Will legendary Avro Arrow make Lazarus-like return?

Howard Hughes was so impressed with it that he bought it. (or tried to)

Yes, but you need to consider what people like Kelly Johnson say about Hughes' aircraft test flying/buying at the time.

In spite of specifically building his dream ranch to accommodate ICBMs Johnson was no nutbar, and his opinion of Hughes' flying skills at the time was not high.

Now back to the sad tale of the Arrow I guess.
 
If a relatively small country like Sweden with it's 9 million inhabitants can have their own fighter built in house, I don't see why Canada couldn't!
 
If a relatively small country like Sweden with it's 9 million inhabitants can have their own fighter built in house, I don't see why Canada couldn't!

Look at threatspace, and GDP density or even population density. Also, Canada is a weak state. Should we have a coherent well understood threat, and a homogeneous culture, the Arrow may have provided a great defense against the threat to a large nation.
 
I agree with the SU fans. The Russian planes would suit our purposes much better, have a much lower maintenance cost and a much lower price tag then the bloated F35. But I doubt that would ever happen because the US has too much say in our government affairs (most likely why the arrow got canned in the first place).
 
A Russian aircraft would not meet any NATO requirements. Fluids, plugs, wiring, data buses, instruments, and countless other components would not meet NATO standards and would have to be changed. Russian aircraft are not an option at all.

Infrastructure changes would be required to airbases to accommodate aircraft substantially bigger then the current CF-18.

Moreover, purchasing an aircraft from a country that wishes to challenge our sovereignty in the arctic is preposterous, to say the least.
 
A Russian aircraft would not meet any NATO requirements. Fluids, plugs, wiring, data buses, instruments, and countless other components would not meet NATO standards and would have to be changed. Russian aircraft are not an option at all.

Infrastructure changes would be required to airbases to accommodate aircraft substantially bigger then the current CF-18.

Moreover, purchasing an aircraft from a country that wishes to challenge our sovereignty in the arctic is preposterous, to say the least.

Translation= we would have to use Russian weapons too. Not really a good idea.
 
Translation= we would have to use Russian weapons too. Not really a good idea.

I'm sure the Russians would put a back door command in the aircraft that would give them the ability to shut down important functions at their leisure.

Since they are a potential adversary this would be less than a good idea. Too bad as they are making some pretty good looking aircraft and weapons for them.

I could wish we just go ahead and build our own aircraft. I believe it could be done with the right level of national will.

Problem is it would be done in Quebec, and with a PQ govt...how well would that go over?
 
WHY must it be done in Quebec?

Quebec was not always the centre of Canada's aviation industry; for a while it was Western Canada. Trudeau moved the entire industry to Quebec in order that Quebec would have a prestigious world-class industry and make all those tons of money from building overpriced, behind-schedule CF-18 components.

But what has been moved once can be moved again..... and I can't find a thing in the Bible that says that Quebec has to get everything handed to them on a gold platter. The CF-18 Scandal, as it is remembered, is still a hot button out here.

Western companies, notably in Winnipeg, had invested millions of dollars in readying for the CF-18 contracts. Trudeau handed the contacts to Quebec, despite the fact that the Prairie prices were LOWER, and ORDERED the Western companies to hand over all their technical information to Quebec. So Quebec got the CF-18 and the West got the maintenance contracts on the stuff that was one short step from the junkyard.

Allrighty, Quebec can HAVE the CF-18. They whined and bickered and b*tched until they got it, let 'em keep it. The West gets the ARROW II. If Toronto can bring itself to vote in half a dozen Conservatives next election, they might even get the Mossie contract. The originals were built there; it is only fitting that the Next Generation Mosquito be built there also. Of course, Aircraft Repair was in Edmonton and they did pretty decent work in War Two; maybe they should have a chance at this one.

How much ya wanta bet both projects come in ON TIME and UNDER BUDGET?
.
 
Avro was a large, highly experienced aircraft factory in Malton ON. They had made like 600 CF100 jet fighters for Canada just before they geared up for the Arrow. During WWII they made excellent Lancaster bombers for the war effort. They were on the cutting edge of technology. They had a prototype jetliner called the Avro Jetliner flying...if I remember correctly Howard Hughes was so impressed with it that he bought it. (or tried to)

This factory was demolished long ago. The workers, engineers etc are long gone. The area now could best be described as Little India.

If it was all still there then sure...but it isn't. :(

Believe me, I'd love to see Canada build it's own aircraft. Screw the F35.

I was aware of Avro's history, but unfortunately AVRO is long gone. John Diefenbaker's only lasting legacy for Canada was to turn us into a second class power. Diefebaker did almost as much damage to Canada as Trudeau, and he did it in half the time.
 
Last edited:
Dief had a LOT of help from the smiling guy with the very hard eyes in the White House. Eisenhower only knew one game: hardball. He played it with (against) everyone, INCLUDING his allies. There was only one way: Ike's.

Ike was a politician, first and last. During War 2, he utterly DESPISED his 2I/C Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery. Monty had 3 strikes against him from the start: he was British, he was a small man who would NOT eat sh*t and he was a FINE general. Yes, Monty believed in training, training, training, but look at the results: comparatively, his forces took FAR less casualties than did others. The difference: Monty served in the Trenches in War One, Ike in the Artillery, miles from the Front; Monty had seen, first-hand, the results of sloppy generalship. Look at D-Day: Monty's forces were miles and miles inland while the Americans still were on the beach. And yet, even BEFORE the disaster at Slapton Sands (2 weeks before D-Day), Monty had told Ike, face to face, that the Americans were not trained well enough to attempt an invasion of anything. The casualty figures proved Monty was right....... again.

There were two big military alliances in the world: East and West. The Eastern alliance (Warsaw Pact) used the Russian ammunition and a lot of Russian equipmnt. That meant that the Western alliance (NATO) was damn well GOING to use AMERICAN equipment..... and nothing BUT American equipment.

Look at what happened with the EM-2 project: rifle scrapped, ammunition scrapped, AFTER it had proven BETTER than the American development. NATO got a FULL-POWERED cartridge, no matter that the rifles were uncontrollable on the (specified) full-auto fire. AMERICA wanted a .30-cal cartridge, so that was what NATO GOT: the US offered to pull out of NATO if they did not get their way. Twenty years later, the US had pulled away from the NATO cartridge which they had pushed on everybody else, a new competition was held for a small-calibre round..... and the British effort, once again proven better, was trashed.... and NATO ended up with the American cartridge, after the Americans adopted the Belgian bullet.

Eisenhower is remembered today for his parting shot, the warning about the Military-Industrial Complex. Ike knew all about it: he helped invent it.

But Ike was the President and he would brook NO competition to AMERICAN industry, especially from a third-rate dump like Canada, double-especially after the Canadians had put an aircraft into the air which was 2 generations ahead of ANYTHING the US could build.

So the Arrow had to go.

Ike made a special trip to Ottawa and had a conference with Diefenbaker at that time. I don't know if the notes (if any were kept) have ever been released, but I suspect they are still secret. From the results, we know that Ike "laid down the law" regarding military equipment.

The Arrow was scrapped immediately afterwards...... and Canada bought heaps of US-made equipment, including Bomarcs, F-104s, small-arms which are STILL in service and God-alone-knows-what-else.

The threat to the US military aircraft industry was removed..... along with most of my respect for ANY American politicians.
.
 
From what I've read, the decision to award the CF-18 maintenance contract to Canadair in Montreal rather than Bristol in Winnipeg occurred in 1986 under the Mulrooney Progressive Conservatives.
 
Mulroney was a Liberal in a blue jacket, that's all.

His policies were Liberal, his allegiances were Liberal..... and he had to reward Quebec.

Again.
.
 
Official introduction of the CF-18 was in January, 1983.

Aircraft already had been on delivery for several months.

The technology transfer was BEFORE any construction even started.

TRUDEAU.

Again.
.
 
The Arrow was designed for one thing, and one thing only - High Arctic intercepts of Soviet bombers coming over the North Pole. It was a huge airframe, as it had to be to hold the fuel needed for those two massive engines.

It was not designed, nor would it be a good choice, for ground support attacks.

It was optimized for straight-line speed, and like all interceptors, couldn't really mix it up with another fighter aircraft. That also means it would have a hell of a time dodging SAM's, AAM's, and AAA fire. Given the size of the airframe, it means that it's an easier target (relatively speaking) to hit.

As much as I'd like to see a resurrected Arrow, it's not what Canada needs to replace our CF-18's.

I also believe that reconstructing the industry needed to design, test, and manufacture a modern jet fighter is too cost-prohibitive for Canada.
 
I also believe that reconstructing the industry needed to design, test, and manufacture a modern jet fighter is too cost-prohibitive for Canada.

It isn't that it's too cost prohibitive, it's just it can't be done all at once to design a new aircraft from scratch. You just can't "wish" a design team/company into existence, no matter how much money you throw at it. A design team has to be built over many years, which includes all the backup infrastructure and partners.

And the design team is the easy part, then you need to build it.

And you need to build it within budget........


Sweden builds fighters, the Saab Gripen. But key to that is they also sell to other countries.

And Sweden only has a population of 9.5 million. But then Saab has been doing this for 75 years.
 
A Russian aircraft would not meet any NATO requirements. Fluids, plugs, wiring, data buses, instruments, and countless other components would not meet NATO standards and would have to be changed. Russian aircraft are not an option at all.

Infrastructure changes would be required to airbases to accommodate aircraft substantially bigger then the current CF-18.

Moreover, purchasing an aircraft from a country that wishes to challenge our sovereignty in the arctic is preposterous, to say the least.

Nonsense.

Put in an order, built to whatever spec you want and get a basic flying airframe with avionics from any suppliers or to any spec you want. Then complete all the avionics and weapons systems in Canada for classified equipment. All aerospace companies use subcontractors from all over the world, Russia is no different anymore.

The Russians built a couple modules for the space station. Who's specs do you think they used? And it is now Russian rockets that are now flying all the missions since all the US space shuttles are decommissioned. Systems need some compatibility.

On an multi billion mining project I'm working on, some major equipment is coming from an old, very respected German company. Yet all of the materials and equipment is being fabricated and assembled in China, to German specs, with some European control systems.

Buying a military aircraft isn't quite like going to a car dealer and buying one off the lot. Cars are made by the millions, military aircraft by the hundreds (or a couple thousand). You get it the way you want it. Will it cost more? Sure, a bit more, but more than a F-35?
 
Too bad if they did develop it again it's main armament would be limited to .22lr caliber and pinned to ten rounds. The AVRO Arrow is on the prohib list?

Canada's MBT was developed where?

The current Infantry weapon is a what?

Face it. Canada as well as the US both have used weapon designs with origins outside their respective countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_infantry_weapons_and_equipment_of_the_Canadian_military

Now get back to work protecting the 13 Northern US Provinces! We will worry about the other 57 states.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom