I believe so, but work is now underway with the Il-76-90VD which should be a short-fuselage PS-90 powered Il-76. Don’t know if it has flown yet, but Tashkent is offering it’s white tails at the factory to be delivered as such.

They for sure haven’t got the PS90 engines, and the designation doesn’t indicate that they have different cockpits either. They are simply IL-78M’s (the second brand of Candid-tankers, externally recognisable by the different mounting of the central refuelling pod), for export (enter IL-78MK), customer India (enter Il-78MKI).
Besides, just basic IL-76 systems allows for commonality with the IL-76 fleet.

The PS-90 and stretched version is the Il-76MF, which only slowly seems to have left the development stage now (after a decade or so).

I think Deino has a number of those drawings. At least he’s the resident might-have-been design sketches collector.

That’s not a full regiment in Russia with those camouflaged Fencers. There used to be a handful camouflaged Su-24Ms at Kubinka with borts in the 9x range, some of which were actually Su-24MK’s. Now with the Fencers gone from Kubinka i don’t know where these have gone to, unfortunately. Krasnodar’s ‘foreign’ Su-24 school appearantly has closed too, although i don’t believe all Krasnodar-Fencers were camouflaged. And since the Totskoye Fencer training unit seems to have been dissolved as well… i don’t know where any Fencer training is being undertaken now (apart from Lipetsk) actually.

This was one of the Kubinka MK’s.

Originally posted by almost everybody
ofcourse then there are those pics of FC1 manouvering which according to some people here was enough to classify FC1 much more manouverable than LCA. but those were the first two prototypes now werent they? so why was the whole sister’s girfriend’s aunt’s butler’s lesbian girl friend’s cook’s dog’s food supplier’s uncle in the PAF.

its funny how the first prototypes have no FBW and then all of a sudden the next two prototypes have a full digital FBW. oh and the aircraft will become operation in the next three years and this also after the next in line prototyps have a digi fbw. pakistani egns must be genious to be able to do this so quickly. carriers are symbolic. Last war the carrier was on the other side to avoid problems. Without decent defence (compare it what US uses to protect their carrier) and very easy tracking (PN subs) the carrier is not havnig any pleasant time at all.

BTW those 8XX missiles are heavy for FC1… It is airdefence fighter not coastal defence. If chinese factories become better then PAF will get products there. I’d also like to point out to the Usman guy that the RD-93 does not smoke, like the latest versions of that engine. It’s the RD-33 which had a problem with smokiness and I thought that it was the RD-93 which was in the 50 mig21 clones to counter MKI are saying this. frankly if its those AF people that your friend met then they ont understand jack about how you make an aircraft. are they feeding you bull? or is your friend feeding you bull? do you even understand the problems with inducing composites in the in testing phase of an aircraft? do you know what goes on when feilding composites to an aircraft? Navy version Fantans have launched C-8XX class missiles before. That’s for a plane lighter than the FC-1.

HMS is not an issue; the Chinese have shown local developments of this, and they are made to work for the PL-8/9. It’s a matter of the customer putting a check on the options list. do you even understand the problems with inducing composites in the in testing phase of an aircraft? do you know what goes on when feilding composites to an aircraft? or you may just end up altering the entire aerodynamics of the aircraft. and ofcourse this will happen with a digital fbw (which takes about 5-10 yrs for othrs countries to hardwire) and all the avionics which have still not been finalised. all this is supposed to happen by 2006-8 too? amazing. you people must have some brains working for you at PAC. good luck with you childish fantasies.

Can you guys please stop quoting whole pages only to reply with one sentence? Either snip, or just name the person you feel like responding to.

Thanks in advance for your magnimonious understanding of all the ways of keeping a forum readable, and your undoubtedly enthusiastic cooperation to reduce bandwith-wastage and the overall length of thread pages.

Cool! A pictorial quiz is a while back…

-1-
CM170 Magister, Cameroon

-2-
I-22 Iryda, Poland but still with PZL.

-3-
G2 Galeb, Lybia

-4-
CM170 Magister, Morocco (?)

-5-
Alpha Jet A, ex-Luftwaffe, now Thailand

-6-
G4 Super Galeb, Myanmar/Burma

-7-
Strikemaster, civil but in Botswana AF markings

-8-
IAR99 Soim, Romania

-9-
CM170 Magister, Bangladesh

-10-
MB326K, Ghana

-11-
C101CC, Honduras

-12-
CM170 Magister, El Salvador

-13-
MB326, Congo (the Kinshasa one)
Have they taken this finflash and flag again, BTW?

-14-
Tazarv, Iran

-15-
Alpha Jet, Ivory Coast

-16-
L39, Syria (?)

-17-
K-8, Namibia

-18-
Hawk, Zimbabwe

-19-
Strikemaster, South Yemen (cool!)

-20-
L29, Syria

-21-
MB326, Zambia

I think the massive amount of jet trainers currently available nowadays has far less to do with what the markets want, but a whole lot with what countries and aircraft manufacturers think is good for them.

Developing a completely new, indigenous combat jet has often proven to be a highly risky business, especially if there is little experience in the field. It definately requires immense resources for design and development, and still you’ll only find out if those investments were worth it if your aircraft is entering service and proves to be a capable platform. Even worse, because development costs are so high, the unit price will be equally enormous unless you manage to sell enough. Which becomes some kind of a problem, because unless you operate a 400+ fleet of fast jets, you will have to find export customers to spread your initial investments somewhat.

But wait… there’s something else we can do. Let’s make jet trainers! They have almost the same coolness factor (especially if you put a large enough engine inside and give them some pylons: to a layman it suddenly has become a fast jet!), but it saves a whole lot of initial development costs: systems / weapons integration, ultra-state-of-the-art goodies, extreme thrust/weight ratios… Doing so, your country will maintain a relatively advanced aviation industry without the huge efforts required for advanced jets or advanced civil aircraft. Yet definately a lot more appealing than just some low-key shop which does some maintenance and makes a bit of spares and light/general aviation propellorthingies nobody cares about. And what’s even better, a jet trainer SEEMS to have more chances on the export market.

So there you have it. An enormous plethora of jet trainers ranging from extremely simple (just a little above the BD-5J when it comes to performance) to extremely complex. It’s a wonder everyone is always mentioning the nasty marketing wars when it comes to combat jets, but i can’t imagine the trainer-game is played any friendlier.
IA63 Pampa, C101, S211, MB339, M346, Alpha Jet, Hawk, L59/159, IAR99/109, I-22, MiG-AT, Yak-130, K-8, L-15, Jet Squalus, IJT, T-50, AMX-T, Simourq, FTC-2000…
No wonder the US has left this market. Let the other ones compete themselves to death.