On Sun, 11 May 2008 05:55:51 -0700 (PDT), Jack Linthicum
wrote:

On May 11, 2:14 am, T.L. Davis wrote:
On Fri, 9 May 2008 15:27:22 -0700 (PDT), Douglas Eagleson

wrote:
If you can not do the two maneuvers stated, in a F-16 or F-22 you will
never beat the Griphen. The russian mig-30 that literally stops in mid
flight and recovers, is another example. A forward canard allows this.

It is a critical failure of US technology.

OTOH, the forward strakes of US aircraft are growing in size, either
to blend the fuselage/wing for stealth purposes (pioneered by the
SR-71), or for increased lift as in the F/A-18 as compared to the
original F-18. A large forward strake of adequate wing section would
serve the same purpose as a canard in a stall, movable or not, yes?

Or so it intuitively seems to an aeronautics newbie...

Of course, should the Su-35/Su-37 be produced in large enough
numbers, canards will be the least of our problems. Sure, the canards
help, but jet nozzles on gimbals trump their contribution.

T.L. Davis

There is a sign of your newness to Russian design, maintenance is
secondary to air show performances. Imagine what a Russian mechanic
can do with those nozzles and then multiply that by the guy he
teaches, perhaps in English perhaps not. Certainly not the recipient's
native colloquial tongue

So, impressive as an airshow gimmick, but not necessarily reliable or
representative of easily transferable technology...I got it.