It is 6.6 metres according to the website linked to below. To be exact it says that the hangar dimensions on the Baku were the same as on the Kiev class. In the page about the Kiev class it says that the hangar height was 6.6 metres.

http://www.airforce.ru/aircraft/miscellaneous/carriers/index.htm

Ok. Well, in that case, I suppose you could do a wing with single folding point at the wing root. It would be tight though, with probably not much more than 0.5m to spare. Then again, its not like you got big bumps to roll over when moving the aircraft.

By the way, that same website, the page about Baku/Gorshkov say this about the reconstruction for India:

“Is at present developed the project of re-equipment “Admiral Gorshkov” into valuable AV for THE NAVY of India. It is intended to dismantle all the armament and RLS “Mars-passat”; the length of the flight deck to increase to 280 m, and in the nose section to equip springboard. Will increase the dimensions of hangar (to 130х23х6,6 m) and the width of stern elevator; arresting gears and optical system of landing aircraft on the angled deck will be established. All this will make it possible to place on board 34 aircraft – 21 destroyers MiG-29K end even 13 helicopters. Defensive armament will compose 6 ZRAK “Kortik”. It is expected that the modernization will be carry ouied in the near future on “sevmashpredpriyatii” in Severodvinske.”

Hangar space for Kiev was 130х22,5×6,6 so it’s not much of an hangar space improvement! It suggests 6 Kashtan CIWS for modifed Gorshkov.

Mmm, moving the wing-fold to the wing root and also folding the horizontal stabilizer could reduce footprint but I wonder if the hangar space is sufficiently high.

A regular Mig29 stands 4,73 m tall from the ground up to the top of the tailplane. Normal span of the Mig29K is 11,99 m, and 7,80 m with wings folded. This means the folded section measures about (11.99-7.8)/2=2.10 m. The section from the existing fold to the wingroot does not seem to measure more than the currently folded section, but also not much less. Subtracting the height of the folded section from the overal height leaves 2.62m, of which some is the top portion of the tail but most is the height from the ground to the wing. Also, the folded section is at a slight inward angle, which reduced its height. It’s just a rough estimate but considering the previous, the new modification of the carrier-borne Mig29K discussed in the article would probably be some 1.5m (but not more than 2.1 meters) taller than the original Mig29K. That would make it just over 6 meters tall!

That is, unless the wing would get a double fold i.e. a fold at the wingroot in addition to the fold already in place in the Mig29K… but that would only be necessary if the the hangar space wasn’t high enough.

So, how tall is the hangar space of INS Vikramaditya (ex-Gorshkov) actually??

If I’m not completely wrong informed, all but one british choppers were taken out (as the ship carrying ’em was eliminated).

You mean, all but one of Royal Air Force Chinook heavy lift helicopters carried on board the converted containership Atlantic Conveyor. There still were plenty of Wessex, Sea King, Lynx and Wasp helicopters around the fleet, just not more than 1 heavy lift helicopter. However, I believe another similarly converted container ship with helicopters was al ready en-route.

If the Brits hadn’t had their Harrier-carriers, they may not have been willing to stage a landing. But they would have been able to enforce a sea blockade with they SSNs, which would have limited the Argentinians to supplying their force by air only. Next, there surely would have been international – notably US – pressure on the Argentinians to withdraw. Remember that the US backed the Brits e.g. by providing their top-model Sidewinder AAM which was superior to the older-model Sidewinder and other AAMs used by the Argentinians. They could well have made a super-carrier available to the British (which they wouldn’t have considered doing for the French, let alone for the Spanish or Italians)

Anyway, although the islands were taken by Argentian marines, on the ground on the Islands, the Argentinians later stationed mainly poorly led regular army units consisting of conscripts. Hardly a fair match for the British troops, the bulk of which comprised para’s, commandos, marines and SAS. Crucially, the Argentinians failed to put jet fighters on the Island themselves immediately. Had they been able to do that, odds would have been much more unfavorable for the British than with fighter-bombers flying to the edge of their endurance from the mainland.

Except the radar in the Mig-31 is nothing like the radar in the F-14 and the R-33 is nothing like the Phoenix. The R-33 is SAR.

Nobody said they were similar. Besides, even if dissimilar, that doesn’t mean the Russians couldn’t have learned from taking a look at those choice items of equipment.

And about that Hawk on the Tomcat…did they use the airframe or just the propulsion/guidance unit?

I can’t imagine hanging a Hawk on a Tomcat…that’s a very big missile….I’d have to see it to believe it!!!

No doubt the Iranians are clever…and with a well trained military..before the fall of the shah, they most of their military officers were educated and trained in the states…it’s a pity there was the “falling out”.

Here you go… MIM-23 I-HAWK on Iranian F-14 Tomcat.

For comparision, a Tomcat with Phoenix

8 September 1998
“A military parade in Tehran marks the first time that many Iranian missiles are displayed publicly… [snip]… Five air-to-air missiles on display during the parade are identified as the Russian R-27 “Alamo” and the R-73 “Archer,” the US AIM-7 Sparrow and AIM-9 Sidewinder, and an Iranian modification to the US HAWK surface-to-air missile (SAM). It is believed that the US MIM-23 HAWK, sold to Iran in the 1970s, was modified by the Self-Sufficiency Group of the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force in the early to mid-1990s for the F-14 Tomcat or to replace the Phoenix air-to-air missile.”
—”Iran’s missiles on parade,” Jane’s Defence Weekly, 9 December 1998, in Lexis-Nexis, .

“… The Iranian F-14s were of exactly the same specification as those being delivered to the US Navy. The only noticeable difference to the technology being suplied was in the Iranian version of AIM-54A Phoenix beyond visual range air-to-air missile. The Iranian Phoenix did not have the electroniic counter-countermeasures (ECCM) suite installed, as was fitted to the US Navy’s missiles, thus making the missile more suscepttible to jamming…
… It is widely belived that an undisclosed number of F-14s and Phoenix missiles were traded with the Soviet Uniion in exchange for other military hardware. This allowed the Soviets access not only to the Phoenix but also to the Tomcat’s AWG-9 wepons system and this is thought to have played a major part in the development of the MIG-31 Foxhound and AA-9 Amos missile, as well as helping to develop countermeasures to American systems…
… (IRIAF) engineer are reported to have configured at least two F-14A Tomcats to carry modified MIM-23 Hawk surface-to-air missile for air-to-air role. The work was carried out in the late 1980s under the programme name Sedjil. It is thought that only a small number of F-14s received the modification and there is no reliable information on the success of the project.”
An AirForces special monthly/ F-14 & F/A-18.

Navy oil tanker fire wounds dozens

ISLAMABAD — Navy and police sources told KUNA the number of those wounded in the accidental fire hat broke out on a Navy oil tanker stationed at the naval dockyard in the southern Karachi port city exceeds 100 people, mostly sailors.

Sources said the oil tanker caught on fire when navymen were cleaning it, however, some reports suggested that the fire broke out during routine exercise.

Source said the fire triggered huge blast, damaging the whole tanker badly. They said further that around hundred wounded people have been pulled out, adding that many including five Navy officials are also missing.

An eyewitness Farooq Ahmed said navy helicopters are hovering in the air over the tanker, which has been roofed with clouds of black smoke. More details to follow.

http://www.kuna.net.kw

If the Iranians kept their F14s flying and combat capable all these years without US deliveries of parts, why would they be interested in such an offer from Bush?