SAAB J35A Draken (Refurbished 1957 Revell kit)

[Old Wombat]

That's not a backstory, it's a backnovel!

Very good stuff, too!

[NARSES2]

Excellent "stuff"   

[Pellson]

Still no pylons, but all the rest is there.

You cannot view this attachment.

You cannot view this attachment.

Still pretty chuffed. 

*********

Missile upgrade considerations:

At the end of their career, the J35J featured an upgraded PS-01 radar, the PS-011/A. Basically the same unit, but with significantly better resistance against jamming. The radar was still coupled to the somewhat limited Rb27/AIM-26B Falcon missile. However, the Swedish version was actually upgraded a bit, featuring better ECM resistance (again), and perhaps most revolutionary - a proximity fuse. That meant you could actually hope to hit something when firing it, in stark contrast to the original missile.

Still, the range was short, and the agility of the missile left quite something to be desired, and in 1998, when the J35J  finally was retired, the Swedes had fielded the BAe Skyflash for nigh on 20 years on the JA37 Viggen, and the AIM-120 was actually procured by the RSwAF during 1994 and integrated on the JAS39 Gripens replacing the Drakens. So while hanging AMRAAMs under the J35A may be to push things just a little bit, the Skyflash could theoretically have been integrated, had just the radar catered for them.

Also, the Skyflash monopulse seeker was designed for low level intercepts, in repeated tests hitting target drones flying below 300ft over the ground. Now, that would suit the low level backstory of my J35A very well.
I just don't quite know if it'll work aesthetically. So I will have to fabricate pylons first.

[Rick Lowe]

Coming along nicely. 

[DogfighterZen]

 That oldie is looking good! Will be using this thread as inspiration if i decide to do something to the Revell Draken i was given a few months ago.

[Pellson]

That oldie is looking good! Will be using this thread as inspiration if i decide to do something to the Revell Draken i was given a few months ago.

They do require a bit of work, but nothing really difficult, it seems. The nose is worst, but with some spares, you'll be fine.

There were early sales efforts to Switzerland, and the demonstrations were flown in a short-tailed A.

[Old Wombat]

One of the beautiful things about the Draken is how fast it's going when it's standing still!

[steelpillow]

This topic is getting very bad for me. I already have three long and complicated whiffs in hand. But also a half-baked design for something like these:



The Draken had a powerful effect on designers around the world. At the same time, R-R were developing lightweight lift engines for supersonic VTOL applications. Rolls themselves, Hawker, Short, Sud Aviation and Ryan were among those who stuffed a thick-rooted double-delta with lift engines. Most put them mid-fuselage. Bristol and Ryan opted for in-wing, which looks so much cooler.

I have a made-up Revell Draken. But its inaccuracies, especially being slightly undersize except for the fin which is slightly over, have led me to get a better kit for my stash. So I have this surplus Revell Draken available for major surgery....

[Pellson]

This topic is getting very bad for me. I already have three long and complicated whiffs in hand.

I know what you mean, but I'm much happier after having let go of such limitations, just embracing my lust and mojo. The Shelf of Doom^TM, however, does expand a bit in the process..

I have a made-up Revell Draken. But its inaccuracies, especially being slightly undersize except for the fin which is slightly over, have led me to get a better kit for my stash. So I have this surplus Revell Draken available for major surgery....

That's interesting, because when I compare my Hasegawa S35E reconnaissance Draken with the Revell J35A in this thread, they measure up nigh on perfectly - after the rebuilds described. So I don't feel that it's so undersized in relation to its sibling.
Then again, I have admittedly not measured it up towards scale plans.

••••••••••••••••••

Having tried different pylon and missile setups, I'm currently leaning towards a 2 x Skyflash + 2 x Sidewinder load, the former under the outer wings and the latter under the intakes as per the J35J. The Skyflashes are obviously bigger and above all longer than the Falcons the later Draken did carry, but it's not looking totally out of place, and it will be possible to work them in into my kind of backstory. As you might have noticed, I like to keep things at least almost within the reach of a possible reality, and that can be a very narrow path to wander..

Anyway - it's still not too late to alter, should my mind change, but for now, I think it is continuing to look really good.

There is another, later issue of the same old Revell kit coming up on our local Evilbay variant in a few days, and I'm tempted. It'll be more work transforming such a kit into a long J35A or a J35B, but it should be possible, given that I'll have a spare rear fuselage from my planned Sk35C build. And if I decide it's not worth the effort, then it's still a cheap way to acquire the old style fin I'll need if I go with a Hasegawa modification instead.
Choices, choices...

[Gondor]

Having tried different pylon and missile setups, I'm currently leaning towards a 2 x Skyflash + 2 x Sidewinder load, the former under the outer wings and the latter under the intakes as per the J35J. The Skyflashes are obviously bigger and above all longer than the Falcons the later Draken did carry, but it's not looking totally out of place, and it will be possible to work them in into my kind of backstory. As you might have noticed, I like to keep things at least almost within the reach of a possible reality, and that can be a very narrow path to wander.

So a pair of Rb 71's along with a pair of RB24J's as your loadout, very reasonable I think.

Gondor

[Pellson]

Having tried different pylon and missile setups, I'm currently leaning towards a 2 x Skyflash + 2 x Sidewinder load, the former under the outer wings and the latter under the intakes as per the J35J. The Skyflashes are obviously bigger and above all longer than the Falcons the later Draken did carry, but it's not looking totally out of place, and it will be possible to work them in into my kind of backstory. As you might have noticed, I like to keep things at least almost within the reach of a possible reality, and that can be a very narrow path to wander.

So a pair of Rb 71's along with a pair of RB24J's as your loadout, very reasonable I think.

Gondor

Aye, mate. That's what we're looking at, currently. 

EDIT: Almost. I'll go for the Rb74/AIM-9L instead of the Rb24J. These are within reach, chronologically, and a much, much better missile.

[steelpillow]

H'mm, not sure which kit is the better/worse, now.

Data comparison:
All dimensions in mm

Version	Span	Wing inner    section width	Length	Height	Fin ht.	Notes
Saab 35F	9,420		15,350	3,890		Length Appears to include nose Pitot.
1:72 scaled	131		213	54
Revell	130	58	192	57	24	Assembled model. No Pitot.
Heller	134	64	193/214		22	Unmade kit. Pitot optional.

On the Revell model the wing inner section is noticeably shorter with the intakes set further back. It is also 6 mm narrower, making the whole model look smaller. Wing outer each 1mm wider, with shorter tip chord.
Revell tailpipe is a fraction shorter, but the  fin 2 mm taller (even taking the Heller ridge into account) and with LE more sharply raked with noticeably shorter tip chord.

I have mislaid my main source on Saab, but some of these discrepancies (and others not mentioned) can be explained if we take the Revell kit to be of an earlier variant, perhaps the A or D. Others are due to inaccuracies in one kit or the other. Were the intakes later extended forward? Was the fin tip flattened upwards or downwards? And so on.

[Pellson]

H'mm, not sure which kit is the better/worse, now.

Data comparison:
All dimensions in mm

Version	Span	Wing inner  section width	Length	Height	Fin ht.	Notes
Saab 35F	9,420		15,350	3,890		Length Appears to include nose Pitot.
1:72 scaled	131		213	54
Revell	130	58	192	57	24	Assembled model. No Pitot.
Heller	134	64	193/214		22	Unmade kit. Pitot optional.

On the Revell model the wing inner section is noticeably shorter with the intakes set further back. Wing tip chord is shorter. Centre section is 6 mm narrower, wing outer each 1mm wider.
Revell tailpipe is a fraction shorter, but the  fin 2 mm taller (even taking the Heller ridge into account) and with LE more sharply raked with noticeably shorter tip chord.

I have mislaid my main source on Saab, but some of these discrepancies can be explained if we take the Revell kit to be of an earlier variant, perhaps the A or D. Others are due to inaccuracies in one kit or the other. Were the intakes later extended forward? Was the fin tip flattened upwards or downwards? And so on.

• The Hasegawa kit will have to be your template. It's, by far, the best
• The Hasegawa and Heller kits are representing the later J35D/F/J variant, featuring longer tail cone, different fin and canopy, and longer intakes. The Revell is an early J35A, as is described in my backstory. That part is actually directly "from the book" with production no's etc.

[steelpillow]

Makes sense. Can't think Saab would have widened the inner wing by 40 cm or so from the A, though. Definitely scheduled for the razor saw.

I like Ryan's idea of multiple lift fans. Driven from the main engine, F-35 style. Quad drive via twin shafts, like a Chelsea Tractor. Maybe four in a quad arrangement, or eight smaller ones in four pairs.
Intakes tucked back further, underneath the LE root.
The plane would need to be a bit bigger, like the Project 37-1 strike fighter of 1960, to maintain adequate payload-range. But as the kit's too narrow anyway, that is not a problem. And the intakes are almost far enough back already, just a little further to widen them. This is getting too good to be true.

[Pellson]

Makes sense. Can't think Saab would have widened the inner wing by 40 cm or so from the A, though. Definitely scheduled for the razor saw.

Again - held side by side with a Hasegawa, the total width from the right to the left joint between the outer and inner wings is very similar between the old Revell and the new Hasegawa. So I believe that dimension is correct.

That said - whiffing the kit to something entirely different does leave the door open for about any design you like, so carry on! 

I like Ryan's idea of multiple lift fans. Driven from the main engine, F-35 style. Quad drive via twin shafts, like a Chelsea Tractor. Maybe four in a quad arrangement, or eight smaller ones in four pairs.
Intakes tucked back further, underneath the LE root.
The plane would need to be a bit bigger, like the Project 37-1 strike fighter of 1960, to maintain adequate payload-range. But as the kit's too narrow anyway, that is not a problem. And the intakes are almost far enough back already, just a little further to widen them. This is getting too good to be true.

The possibilities are endless..