Sweden SAAB Future Combat Air System (FCAS)

And knowing Saab these will always remain promo and nothing more.
 
EmoBirb said:
And knowing Saab these will always remain promo and nothing more.
Click to expand...
You're probably right, but at least one concept was shown last year.
And it's quite possible that Saab is also hinting at the answer to the unresolved question of whether the new system will also include a manned "component"...
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2317.jpeg
    IMG_2317.jpeg
    110.9 KB · Views: 308
EmoBirb said:
And knowing Saab these will always remain promo and nothing more.
Click to expand...

Sure, we won't see all of these concepts - but we don't see all the concepts from any aviation firm become hardware - and Sweden has a surprisingly consistent history of producing aircraft in spite of the small size of the country.

There will likely be a need for multiple CCA providers. The decline in American hegemony in the export market might also mean that they face less obstacles than their 4th generation Gripen did, when it comes to export markets - and securing a few large contracts (e.g. Ukraine, Canada) could help.

Also, while CCAs provide a high/low mix for the FCAS and the French or German programs, a lot of smaller companies may still want a manned platform at a lower price... so a slightly scaled up version of a CCA with a cockpit to act as a control node is a possibility... we can't rule out a manned design entirely.
 
Geo said:
You're probably right, but at least one concept was shown last year.
And it's quite possible that Saab is also hinting at the answer to the unresolved question of whether the new system will also include a manned "component"...
Click to expand...
Would love to see the full model of this one since it seems to look like a f-22 with canards if we refer to the promotion material above
 
Avimimus said:
Sure, we won't see all of these concepts - but we don't see all the concepts from any aviation firm become hardware - and Sweden has a surprisingly consistent history of producing aircraft in spite of the small size of the country.

There will likely be a need for multiple CCA providers. The decline in American hegemony in the export market might also mean that they face less obstacles than their 4th generation Gripen did, when it comes to export markets - and securing a few large contracts (e.g. Ukraine, Canada) could help.

Also, while CCAs provide a high/low mix for the FCAS and the French or German programs, a lot of smaller companies may still want a manned platform at a lower price... so a slightly scaled up version of a CCA with a cockpit to act as a control node is a possibility... we can't rule out a manned design entirely.
Click to expand...
I also think that even the US would be less resistant to foreign-made CCAs, after all "they're just drones".

So there's a pretty solid export base for CCAs, assuming that Saab can make them en masse.
 
kqcke for you said:
All the fun bio looking stuff but yeah it Sounds a bit stupid
Click to expand...

Quoting Saab:
The world's first software-defined fuselage. With AI-driven algorithms and additive manufacturing, Saab is redefining the future of aircraft production.
Click to expand...
Software-defined-airframe-Saab-scaled.jpg

They could have just said that they are testing components where AI aided in the design, which would have been a bit clearer and true to the material they showcased. But as is usual with Saab, they try their hardest to market something not-so-special as something ground breaking and super impressive. Which is also the entire core of how they market the unremarkable Gripen family.

As for the process itself, while certainly helpful in optimizing design and manufacturing of individual components and cutting down on time from design to production, it's not exactly witchcraft. While I'm more than certain that other aerospace contractors have at the very least dabbled in it, if one is vaguely in touch with the automotive world one also knows that this kind of design and manufacturing process has been present in road going cars since 2021:
2023-czinger-21c-track-specification-2.jpg
2026-czinger-21c-v-max-68-690ca0a377779.jpg

I think it's also worth pointing out that additive manufacturing, especially with metals, isn't without drawbacks. And certain components are certainly better off being machined from solid pieces of a given material or properly welded. Not touching on composites and their many advantages here. So yeah, it's a neat manufacturing method and AI is another useful tool that can aid in the design process, but overall this is a lot of the (typical) Saab marketing fluff and I'm more than sceptical to see how widely they adopt this kind of manufacturing into future products.

Another comment I'd like to add:
While I'm certain that some will see the heavy emphasis on unmanned systems in recently published material as "going with the times" and "a smart move", I for one think that the honestly lackluster export history of the Gripen family ensured that Saab wouldn't be able to develop a competitive modern fighter jet on their own going forward. The fact that the Gripen kinda flopped aside from the Brazil deal, that the Gripen E/F has moved out at a glacial pace and that Saab has so far been left out of all the big next gen programs more or less forced them to scale their ambitions down significantly for their next endeavor. Which is how one arrives at this loyal wingman/CCA type thing. Something that other countries view as purely supplemental to manned aircraft and in some cases even has completely expendable. In my eyes that's a bleak outlook for Saab, because most of Europe will already be served with whatever Dassault, Airbus and BAE will offer down the line. While the Gripen users that could pick this up are not only spread quite thin but also not really known to throw money out lightheartedly. The UCAV niche will be very competitive because it's quite a bit easier for a given nation to develop an UCAV, so I'm extremely curious to see how Saab will try to make a case for their future offerings under this planned unmanned product offensive.
 
Last edited:
https://aviationweek.com/defense/ai...-eyes-2027-flight-future-fighter-demonstrator
The demonstrator is part of a transition in Saab’s work under the future fighter project from research and development to validating technologies. The concept phase involved around 270 specialists working on 50 R&D projects, Nilsson said. The activities addressed topics such as low observability, high levels of autonomy for crewed and uncrewed systems, and how to have strong electronic warfare capabilities.


Nilsson said Saab is looking to advance work on what it calls robust low observables. It is supposed to allow the use of low observables that traditionally have been hard to maintain for use in the operational concept of the Swedish Air Force. That means being able to operate the aircraft in dispersed operations and use road runways without specialized tools, he said.

The low observable technology will be demonstrated next year but not on the flying demonstrator by then, Nilsson said.

The government-funded program is supposed to involve supersonic demonstrators.
Click to expand...
 
EmoBirb said:
Quoting Saab:

View attachment 801096

They could have just said that they are testing components where AI aided in the design, which would have been a bit clearer and true to the material they showcased.
Click to expand...
Which would be another buzzword really but also doesn't really hit the mark (the other neither).
EmoBirb said:
As for the process itself, while certainly helpful in optimizing design and manufacturing of individual components and cutting down on time from design to production, it's not exactly witchcraft.
Click to expand...
My understanding of this is that its similiar to NGs digital Pathfinder programm is. Bringing a mostly digital development capability which can vastly reduce development cost and time.
EmoBirb said:
While I'm more than certain that other aerospace contractors have at the very least dabbled in it, if one is vaguely in touch with the automotive world one also knows that this kind of design and manufacturing process has been present in road going cars since 2021:
View attachment 801095
View attachment 801101
Click to expand...
You mean hypercars because your daily roadcar isn't really there yet.
 
Dreamflyer said:
Quite similar to how the Draken and Viggen 'flopped'. Which didn´t stop Saab from moving forward their next flop.
Click to expand...
Aircraft become more and more expensive and more and more complex. Eventually comes the point where Saab alone cannot deliver what's necessary to remain competitive. I know Saab has a strong cult following and people often root for the Underdog, but the aerospace industry is super competitive (just look how the landscape in the US changed over the years, from various conteactors to three large ones today). I wouldn't be surprised if Saab as an independent entity won't make it into the 2040s.
 
EmoBirb said:
The fact that the Gripen kinda flopped aside from the Brazil deal
Click to expand...
Not anymore at this point. Not great, but selling better than eurofighter - and with two big opportunities where they're emerging politically at just the right spot to go forward.
EmoBirb said:
Aircraft become more and more expensive and more and more complex.
Click to expand...
Tbh, if you make them so, they indeed do.
Main path of technology itself doesn't impose it, arguably quite the opposite.
 
Ainen said:
Not anymore at this point. Not great, but selling better than eurofighter - and with two big opportunities where they're emerging politically at just the right spot to go forward.

Tbh, if you make them so, they indeed do.
Main path of technology itself doesn't impose it, arguably quite the opposite.
Click to expand...
I don't know what "Gripen" you mean, but the Saab Gripen is only operated by Sweden, Brazil, Czechia, Hungary and Thailand. South Africa operates the type on paper as well, but de facto that dysfunctional state is unable to operate them and actually fly their Gripen. I won't touch on the various failed bids here. The international Eurofighter fleet is not only vastly more numerous, the Eurofighter is also operated by nine countries and soon Turkey as well. The Gripen never came close to the other two Eurocanards with regards to foreign sales or fleet size. Which is certainly in part responsible for Saab being unable to develop and fund a proper successor, as previously discussed.

And yes, modern military aviation imposes a bare minimum of performance. Be it engine performance, payload capacity, radar performance, sensor suite, avionics, networking, electronic warfare and so on. And as Sweden is a first world country, you cannot even cut back cost through cheap labor and lower average wages for employees. So no, it's not a choice, combat aircraft have to be more complex, more capable and thus more expensive if they want to be competitive. In many ways not being capable enough is also why the Gripen often failed to secure sales against the Rafale and Eurofighter.
 
I completely disagree with your analysis. Yes, the Gripen A/C hadn´t had much success where directly competing against larger airframe or Stealth aircraft. This was certainly aggravated by the long promised Gripen NG that made Saab competing with papers against hard billet of aluminum, something that larger company have failed to do before them as well.

Where Saab offered the Gripen where a larger airframe was ill-suited, and with an agile bidding process, Saab was successful. You have mentioned the numerous lend-lease agreements signed with various countries, including European or NATO members. That's really something for a non-NATO country at the time with such a small population.

In term of systems performances, your statements are factually wrong. Saab Gripen has been one of the most modern airframe available in Europe for long. Obviously that is the sole consequence of European airframer being reluctant to seriously invest in upgrade packages, joining the band wagon only when public money was made available in large quantities (something opposite to how Saab operated on that aspect).

So, Sweden is not on the same footstep as Airbus Def, Dassault or even BAE. They have invested for long in the technologies they are, today, teasing the market with. This is what R&D money is for.

Then they are inherently Swede, and, without disrespect, any marketing claims should be seen with attentive circumspection until proof of achievements*.

*"Oh no, not yet another GIGA factory!"
 
Last edited:
So will Sweden do another single engined fighter or will they bite the bullet and design a new twin fighter? Currently I am thinking that they will stick with what they know.
 
Who knows, maybe the forthcoming collaps of FCAS may open up new opportunities. A possible collaboration with Germany on a 6th gen design, possibly involving Spain as well. Why not? If you design some decent complementary CCAs you can make up for numbers, if the main fighter becomes a bit too expensive to be procured in large enough quantities.
 
Love the slight connection to J 35 Draken wing layout. Also, this kind of a project, IF it is advanced enough and not just a illustrative mockup, may make SAAB an even more attractive partner for anyone looking for a partner to create a new manned fighter as well.
 
https://www.sverigesradio.se/artikel/saab-presenterar-nytt-obemannat-jaktplan

https://www.corren.se/nyheter/linkoping/artikel/har-ar-saabs-nya-jaktplan-/r23ewo2l

https://www.corren.se/nyheter/linko...flygplan-basta-som-finns-i-linkoping/jn3n82mr
Obviously you don't need a tail fin on a plane like this?

– I'm arguing with my engineers. We'll test both with and without a tail fin. It's quite difficult to remove a tail fin. I understand why sharks have a dorsal fin. It's not stupid to have it. But if you look from the side with radar, a tail fin is big. Let's see what it ends up being, says Peter "Nizze" Nilsson.
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6392.jpeg
    IMG_6392.jpeg
    481.8 KB · Views: 90
  • IMG_6393.jpeg
    IMG_6393.jpeg
    545.1 KB · Views: 86
  • IMG_6396.jpeg
    IMG_6396.jpeg
    104.6 KB · Views: 81
  • IMG_6395.jpeg
    IMG_6395.jpeg
    87.6 KB · Views: 86
  • IMG_6391.jpeg
    IMG_6391.jpeg
    387.6 KB · Views: 88
  • IMG_6401.jpeg
    IMG_6401.jpeg
    5.1 MB · Views: 88
  • IMG_6402.jpeg
    IMG_6402.jpeg
    2.7 MB · Views: 101
Last edited:
https://www.aviacionline.com/englis...rsonic-and-stealthy_a6a889c7948f452581e612033

Saab says it will develop and test a progressive sequence of platforms designated A1, A2, and A3. A full size mockup has been built of an A3 prototype without a tail though they say they are still considering A3 designs with and without a tail (and according to another article no engine has been chosen for A3 as they don't yet know what performance they want it to have). An A1 demonstrator is under construction which will be a more conventional design about the size of a Gripen and using the same engine. Wont be a multipurpose CCA, instead they consider it a platform from which specific role variants will be produced e.g. Fighter, Strike Aircraft or EW.
 
Hope this makes it into service and gets adopted in numbers. Seems like they're taking the right approach to developing a competitive modern platform for Sweden within their unique conditions and limitations, regardless of whether the vertical stab(s) stay.

What kind of size/payload/IWB/range configuration they eventually come up with will be interesting to see too, especially if it stays around Gripen-size and uses the same engine. (Even if there are similar designs already in existence --or beginning to take shape-- around the world aimed at the same roles)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I should add only A1 and A2 demonstrator development is funded through 2030, 2031 and beyond including A3 is not currently funded. A1 will have an internal payload bay but wont be used for weapon drop tests purely as an aerodynamic and stealth characteristics test platform, A2 will be used for drop tests as well as fitted equipment e.g. radar. Flight tests wont be conducted from the Saab facility but from a northern military test range both to keep it away from prying eyes as well as to reduce the risk of crashes causing casualties on the ground.
 
Last edited:

Attachments

  • 09160_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias.jpg
    09160_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias.jpg
    646.5 KB · Views: 80
  • 09162_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias2.jpg
    09162_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias2.jpg
    499.9 KB · Views: 77
  • 09161_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias.jpg
    09161_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias.jpg
    488.8 KB · Views: 77
  • 09162_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias6.jpg
    09162_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias6.jpg
    453.8 KB · Views: 89
  • 09155_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias.jpg
    09155_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias.jpg
    367.8 KB · Views: 100
  • 09157_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias.jpg
    09157_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias.jpg
    571.4 KB · Views: 110
  • 09159_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias.jpg
    09159_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias.jpg
    374.5 KB · Views: 101
  • 09158_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias.jpg
    09158_c_Militaer-AktuellZacharias.jpg
    518.7 KB · Views: 110
raptor82 said:
https://militaeraktuell.at/saab-zeigt-collaborative-combat-aircraft-acp/
Click to expand...
Interesting article... A1 demonstrator already in assembly it seems!

Saab also raises a point that I've missed in all other CCA programs so far:

"Saab sees a crucial difference to numerous US CCA projects in the certification process. A European unmanned combat aircraft must not only function in war, but also be able to operate safely in civilian airspace during long periods between peace and open conflict. This is particularly crucial for scenarios in the Baltic Sea region: An autonomous combat aircraft could have to operate there alongside civilian air traffic for years. Therefore, Saab intends to incorporate a correspondingly high level of certification right from the design stage. Such capability cannot simply be retrofitted later, Nilsson emphasized." (Google translate).
 

Attachments

  • 1787405022948.png
    1787405022948.png
    446.5 KB · Views: 101
From what I have seen in the image it looks like Saab are not doing away with tradition any time soon Forest Green with single engined fighters.
 
FighterJock said:
From what I have seen in the image it looks like Saab are not doing away with tradition any time soon Forest Green with single engined fighters.
Click to expand...
There's more than enough nations biting more than they can chew without Sweden.
When 1/2/3 engined fighters are broadly equal in fighting capabilities(engines and size don't directly drive disparity in a2a domain), at least someone is preserving sanity.
 
Quite right too Ainen. Saab are at least doing what they do best and that is sticking with the single engined fighter, they have been doing that since the first jet fighter that they designed.
 
Btw, should we take a notion:

SAAB specifically goes to release a LW by default more advanced and capable their manned proposition for decade(s) to come - i.e. the "high" component of their ecosystem.

Not "comparable", not "equal"(I'm getting better at manual Twitter AI slop phrasing). I think that's more or less a global first.

Granted, France may very well be further down this path (depending on what they're cooking). But whomever gets the first, gets the first. Medal goes to Saab.
 
Last edited:
EmoBirb said:
What plane? That's not even a technical proposal, not even mock up. That's barely over AI generated advertisement.
Click to expand...
I am old enough to remember early Viggen artwork so am still optimistic that Saab will bring us another good plane. But I have Olivia Newton-John's autograph from 1972 and still like ABBA.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom