The Saab 36 Nidhögg

[Glenn Gilbertson]

Great idea and terrific modelling! Looks very plausible.

[rickshaw]

Excellent in concept and execution!

I assume you're familiar with the real Saab 36 project, the Vargen?

Yes.  I'm also aware there is a vacuform model available of it.   I like mine better. 

[Pellson]

That's excellent - really convincing idea! 

There really was a proposal to add canards to a Draken, but they were just behind the intakes, rather than the cockpit.

Yes I know.  They were for manoeuvring though.  Mine are to decrease the angle of attack on landing. 

Nah, the fold-out canards on the J35 Mod 4 were only to be used at landing as well.

About the SAAB A36 Vargen - the name "Vargen" is as much whif as the "Nidhögg" while the design of the "Vargen" is real. No name was ever allocated to the paperstudy later called SAAB A36. At the time, the name was Project 1300.
Initially, the 1300/Vargen was designed as a superfast Canberra, i.e flying fast and high enough to be untouchable. As time passed, that tactic rapidly turned sour (to mr Powers surprise) and the design had to be reconfigured for flying on the deck. However, as the study developed, it was also found that the Vargen layout would a) have needed half of Sweden as a runway (compare the Mirage IV) and b) have sucked up half of Sweden into it's engine on take-off due to the chin intake. Also, the large delta wing while having advantages also would mean rough low level riding characteristics why something to remedy this had to be thought out. In the time, the nuclear package also got smaller why the plane could be redesigned to be smaller and carry all load externally rather than as originally concieved, semirecessed in the belly, and eventually, the AJ37 Viggen was what came out of the Vargen studies, correcting the major deficiencies with the Vargen design. Apart from giving superb STOL capability to the Viggen, the canards also in high speed provides a vortex that smoothens the ride out substantially without losing manouverability.

All this straightened, I also like the Nidhögg better than the Vargen, and for several reasons.
- It's bigger, potentially being able to carry more load further at higher speed
- It's a two seater, allowing countermeasures and targetting to be performed by a second crewmember while no 1 is very much preoccupied with flying very fast very low (compare the current F-104-thread in this forum)
- It's looking meaner! 

All in all - it's brilliant! 

Only downside - cost. On the other hand - everything funny has the condition of being excessively expensive..   

[bearmatt]

Just came across this one... Awesome!   

[rickshaw]

That's excellent - really convincing idea! 

There really was a proposal to add canards to a Draken, but they were just behind the intakes, rather than the cockpit.

Yes I know.  They were for manoeuvring though.  Mine are to decrease the angle of attack on landing. 

Nah, the fold-out canards on the J35 Mod 4 were only to be used at landing as well.

About the SAAB A36 Vargen - the name "Vargen" is as much whif as the "Nidhögg" while the design of the "Vargen" is real. No name was ever allocated to the paperstudy later called SAAB A36. At the time, the name was Project 1300.
Initially, the 1300/Vargen was designed as a superfast Canberra, i.e flying fast and high enough to be untouchable. As time passed, that tactic rapidly turned sour (to mr Powers surprise) and the design had to be reconfigured for flying on the deck. However, as the study developed, it was also found that the Vargen layout would a) have needed half of Sweden as a runway (compare the Mirage IV) and b) have sucked up half of Sweden into it's engine on take-off due to the chin intake. Also, the large delta wing while having advantages also would mean rough low level riding characteristics why something to remedy this had to be thought out. In the time, the nuclear package also got smaller why the plane could be redesigned to be smaller and carry all load externally rather than as originally concieved, semirecessed in the belly, and eventually, the AJ37 Viggen was what came out of the Vargen studies, correcting the major deficiencies with the Vargen design. Apart from giving superb STOL capability to the Viggen, the canards also in high speed provides a vortex that smoothens the ride out substantially without losing manouverability.

All this straightened, I also like the Nidhögg better than the Vargen, and for several reasons.
- It's bigger, potentially being able to carry more load further at higher speed
- It's a two seater, allowing countermeasures and targetting to be performed by a second crewmember while no 1 is very much preoccupied with flying very fast very low (compare the current F-104-thread in this forum)
- It's looking meaner! 

All in all - it's brilliant! 

Only downside - cost. On the other hand - everything funny has the condition of being excessively expensive..   

All good reason.   

"Funny" as in different or as in amusing. 

I hoped that by using the Draken's known aerodynamic design, the Swedes would have like the French kept development costs down as they did on the Mirage IV.

As to how this Saab 36 would have been used, initially it would have been at high altitude then as the Soviet SAM defences toughened up, so it would have been like all bombers, forced low and had to use a stand-off missile.   I had given some thought to a post-Cold War use as a strategic reconnaissance aircraft, rather as the Mirage IV was but really, there isn't enough of a threat in post-Cold War Scandinavia to justify it and retiring it was I felt more in line with Sweden's image...

It'd make a really cool strategic reconnaissance aircraft though.   Who knows what is lurking in the depths of those Swedish mountains?   

[kitbasher]

Top notch, sir!

I can just see one of those on display in the tunnels at Aeroseum right now.   

[tc2324]

Story and model are all very very nicely done.

I like that

[Amphion]

......Who knows what is lurking in the depths of those Swedish mountains?   

U'd be surprised 

[perttime]

Only downside - cost. On the other hand - everything funny has the condition of being excessively expensive..   

"Funny" as in different or as in amusing. 

In my experience, many whose native language is not English use "funny" instead of "fun".

"Going to an amusement park is funny."

I very much like the "Nidhögg" but the could've-been "Vargen" (The Wolf) has some things that I like too.
In a Swedish thread, people seemed to think that the vacuform Vargen kit is not the greatest, or at least it is a lot of work.

[Pellson]

The ambiguation was intentional, you sods.. 

[Nick]

Sweden is practically hollow given how much they excavated for aircraft hangars, fuel tanks, power plants, submarine docks, gun mounts and nuclear shelters. Aeroseum is a great example of this concept.

Great build there!

[PR19_Kit]

Sweden is practically hollow given how much they excavated for aircraft hangars, fuel tanks, power plants, submarine docks, gun mounts and nuclear shelters.

Not to mention large chunks of the SAAB factory at Linkoping too! 

[Pellson]

Sweden is practically hollow given how much they excavated for aircraft hangars, fuel tanks, power plants, submarine docks, gun mounts and nuclear shelters.

Not to mention large chunks of the SAAB factory at Linkoping too! 

...sadly decommissioned 30 years ago..

[PR19_Kit]

Sweden is practically hollow given how much they excavated for aircraft hangars, fuel tanks, power plants, submarine docks, gun mounts and nuclear shelters.

Not to mention large chunks of the SAAB factory at Linkoping too! 

...sadly decommissioned 30 years ago..

Tell me about it......

I had to de-commission a 72 channel test rig there that I'd only installed a few years before. A pity as it was a great place. What did they do with the site afterward?

[Pellson]

Sweden is practically hollow given how much they excavated for aircraft hangars, fuel tanks, power plants, submarine docks, gun mounts and nuclear shelters.

Not to mention large chunks of the SAAB factory at Linkoping too! 

...sadly decommissioned 30 years ago..

Tell me about it......

I had to de-commission a 72 channel test rig there that I'd only installed a few years before. A pity as it was a great place. What did they do with the site afterward?

Actually - nothing. It stills stands as it did when the last engineer put down his pen and left. Frozen in time, in a sense.