Petear

Yep, I agree! But still, there is a question of cost/effectivity ratio (or how is it called, english is not my native language so be patient :-) ) which matters. So I think that U.S. and Russian went through the way of vectoring because a) U.S. can afford it b ) Russia can't stand to be behind and they really can do wonders with least sources. The other countries just chose the golden middle path to get as much as possible from Flight Control System software improvement as well as improvement of target acquisition systems and other important matters like advanced weapons. The question might be

IMHO the usage of canards is just one of the branches of development of modern aircrafts and it is used just because it is a bit cheaper to get highly manouevreable plane by adding extra piece of metal, carbon fibre or whatever and improve the software operating it than to develop vectored thrust engines (or even buy either technology or the engine itself). Which of the countries can afford to pay for such engines? And, on the other hand, is it so much more efficient and needed in real situations to use the vectored thrust engine than to use the "common" canards comparing it again with the pri

Wow Sounds very interesting! Thank you

Thank you very much Do you you know by chance how can this position be achieved? Is it a built in function in the seat or do you still have to have some extra equipment? Sorry for tricky questions but I can still hardly imagine it

Hi there! Could anybody please give me any information about the position of the seat shown here? http://www.phil123.addr.com/FOL4.html picture no.14 It should be a picture from a regular operational day but I can't imagine the reason or even whether it is possible to get such a position of the seat without using of a special equipment. Thank you in advance!