I like the flip-down ventral fin on the tail - ironically I was immediately thinking the exact design concept just before i scrolled down to the las pic and said; 'wow, that's cool'.
Was the ventral fin fixed, a la F-16 type, or moving to give enhanced ACM adavantage? It looks like a potential candidate also for late-life upgrade involving intake-mounted canard? Pretty bird for the time, no doubt.
I can't see any mechanism for moving the ventrals (other than unfolding them), so I think they were fixed. More than likely, the Super Tiger, with it's higher mach capability. needed additional directional stability, not directional control power. At the higher machs, the existing vertical tail would be experiencing elastic loss of effectiveness. The ventrals, shorter and stiffer, could have replaced that loss.
Similar devices were used on the MiG-23/27 and Vought's XF8U-3.
How did they load the overwing stores on the Jaguar? I was also wondering about the effects of the aft missile plume on the vertical tail.
Take a close look at the photo taken from the left rear quarter. You can see the canopy is slid up and back and the forward part of the forward missile seems to be attached to the canopy, while the rest of the missile is attached to the upper fuselage. I think they still had a few problems to solve before the mounting was perfected. Reminds me of the wooden AMRAAMs attached to the lower surface of the F-16XL without bothering to cut troughs into the airplane lower surface.
Yeah that pic with the "broken" AIM-9 was just a mock-up pick (at least the missile's were mock-ups, though I think the plane was real). I still would've loved to seen how this jet would've done over Vietnam in comparison to the F-8 in terms of close-in dogfighting.
It looks like it would have had good cockpit visibility, low wing loading, and low drag relative fighters that used external stores. What were its drawbacks relative the F-104A Starfighter that beat it out?