Oh sure, one might wish being that way…
In fact their boats were mostly flat bottom ones, intended to be fast coastal sailboats.
Their sails were rather effective downwind but very poor windward, then the slaves had to row…
Thanks to their flat bottoms they could easily go ashore doing "strandhugg" plunge & plunder and quickly runaway.
They used the creeks, inlets and coves found along the coasts to rest during their sailing, hence the name Viking, which is believed to originate from "Vik" a Swedish word that means creek, inlet, cove or gulf.
It's still unsure whether Leif Ericson had planed his sailing to N. America or just had drifted ashore there by a storm...
It's unknown whether it was a single trip (one way ticket) or there were several trips back and forth.

Below is the picture of the "Svenska Flygvapen" most precious jewel.
JAS stands for "Jakt, Attack & Spaning", which means hunt, attack & reconnaissance.

.
That's actually a Seversky EP-1-106... (Export Pursuit 1) (J-9 in Sweden), developed from the AP-7 racer, not the P-35.
Sweden boutght 120 of them (the last 60 weren't delivered), used them well past the end of WWII.
Nifty looking airplane!

Tall Paul: the P36 was the Curtiss. My typo but also thought it was the Seversky P35 as featured in Clark Gable's film "Test Pilot"? When you stated "not the P-35", above, did you mean P-36? No dispute over Leif Erikson discovering N. America?

P-36... Curtiss Mohawk... Flew well against the Bf-109s and Yaks, when flown by, the dare I say it, French and Finns respectively.
P-35... offspring of the AP-7... there's an amusing film clip of Jackie Cochran taking off in one from Burbank in a Thompson Trophy race... as she winds up the landing gear you can see the plane oscillate due to her holding onto the control stick.
Wasn't the first guy from Yurp to the "New World" Snorri someone'sson?

Adam: check your Viking history for someone named Snorri sailing away and never returning to the homeland! Tall Paul knows his history.

The suggested name "Snorri" opens a new alternative, which urges to be investigated in detail.
Comprehensive research based on this new finding is now in progress, and the results will be made public within short…
The fact that it must has been someone's son from Yurp is already confirmed.

Flicka5, your last picture seems to show someone performing a dreadful diving manoeuvre.

As for the Curtiss Mohawk, it is not recorded in the "Flygvapnets" list.:spinnyeye

You might consider the following alternatives:

Seversky 2PA-204A Guardsman 1940/53 qty: 2
Seversky EP-106 1939/52 qty. 60

By the way, what are that dam strakes aft the plane's canards for?

Adam: you have a good sense of humor to put up with all our jesting! Don't know about the fuselage strakes behind the Swedish canard surface but will reserve judgment to a "real" aerodynamicist out there. Are there any out there?

Another pic. attached from my collection of model images. Same dummy pilot as above but having regained control?

"By the way, what are that dam strakes aft the plane's canards for? "
Those are to control the airflow over the inner part of the wing root at high angle of attack.
Quite possibly the airflow at slow speeds needed to be re-directed along the sides of the fuselage to remain closer to the wing instead of curling over the top of the fuselage.

Flicka5, it's a relief noticing that the machine was in the hands of a skilled dummy pilot who managed getting her out of that dreadful dive.

Tall Paul, I must admit you are right.
I am really impressed and now I believe in every word you say…
Just one more question: what do they mean with MLL-limit?
Thanks.

Adam, other than "manuvering" being the first word in MLL... I don't know what that might mean.

Ok Paul, I can't blame you for that.

Here's part of a text related to the JAS development (found on the net), which answers my question:

"One visible “fix” has been added to the aircraft, though. It consists of a small strake behind each canard surface, but their usefulness is restricted to angles of attack above the EFCS Manoeuvre Load Limitation Boundaries."

EFCS stands for Electronic Flight Control System.

The whole article may be found here:
http://www.mach-flyg.com/80jas.htm
The first part is written in Swedish but you'll find the English text by scrolling down the page a little bit.

Cheers

Tall Paul: is Adam giving you a test of some sort and in Swedish? Looks like observers are hunting for them thar strakes on the Concorde, attached!

Adam, thanks for the link. I've been looking for a good explanation of modern fighter shapes...
Here we generally tend to prevent the aircraft from exceeding the MLL with stick-pushers.

It was an interesting article. I noticed that they went to an unstable configuration. A stable airplane although having higher trim drag doesn't need a complex control system, which is good for us doing RC airplane work.

One of the problems with relaxed/negative static margins in airplanes is controllability. To initiate a pitch up you give just a little up elevator. Then at that elevator setting the airplane goes nuts with an increasing nose up pitch rate due to the instability.

Almost immediately the control system has to imput a nose down control to either maintain a constant pitch rate or to stop the pitch rate at a given angle of attack. It requires a pretty good control system that actually knows the aerodynamics of the airplane in order to give the proper elevator control to give you what you think you want. It also requires an aerodynamically effective elevator moving at a very high rate to get the elevator where the airplane needs it to be.

It is like balancing a yard stick on your finger.

The rate that the elevator needs to move at can be a problem in the large unstable airplane design work. It requires a much more powerful (heavier) actuator and pump than that used in the stable airplane control system.

Hi guys,

That's true, our aircraft models hardly need to have negative stability.
I just thought it could be interesting to read how they create unstable aircraft in order to get an extreme manoeuvrable modern fighter.
As Ben said, it requires a smart computer program capable to take care of the instability during the flight.
In case of computer failure the JAS is claimed to be able to fly under normal stable condition by locking the canards at a certain angle and only using the main wings control surfaces.

Cheers,

well its not any of the above.
this is a J-3 Kitten
check it out at www.rcmicroflight.com
march 2003 in yellow
its a carden J-3 Kitten

thnx

K_Tar: "I knew J3 Kitten and J3 Kitten was a friend of mine and this is no J3 Kitten"! Yep, it has similar lines to the J3-Kitten but so do a lot of Hi-wing, light planes. An acquaintance of mine designed the model using similarities from the Cessna family of light aircraft and the plans were published in Model Airplane News as the McCessna some years ago. All I did was bash it a little to add the "flapping" ailerons not for any perceived aerodynamic or aeroelastic breakthrough, but just to have fun and get people thinking! I was surprised that they work as well as they do but
maybe I have a cleverly disguised biplane with a
discontinuous, fully flying lower wing similar in function to a horizontal flying stab. that doesn't have the conventional elevator?

In any case we have been part way around the world with this discussion thanks to the computer engineers and Al Gore for the Internet! Who is Al Gore, by the way?

Picture of newest creation from the McCessna designer. It is an electric McBluebird! Its design feature is that it is made entirely from 1/16" balsa sheets.