DCS: AJS-37 Viggen Discussion

[MYSE1234]

A week without any new posts? Unacceptable. This thread must move at at least M0.85 :D

 

Something that's been bothering me for a while, is will the Viggen be able to land on a carrier? It has tough landing gear and reverse thrust. What about other factors like brake strength and the time it takes to engage reverse thrust? Also can it be engaged mid air?

 

Takeoff will be no issue with 3 zones (or was it 4 zones?) of afterburner shoving the plane forward.

I've made ONE succesful landing on a carrier with a Viggen. It was in a simulator with a real Viggen cockpit, but it used Xplane 10, so im not sure how realistic it was. So it might be able to do it.

 

Skickat från min Nexus 5 via Tapatalk

[SchnitzelF16]

Uglies plane ever made

[SpeedStick]

Most useless comment ever written

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Uglies plane ever made

 

Have you never seen the Il-102?

[Tirak]

Have you never seen the Il-102?

 

Or the Starfighter?

 

Like, I don't think the Viggen's the prettiest cloud in the sky, but there has been waaay worse.

[QuiGon]

Uglies plane ever made

Blasphemy!!! :shocking:

 

Or the Starfighter?

Another heretic! :furious:

 

;)

[drPhibes]

I think the PZL Belphegor may be #1 on ugly-o-meter. Or maybe it shares the spot with the fat-nosed AEW 707 (Phalcon?) and various single engine anti-sub aircraft (Gannet, Alize etc.). The Viggen is nowhere near the top of the list. Trust me, I know, I'm a professional.

[grunf]

Uglies plane ever made

A year ago I'd mostly agree with this statement, but it kind of grew on me over time :D. Now I think it's a good looking, elegant plane, especially when viewed from certain angles.

 

 

[Mmmslash]

Or the Starfighter?

 

Hello,

 

I regret to inform you that we are now enemies for life.

 

Apologies for the inconvenience!

 

Sincerely,

Mmmslash

[Tirak]

Hello,

 

I regret to inform you that we are now enemies for life.

 

Apologies for the inconvenience!

 

Sincerely,

Mmmslash

 

Blasphemy!!! :shocking:

 

 

Another heretic! :furious:

 

;)

 

The Starfighter looks like a toilet paper roll with two chunks of cardboard stuck on by a second grader.

 

[Nerd1000]

A year ago I'd mostly agree with this statement, but it kind of grew on me over time :D. Now I think it's a good looking, elegant plane, especially when viewed from certain angles.

 

 

That area ruling :thumbup:

[Pocket Sized]

Guys there's an entire thread discussing this here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=142994

 

Also OK yeah the Viggen won't win any beauty pageants but then again you're never really gonna see it in normal operation seeing as it will be camouflaged among the treetops :D

[mattebubben]

If you ask most Swedes (with an interest in aircraft) they will tell you that the Viggen is the Best looking fighter out there ^^.

 

Sure she might not be as slim or have as "perfect" lines as some other aircraft.

 

But what makes her sexy (especially for those who have seen it live or in action) is the sheer power and ruggedness in her looks.

 

Some aircraft are Foto models but the Viggen is not,

She is an Elite Athlete.

She might have a few more visible muscles then what some might say is "perfect",

But thats just a part of what makes her so sexy ^^.

 

Edited October 12, 2016 by mattebubben

[Hummingbird]

That last picture :matrix:

[hughlb]

I wouldn't call it a 'beautiful' aircraft.

 

Viggen reminds me of the Millennium Falcon, an inelegant mash of advanced ideas that form an aesthetic that is striking, unique, and for those reasons, memorable.

 

A little off topic, but my point is that the Viggen takes on an otherworldly appearance, so unlike any other aircraft. Although, like the F-104, it appears more spaceship than aircraft.

 

It really makes me want to fly it. :)

[Marsvinet]

The Viggen talks to my reptile brain, and screams "THIS IS WHAT RAW POWER LOOKS LIKE", that is the beauty of the Viggen. And canard/delta, combination never fails

[Farks]

The Viggen has been described as "fulsnygg", which roughly means "ugly in a good looking way" or "attractively ugly". If that makes any sense. It's most certainly not a sleek looking aircraft but it does look menacing and powerful. I think the same applies to the F-4.

[drPhibes]

The Viggen has everything. Compound delta wing, "lumpy" area ruled fuselage, thrust reverser, in-line bogie main landing gear, and the smell of surströmming in the cockpit. What more can you ask for? It's much more interesting than the boring F-16 the RNoAF flies.

[Farks]

The Viggen has everything. Compound delta wing, "lumpy" area ruled fuselage, thrust reverser, in-line bogie main landing gear, and the smell of surströmming in the cockpit. What more can you ask for? It's much more interesting than the boring F-16 the RNoAF flies.

 

The Viggen was offered for export to Norway and all the other NATO nations that ended up buying the F-16. It was marketed under the name "Eurofighter" and would have been based on the JA 37.

[QuiGon]

The Viggen has everything. Compound delta wing, "lumpy" area ruled fuselage, thrust reverser, in-line bogie main landing gear, and the smell of surströmming in the cockpit. What more can you ask for? It's much more interesting than the boring F-16 the RNoAF flies.

 

It sure is more interesting, but it's a way more specialized design, that can't compete with the norwegian F-16s in most regards. It's an older design though and hasn't been upgraded as much as the F-16s.

[Pocket Sized]

Can we not with the political/export/semantics discussion

[probad]

f16bois ruin everything because they make every discussion about them

[Tirak]

f16bois ruin everything because they make every discussion about them

 

I see what you're trying to do, so before you can:

 

 

Anyway, to sum up, Viggen be ugly, but not too ugly.

Edited October 12, 2016 by Tirak

[mattebubben]

It sure is more interesting, but it's a way more specialized design, that can't compete with the norwegian F-16s in most regards. It's an older design though and hasn't been upgraded as much as the F-16s.

 

Well in what way?.

 

And also the Saab 37E (Eurofighter) that was offered to the Norweigans (and other Nato nations like Denmark,Belgium and the netherlands) was not the same as the AJ 37 or the later JA 37 (as it was on the possibilities board in the mid 70s).

 

So it would have been tailored to the needs of the customers.

 

And would most likely have been a multirole aircraft (Fighter capabilities and BVR missiles as well as advanced air-ground capabilities).

 

(Norway was also apparently offered the Viggen at an earlier stage in 1967-1968 before the Viggen entered into service and that would probably have been more or less a AJ 37)

 

And the Swedish Viggen variants are well capable to compete with the Norweigan F-16s (if we look at the time the Viggen was in service).

 

And if you compare the capabilities of the Norweigan F-16s with the corresponding abilities of the Viggen its very comparable.

 

Since sure the F-16A might be a better fighter then the AJ37 but its no better fighter (over all) then the JA 37

(that entered around the same time as the F16)

And the AJ 37 is not really any worse then the F-16A in the Air-ground area either.

 

and as i understood it the Saab 37E would be fully multirole (so you would only need 1 version instead of two).

 

And the Viggen would also have advantages for Norway as it would be more adapted to the Winter etc (better handling on ice as well as be able to use shorter runways during winter etc).

[Cobra847]

A minor update for ye fellow Viggenites!

 

The crunch continues.

Most of our work is still focused on fixing issues, blocking bugs, ironing out inconsistencies, fixing things that were broken due to version changes and adding a few very minor missing features.

 

We've also been working hard on auxiliary content that is somewhat seperate from the aircraft.

This includes the training suite, the mini campaign, the main campaign, and a third mini campaign for NTTR.

 

A lot of effort and time has been lately spent on optimizing the aircraft and the code and/or calculations behind various systems.

We've offloaded the ground radar and a few other items to seperate threads and cores, significantly minimizing impact on CPU time.

 

Additional time has been spent on writing various automated tests, including tests to ascertain stability (to fix crashes) and to automatically test flight parameters and/or performance.

 

We're nervous and excited for you all to fly the aircraft. <insert S-Word>

 

Many thanks for your support, always!

 

LN

Edited October 12, 2016 by Cobra847