Military Review

China increases production of Su-27 family fighters

55
China increases production of Su-27 family fighters

China is expanding the production of aircraft created by Sukhoi. ARMS-TASS correspondent was informed about this during the Singapore Airshow-2014 air show.


At the same time, the attention of specialists is focused on the development of Chinese own programs to create fighters, such as Jian-10 (J-10), Jian-20 (J-20) and Jian-21 / 31 ( J-21 / 31), Shenyang Aircraft Corporation SAC (Shenyang Aircraft Corporation) continues to develop the family of Su-27 aircraft that are in the Air Force of the People’s Liberation Army of China (PLA Air Force) with 1992. The most modern versions of the aircraft are carrier-based fighter Jian-15 (J-15) and multipurpose fighter Jian-16 (J-16).

China began its own development on the basis of the Su-27 family in 1992, when it became the first state to purchase a heavy fighter in addition to the post-Soviet countries. Three batches of single-seat fighters Su-27SK and two-seat Su-27UBK were delivered from Russia. These aircraft had a significant impact on changes in aviation industry of China.

Then, China received a license to manufacture Su-27SK aircraft at the plant in Shenyang. The contract was completed in 1996. The construction of 200 airplanes was originally intended. Production began with the assembly of fighters from the supplied car-sets, but then China gradually began to increase the share of its own work. Collected in Shenyang Su-27 received the designation "Jian-11" (J-11). Experts noted a low level of quality control system of the aircraft. As a result, production was completed after the assembly of the Jian-105 and Jian-11А (J-11A) fighters, which was distinguished by a number of improvements in the pilot's office and aircraft armament, placed on external pylons.

As the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation and the 601 Institute collaborating with it gained more experience building aircraft, the development of a local version of the Su-27 aircraft, Jian-11В (J-11B), began. In an effort to get rid of technological dependence on Russia, the Chinese industry developed a number of elements and systems that made it possible to assemble fighters without Russian spare parts and adapt them to the use of local aviation weapons.

The main difference of the Chinese fighter was the installed engine of local production "Shenyang-Limin" WS-10A "Taihang", which replaced the Russian TRD AL-31F produced by NPO Saturn. The test flight of the J-11WS model took place in 2002. Two years later, the first J-11B prototype, equipped with two WS-10A turbofan engines, took off. Production of the Jian-11В aircraft continued with Chinese engines, however problems associated with its reliability led to the use of the Russian AL-31F aircraft engines. At present, experts believe that most of the problems associated with the WS-10A have been overcome and the Jian-11В fighters will be equipped with these aircraft engines. Photos that appeared at the end of last year indicate that additional changes might have been made to the WS-10A design, since the shape of the nozzle was different from those presented earlier.

In addition to the new engine, the Jian-11В has a new Chinese multifunctional on-board radar (radar), an infrared search-tracking system and a communication channel that allows the use of a wide range of Chinese weapons, including the air-to-air missile PL-12 with active radar guidance. The pilot's office, which has five multifunctional displays, also uses Chinese instruments.

Jian-11В fighters entered service with the PLA Air Force at the end of 2007, and from that moment their number increased significantly. At the beginning of 2010, the PLA Navy Aviation began to receive the Jian-11В version, designed for use in the coastal zone. In addition to the single-seat fighter, the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation has developed a double version, called the Jian-11BS (J-11BS). The plane made the first flight in 2007, and was adopted by the Air Force and Navy PLA in 2010.

When solving the task of creating a deck fighter, Soviet experts chose the option of an appropriate modernization of the Su-27, which was designated the Su-33. China chose the exact same path, creating an aircraft to equip its new aircraft carrier, Liaoning. For these purposes, a prototype Su-33 was acquired from Ukraine.

The new aircraft received the designation "Jian-15" (J-15) and the name "Flying Shark". He looks and structurally resembles the Su-33, but when it was created, composite materials (CM) were widely used to reduce the mass. Most systems installed on Jian-15 are equivalent to Jian-11B. It uses a similar radar, although according to preliminary information, its action is expanded and includes several "marine" modes. The missile warning system is also similar to that of Jian-11В. The cabin is equipped with five multifunctional displays.

"Jian-15" is equipped with a wide range of weapons, which include air-to-air, ground-to-air missiles and anti-ship missiles (ASM). An unusual feature is the ability to install a container with fuel for refueling other aircraft, which allows the Jian-15 with heavy weapons to accompany other planes when performing combat missions at a considerable distance. The fuel filling rod is similar in appearance to the Russian UPAZ-1A and could be copied or purchased in Russia.

As in the case of Jian-11В, the use of a local-made aircraft engine significantly reduces the combat qualities of the aircraft. Jian-15 is supposed to use the WS-10H TRDD, which is the “maritime” version of the WS-10A. The main difference is the increased burden required to improve the take-off and landing from the deck of the Liaoning aircraft carrier. However, only one of the two prototypes of the deck fighter is equipped with engines WS-10H. At least five “Jian-15” are equipped with Russian turbofan engines AL-31F. The prototype aircraft with these engines made the first flight in August 2009. By May 2010, flights were already made from a ground platform that simulated the deck of an aircraft carrier. Tests directly on the ship began at the end of last year, when on November 23 two prototypes took off and landed. The photographs published in December 2013 clearly show that the first Jian-15, produced by the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation, are equipped with Russian aircraft engines.

At the same time, a two-seat version of the deck fighter is being developed, which may receive the designation Jian-15S (J-15S). The prototype, equipped with WS-10A engines, made its first flight in November 2012. Despite the fact that Jian-15S was originally intended to be used as a training aircraft, this fighter will be used in electronic warfare and in various combat missions.

Impressed by the use of the Su-27 family of aircraft as air defense systems, the Chinese turned their attention to the Sukhoi aircraft that could act as a carrier of heavy weapons. At the end of the 2000-s, the People's Republic of China received the first batch of two-seat multipurpose fighter Su-30MKK, which significantly increased the capabilities of the PLA Air Force to use high-precision weapons. It was ordered for the Air Force two batches of Su-30MKK on 38 aircraft in each. The aircraft ordered for the aviation of the PLA 25 Navy received an upgraded radar that allowed the use of weapon by ships.
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/
55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch 20 February 2014 12: 18
    +17
    Do not forget that China is nearby! But Poghosyan also wants to teach them how to do the 35th! Where do those who are responsible for such transactions look. Is it really not clear?
    1. predator.3
      predator.3 20 February 2014 12: 53
      +12
      Quote: polkovnik manuch
      Do not forget that China is nearby! But Poghosyan also wants to teach them how to do the 35th! Where do those who are responsible for such transactions look. Is it really not clear?

      That's right, China is the most dangerous likely enemy of Russia, which has common borders, you cannot sell modern military equipment and technologies to the Hunghus, it will be more expensive in the future! And how much do they plan to earn on this? a couple of billion? Then, in the event of war, how many thousands of lives will our soldiers pay for this, who will be killed from "our" weapons! fool
      And why does Pagosyan solve such issues, we don’t have a president, MO? And why are they silent?
      1. supertiger21
        supertiger21 20 February 2014 18: 41
        +3
        Quote: predator.3
        That's right, China is the most dangerous likely enemy of Russia, which has common borders, you can't sell modern military equipment and technologies to the Hunghus, it will be more expensive in the future! And how much do they plan to earn on this? a couple of billion? Then, in the event of a war, how many thousands of lives will our soldiers pay for this, who will be killed with "our" weapons! And why is it Pagosyan deciding such issues, that we do not have a president, MO? And why are they silent?


        Keep drinks , ahead of me in thought!
    2. Argon
      Argon 20 February 2014 12: 58
      0
      Dear compatriots, think about the contents of the article, they will build this Su-35 in 5 years without us, but there will be no question of buying. The main thing is to resolve the issue of the quantity in the batch being sold, and of course with the targeted spending of the funds received.
    3. EvilLion
      EvilLion 20 February 2014 13: 40
      0
      Excuse me, but are you completely not friends?
      1. Argon
        Argon 20 February 2014 16: 48
        +1
        Su-35 is a burden for our Air Force; and so it will be less than there will be more exports. The Chinese have not copied for a long time - they are DEVELOPING the technologies received, the latest modifications of the J-11 J15 are superior to the Su-27SM in their capabilities, the Su-33 has a larger modernization potential. And note that they are being built in series. The only thing that they are holding back is the engines, but not for long. The crisis works for them - they will buy some kind of French or English, Canadian engine-building company and they will be with dvigl and we will be left alone with our problems.
  2. Saburo
    Saburo 20 February 2014 12: 26
    +4
    And some still want to sell the Su-35 to the Chinese ...
  3. polkownik1
    polkownik1 20 February 2014 12: 46
    +1
    We are all shy in the definitions. There is a betrayal of Russia's interests. Everything is much more serious than you could imagine. The inability to effectively manage their own economy cannot justify the sale of modern and promising weapons, if not so far to the enemy, but to the opponent.
  4. indiggo
    indiggo 20 February 2014 13: 46
    +3
    you can’t sell the modern weapons to the Chinese, they will not fulfill the agreement not to copy equipment, this is already clear to everyone except us. here, as I understand it, not political but financial desire. since there are people who do not see their future in Russia. their task is to earn and go for a cardon.
  5. user1212
    user1212 20 February 2014 14: 04
    +3
    Yes Yes Yes. sold mother Russia. Start thinking with your head
    China is not only a rival but also the ONLY ally of Russia against the USA
    The Chinese will buy the necessary technology anyway. Not so with the USA, France or Israel. The only question is who will benefit from this (some contracts for training and maintenance of equipment are worth what).
    Su 35 is not the height of technical thought. To develop new aircraft, you need a lot of money. Selling equipment China is one of the ways to earn money and save the most valuable employees, upgrade equipment, etc. Or do you offer them to open Sukhoi-Plaza following the example of Tupolev’s?
    Fighting with a country that serves your planes is almost impossible. In a month you will be left without aviation.
    The sale of aircraft to China will seriously reduce the cost of their production for the Russian Air Force (remember the fate of f22. They did not want to sell for export, then we realized that they themselves would not pull)
    Can anyone here give at least one real argument not to sell su 35 China?
    Will they copy? Su 27 could not really copy for 20 years. All of them have an under-plane. And this is a plane developed 50 years ago
    Will they start shooting at us? c400 do not care 27th or 35th shoot down. The main thing is that there are enough missiles and PUs (and this is a question not related to the sale of aircraft in China)
    Russia and China have far fewer problems than China and the United States. Their dismantling among themselves is in our hands. Not Against Us (So far) US Strengthens Pacific Navy Group
    1. predator.3
      predator.3 20 February 2014 14: 27
      +1
      Quote: user1212
      Su 35 is not the height of technical thought. To develop new aircraft, you need a lot of money. Sale of equipment in China is one of the ways to earn it and keep the most valuable employees, update equipment, etc.

      And that Russia already as a pauper sits on the porch, at Sochi 2014 they just banged $ 50 billion, so this money is not just an airplane, but 5-6 aircraft carriers can be built!
      1. user1212
        user1212 20 February 2014 16: 49
        +1
        Quote: predator.3
        at Sochi-2014 only banged $ 50 billion

        Where does this figure come from? Will you provide an estimate? One "journalist" blurted out and away we go?
        1. predator.3
          predator.3 20 February 2014 17: 18
          0
          Quote: user1212
          Quote: predator.3
          at Sochi-2014 only banged $ 50 billion

          Where does this figure come from? Will you provide an estimate? One "journalist" blurted out and away we go?


          Yes, Comrade Dima himself voiced it.
          1. user1212
            user1212 20 February 2014 17: 24
            +1
            He announced the volume of investments in the Krasnodar Territory. Don't you feel the difference?
            1. clidon
              clidon 20 February 2014 20: 44
              +3
              Well, it’s clear that the investments that fell to the Krasnoyarsk Territory (such as tunnels to Krasnaya Polyana, aligned mountainsides, imported trains, etc.) are not connected in any way with the Olympics. It coincided. Yes, and the stadiums were accidentally built there, just decided to develop sports in this region, and then opa and Sochi 2014.) In general, this Olympics is just a tangle of random coincidences.
              And the budget itself is clubs, pucks and Coca-Cola for guests.
              1. user1212
                user1212 21 February 2014 05: 27
                +1
                What is wrong with building stadiums? Not needed?
                For example, MTS and Megafon invest about 10 billion rubles. in the organization of communications in Sochi (also included in $ 50 billion). After the Olympics, the extra towers are dismantled and transported to other regions. They will beat off their roaming + advertising. Hotels were built by private owners. New hotels in the resort town are not needed? A power plant in a city in which big problems with power supply is also not needed? And we definitely do not need roads.
                Of course I swelled dofiga I do not argue. But firstly, the figure of $ 50 billion is greatly overstated (they didn’t take everything from the budget), secondly, they invested in a resort town, and not just in the Olympics, in the third part of the costs will be recaptured (of course they won’t be able to recapture everything), in the fourth it’s better to invest in Russian Sport than in the American economy.
                1. clidon
                  clidon 21 February 2014 18: 10
                  0
                  Swell of course dofiga I do not argue

                  From this one could start and end with the same ... Of course, something will return, of course, not everything is thrown into the wind in the form of dust in the eyes. But, the losses will amount to billions of dollars, billions of which are needed throughout the country (where they are often hanged for a million dollars), for things much more necessary than towers and superstadiums for spectacles. For sports schools, swimming pools, roads ... Look, for example, the millionth Chelyabinsk is going to freeze the construction of the metro - there is no money, the city is suffocating. But the answer from the center is one - "There is no money, somehow yourself"
                  The Olympics is a show that could be dispensed with until the economy was put in order, the state really became strong, and (as usual) engaged in costly and pathetic window dressing.
                  And the “personal funds of companies” most often turn out to be a screen behind which is the next state investment fund, which received money from the Central Bank “for the Olympics”. Which compensates for losses from the budget. But directly, of course, everything is clean and smooth - "Megaphone invested."
                  1. user1212
                    user1212 21 February 2014 19: 17
                    0
                    In November 2013, FSB officers conducted searches in the case of a large theft of budget funds allocated for the supply of equipment for the construction of the metro. According to the investigation, in 2007 Chelyabmetrotransstroy Municipal Unitary Enterprise entered into a municipal contract for 182 million rubles with Energomash LLC for the purchase of equipment without design documentation and with the help of one-day firms. The cost of equipment was greatly overstated, money from the accounts of these companies was transferred to the accounts of individuals and cashed out. The equipment supplied under the contract since 2008 has not been mounted on construction sites and has not been operated.

                    Quote: clidon
                    Of course, something will return, of course, not everything is thrown into the wind in the form of dust in the eyes. But, the losses will be in the billions of dollars, billions that are needed throughout the country.

                    I do not argue with what is expensive and stupid. I argue that you don’t need to build anything in Sochi at all and all the money has been thrown away.
                    But let's turn the question a little differently. And the money invested in the cinema is not thrown to the wind? Also, incidentally, millions of dollars. What about football? We sell oil, we buy blacks in teams. It makes no sense to invest in sports then. Not cost effective. Close all cinemas, sports sections, bars, restaurants, museums (nefig spend money). Housing also does not make sense to build because barracks are more profitable. Again, we will make the clothes the same so that no one is offended. North Korea damn it. good
                    1. clidon
                      clidon 21 February 2014 21: 09
                      0
                      They steal from us everywhere, by the way, I didn’t mention the looting in Sochi at all, because it’s clear that a quarter or a third is stolen wherever something is done.

                      And the money invested in the cinema is not thrown to the wind?

                      You don't seem to see the difference (judging by the fussing with the barracks), between supporting sports and giving money for culture and arranging a pretentious celebration or creating such a festival to make the Oscar cry, with diamond figurines (with a meteorite of course) and a marble staircase with Persian carpets on which the stars of cinema will tread. In the new 20-storey Cinema Palace. And fireworks on all channels. Are we going to do this kind of support for the cinema? Let's get the billions off thirty bucks? Of course, someone will have to be squeezed for the sake of such an event, but we will support everyone's nose in the morning and filmmakers ...
                      1. user1212
                        user1212 21 February 2014 22: 29
                        0
                        This is clear. Everything is good in moderation. That is why I gave the opposite exaggerated opinion
                        We had the last Olympiad in 80. So there is a suspicion that over the years they killed more than the 2014 Olympics for cinema. I mean not only direct sponsorship of the shootings, but also the maintenance of studios, educational institutions, a department of the ministry of culture, and so on. And note that this money, too, will not be beaten off even by half. I’m silent about football.
                      2. clidon
                        clidon 22 February 2014 09: 17
                        0
                        Well, here again, on the one hand, you seem to understand, but on the other hand, there are some incomprehensible comparisons - "in 34 years, too, you spent a lot of things on cinema." I know the figures - for the whole culture (support for cinema, theaters, and other events), from the budget we have spent 3 billion dollars a year for the past few years, and the figure is decreasing every year ...
                        I understand that the "above" perfectly understand the ancient truth "to the crowd - bread and circuses". We have traditional problems with bread, but the spectacle of zababakhat and please your ego is please. But such a "state" approach is unpleasant to me.
                      3. user1212
                        user1212 22 February 2014 10: 30
                        +1
                        Quote: clidon
                        Well, again, on the one hand, you seem to understand, and on the other hand, some strange comparisons

                        What did you see incomprehensible there? Comparison with cinema? Nobody yells at the forums tries we so much ruin at mediocre directors who shoot nonsense. Can you remember 10 films in the last 10 years that you enjoyed watching? Where are the accusations of GDP for immeasurable spending on culture? Also, the metro could have been built by the way. I am not for the immeasurable budget of the Olympiad and am not against spending on culture. I am for an objective view of the problems, and not a stupid reprinting of liberal slogans about $ 50 billion. Agree if everyone thinks with their own head idiocy we will have less. If maydanutye THOUGHT, and did not repeat like parrots "Glory to Ukraine" life there now would be calmer.
                      4. user1212
                        user1212 22 February 2014 11: 28
                        0
                        So with the topic of the article. I am not very happy to sell aircraft to China, but this will increase the series, load factories, and improve the production culture. Another question is under what conditions these aircraft should be supplied. For example, it is difficult to call smart the idea of ​​transferring documentation to production and new technologies. You can sell a large batch of ready-made aircraft, and then sell documentation for old or used ones (those that we will not use in new aircraft), your technology. Yes, and then thinking very well about the consequences
                      5. clidon
                        clidon 22 February 2014 21: 40
                        0
                        The situation here is complicated in one thing - we have shown and are showing absolute incompetence in negotiations with China (we generally have a weak eastern direction) and an absolute desire for an instant desire to cut money now and immediately. That is, we sell weapons, supported the production, and then ... well, then I retire and it will dissolve someone else.
                        China does not make a secret - they primarily need engines about the Su-35. If we want to promote Chinese engine building, then of course you can sell ...
                        There is another little nuance here - can we now completely refuse China? Perhaps this is pure politics intertwined with the economy ...
                    2. clidon
                      clidon 22 February 2014 21: 30
                      0
                      And what is the GDP praised for supporting (not tens of billions by the way, but supporting pants more) mediocre Russian directing? And they ask for a further rise to enter tens of billions tons of greenery into this business? Yes, I also think that instead of supporting all sorts of Mikhalkovs, it would be better to invest money in art schools. But what does this have to do with throwing money into pathos and candy wrappers?

                      I am for an objective view of the problems, and not the stupid retyping of liberal slogans about $ 50 billion.

                      If liberal slogans are generally right here, what can you do. If a policeman hits her aunt with a child in the face, I don’t care anyway - is this a dull liberal criticism or not.

                      If maydanutye THOUGHT, and did not repeat like parrots "Glory to Ukraine" life there now would be calmer.

                      I would not want to drown the dialogue in the muddy Ukrainian topic, but I will say that Maidan is thinking. He just thinks with different brains and other evaluations.
  • polkownik1
    polkownik1 20 February 2014 15: 23
    +2
    Su 35 is not the height of technical thought.
    I would easily agree with that. One thing hinders the serial production of the "top of technical thought" T-50 is very far away. Besides, in the war with China, quantity is extremely important, not only quality. You can sell what is reliably replaced by a more perfect one and in the required quantity. And about the effectiveness of the air defense system - look at the map! At the best of times, there were enough holes, but today ... Yes, with such a management, the S-400 for the most part will go on sale.
    As for "feeding the design teams ..." - a day before the beginning of the Second World War, we drove trains with grain and oil to Germany. Have you fed your designers?
    1. user1212
      user1212 20 February 2014 17: 07
      0
      And the T50 is the top of technical thought? Aircraft design never stops. While the T50 is being finalized, the design departments are already drawing the next plane. You can't just let out a good plane and stop there (Japanese zero is a good example of "laurel"). Unfortunately, the RF Ministry of Defense cannot provide such a level of orders at which it will become profitable to make fighters, and you will not get fat on budget handouts. Let's bankrupt the last capable design bureau in Russia and send specialists to tax. Who makes it easier? The question is not whether it is good to sell the plane to the Chinese or not. The question is how else to preserve design bureaus and factories? Give your idea. Just don't talk about the Olympics. I got this nonsense already.
      Quote: polkownik1
      In addition, in the war with China, quantity, not just quality, is extremely important

      How do you imagine a full-scale war of two nuclear powers? In a couple of hours there will be no one to fight. Local conflicts are another matter. But there, numbers are not as important as quality.
      1. user1212
        user1212 20 February 2014 17: 28
        0
        Quote: user1212
        And as for the effectiveness of air defense systems - look at the map!

        I already wrote above that this is not a question of selling airplanes, but of the presence of air defense systems. The Chinese can fly to TB-3 laughing if there is no air defense.
        1. polkownik1
          polkownik1 20 February 2014 20: 59
          0
          It's a matter of selling planes! Such as the Su-27 Su-35, which, due to their range-duration characteristics and the presence of powerful anti-radar weapons, can bypass the affected areas of the air defense missile system. There is no continuous radar field and will not be. And the length of the border ... I don't remember exactly, several thousand kilometers. Yes, mountains are everywhere. We know they swam :)) Determination of the enemy's flight time: From the moment it was detected by our advanced radar stations until the moment it completed its combat mission (launching air-to-ground missiles). For example: the flight time of an enemy aircraft at low altitude near the Ak-Tepe airfield (our former interceptor airfield) is only 6 (six) minutes! And this - with the "ancient" rockets "in-z" Seconds today. This means that the affected area of ​​the S-400 air defense system, which completely depends on the target detection zone, shrinks to the size of a football field (almost :)) So the capabilities of any air defense system must be treated creatively :)) And the Chinese know all this.
      2. polkownik1
        polkownik1 20 February 2014 20: 44
        0
        Just do not we need to get into this endless circle! Do not have time to do one thing - you need to do the following, etc. You are guided by the current state of affairs, when that aircraft, that submarines are designed, built and come to the army for 20-25 years! And even then in a scanty amount. This cannot be the norm and guideline. A full-blown nuclear war in a couple of hours? Not sure. The real war after the exchange of blows will only begin. Especially - with China, whose main task will not be the destruction of our state infrastructure, but the capture of vast areas suitable for living. For life tomorrow, and not after the half-life of any cesium-plutonium in 150 years.
        1. user1212
          user1212 21 February 2014 05: 53
          0
          Quote: polkownik1
          Just do not we need to get into this endless circle! Do not have time to do one thing - you need to do the following, etc.

          We have always been in this circle. And not just us. Look at the years of adoption of fighter aircraft and the years of the development of the following. For example, the MiG23 made its first flight in the year 67. At this time, the development of the Su 27 and MiG 29 had already begun
        2. user1212
          user1212 21 February 2014 06: 36
          0
          I will not undertake to predict the consequences of a global nuclear strike
    2. user1212
      user1212 20 February 2014 18: 32
      +1
      Quote: polkownik1
      Have you fed your designers?

      In general, yes. But what would a lack of oil and grain supply prevent the war?
      And what did the USSR buy in Germany?
      Germany’s acute need for raw materials and food did not allow the USSR to take all the goods that Germany could offer, but to demand what the Soviet side needed most in the growing danger of war. The Soviet government agreed to supply the goods necessary for Germany only on condition that it could purchase machine tools and other factory equipment in it. Moreover, a significant part of these purchases should have been the latest military equipment

      http://gkaf.narod.ru/kirillov/ref-liter/nni1997-2-prewar.html
      1. polkownik1
        polkownik1 20 February 2014 21: 12
        0
        I am embarrassed to ask, what kind of samples of the latest military equipment did Germany give us, and which of these did we put into production? How are the Chinese today, unashamedly, delivering our weapons? By the way, stocks of grain and oil for the war are just as important as shells. Who is who here, another question ...
        1. user1212
          user1212 21 February 2014 04: 43
          0
          German-Soviet Trade Agreement (1939)
          http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%93%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE-%D1%81%D
          0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0
          %B2%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_(19
          39 )
  • Nayhas
    Nayhas 20 February 2014 15: 53
    +2
    Quote: user1212
    China is not only a rival but also the ONLY ally of Russia against the USA

    We do not have a common land border with the United States, and in textbooks it is not the United States that draws Siberia and the Far East as its territory.
    Quote: user1212
    The Chinese will buy the necessary technology anyway. Not so with the USA, France or Israel.

    Fuck them in the nose, after known events on the square. Tiananmen do not sell weapons to China because of the embargo. This, by the way, is one of the reasons why China is buying weapons from us.
    Quote: user1212
    Fighting with a country that serves your planes is almost impossible. In a month you will be left without aviation.

    Read the article carefully, China localizes production at 100%.
    1. user1212
      user1212 20 February 2014 17: 21
      +1
      Quote: Nayhas
      We do not have a common land border with the United States, and in textbooks it is not the United States that draws Siberia and the Far East as its territory.

      If you pay attention, the modern war is not waged as in the 1941m. Look at Ukraine with Syria. They also do not have a common border with the United States. Does this bother anyone?
      Quote: Nayhas
      Fuck them in the nose, after known events on the square. Tiananmen do not sell weapons to China because of the embargo. This, by the way, is one of the reasons why China is buying weapons from us.

      China is not only buying weapons from us. In general, they are more likely to buy technology than finished products. Although they also steal decently. But the plane cannot simply be dismantled and built the same. I repeat Su 27 years trying to copy. It turns out badly.
      Quote: Nayhas
      Read the article carefully, China localizes production at 100%

      Only in dreams. wink
  • project sity
    project sity 20 February 2014 14: 07
    +1
    Yes, even if we do not sell, others will. Listen to your words! Russia will sell to others, they will buy from others. Chain
  • project sity
    project sity 20 February 2014 14: 08
    0
    Yes, even if we do not sell, others will. Listen to your words! Russia will sell to others, they will buy from others. Chain
  • indiggo
    indiggo 20 February 2014 14: 42
    +2
    for example, who? You know that each country has its own export version. plus documentation and arrival of specialists. so let them buy as you said in a chain. the technological process and technology in this case, the Chinese will not receive.
  • Alex_Popovson
    Alex_Popovson 20 February 2014 15: 04
    +2
    Uncle Liao is very fond of Chinese industry. Uncle cares about producing the most low-quality crap from very good resources. Our uncle Liao says that planes will flare up over Bai-Jin more beautifully than the Best of the Empresses imagined fireworks.
    The Celestial Empire is always confident in its power. And she is very perplexed why the pale barbarians do not add tribute to the feet of Kun-shek from the Middle Kingdom.
  • Leisure
    Leisure 20 February 2014 15: 06
    +1
    The blue dream of the West, to pit us with the Chinese. We need an alliance with China against the United States.
  • inkass_98
    inkass_98 20 February 2014 15: 34
    +3
    [quote = user1212] Yes yes yes. sold mother Russia. Start thinking with your head
    China is not only a rival but also the ONLY ally of Russia against the USA

    Russia is not an ally of China, they themselves say so. There are a number of general areas in economics and politics, no more. While we just need each other, fellow travelers.
    1. 123dv
      123dv 20 February 2014 15: 49
      0
      We are all fellow travelers, dear, on our way to the cemetery.
      So there’s nothing to catch a wave.
    2. user1212
      user1212 20 February 2014 17: 33
      0
      Ally against the United States, not an ally in all areas of state activity. It is clear that the concept of friendship and politics are not compatible.
  • Santor
    Santor 20 February 2014 15: 46
    0
    Blo and here cheers ..... China and without us all will do, for examples do not have to go far. The PRC fleet is already at 86% equipped with new ships built in the 2000's. In this they have already bypassed all countries of the world, including the USA.
    While we are screaming that only suckers could order the Mistral and we don’t need them, China designed and started building 6 (six) ships of this class.

    http://www.militaryparitet.com/editor/assets/new/files3/Landing_Helicopter_Dock_
    (LHD) _Type_081-1.jpg

    http://www.militaryparitet.com/editor/assets/new/3/China%20Type%20081%202.jpg

    The newest two landing ships of the 071 type were put into operation, the third already on the water and the fourth on the slipway ... The presence, quality and ability to maintain a powerful Navy are an indicator of the country's power and its place among world powers

    http://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2012-02/1329538521_5139001.jpg

    China already has 10 Aegis ships in service, the 6 EM of the 052С project is being completed, and the construction of a series of 8 052D class destroyers has begun (1 is already in trials and three are afloat) - we have none.

    http://s00.yaplakal.com/pics/pics_preview/6/0/7/2466706.jpg

    And we about that - to sell them modern weapons or not to sell .... And then what is theirs then? What about today's news that China tested the first industrial design of the photon engine?
    1. ultra
      ultra 20 February 2014 15: 55
      +1
      Quote: Santor
      China already has 10 Aegis ships in service

      Oh well !!! In what Chinese dream did you watch this?
    2. user1212
      user1212 20 February 2014 17: 42
      0
      Quote: Santor
      China already has 10 Aegis ships in service

      The Chinese counterpart (and not AEGIS) is not up to the mattresses yet. And not quite enough. It’s rather an attempt to create at least something similar, rather than a ready-made technology in the army
      Quote: Santor
      What did China test the first industrial design of the photon engine?

      This is generally from the field of delirium.
      A photon engine (quantum) is a hypothetical rocket engine where the body that emits light is the source of energy. The photon has an impulse, and, accordingly, when it flows out of the engine, the light creates reactive thrust. Theoretically, a photon engine can develop maximum thrust based on the spent mass of the spacecraft, allowing it to reach speeds close to the speed of light.
      On the ground, the photon engine cannot work. And what is the industry in space?
  • darksoul
    darksoul 20 February 2014 16: 17
    0
    And against such a background, do we want the supply of Su-35?
    1. clidon
      clidon 20 February 2014 20: 46
      0
      Are you sure that we can refuse China? So that they are not offended?
  • loginovich
    loginovich 20 February 2014 16: 20
    +1
    Here is China running after sparrows. They have a big problem. There is no open access to the ocean all through the straits.
  • buga1979
    buga1979 20 February 2014 19: 55
    0
    Quote: user1212
    Quote: polkownik1
    Have you fed your designers?

    In general, yes. But what would a lack of oil and grain supply prevent the war?
    And what did the USSR buy in Germany?
    Germany’s acute need for raw materials and food did not allow the USSR to take all the goods that Germany could offer, but to demand what the Soviet side needed most in the growing danger of war. The Soviet government agreed to supply the goods necessary for Germany only on condition that it could purchase machine tools and other factory equipment in it. Moreover, a significant part of these purchases should have been the latest military equipment removed from the tongue plus you

    http://gkaf.narod.ru/kirillov/ref-liter/nni1997-2-prewar.html
  • witch
    witch 20 February 2014 22: 01
    0
    I don’t understand why our Migi ignore it, I don’t hear that there would be a lot of them mostly Dry PR and riveting. But Mig is also a great machine. They still can’t do what it can do for a moment. I think they need as many as Sushki in our country
    1. user1212
      user1212 21 February 2014 06: 33
      0
      In the 90s, the MiG could not push their planes abroad. As a result, they were far from engaged in aircraft matters so as not to die of hunger. People left naturally. How much migovtsy is now able to design and build a new aircraft is a big question. They have an order for a new fighter, they gave money. We will see.
      By the way, the MiG and Tupolev directors who plundered all the design bureaus do not remember it somehow, but Pogosyan, who retained the design bureau in the 90s, bothers everyone and does not allow anyone to live
  • Const
    Const 20 February 2014 22: 07
    0
    Again, I propose to bring all design bureaus to China together with specialists subject to the application of developments in the Russian defense industry. We will give the proceeds to Medvedev personally (or whoever approves such transactions there). Let's rename it to Northern Honduras and die from sores. May this man enjoy the product of his greed.
    PS And what, the SU-35 has not yet surpassed in China? Well, what about? A person is starving to death.
    Sad.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • nod739
    nod739 21 February 2014 14: 05
    0
    China, although nearby, but we live in general in good neighborliness
    this is not yankee
    making and copying weapons and conquering markets, China weakens not only the Russian Federation, but also the western military-industrial complex on their presence
    so the enemy of my enemy is my friend
    how was the song there? "Russian and Chinese are brothers forever ...")))
    it’s better to be friends with them than NATO than just