I'm certain China has surpassed Russia and many other nations in certain fields and lags behind in many others. Soviet and Russian equipment are compareably heavy, but cheap. That in turn requires more extensive logistics for Russian operations or limits their mobility in comparison to European and US designs. China is a heir to these designs because the weight offers one advantage, a low price of the weapon systems.
In this context, introducing Mistral construction capability to Russian shipyards would be a great leap in reducing deadweight to load ratio for flat top ships where it counts most. The acquired technology is not only valuable for commando carriers, but also for the Russsian concept of aircraft carriers that is very helicopter heavy and for this reason can well be developed out of a helicopter carrier. One big advantage of the Mistral is an increased resilence against enemy strikes by extensive use of ballast tanks that go along with French damage control.
Both the lighter design and the increased resilance offer capabilities the Russians would have a hard time to develop on their own. Electronics will be another field where you can't have enough know-how.
What a load of ridiculously simplistic and plainly wrong generalisation.
The Russians lost much of their industrial capacity after the fall of the USSR, and that capacity is hard, expensive and time consuming to re-generate once lost.
Concerning the other isssues in replies to my post. Yes, I consider cooperation essential for China to boost her developement by cooperation with Russia and Bazil. Not cooperating is for me a sign of arrogance that seems to pale all the arrogance claims directed against the US.
All your personal opinion, which matters very little at the end of the day.
It seems you want it both ways, when China does co-operate, they are accused on copying or lacking the ability to innovate. OTOH, not co-operating is a sign of arrogance?
Co-operation between unequal partners is a pointless waste of time and resources because the only thing that matters at the end of the day is self-interest.
No-one is going to give you all their knowledge, their competative edge unless you have sufficient leverage, and/or collateral to make them. That is the first rule of capitalism, and it is amusing that 'communist' China realizes this simple fact better than most capitalist western countries.
When you enter into a co-operative deal with a company that is far more advance than you, yes you will get some advanced technology, but your more advance partner is going to make damn sure you do not get anywhere near enough to catch up with them. Just look at all your vaunted co-operation deals between western firms and those from less developed countries.
There has not been a single case where the less developed partner has gotten the full set of cutting-edge tech the two sides are co-developing. All too often, the less developed side foots much of the costs, while key, core technologies are 'black boxed' and denied to them.
Being able to make 90% of something is meaningless if that missing 10% is what really makes that system tick, and everyone else can already make the 90% you can without even having to enter such a co-operative deal.
In addition, such co-operative agreements often result in your own indigenous R&D capabilities becoming starved of resources and either having it's growth and development badly stunted or even killed off as a result.
Just look at where India and China.
India has been the golden boy of the west, playing by all the rules the west has set up. They get a pat on the head, and fancy weapons so long as they pay through the nose and play nice. But they cannot make any of it completely by themselves. If there was a complete embargo against India today, their entire armed forces (ane economy) would simply stop to function in however long their stock of spares will last.
China is eager to improve and their developments are directed towards a green water navy with some blue water task forces. In a few decades they want to have made the next step towards a blue water navy.
You are a few decades out, as the PLAN is making the leap to blue water navy already, and they will get there faster than you will imagine.
The DF21 development is a back-up for a green water navy to fight a major opponent with asymmetric means. That's the rational behind assassin's mace and that's the reason why Chinese are working around the problem and not taking it head on by launching own supercarriers.
The DF21 is no back-up. It is just another weapon system to add to the PLAN's arsenal. And it would be amusing to revisit this thread in a few years time when the PLAN starts launching their own carriers. Sure they won't be supercarriers, but they won't be for green water ops either.
It's interesting to see your reflex "we are capable of doing everything better and will be most powerful and are very powerful."
Considering my comparison to German naval history, it's by now an official statement of the German navy that they needed to learn a lot, especiall from the British, in order to become a better navy than during the two world wars.
That is a strawman argument if ever there was one. No-one here has claimed anything of the sort. And your continued insistence of using the German navy as a comparison betrays more your own tunnel vision than anything insightful on the PLAN.
If you spent less time trying to shoehorn the PLAN's development to match those of the German navy, maybe you will start to actually get some real insight on the matter.
