Pellsons Perceivings

[NARSES2]

Head on view of that P 1100 is fascinating

[kitbasher]

Here you go, Mr P, a trip out west: https://aeroseum.se/events/aim-art-in-miniature-6-7-september-2025/

(I realise it's a bit of a slog for you to get there, but it is on the way to Telford  )

[Charlie_c67]

Head on view of that P 1100 is fascinating

Agreed. It's got a bit of a Thunderbird 2 look about it!

[Old Wombat]

[PR19_Kit]

What a MAGNIFICENT pic!     

[Old Wombat]

'Twas posted on BtS & I thought our Scandinavian friend would appreciate it.   

[Pellson]

'Twas posted on BtS & I thought our Scandinavian friend would appreciate it.   

I do indeed!

[Pellson]

Here you go, Mr P, a trip out west: https://aeroseum.se/events/aim-art-in-miniature-6-7-september-2025/

(I realise it's a bit of a slog for you to get there, but it is on the way to Telford  )

That is, actually, a good tip, and I did use to frequent that event back when I was based in the vicinity. Also, the Aeroseum, housed in the old underground hangars of the disbanded F9 wing, is quite worth the visit on its own. But..

I shall take this under consideration.

[Pellson]

Having emerged from bed somewhat less than sprightly today (some days, the fatigue is more "on" than other days), I found myself leafing through some reference books on the Draken aircraft, and as it sometimes is, you stumble on something you hadn't thought of before. In this case, I came across technical data and performance figures for the Mod 4 Draken, all obviously calculated rather than measured as the aircraft never was built, let alone fly, but still, these were official SAAB figures, so I'll allow myself to treat them as trustworthy.
Anyway - what I am getting at is that, compared to the J35F version, while the Mod 4 got a somewhat bigger wing, the powerplant was entirely unchanged, and while the max takeoff weight went up from 12 016kg to about 14 800kg, the take off distance actually shrunk from 900m to 750m, and the landing roll from 850m to 600m, both the latter with chute deployed.

You cannot view this attachment.

While some of this probably can be attributed to the somewhat larger and undoubtedly more efficient wing, I would actually assume that the game changer is that little retractable canard wing just behind the intake. It's only deployed in low speeds, generally when in landing configuration, and what it does is that it allows for a much higher controlled angle of attack (AoA).

Where a canardless delta will have to angle its elevons upwards to increase the AoA, an aircraft with moving or flap equipped canards can leave the elevons in neutral, or even deflect them somewhat to increase the wings lift, but rather control the AoA with the lift generated by the canards. The consequence is that for a given wing area, a canard aircraft will generate higher lift than a pure delta, and thus also be able to fly at lower airspeeds, hence it will also take off and touch down at lower airspeeds, thereby shortening the required runway distances as per above.

So, by adding that small canard, SAAB was able to lift more fuel and payload from shorter fields, using the same powerplant as before. Rather cool, actually.

Right. Maybe I should see if I can sort the wings at that trainer, by the way..

Edit: That more efficient wing, by the way, in addition to cater for more load, they also increased the aerodynamic loads possible, lifting the practical max positive G load from 7,5 to 9 G, thereby making the aircraft more manoeuvrable and thereby also a better dogfighter. But that had very little to do with the canard..

[Dizzyfugu]

Nice. I also have a Draken with canards on my agenda, as a proposal/alternative for Switzerland's Mirage III.

I have also been thinking about the Skyknight-based bomber/night fighter, but that's more challenging than expected, because finding suitable and matching donor parts for what I have in mind either in The Stash™, the trash heap or externally turns out to be more complicated than expected. However, I still like the idea and the potentially brutal/bulky thing that might emerge, and I might give it the Saab J31 designation, so that it fits into the intended time frame, too ("lending" it from the Spitfire PR.XIXs). We'll see. 

[Pellson]

Nice. I also have a Draken with canards on my agenda, as a proposal/alternative for Switzerland's Mirage III.

I have also been thinking about the Skyknight-based bomber/night fighter, but that's more challenging than expected, because finding suitable and matching donor parts for what I have in mind either in The Stash™, the trash heap or externally turns out to be more complicated than expected. However, I still like the idea and the potentially brutal/bulky thing that might emerge, and I might give it the Saab J31 designation, so that it fits into the intended time frame, too ("lending" it from the Spitfire PR.XIXs). We'll see. 

I'm looking forward to whatever you will proceed with. That said, as I think this would have been primarily an attack/strike aircraft, then maybe you should consider the "A" prefix for Attack, rather than the "J" for Jakt? Hence, A31?

*********

In other news - not much. The working season has commenced, and with that, while sitting more or less constantly at the table, my focus obviously has to be elsewhere than on models. That said, I have adjusted the Sk35C somewhat (minor antenna placement) to align better with the J35A and B models, and I have also added the flip-out canards on the Mod 4 trainer intakes. As the next "gate" on that model will have to be to paint the belly as I won't be able to reach parts of that once the drop tanks go on, next step will be to add pylons, and also launch rails, to be able to paint then in where they are placed. The pylons are only on the Mod 4 machine, but the rails also will go on the three older Drakens, as I am realising that I want more capability in my armament that reasonably can be squeezed out from the minuscule Falcon airframe. There is somewhere a limit to what a back story can privide, and in this case, a larger missile will always be able to provide space and weight for more engine, more warhead and better systems.

But more on that in respective project thread as things move along.

[Pellson]

..Oh. And I might just have bought another Hasegawa Draken, and a Heller Lansen just to balance things up.. 

[PR19_Kit]

You can never have too many SAABs. 

[NARSES2]

..Oh. And I might just have bought another Hasegawa Draken, and a Heller Lansen just to balance things up.. 

As one does   

[Dizzyfugu]

Nice. I also have a Draken with canards on my agenda, as a proposal/alternative for Switzerland's Mirage III.

I have also been thinking about the Skyknight-based bomber/night fighter, but that's more challenging than expected, because finding suitable and matching donor parts for what I have in mind either in The Stash™, the trash heap or externally turns out to be more complicated than expected. However, I still like the idea and the potentially brutal/bulky thing that might emerge, and I might give it the Saab J31 designation, so that it fits into the intended time frame, too ("lending" it from the Spitfire PR.XIXs). We'll see. 

I'm looking forward to whatever you will proceed with. That said, as I think this would have been primarily an attack/strike aircraft, then maybe you should consider the "A" prefix for Attack, rather than the "J" for Jakt? Hence, A31?

Well, the story will be a light jet bomber project as a Saab 18 replacement with the Saab 29's technology - and there was also a dire need for an all-weather fighter, which eventually led to the procurement of the J30 (Mosquito) and J33 (Venom) while the J32B was on its way. The Sud-Oeast Vautour is a good benchmark, and the Saab 32 followed a similar multi-role concept for an attack/A-W-Fighter/recce type, just with already more advanced technology (esp. a singlemore powerful engine than the Ghost jet powerplant from the Tunnan). The bomber/attack version for "my" Saab 31 might have been dropped with the A32A on the horizon, in favor of an N/AW fighter derived from the airframe - maybe the J30 and J33 never happened? And that J31 would certainly not have been in service for long, due to the J32B which appeared in 1958. The J29 as technological benchmark made its maiden flight in 1948, and the twin-engined Saab 31 would have been developed around the same time, so that an active career of ~10-12 years until the early Sixties would be plausible.