policy can lead to extremely negative consequences for China itself. Thus, the leadership of Vietnam is concerned about the growing naval power and ambitions of the PRC. Given the sad experience of relations with China in the 1970 – 1980-ies, it began to actively purchase naval equipment from Russia, as well as strengthen ties with India and the United States.

Carriers can also be used in situations other than a “zero-sum game,” for example, as a tool of naval diplomacy to increase China’s weight on the world stage, strengthen existing and create new interstate ties in the military-technical and military-political spheres. As the experience of the US Navy shows, aircraft carriers can be effectively used in the provision of humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. Given the fact that about 65 million Chinese citizens travel and work outside China, aircraft carriers can be an indispensable tool for carrying out operations to evacuate these people from countries experiencing a military or other crisis.

A combat-ready aircraft carrier on patrol in the oceans will serve as a clear demonstration of China’s economic, military and technological power not only for other states, but also for the population of China itself. Improving the image of the CCP among ordinary Chinese and the growth of patriotic feelings are among the arguments in favor of building such ships. It is likely that in the next decade, it is the non-military tasks of peacetime that will become the core of the nascent aircraft carrier component of the Chinese fleet.
38 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +7
    20 February 2013 06: 27
    You listen to the Chinese, somehow out of habit it’s funny, but you will think ... After all, they will build it! Like it or not, and we oh how our AUG in the Pacific. USA, China, Japan, Korea.
    1. +4
      20 February 2013 06: 56
      Friend, not funny for a long time.
    2. 0
      20 February 2013 23: 03
      what for? some nuclear missiles and these countries will blow away !! and so one AUG will not solve the issue !!
  2. askold
    +8
    20 February 2013 06: 44
    And on our TARK "N. Kuznetsov", they say there are only 8 ship dryers left, capable of taking off ... They will write off them and hello, the boat is for fun, and then you see, the same China will be sold "for a casino." You look at the achievements of Russia and China and you understand how a thieves' state differs from a developing one.
    1. sashka
      +1
      20 February 2013 07: 40
      One hundred million pluses ...
      1. Goga
        +5
        20 February 2013 08: 05
        sashka - Colleague - quote - "... Improving the image of the CCP among ordinary Chinese and the growth of patriotic feelings are some of the arguments in favor of building such ships ..." - and what, the EP does not need to "improve its image" among ordinary Russians? We practically threw away "Varyag", but they picked up and what a handsome man they made of him ... it's a shame request
        1. sashka
          +1
          20 February 2013 10: 55
          It's a shame this is not the word .. It's a pity that they forbid having a weapon. Afraid however .. Glory to Pu ..
    2. +3
      20 February 2013 09: 09
      Do you really think that under the current defense minister and president they will write off? They've already got it out with their whining. They won't sell Kuzya, don't worry. And the air group will be new for him.
    3. +2
      20 February 2013 11: 39
      Quote: ascold
      they say only 8 ship dryers left that can fly up ... They will write them off and hi, a boat for fun

      Modernization awaits the forge! Instead of dryers, the MIG-29K / KUB will be based! good
    4. Avenger711
      0
      20 February 2013 12: 54
      And replace with the MiG-29K, which are already ordered. Sleep further.
      1. not good
        0
        20 February 2013 14: 07
        Poghosyan, probably, all went to shit, how could it not be his planes that took him.
      2. 0
        20 February 2013 14: 13
        Mig - 29 .. it certainly is not SU-33
    5. Dr.M.
      0
      20 February 2013 15: 20
      @ # $% &: //politikus.ru/army/603-avianesusc hiy-kreyser-admiral-kuznecov-poluchit-novye-m ig-29k-i-mig-29kub.html
      A contract was signed between the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation Anatoly Serdyukov and the General Director of OJSC Russian MiG Aircraft Corporation Sergey Korotkov for the supply of 20 ship fighters MiG-29K and 4 MiG-29KUB.
      These fighters will replace ten Su-33 aircraft and two Su-25UTG carrier-based attack aircraft, which are currently in combat service, on the aircraft carrier cruiser Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov. Replacement will be made as the resource is depleted. Full equipment of the aircraft carrier cruiser with new ship aircraft is planned to be completed by 2015.
  3. +4
    20 February 2013 06: 55
    The Chinese, well done! If they raise the quality - kaput to the world! And the fact that loot is being thrown into the army is dangerous for us in the first place. Everyone else is far away, and we are behind the fence. And the fence is not the slightest.
    1. +1
      20 February 2013 07: 48
      Carriers do not go along the Northern Route ... But the flow of 1 billion cannot be stopped ...
      1. Avenger711
        0
        20 February 2013 12: 55
        But there is no flow, no one wants to live in such places.
  4. +1
    20 February 2013 07: 33
    An interesting article, but the Chinese are betting on quality.
  5. 0
    20 February 2013 07: 46
    ... will serve as a clear demonstration of China's economic, military and technological power ...
    Reason (especially the Chinese mentality) does not imply the waging of war, the war is started by greed and pride. The Chinese are quietly buying gold and loudly declaring the progress in production. But China is not China if it cannot show the world a vivid example of "the best in the world", albeit far (so far) from quality.
  6. Kaa
    +3
    20 February 2013 08: 08
    China does not need aircraft carriers for war, but for "demonstrating moschi" in the World Ocean. They can't catch up with the USA on AUG, with whom to fight? With Taiwan, negotiations are underway on a merger like Gokong, for Japan - the United States will fit in, the Russian Federation is terrifying for its unpredictability in terms of a massive nuclear missile strike that nullifies its military-industrial potential. Any Vietnam-Singapore-Philippines - China remembers Japan's lesson on moving in this direction ... And why should China fight for resources if it can buy them for the US cut green paper ... he has a couple of trillions of that. But getting hydrocarbons from the Persian Gulf by sea, in case of a big naughty, conducting convoys with minerals and influencing the African kings is the very thing. Look, they have lathered themselves with Africa, for resources that can be exchanged for Treasuries or dollars - "a donkey laden with gold opens the gates of a fortress better than any army" - just as (for now) the dollar works. That's what they are going to do, and aircraft carriers this is from the category "Colt and a kind word convince better than just a kind word" .. Click on the picture - and you will see in detail how China "soaped up" in Africa ...
    1. 0
      20 February 2013 09: 49
      Not only to Africa ... Recently there was a message that they would develop the Russian continental shelf together with Rosneft ... But our ears were hung up, they gave oil, wood, and gas for priceless green papers ... whatever, at least mother’s mother ... Things do not go further than stuffing their own pockets, they do not see the development prospects of China, Russia's interests are sideways. Type - time will write everything off. Only the fruits of such a policy will have to reap our children.
      Here is the real topic - what are the significant advantages for the country that this cooperation gives? One is to strengthen China to the peak of the United States, and everything else is a deep minus.
      1. Don
        0
        20 February 2013 14: 02
        Quote: TRex
        Recently there was a message that along with Rosneft they will develop the Russian continental shelf

        Do not throw the link.
        Quote: TRex
        And our ears hung, for the priceless green papers they give away oil, and forest, and gas

        These pieces of paper are valued in the world. And what do you suggest not selling oil and gas? How is it?
        Quote: TRex
        Russia's interests - side

        And what are your interests in Russia? Do not sell oil and gas? Keep them in the bowels?
        Quote: TRex
        Only the fruits of such a policy will have to reap our children.

        What are the fruits of what policy? Oil and gas sales? What nonsense are you talking about?
        1. +1
          20 February 2013 14: 16
          Quote: Don
          Quote: TRex Recently there was a message that together with Rosneft they will develop the Russian continental shelf.

          Who are the Chinese? Didn't hear something like that, maybe you missed it? For example, everyone knows about Gazprom and Shell on Sakhalin for a long time, but about this not so much ... And who is from China - they have only one large state corporation Sinopek there, and in order to "develop together", you need not only and not so much money , but also technology or some other material injections, which can only be provided by companies in the oil and gas industry - for example, Shell.
          1. Don
            0
            20 February 2013 15: 35
            Quote: Egen
            Who are the Chinese? I didn’t hear something like that, maybe I missed it? For example, everyone has known about Gazprom and Shell on Sakhalin for a long time, but it’s not very ... And who are from China, they have only one large state corporation Sinopek

            So I didn’t hear something. Chevron heard about Rosneft and ExxonMobil, but not about China. There are also PetroChina, China National Offshore Oil Corporation and China National Oil and Gas Corporation.
            Otherwise, I completely agree with you.
        2. 0
          20 February 2013 14: 47
          http://piter-piter.ru/business/631-rosneft-planiruet-sotrudnichestvo-s-kitaem.ht

          ml
          Here is a reference. I’m still looking at the news on the box.

          No one answered the question ... What is so vital that we can get from China? We need modern breakthrough technologies in mechanical engineering, electronics, avionics ... We import all kinds of junk in exchange for energy. But oil and the forest may soon end .... On the border of Russia and China, the goods with our forest will be in the line ... Toad presses ... What in return, except for telephones and any crap?
          And this is "nonsense"? Dear Don! China is getting stronger, and we are turning into its raw material appendage ...
          1. Don
            0
            20 February 2013 16: 29
            Quote: TRex
            Here is a reference. I’m still looking at the news on the box.

            In principle, this is not even important. The joint development and exploration of minerals is a natural and normal thing. Can you imagine how much money you need to invest in mineral exploration? If China is ready to invest, then this is good.
            Quote: TRex
            What is so vital we can get from China? We need modern breakthrough technologies in mechanical engineering, electronics, avionics ... We import all kinds of junk in exchange for energy. But oil and the forest may soon end .... On the border of Russia and China, goods with our forest will be in the line ... Toad presses ... What in return, except for telephones and any crap?

            Dear TRex is a trade. What does vital necessities mean? For China, is Russian oil vital? They buy most of the oil in Iran, Angola, Sudan. What kind of junk? Phones? So if the Russian Federation starts to produce them itself, then their prices will rise. This is the economy. Engineering in the Russian Federation (Heavy I mean) is no worse than in China. Selling resources is normal. Economically developed countries such as Australia, Canada, Norway sell.
            Quote: TRex
            Dear Don! China is growing stronger, and we are turning into its raw materials appendage ... In what!

            You respected just seem to have a poor understanding of the structure of the economy. You say that the Russian Federation is turning into a raw materials appendage of the PRC, others that the raw materials appendage of the EU. And you and others are wrong, you can even look at the numbers. China is only 8% of Russian exports and 13,2% of imports, and the EU is only 30% of exports and 30% of imports. And the Russian Federation exports not only oil and gas, but also metals (not ores), chemical products, military products (the same engines in China), read for Sitronics, Angstrom, Mikron.
            And the Russian Federation can not be called a raw materials appendage, I can explain to you why. Kuwait is a raw materials appendage. Oil gives Kuwait about 50% of GDP and 95% of the revenue of the state budget.
      2. +1
        20 February 2013 14: 27
        Quote: TRex
        And our ears were hung up, they give oil, wood, and gas for their priceless green papers ...

        Quote: TRex
        Here is the real topic - what are the significant advantages for the country that this cooperation gives? One is to strengthen China to the peak of the United States, and everything else is a deep minus.

        You are not quite right. Nevertheless, these pieces of paper are still a currency, we spend them on all sorts of needs (I don’t say what, this is another question :))
        For example, Gazprom creates 50% of the country's budget by exporting gas — it read a fact somewhere (I was surprised myself), and the coal industry only 10 or 20% (I wonder how much oil I didn’t find) Without gas export and Gazprom (by the way he is 20 years old 17.02) would not have money in the budget. Do you know how much money you spent on the last election? All at the expense of Gazprom ... :(
        So, gas oil export, etc. it is extremely important for us, here you are wrong.
        But then you are absolutely right - about what we have from this. Well, a small pension supplement :) The rest is all coming ... (put it yourself). At the same time, there is a wonderful experience of two countries - the Netherlands and all sorts of Emirates - in transferring the economy from oil and gas. Both there and there developed a normal industry (/ tourism), which now fills the budget quite well (unlike us). And the main thing is simple !! Russia also has every opportunity to go on the rails of budget independence from the export of raw materials, but the last few years have only been talking about it loudly ... 15 ?, and everything is pouring into ... nano, which no one sees and does not feel :)) )
        Yes, it can be argued that the Arabs say that the climate is especially for the resort, and the Dutch are in the center of Europe, but nifiga, the Bedouins had a problem with sands even cleaner than ours with snow, but they could, and we are worse? : (((
        1. Don
          0
          20 February 2013 15: 53
          Quote: Egen
          Gazprom through gas exports forms 50% of the country's budget

          I don’t know where you read it, but this is nonsense. In the structure of the GDP of the Russian Federation, mineral extraction is only 9,1%, how then in the budget and only from Gazprom, maybe 50%? For 2012, 17% of the budget was formed from the tax on mining.
          Quote: Egen
          and the coal industry - only 10 or 20%

          Has the coal industry generated 10-20% of the budget? RF exports coal? And which coal exports and where if not a secret? Coking or energetic? Comrade is complete nonsense. You read the wrong information somewhere. The vast majority of mines are not owned by the state, but are privately owned. Corporations such as NLMZ, Mechel, Severstal pay taxes on production and use most of the coking coal mined for themselves to produce steel and rolled products. You do not confuse state export articles with the formation of its budget.
          1. 0
            21 February 2013 09: 38
            Quote: Don
            I don’t know where you read it.

            To be honest - in closed reports :) I'm in money, not in volumes :(
            Quote: Don
            RF exports coal?

            no, it is clear not the Russian Federation, but private capital, but it exports most of it. By the way, NLMZ undertook to build a mine and froze something. Coke, yes, more for myself, this is always a tidbit, but we also have other coals besides the "iron-making" owners and mines - the same Kuzbassrazrezugol, for example, but open official documents on the website of the Kemerovo Region administration, somewhere there were production volumes and export, I'm sorry, too lazy to rummage :( And "where" - now more to China, although it mines 5 or 10 times more than the Russian Federation, but everything is not enough for him. Previously, there was a time coal from Kuzbass, even to Australia, was transported to Japan, but there is more gas there now ... And what is being done in the coal industry in Ukraine?
        2. 0
          20 February 2013 17: 13
          Thanks to everyone for the discussion. The photo is not the topic - to raise the mood of respected members of the forum.
    2. Don
      0
      20 February 2013 13: 57
      I do not agree with you Kaa.
      Quote: Kaa
      US on AUG they can not catch up

      The USA did not build its AUGs in 10 years.
      Quote: Kaa
      Gokong-type merger talks underway with Taiwan

      When did these negotiations take place? When will be held?
      Quote: Kaa
      for Japan - the US will fit

      Not necessary. With the United States of America, the war is not to bomb Iraq. May not be solved. In addition, there may not be a full-scale war.
      Quote: Kaa
      All sorts of Vietnam-Singapore-Philippines - China remembers Japan's lesson in moving in this direction

      Japan took all sorts of Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia and Singapore. Then the United States and Great Britain knocked them out of there. And at the moment, the PRC will do without questions for the disputed territories of Vietnam and the Philippines. they are not going to occupy them.
    3. 0
      20 February 2013 14: 31
      Quote: Kaa
      Click on the picture - and you will see in detail how China "soaped up" in Africa ...

      This is not an absolutely adequate model. Does not take into account the work in the same Africa of companies from other countries acting in the interests of China. For example, a familiar Australian company begins to produce gas in Africa, but ultimately it will not be delivered home (they are already in first place in export), but to China.
  7. +4
    20 February 2013 08: 29
    Dear, what about giving communism all over the world ??? !! B
    1. Kaa
      +3
      20 February 2013 09: 41
      Quote: Samaritan
      what about give communism all over the world

      So far, the slogan "Mao's teachings are eternal and true" rules. Recently, The New York Times published an article portraying Xi Jinping as a kind of "conservative in sheep's clothing." According to the newspaper, during that very visit to Shenzhen, when Xi Jinping announced the need for reforms, at one of the internal party meetings he revealed his true identity, promising that will not repeat the mistakes of Mikhail Gorbachev. over the past 20 years, the collapse of the Soviet Union has been an important lesson for the entire palette of Chinese political thinkers, from conservatives to liberals. Moreover, this experience was intensively studied and analyzed in the party schools and institutions of the PRC Academy of Social Sciences, that is, in the true strongholds of Chinese Marxism, and all these researchers usually came to the same conclusion: the CCP must deal with corruption and other social problems before of how she is forced to do it from the outside The collapse of the Soviet Union in China recall not as an example of the triumph of democracy, but as an example of what could happen if too much freedom is given too soon. For most Chinese, Russia's transition to democracy is associated primarily with huge territorial losses and the appropriation of a mass of state funds and assets by a new class of oligarchs, and I must say that the inhabitants of a country in which the two largest provinces are known for their separatist movements have everything reason to take the situation that way. Original publication: China's Soviet Lessons
      Опубликовано: 19/02/2013 13:24
      http://www.inosmi.ru/fareast/20130220/206110353.html#ixzz2LPnGkj8l
    2. sashka
      0
      20 February 2013 11: 01
      As far as I remember. Our goal is PEACE .. Sounds great. And what is meant? It is necessary to lie a question for the Strategic Missile Forces .. ???
  8. +1
    20 February 2013 08: 34
    Everything is correct and logical, but
    "In the event of a military clash in the World Ocean with almost any state other than the United States ..." - unless the states will allow anyone to fight without them :) With the (comparative) weakening of the US fleet, this all works, but alas, this is still a distant prospect :( - quite real that the Chinese have calculated and are preparing ahead of time, and we ... :(
  9. Alikovo
    0
    20 February 2013 08: 51
    Russia needs three aircraft carriers: 2 to the Northern Fleet, 1 Pacific. fleet.
    1. not good
      +1
      20 February 2013 14: 11
      At the Pacific Fleet there is more "water", and the region is more problematic, there are few AUGs there.
  10. bdolah
    +2
    20 February 2013 09: 14
    Damn, but this board was laid with me at the Black Sea shipbuilding, when I served in Nikolaev in the 80s with the state acceptance of ships ... Evil is not enough ...
  11. sashka
    0
    20 February 2013 11: 11
    STATES for my citizen I am sending AUG .. We can only "send"
    1. +2
      20 February 2013 12: 40
      Yes, and send .... your citizen ..
  12. 0
    20 February 2013 11: 42
    At one time, they also scoffed at the industrialization of SOCIALIST RUSSIA until the USSR turned around. And now China shows that we, too, once had prospects, if the thieves in power slammed in time. Unfortunately, HISTORY does not have subjunctive pronouns in its arsenal.
  13. 0
    20 February 2013 11: 45
    A state without an ideological foundation is doomed to be someone else's colony. In fact, Russia is a colony. A rich country with a poor population. Sells resources for green candy wrappers.
    After all, you can't do the elementary thing - open an oil or gas exchange to trade on your site! Medvedev is 4 years old "blah blah blah", before that Putin "blah blah blah" ... but things are still there.
    I’m silent about making the ruble convertible - the world banking system simply will not allow this, I think.
    Well done Chinese, silent glanders promote their ideas.
    1. not good
      0
      20 February 2013 14: 18
      Any ideology, correctly presented, leads to the consolidation of the people, but as long as the people are disunited, the country can be milked. Therefore, neither Russian oligarchs, nor our Western "friends" are interested in building a state ideology. And the current leadership of the country, ideology, seems to be an incomprehensible word.
  14. 0
    20 February 2013 13: 20
    Of the entire history of plundering the Soviet legacy, of course, one of the craziest cases is the sale of ex-Varyag for 20 (!) Million dollars.
    It is necessary to so want money, and be so stupid as to sell a ship for hardly the fiftieth of its value!
    But the Chinese fellows are building their own full-fledged carrier fleet, and Liaoning will be only the first swallow here.
    1. 0
      21 February 2013 01: 14
      After the collapse, this building belonged to Ukraine, and they considered it inappropriately ...