Sweden is probably the only country that has road-bases as an operational integrated part of the airforce not only for a extraordinary or war-time purpose and with jets designed specifically to match this system.
Across the nation there’s a few large airbase groups (or we can call them AirWing), in one group there’s :
Containing one or several of:
Main base (Typical airbase with one or more large wide and long runways, fixed A/C hangars, full service, living conditions etc) but also shorter runways (up to 1800m)in direct connection to the base, these can be straight sections of road, a civil airfield or dedicated runways close but ‘off base’ for instance in a tight squeeze between high trees.
Side-base (dedicated small airbase or civil airfield that might need some preparation and is not manned during normal operations)
Reserve-base (Similar to a side-base but need more work to get ready)
Short-track A short strip of country-side road, widened.
All of them have re-arm re-fit pockets/sections attached to the track, it can be either a open field concrete section or a pocket inside the forest. To support the spread out system there’s all kinds of mobile equipment from landing lights, service section now capable of repairing composit materials, field hangars (either inflatable or more capable ones constructed on site within hours) and ammo and fuel trucks of course.
So one airwing is responsible for a very large geographical part of the country.
yeap things are done a bit different in times of war and peace… in peace time a training execises would be cancelled if they had a heavy snow storm… in war, they would accept the risk… applies to alot of scenarios.
check out these nose gear carriages. Guess who’s built for hard landings.


Dual-wheel strong carriage + canards act as gigantic airbrakes on Gripen. (photo is version B, the C/D have a even stronger carriage)

Rafale a similar setup, even stronger on the marine version. Two wheels
adds stability and ground pressure area + more results from carbon brakes.

Eurofighter. A single wheel setup. (If you don’t need it, don’t add it.)

F-16. Single wheel. (brrrrrr)
I’m cool as vanilla ice… well there is only a problem when people compare projects that do not share the same goal. And neuron, barracuda, corax do not share the same goal. There’s also a further difference on the issue of autonomous operations as the certification for restricted or civilian airspace differs alot.
Barracuda and Sky-X are quite similar as they both have no airforce commitment behind them yet demonstrate (at least sky-x have so far) a autonomous capability for strikes in a restricted airspace, that can quickly be produced should an airforce need this capability. So far there is little interest by militaries for barracuda/sky-x and similar platforms. Cheap ISTAR uav’s is in demand and the french and americans have plenty to offer there.
The next step is for stealth and auton´ certified for civilian airspace with the option to carry a weapons load, and there’s no candidate ready as we speak. Anywhere in the world. everyone is rushing to solve the technological problem areas now…
Oh btw, what did AFM actually say Phil, please? 🙂
x2 🙂
(btw talk about costs and too expensive…this is fighter jets.. so much more than just money comes into play…how often don’t we see offset deals over 100% or government assisted trade deals etc..)
@ mark1100
“Filur and B-Sharc are little rc toys compared to barracuda wich is supposed to be a full ucav demonstrator, they look big on single pictures but look at this …”
Although I’ve read your other posts in this thread and clearly you are not mature enough to discuss the subject in full, I will try to explain this as simple as I can.
B-sharc and Filur are scaled down demonstrators ok, hence the name BABY-SHARC this is development procedure SAAB have used in the past when they are breaking new ground in aearodynamics development. They also hold a world unique production capacity in composite structures that now enables they to produce testbeds quicker than before. Both the B-SHARC and FILUR have had their fully autonomous flights and sharc downlinked real time video to the Linköping office 2000km south.
So don’t come here talking about R/C kiddo, you obviously have little knowledge of these matters. But maybe you have learned something now.
Another “baby” demonstrator that recently flew were the German EADS Phoenix space shuttle, this too at Vidsel base. Would you call this a R/C jet?
History lesson:
21 January 1952 first flight of SAAB 210, “Lill-draken” (Baby Dragon) built to verify the Double Delta-wing airworthiness. Vital lessons learned from this baby jet led to the design of the big Draken and for the Concorde project.

yeah. 2 years ago it was revealed that Serge Dassault had attemped to censor the publisher of Le Figaro on a story regarding Rafale jets to Algeria (as the story talked about the assistance of Jacques Chirac and that made it all very uncomfortable)
Algeria is said to update and replace all its current ~200 jet inventory and so far I believe they have ordered upgrades and new mig-29’s for half (90 fixed->120) that inventory.
Neuron is a product demonstrator for future european combat planes in the 2020-2030 time frame (and upgrades to existing jets such as Gripen and Rafale) . It’s not being built with the goal to be a operational UCAV. That’s what Barracuda, SAAB’s unnamed ‘TUAV’, Sky-X, Dassault * Duc etc etc is all about.
Ok, the firms involved in NEURON have other UCAV projects in parallell that if they haven’t already had first flight will have soon. Barracuda is no where near as sophisticated as some of the other projects but thus should be capable of assuming operational capability much sooner.
And…since the Swedish defense have said they do not plan to buy any autonomous UCAV’s that is not certified also for civilian airspace ,the projects within SAAB is more about perfecting the technology rather than build rough mock-ups no one will order anyway. They are not alone with this position. Filur and B-Sharc will continue flights in 2006 and in 2007 the TUAV (and possibly MALE) will fly. the time table for the other projects have not been made public but they have some interesting ideas in electronic propulsion.
As long as people remember AESA is just the antenna technique and can’t do jack for an airforce without good support and processing systems behind it. (i.e ‘putting lipstick on a cow’) It’s all about achieving information superiority and that is delivered to and from the operator by computer guided (sub) systems.
Nah incident ? Close yes, we don’t get too see ‘stunts’ like these much any more, but the pilot has full control of his jet. The Typhoon can accelerate fast enough in low altitude.
@ Battlecry
The Typhoon and Gripen is supposed to have similar turn rates both in sustained and instaneous according to info obtained by flight mags, but jets do things a bit different during peace time in-service and on airshows and war time (For Gripen: such as less restrictive software and the use of movable canards in turns)
Looks like a Reconnaissance Pod (with camera)
great video 🙂
@ SOC
The 2003 flight to the US by 2 JAS 39A was done for :
2 invitations. One from Nellis under the red flag framework and one
from the AF to participate in honoring the 100th year of Wrights.
The jets landed on Andrews AFB and was supposed to join a airshow
4 days later but due to hurricane Isabel they had to relocate to
Nellis sooner than expected. There they spent some time preparing
for future participation with the JAS 39 C version.
They also had stops in Scotland, Iceland, Greenland and Canada. 🙂
..
The current radar in batch 3 jets is PS/05A MKIII with significally
upgraded processors and s/w. MK4 upgrade includes high resolution SAR.
The MK5 NORA (AESA radar, EW Suit, Data Com. All in one)
is likely to be available in a export version before serial production
for the swedish airforce. The current MSI39 demonstrator program ordered
by the Swedish military will end 2009-12-31, after that it’s ready to go.
…
@ Entropy
All C-130 Hercules in the Swedish airforce is receiving the big AMP upgrade
between 2007 and 2009. In addition to this, and this is rather new info,
the Swedish military has issued a procurement for new airlift capability
to the Nordic Battle Group. The requirement posted on http://www.fmv.se for these new
cargo planes only matches the A400M.
—-
ah ok, thanks. Any more details ?
Today I read that the Swedish FMV approved the funding of the Stridsbåt 2010 “Ny”, the future CombatBoat 90H.
Where did you read this? It’s not on the FMV website (yet)