Added: 3 years ago
From: notnick99
Views: 61,590
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (699)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Spud McCocky definitely provided a fake name for this report lmao

  • simple fact is we were going to have an aircraft which nobody would buy. We would have to float the program for ??? years and the Soviets weren't really worried about us...

    So in reality if UK or USA didnt want it. Then we would spend the money and prove the weapon platform. Then they might buy it.... or more likely steal the concept and make their own.

    What happened was a shame, but it ended the only way it could.

  • Another beautiful aircraft, and a country's cpability sacrificed due to greed and corruption!

    And this is comming from an American!

    It was because of the machinations started by Lockheed Corp. giving monies to a British MP named: Duncan Sandys who killed off the Rotodyne,and started the process to kill off the TSR 2, and a whole bunch of other planes and missiles, who then handed a White Paper to Canadian Diffenbacher to kill off the CF-105 Avro Arrow!

    CF-105, TSR-2, Rotodyne, BlueStreak: R.I.P.

  • My grandfather also worked at av roe, when the plane was cancelled, he passed away shortly after that.

  • It reminds me of the NASA space shuttle for some reason, and it definitely looks modern for a 50's jet. Beautiful.

  • my grandfather designed the cockpit on this juss saying :o

  • It was an incredible airplane, and if you believe it was cancelled because of lack of money you're a bit misinformed. The reason it was cancelled was because the plant was crawling with Soviet spies relaying every detail back to mother Russia. A few years later came the Foxbat, with several striking similarities, mainly the titanium alloy usage near leading-edge surfaces that had a tendency to heat up the higher speeds. It's a horrible end to such an aerodynamic piece of beautiful machinery.

  • @littleneddygoestowar: Unlike the MiG 25, the CF-105 did NOT use titanium in any of the leading edge surfaces. Small amounts of titanium were used in the engine bay areas, as well as for minor fixtures and fittings. It's fuselage was almost entirely made of aluminum alloy. The Iroquois engines did use extensive amounts of titanium, but never powered a flyable Arrow.

  • Comment removed

  • Spud Patocky lol

  • The price of collaborating with Americans.

  • fuck traitors the conservative party

  • never trust a conservative

  • raynus1

    Go suck a dick and fuck off asshole!

    Arrow or (future planned variants) never got the chance to fully prove itself.

  • @comx427: I think someone needs a hug....and their mouth washed out with a pail of diesel.

  • @comx427 FUCK YOU.

  • @BKproductions11 FUCK YOU TOO ASSHOLE.

    lol

  • ryanvms needs an enema

  • The worst part of this is we spent ten times what we spent on the arrow paying for the american f18. Had we kept the arrow, other countries would have been PAYING us to build it. There were offers on the table to buy engines and complete aircraft. Think jobs. But it was capable of shooting down US spy planes and the cunt americans didnt want the industrial competition. The aircraft was built. Over 30 were ready or almost ready. Well to the United States, FUCK YOU!!!! F18 still cant compete.

  • @ryanvms: If you factor in inflation, we paid about $10M less per airframe for the CF-18, and received a far more advanced, much more versatile aircraft. The CF-18 is a true multi-role combat aircraft. The Arrow was a single-purpose interceptor that didn’t even mount a gun. No contest. A CF-18 would make swiss cheese out of an Arrow in very short order.

  • @ryanvms: (cont'd)You also suggest that a CF-105 would be able to shoot down US spyplanes. Aside from that being a non-issue in the first place, unless Canada planned on selling Arrows to Russia (a sworn cold war enemy), Avro Canada dropped the ASTRA/Sparrow program in favor of less complex Falcon/Genie weaponry to equip potential aircraft, limiting shoot-downs to short/medium range attacks on lumbering bombers, not high-altitude recon aircraft.

  • @ryanvms: (cont'd) Lockheed’s A-12 (precursor to the SR-71) flew in 1962 and was capable of mach 3 flight at 85,000’, well beyond the reach of any Arrow, as the Falcon missile and Genie rocket had a maximum range of only six miles and top speeds of mach 3. They would only match the speed of an A-12/SR-71, and run out of fuel long before reaching their target.

  • @ryanvms: (cont'd): The only interested party in purchasing the CF-105 was Great Britain, and the cancelled all involvement/interest in the program in January, 1959, (a month prior to black Friday) without placing an order. France expressed brief interest in acquiring roughly 200 PS.13 Iroquois engines for use in their Mirage aircraft, but never considered buying complete CF-105 airframes.

  • @ryanvms: (cont'd) On a final note, there were five flyable Arrows at cancellation, with the Iroquois-powered #206 98% complete, numbers 207, 208, 209, and 210 at 85%, 80%, 57%, and 46% complete, respectively. Only various components and sub-components existed for another eleven aircraft, no semi-complete airframes. Ten aircraft in various stages of completion at cancellation, not thirty, as you claim.

  • I love the Avro Arow

  • It is great how many of these engineers went on to other projects. The Arrow's designer went on to nasa and designed the lunar lander. 3 engineers went on to Douglas aircraft and were directly responcable for the f-4 phantom and later the f-15 eagle. 1 went to Northrop and was involved with the f/a-18 design and numerous missle projects. Another went to Liton industries and was involved with the cruise missle development. Many were hired by General Dynamics in Texas and worked on the f-111.

  • @2ndRCHAret: The F-4 Phantom was designed by McDonnell Aircraft Corporation during the same period as the CF-105 Arrow, and first flew in May of 1958 (only three months after the CF-105's maiden flight), a full nine months prior to termination of the Arrow project. American engineers led by American-born Dave Lewis were responsible for the F-4, not ex-Avro engineers as your post suggests. As a sidenote, McDonnell didn't merge with Douglas until 1967.

  • diefenbaker is a fucking idiot, destroying the worlds best aircraft and know the only way to get to space now is the russians ww2 shuttle cuz america is too poor to send out any. damn this world is dumb

  • This is the face of Canadian Jingoism.

  • canadas broken dream

  • Man what douche killed this plane. I would have loved to have a career with Avro when i graduate -_-

  • A fighter years ahead of its time! What dimwits they were to cancel it. Very similar story to the TSR-2

  • BRING BACK THE ARROW

  • My great uncle was a mechanic on these planes and I wish I knew that before he died... His brother told me it exceeded mach 3 and how he saw it fly at 90 degree climb right from take off till he couldn't see it.

  • @NeeShallPass: Nonsense. The highest speed attained was 1.98mach, on November 11, 1958, and it never exceeded 50,000' during the flight test programme. Instead of buying into outlandish Arrow mythology, read a factual study on the aircraft.

  • @raynus1 Hi raynus. I see your still at it trying to lead our countrymen to the truth about the Arrow. Good luck my friend you have a huge task ahead of you. I saw the Peter Mansbridge interview with Malcolm Gladwell. Peter called him a great thinker but I'm sure the purpose was for Mansbridge to finally host an interview with someone who had worse hair. I'm not sure what irked me more. The bullshit I heard or, the fact that the clown (Gladwell) got airtime with our tax dollars.

  • My Grandfather, who died in 1997, swore that if this had been put into production, even by 1997 standards, it would have still been a viable jet aircraft. And he wasn't one to mince on words - being a jet engineer for the latter part of his life.

    That means that this aircraft would have been a completely usable design for 30+ years, and would have no doubt been very well refined by the end of that term, and inexpensive to manufacture. How sad to see its life cut short from the very start.

  • The frustrations of government. From the get-go avro was being screwed over by government. imagine this plane with today's engines.

  • overrated, would not have been as fast as an electric lightning

  • @dmax631 if that was the case then you would of been on the electric lighting video and not the avro arrow

  • @dmax631 nothing would..... andthe arrow was capable of mach 2.5 and 3.26749 with afterburners but it was said to be unsafe

  • @spencerhopkins91 My Father worked at Avro in the design team of the Arrow during the 50's.The Arrow was never capable of anything over Mach 2.0 with the Pratt & Whitney J75 P3 engines. The Arrow never flew with their much more powerful Orenda Iroquois engines. Mach 2.5 and 3.0 were only drawing board plans not yet acted upon. Too bad Diefenbacher was such a spineless, egotistical man,who is responsible for losing it , it's technology and the brilliant minds that created it. Sad indeed!

  • @MrMENMEL well the Iroquois engine was capable of mach 3. and yes We would go down in history until our government stopped it

  • @spencerhopkins91 - Yes, maybe theoretically on paper it could have been capable of Mach 3.0, but the air frame certain was not capable, without major modification and experimentation. Just ask anyone at Lockheed how hard it is to build an air frame and engine capable of Mach3.0 +, for example the A12 Oxcart or SR-71.

  • Does any one have 3 view drawings or plans for this. I want to build a scale rc version of this beautiful plane. Please let me know.

  • and to everyone saying that it was too expensive to build and continue to develop, i have one question: how much do you think it cost apple to design, engineer and manufacture the first Mac, iPhone or iPod? TONS of money and guess what-they stuck with it, and now look at them! I work at a Nuke power plant and guess what- it was ground breaking technology when it was designed and built more than 40 years ago and IT'S STILL RUNNING! The point is YOU CAN'T PUT A PRICE ON R&D OF SOMETHING NEW!

  • Just so everyone knows. It was the CONSERVATIVES that canceled the program when they came to power in '57and ordered it to not fly the same day (Feb 18/1959) it was to test the Iroquois engines (26000 lb thrust with AB x 2!) and DESTROY every jet record in the books to date. All due to AMERICAN POLITICS and pressure from them to buy their planes, and to invest in NORAD, also-the RCMP had suspicion that the KGB had a mole in the program and was the reason for scrapping it.

  • If this had been built, it wouldn't have stopped at Mark II either. By 2011 in a (better) alternate universe, the CF-105 Arrow goes Mach 4.2 at 97,000ft, or something close to that.

  • @GangsterHutterite: That's just silly. Mach 3 flight is so 1960's, as is the interceptor. If it had continued, it likely would've evolved into a multi-role combat aircraft, similar to the F-15SE.

  • "This clip brings tears to my eyes. What a great country this is."

    how ironic you think canada is a great country -- for what? buidling and then cancelling his plane way back in the 50's and shifting so much engineering expertise to the americans. now we are buying the americans behind schedule overrpriced underperforming f-35. that is a real great country. almost as great as how we gave away our natural resources to american companies to profit from.

  • @MidnightRambler73 you're right; as long as they'd put a Fleur de lysée at the center of it. ;o)

  • I love Canada

  • @kahlonjatt09 It's too bad that they canceled this fighter plane.....It's really sad

  • Thanks for nothing Dief.

  • Dear Canadians,

    please get back soon to kicking ass and let me know if I can help.

    Signed,

    disgruntled italian

  • @MidnightRambler73

    Every dead Canadian Soldier that's driven by my town, from Trenton to Toronto, is a direct result of Mr. Harper and his Conservatives. However, no widow or fatherless child can hold him accountable. Prior to the Harperites, we were a peacekeeping nation, with a balanced budget. Enjoy the next four years (plus I don't care what province you're from - Ontario is the heart and soul of Canada.)

  • @Krashdavus every dead soldier coming down to Toronto is a sign we are still free and fight for what supposed to be right against wrong.

    To think war is a tea party is most liberal !

    

  • @frank0067

    Free from what you idiot, the Taliban?? The reason the Taliban exists is because of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Free from weapons of mass destruction, they didn't exist! Free from the North Korean? The U.S. created that problem in the 50's. Free from Iranian invasion? Won't happen. Again another problem started by U.S. foreign policy when they eliminated a newly elected government in Iran, and brought in the Shah. We have freedom because of victories in WW1 & WW!.

  • @Kraandshdavus The dead soldiers coming down the Highway of Heroes is a sign Canada still fights for what's right. And there's no reason to call someone an idiot because they're respecting their country's dead soldiers.

  • @MidnightRambler73

    We now have one of the most recognized flags in the world, as opposed to an old Colonial Flag, and a national anthem to go with it, thanks to the Liberals.

  • I couldnt ever have piloted this plane my legs are too short to get over the canopy to exit LOL

  • @PhilsCinema They could lower you with a rope! LOL

  • CANADA

  • Canada proved it could build a great aircraft. To bad it was canceled.

    

  • Granted, the arrow was an interceptor; but its abandonment was a product of that same missile-fever which lead the U.S.A.F., over a particularly costly period, to abandon training pilots in basic dogfighting skills (resulting in many of its pilots entering the theater of Vietnam in expensive F-4 without knowing what the aircraft was truly capable of in a turning-fight; much less how superior the MiG was in that arena).

  • As an American, I take no shame in admitting that Canada produced the most beautiful single-seat flying machine, ever, in the form of the Avro CF-105 Arrow. Its continuation would have been of benefit to both countries... sadly, both of whom's higher commands were terribly short-sighted in placing unwarranted faith on missiles (which would take many decades to prove reliable - in that span of time, causing U.S. kill-ratios to plummet versus the more agile MiG-17, 19, & 21 over Vietnam).

  • @MidnightRambler73 Yep, Just As I Corrected Myself Just Underneath Your Comment.

  • @MidnightRambler73 Diefenbaker Was Responsible For The Flag Change, The Avro Cancellation & Canada Not Being Able To Build Any Military Aircraft For Our Armed Forces. We Are Only Aloud to Buy Military Aircraft From The US. Good Footage By The Way.

  • @MapleBalls "Diefenbaker Was Responsible For The Flag Change..."

    Diefenbaker vehemently opposed the flag change.

  • @LeopoldPlumtree Your Right, It Was Pearson, I Just Keep Remembering The Old Video Of When Pearson Was Booo-ed While Trying To Explain It To A Group Of Legion & Armed Forces Members, & Remembered Diefenbaker For Some Resign.

  • @LeopoldPlumtree He opposed the cancellation of the Arrow as well. But he was persuaded by others.

  • Oh the shame...

  • *sighes* such a beautiful aircraft made in canada soil toobad we had to scrap the project T_T

  • Avro Arrow first flight March 25th, 1958.

  • Man, losing this aircraft hurts worse than losing a crate of beer

  • Looks like the Tornado in some ways, only 3 years earlier!

  • We're coming in to make autographs, stand by.

  • Does anyone know which runway at YYZ the first flight took off from?

  • @JTF2CSOR1 The former runway 32 (now a taxiway beside the present 33R).

  • Plain and simple, the Arrow was a beautiful plane and is historically one of the best Canadian achievements. Imagine what this country would be like if Dief hadn't been a butt head and killed it. If only the Orenda engine had of been built from the beginning instead of using the Pratts, it would have taken the records for sure. Good business point tho, why give the Pratt the credit when it would make the Orenda famous. It was just was ahead of its time. Remarkable none the less.

  • xXwirelessXx says: "No, actually, I'm just going by what I believe, and I don't want to argue with you. So please stop messaging me."

  • xXwirelessXx says: "Born and raised in Western Canada eh? Well you sound more like a stuck up American that thinks he knows all. Sorry for tweaking, but you piss people off when you " present facts and figures to articulate a position"

  • xXwirelessXx says: "STFU buddy you think your the shit? your probably some stuck up prick of an American, i was just making a comment on my views of the Avreo Aero, u probably read Wikipedia and have been plagiarizing and have no right to chirp me for my views. BTW your not cool for having arguments on you tube so get a life you good for nothing loser"

  • Attention on deck: xXwirelessXx, after sending me a very rude personal message, has now demanded that I stop messaging him. So, as a rebuttal, I'll make this reply public to respect his wishes. xXwirelessXx, spineless jellyfish that he is, states that he prefers to stick with his 'beliefs' pertaining to the 'Avreo Aero' (to paraphrase), rather than documented historical fact. He's likely a Liberal; Probably from Central Canada. Liberals don't deal well with reality. That is all. Carry on.

  • @raynus1 Perhaps we should continue to refer to this mythologic aircraft as the "Aero" (or "Errow") to properly distinguish it from the historic Arrow.

  • @LeopoldPlumtree It is interesting, though you are saying it in a very funny way. But we don't really have a fully comprehensive view of the real plane. largly because it never got the oportunity to prove itself, leaving things open to rumor inuendo falacy fantasy mixed with fiction speculation and truth. It would be nice to just no it all. be if we did just think of all this fun we'd be missing out on.

  • I cant believe they scraped the Avro, it was the best interceptor of the time and the gay U.S. presidud (lol) bullied our PM into scraping it, all because it was better than anything the US could ever dream of making at that time

  • @xXwirelessXx: Dwight Eisenhower was a 'Gay Dud'? How old are you? Twelve?

  • @xXwirelessXx

    Typical Canadian propaganda my dear boy. Read some of the other comments below, and other threads, you will see how wrong you are.

  • @JohnQRandom Typical Canadian propaganda? No, compared to the US canada is never heard of in any history txt book except our own. and eisenhower was a genius, but the theory is that he bullied diefenbaker into scraping iit, and i believe that, because the US thinks there the shit, and the're not. And im not 12

  • @xXwirelessXx

    My boy, you are talking to people on this thread far older, more experienced, and smarter than you are. The promo that was made about this aircraft was a far cry from reality, and was made with the intent to make Canadians feel that it was the Americans who forced your government to scrap it. Raynus, whose comments can be read below, also posts his comments on numrous other Avro threads. Have a word with him, as of right now I don't have time.

  • @JohnQRandom The Arrow heads also seem to overlook the fact that the Americans ofered to help finance the Arrow not kill it.

  • @banjer4u

    I don't doubt that one bit. As if we would pass a chance to stay ahead of the Soviets in favor of a pissing contest with Canada. Where the hell is the logic there??

  • @xXwirelessXx : It was your 'boogeyman' Eisenhower who warned about the looming 'Military Industrial Complex' that lefties love to quote & predicate endless conspiracy theories on. It was the Eisenhower administration that axed the very advanced XF-108 program, an American interceptor design that exceeded the Arrow's capabilities in almost every conceivable way. And Eisenhower most certainly didn't bully anyone into dropping the CF-105 program...especially a prairie hard-ass like Diefenbaker.

  • My grandfather was an engineer who worked on her.

    RIP GrandDad :)

    The Arrow is engraved on his headstone

  • The canceling had to do with only one reason: NORAD

    The government had to choose between the aircraft OR the radar system in the north to track the soviets but couldn't afford both. History tells us that the soviet menace never manifested, thus all these radar ended up being useless in the end. If only we didn't get into NORAD...we would've had this awesome plane, and Avro would still make fighters, which would solve our little F-35 problem.

    NORAD is only an outdated cold war monument, anyway.

  • @anarchyXI>> "History tells us that the soviet menace never manifested, thus all these radar ended up being useless in the end."

    Um, the Arrow was being designed solely to defend against that very same menace. The radar network would have been necessary either way (or Soviet bombers would have been able to fly over parked Arrows ;)...

  • That is interesting! I was 16 when I managed a trip from Scarborough (when the Golden Mile was on the edge of the city) to Malton with a friend. We climbed the fence to get a good look at 201. We were awestruck I had already made up my mind I was going to fly that airplane. It didn't work out that way. Instead I flew the CF-104 in the nuclear strike role in Germany. That's life. I thoroughly enjoyed my stint in the RCAF. The Arrow is a beautiful design.

  • @notnick99 you are a very lucky man!!!! I juined the RCAF in 67 and I was 17 years old, I remember we still had the Chipmunk around but I neveer got the chance to try one did you? It make me mad to think about that lost opportunity that was the Avro Arrow. We could have gone soo far in that line.....

  • According to "Kennedy and Diefenbaker" by Knowlton Nash, the St. Laurent gov't before Diefenbaker had intended to scrap the Arrow because it was way over budget. They didn't do it because they lost the election. There were KGB moles at Avro, that's one reason they cut the planes up. According to "Learning to Love the Bomb" by Sean Maloney, the planes were cut up and all blueprints retrieved because some plans were for how to install the nuclear air-to-air MB-1 "Genie" rocket.

  • @synthfreakify: Wouldn't surprise me a bit. C.D. Howe, Laurent's 'Minister of Everything' conceded that the Arrow needed to be cancelled..after the Conservatives took power. Yes, the Genie and Falcon were to be the Arrow's armament after the Sparrow II/ASTRA system was dropped. Makes sense that any reference to them would be destroyed..especially if Soviet moles had infiltrated Avro.

  • Comment removed

  • Correction, 201.

    

  • Both Raynus1, and LeopoldPlumtree, surely you can concede that it was beautifully played by Canada, and that the Interceptor was designed to perform exactly as planned. I am still pissed at the world that 301 is not still out there.

    It truly was a beautiful design.

    Dan P

  • @nsla The Arrow was impressive and exceptionally beautiful. I'd never say otherwise. Of course, looks weren't vital to filling the Arrow's intended role, but even though it was never fully proven, I don't doubt it would have been a plenty capable aircraft had development continued.

  • @LeopoldPlumtree Point taken. Beautiful, but never proven. :) Still, to dream a dream, eh? Kinda like what James Dean, Jimi Hendrix, Marilyn Monroe, or JFK may have been. Always leave the audience wanting more. :)

  • Does anyone know which runway at YYZ the first flight took off from?

  • @Live2Race82: Runway 32 (now a taxiway).

  • The Internet is truly a remarkable resource.

    Tonight, by chance, I came across this video copy of a

    16mm. movie that I wrote and edited 52 years ago.

    "Flight Of The Arrow."

    At the time, I was employed as a scriptwriter for Avro Aircraft

    in Toronto. It was astonishing, and strangely emotional, for

    me to find this film again after all this time.

    -- Sidney Allinson,

    Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.

  • undisputed greatest airplane ever built

  • The Arrow was capable of Mach 2 even without the Iroquois engine installed. Imagine what it could have done with the Iroquois. My guess would be Mach 2.5, which would put it right up there with most of today's state-of-the-art aircraft. Not bad for a plane designed more than half a century ago. No wonder the Americans wanted it. When Avro ceased operations, our loss became NASA's and Great Britain's gain. Oh, well!

  • I am dumbfounded that among the Arrow, the Iroqouis and the Jetliner---none survived. All were outstanding products and did not deserve to be cut up to scrap.

  • @avro206 There is an Iroquois in the National Aeronautical Collection in Ottawa; along with the nose section and the wing tips of RL206

  • @bobcat188 --I was there a few years back, thanks. Very sad--it's just a ghost. Next stop the Toronto air museum---full sized Arrow replica!

  • Comment removed

  • What a sad story the Arrow was for the history of flight. Too bad.

  • It was a beautifull design and.

  • @buckbuckaroo1 Definbaker canceled the project and put 50 thousand people out of work!!! buck!

  • @Kmacster: Oh, waaaa. It was government-sponsored corporate welfare to begin with.

  • @buckbuckaroo1 I've been having a little fun digging around about it, and from what I know, it was misinformation, rising costs, and poor advice. This could be wrong, for all I know, but it's what I've got.

  • @Kmacster: If the Liberals, NDP, and BQ had their way, Canada wouldn't even have an effective air force. Guess you haven't been following the whole F-35 thing, have you?

    Comparing Avro Canada to NASA is like comparing RollerBlade to BMW.

  • Comment removed

  • @raynus1 the arrow was a liberal program canceled by the concervitive party lead by john definbaker, Avro was well on its way to being comparable to Nasa and at the time built a plane that others said was impossible. Your a know nothing simpleton get your facts stright and hey heres an idea.. watch the feature film `the arrow` might give you some insight into the topic. oh and we dont have an effective air force. or amry, or navy.

  • @Kmacster: If you think CBC's 'The Arrow' serves as accurate historical fact, you're more of an idiot than even your previous posts would suggest.

  • Bloody Russians Copied our Plane -.-

  • She was so beautiful, sleek and sexy. Such a crime what happened to this magnificent aircraft.

  • Comment removed

  • it looks normal now, imagine how futuristic it looked back then

  • @PhrostBack The US already had the F-106 which was capable of mach 2+. The SR-71 had two early-60s predecessors in the A-12 and YF-12 (also intended to be an interceptor like the Arrow). These were all mach 3+ aircraft. Flight testing for the Arrow started in 1958 (it wasn't made in 1953; the project was only beginning), which was limited to mach 1.98, though could conceivably have been better than mach 2. Your claim that the cancellation was more than internal has no real support I've seen.

  • @LeopoldPlumtree

    I can totally see what you're talking about with the 106. Had never actually heard of it before. Creepy similarities, though, especially in the cockpit layout! I think one hand was talking to the other!! Thanks for the info! Which of course begs the question...... what else was being shared? Did canada really have the upper hand on a Mach 2+ interceptor in the 50's? WTF??

  • Comment removed

  • Also I have watched the movie, and I watched it for what it was, A MOVIE. Projekt you probably also believe mummy and daddy didn't tuck you in enough at night too. You're a sad sad little man with penis envy that the U.S. didn't come up with the arrow first.

  • @PhrostBack That's not a very substantial rebuttal. Unless you're just trolling, would you care to provide more than sophomoric insults? The US did come up with an aircraft of the Arrow's class before the Arrow in the F-106. TheProjektcc wasn't slamming the Arrow. There have been many outlandish, unsupportable claims made about the CF-105. Pointing out that there have been other machines just as amazing isn't an insult to Arrow.

  • The Avro arrow was made from bacon and was fueled by syrup......Blaah Blaah....Canada is amazing and rapes everyone. Get over it America !

  • @TheThruster24

    America had very little to do with the cancellation of this plane. Look it up. It was all internal strife amongst the Canadians and only the Canadians.

  • during the flight it sounds like a german and a russian communicating on the radio..ha-ha...now THAT"S Canada for you

  • @PhrostBack It all sounds very anecdotal. Where does one have to "dig" for these records? What are the sources backing up the claim the US was behind the Arrow's cancellation? Why did the US aid in the Arrow's development if they were looking to kill the program?

  • @PhrostBack

    You're an idiot who beleives foolish myths. Canadians have all the right to be proud of their invention but not to the point where they make ridiculous claims. The threat of ballistic missiles and the decline of straight forward interceptors world wide, combined with the cost of development and production, and internal Canadian disagreements ended this plane.

    Go watch the film "there never was an arrow" trust me the last thing the US would do is cancel it.

  • @PhrostBack There was no "pissing contest" between Canada and the US. The Arrow was just one program and was of no threat to the US aerospace industry. Plenty of US aerospace projects have been cancelled just as the Arrow was, but without the fanciful claims of conspiracy. The Arrow was just another mach 2 aircraft developed at a time when there were a number of other mach 2 aircraft in service or under development in the UK, France and the US.

  • @LeopoldPlumtree

    so true the canadians have a right to be proud of their creation but it was one of many exotic mach 2 designs of the era to be scrapped and the Idea of america silencing it is ridiculous.

    There are plenty of occasions of the US purchasing foreign weapons systems. Ex( harrier jump jet) if this plane was as good as the hopeful Canadians had dreamed it would be, the last thing the US would try to do would be to end the program especially during the cold war.

  • Leave it to Diefienbaker to let the U.S. bully Canada into scrapping it back the 50's.

  • @PhrostBack There's no reason to believe Diefenbaker was bullied by the US into chopping the Arrow. There's no record of such a thing ever happening. The entire premise makes no sense; having another interceptor like the Arrow guarding the north pole would've benefited the US just as much as Canada.

  • @PhrostBack: Ridiculous Canadian Myth. Diefenbaker was anything but a pushover, and, save a warm relationship with Dwight Eisenhower, typically didn't care much for Americans. During the that era, it was the Liberals who tended to cozy up to US industry, not the Conservatives...that was long before the LPC turned into the rabid anti-american loonies they are today. Cost killed the CF-105 program. Cost and a misguided, worldwide, belief that the manned interceptor was obsolete.

  • @2010kian23 I second that opinion! :D

  • Arrow + RCAF March past :D

  • The whole thing was just a "proof-of-concept" for developing the American "Valkyrie", which was lift-plane for a CIA SCRAM-jet spyplane. The imagined "hop & pop" scenario of intercepting Soviet Mach 3 bombers at 70,000 was never going to happen because of the short range of supersonic aircraft. The "Arrow" program was to be cancelled before the first flight which is why the flight-simulator was rigged to portray an un-flyable aircraft. The Liberals squandered(in today's money $10B) for the US

  • MFU. The Liberals from St Laurent on have been giving away Canada for their own personal profit. Why do you think Canadians pay $100 billion a year in interest payments to American banks? Trudeau got a kick back from every billion paid out, the way Martin didn't pay taxes on his shipping company. Also, the 104 Starfighter could fly Mach 2.2, climb faster and fly further when the "Arrow" was on the drawing board. Your "Superplane" was no more advanced than the one the Argentines were working on.

  • @NormN354 If it was a "proof-of-concept" program, then why did the USAF offer to buy the planes off the production line and give them to the RCAF? Top officials in the USAF and Avro were on record as saying the offer was made. They wanted to keep the production line open. Between Avro and Canadair, some of the best work in advanced interceptors was being done north of the border.

  • @40thCapeRifles I've read a lot of "ArrowHead" propaganda and never found this claim. Get the "First Person Singular" progrram from the CBC. Lester Pearson says of the Arrow cancellation "At least it saved us(the Liberals) from having to do it,. It was too expensive". Any offer would have jumped on. The Canberra bomber and the Harrier fighter-bomber are the only planes the Americans ever bought from outsiders and then only out of immediate necessity.

  • @NormN354: Although not as spectacular in their design, large numbers of Canadian-built Noorduyn Norsemen, deHavilland DHC-2 Beavers, DHC-3 Otter, and DH-4 Caribou aircraft were also purchased by the US military, from WWII through the 1960's.