The Swedish connection instead of French/'Euro NATO' connection for the UK?

T

tomo pauk

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
1 May 2011
Messages
833
Reaction score
615
IOW - earlier & greater cooperation with SAAB and the British companies, while the cooperation between the later and the French and other European NATO is much smaller?
Draken was powered by the British engine, Viggen was supposed to be powered by the Medway, while the Gripen should've been just fine with the EJ.200 (or however that engine is called in this time line).
The RAF benefiting with the bomb-toting Draken and/or Viggen (powered by the after-burning version of the RB.168-62; the non-after-burning version was the TF-41) made in the UK etc, while the Gripen is a joint venture in the true sense of the word? Fighter Viggen for the RAF for the 1980s?

Possibility of the export success?
 
I like the sounds of this. As for export success, it is easy to imagine an RAAF Draken chosen instead of Mirage III-Os.

I'm puzzled though as to why the change of engines for the Viggen. Mentioned first was the RW planned Medway, then a switch to a non-reheat TF41. I'm not sure that I see the point to this.

The historical RB.177 Medway was to produce 15,000 lbf (dry) and over 25,000 lbf in reheat. Had the RAF been interested in the Viggen, I can't see Rolls-Royce abandoning RB.177 development. But, even if they did, why switch to a non-reheat Spey producing a tad over 12,000 lbf? Even if RR couldn't provide an afterburner, Volvo Flygmotor had a genius for reheat anyway.

(BTW, the Brits wouldn't have needed to import TF41s, the RB.168 Spey Mk.251 would suite just as well.)
 
Apophenia said:
I'm puzzled though as to why the change of engines for the Viggen. Mentioned first was the RW planned Medway, then a switch to a non-reheat TF41. I'm not sure that I see the point to this.
Click to expand...
The reheat TF41; sorry for misunderstanding.

Apophenia said:
(BTW, the Brits wouldn't have needed to import TF41s, the RB.168 Spey Mk.251 would suite just as well.)
Click to expand...

Always liked the Spey.
 
Oh, okay, I get it. When you say "reheat TF41", you're not talking about the Allison AR 168R but rather the Rolls RB.168-62 - the engine which was to power the RW Saab 37 XE-1 proposed to the RAF (as opposed to a British purchase of a Medway Viggen).
 
Apophenia said:
I like the sounds of this. As for export success, it is easy to imagine an RAAF Draken chosen instead of Mirage III-Os.

I'm puzzled though as to why the change of engines for the Viggen. Mentioned first was the RW planned Medway, then a switch to a non-reheat TF41. I'm not sure that I see the point to this.

The historical RB.177 Medway was to produce 15,000 lbf (dry) and over 25,000 lbf in reheat. Had the RAF been interested in the Viggen, I can't see Rolls-Royce abandoning RB.177 development. But, even if they did, why switch to a non-reheat Spey producing a tad over 12,000 lbf? Even if RR couldn't provide an afterburner, Volvo Flygmotor had a genius for reheat anyway.

(BTW, the Brits wouldn't have needed to import TF41s, the RB.168 Spey Mk.251 would suite just as well.)
Click to expand...

The TF41 (Allison/Rolls-Royce upgraded Spey) produced 14,500 lb thrust in the USAF A-7D and 15,000 lb thrust in the USN A-7E.

Adding an afterburner with the normal thrust increase (the historical afterburning Spey had an afterburning thrust 1.675% of the dry thrust) would produce ~25,100 lb thrust in afterburning.

So that's your Medway thrust matched.

The RM8A of the initial Viggen models (strike, maritime strike, trainer, recon) produced 14,720 lb dry and 25,940 lb in afterburner - the RM8B of the later multirole fighter version produced 16,315 lb dry & 28,875 lb in afterburner.

I would expect the TF41 could possibly be boosted to keep up - if not then another engine might be needed.
 
Rule of cool said:
In this cooperation what British kit does Sweden buy, perhaps with some Swedish input?
Click to expand...
Engines all the way (so not just for Draken), including the perspective export aircraft that might be more numerous between ~1965 and 1990, Skyflash as it was the case historically, and, by time Viggen is around, British companies make parts for it?
Also as noted above, the Gripen is a full cooperation, with British focus being the engines, and the rest about 1:1?
 
Rule of cool said:
In this cooperation what British kit does Sweden buy, perhaps with some Swedish input?
Click to expand...
Potential...In no particular order or sequence.
Under the table discussion about nuclear weapons and reinforcement in the event of Soviet invasion.

Sea Dart and possible developments of. Likely to succeed Bloodhound in some iteration.
Earlier on the AI.23 and Red Top might gain along with Ferranti Auto-interception and datalink.
As it was the RN got quite serious about the Swedish 120mm twin, so it might be possible to see a UK funded single.
Tigerfish?
Possible licence for Challenger MkI or MkII?
ALARM
ASRAAM
Brimstone
 
The reason why I've suggested Sweden as a long-term partner, while avoiding the 'rest', is that Sweden has/had a good compass in what they are good at (generally airframes and electronics), and what they need to buy abroad (engines, AA weapons). Dealing with just one country rather than with 2-3-4 simplifies the deal-making. Changes of governments, that can range from conservative to socialist, adds another layer of uncertainty, and British have the domestic examples of how the changes in office can rock, if not sink the programs in development already by the late 1950s.
In similar fashion, dealing with just one or two major foreign companies instead of 6-12 (choose your number) is a boon.

Dealing with France is dealing with someone that is roughly as capable as the UK, and that might try to steer the joint ship in their preferred direction, both wrt. the airframe and engine. French commercial interests are not British commercial interests. Expecting that French will favor the by the same way a 50/50 design instead of 100% French design is not realistic.

Granted, this comes with a dose of hindsight, but we are in the alternative history sub-forum after all.
 
Probably not for this thread but worth saying.
France is the only Western European power which has so much in common with the UK militarily and diplomatically.
Relations in both these areas are very close.
But in the industrial and business areas competition is perhaps too fierce for British and French companies to collaborate. Hence after Jaguar we have Harrier and F35B with the US and Tornado and Typhoon with Germany. Later as Sweden became closer politically we got Gripen.
 
I agree with the idea that Britain could do with a 'junior' partner in aircraft development, but I don't think Sweden is the best option. What Britain needs is partners that will assist with the development of British aircraft, for example if West Germany went British instead of the F104. Such an order would both drive and fund a raft of development of the Lightning and Buccaneer to the great benefit of Britain's requirements.
 
Rule of cool said:
I agree with the idea that Britain could do with a 'junior' partner in aircraft development, but I don't think Sweden is the best option. What Britain needs is partners that will assist with the development of British aircraft, for example if West Germany went British instead of the F104. Such an order would both drive and fund a raft of development of the Lightning and Buccaneer to the great benefit of Britain's requirements.
Click to expand...

Be it as it might, UK-German cooperation is not the topic here.
 
tomo pauk said:
Be it as it might, UK-German cooperation is not the topic here.
Click to expand...

Granted, but I suspect that you don't want to explore British - Swedish cooperation to address Sweden's problems.

Interestingly the Viggen was the first aircraft to have a digital central computer with integrated circuits. This 'first' would have gone to the TRS2 if it wasn't cancelled.
 
tomo pauk said:
The reason why I've suggested Sweden as a long-term partner, while avoiding the 'rest', is that Sweden has/had a good compass in what they are good at (generally airframes and electronics), and what they need to buy abroad (engines, AA weapons).
Click to expand...
So turning it round a bit, then what stopped Sweden from simply just buying British engines for it's fighters/aircraft? We don't really seem to be talking about a joint development partnership, more like a long term stable commercial relationship.

  • Tunnan / Reheated Ghost (maybe Sweden gets dH to do the reheat?)
  • Lansen / Avon as historical
  • Draken / Avon as historical, maybe 300 series too?
  • Viggen / Medway or Spey or Olympus
  • Gripen / RB.199 and then EJ200
  • 105 / Viper
Seems quite an easy change really. Not sure what is actually required to make this happen - RR to lower costs?
 
red admiral said:
Seems quite an easy change really. Not sure what is actually required to make this happen - RR to lower costs?
Click to expand...

Swedes were making Avons for the Lansen and Draken under licence. So having RR making the further licence deals would've been nothing out of ordinary.
 
If De Havilland and the Ministry of Supply resisted BEAs 1959 call to shrink the DH.121 it would have been developed with the Medway.

If Saab was able to use the Medway in the Viggen it wouldn't have faced the export bans that the US imposed with the JT8D, so might have picked up a few export orders.
 
One of the final Viggen concepts used a Spey. What stopped them using that instead? The slightly later proposed variant with Spey offered to UK had a bit lower max Mach than JT8D, but much greater range.

I'm not sure this really gets into more and earlier collaboration with Sweden though, it's simply that they could have continued to buy licences to build RR engines on a commercial basis. Or was the issue that RR no longer wanted to offer licence build?
 
red admiral said:
One of the final Viggen concepts used a Spey. What stopped them using that instead? The slightly later proposed variant with Spey offered to UK had a bit lower max Mach than JT8D, but much greater range.

I'm not sure this really gets into more and earlier collaboration with Sweden though, it's simply that they could have continued to buy licences to build RR engines on a commercial basis. Or was the issue that RR no longer wanted to offer licence build?
Click to expand...

My guess would be timing, the Viggens design was finalised when the Spey was new and making about 10,000lbs of thrust. By the time the Spey was making enough thrust for the Viggen the plane was in production.
 
From going back to the Aviation Historical Review book on Viggen, then lower costs is the reason given for going with JT8D. Apparently Olympus favoured by Saab but government made decision.
 
Rule of cool said:
If De Havilland and the Ministry of Supply resisted BEAs 1959 call to shrink the DH.121 it would have been developed with the Medway.

If Saab was able to use the Medway in the Viggen it wouldn't have faced the export bans that the US imposed with the JT8D, so might have picked up a few export orders.
Click to expand...
DataSAAB cooperated very closely with US companies Honeywell and Singer-Kearfott for Viggen's electronics.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom