@TheThruster24 "Better than anything you could have considered at the time"? Doesn't that strike you as propagandistic? Are we to believe the Arrow was some magically superior work of alchemists and sorcerers known only to Avro Canada? There were other aircraft with comparable performance specs already flying by the time of Arrow's appearance (Mirage III, F-106, F-4, etc...). The Arrow was a "me too" project in the midst of several others, all aiming to fly faster and higher than before.
@the14u36 A CF-18 boasts better than 1:1 thrust-to-weight ratio with almost 9000lbs of useful load, something no flyable Arrow could claim, and an Iroquois-powered Arrow Mk2 could only (theoretically) do with a load of 5000lbs or less. An F-18 would rip a CF-105 to shreds...very quickly. Manouverability, avionics, a far better, stronger bird. Sidewinders, Sparrows, and a 20mm cannon would make an easy meal out of an Arrow. Most 1950's fighters had internal weapons bays. A-5 (1958) was FBW also
@banjer4u ... People mistake development costs with production costs .. final production costs of the MKII Arrows (RL206, 207...) Would have been the same as the price we paid for ageing aircraft from the US.
I'd like to know where banjer4u got his info since almost nothing is knowen about the avro areo aside from it's costs since all of the info about the avro are was DESTROYED along with whats knowen to be all of the aircraft. it was the fastest plane in the world and barely got a chance to strut it's stuff before a weak canadian gov. scraped it. bowing to the americans and killing any hope canada had of getting into the military aircraft sceen. shame because we could have made billions on it
@UglyJoe2007 Direct me to one shred of credible proof that the USA felt 'threatened' by the CF-105 or had anything to do with its cancellation. Just one.
Don't you Ontario liberal-types ever tire of blaming the USA for Canadian failures? Avro dropped the ball & Diefenbaker cut off funding. The Arrow program, budgeted at $100M by the St. Laurent government, ended up being 340% over-budget (cont'd)
@ShayisWY 1) I don't live any where even close to Ontario nor would i ever want to. 2) Nice trolling dude what do you do man just troll around youtrube making comments on posts others have made OVER 8 MONTHS ago. Find something better to do with your life other then being an annoying little web troll.
@UglyJoe2007 Well then please enlighten us and detail how I am wrong and provide us your source that the Arrow had the speed record for it's time? Chances are that you will just keep living the lie the Arrow was the fastroest plan in it's day and that it was more advanced than anything out there for its time. Or the lie the US forced the cancellation when no evidence exists to support this.....perhpas it had to do with the fact they were very helpfull partners with the Av
@UglyJoe2007 (cont'd) producing only five flyable airframes and had yet to fit or test a weapons system. When it did, it ended up being an off-the-shelf US Hughes system that wouldn't be fully installed until March/April of 1959. Canada's much-touted interceptor went to its grave without firing a shot or even carrying a missile. Sad, really. But people like you continue to perpetuate myths and lies, claiming the CF-105 was something that it wasn't. It was NOT a record-breaker. (cont'd)
As flown, it was no faster than contemporary US and British designs, and flew no higher. HAD it flown with the PS-13 engines, there is a high degree of probability that it would've (briefly) held speed, ROC, and possibly altitude records. It didn't, so those numbers remain purely hypothetical. Your zeal to blame the USA for the Arrow's cancellation makes no sense at all. From the outset, America was a helpful party in the Arrow's development. They provided wind tunnels for (cont'd)
(cont'd) aerodynamic testing, provided the J-75 engines for the first five MkI Arrows, provided the B-47 Stratojet bomber for flight-testing of the PS-13 Iroquois, provided the Hughes MX-1179 radar system, the AIM-4 Falcons, and the AIR-2 Genies that would've eventually found their way into production CF-105 Mk II's. When the program began to falter, the USA immediately offered to take on some of the weapons system testing to alleviate Avro's financial burdon. (cont'd)
cont'd) Upon cancellation, the USA was very concerned about the air defense 'deficit' created by the Arrow's demise, hence the urgent request that Canada adopt the Bomarc SAM and later, the CF-101B. Had the USA wanted or feared Canadian technology, they would've adopted Arrow features into future combat aircraft. They didn't. Their F-106 interceptor (that flew 2 years before the CF-105) did precicely what the Arrow was intended for, until its own retirement in the late 1980's.
Gee banjer4u is a one man propaganda team. For those who want to know about the Arrow, just read the books. CD Howe got a gold medal from the US aircraft industry and he didn't get if for nothing.
I wouldn't say that it flew without faults, one of them being, it was over $200,000,000 over budget. When the dust finally setlled we had pumped $470,000,000 into this leviathon. By comparison we replaced it with 66 CF-101s at 1/4 the cost of the Arrows development. The CF-101 was simply a plane beter suited to Canadas needs in almost every respect. It was more manouverable, climbed faster, had much farther range, and was almost as fast. Its aquisition likely saved some of our pilots lives.
the f-106 needed constant upgrades, it wasnt what they said it would be when it first came out.. not to mention it killed 12 pilots who tried to eject. The arrows first flight flew as promised without any faults. The first pilots only complaint was that it didnt have a clock in the cock pit
Most combat aircraft need constant upgrades. The CF-105 was no exception. Engines, fire control system, missiles...all would have needed improvement (and plans were in the works for all of these things).
The F-106 was as fast as the proposed Arrow II, carried the same armament, a very similar fire control system, and served well into the eighties.
Two CF--105's were significantly damaged during the test program. One from a landing gear failure that resulted in Aircraft 201 veering off the runway in a skid, resulting in all three gear legs collapsing.
Aircraft 202 had an AFS failure that resulted in a wheel brake lock-up. It too skidded off the runway and suffered a main gear collapse.
It was right in the green but you know how they love to act down south. I've been following this bird ever since it was mentioned (probably back in 2003 when in school). Went from many different sites, movies, and such and all say the same damn thing about the Americans being the evil villains crushing a Canadian masterpiece.
CBC's 'The Arrow' doesn't count as reliable information. Most internet sites follow that (incorrect) theory. It was $230M overbudget ($1.7B in today's numbers). The original budget was $100m. It's weapons system required extensive upgrading, which in turn required massive re-tooling of the forward fuselage and flight management systems. It had no foreign orders. The government of the day refused to pour any more money into it.
@raynus1 You seem to be one of the few fellow Canadians aquainted with the truth about the Arrow. True story is even worse than you think. On top of the $400,000,000 we had already spent on development, Avro wanted the government to lock into a contract for(get this) $3,750,000 a plane even though they had never tested the Orenda engine, and had no functional weapons system as of yet. You can view original documents inculding the leter to the PM. by googling Avro Arrow information.
Several years ago, a former aide to Diefenbaker made the stunning revalation that it was in fact senior management at Avro that ordered the prototypes & blueprints destroyed, not the DND. Unfortunately, Diefenbaker has been pinned with the Arrow's demise, simply because he refused to throw limitless amounts taxpayer dollars at it. Shame.
The Americans had several already-flying designs that equalled or exceeded the Arrow's capabilities. For example, the F-106 was already operational in 1959. It was armed with the same Falcon/Genie system as was to be used by the CF-105. It was Mach 2.3 capable. The F-4 Phantom (then called the F-110) first flew in 1958...the same year as the Arrow. The A-5 Vigilante first flew in 1958 as well...it was even more advanced than the Arrow (HUD, Digital avionics, Fly-by-wire, Mach 2 capable).
To say that the USA crushed the Arrow is unsubstantiated hyperbole typical of the anti-American sentiment so childishly evident in parts of east-central Canada. The reality is that the USA had little to fear from the Arrow's technology, other than perhaps Soviet espionage (which is suggested to have occurred under Avro's watch). It's a shame it was cancelled...but to outright blame Diefenbaker or the Americans (whom, incidentally, he disliked immensely) is historically inaccurate and very wrong.
Their is still pieces of the Avro Arrow in the Ancaster Ontario Canada scrap yard were they salvaged it all but its nearly impossible to find them ive tried my self
It Failed Due to American Pressure, and the so called bomark missle system which we purchased from the yanks that was a disaster, thanks to Deifenbaker, what a flunky and liveing proof who owns canada. My Uncle cried, He was just an electrical contractor, not about looseing the job, But the Dream.
If they had continued it would have been bought by everyone and the US couldn't allow that. Technologie in this aircraft wasn't comon standard till the 80s and 90s : internal weapons bay, mach 2 capabilty, advanced fire control system and much more... you cannot imagine how different the country would be if this went to the market, we may have become a worl leader in technologie but the goverment stuck their nose in and ruined the dream.
Were you brainwashed by American propoganda. The jet is better than anything you could have considered at the time. It's not even worth a fight.
TheThruster24 1 year ago
@TheThruster24 "Better than anything you could have considered at the time"? Doesn't that strike you as propagandistic? Are we to believe the Arrow was some magically superior work of alchemists and sorcerers known only to Avro Canada? There were other aircraft with comparable performance specs already flying by the time of Arrow's appearance (Mirage III, F-106, F-4, etc...). The Arrow was a "me too" project in the midst of several others, all aiming to fly faster and higher than before.
LeopoldPlumtree 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheThruster24: "The jet is better than anything you could have considered at the time" Really? How so?
raynus1 1 year ago
Say what you want. This was the best jet ever made. and if it was still flying, would fly circles around the f18 super hornet.
the14u36 1 year ago
@the14u36 "Best jet ever made" by what measure(s)?
LeopoldPlumtree 1 year ago
@the14u36 A CF-18 boasts better than 1:1 thrust-to-weight ratio with almost 9000lbs of useful load, something no flyable Arrow could claim, and an Iroquois-powered Arrow Mk2 could only (theoretically) do with a load of 5000lbs or less. An F-18 would rip a CF-105 to shreds...very quickly. Manouverability, avionics, a far better, stronger bird. Sidewinders, Sparrows, and a 20mm cannon would make an easy meal out of an Arrow. Most 1950's fighters had internal weapons bays. A-5 (1958) was FBW also
ShayisWY 1 year ago
@ShayisWY Thanks again to raymus1 for the information
ShayisWY 1 year ago
Avro "Aero" - so much for Canada's education system.
It's ARROW dear boy.
Gruntol5 1 year ago 8
@Gruntol5 lol!
inventionmaker99 1 year ago
@banjer4u ... People mistake development costs with production costs .. final production costs of the MKII Arrows (RL206, 207...) Would have been the same as the price we paid for ageing aircraft from the US.
mikeluvs2fly 1 year ago
I'd like to know where banjer4u got his info since almost nothing is knowen about the avro areo aside from it's costs since all of the info about the avro are was DESTROYED along with whats knowen to be all of the aircraft. it was the fastest plane in the world and barely got a chance to strut it's stuff before a weak canadian gov. scraped it. bowing to the americans and killing any hope canada had of getting into the military aircraft sceen. shame because we could have made billions on it
UglyJoe2007 2 years ago
@UglyJoe2007 Direct me to one shred of credible proof that the USA felt 'threatened' by the CF-105 or had anything to do with its cancellation. Just one.
Don't you Ontario liberal-types ever tire of blaming the USA for Canadian failures? Avro dropped the ball & Diefenbaker cut off funding. The Arrow program, budgeted at $100M by the St. Laurent government, ended up being 340% over-budget (cont'd)
ShayisWY 1 year ago
@ShayisWY 1) I don't live any where even close to Ontario nor would i ever want to. 2) Nice trolling dude what do you do man just troll around youtrube making comments on posts others have made OVER 8 MONTHS ago. Find something better to do with your life other then being an annoying little web troll.
UglyJoe2007 1 year ago
@UglyJoe2007 Well then please enlighten us and detail how I am wrong and provide us your source that the Arrow had the speed record for it's time? Chances are that you will just keep living the lie the Arrow was the fastroest plan in it's day and that it was more advanced than anything out there for its time. Or the lie the US forced the cancellation when no evidence exists to support this.....perhpas it had to do with the fact they were very helpfull partners with the Av
ShayisWY 1 year ago
@UglyJoe2007 (cont'd) producing only five flyable airframes and had yet to fit or test a weapons system. When it did, it ended up being an off-the-shelf US Hughes system that wouldn't be fully installed until March/April of 1959. Canada's much-touted interceptor went to its grave without firing a shot or even carrying a missile. Sad, really. But people like you continue to perpetuate myths and lies, claiming the CF-105 was something that it wasn't. It was NOT a record-breaker. (cont'd)
ShayisWY 1 year ago
As flown, it was no faster than contemporary US and British designs, and flew no higher. HAD it flown with the PS-13 engines, there is a high degree of probability that it would've (briefly) held speed, ROC, and possibly altitude records. It didn't, so those numbers remain purely hypothetical. Your zeal to blame the USA for the Arrow's cancellation makes no sense at all. From the outset, America was a helpful party in the Arrow's development. They provided wind tunnels for (cont'd)
ShayisWY 1 year ago
(cont'd) aerodynamic testing, provided the J-75 engines for the first five MkI Arrows, provided the B-47 Stratojet bomber for flight-testing of the PS-13 Iroquois, provided the Hughes MX-1179 radar system, the AIM-4 Falcons, and the AIR-2 Genies that would've eventually found their way into production CF-105 Mk II's. When the program began to falter, the USA immediately offered to take on some of the weapons system testing to alleviate Avro's financial burdon. (cont'd)
ShayisWY 1 year ago
cont'd) Upon cancellation, the USA was very concerned about the air defense 'deficit' created by the Arrow's demise, hence the urgent request that Canada adopt the Bomarc SAM and later, the CF-101B. Had the USA wanted or feared Canadian technology, they would've adopted Arrow features into future combat aircraft. They didn't. Their F-106 interceptor (that flew 2 years before the CF-105) did precicely what the Arrow was intended for, until its own retirement in the late 1980's.
ShayisWY 1 year ago
@ShayisWY I have to thank Raynus1 for the highly usefull information
ShayisWY 1 year ago
Gee banjer4u is a one man propaganda team. For those who want to know about the Arrow, just read the books. CD Howe got a gold medal from the US aircraft industry and he didn't get if for nothing.
Gbrltr 2 years ago
I wouldn't say that it flew without faults, one of them being, it was over $200,000,000 over budget. When the dust finally setlled we had pumped $470,000,000 into this leviathon. By comparison we replaced it with 66 CF-101s at 1/4 the cost of the Arrows development. The CF-101 was simply a plane beter suited to Canadas needs in almost every respect. It was more manouverable, climbed faster, had much farther range, and was almost as fast. Its aquisition likely saved some of our pilots lives.
banjer4u 2 years ago
the f-106 needed constant upgrades, it wasnt what they said it would be when it first came out.. not to mention it killed 12 pilots who tried to eject. The arrows first flight flew as promised without any faults. The first pilots only complaint was that it didnt have a clock in the cock pit
Trevor10 2 years ago
Most combat aircraft need constant upgrades. The CF-105 was no exception. Engines, fire control system, missiles...all would have needed improvement (and plans were in the works for all of these things).
The F-106 was as fast as the proposed Arrow II, carried the same armament, a very similar fire control system, and served well into the eighties.
raynus1 2 years ago
The Arrow had a couple of problems as well.
Two CF--105's were significantly damaged during the test program. One from a landing gear failure that resulted in Aircraft 201 veering off the runway in a skid, resulting in all three gear legs collapsing.
Aircraft 202 had an AFS failure that resulted in a wheel brake lock-up. It too skidded off the runway and suffered a main gear collapse.
raynus1 2 years ago
It was dropped because it was way over budget and suffered serious systems shortcomings that would've put it even further into the red.
It had little, if anything, to do with Americans...they had aircraft equally as advanced (some designs even more so).
Before posting nonsense, do some research on this bird.
raynus1 2 years ago
I did and its vice versa of what you just said ^
It was right in the green but you know how they love to act down south. I've been following this bird ever since it was mentioned (probably back in 2003 when in school). Went from many different sites, movies, and such and all say the same damn thing about the Americans being the evil villains crushing a Canadian masterpiece.
Eurosubstance 2 years ago
CBC's 'The Arrow' doesn't count as reliable information. Most internet sites follow that (incorrect) theory. It was $230M overbudget ($1.7B in today's numbers). The original budget was $100m. It's weapons system required extensive upgrading, which in turn required massive re-tooling of the forward fuselage and flight management systems. It had no foreign orders. The government of the day refused to pour any more money into it.
raynus1 2 years ago
@raynus1 You seem to be one of the few fellow Canadians aquainted with the truth about the Arrow. True story is even worse than you think. On top of the $400,000,000 we had already spent on development, Avro wanted the government to lock into a contract for(get this) $3,750,000 a plane even though they had never tested the Orenda engine, and had no functional weapons system as of yet. You can view original documents inculding the leter to the PM. by googling Avro Arrow information.
banjer4u 2 years ago
I think it was even worse than that.
Once operational, the MkII would have had a fly-away cost approaching $12M/ aircraft...in 1961-62. I'll attempt to re-acquire the source & post.
raynus1 2 years ago
Several years ago, a former aide to Diefenbaker made the stunning revalation that it was in fact senior management at Avro that ordered the prototypes & blueprints destroyed, not the DND. Unfortunately, Diefenbaker has been pinned with the Arrow's demise, simply because he refused to throw limitless amounts taxpayer dollars at it. Shame.
raynus1 2 years ago
The Americans had several already-flying designs that equalled or exceeded the Arrow's capabilities. For example, the F-106 was already operational in 1959. It was armed with the same Falcon/Genie system as was to be used by the CF-105. It was Mach 2.3 capable. The F-4 Phantom (then called the F-110) first flew in 1958...the same year as the Arrow. The A-5 Vigilante first flew in 1958 as well...it was even more advanced than the Arrow (HUD, Digital avionics, Fly-by-wire, Mach 2 capable).
raynus1 2 years ago
To say that the USA crushed the Arrow is unsubstantiated hyperbole typical of the anti-American sentiment so childishly evident in parts of east-central Canada. The reality is that the USA had little to fear from the Arrow's technology, other than perhaps Soviet espionage (which is suggested to have occurred under Avro's watch). It's a shame it was cancelled...but to outright blame Diefenbaker or the Americans (whom, incidentally, he disliked immensely) is historically inaccurate and very wrong.
raynus1 2 years ago
damn americans.
65476546 3 years ago 2
Their is still pieces of the Avro Arrow in the Ancaster Ontario Canada scrap yard were they salvaged it all but its nearly impossible to find them ive tried my self
shaneedwardsimmons 4 years ago
It Failed Due to American Pressure, and the so called bomark missle system which we purchased from the yanks that was a disaster, thanks to Deifenbaker, what a flunky and liveing proof who owns canada. My Uncle cried, He was just an electrical contractor, not about looseing the job, But the Dream.
cycimian 4 years ago
If they had continued it would have been bought by everyone and the US couldn't allow that. Technologie in this aircraft wasn't comon standard till the 80s and 90s : internal weapons bay, mach 2 capabilty, advanced fire control system and much more... you cannot imagine how different the country would be if this went to the market, we may have become a worl leader in technologie but the goverment stuck their nose in and ruined the dream.
aircraftwiz 3 years ago
Cool, man!
computerdude28 5 years ago
Nice clip of a rare plane. However, it is an Avro Arrow, the ill-fated Canadian counterpart to the TSR2.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Arrow
royzee 5 years ago