The “mystery” is this bird sometimes called the 15th machine but apparently equipped with a radar !?!
Was this a conversion to test the final proposed PLAAF version which later failed ??? โฆ or was this used as a radar testbed at a later stage โฆ and what radar does it use ??? :confused:
Any help ???
Deino
Hi guys … I once again have some special questions regarding the Q-5 and here at first the proposed naval-version Q-5B
As I reconstructed so far we know the proposed Q-5B with its raised cockipt and the small radar from 3 (maybe 4) pictures – look below – but there is also this strange Q-5 numbered 31124 / 124sometimes called Q-5B too !!
Is this machine 31124 / 124 a specialised test-bed or an earlier configuration for the Q-5B ???? :confused: See also post no. 48 !
Can anyone help me out ???
Thanks, Deino ๐
China did buy at least one Harrier for R&D purpose. It still sits in one of China ‘s avaiation university.
China did not obtain this aircraft for R & D .. it was later delivered after being withdrawn from RAF service purely for the exhibition !
A British collector presented this Harrier to Beijing Aviation Hall in 1996 while he got a Russian propeller fighter from China as an exchange.
Otherwise I found these “documents” (?) regarding the possible Harrier accisition by China: but I have to admit that I’m not sure if this is a pure “what-if” text or the actual truth as it was discussed at the what-if forum !! :confused:
http://harrier.hyperlinx.cz/gallery/mod8.htm
Background Notes
Improbable though it may seem now, there was a very real possibility of a sale of a substantial number of Harriers to the Chinese in the late Seventies, with a major manufacturing licence agreement to follow. The proposed sale had commitment from British industry and political support at the highest level – from both the Labour and succeeding Conservative administrations.
There were two major sales drives, the first when a Chinese delegation visited Dunsfold in December 1978, which resulted in a Mr Mah, Number Two in the Fighter Command of the Chinese Peoples Liberation Army, getting a ‘little fly in G-VTOL and doing the main manoeuvres’. As Mr Mah spoke no English, and Harrier Chief Test Pilot John Farley spoke no Chinese, Farley wrote down all the essential commands, got these validated separately by three interpreters, then had the Chinese commands written alongside Morse code symbols on two pads so he could get the messages across in flight. It must have worked, as G-VTOL returned in one piece.
BAe gave a presentation in Peking a year later, here it became apparent what the intended operational scenario for the Chinese Harrier force was. They were to be deployed along the Russian border at numerous dispersal sites, to counter possible Russian incursions. BAe were convinced that the interest in the Harrier was genuine, although there were some reservations in the British camp over the likely performance from some operating sites that were ‘hot and high’, which would have degraded the hover performance somewhat. (Harriers can’t hover beyond 5000 ft above sea level.)
The Chinese Harrier would have been based on the Sea Harrier FRS.1 design, because it was in production at the time, and offered an improved cockpit and rear view, but would have been fitted with a revised nav/attack system to suit Chinese requirements, (not to mention UK high technology defence export restrictions). There were separate proposals for a naval type with modified Blue Fox radar, this replaced with a laser rangefinder in the FGA Mk 53 land based version, but retaining the basic Sea Harrier airframe. The likely contract was to have been for a hundred or so of UK origin, including some two seaters, with a further two hundred or more licence built at Shenyang.
The massive deal ultimately stalled because of improved Chinese relations with Russia, combined with the effects of inflation on the contract price and reductions in the Chinese defence budget. The inflation angle was viewed by the Chinese with bewilderment – they viewed it as ‘cheating’, being accustomed to their centrally planned economy.
The Chinese Harrier story ends with a truly galling postscript for BAe shareholders…. The spectacular success of the Sea Harrier over the Falklands two years later prompted Mr Mah to contact BAe once more, when he explained that had they known the Harrier was that good, they would have found a way of paying for them anyway!
Text largely paraphrased from ‘Harrier Story’, by Peter E Davies and Tony Thornborough, Arms and Armour Press.
Does anyone have more information on these “Background Notes” ???
Cheers, Deino ๐
Two variants of the Y-8 radar variants including the pancake and the side scan.
Interesting picture on the Y-8 pancake. It looks like an older solid-nose Y-8F400 platform instead of the new “category III” which carries the balance beam.
… and it lokks like a radom on the tail that is being hinged up for maintanance !
Deino :confused:
A new J-10 picture for Deino ๐
Hey … THANKS !!! Locks like the one aircraft from the CAC airfield with the missing canopy (from the 3rd Div. aircraft, when some semi-finished were standing behind !)
Cheers, Deino ๐
JH-7A. The file was posted on the Chinese-language WMF as a “scan.” Most likely from a mainland publication.
The best detailed picture of the A variant so far.
Is this a new regiment ??? As far I knew all PLAAF JH-7As had 21x9x numbers which are from the 28th Division, 83rd Regiment and seem to follow the “old” numbering system !
This particular machine now has a 30x9x number which seem to reflect the “new” numbering system 39 – 11 = 28th Division, but the secoond digit “0” … does it stand for another regiment ???
Cheers, Deino :confused:
LoL! why not DEINO? It is flying 2meters above the ground, russians would say “normalna”. ๐ Just for comparison look at me under the Su-27, taken in 1995, I was 185cm height that time.
Martinez
I think we have a problem here … there are two pictures both depicting the same airplane in the same situation taken from two guys from two different standpoints … and its posted at Airliners.net !
If I had found that picture from any Chinese forum I would agree with You … but here ?!?! :confused:
Cheers, Deino
PS: And please don’t think that I’m the one who photosoped them ! ๐
Oh no Deino !!!!
That photo hs been discussed to death on another thread and on other forums….. ๐ฎ
Is it – or isn’t it…………. :rolleyes:
Ken
I still think it isn’t …. http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1027487/L/
Here’s another “unbelieveable” picture ! … or once again a PS ?? ๐ฎ
Cheers, Deino
Good. You passed the test.
Oh, poor Deino, he must have puzzled why he, along with his spy, failed itโฆ ๐
O.k. … I admit !! ๐
Is there a chance to repeat this “class” next year ??? … or am I “dismissed” right now ??? :confused:
Cheers, Deino ๐
Are You sure … ??? Yes some of the Chinese guys faces were blurred … but is it completely PSed ??
Deino
Here is an interesting pic.
Hmmm … very interesting to know who is this man on the left !! ๐
He doesn’t look like a Chinese ๐ … so maybe a Russian technician for the engine integration, an Israeli (a proof for the copy theory) :diablo: … a spy !!!
Anyway this particular aircraft is the same we know from other pictures.
Thanks for posting,
Deino ๐
Thanks … and how many machines are currently flying ???
When will the first two-seater take off ?
Cheers, Deino ๐
ohhhhh …. You are right !!! I’m such a fool !! ๐ฎ :diablo:
It’s our old friend here ….
Cheers, Deino
Are there any latest news on the LCA-project progress ???