Canadian Government Urged to Restart Avro Arrow Project
52 replies, posted
[img]http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/photos/2009/02/20/tech-cp-avro-arrow-banner.jpg[/img]
[quote]The federal government is being urged to reach back in history for a made-in-Canada solution to its fighter jet woes by resurrecting the legendary but aborted Avro Arrow interceptor to serve as this country’s next war plane.
It may seem a far-fetched idea but backers – including retired major-general Lewis MacKenzie – insist that a revised version of the 1950s jet, with an upgraded engine, would outperform Ottawa’s preferred choice on several important counts.
The revive-the-Avro campaign is the latest bizarre twist in a military purchase that’s gone awry on the Harper government’s watch.
The Conservatives, embarrassed by the rising costs of the U.S.-designed F-35 Lightning jets that the Royal Canadian Air Force sorely wants to purchase, are currently rethinking options for a next generation fighter.
Mr. MacKenzie and a group of design, engineering and logistics experts are pressing Ottawa to consider the long-discarded CF-105 plane.
The Diefenbaker government famously cancelled the Avro Arrow project in 1959, ending work on a Canadian aerospace marvel that supporters called the most advanced aircraft of its time.
Many in the Canadian aviation community never forgave Ottawa for scrapping the sleek, white plane, particularly after the government went on to buy U.S.-made Voodoo jets instead.
[B]Proponents of reviving the Arrow are shopping a proposal around Ottawa that promises 120 planes for $9-billion, a number that just happens to be the government’s original cost estimate for the increasingly expensive F-35 jets.[/B]
[B]Each new CF-105, they say, would cost $73-million to produce[/B] – a homegrown solution that would also create a domestic supersonic jet manufacturing capacity.
It’s hard to imagine a 53-year-old plane could outperform Lockheed Martin’s costly new F-35 fighter-bomber, but those behind a new CF-105 say their jet would pack a 21st-century punch.
[B]Mr. MacKenzie said the proposal he’s put before the Harper government is for a made-in-Canada plane that could fly twice as fast as the F-35 and up to 20,000 feet higher. It would feature an updated Mark III engine and its range would be two to three times that of the F-35.[/B]
The former soldier, an unpaid supporter of the project, has run the pitch by Defence Minister Peter MacKay, senior defence officials as well as the Prime Minister’s Office and Julian Fantino when he was associate defence minister in charge of procurement.
Mr. MacKenzie said he’s met resistance in Ottawa, where officials insist they want the stealth capabilities that the F-35 can provide. Supporters of bringing back the CF-105, however, say the updated Arrow’s capabilities would make up for this because it could fly so much higher and faster.
One senior government source who’s reviewed the Avro backers’ pitch expressed deep skepticism about their business plan.
“[It] didn’t make a lot of sense to me,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Marc Bourdeau, a former Canadian public servant spearheading the CF-105 proposal, rejects the notion this is a pipe dream.
“This is not an exercise in nostalgia. This is an exercise in defence and industrial policy for Canada.”
Mr. MacKenzie said the new CF-105 would look like its predecessor but comparisons would end there.
“We are talking about a basic design that was tested and proven .… It will be recognizable in shape but it won’t be recognizable beyond that, given new technology and materials.”
Mr. MacKenzie, who is disappointed by the F-35, and in particular its capacity to intercept threats, said backers are taking their proposal to Canadians to see if there’s public pressure that can be brought to bear on the Harper government.[/quote]
[url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/will-legendary-avro-arrow-make-lazarus-like-return/article4530724/]**SOURCE**[/url]
I want to believe something as massive as the Arrow could ever take to the sky for full service today.
Will probably never happen, but it's a pretty swell idea.
CF-18s are amazing, why spend so much on the F-35 or this F-105?
If the proof is in the pudding then I'm all for it. I'd love to see the (new) Avro Arrow make it's ACTUAL debut in my lifetime
This'd be eons better than the F-35.
[QUOTE=Disotrtion;37608561]CF-18s are amazing, why spend so much on the F-35 or this F-105?[/QUOTE]
Because the CF-18 planes are outdated compared to newer fifth-generation aircraft; and plus, the ones we currently have are under maintenance a lot of the time too, with many problems because of their age (I was in CFB Bagotville where they had many CF-18s).
I really hope that they look into kickstarting the CF-105 project again. It would greatly benefit the RCAF... if the price is right.
[QUOTE=Disotrtion;37608561]CF-18s are amazing, why spend so much on the F-35 or this F-105?[/QUOTE]
They're aging. It'd make more sense to retire them and go with something new. That'd save quite a bit of money on maintenance of the CF-18s alone.
I would absolutely love to see an Arrow take to the skies ones again. My grandfather worked on the final assembly line when the project was cut back in 1959. He said it was the darkest day in the history of aviation in Canada, and I wholeheartedly agree.
Wouldn't a 50s airframe be a bit outdated even with all of those modern avionics gubbins and engines?
[QUOTE=Apache249;37608824]Wouldn't a 50s airframe be a bit outdated even with all of those modern avionics gubbins and engines?[/QUOTE]
I'd imagine they'd have some changes to the airframe.
Twice as many planes for much less, yeah why not? I mean, this being a military contract I'm sure costs will go up but, it couldn't be as bad as the F35.
[QUOTE=Disotrtion;37608561]CF-18s are amazing, why spend so much on the F-35 or this F-105?[/QUOTE]
Because their life is running out. Planes can only fly so long before developing problems (cracks fractures) in their airframes. While in normal airplanes this can be somewhat tolerated, in fighter aircraft capable of high performance and forces, it is not the case.
When they reach their limit one of two things has to happen.
A) Expensive repairs on planes that are likely becoming older and will need replacement before long.
B) Buying new planes.
On the topic of the design, I imagine while it would look somewhat different, it would look like a cross between the 105 and a 5th/4.5 generation fight
The original post is lacking the proper amount of patriotism.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-98Jg_4p_O8[/media]
[QUOTE=Apache249;37608824]Wouldn't a 50s airframe be a bit outdated even with all of those modern avionics gubbins and engines?[/QUOTE]
It's not as outdated as one would think. Here is a chart that I made.
[TABLE="width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]CF-35[/TD]
[TD]CF-105[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Cruise Speed[/TD]
[TD]Mach 1.1[/TD]
[TD]Mach 0.91[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Max Speed[/TD]
[TD]Mach 1.6+ (tested to 1.61)[/TD]
[TD]Mach 2+[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Thrust (dry)[/TD]
[TD]28000[/TD]
[TD]25000[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Thrust with Afterburner[/TD]
[TD]43000[/TD]
[TD]47000[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Thrust to Weight[/TD]
[TD]0.87[/TD]
[TD]0.95[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
The Avro Arrow blew all fighter jets out of the water at the time, and if we had one, could still compete amongst the world's fighter fleets. If the plane was rebuilt today, the plane would have a large amount of composites, replacing part's of it's aluminium body, and a larger engine, increasing thrust to weight, and decreasing fuel consumption.
Exactly, the F-35s are a waste of money, we'll never use them to their full potential anyways. We just need a plane that can full fill the role of what ever our F-18s are doing.
the avro arrow, if it was completed, would be able to compete with even some 5th gen fighters I think, even without revision, it was really an incredible aircraft
[QUOTE=viperfan7;37609607]the avro arrow, if it was completed, would be able to compete with even some 5th gen fighters I think, even without revision, it was really an incredible aircraft[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't go that far, but for its time it was quite an advanced craft.
[QUOTE=viperfan7;37609607]the avro arrow, if it was completed, would be able to compete with even some 5th gen fighters I think, even without revision, it was really an incredible aircraft[/QUOTE]
No, it would diffidently would need some revision.
The F-35 project is an abomination. What is worse is that it is costing so much that they are cutting troop levels to compensate for it. I think it is a disgusting waste of money.
[QUOTE=OogalaBoogal;37609440]It's not as outdated as one would think. Here is a chart that I made.
[TABLE="width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]CF-35[/TD]
[TD]CF-105[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Cruise Speed[/TD]
[TD]Mach 1.1[/TD]
[TD]Mach 0.91[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Max Speed[/TD]
[TD]Mach 1.6+ (tested to 1.61)[/TD]
[TD]Mach 2+[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Thrust (dry)[/TD]
[TD]28000[/TD]
[TD]25000[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Thrust with Afterburner[/TD]
[TD]43000[/TD]
[TD]47000[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Thrust to Weight[/TD]
[TD]0.87[/TD]
[TD]0.95[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
The Avro Arrow blew all fighter jets out of the water at the time, and if we had one, could still compete amongst the world's fighter fleets. If the plane was rebuilt today, the plane would have a large amount of composites, replacing part's of it's aluminium body, and a larger engine, increasing thrust to weight, and decreasing fuel consumption.[/QUOTE]
But as we've learned, brute force and going fast don't mean shit if you can't maneuver. In its current form, the wing loading of the jet is probably very high, which leads to poor maneuverability.
[QUOTE=SKEEA;37609732]The F-35 project is an abomination. What is worse is that it is costing so much that they are cutting troop levels to compensate for it. I think it is a disgusting waste of money.[/QUOTE]
F-22s are great. We really don't need the F-35.
[QUOTE=SKEEA;37609732]The F-35 project is an abomination. What is worse is that it is costing so much that they are cutting troop levels to compensate for it. I think it is a disgusting waste of money.[/QUOTE]
Plus it looks ugly. Who wants an ugly plane?
I think the F-35 only looks good from certain angles
Now the F-22, that is a sexy plane.
If we had to get a stealth fighter, then the F-22 would be the best choice over the F-35.
It isn't stealth. So its speed is pointless. Unless it can outrun an S-400 or a sidewinder, it's fairly useless for that role.
F-22 has too many maintenance issues and would also cost a fortune.
[QUOTE=Tuskin;37609789]I think the F-35 only looks good from certain angles
Now the F-22, that is a sexy plane.[/QUOTE]
Won't help us Canadians. The F-22 is for American use only. Same with many pieces of radar and equipment from the American version of the F35.
[editline]10th September 2012[/editline]
[video=youtube;PEeaomG32Dc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEeaomG32Dc[/video]
And this happened too
[IMG]http://fi.somethingawful.com/images/smilies/emot-canada.gif[/IMG]
If this project continued during World War 2, it would have been one of the fastest jets ever at the time. But nope, the project had to be canceled.
[QUOTE=garychencool;37610611][B]If this project continued during World War 2[/B], it would have been one of the fastest jets ever at the time. But nope, the project had to be canceled.[/QUOTE]
What?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.