On the A-6 the B/N sat lower and further back.

Ever so slightly, though. One never really noticed it - or cared worth a fig.

Owl sends
--

Mike Kanze

"You know how they say that after a while people start to look like their pets? Well, we're starting to look like Iraq - a bunch of warring political tribes incapable of acting in common for the greater good."

- Thomas L. Friedman


"Ralph_S" wrote in message ups.com...

Yeff wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 22:02:04 +0100, Paul J. Adam wrote:

If the brits really expected the EF to be a fighter/bomber I
doubt they would have put the canards so far forward that they obscure
the ground. They prolly would have been farther back, as they are in the
rafale.

Not that much of an issue for high-risk jobs, surely? (After all, what
was the view like out of side-by-side strikers like the F-111 and A-6?
Fine to one side, but to the right you're trying to see through the
other crewman's helmet)

It's been a long time since I read "Flight of the Intruder" but I seem to
remember something about the BN's seat being lower and maybe further back
than the pilots. Anyone know for sure?

[cross-posted to RAMN added for an authoritative answer]

--
Very true. On the A-6 the B/N sat lower and further back.
The same arrangement was also carried over to the EA-6B.
Cheers,
Ralph

-Jeff B.
zoomie at fastmail fm