I find it just amusing that according to you any American civilian hacks owning a Mig and having a civil FAA registration has to be automatically airworthy. 😀
AFAIK there was only one Mig-23 airworthy in 2006 and I doubt it still is.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/310637/mig_23_air_display_at_the_2006_new_castle_airshow/

I am well aware of the limitations on the FAA registry and if you look in the Historic forum you will see that the B-26 which crashed at Biggin Hill years ago is still shown as being current on the FAA register.

The International Civil Avaition Organisation publishes (or used to publish) an annual statisical digest called ‘ Civil Aircraft on the Register’ which breaks down the number of aircraft type by country and in the mid 1990’s we used to discuss online what certain aircraft were that were shown as being current. The vast majority of the interesting types on the US register were quite clearly wfu at best or pwfu.

I was part of a small working group tasked with looking at revising some of the ICAO publications and we recommended that the Civil Aircraft on the register’ digest be dropped because it was clear that the US data was extremely suspect and that anybody who really wanted to know anything probably had access to professional databases such as the AirClaims CASE database. For political reasons our recommendation on this particular digest was overruled.

Sorry, do not understand, how is this connected to the airworthiness of the Mig-29 and Su-27 in the USAF we are discussing right now?

Let me spell it out to you in simple terms.

1) You do not seem to believe that the USAF/DoD/CIA currently fly MiG-29/Su-27 and that you want photographic proof.

2) In the mid 1980s there was pleanty of evidence that there was a lot of activity at TTR but no photogrpahic proof of anything until the uSAF revealed (at a fairly late stage) a rather misleading photograph of a F-117.

3) Now we accept that most of the reports of streams of aircraft etc were F-117s on night flying missions although we have no hard documentary evidence absolutely proving this.

4) We have some grainy shots of Su-27/MiG-29 in the Groom Lake area which would seem to indicate that flying activities is going on with these types of aircraft.

5) Is it so difficult to believe?

Incidentally, I understand that there is one MiG-23 being flown privately in the US, but I cannot remember the website.

There are two ex-Czech MiG-23s in Florida, one of which is certainly on the airshow circuit.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/23437487@N00/470491266

http://www.flickr.com/photos/23437487@N00/470491256/in/set-72157594477944672/

How many pieces of Mi-24 are flying at Fort Bliss?

Apart from the two US military serialled ones (that I can remember) a quick check of the FAA registry would appear to indicate that there are 7 civil ones

http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/mmsinqSQL.asp?mmstxt=5580103

and a quick google search on Vertol Systems Company reveals that their mission statement as follows:

The mission of the VSC War Fighter Support Detachment is to improve overall effectiveness of combat air forces through the training of students, providing technical and tactical expertise to the field, and by providing the most realistic Dissimilar Aircraft Combat Training (DACT) available to U.S. Armed Forces. VSC provides standardized advanced tactical training and certification of unit instructors and provides assistance in the development and employment of aviation weapons and tactics. Our War fighter Detachment can also provide advanced aviation Night Vision Goggle (NVG) training and crew transition training in our DACT aircraft.

VSC understands the nature and critical importance on the Global War on Terror. The aim of VSC’s Integrated War Fighter Support Detachment is to provide the most realistic and effective combat training to the aircrews of the U.S. Military.

http://www.vscglobal.com/index.html

I have no doubt the US DOD had/has inclination to evaluate the Flanker, Fulcrum or any other foreign flying hardware. The point we are arguing here is to maintain foreign military aircrafts in flightworthy state.

If you need an example of what the US/DoD can do, you need look no further than the US Army Mil-24s that are frequently seen opearting out of places like Fort Bliss.

Likewise, the US/DoD bought a large number of ex Polish Lims for use in a mobile multi threat analysis which went unreported for some time.

If people can resurrect warbird jets (like the Daryl Greenmayer’s RB-104 Starfighter) from near dead wrecks surely it is not beyond the realms of possibility that the USAF/CIA can do the same?

Sprawling Basingstoke has a Model Zone, good choices and silly price cuts on a regular basis on die-cast and plastic scale models. We also have an Entertainer that is a bit grim, and a souless Toys are us. Toys and playing seem not be as valued anymore…. As for Corgi, can only speak from experience collecting die-cast and they have struggled a while meeting timescales and they have serious competition now from Hobbymaster and others. At least that filters down to price cuts at times….

And Church Street Models for the model railway clan (from another Basingstoke resident)

It hardly seems credible now but in the pre-deregulation days the cheapest way to fly from Europe to the US was to get on a Lofltleider CL-44 which flew fro Luxembourg to the US. Loftleider was not an IATA member and could therefore charge much lower fares than the cartel members could.

I seem to remember they came through Glasgow on the inward journey and that was where you got on for the flight to Luxembourg.

Ah happy days of the late 1960s…

Given that there was only ever just the one CL-44T Guppy then yes it is the last of its type.

LoL, only I know country can sign treaty with country but what contract? Only business entity can sign contract with another, which in this specific case is Russia’s Sukhoi and China’s SAC. This is the basic you need to know when you like to talk aloud.

I would think there would be an inter-govermental Memorandum of Understanding covering the basic heads of the agreement between Russia and China, a fairly normal occurrence in addition to the normal commercial contract.