Should Russia sell SU-35 to China?

The Diplomat ^ | 3/12/2012 | Harry Kazianis

[U-238]

Russia is reportedly close to finalizing a major sale of advanced fighter aircraft to China worth $4 billion. Such a sale, newsworthy in itself, would have been hard to imagine as recently as a few years ago considering the history of previous agreements.

The anticipated deal, first reported by Kommersant, sees the two sides “practically agreed on the delivery of 48 Su-35 multirole fighters, worth $4 billion, to China.” Some reports suggest that Chinese officials have dismissed talk of such a deal. But if true, an agreement like this would certainly make sense for Beijing, giving China access to an advanced fighter. The Su-35 or “NATO Flanker-E +” is described as a “4++ generation (fighter) using fifth-generation technology.” The fighter is “armed with 30-millimeter cannons and has 12 points of suspension for suspension of arms, including missiles and bombs.”

Russia, having lost out in India’s MMRCA fighter competition to French competitor Rafale, would for its part gain an important new military contract. But it seems like Moscow also has much to lose through the sale. After all, purely business considerations aside, Russia is said to have been stung before after selling China advanced aircraft.

And there’s another question raised by the reported deal – why would China want to procure advanced 4th generation fighters when it’s developing a 5th generation plane, the J-20, which is believed to have stealth capabilities?

A look into the recent past offers some possible answers.

The last major aircraft deal between Russia and China involved the SU-27 flanker in the 1990s. Moscow hadn’t sold major weapons systems to Beijing since the so-called Sino-Soviet split, when a rise in tensions sparked border clashes in 1969.

[U-238]

One difference is the SU-35 does not have any combat experience. The F-15 has combat experience.

[cunning_fish]

AFAIK it is taught in Soviet military academies since 1960s being a common knowledge there. Maybe it’s part of Khruschev antistalinist propaganda but there are a lot of facts behind this.
There are Western studies as well:

Pariahs, Partners, Predators: German-Soviet Relations, 1922-1941
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3686/is_3_33/ai_n28721777/

Soviet-German relations before 1941
Information about Soviet-German relations before 1941
http://english.turkcebilgi.com/Soviet-German+relations+before+1941

I ‘ve just find it from yahoo right now. You can make deeper research if you want it.

[U-238]

Your version is accurate.

[U-238]

Thank you for linking it and its correct. No further research is necessary.

[U-238]

You are both correct. I always give credit where credit is due.

[cunning_fish]

Well, Western studies are influenced by former Nazy, Soviet studies are influenced by Soviets.
For that reason I think actual input from cooperation was mutual from both sides.

As for military theories blitzcrieg (if you can call it a doctrine) is not the same as soviet deep battle concept but it took many elements from it.

[cunning_fish]

10x for credits:)

[U-238]

:)