F-16 MATV Axisymmetric vectoring in the early 1990's.

[beaggyboy]

America duznt nid 2 muc F22s,heck al ye nid is 2 reactivate programes suc s dis MATV/VISTA 4 d F16s & HARV,ad F23 type all movin vert tailplane & TVNs 2 d F-18s & it'll be mor den sufice 2 return US air defenses' repute bac 2 lead position,but F15 is mor of a dificult caz,owing 2 its inherent dezyn,unles its engine position is sumwat moved further aback 2 acentuate d multi-axis jetblast unhindered,but dat wil afect itz longitudinal air-flo s it exits,thus undermining itz overall air-spid & SVTO

[MrAyoss]

Does anybody else think the F16's thrust vectoring thingy looks like a butthole?

[elpapaxo]

omg hax

[Inklebonker1]

haha the russians had me fooled i thought they made that up

[Wes91793]

why don't they just use upgraded F-16s and F-18s with thrust vectoring instead of using the F-35?

[tonygogap]

Because they F-16 and F-18 are old pieces of shit and the F-35 is way more effective.

[Wes91793]

Their not pieces of shit, just old. Does the F-35 have thrust vectoring?

[tonygogap]

Nope, Thats why it has a HMD that allows the pilot capable of looking 360 dergrees of the nose and get a lock.

[Wes91793]

what happens when you're out of missiles? what happens when the missiles don't work?

[tonygogap]

Then you go in for guns. You could still win a gunfight without thrust vectoring.

[Wes91793]

oh ok. Can the F-35 turn like an F-16? Can it perform high alpha like an F-18? I just wanna know, I'm not trying to prove a point anymore

[cr9527]

1stly, F-35 is designed to maneuver as well as the F-16.

2ndly, the F-35's fused avionics can borrow other aircraft's sensors to lock on, thus, essentially, lending another wing man with your own missile.

3rdly, Chances of it running out of missiles is just as low as the F-16 running out of bullets.

[markbart7]

When both happen, you wait for the chance, and run like hell.

[WooDpenis]

that never will happen... everyone will be shot down before u run outta missiles and ammo...

[619cactusjack]

the f22 and f35 have thrust vectoring but is not like that, the thrust vectoring of f22 and f35 is in 2d and the f16 matv have it but in 3d

[Baseshocks]

@619cactusjack they were going to add thrust vector to f-35 but the costs were way too much.

[350zfan09]

no but the JSF does but only for VTOL

[EnaRbg]

Just because they are too old.

[cr9527]

because F-16s or F-18s cannot perform stealth missions, nor do they have nearly as good of avionics package of the F-35.

[111danish111]

0:3 The movement looks so organic !!!

[suraxis]

Seeing an f-16 doing a Pugachev Cobra... FUCKING AWESOME.

[liobeking]

I would like to see how the nozzle is actuated. Seems to be two layers of strips and then it's one big mistery to me.

[SupremeCommanderO1]

that engine looks pretty damn awsome

[skipplet]

Who cares who was first to do the Cobra maneuver. It's an Airshow trick, nothing more. It has no place in combat, which is what all these planes were made to do.

[grame141]

it does actualy it can be used to shoot down enemy aircraft above or behind you

[CBlackjr]

true but it makes you a sitting duck. Doing a cobra means you just killed your airspeed and much less capable of evading a missile

[rubent100]

then wtf is all this technology for? i think NASA should really hire you dude. you would be such a good addition to there team.

[naridon]

If an aircraft is behind you and (not capable of this move), you can just go up (by several feet and slow down/pause in mid flight). The craft originally behind you just keeps going (remember all this happens at high speed). When you drop back after the cobra move, you are now behind the enemy aircraft. So it gives distinctive combat advantage in a one-on-one dogfight situation. If there are multiple enemy craft, then it makes you a sitting target, probably.

[skipplet]

I guess that's from the Tom Cruise school of dog fighting.

[AnseTakamaka]

a cobra-maneuvre is ONLY possible with NO weapons and less fuel (weight) and thats why its absolutely impossible doing cobras in a dogfight until you are out of ammo and fuel. so the maneuvre is worthless but looks cool in airshows...thats it! search google and/or wikipedia for the "cobra-maneuvre"

[belkan991]

omfg a f-16 doing a cobra lol u defenetly dont see that everyday

[luischin003]

simplemente: E S P E C T A C U L A R.

Saludos

[bestamerica]

i like all america jetfighter planes are the best than ussr russia jetfighters

[basharbers]

droolsk i want one of those modded F16's :-P~~~~

[RSsnowolf4]

You people are forgetting the X-31 Vector, which came before everything you guys have mentioned except the harrier.

[FalconProductions]

If you want to get technical, the Messerschmitt Me 163 was the first thrust vectoring aircraft (yaw only). The EWR VJ 10 and Dornier Do 31 came before the Harrier too. So the Germans pretty much beat everyone to thrust vectoring.

[benatbenland]

I did thrust vectoring on my lawnmower before the germans did way back in 1947

[MegaBrits]

If you want to be really pedantic - THE 1st thrust vectored system was the gyro operated thrust vector paddles on the German V1 - Thats is how it was able to take off and maintain attitude. On Modern rockets they have the actual nozzles movable.

Germany should have won the war, with the British as allies and with Hitler sacked.

Russia and America would be theme parks for bored Europeans now, only kidding.

[ohainoob]

The first aircraft to use thrust vectoring would be the Harrier.

The first aircraft to use thrust vectoring in a sense to gain high angles of attack was the F-18 HARV, which flew in 1987, a US aircraft.

[MegaBrits]

Absolutely - Although the wing with the highest angle of attack mastered by Britain was the delta wing - Hence Eurofighter, HP-Victor Vulcan, concorde, Vickers Type 559 etc etc.

Want to see how efficient and high angle of attack a Delta wing is? See Britains huge supersonic bomber from 1955 simply take, off short steep climb and then rolling just feet from the ground.

YouTube search for

"air show vulcan rolls at farnborough"

Handles not far off like a fighter and was supersonic.

[ohainoob]

"Absolutely"

So the US first pioneered thrust vectoring technology used to gain high AoA.

Not the British.

And not the Russians.

Glad the two of us cleared this up for everyone to see. ;)

[MegaBrits]

Yes T-V on Airframes is Britains baby. The use of a delta wing alone to get high AoA is Britains baby. The use of thrust vectoring to achieve even higher AoA is the TV on the F-18HARV (More success was the X-31A = mostly German technology with Americas usual development wallet).

Eurofighter has much X-31A / German input, thats why the TV upgrade we have for it will make it far outshine the F-22, a plane which a Brit designed the stealth for and BEA most of its avionics anyhow - LOL.

[ohainoob]

I have yet to see a test or production aircraft built and successfully flown by the UK that uses thrust vectoring in a sense to gain high angles of attack.

Fact is, the F-18 HARV beat everyone else (Russia, France, UK, etc) to it.

LOL

[MegaBrits]

Not doubting what you say, we Brits dont have a tail configured TV fighter other than our HUGE input into the F-35 (avionics, lift engine, etc etc), but we do have a TV upgrade ready for EF Typhoon.

[ohainoob]

So the US was first to us TV in a sense to gain high angles of attack. Glad we agree. :)

And the UK's input in the F-35 is indeed huge. We agree on that too. :)

[MegaBrits]

Yes indeed.

[tonygogap]

Yea but the f-18 harv did not have its thrust vectoring on it in flight until after nf-16 vista. It went through three stages for the f-18 harv so it was later.

[colmv123]

WOW that is incedibly agile

[coecoebutter]

we took the idea off of SU-37

[JNT11593]

How when the F/A-18HARV,F-16 MATV,F-15 ACTIVE came before it. and The Raptor project also came long before the 37

[kederaji]

He typoed. The SU-27 was the first Russian plane to do thrust vectoring, and also the first plane used to do the Pugachev Cobra manuver shown in the video.

[JNT11593]

The first plane to use it was the Harrier. But the first plane to use it like the F-22 or Su-37 was the F/A-18 HARV. Although the flanker was the first to do a Cobra. But wasn't the Su-30MK the first flanker model with TVC?

[F22RaptorFF]

we should put thrust vectoring on all f-16's so it can out turn the Su-35 and Mig-35

[JNT11593]

I think we should built of alot of F-15 ACTIVES

[F22RaptorFF]

but u couldn't do it on the F-15C because of the airframe is to oldand the airframe would fail. but the F-15E would be fine because the airframe would not break because its a newer airframe. so ya we should do it. btw a new b1iscoming out the B-1R. i has F119 engines (f-22 engines)advanced radar's and AMRAAM missles

[JNT11593]

the F-15 ACTIVE is actually based on the F-15C Airfram. But yes I would prefer to see it on the E models

[yacek89]

f-16 w/o vectoring is awsome :) With vectoring would be impossible to beat :))

[vacazul]

Para hacer unas salchichas tiene que funcionar de miedo!

wow! cómo se mueven las toberas!!!

[pedestrian0101]

que pasa es bunghole!

[crazysunami]

woo an F-16 doing a cobra!

[337cash337]

LOL!!! they copied off the mig-29 loool

[beaann]

are you serious? cash you are aware that this was 15 years before the russians ovt right? The Russians copied us. Try looking up the f-15 active, the f-18 harv , the x-29/31 planes. you will see every one of our desings in the su30, 29, and 37.

[zemarus]

why do you think f15 looks like Mig25?)

[beaann]

are you serious? the foxbat and the f15 look nothing a like. The foxbat is a box with wings that cant turn. The f-15 is an agile aircraft that is an amazing looking machine that would smoke the foxbat in a dogfight no proble. The two aircraft have 2 engines, that is about as closee as it gets in simularity

[alexsydmaddie]

also somewhat in the shape of the intakes. and you know both planes serve fantasticaly in their own roles: the f-15 being an agile fighter, while the foxbat is an incredably fast interceptor, the fastest in the world i beleive.

[Androgenies]

i believe not. the mig 29 OVT may have been developed later than the F16MATV but the russian SU 35 is the first plane in production to use the thrust vectoring technology. it was you,americans that copied our technology. the the SU 33's predecessor, SU 27 may have earlier used the thrust vectoring tech. so it was us, russians that invented the vectored thrust first.

[jumpsweet]

Androgenies,

I rarely comment on these videos anymore because it always ends up in a war of words that it rather pointless.

The F-16 MATV was not the first axisymmetric or 3-D jet the U.S. made and tested. It was the F-18 HARV and it first flew in 1987 as the first phase HARV.

Again, we are talking 3-D thrust vectoring here and the U.S. was infact frist with it. I don't see what it matters, the U.S. found in testing that 3-D thrust vectoring is a waste of time and money.

[jumpsweet]

The problem with 3-D vectoring is that it works best with round nozzles and because the nozzles are shaped this way the IR signature becomes much larger.

In today's air to air fighting, the maneuvers gained by 3-D vectoring are out weighted by lower RCS and lower IR signature. The reason the F-22 has edged shaped nozzles is to lower it's RCS and IR signature.

It was also learned that if one uses large enough control surfaces a jet can get the same yaw axis maneuvering as 3-D vectoring.

[theinsane101]

germans had it first.

[jumpsweet]

theinsane101,

Sorry but that's not correct. The Germans were working on ideas for axisymmetric thrust vectoring with the U.S. in the NASA program back in 1987 when the frist phase F-18 HARV was made but, the HARV was made by mostly U.S. engineer's.

The Germans had input but they were not the lead engineer's on the project.

[beaann]

you are out of your mind. The first thrust vectoring aircraft in the world is the x-31 and it was shown at the 1998 french airshow. I suggest you do more research on this because vectoring was first done by the americans. Its maiden flight was in August 1992. For the next three years we would develop the f-15 active, the f-16 matv and the f-18 harv along with the x-29 reverse wing technology you see on the new russian prototypes. The americans were 15 years ahead of the russians in this.

[beaann]

I am incorrect. The first thrust vectoring aircraft in the world in the f-18 HARV and it first flew in April 1987 which would make the Americans having thrust vectroing more than 20years before the Russians.

[akngac5]

Androgenies, okay, done with the tantrum yet? You live in the PI, they have no technological advances in fighter jets, maybe a trike or jeepney here and there. The American F-18 and F-16 were the first, do the research before piping all that hot air out of the side of your neck and speaking of things you know nothing about. So easily impressed with boy toy function...tsk, tsk, tsk..moron. And what do you mean OUR technology, did you say that for real, stop pretending to be Russian.

[wooka21]

I guess that depends. Which idea was in blue prints first and tested first. how do we now both nation just did not discover it on their own.

[beaann]

My god do you people not know the power of the google? would you try googling the first thrust vectored aircraft? If you do you are going to see that the US produced the first 3d thrust vectored flight in 1987 with the f-18 HARV. That is correct Androgenies that is 20 years before the Russians did it at air shows. The actual first version of thrust vectoring is on the British Harrier. Rear engine 3d thrust vectoring is on the HARV not the modified SU-27.

[repsollenny]

the MATV project is also known as the f16 vista

[Tarapatintirintintin]

Wow, great desing, like the ULA-ULA!!!! hahhaha.

Beatyful!!!

[joaofga123]

why the usaf don't use this planes? is very better than original f-15 or f-16!

[danieleriskay]

I find many of the Russian vs. American planes comments so amusing because they seem to believe that fighter are somehow comparable:  they really aren't. They are apart of a larger force structure and they are generally meant to accomplish different objectives. It really doesn't matter what kind of goofy manueverability you can claim if your opponent isn't going to engage you in a dogfight.

[thatoneguy12ize]

@danieleriskay have you pasted this to other vids or can I just asking if I could?

[beaggyboy]

@danieleriskay,whyl I'm not lukin 2 rebuf U in anyway lyk many of us do,but in dis day & age,Fjets R in fact optimised 4 multimission,hence its aptly called Multi Role Combat Aircraft,F18F, 4 say is gud 4 interdiction-attack,ground-air support,air interception-superiority & latest w/electronic warfare & jammer suite de 'Growler',whyl all 4-5th gen Acraf generaly have similar capability,except 4 EW & Jaming(exclusivly F18f),dey've now esentialy integrated all mision objectivs in2 1 comon platform

[beaggyboy]

@danieleriskay,(2 cont furthe);manuverability is especialy crucial in all aircraft makes s whether 1 party is 2 b carying out a mision (s agressor) s allied forces against serbian actvt or US Navy (self-defending)agst Iranian Fjets flights,& its not lykly dat any1 hi-tails,its down 2 dogfite,wen misiles fail wic is unlykly 4 rezons,misiles r dificult 2 out manuver & many mor misile options can b available.Agility is den critical hir s 1 is actualy heading on d other,misiles wud b 2 clos 4 use

[OlderG0ds]

@beaggyboy What language are you typing in?

[Necrodragn]

Backwards flight? Only in this vid so far have I seen it so close to perfection. Thrust vectoring has some eye-popping capabilities, that's for sure. I'm not really sure how they do it, though. I am assuming that by propping up the plane to such a high angle, the jets can be vectored forward, allowing for backward travel. Must take some sharpened reflexes and control, though.

[JETZcorp]

I don't know if I'm understanding you right here.  What happens is that the engine thrust is diverted up, forcing the tail down, increasing AoA and thus turning capability. If this is violent enough, the plane can whip around more than 90 degrees and keep flying in the same direction by momentum, which is what we see demonstrated at the end there.

[Necrodragn]

Oh I see now, so momentum is the cause for reverse flight... that makes sense now that I think about it, considering MxV=P.

[Z971]

"This is a video of the F-16 MATV using axisymmetric thrust vectoring in the early 90's..years before the Mig-29 OVT."

Exept the fact that mig 35 actually flies ))

[EarlMcCrackin]

The MiG-29OVT isn't the MiG-35. The MiG-35 doesn't have TVC unless requested which probably isn't likely due to maintenence, etc.

[fpere006]

The MATV flew, so did the 15 active.

[BolterBolter]

Technically, the Harrier beat them both to it... To the extreme!

[angelNNNdevil]

This goes on to prove that Americans had thrust vectoring way before the Russian knew of its possibility.

Sukhoi 37 MKIs came only in late 90s early 2000s

[sxekjb]

this is where they must have tested the batmobile

[darwingotcha]

BTW They do fly F-22s in airshows... I have seen several.

[em745aa]

Uh... Anyone else turned on by the nozzle's "sultry" movements at the beginning? o_O

;)

:P

[Hujcerz]

Have you ever seen F-22 on any airshow Farborought ILA... No! why? becouse this plane is only a legend or myth if they show this plane in flight this would be the end of this "super" plane legend. But we can see a plenty films and games, ouuu yes US Planes are the best (on films and games!)

[EarlMcCrackin]

Uh, the demo team has just been put together. Wait till 2008.

[ArekSzynal]

I saw the raptor up here in Toronto. Loud and awesome.

[Hujcerz]

Ok my mistake. I saw it on youtuybe film but it wasn't awsome it looks rather then F-15 not next generation fighter

[EarlMcCrackin]

You're an F-15.

[skysherif105]

You're a fucking idiot, tell that to Max Moga.

[Hujcerz]

I dont want to do this but if you realy want it ok:

Max Maga You're a fucking idiot

[RSsnowolf4]

Lol LMFAO!!!! are you KIDDING ME?!?!?!

I have a question for you, who has been brainwashing you? because whoever it is, has been doing an AMAZING job

[Hujcerz]

Who has brainwashed my I don't know...KGB? But I know who brainwashed yours Hollywod and Pentagon :)

[RSsnowolf4]

In order to say the F-22 is a myth, you have to go through some serious brainwashing

[ChronoLegionX]

Wow, clearly someone has never been to an actual airshow...

[fatathaland]

Do pilots have the freedom to control thrust vectoring with a seperate input, or is it all computerised to go in sync with stick, rudder and throttle positions?

[Knightfang1]

I don't know how russian jets do it but on the raptor and this F-16 prototype the Thrust vectoring is hard wired into the fly by wire control system. just move the stick or the rudder pedals and the vector system responds right along with the rest of the controls.

[jumpsweet]

I removed all the disrespectful comments.

I will not have any of that on my videos.

Talk about the axisymmetric thrust vectoring, that's what the video is about.

Thanks.

[darkskyak1]

about that last comment if you wanna help me defend the rapter look for the langly demo video thread thanks alot i apreciate any help

[darkskyak1]

about the sukhoi fans comment there hard headed even if we were to produce the "mtd" or "matv" they would still find sumtin stupid to ague about and i kno cuz am in a huge arguement with a su fan and hes really ignorent some help would be nice anyone?

[Knightfang1]

I wish the US had released this aircraft as well as the F-15mtd. maybe then the Sukhoi fans would shut up for a while.

[darkskyak1]

the shuda equipted the superhornet with the HARV nozzels or made a agresser squadron of them for the navy

[Knightfang1]

along with what Jumpsweet said below, the real problem with thrust vectoring is increased maintence and upkeep costs. the more high g manuvers a plane takes the faster it wears out and things need to be fixed. things like cracks in the wings and airframe.

[shelldawv]

The only thing that TVC is good for is close combat and airshows. I don't think that you want to hold a vertical stall or back flips when you have a missile coming at your ass at mach 3. TVC does nothing for all out speed ,only maneuvering, and that is limited by the pilots endurance.

[jumpsweet]

shelldawv,

Indeed, thrust vectoring is a last-ditch operation in aerial combat in view of the increased vulnerability of the aircraft when it is in a low-energy state. The truth is that if one is forced to use it, it's likely they are about ready to get shot down.

[shelldawv]

My point exactly, but you won't be able to outmaneuver multiple missiles at the same time .

[pbednar71]

I'd rather have more speed/fuel/missles/less weight than thrust vectoring really. So yea I totally agree.

[Northax]

TVC is also for good short take off launches.

[Knightfang1]

True, The f-22A can take off in about 900 feet of runway because of a combination of TVC, very large wing area and exceptional thrust to weight ratio. I beleive that is shorter than any other heavy fighter in the world.

[jumpsweet]

If you watch video of the Su-30MK which has 3-D vectoring, the only way it's yaw vectoring helps it is when it turns in the horizontal at high AOA. Well, if a jet can do a controlled flat spin which the F-22 has now shown, it can turn in the horizontal at high AOA just as well as a yaw vectoring jet. I was not sure the F-22 could do that but, after watching the video you can see it clearly can.

[Knightfang1]

you are totally correct, the f-22 uses it's oversized control surfaces to do all the same manuvers as a jet with yaw vectoring. the reason the nozzels are the way they are on the 22 is for stealth.

[Knightfang1]

The rudders large enough that they are even used as the raptor's airbrakes by moving them in opposite directions simultaniously, as the F-22A had the standard airbrake from the YF-22 Removed from it's design. Just one of a whole list of differences between the prototype and the production aircraft.

[jumpsweet]

StarcraftF22A,

You and others are going to learn when the F-22 does it's offical demo that the U.S. has found a way using the F-22's airframe with it's rudders, ailerons, and elevators to give the F-22 just as much yaw control as a axisymmectric vectoring jet. If you watch the video I posted of the F-22, it does a controlled flat spin in the video.

[StarcraftF22A]

They need to install those engines on the Raptor, since the F-22's engines only go 90 degrees vertical.

[Northax]

No. Then it'd lose stealth. The F-22 has 2D TVC to keep the nozzles flat and angled to reflect radar waves in different directions. It's not that they couldn't fit 3D TVC onto the F-22, but chose not to, for good reason.

[aaron8862006]

thank you for this! fantastic footage of some really neat attempts at thrust vectoring. and thank you for not jizzing all over the screen about TVC, it's only helpful, not all-powerful. great stuff.

[xrunner87]

Thanks for the vid bro, I have searched high and low for this.. the vectoring metheod they used is fenominal!!

[jumpsweet]

Then, the F-16 MATV, NF-16D and F-18 HARV which were all axisymmetric 3-D vectoring jets do their first tests in late 1993-1994. The U.S. was first with nozzle thrust vectoring.

[gogogomoveit]

However you have to bear in mind that US is not the first to field TV operationally. Su 30MKI with the Indian Air Force is the first operational fighter with thrust vectoring capability. Having said that, i would say that who's the first doing TVC doesnt really mean anything.

[Northax]

Yes, but that doesn't matter much, since the US could have easily been the first country to field TVC and canards on their aircraft, but we were saving our money for much more important jets: F-22 (which does have 2D TVC), and later the F-35 (no TVC, but stealth, which is more important compared). ;)

[Northax]

The US is, and has been since the 1970s (look up HiMAT, which flew in 1979...), more knowledgable about super maneuverability than Russia. This is fact, but since the US doesn't show off their super maneuverable aircraft off at airshows, many people think the US is ignorant of such things; as they say: ignorance is bliss. :)

[hyemp3s]

What makes you be so sure that what Russians show at the airshows is what all they got. Its very easy to say, "This is fact". Ignorance is bliss it is!

[shelldawv]

Do you mean like the Su-47..that's all they've got..literaly....

[jumpsweet]

djsal510,

Yes, the Russians were first in space but not with nozzle thrust vectoring. The first nozzle vecoring jet the Russians made was the Su-35 which was doing it's opening tests back in the early 1990's then later the Su-37 came along in 1995 and did it's first air show in 1996.

The first F-15 STOL which had pitch vectoring was tested in 1988. It was the first nozzle vectoring jet. The F-15 ACTIVE which had axisymmetric or 3-D nozzles first got tested in 1993.

[djsal510]

well the russian Su are the first one also dont forget russia was the first one in space with sputnik.

[jumpsweet]

I would say it's a draw in terms of how agile the two jets are or were.

I am hoping some of the videos that show the F-16 MATV doing the controlled flat spin get uploaded. It's very cool to watch.

[jumpsweet]

darijo203,

This is just a small video of the F-16 MATV. There are others where it does a controlled flat spin keeping it's nose up and level with a slow axis turn of a full 360 degrees.

The F-16 MATV never did a demo like the Su-37 because it was used to study axisymmetric vectoring. I never said the F-16 MATV was more agile than the Su-37. There are moves the Su-37 can do the F-16 MATV could not just like the Su-37 can't do a controlled flat spin.

[darijo203]

Im looking and looking and get get an anwser why would this be any better then SU37.

I mean you can scream for F16 but when you type Su37 in the searchbar and see the videos...judge for yourself.

[jumpsweet]

mojoefly,

This video is about axisymmetric thrust vectoring. The first jet to have it was the X-31 which first flew in the late 1980's. It used three arms to defect thrust 3-D. The F-16 MATV and NF-16D were the first to use nozzles. The Su-35 had pitch vectoring nozzles as early as the early 90's but Russian 3-D vectoring came along in the middle 90's with the demo Su-37.

[zeroyon04]

actually, the Su-37 never had 2D TVC. To my knowledge, it was never equipped with the AL-31FP engine, it had the AL-31FU, which goes up-down only. The Su-30MKI isn't true 3D TVC too. It uses two 2D nozzles mounted 30 degrees rotated, to give a pseudo-3D effect. As in, (looking from the back) the right nozzle only moves from top-right to bottom-left, and the left nozzle only moves from top-left to bottom right.

[zeroyon04]

sorry, i meant the Su-37 never had 3D TVC

[Knightfang1]

that is correct, people see it's nozzels and think its 3D but in reality it was a pair of 2D nozzels offset by about 35 degrees of rotation from eachother. so when they vector up they converge inwards and when they vector down they face away from eachother.

[zeroyon04]

actually, even that isn't true. The nozzles were not offset on the Su-37, they only went up-down. The nozzles on the Su-30MKI are offset by ~30 degrees though.

[mojoefly]

what was the first jet or plane to have thrust vectoring? is it the mig?

[exsepp]

technically I think it might have beena Harrier prototype

[majnos]

I doubt that. This is F-16s P&W 220. Harriers pegasus thrust is directed by stiff not movable nozzels. Its on wiki :)