yeah they did but then what is an analog flight control systems? any modern aircraft have sensors to calculate air preassures, speed, altitude, etc etc they are not flying on the cyberspace but in real air, even with an analog flight control system is not the pilot who controls the airplane since he is not flying with mechanical or hydromechanical systems but it is the aircraft flight control system via all the sensors and known flying characteristics converted to electric inputs, and they have to be calculated and that means more complexities than a pure hydromechanical system.
By digital they mean software changes, but it does not mean an analog flying control sysyem does not compute.
The F-16 is called electric jet simply because is not mechanically controled

Always stay on the subject!
Who has something drivelling about computer power?
Analog FBW is used since 1956 in Europe (Avro Vulcan)!
The first fighter with FBW was the Mirage 3.:diablo:
The first Jets with relaxed stability was the Europe VTOL aircrafts. :diablo:
At this time and long after this fly the US Jets with pipes and steel cable.:diablo:

The F-16 is called electric jet simply because is not mechanically controled

The F-16 is called lawndart (widowmaker) simply because no backup system avaible at the early analog FCS.
In the first decade was the F-16 FBW fault-prone. Somtimes black labour, wire puncture and bad chips (Texas Instrument)….

Now know we that a F-16 has a much better VCS as a F-22.:rolleyes:

Here is the answer, no, the LERX and tail design are not the best, the tailess delta is the best in terms of drag, the F-16XL and LCA are two good examples but here the problems lies in controlability, that is why most aircraft have either a tail or a canard.

Wrong the momentum arm at a clean Delta is to short and therefor bleed a clean Delta more engery in curves. With relaxed stability and slates is this a little bit moderated (Mirage 2000) but when I fly then in a curve and then must I bank then bleed a clean Delta more energy despite of relaxed stability. Additionally a Mirage 2000 can do a perfect Cobra without a LERX crook.

The Cobra manuvre..:(
It has little to do with operational tactics and manuvres..
With or without the Carnards in mind.

Another very usefull russian maneuvre is the Taran very similar to a Cobra without bank. 😀

another trouble of canards is they are more sensitive to aspect ratio, high aspect ratio canards are used for less drag while low aspect canards for lift, this makes constraigns in the mission profile, since some are better for lift but worse for drag and viceversa tailplanes are less sensitive due to the fact they achieve higher lift and lower drag since they do not affect the wing independently of their aspect ratio.
as a general rule the canard wing configurations achieves less lift than the tail wing configuration.

I see you have no clue about aspect ratio and the uncoupling at transsonic and supersonic speed. You have no clue about the harmfull impact of the harmfull area.

In in a curve is your lift sensless, the wing produce near zero or zero lift in this state. This show me you have no clue about fligth dynamics

the tailplane is usually more swept than the wing so it has a lower critical mach number then reducing drag and have a good moment arm force,

Wrong more swept higher critcal Mach number!
Momentum arm is a odd thing.
At a Delta-Wing is the COG more forward shifted as at a ordinary tail aeroplane.
With a moveable Carnard have we too moment arms 😉
Canard and Ailerons can act as elevator and two is better as one.
In curves acts the tail plane and the Canard + Ailerons both as sideruder (the axis are now changed, a comon failure that an armchair pilot makes). A 8g curve fly I always with 85° lateral inclination (and a 90° theoreticall impossible without the sideruder acting as elevator).
In this position bleed the conventional tailplane yet more energy as a doubleperforming Canard-Aeilron (2 elevators) The tailplane force point now in the wrong direction outside the curve (Wing force MINUS tailpalne force), were as the Canard force points inwards the curve (Wing force PLUS Canard force). Both fly now in the pitch axis stabil the instabil axis is now the sideruder axis!;)

You can’t **** an old Traper in his Colt.:dev2:

it has to do, a lot, but before you ask me questions ask your self these ones, why the canards in the Gripen are above of the wing level, why they have dihedral, why they they are trapezoidal and not triangular in shape, when you answer your self that ask your self why the F-22 has planform alignement.

After that you will understand a few things that have been said from the begining of of the thread by em745 who has solved the questions and has answered them since a long time.

Nether Su-27 and derivates nor the teen series fighter a match in RCS against the Eurocanards.