The only one I can think of with full 360 degree coverage: the ACH-47. Would work like a charm in an urban environment.

…but it certainly does give a good possible idea of where the first Super-7 design came from, which after a couple of decades evolved into the FC-1.

Utter rubbish.

It’s perfectly well documented that the Super-7 design was a cooperation between Grumman and Chengdu. The contract was signed in 1986 with a value of US$ 550 million, and was cacelled in 1990 after the Tienanmen incident. Romania had nothing to do with the FC-1, no matter how much nonsense you wish to fabricate around it.

No authority is going to risk allowing an uncertified jet to perform acrobats over a crowd of thousands of people. Even if it is in service by another air-force, i.e. PAF. That it was just allowed to fly in and out of British airspace must’ve come by some last-minute diplomacy.

Demonstrators and in-development aircraft are not allowed to fly in any air-show. Only demonstrators of the home-country are allowed, because its own plots are involved in testing. So Tejas has performed in the last 3 Aero-India shows.

You really make up the stuff as you go, don’t you?
Just an example from a few threads away:
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=101902

IAR93 – Romanian version of the Soko Galeb…

No, it’s the Romanian version of the J22 Orao. The Orao was designed together by Romania and Yugoslavia, with both countries getting a production line.

The Galeb is a plank-winged jet trainer.

Let’s not forget that because of the Yak-25/27/28 pedigree, the structural design of the -28 wasn’t really suited to the mission anymore. The fuselage just didn’t have the rigidity to have a decent bombload. I mean, if a full internal load flexed the fuselage that much that the canopy jammed open if it wasn’t closed before loading, then surely something must be wrong with the design?

The original 1940s-design was simply overstretched.

It would be comparable to a swept-winged F-89 doing the work of the F-105, or a rewinged Meteor instead of the Buccaneer. It was simply an obsolete airframe.

Of course, the internal volume made it a suitable EW aircraft because it had ample room for internal EW kit. But that was more of an afterthought, and not something the Brewer was originally designed for.

But from a general coolness perspective: LOVE the Brewer. Unfortunately my pictures from the Chortkiv playground have been missing for a long time now, but I can assure you that it’s a very cramped cockpit. The view forward through that cool windshield isn’t all that great either.

EDIT: The desert camo is a bit different on this Yak-28R.

7907 is the serial number of an Egyptian Su-7UMK (one of 44 built, between 1968-1971).

But if it is the construction number, it would be a Su-7BKL built in late 1971 (and one of the last Su-7s built, actually).

I would like to paint her in colours of the indo-pak wars of 1971
being that is where the type seen most of its combat history, and the fact
that at the moment her history is very vaque at best.

It’s your piece of airframe of course, but wouldn’t it be more fitting to trace it’s original history? Considering the source you got it from, it’s probably one of the most interesting Su-7s ever to have flown.

It’s pretty likely that you have a former Egyptian machine, which could well be a veteran from 1967 and/or 1973. Then peace broke out, Egypt became friends with other countries again, secretly gave them some aircraft (Su-20s to Germany, MiG-21s and 23s to China and the US, and probably your Su-7 as well) which ended up being studied and snooped by secret squirrels before being disposed of.

Besides, there is nothing wrong with the Egyptian camouflage.

Also, have you looked on your bit of airframe for any construction plates yet? It seems you still have the nosewheel bay – you should find a plate there.

As for parts, Poland could well be an easier place to find ’em and have them shipped over than India.