He was found hiding in a box in his parents’ attic.

His older brother, who repeatedly told police that he had seen his brother climb into the cargo box of the balloon just before take-off is likely to experience a “hiding” of his own.

So is this a “Great Leap Forward” in Chinese military capability?

Who said anything about the Russians catering to the Chinese? The russians didn’t have much to go on aside from yak-39 VTOl and went from Su-27 to Su-33 all by themselves. How hard can it be for the chinese to go from J11 to something similar, really?

Particularly considering all the public-domain data around on the F-4 Phantom, etc… and the friendly relations between China & Iran, who have flying F-14s, for Allah’s sake!

Then add in information gained from espionage programs.

Lots of technical info from which to create computer models for aerodynamic simulations and structural analysis of carrier aircraft designs!

China should have no problem designing a successful carrier aircraft of their own.

All this is exactly what a friend (retired from the USN in 2001) and I agreed the Chinese would do when the sale was first announced way back then… and we laughed at the “not to be made a functional ship” clause in the sale contract.

It is probable that the large structures of the boilers/turbines WERE installed during construction, but few (if any) of the many smaller parts (that can be moved through the installed deck hatches) were in place… and those were probably removed before sale.

Thus, it is very likely that they can indeed be completed, and brought to operational status without major “hull-cutting” being done.

Alternatively, consider that the CVL HNLMS Karel Doorman (ex-RN WW2 Colossus class light fleet carrier) had her boilers replaced by those from the incomplete HMS Leviathan in 1968-69 before her sale to Argentina (as 25 de Mayo).
How was this done? Perhaps the Chinese got “historical info” from the Dutch?

I like the BAE-146M concept with Rolls Royce BR725’s and a high mount TP400 turboprop:

I don’t think I WANT what you’ve been smoking!!

😮

Does anyone else find it odd that Italian-designed, Italian-built, ex-Italian air force aircraft are referred to using the designation applied in US (not Italian) service to a slightly modified (different avionics) version?

Note that this article, posted in the Military Aviation News from around the world thread here (page 11, post #308, 28 Sept 2009), calls them G.222s, and never mentions the US designation once!

The C-27A designation is probably being applied because the aircraft are being bought with USAF assistance program funds.

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1465606&postcount=308

Yeah the OSD for Phantom was meant to be 2008 not 1992, the Phantoms were going through an expensive SLEP when they were retired to get them to this point.

As for a naval Tornado if CVA-01 had happened…I don’t think so.

Phantom and Bucaneer would of operated off CVA-01 until the late 90’s at least maybe even the first few years of this decade. No reason why the couldn’t, the Phantoms were fairly fresh when they were retired and when CVA-01 was on the cards they were going to be purchased in larger numbers.

I think we would of seen a E2C Hawkeye purchase in the mid 80’s and the Phantom/Buccaneer replacement would of been a single type possible the the F/A18D or some kind of Anglo/French project.

The RN would probably have done a more in-depth modernization of the Phantoms in the early 1990s.

Perhaps like the Greek’s Peace Icarus 2000. That got the APG-65 radar… the same as the USN/USMC’s F/A-18A/C/Ds have.

Or the Japanese F-4EJ Kai, with the APG-66 (F-16) radar?

Or the Israeli Phantom 2000? They got a new radar based on the Norden multi-mode synthetic aperture technology developed for the A-6F/G program. They also wanted to replace the J79s with PW1120 (same thrust as the Spey in the RN’s Phantoms but with slightly worse fuel consumption, but better high-altitude performance than the Speys).

Perhaps the RN’s ‘Tooms & Buccs would get something resembling the Blue Vixen?
And upgraded Speys based on the TF41 (license-built Spey variant from the A-7D/E, which had 2,000-2,500 lb more military thrust than any UK Spey variant)?

Probably the late 1970s for the E-2B/Cs, and more likely either the UK sides with the French on a carrier version of the Eurofighter, go with France on Rafale, or just buy F/A-18E/Fs. Perhaps with EJ-200s?

The first Grumman W2F-1 Hawkeye (E-2A) flew in October of 1961, with first fleet operations commencing in January of 1964. There were 59 E-2A aircraft delivered by 1967.

In 1968, the development of two other versions started because some of the instruments aboard the E-2A were not very reliable. This resulted in the creation of the E-2B and the E-2C. Based on Vietnam experience, an improved model with a better computer, the E-2B, was developed, first flying on 20 February 1969. By 1974, 50 of the E-2As were retrofitted with improved avionics (new AN/APS-120 radar) and computers and were designated as E-2Bs. The E-2B can track up to 300 targets both in the air and on the surface or ground. The last E-2B squadron (VAW-117) traded them for E-2Cs in 1986.

Built during the early 1970s (new-builds, not modernizations except the 2 prototypes), the E-2C utilized an AN/APS-120 radar. In 1978 the AN/APS-125 Advanced Radar Processing System was introduced with automatic overland detection and tracking capability. In 1984 it was succeeded by the AN/APS-138, with improved operation in an Electro-Magnetic Interference (EMI) environment. December 1991 saw the start of an upgrade to the AN/APS-145 radar system, which provides fully automatic overland targeting and tracking capability, an improved IFF system, and a 40 percent increase in radar and IFF ranges.