Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The potential for joint Russian-Chinese collaboration

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • JSR
    JSR
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Aug 2011
    • 4976

    #81
    Originally posted by Multirole View Post

    Oh dear, how did the poor Russians get by all these years without them? Surely the Americans could never have fought the Vietnam War with just turbojet powered KC-135s.

    China never had it so good with tankers as they do now. Theyll be fine.


    in Vietnam war US had 200m population, Oil was cheap, Pilot and maintainance salaries were so much much less,. There was no concept of building planes with advanced titanium and composite materials with large software lines.range of tactical missiles were short so not much range required for plane safety on airfield.

    China simply cannot afford those substandard aviation products. they are totally inefficient/ineffective and built with external components.

    Those days are almost over when Germany could run by big Surpluses with US/UK/Turkey/Middleast and re invest that money in China to produce even more profits.

    Comment

    • Multirole
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Jan 2000
      • 903

      #82
      Originally posted by haavarla View Post

      Umm all of a sudden, a change of goal post..
      You just claimed the Y-20 was better vs a Il-476, NOT if its good enough for PLAAF.
      See what you did there..
      You should read post #55 more carefully. I do admit to the typo about CR-929.

      Y-20 will be better than Il-78 and A-50 in those roles, so good enough for PLAAF needs. They can afford to wait for the CR-919.
      Last edited by Multirole; 4th August 2019, 23:38.
      pb::

      Comment

      • haavarla
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Dec 2008
        • 6696

        #83
        Originally posted by J-20 View Post

        you saying the Chinese cant make equal or better transports than the Russians????
        By all means, PLAAF can keep flying big Cargo jets with DF-30 engines into this Decade, while Russia keeps re-engine its fleet with PS-90A engine. By the end of 2020, you can come back here and ask me the very same question..
        Thanks

        Comment

        • haavarla
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Dec 2008
          • 6696

          #84
          Originally posted by Multirole View Post

          You should read post #55 more carefully. I do admit to the typo about CR-929.
          Russia has longer routes and supply chain to cover East-West, and North- South to Syria. Even down to Cuba and Venezuela sometimes.
          And such the increased flight range with PS-90A engine is a do or die for the Russian transport fleet. The increase of flight range here is Absolutely vital for their operations.
          Perhaps some day you will understand such trivial information..
          Thanks

          Comment

          • Multirole
            Rank 5 Registered User
            • Jan 2000
            • 903

            #85
            Originally posted by haavarla View Post

            Russia has longer routes and supply chain to cover East-West, and North- South to Syria. Even down to Cuba and Venezuela sometimes.
            And such the increased flight range with PS-90A engine is a do or die for the Russian transport fleet. The increase of flight range here is Absolutely vital for their operations.
            Perhaps some day you will understand such trivial information..
            Im sure Russia has the platforms and engines it needs. Im pointing out China is fine without a Il-96 tanker. Didnt mean to hurt your feelings.
            pb::

            Comment

            • J-20
              Rank 4 Registered User
              • Jan 2018
              • 255

              #86
              Originally posted by Multirole View Post

              Im sure Russia has the platforms and engines it needs. Im pointing out China is fine without a Il-96 tanker. Didnt mean to hurt your feelings.
              I think what Harrvey is trying to say.. Russia don't need no friends!! just like Harvey!

              Comment

              • XB-70
                Rank 4 Registered User
                • May 2018
                • 350

                #87
                Russia-Sino consortium will also go for an An-124 replacement program too
                J-20 - That is an option. I don't know why I didn't think of that one. The Russians have their "Slon" concept, but it is still early enough that Chinese participation in its design and build can be scoped in. And a transport isn't the same sort of potential threat that a fighter or bomber is.

                Without an actual defense alliance though, the opportunities for joint projects will be limited. Such programs would have to offer plenty for the design and manufacturing industries of both nations while simultaneously avoiding potential security problems.

                Comment

                • rpgtype7v
                  Rank 4 Registered User
                  • Jan 2018
                  • 25

                  #88
                  the potential for cooperation is huuge.
                  one area in particular , china lacks good longrange bombers and its really lagging there.... russia should sell about 50 tu-160 to chinese and use that money to produce more tu-160 for its own needs and get pak-da operational in good numbers.
                  win=win for both sides.

                  Comment

                  • XB-70
                    Rank 4 Registered User
                    • May 2018
                    • 350

                    #89
                    rpgtype7v - The problem with that is China and Russia does not have a defense/security pact. So, both countries have to keep in mind that the possibility that relations might not remain as warm as they are now. In the long run, supplying China with platforms which can deliver 80,000lbs of ordinance to Moscow or St. Pete might not be wise for Russia. And it might not be wise for China to be dependent on Russia for a strategic deterrence weapon. The reality is that cooperation has to start slow. This is why most of us have been focusing on transports, AWACS, tankers, and such. The security issues there are much more manageable.

                    Comment

                    • J-20
                      Rank 4 Registered User
                      • Jan 2018
                      • 255

                      #90
                      Originally posted by XB-70 View Post

                      J-20 - That is an option. I don't know why I didn't think of that one. The Russians have their "Slon" concept, but it is still early enough that Chinese participation in its design and build can be scoped in. And a transport isn't the same sort of potential threat that a fighter or bomber is.

                      Without an actual defense alliance though, the opportunities for joint projects will be limited. Such programs would have to offer plenty for the design and manufacturing industries of both nations while simultaneously avoiding potential security problems.
                      Shlong concept! I looked at it and it looked almost exactly like the An-124. would not be surprised its a reversed engineered one with newer engines

                      Comment

                      • LMFS
                        Rank 4 Registered User
                        • Feb 2018
                        • 519

                        #91
                        Originally posted by J-20 View Post

                        Shlong concept! I looked at it and it looked almost exactly like the An-124. would not be surprised its a reversed engineered one with newer engines
                        "Reverse engineered" does not really apply when you are developer and builder of the plane... those were Soviet projects involving a number of companies and scientific institutions, most of which are now located in Russia.

                        Comment

                        • J-20
                          Rank 4 Registered User
                          • Jan 2018
                          • 255

                          #92
                          Originally posted by LMFS View Post

                          "Reverse engineered" does not really apply when you are developer and builder of the plane... those were Soviet projects involving a number of companies and scientific institutions, most of which are now located in Russia.
                          okay thats a fair point. but anyways yes, it looks more or less like a localized An-124 of their own.

                          Comment

                          • Multirole
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Jan 2000
                            • 903

                            #93
                            There are some potential areas for cooperation in amphibious operations. Russia could produce a naval Ka-50 for shipboard use, configured to carry AShMs. China could build them Type 075 assault ships replacing the failed Mistral deal. Though the Chinese ship is twice the size, not sure the Russian Navy needs something that big. It seems the Russians had a favorable impression of the Type 05 amphibious assault vehicle as well.
                            pb::

                            Comment

                            • J-20
                              Rank 4 Registered User
                              • Jan 2018
                              • 255

                              #94
                              Originally posted by Multirole View Post
                              There are some potential areas for cooperation in amphibious operations. Russia could produce a naval Ka-50 for shipboard use, configured to carry AShMs. China could build them Type 075 assault ships replacing the failed Mistral deal. Though the Chinese ship is twice the size, not sure the Russian Navy needs something that big. It seems the Russians had a favorable impression of the Type 05 amphibious assault vehicle as well.
                              good point about flat tops.
                              actually China could ask Russia to buy their upcoming carrier designs..

                              win win on both sides

                              China is stuck on 2nd generation aircraft carrier designs
                              Russia has moved on to 3rd gen aircraft carrier designs but they don't have enough shipyards and money. that's where china can come in. win win for both

                              this graphics shows what Russia can do.. it was made by RolePlaying Game 7 in navy section
                              Click image for larger version

Name:	fetch?id=3869996&d=1565022175.jpg
Views:	175
Size:	374.7 KB
ID:	3870156

                              Comment

                              • Deino
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Jan 2000
                                • 4225

                                #95
                                Originally posted by J-20 View Post

                                good point about flat tops.
                                actually China could ask Russia to buy their upcoming carrier designs..

                                win win on both sides

                                China is stuck on 2nd generation aircraft carrier designs
                                Russia has moved on to 3rd gen aircraft carrier designs but they don't have enough shipyards and money. that's where china can come in. win win for both

                                this graphics shows what Russia can do.. it was made by RolePlaying Game 7 in navy section
                                Click image for larger version

Name:	fetch?id=3869996&d=1565022175.jpg
Views:	175
Size:	374.7 KB
ID:	3870156

                                Pardon ... maybe you missed this baby! So while Russia as you say "has moved on to 3rd gen aircraft carrier designs", China is already building a 4th generation EMALS-flattop carrier.
                                But, sorry I forgot, it's Chinese ... so it is cheap, junk and any Russian would ever prefer to dream on but to get something from China.

                                Click image for larger version

Name:	PLN Type 003 carrier - 20190712 - 2.jpg
Views:	163
Size:	269.6 KB
ID:	3870193


                                The problem for some here in this thread seems to be, it is not an issue that China knows, that it is lacking behind, that in most cases it still would benefit more - while fast catching up and undeniable with the bigger budget - but the possibility to even come to the idea that it must be some sort of cooperation and not a warm-up of any old 1990s technology based design like these failed Kuznetsov designs. It must be a partnership in which not only Russia leads and China pays. As long this is not accepted I see barely any chances regardless that such a partnership would be fruitful for both sides.

                                One point that is missing is IMO a closer cooperation on space and rocket technology.

                                ...

                                He was my North, my South, my East and West,
                                My working week and my Sunday rest,
                                My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
                                I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

                                The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
                                Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
                                Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
                                For nothing now can ever come to any good.
                                -------------------------------------------------
                                W.H.Auden (1945)

                                Comment

                                • LMFS
                                  Rank 4 Registered User
                                  • Feb 2018
                                  • 519

                                  #96
                                  Originally posted by Deino View Post
                                  It must be a partnership in which not only Russia leads and China pays. As long this is not accepted I see barely any chances regardless that such a partnership would be fruitful for both sides.
                                  Why would China be interested in a project with Russia if they had all the technology already? And why would Russia be interested if it was not for the money it can bring? Just look at the current cooperation projects in the fields of military and aerospace and this is a constant characteristic: Chinese use the cooperation to learn faster and the Russian to make cash and keep their industry active and up to date. Cooperation brings IP and exploitation restrictions, safety risks and in general organizational complications. They need to be offset with a substantial contribution that one side is lacking but the other has in abundance: experience in military development in the case of Russia case and cash in that of China.

                                  Comment

                                  • JSR
                                    JSR
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • Aug 2011
                                    • 4976

                                    #97
                                    Originally posted by Deino View Post

                                    The problem for some here in this thread seems to be, it is not an issue that China knows, that it is lacking behind, that in most cases it still would benefit more - while fast catching up and undeniable with the bigger budget -
                                    There is no such thing as bigger budget in China that's why Russia can subsidize 150 Sukhoi Superjet with more modifications.. while China barely at 10.
                                    Russia can implement Glonas faster. It made more space ports.

                                    Russia is not interested in worthless projects like J-10/FC-31/JH-7/H-6K and whole host of short range UAVs.

                                    but the possibility to even come to the idea that it must be some sort of cooperation and not a warm-up of any old 1990s technology based design like these failed Kuznetsov designs.
                                    Kuznetsov is not failed design. for Aircraft carrier need to be effective it need big support in EU/Middleast/Japan etc and it need a very different open economic system of interdependence.

                                    Remember this. and in this Germany not actively participated to help French. I gave you enough hints in other thread that only worry about funding French space force and 6G fighter.
                                    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/...nalCode=cjcc20
                                    This article examines China's response to the 2011 Libya crisis and the emergence of a new diplomatic imperative: overseas citizen protection. Over a 12-day period in February and March 2011, China evacuated more than 35,000 Chinese nationals from civil war torn Libya
                                    It must be a partnership in which not only Russia leads and China pays. As long this is not accepted I see barely any chances regardless that such a partnership would be fruitful for both sides.
                                    One point that is missing is IMO a closer cooperation on space and rocket technology.
                                    China will have to accept that Russia lead a project as Russia has more effective R&D, the right materials for heavy products and exactly knows what need to be done. they have million of sorties in cargo planes public and private operators. China will simply run out of money in upcoming trade wars.

                                    Comment

                                    • panzerfeist1
                                      Rank 6 Registered User
                                      • Feb 2018
                                      • 398

                                      #98
                                      For the aircraft carrier design there is no doubt the Russians should be the lead designers for nuclear engines, radars and weapons. But the Chinese can go create the construction layout of the aircraft carrier themselves if they want to as long as the Russians provide the size and space needed for the engines, radars and weapons.

                                      However I believe in terms of submarine technology it should all be Russian made and sold to the Chinese for profit just by me seeing the specifications of the Yasen-M. But there is no doubt Russian/Chinese military cooperations would 110% be against US interests.
                                      I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

                                      Comment

                                      • Deino
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • Jan 2000
                                        • 4225

                                        #99
                                        Originally posted by LMFS View Post

                                        Why would China be interested in a project with Russia if they had all the technology already? ...

                                        Simply for the same reason, other cooperation projects were initiated, executed and successfully completed: to share resources, since ghe burden to carry on alone is much harder - and IMO this is the reason, why at least one if not both great European projects will fail - and eventually since it strengthens a political alliance.

                                        That's why it is called cooperation.
                                        ...

                                        He was my North, my South, my East and West,
                                        My working week and my Sunday rest,
                                        My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
                                        I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

                                        The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
                                        Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
                                        Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
                                        For nothing now can ever come to any good.
                                        -------------------------------------------------
                                        W.H.Auden (1945)

                                        Comment

                                        • Levsha
                                          Rank 5 Registered User
                                          • Jan 2006
                                          • 2851

                                          Originally posted by panzerfeist1 View Post
                                          For the aircraft carrier design there is no doubt the Russians should be the lead designers for nuclear engines, radars and weapons.
                                          I doubt if The Chinese have much to learn from any country in these categories, except perhaps with hypersonic missiles. In fact, it seems as if Chinese Navy ships have more advanced AESA radars fitted than can be found on Russian Navy vessels?

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X