avro arrow

Curious Cdn
#31
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

And made good money. Avro would have been a good bomber but F15-16 were being developed and Canada/A.V. Roe made more from the Space Race than they ever would have with the Arrow.

It was the Arrow or T.C. Douglas' Universal Health Care that Douglas and Pearson pushed for in Opposition.

The F-4 Phantom was being developed, at that time and many Avro Canada engineers ended up working at McDonnell.
 
taxslave
#32
Quote: Originally Posted by PoliticalNickView Post

Oh sure....why not go where the price jumps by 3000% every time someone cancels an order and you have to sign a contract saying the US government and military retain ownership and control of the software and can shut it down remotely at any time anywhere in the world causing your new F-35 to fall from the sky like a rock.

Such an awesome deal....

If it runs on Microsoft all they have to do is wait and it will crash all on it's own.

Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

All salty because of the failure known as the Avro.

How did that Rwanda thing workout? FAIL... Libya? FAIL... 1812? FAIL

Keep them tears coming B00Mer!

1812? Isn't the when a couple of the boys oversampled the shine and wondered down to Washington and started a wee bonfire in the shack your Prez was squating in?
 
B00Mer
#33


Made in Canada, eh!!




Made in America..
 
MHz
#34
Quote: Originally Posted by B00MerView Post



Made in Canada, eh!!


Add 2 more engines and more wing and how much weight can it haul at supersonic speeds?

Canada's role should include super conductors as we have places like Baffin Island that could become a space launch facility that bypasses the radiation belt..
 
B00Mer
#35
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Add 2 more engines and more wing and how much weight can it haul at supersonic speeds?

Canada's role should include super conductors as we have places like Baffin Island that could become a space launch facility that bypasses the radiation belt..

You mean the Avro Canada C102 Jetliner?



Last edited by B00Mer; 1 week ago at 07:46 PM..
 
Curious Cdn
#36
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Add 2 more engines and more wing and how much weight can it haul at supersonic speeds?

Canada's role should include super conductors as we have places like Baffin Island that could become a space launch facility that bypasses the radiation belt..

Avro Canada engineers also worked on the Concorde.
 
lone wolf
#37
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious CdnView Post

The F-4 Phantom was being developed, at that time and many Avro Canada engineers ended up working at McDonnell.

Phantom? Why'd Dief settle on the VooDoo
 
PoliticalNick
#38
Unfortunately for those of us committed to purchase F-35s we have been duped into believing it is not just a fantastic aircraft but also a fantastic deal. Wrong on both counts. The VTO system has had major issues and even a complete catastrophic failure. It apparently bleeds fuel when inverted. The thrust vectoring tabs which are supposed to add maneuverability have a habit of sticking making it harder to fly and the power to weight ratio leaves it much slower than many fighters from 20+ years ago. Add in that the US government and military have designed the sales contracts to retain complete control over the software and maintenance parts supply and it's really a piece of junk.

Now if you want a real military aircraft the the Typhoon Euro-fighter is probably the best thing going at the moment unless you can figure out how to get your hands on the F-22 Raptor which puts every other plane to shame.
 
Nick Danger
#39
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

Phantom? Why'd Dief settle on the VooDoo

I think the major complaint with the Arrow, from both domestic and foreign buyers, was the price tag. Both purchase price and the cost of ongoing support/maintenance were far more than competing aircraft.
 
Murphy
#40
Money was the big thing. The CF101 (Voodoo) was originally purchased for $750,000 a unit. That was a figure bashed around when I was still in uniform. I cannot find a cite. In contrast, the Arrow's price tag was considerably more. Voodoos were in production in the US, with no no build costs, just a straight across purchase.

In contrast, 27 million dollars was given out by the Cdn govt for development of the Arrow. A further $260 million was scheduled to be released for 5 test Arrows. To be fair, this included the start up costs - facilities and people - but that would have put the price tag at $287 million, in 1950s dollars, with no sales and only five a/c. And, being the cynic, I believe those costs would have climbed. After all, the government was funding it.

My personal belief is, that despite all the flag waving and improvements in performance, the price tag was too high.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_CF-105_Arrow (external - login to view)
Last edited by Murphy; 1 week ago at 04:08 PM..
 
MHz
#41
Quote: Originally Posted by Nick DangerView Post

I think the major complaint with the Arrow, from both domestic and foreign buyers, was the price tag. Both purchase price and the cost of ongoing support/maintenance were far more than competing aircraft.

What other supersonic aircraft were in the running??
 
Nick Danger
#42
Quote: Originally Posted by MurphyView Post

Money was the big thing. The CF101 (Voodoo) was originally purchased for $750,000 a unit. That was a figure bashed around when I was still in uniform. I cannot find a cite. In contrast, the Arrow's price tag was considerably more.

The bit of snooping around I did said that the Iroquois engine upgrade, lighter and more efficient than the original Pratt & Whitneys, was to have brought the per unit price tag down to around eight million dollars a pop.
 
Curious Cdn
#43
Quote: Originally Posted by MurphyView Post

Money was the big thing. The CF101 (Voodoo) was originally purchased for $750,000 a unit. That was a figure bashed around when I was still in uniform. I cannot find a cite. In contrast, the Arrow's price tag was considerably more. Voodoos were in production in the US, with no no build costs, just a straight across purchase.

In contrast, 27 million dollars was given out by the Cdn govt for development of the Arrow. A further $260 million was scheduled to be released for 5 test Arrows. To be fair, this included the start up costs - facilities and people - but that would have put the price tag at $287 million, in 1950s dollars, with no sales and only five a/c. And, being the cynic, I believe those costs would have climbed. After all, the government was funding it.

My personal belief is, that despite all the flag waving and improvements in performance, the price tag was too high.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_CF-105_Arrow (external - login to view)

The Voodoo was a vehicle to carry the nuclear Genie air-to-air missile. I don't think that he designers of the Arrow were looking at it as a mere launch stage for nukes. That weapons system made the "fighter" role of obsolete. The aircraft had to have a long range, high ceiling, "all weather" capability and reasonable supersonic speed. Manoeverability was no longer relevant.

By the way, one aircraft of that era that was very much like the Arrow was the SAAB Drakken. It almost looks like a crib of the Arrow. The Swede criteria for fighter aircraft are little different from ours I would think as Canada's aerial battlefields are a few hours to the north and Sweden's are a few minutes to the east.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_35_Draken (external - login to view)

Check this out... 1950's vintage delta wing Saabs doing the "Cobra" manoever like a Sukhoi. I'll bet that the Arrow could have done that. It's almost he same damned aircraft:

theaviationist.com/2012/04/12/cobra-draken/ (external - login to view)
Last edited by Curious Cdn; 1 week ago at 05:44 PM..
 
Nick Danger
#44
Timing was not in the Arrow's favour either. The advent of long range missiles in that day and age made the role of an interceptor questionable. It was the Canadian government's position that the next big war would be fought with ICBMs and foot soldiers. (It has also been said that the Canadian Air Force simply did not have the funding to be able to afford the Arrow, and that this was a potential source of international embarrassment.)
 
Curious Cdn
#45
Quote: Originally Posted by Nick DangerView Post

Timing was not in the Arrow's favour either. The advent of long range missiles in that day and age made the role of an interceptor questionable. It was the Canadian government's position that the next big war would be fought with ICBMs and foot soldiers. (It has also been said that the Canadian Air Force simply did not have the funding to be able to afford the Arrow, and that this was a potential source of international embarrassment.)

Well, it would have been a means of subsidizing sectors of our economy. That, however is a controversial thing to do in this country. (Notice how difficult it is, now, to get a home-made warship built) The Americans spend ridiculous sums on all sorts of weapons systems and, for the most part, the process seems to have increased their wealth as a nation. I suspect that some of that has been at work in Britain and France, as well.
 
Nick Danger
+1
#46
Some interesting parallels between the Arrow project and the ongoing Bombardier saga when it comes to finally pulling the pin on such a huge undertaking. I think it was Joss Whedon talking about his love for the ill-fated "Firefly" series who said something to the tune of "You have to know when mouth-to-mouth stops being life support and becomes necrophilia."
 
Murphy
#47
In the end, I believe that the government just couldn't afford it. Part of the R&D was to improve target detection and wpns launch systems. The new engine had several improvements as well. I think that for security purposes, the plant got shut down and things packed up to stop prying eyes from getting a hold of it.

There's no reason to cut up and destroy unsuccessful prototypes - unless new technology used in the plane could be stolen.

No tin foil hat, oddball conspiracy beliefs here. It was just the govt protecting sensitive tech from falling into Russian hands.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#48
Quote: Originally Posted by B00MerView Post



Made in Canada, eh!!

Who do you think would win a straight-up fight? Canada's artist's impression air force or Engerland's CGI navy?
 
Murphy
#49
I would also add to the discussion that the government was right to select the 101. When you have a facility already in existence that makes what you want (or close to it) at an affordable price, you grab it. The US was lukewarm about the Arrow because they had an aerospace industry and needed to counter any competition. The US also knew the technological advancements that resulted from the Arrow program would be theirs to incorporate and improve upon in short order.

The collapse of the program and subsequent exodus of aerospace scientists/technicians to the US couldn't have been timed any better. With the US-Russia space race starting, if you couldn't get a job in Malton, you could find one easily in California, Florida or Texas.

The mystique of the Arrow is always great fun to read, but aliens, men in black or the Illuminati didn't kill it. I think the extreme cost did.
---

And here's President Kennedy speaking about getting into space. Hinting to the Russians that the US was committed to the race.

This video has been edited and music added to communicate the patriotism and verve of the Prez and the time.

 
Curious Cdn
#50
Quote: Originally Posted by MurphyView Post

I would also add to the discussion that the government was right to select the 101. When you have a facility already in existence that makes what you want (or close to it) at an affordable price, you grab it. The US was lukewarm about the Arrow because they had an aerospace industry and needed to counter any competition. The US also knew the technological advancements that resulted from the Arrow program would be theirs to incorporate and improve upon in short order.

The collapse of the program and subsequent exodus of aerospace scientists/technicians to the US couldn't have been timed any better. With the US-Russia space race starting, if you couldn't get a job in Malton, you could find one easily in California, Florida or Texas.

The mystique of the Arrow is always great fun to read, but aliens, men in black or the Illuminati didn't kill it. I think the extreme cost did.
---

And here's President Kennedy speaking about getting into space. Hinting to the Russians that the US was committed to the race.

This video has been edited and music added to communicate the patriotism and verve of the Prez and the time.

My wife's grandfather went from A.V.Roe to Avro Canada to Orenda to NASA.
 
Murphy
#51
I think there are several similar stories like that.
 
Curious Cdn
#52
Quote: Originally Posted by MurphyView Post

I think there are several similar stories like that.

My mother worked hard to get Diefenbaker elected.

We don't talk about these things in our household.
 
Murphy
#53
Different times. You talk about Diefenbaker. It's alright. He's dead. Dief won't mind at all.
 
petros
#54
Quote: Originally Posted by MurphyView Post

Different times. You talk about Diefenbaker. It's alright. He's dead. Dief won't mind at all.

And frozen.
 
Murphy
#55
Available in the frozen food section of your favourite grocery store.

 
petros
#56
ooOOoo...Prime Minister's Choice blue menu as well.
 

Similar Threads

146
Looking Back on the Avro Arrow
by CDNBear | Oct 24th, 2013
62
Yeah, let's rebuild the Avro Arrow
by Locutus | Sep 15th, 2012
0
Avro Arrow
by sanctus | Dec 11th, 2006
no new posts