* * Q U I Z * * Q U I Z * * Q U I Z * * Q U I Z * * Q U I Z * *

You know the drill with the colours, i guess.
Round two in this shade of blwo
This colour has the strange name of ‘teal’ and has the remarks previously in red.
The answers never given by any of you…

-1-
What aircraft, developed in international programs, are in use with the British military?
An easy one to get going. Merlin (with Italy), Lynx (with France), Gazelle (with France), Jaguar (with France), Tornado (with Germany and Italy), Typhoon (with Spain, Germany and Italy), Harrier GR.7 (with the US and, back in the Kestrel days, with Germany too).
The Puma is far too much a French product to be considered a real international program. I did agree with the Lynx and Gazelle, as these two were essentially the two legs of one Anglo-French helo program.

-2-
From quite a few trainers, single-seat light combat aircraft were developed and flown. Name the original twin-seat design, and the single-seat variant of seven jet trainers.
There were a few more of course, but these ones are all dedicated single-seat airframes with a little bit more than just an empty second seat.
L-39 -> L-159
Hawk -> Hawk 200
Mitsubishi T-2 -> Mitsubishi F-1
MB.326 -> Impala Not 100% correct yet, and there were more than just the Impala
The first single-seat MB326 was the MB326K. The Impala can be both: Impala I = MB326M trainer, Impala II = license-built and upgraded MB326K.
MB.339 -> MB.339K
Galeb -> Jastreb
L29 -> L29 Akrobat
Yak-30 -> Yak-32 (i knew i could count on you, Ken!)
The T-38/F-5 doesn’t count since both are evolved from the N156 prototype, and are as such more like brother and sister rather than mother and son. The A-37 is still a twin seater, as was the ‘single seat’ TS11 which only flew with one seat for a short time before ending up as a standard PWL Iskra. The T-33 is a trainer developed from a single-seat fighter, and all subsequent combat versions of the T-33 (RT/AT-33 and F-94) still remained two-seaters.
I didn’t count the HA220 or C.101CC either, as those still have the same crew compartment of the twin-sticks. In fact, the Super Saeta flew both with one and two seats.
More or less the same is true with the C.101CC: while Chile has removed the back seats of their A-36 Halcons or C.101CC-02, the Honduran C.101CC-03s and Jordanian C.101CC-04 are all twin seaters and are respectively trainer/attack aircraft and advanced/weapons trainers. But if you want to include these, i think you should add Portugal’s Alpha Jet As with Esq 301 too

-3-
What are the navigation trainers for the following military services :
a- USAF
The Boeing T-43 is correct
b- Russian AF
It is the Tu-134Sh, not BSh.
Sh means Shturman’ or Navigator (yes, they took that word from the Dutch language back in the days when Peter the Great went sailing with the Dutch). There are actually two variants: the Sh1 for bomber crews, and the Sh2 which was for Tu-128 navigators.
UBL means Uchobny Boyevoy Lotchikov, Trainer Combat Pilots. It’s the trainer for Tu-22M and Tu-160 pilots.
c- RAF
It is the HS125, but that’s not the designation it flies with in the RAF.
I wanted Dominie T.1 because the RAF flies the Dominie T.1 as nav trainer, while the VIP transports are called HS125 CC.1 / BAe125 CC.2 / BAe125 CC.3 And yes, re-using Dominie is a disgrace for the lovely DH89.
The RAF Jetstreams aren not for nav training, the Navy ones are (sometimes).
d- Armée de l’Air
It’s the Nord N262 Frégate. Not the Xingu (which is multi-engine training), not the Falcon 20 (which does serve as an attack instrument trainer), nor the MS760 Paris which did have this role but is retired now.

-4-
The following aircraft types are/were built at more than one location/factory. Name them.
a- MiG-27
Irkutsk, Nasik and Ulan Ude. In the latter plant, they didn’t just rebuild but also assemble Floggers so they were indeed built here.
b- B-52
Wichita and Seattle of course.
c- F-5
Northrop Hawthorne, AIDC Shuinan (Taiwan), Canadair Cartierville/Montreal, CASA Sevilla, Eidg. Flgzw. Emmen and Hanjin in Korea. I don’t agree with Santiago de Chile, as you would have to add other dissasembly-assembly sites like Singapore, SABCA Gosselies, IAI and Nurtiano Bandung (iirc) as well. Extreme maintenance/update doesn’t equate to the creation of airframes.
It’s nice to be the quizmaster 😀
d- Single-engined Hueys
Bell in Hurst, TX
Agusta, Vergiate/Varese, Italy
Dornier/VFW-Fokker, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany
Fuji-Ota is correct, but i had the airfield name of Utsonomiya in mind.
Shar Lu for AIDC is also correct – but in my book it’s Taichung of course.
Still one missing, i’ll accept both the old and new names of the airfield, and the city 😉
Turkey also appearantly built Hueys, at the factory now called TUSAS at Ankara – Akinci (or Mürted as the airfield was used to be called
e- Mirage III
Bordeaux-Mérignac for the bulk of course
Emmen again for the Swiss ones.
The Australian ones were built by GAF at Avalon
Israel never built it’s own Mirage IIICs.

-5-
a- What is unique about the KDC-10s refuelling system?
Indeed, the boom operator sits with the rest of the crew in the cockpit and waves around his flying boom with the aid of a closed TV circuit, rather than laying on his belly looking out the rear of the tanker as all other boom-tankers.
b- One of the two KDC-10s is made from a spare airframe. What happened to the original?
The ‘original’ KDC-10 crashed at Faro in Portugal when it wasn’t yet modified, and still flew with Martinair. It was already bought by the Dutch government though.

-6-
a- Which aircraft were/are capable of both hose-and-drogue and boom refuelling, without modifications?
[COLOR=green]I was a bit unclear here, what i ment was for which types of aircraft it wouldn’t matter if they’d get a hose/drogue or a boom tanker. These are the:
F-101
F-105
E-3D
E-3F
E-3A in Saudi Arabia
The F-84 is not correct. Only the F-84G had the wing-mounted refuelling boom receptacle, while most other variants could be equipped with a probe. The Thunderjet is an answer under question 6, section B 😉
Didn’t know that an F-84G flew with both a receptacle and a boom, but that surely makes it correct. The IDF/AF F-16 with boom-refuelling capability has it’s probe mounted on a modified fuel tank and not on the aircraft. While certainly an interesting idea (one about which i haven’t heard much over the last few years though), i don’t think it qualifies.
b- Which aircraft flew/flies in both probe-and-drogue and boom receptacle refuellng configurations?
Again apologies for not being clear, but for this i mean the aircraft types you can get in either probe/drogue or boom receptacle variant.
F-84
F-4
A-7
C-130

-7-
What six designators in the American MDS system have been assigned to the B707 airframe?
C-137, C-18, E-3, E-6, E-7 (the original designation for which became the C-18), E-8, and the latest addition C-49 (in TC-49 form).

-8-
Give the operator and a more commonly known designation for the following aircraft:
a- AF-1A
.These are the ex-Kuwaiti TA-4KUs, twin-seaters with a hump. Ironically, these aren’t carrier-capable unlike the single-seat AF-1s.
b- UH-14
Brasilian Navy Super Puma.
c- SH-14D
Dutch Navy Lynx.
d- Fpl-53
[Stupid typo by me, didn’t even get Distiller’s hint, but the Swedish Do 27 it is.
e- T.14
Spain’s Convairs indeed.
f- H.6
Good call Sean! Thai Hueys are indeed designated H.6
g- CV-2
The Caribou indeed. When still with the US Army, the Caribou had been given a designator for being a STOL aircraft with a transport job, hence CV-2 in the same series as the OV-1 Mohawk. Only when they got to the USAF, they were given a proper Transport designator.

-9-
What was the first supersonic aircraft, controlled by a sidestick and a multiply redundant electronic control system?
SOC has got it, it was the Bounder. Hope this is an inspiration for you to go out and visit Monino, as i’m sure you will like it a lot.
Apart from the sidestick, the Bounder also had a triple redundant electronic control system which makes it pretty advanced for it’s day, as it first flew in 1959. The NACA F-107 did have a sidestick, but as far as i know no redundancy in it’s controls.

-10-
Which training aircraft has the US military purchased over the last 25 years from non-US design? Give the aircraft type, and the original country/design of origin.
Extra bonus credits for Optimator for coming with the lovely bunch of gliders. While i wasn’t thinking about these, they are definately correct:
TG-10B (L-23 Super Blanik) Czech Republic
TG-14 (AMT-200S Ximango) Brazil
TG-11 (Stemme S10V) Germany
TG-7 (Schleicher GmbH) Germany
And the more traditional ones:
T-45 Goshawk – BAe, UK
T-3 Firefly – Slingsby, UK and indeed even further back: Fournier, France.
T-6 Texan – Pilatus, Switzerland.
The Grob 115 is indeed privately operated (it’s officially an interim-solution until a replacement for the wrecked-by-C-5-&-B-52-pilots-Slingsbies), so it doesn’t count in this list.
One recent ‘foreign’ trainer, in large scale service, hasn’t been mentioned yet.
The Beech T-1 Jayhawk trainer is a Japanese design. It was originally the Mitsubishi Mu 300/400 Diamond, for which Beech bought the license rights.

-11-
Describe the following things, and give an example of an aircraft using that particulair piece of kit/effect/whatever:
a- Fulton gear
Up, up and away, with my beautiful balloon which has been grabbed with a Fulton-equipped aircraft. The last operational aircraft with this lovely toy were a number of MC-130s (would have to check on the exact sort of Combat Talon), but it was indeed used on a Neptune and a B-17 too. Extra credit for the negative bungee description. I wish i had thought of that.
b- Karmann (sic)fairing
Sorry for the N. Yes, it is an aerodynamic fairing, but where can i find it? And does every (for example) Mirage variant have those fairings?
A whole dynasty of Distillers? Whoa…
I was personally thinking about the ‘soft edges’ between the Mirage 2000’s fuselage and wing as an example, but there are of course dozens more
c- Coanda effect
Blow extra air over your wing, the airflow sticks to that wing and you get even more lift, that’s how laymen like me know it and i believe that has been said. The An-71/72/74 (and 73 🙂 ) are of course prime examples, but there were indeed more like the NAL Asuka and the YC-14.

-12-
What neat little trick did the Buccanneer and later MiG-21s have in common?
Boundary Layer Control, or blown flaps. Yup, again a feature more aircraft had but i thought those two made a nice contrast.

-13-
Spot the difference! How do you identify the variants if you have the following pair of aircraft in front of you (no serial numbers of course!) The aircraft chosen might seem a bit odd, but this one is especially for our Subcontinental friends which must be bored now the Gorshkov deal has been signed:
a- Kiran I + Kiran IA
It’s not the hardpoints, those are the difference between the I/IA and the II. 🙂
The Kiran I does not have the absolutely huge blade aerial under the nose, which you can find on both the IA and II
b- Jaguar IS + Jaguar IM
The IM has indeed a radome in it’s nose, the IS has the RAF-style chisel nose with a LRMTS in it.
c- Mirage 2000C/E + Mirage 2000-5
The 2000-5 lacks a pitot tube on the radome. Whereas the 2000-5 series always has an extra EW antenna on the tail, this not variant-specific and can be put on earlier M2Ks.
d- Mirage 5PA + Mirage 5PA2
Niels has got it – the radome on the PA2 versus the needle nose on the PA
e- Alouette II + Alouette Lama
The larger engine is actually pretty visible. The Lama has the large, square mesh-filtered intakes the Alouette III has (with a bit of imagination, these intakes look a bit like inflatable rubber boats). The Alouette II’s intakes are smaller and stand out far less.
f- MiG-21F-13 + first series of J-7
The MiG only has one 30mm gun, the J-7 has two.

-14-
What is/was the sole military export customers for:
a- PAC Mushshak
My traditional screwup. If everyone stops laughing, the following customers have gotten Pakistan’s Mushshaks:
Oman
Syria
Iran
Bangladesh
Sierra Leone
b- MS760 Paris
Argentina.
c- Z-5
The lovely Albania. If anybody wants to buy one as garden ornament or for a museum, please contact me as i can make arrangements. If you’re a bit in Europe, the Z-5 will be flown to wherever you want it by the ever so friendly Albanian Air Force.
This is serious, btw.
d- TS.11
India.
e- YS-11
Greece of course, but as Fantasma says: these aren’t real ‘export’ aircraft, since the EPA’s YS-11s are ex-Olympic Airways I didn’t know one was still going strong… but will the Dakotas outlast it?
f- Pilatus P3
The Brasilian Navy.

Good luck, as usual answers will be forthcoming when i feel like it.