About the fuselage helping to create lift on pitch-up:

It doesn't necessarily have to be wide, but it's helpful to have a surface, whether it's the fuselage itself, or something like the canard surfaces of the Eurofighter or Rafale, which contribute very little to drag at low angles of attack, but "show" their surfaces on pitch-up. The same is true of rear-mounted ventral fins, as on the F-16, but in reverse. They produce almost no drag at low AOA, but help prevent over-rotation at high AOA. (Learjet, Piaggio, and Raytheon use them on their business aircraft, and they contribute to directional stability, too.)

In the case of my design (previous post) I used lessons learned from slicing up an FA-22 model, and analyzing it the best I could. I found that the maximum thickness point of the fuselage (excluding the canopy) was coincindental with the projected maximum thickness point of the wings... In other words, the fuselage shape is to some degree, a continuation of the wing's airfoil, with the "chine" at the front providing a camber line. (Lockheed-Martin has said that in cruise flight, the fuselage contributes 50% of the lift!) You can look at this from at least two points of view... The American approach seems to be to use sharp chines. The Russians, on the other hand took the approach of actually extending a relatively thick airfoil toward the nose of some of their jets, such as the Mig 29 and SU-27, and the French chose something in between for their Rafale. (images attached) I selected the American approach.

These things are going to be "science experiments", at model Reynolds numbers... Difficult to precisely predict in advance, but to me at least, worth trying. I should have flight test results on my design in about 90 days, and will post the results here. I've also included a small (again, FA-22-ish) "chine" at the nose, in the hope that at high AOA, the chine will create inward-rotating vortexes, helping the air stick to the plane.

Interesting and fun, regardless. Only the results will prove or disprove these ideas.

PS> My particular design is realtively wide for a different reason...
To keep the semi-scale look and shape of a modern fighter, while keeping the engine enclosed, and avoiding the use of drag-producing (fake) inlet ducts, a smooth curve was required, which drove the design to where it is today. The jet "intakes" on my design are not actually there at all, but are graphically faked to provide the illusion. (image attached)

Keep us posted on your results. These things are always interesting to watch, and we all might learn something new.