DCS: AJS-37 Viggen Discussion

[T0x1s]

A Baltic sea map with Gotland would be perfect for the Viggen attacking Soviet landing crafts.

 

 

But, what about the air to ground profile of low and very fast? I've always felt having something along the lines of the F-111, Su-24, or Tornado would be insane fun as you dodge mountains, trees, and other hazards before dumping a load of hell onto targets.

 

Low and fast is what the AJ-37 is supposed to do :)

 

[ame]

[/ame]

 

(I think you are looking for 3:33)

 

Notice that at 1:33 even the runway directions use the same signs as Swedish roads use :)

 

 

Another nice video(in Swedish but got great footage) about road-bases:

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoQtnugT6A4[/ame]

Edited December 8, 2015 by T0x1s

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

A Baltic sea map with Gotland would be perfect for the Viggen attacking Soviet landing crafts.

 

 

 

 

Low and fast is what the AJ-37 is supposed to do :)

 

Psssst. Fixed that for you. Just the code after the = in a youtube.

 

And yes, this will be awesome.

[CoBlue]

There was an earlier discussion involving an former SAAB employee, about if some A2G missiles were controlled from the right or left side.

 

In this video (watch from 13:00) you can see that the pilot is controlling the missile, an Robot 05, from the right side.

 

On the right side we have "Spakenhet RB 05" = stickunit Robot 05 (see pic)

And on the left side we have the big joystick "Handkontroll radar" (see pic)

 

Looks like we'll have our hands full with allot of fun stuff:smilewink: can't wait ;) !

Anybody have some more insights to those systems?

[mattebubben]

I read that a few if the late JA had a NATO compatible radios added for use since they were part of a NATO QRF of some kind. The finns are antennas for this radio. :-)

 

Yea that would the the JA-37DI.

 

More then Half of JA-37Ds where Upgraded to JA-37DI standard that added Nato Compabitle Radios / avionics aswell as Instruments using Knots / Feet instead of the normal KM/H and Meters.

 

It was to make it better suited for international service (Ie UN missions etc)

 

just did not realise those changes included the fins.

 

Thanks for the info.

[El Hadji]

There was an earlier discussion involving an former SAAB employee, about if some A2G missiles were controlled from the right or left side.

 

In this video (watch from 13:00) you can see that the pilot is controlling the missile, an Robot 05, from the right side.

 

On the right side we have "Spakenhet RB 05" = stickunit Robot 05 (see pic)

And on the left side we have the big joystick "Handkontroll radar" (see pic)

 

Looks like we'll have our hands full with allot of fun stuff can't wait !

Anybody have some more insights to those systems?

 

www.robotmuseum.se/ has some info (in Swe, Eng and Ger) but not any real in-depth stuff...

[RaXha]

There was an earlier discussion involving an former SAAB employee, about if some A2G missiles were controlled from the right or left side.

 

In this video (watch from 13:00) you can see that the pilot is controlling the missile, an Robot 05, from the right side.

 

On the right side we have "Spakenhet RB 05" = stickunit Robot 05 (see pic)

And on the left side we have the big joystick "Handkontroll radar" (see pic)

 

Looks like we'll have our hands full with allot of fun stuff:smilewink: can't wait ;) !

Anybody have some more insights to those systems?

 

 

So it appears the Viggen has a "Hands Off Throttle And Stick" system :P

[Pikey]

Of course we might not know, but I have found there are multiple simulators of the AJS

 

 

and the others I guess, but at least its there.

 

I think what he ment was a reason why they chose to model the AJS-37 instead of a JA-37 might be that some systems in the JA-37 might still be classified and as such might be much harder to get enough info on in order to make a complete simulation of a JA-37.

 

But Since the AJS-37 systems are all retired and there is one Flying Today it much easier to get complete info on.

[VEPR 12]

I find this RB 05 weapon very interesting, as it is hand control by pilot. What was this weapon intended to kill?

[Bacab]

Does anyone know what AG mode the radar had ? From what I've seen it I'm expecting GMTI, SAR, and some kind of air-sea mode, anything else ?

[Eldur]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKP2fCoGmYA

 

a short Clip from a Swedish Movie Drama from 95 that happends to start up on a nice enough Flightscene with Viggens in a mock dogfight

(2 AJS-37s vs 2 Ja-37s)

 

followed by a "bird strike" and a emergency road landing.

 

Alter Schwede! This clip contains more flight scenes than "Pearl Harbour"

 

:thumbup:

[grunf]

I must say Viggen was never on my wishlist, but watching all these videos and other info makes me like it more and more. :thumbup: Definitely a first day pre-order for me.

 

I'm off now to do some road landings with the Mig-21... :D

[mattebubben]

I find this RB 05 weapon very interesting, as it is hand control by pilot. What was this weapon intended to kill?

 

Well anything that could be killed by a bomb would be my guess.

 

It had the heaviest warhead of the weapons the Viggen could carry except for the anti ship weapons with a warhead of 160kg

(with the RB 05 being 305kg all in all)

 

One of its roles would be to take out hardend targets but it could be used against most targets.

 

It was even discoverd that you could use it against Slow moving Air targets like Helos aswell.

 

The main advantage of it was that you could attack from further away then if you used bombs and it could also be very precise with somone who knew how to use it.

 

Overall it was very well liked by its pilots and had very good hit statistics.

 

in the early 70s they planned to make a TV guided variant aswell but ended up buying AGM-65s instead since that was much more cost effective.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

This entire thread, basically:

 

[renhanxue]

I am surprised no one has mentioned one reason as to why we might not see the JA 37. At least not a fully functioning one...

 

At the time of the J 35 Sweden introduced STRIL 60 (a combat/tactical control system) which introduced "datalänk" (data link) for sending data between aircraft. I think the J 35 was the first fighter in the world to use a system like this. With the JA 37 "jaktlänk" (fighter link) was introduced in the 1980's with the same purpose. This system has since been developed for the JAS 39 into "flygplanslänk" (aircraft link).

 

I think (not 100% sure though) that parts of the old "jaktlänk" system is still classifed since the latest system is based on it. A JA 37 would be pretty useless in-game if this wasn't simulated properly.

 

This is mostly speculation on my part but it would make sense...

 

No, this is not the case. The Swedish data link system was implemented on the Gripen A and B, but when the big doctrine shift arrived in the early 2000's everything had to be NATO compatible, so on the Gripen C/D, along with changing all the instrumentation away from metric and a lot of other things, they threw out the old data link system and replaced it with the NATO standard Link 16. Or at least, that was the plan - in reality they put in the radios etc for Link 16 but didn't actually implement the software for old functionality that had been there even on the JA 37 (such as buddy illumination for the Skyflash, sharing of situational info between aircraft) for many years. It's there today (I think - the actual capabilities are probably classified) but there was a period of several years in the early 2000's when the Gripen C/D was actually less capable than the A/B in some ways.

 

If you're interested in how the old data link system worked, I have some great reading for you: [ame]http://fht.nu/Dokument/Flygvapnet/flyg_publ_dok_svenska_flygvapnets_styrdatasystem.pdf[/ame]

 

The system was originally really simple - one modem on the ground and one in the aircraft (initially J 35 only). The ground installation continuously sent data packets 103 bits long at 3000 bits/s, containing info about the target position, altitude, heading etc. Then it evolved over the years but the basics (including the 103-bit data packets!) persisted until the very end in the early 2000's. Not bad for a system designed in the dawn of the digital era...

Edited December 8, 2015 by renhanxue

[Krieg]

I find this RB 05 weapon very interesting, as it is hand control by pilot. What was this weapon intended to kill?

 

A primary purpose with the Rb05 was to take out the bridges erected by the enemy coming from the north going south, delaying movement across the plentifull rivers running from west to east. The regular bridges were supposed to have already been destroyed by defending infantry..

 

The BK-90 was to be utilized as a DEAD-weapon, with it's stand off capabilites and precision. (And to take out other high value targets or bridge-heads)

[emg]

I find this RB 05 weapon very interesting, as it is hand control by pilot.

 

If you are more familiar with Russian equipment, it's fairly similar to the Kh-23.

[renhanxue]

I find this RB 05 weapon very interesting, as it is hand control by pilot. What was this weapon intended to kill?

 

I believe the rb 05 was initially conceived as an alternative to the rb 04E. The rb 04 could not be used in archipelagos or anywhere other than on the open sea because its seeker couldn't tell the target from the ground clutter. Hence, a backup was needed since the dumb 450kg bombs used on the Lansen were out of fashion, and the rb 05A was born. Once it was there, you could use it against anything you'd use a Paveway on. There were plans for an optically guided version (like the Maverick) but the Air Force just bought the Maverick instead.

[Airwolf435]

Do we know what the current schedule is for the viggen?

 

Is it something coming out this year or sometime during 2016?

 

Also going to be interested to see if the area attack is implemented for the RB04/05

[iLOVEwindmills]

Does anyone know how the BK90/Mjolnir was targeted? Could the pilot designate a target for it on the fly or were GPS coordinates entered before each mission?

[Custard]

Does anyone know how the BK90/Mjolnir was targeted? Could the pilot designate a target for it on the fly or were GPS coordinates entered before each mission?

The initial versions could not use GPS targeting, so that leaves either the HLD or the radar aiming the BK90. I don't think the radar was sophisticated enough to designate ground targets on land and I've no idea how the EP-13 works.

[WinterH]

If I would guess, I'd say BK 90 is probably employed on pre defined coordinates, guided most likely by an inertial navigation system.

[Custard]

If I would guess, I'd say BK 90 is probably employed on pre defined coordinates, guided most likely by an inertial navigation system.

[ame]https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1990/1990%20-%202880.PDF[/ame]

Mentions the BK90 being provided with targeting information from the parent aircraft's targeting system before release.

[renhanxue]

If I would guess, I'd say BK 90 is probably employed on pre defined coordinates, guided most likely by an inertial navigation system.

Correct. This is what the unclassified part of the flight manual has to say about the weapon: http://imgur.com/a/NtY7f

 

To summarize in English, the guidance is inertial and target data (its geographical position in latitude/longitude) is either pre-loaded on the ground or programmed in flight via the data panel, which is next to the weapon selector panel on the right side of the cockpit. The dispenser approach altitude and sub-munition deployment altitude are both programmable independently of each other.

Edited December 9, 2015 by renhanxue

[mattebubben]

No, this is not the case. The Swedish data link system was implemented on the Gripen A and B, but when the big doctrine shift arrived in the early 2000's everything had to be NATO compatible, so on the Gripen C/D, along with changing all the instrumentation away from metric and a lot of other things, they threw out the old data link system and replaced it with the NATO standard Link 16. Or at least, that was the plan - in reality they put in the radios etc for Link 16 but didn't actually implement the software for old functionality that had been there even on the JA 37 (such as buddy illumination for the Skyflash, sharing of situational info between aircraft) for many years. It's there today (I think - the actual capabilities are probably classified) but there was a period of several years in the early 2000's when the Gripen C/D was actually less capable than the A/B in some ways.

 

If you're interested in how the old data link system worked, I have some great reading for you: http://fht.nu/Dokument/Flygvapnet/flyg_publ_dok_svenska_flygvapnets_styrdatasystem.pdf

 

The system was originally really simple - one modem on the ground and one in the aircraft (initially J 35 only). The ground installation continuously sent data packets 103 bits long at 3000 bits/s, containing info about the target position, altitude, heading etc. Then it evolved over the years but the basics (including the 103-bit data packets!) persisted until the very end in the early 2000's. Not bad for a system designed in the dawn of the digital era...

 

 

No the "old" system was not thrown out infavor of Link-16.

 

We simply had to Install Link-16 ontop of the current system since Taras (name of the swedish system)

 

and link-16 are not compatible and cannot communicate with eachother.

 

Thus the my understanding from what i have read is that the Jas-39C/D Have both Taras And Link-16.

 

Taras to Communicate with swedish Taras Equipped units and link-16 to communicate with Link-16 units / Allies.

 

The Taras System has a Significant number of Advantages over Link-16 to the degree where we did not want to loose it all together.

 

Export Gripens however are not equipped with Taras its offerd but all export customers have either slected Link-16 in order to be compatible with Nato / Other systems they operate or chosen a systems they already had or had developed themselves.

 

Most of the JA-37Ds Datalink system is extremly similar to that in use on the Gripen C/D in use today.

 

And as such is still Classified making it hard for Leatherneck to get enough info to model it ingame.

 

and modeling a JA-37D without the proper Datalink would be like Neutering it.

 

It would still be good but nowhere near as good as it should be.

 

So i still think this might be a big reason to why we are getting the AJS-37 instead of a JA-37.

 

Aswell as the fact that DCS needs a Supersonic strike aircraft more then they need another Interceptor / fighter atm.

Edited December 8, 2015 by mattebubben

[renhanxue]

No the "old" system was not thrown out infavor of Link-16.

 

We simply had to Install Link-16 ontop of the current system since Taras (name of the swedish system)

 

and link-16 are not compatible and cannot communicate with eachother.

 

Thus the Jas-39C/D Have both Taras And Link-16.

 

Taras to Communicate with swedish Taras Equipped units and link-16 to communicate with Link-16 units / Allies.

 

The Taras System had a Significant number of Advantages over Link-16 do the degree where we did not want to loose it all together.

 

Export Gripens however are not equipped with Taras its offerd but all export customers have either slected Link-16 in order to be compatible with Nato / Other systems they operate or chosen a systems they already had or had developed themselves.

I've read somewhere (no source, sorry - might be completely wrong) that TARAS was actually kicked out of the Gripen C/D. My narrative was mainly based on what Wiseman wrote a year ago - I figured he should know what he was talking about. If you have sources that prove me wrong I'd be very interested to read them, but Wiseman says when the Gripen C/D arrived there simply was no datalink anymore for many years.

 

edit: seems I'm confused - the aircraft-to-aircraft link (TIDLS, which originated on the JA 37) is still in use, but the ground-to-air link/TARAS is not. I think?

 

edit 2: right: [ame]

[/ame]

 

So you're correct in that the JA 37's fighter-to-fighter data link (or a modernized version of it) lives on even today. The ground-to-air link is a different thing these days though. I confused the two systems - my bad!

Edited December 9, 2015 by renhanxue