Avro Arrow makes a return to museum

[Barry N]

The cancellation of the Avro Arrow 50 years ago has been described as a Canadian tragedy.

For Alan Jackson, it was a personal one.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/life/...829/story.html

[Jeff]

at the Wetaskiwin Reynolds museum...

[Chmilz]

I better check this out before it's gone again. Makes me both proud and sad to know we created something 20 years ahead of its time, and then scrapped it.

[Edmontonfan]

That's one sleek looking machine!

[Thomas Hinderks]

The AVRO Arrow....

1958 Flight tests

- Mach 1.98 (times the speed of sound) on the underpowered J-57 engines
(Iroquios would have added 30% more power starting in #206)
- 50,000 ft ASL
- 2g turn at Mach 1 and maintain altitude

Technically
- Fly by wire
- computer controlled
- On board target control computer system
- Inboard weapons storage
- Trans Northern unrefueled range

Combine the (2) and you get the F-22 Raptor....45 years earlier

Damn

[IKAN104]

Damn is right. Probably the single biggest mistake in Canadian history. It would have been an entirely different country. If that program had been allowed to survive and thrive, Canada would've been sending rockets into space instead of hitching rides on American rockets.

I still don't understand what he (Diefenbaker) was smoking. Take your country's greatest source of pride and flush it down the drain. Brilliant.

[Thomas Hinderks]

IKAN104

As much as I love the Arrow the bigger mistake happened about 8 years earlier when AVRO was forced to shelve the Jetliner.

Canada had the first practical, certified and ready to operate Jet Airliner, in size, range and scope of performance it was the 737 of its day. On the shelf ready to rock, when Trans Canada Airlines (now Air Canada) refused to follow up on purchasing it Howard Hughes trailed it for several monthes in the USA and wanted the license to build it at Hughes Aircraft, this would have made his Trans World Airways the first Jet Airline operator. The Canadian Government of the day blocked it, forced the return of the aircraft and put it under 24hr guard until it was dismantled.

Just think, we would have been the leader in Jet Airlines....almost 60 years ago.

The Arrow was just more of the same...higher level of technology but killed due to external political pressures and small minded thinking.

First practical Domestic Jet Airliner/Highest technology fighter of the era....theres a trend here.
Tom

[Sonic Death Monkey]

The Avro Arrow has been the subject of many conspiracy theories, mostly involving the American military-industrial complex quashing a competitor.

[Thomas Hinderks]

The Americans were a part, so was Great Britain...then Canada provided it's own share of politics.

Seems we repeat our Aerospace mistakes
- Jetliner
- Arrow
- CL-84

Tom

[IKAN104]

Didn't even know about the jetliner. Very interesting.

[dbegin]

We posted a bunch of pictures of the finished model at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nait/se...7621117581159/
and of the process at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nait/se...7618941407059/

We'll also have a video on our YouTube channel in August telling the story of this model. www.youtube.com/techlifemag

I haven't been out to see the model myself but I know the entire NAIT team was extremely proud to put in the 500 volunteer hours to make this happen. I too am looking forward to see it in person.

Diane Begin
NAIT Corporate communications

[Jeff]

Originally Posted by IKAN104

Damn is right. Probably the single biggest mistake in Canadian history. It would have been an entirely different country. If that program had been allowed to survive and thrive, Canada would've been sending rockets into space instead of hitching rides on American rockets.

I still don't understand what he (Diefenbaker) was smoking. Take your country's greatest source of pride and flush it down the drain. Brilliant.

apparently, Conservative governments and technology pursuits don't mix well. Look no further than the Harper government bent on squashing the Maple Leaf reactor, selling off AECL... and making Canada dependent on foreign countries for our own medical isotope needs.

[Thomas Hinderks]

Canadian Governments and technology pursuits don't mix well

Liberals killed

the Jetliner
the CL-84
the Bras D'or

Canadian failing that crosses party lines

Tom

[Jeff]

Originally Posted by Jeff

apparently, Conservative governments and technology pursuits don't mix well. Look no further than the Harper government bent on squashing the Maple Leaf reactor, selling off AECL... and making Canada dependent on foreign countries for our own medical isotope needs.

Re: Jetliner --- bloody hell! This ‘failure/cancellation’ is directly attributed to Conservative Diefenbaker’s “Minister of Everything”… C.D. Howe. Oh my! How is the ‘failure/cancellation’ of the C102 Avro Jetliner attached to a Liberal government?

Re: CL-84 --- How is the CL-84 ‘failure/cancellation’ attached to a Liberal government? Canadair was unsuccessful in securing any contracts for the CL-84 – anywhere. The history I read says the U.S./Pentagon active testing of the CL-84 proved that the U.S. just wasn’t interested in the CL-84… nor were the Brits, the Germans, the Dutch, the Italians or Scandinavian countries that were approached. If your ire associates with the eventual 1976 General Dynamics sale of the struggling Canadair sub-division to the Canadian government, and the eventual sale of Canadair (to Bombardier)… that eventual sale was on Conservative Mulroney’s watch.

Re: Bras d’Or --- this linked succinct article relates the internal dynamics at play within the Canadian Navy… this was not a political decision... Trials and Tribulations: An Examination of the Decision to Terminate the FHE 400 Hydrofoil Project ... So, again, how is the Bras d’Or hydrofoil ‘failure/cancellation’ attached to a Liberal government?

Score: Historian Jeff: 3 out of 3

[Thomas Hinderks]

CD Howe (Minister of Everything) was part of the St Laurent Liberal Government which in the end was displaced by the Conservative Diefenbaker Government.

Jet Liner....Liberal
Arrow....... Conservative

CL-84...Canada had pursued the CL-84 as a replacement for a series of its helicopters and Search and Rescue aircraft. Changed its mind, program canceled.

Pearson...Liberal Government

Bra d'or... Trudeau government...plain and simple.

Books often carry more detail than quick links on the net

Which proves stupidity crosses party lines.

Tom

[Jeff]

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

CD Howe (Minister of Everything) was part of the St Laurent Liberal Government which in the end was displaced by the Conservative Diefenbaker Government.

Jet Liner....Liberal
Arrow....... Conservative

CL-84...Canada had pursued the CL-84 as a replacement for a series of its helicopters and Search and Rescue aircraft. Changed its mind, program canceled.

Pearson...Liberal Government

Bra d'or... Trudeau government...plain and simple.

Books often carry more detail than quick links on the net

Which proves stupidity crosses party lines.

So I’m not on your ignore list – after all… and I got your attention with the Howe reference. But really, one can hardly fault any government because the large aviation companies opted to hold out for the Boeing 707 rather than get behind the Jetliner… as well… it wasn’t the government of the day that caused TCA to back out of its association with the Jetliner, opting instead to purchase British Viscount aircraft. In the end, surpassed by Boeing and with no sales….. given questionable decisions by Avro itself and with timing implications… the project, at prototype stage was, perhaps, justifiably canceled.

The 1974 cancellation of the CL-84 … if attributed to a Liberal government… was the Trudeau government, not the Pearson government. Again, a company that couldn’t secure contracts – this time, Canadair… even with the U.S./Pentagon, and British significantly involved in testing the CL-84, those testing results did not realize production contracts. If the decision factor you’re referring to reflected the 1971 Defense White Paper, that’s a consideration well ahead of its time and one very timely today; i.e. a focus on “sovereignty protection and internal security versus bilateral Canada-U.S. continental defense, NATO, and UN peacekeeping”. That policy change/shift was a consideration but ultimately not the cause of the CL-84’s cancellation… again, no secured contracts… no viable product/future.

Again, the Bras d’Or was not a political influenced decision regardless of the government of the day. The linked article I provided is hardly a ‘quick link’… it’s a definitive accounting available through the Canadian Nautical Research Society’s website showing the Canadian Navy itself was predisposed to canceling the Bras d’Or initiative.

[FrozenOrca]

Don't backpedal too hard Jeff.

[Thomas Hinderks]

Jeff
" So I’m not on your ignore list – after all… and I got your attention with the Howe reference."

No but I'll fix that after this post.

"But really, one can hardly fault any government because the large aviation companies opted to hold out for the Boeing 707 rather than get behind the Jetliner… as well… it wasn’t the government of the day that caused TCA to back out of its association with the Jetliner, opting instead to purchase British Viscount aircraft. In the end, surpassed by Boeing and with no sales….. given questionable decisions by Avro itself and with timing implications… the project, at prototype stage was, perhaps, justifiably canceled."

You really should try reading more than just the net.

707 wasn't even under consideration or sketches at this time as the KC-135 contract that created it hadn't been. Well ahead of all competition and TCA under government control, as a matter of fact the mods made to fit their demands, not AVROs design changes.

Really Jeff...history is more than finding what you choose on the net, books still carry not just more detail but more views of the story.

"The 1974 cancellation of the CL-84 … if attributed to a Liberal government… was the Trudeau government, not the Pearson government. Again, a company that couldn’t secure contracts – this time, Canadair… even with the U.S./Pentagon, and British significantly involved in testing the CL-84, those testing results did not realize production contracts. If the decision factor you’re referring to reflected the 1971 Defense White Paper, that’s a consideration well ahead of its time and one very timely today; i.e. a focus on “sovereignty protection and internal security versus bilateral Canada-U.S. continental defense, NATO, and UN peacekeeping”. That policy change/shift was a consideration but ultimately not the cause of the CL-84’s cancellation… again, no secured contracts… no viable product/future."

The death knell came much earlier, while I admire Pearson his advisor's gain my ire.

The later competition was a last gasp attempt...it won by the way, but not built in the USA meant it couldn't get the contract...same thing happened with the CF-100 and a number of other Canadian Products. Only exceptions have been the Beaver, Otter, Caribou, Buffalo and B-57 (Canaberra and then only because it was Martin aircraft built)

Trudeau gave us another disaster...unification of the Armed Forces and the start of the major cut backs that have crippled our military since.

"Again, the Bras d’Or was not a political influenced decision regardless of the government of the day. The linked article I provided is hardly a ‘quick link’… it’s a definitive accounting available through the Canadian Nautical Research Society’s website showing the Canadian Navy itself was predisposed to canceling the Bras d’Or initiative."

Having read several books on the Bra D'or that disagree with the Society I go with the book versions that show the effectiveness of both the technology and the mission. But it would have cut contracts on new destroyer escorts that were in favored ridings.

Thanks for reminding me of the ignore feature

Tom

[Jeff]

Originally Posted by Jeff

But really, one can hardly fault any government because the large aviation companies opted to hold out for the Boeing 707 rather than get behind the Jetliner… as well… it wasn’t the government of the day that caused TCA to back out of its association with the Jetliner, opting instead to purchase British Viscount aircraft. In the end, surpassed by Boeing and with no sales….. given questionable decisions by Avro itself and with timing implications… the project, at prototype stage was, perhaps, justifiably canceled.

Pity you won’t read this reply… and see further (continued) example of how you continually get ahead of yourself, rambling on without attention to context offered. As I said, the aviation companies of the day waited for the Boeing 707 – they did not accept/sponsor/order the Avro Jetliner. That’s without dispute as offered by multitudes of websites… in spite of your narrow “old school” views of online research/material. That lack of production sales from the major aviation companies, coupled with the loss of TCA… and other questionable management practices at Avro… put the skids on the Jetliner. Hey guess what… you can actually read books on the net (snicker™).

Originally Posted by Jeff

The 1974 cancellation of the CL-84 … if attributed to a Liberal government… was the Trudeau government, not the Pearson government. Again, a company that couldn’t secure contracts – this time, Canadair… even with the U.S./Pentagon, and British significantly involved in testing the CL-84, those testing results did not realize production contracts. If the decision factor you’re referring to reflected the 1971 Defense White Paper, that’s a consideration well ahead of its time and one very timely today; i.e. a focus on “sovereignty protection and internal security versus bilateral Canada-U.S. continental defense, NATO, and UN peacekeeping”. That policy change/shift was a consideration but ultimately not the cause of the CL-84’s cancellation… again, no secured contracts… no viable product/future.

Cancelled was your reference point… cancellation occurred in 1974 – that’s Trudeau, not Pearson. In any case, as I stated, no secured contracts… no moving past prototype stage. You can’t blame that on the government of the day. Your opinion of the unification of the Armed Forces is simply that – your opinion, one easily refuted on many levels… and done methodically by many… google it, man!

Originally Posted by Jeff

Again, the Bras d’Or was not a political influenced decision regardless of the government of the day. The linked article I provided is hardly a ‘quick link’… it’s a definitive accounting available through the Canadian Nautical Research Society’s website showing the Canadian Navy itself was predisposed to canceling the Bras d’Or initiative.

I provided a link from a respected, acknowledged website… that link offers a paper, one methodical in detail and complete with significant source references. Your “reading several books” summation carries no weight – no substance. Until you actually offer a book name and quotation, you’re simply continuing your most favoured practice of providing your own, without substance/foundation, “opinion”.

[FrozenOrca]

Keep backpeddling Jeff. Keep backpeddling.

You should change your score. It should read: Historian Jeff: 0 out of 3.

[sundance]

Unfortunately aviation manufacturing has a long history of government subsidies, some are of course expected with military aircraft, Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, Bombardier all are guilty. With government involvement comes politics and the strange bedfellows it sometimes breeds.

One only needs to look at the latest US government contracts for rebuilding their refueling fleet for an example, originally Boeing lost it to Airbus ... but wait ... ah yes political reconsideration.

Anyways back on topic here, when you say model of an Avro, what is meant? Is is essentially the same plane minus engines? Or far simplified and never able to fly to teach students the fundamentals of the craft?

[Jeff]

LOL! Hey frozenguy... do you actually have anything to say on whether you think the fate of those airplanes/foil were politically motivated/influenced. Although a quick look back at your posting history shows you're a one-liner kindaguy... perhaps you could surprise - waiting........

[bpeters]

As a bit of a Arrow aficionado, I find this aircraft is an excellent piece of Canadian history with a tragic ending for the aircraft (regardless of whose at fault), but what happened with all the engineers, scientists, designers, and brainiacs involved in the project is really inspiring. And although the debate continues to rage on, the real tragedy in this is the Jetliner. What might have been...... no contracts, be damned.

On a personal note, I have met and conversed with Thomas Hinderks on this very subject and found him to be more than knowledgeable and open-minded on this topic and aviation in general. The best tip he gave me was do your own research, if you're interested and come to your own conclusion. There really isn't a wrong one, there's plenty of blame to go around.

Also, this really is a fascinating tale of our history. It is worth some reading, wherever you get your sources.

I can't wait to check this mock up Arrow.

[bpeters]

Originally Posted by sundance

Unfortunately aviation manufacturing has a long history of government subsidies, some are of course expected with military aircraft, Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, Bombardier all are guilty. With government involvement comes politics and the strange bedfellows it sometimes breeds.

One only needs to look at the latest US government contracts for rebuilding their refueling fleet for an example, originally Boeing lost it to Airbus ... but wait ... ah yes political reconsideration.

Anyways back on topic here, when you say model of an Avro, what is meant? Is is essentially the same plane minus engines? Or far simplified and never able to fly to teach students the fundamentals of the craft?

I believe it is just a shell basically. But awe-inspiring just the same. Thomas?

[Thomas Hinderks]

You are right Quiksilver

The Arrow in Wetaskwin is the Prop from the movie the Arrow

Made of wood, tubing, plastic, thin sheet metal. That said it is full scale and quite awe inspiring. The Arrow was a very large aircraft.

There is also one in Toronto at the Canadian Aviation and Aerospace Museum that was completed about (1) year ago, it is steel tube frame with aluminum cover, but still basically a shell

Amazing piece of history

Tom

[MylesC]

One interesting discussion on the Arrow I've heard relates to what it would have done to Canada's positioning in the Cold War world. It's no question that the Arrow would have been a technical marvel. Given that, I've heard the argument that the Arrow and (if we kept it up) further technical advances would have put us into a super-power position. What it then comes down to is whether or not Canada could have afforded superpower status and what kind of repercussions such a status would have had on other facets of our Nation.

Just a thought. I by no means am an expert historian on that period...I just drink beer with the Historians at the Sugarbowl, haha.

[Thomas Hinderks]

MylesC

Heard and been involved with similar discussions, most logical I have heard is it would have made us somewhat like Sweden.

A Supertech power...not a superpower per se but a technological power in the Super Power race. Like Sweden we would have been/would be the bearers of highly desireable technology that was internationally sought after, but without the population base or outright military force to be a true superpower.

More importantly it would have fed other developments and other technologies that would have pushed us farther forward.

Randal Whitcomb (recently passed away) author of AVRO and the Cold War has in his books and a lot more was ready for his next book on AVRO developments from exisitng projects like the Arrow...some examples

-Extended 120 passenger swept wing Jetliner with intercontinental range
-V/Stol CF-100 version, well ahead of the Harrier
-Arrow Mk II and III that pushed the speed and manuvering technologies even farther

- Electrical Powerplant version of the Iroquois turbine engine running on natural gas
- Marine versions of the Orenda and Iroquois turbine engines
- Turbine powered high speed rail systems

And much more...and he had the information and material from some of the designers.

One of the oft discounted items developed in the Arrow program was the Iroquois engine...France did want to purchase the engine for the Mirage fighters and a civil non afterburning version was in process that would have been the most fuel efficent and powerful jet airliner engine in its day.

The biggest thing Canada lost with the cancellation in my opinion was the attitude of being able to be a world technology leader...we have started to get it back but the leads lost are gone forever.

My opinion anyway

Tom

[Blueline]

Thomas did I see this yesterday ?

http://www.richard-seaman.com/Wallpa...egreesLeft.jpg

[MylesC]

Thanks for the post, Tom, and I couldn't agree more.

I'll have to find Whitcomb's book and take a gander.

[Thomas Hinderks]

BlueLine

Sorta
What you saw was a Canadair CL-13 SabreV, it is the Canadian built version of the F-86.
Us Canucks messed with the design when we built it...
1) AVRO Orenda engine instead of Alison (whole bunch more power)
2) Cleaned up Aerodynamics and control systems (different slat system)
3) Lightened

Stronger, faster, climb higher and turn better.

Canada built hundreds of Sabres in the 1950's (USA even bought some) and the Canadair Sabres and CAC (Australian) Sabres are considered the peak of the design.

The aircraft here is Hawk One,owned by Vintage Wings Canada and on a Canadian Tour celebrating the Centennial of Flight.

On this short visit it is not available for viewing...but Aviation Heritage Week starts July 28th with the return of this aircraft and you will be able to visit the Museum and see it July 28th from arrival to 9pm and all day July 29th.

There will also be another VERY special guest aircraft...wait for the announcement.

MylesC
Randy's book is available at the aviation museum gift shop currently. With Randy's passing it is now out of print so I wouldn't wait too long.

Tom

[bpeters]

MylesC,
I own and have read that book. It is a great read. I like this discussion on the Arrow, Jetliner, Iroquois engines, Orenda, AVRO, etc., it is an exciting time in our history. And to generations who don't know, it's worth a little research.

[Murray B]

It is sad that anyone would waste so much of their life making an effigy of our great white elephant. Too bad, but 50 years of lies is enough and it is time for the facts to come out.

What was Diefenbaker's cabinet told about the program?

The answer is posted at:
http://www.international.gc.ca/depar...?intRefid=8169

The cost of the Arrow is given as nearly $10 million each:

The R.C.A.F. now had nine all-weather squadrons and the present programme called for their re-equipment with the CF-105, requiring a production order of 169 in number. These, together with aircraft recovered from the development and pre-production order for 37, would provide sufficient aircraft for nine squadrons. The total cost would be $2 billion spread from 1959-60 to 1963-64.

[Note that the Voodoos that were purchased instead cost about $2 million each.]

The recommendation to cancel came from the military:

Finally, the cost of the CF-105 programme as a whole was now of such a magnitude that the Chiefs of Staff felt that, to meet the modest requirement of manned aircraft presently considered advisable, it would be more economical to procure a fully developed interceptor of comparable performance in the U.S.

[Note that the Voodoos that were purchased instead of the Arrows cost about $2 million each.]

The Chiefs of staff advised the government that the Arrow's performance was "comparable" to U.S. interceptors. They do not mention anything about the Arrow flying faster, or higher, or further, than anything else.

If there was a conspiracy to kill the Arrow then it is clear that it involves the military and not Diefenbaker's government.

[Thomas Hinderks]

Well........

129 Arrows plus 37 Arrows = 166 Arrows

2 Billion expenditure, all jobs and tech stay in Canada, money goes back through economy, no brain drain to the USA.

66 Voodoos purchased to replace Arrow
@ $2.0M each 132 Million expenditure for used already obsolete aircraft (that in typical fashion continued in service till 1984) no Canadian jobs, all money left country, all technology left country.

CF-105 Mach 1.98 on J57 engines (under powered), Super cruise and trans arctic range.
F-106 Mach 1.3-4 Single engine, short range.


Hmmmmmmm something does add here

BTW

Check out "Storms of Controversy" backs up his work with published Government Docs.

Tom

[Murray B]

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

Well........129 Arrows plus 37 Arrows = 166 Arrows

That may be so but cabinet was told about 169+37 which should be 206. Divide that into 2 gigabuck and I get $9.7 million per copy.

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

2 Billion expenditure, all jobs and tech stay in Canada, money goes back through economy, no brain drain to the USA.

What tech is that? The Arrow was an average performer. At the time of its fastest flight which was just under mach 2 both the Starfighter and Lightning had exceeded mach 2 by a significant margin. The Starfighter had a 70,000 ft. ceiling compared to the Arrows 60,000 ft. The military considered the Arrow’s 1254 nm ferry range to be inadequate but the Voodoo’s 1930 nm range was enough. The Arrow was an average performer for two to five times the price of the competition. No wonder nobody bought it.

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

66 Voodoos purchased to replace Arrow
@ $2.0M each 132 Million expenditure for used already obsolete aircraft (that in typical fashion continued in service till 1984) no Canadian jobs, all money left country, all technology left country.

What are you talking about? Soviet noise jamming would have made it impossible for airborne radars like the Arrow’s to obtain accurate ranging information. That meant they could not get a target lock to guide their missiles. S.A.G.E. overcame this problem by using large mainframe computers to process directional information from mulitiple radars and statistically estimate the target’s location. S.A.G.E. could provide the target vector to the interceptor regardless of any jamming. [The Soviet technology of the time did not allow deception jamming like the U.S. technology did.]. In the late ‘50s any interceptor without S.A.G.E. was obsolete. The Voodoo had it and the Arrow did not.

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

CF-105 Mach 1.98 on J57 engines (under powered)

Avro gave the thrust for the J75 as 24,000 lbs. with reheat in the Mk I brochure. Orenda rated the thrust of the Iroquois as 25,000 lb. with reheat. That is only about 4% more thrust which should by itself only increase the speed by about 2%. This, however, is a red herring since the spec was for mach 1.5, which the Arrow could easily do.

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

Super cruise and trans arctic range.

Supercruise is the ability to travel faster than sound without afterburners. The English Electric Lightning could do it but I don’t know about anything else from around that time that could. The Arrows low speed combat radius was quite limited at 348 nm compared to the Voodoo’s 550 nm but I’m fairly sure that the Voodoo could not supercruise.

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

F-106 Mach 1.3-4 Single engine, short range.

Are you confusing the Delta Dagger with the Delta Dart? The F-106 was a mach 2+ aircraft but because it was a tail-less delta like the Arrow it could not turn hard without ploughing the air. The ferry range looks to be 1570 nm compared to the Arrow's 1254 nm. There is some good stuff on the Delta Dart posted at http://www.f-106deltadart.com/specs.htm

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

Hmmmmmmm something does add here

I’m not clear on what you mean by this.

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

Check out "Storms of Controversy" backs up his work with published Government Docs.

I have my own dog-eared copy that I look at when I need a good laugh. It is every bit as funny as anything Von Daniken has written. Tell me what you think would have happened to the solid state components in the Arrow’s unshielded hybrid vacuum tube/transistor analogue flight control computer if it was hit by the EMP from a nuclear explosion? This is supposed to be Campagna’s area of specialisation.

Some of these Arrow zealots must know when they are lying to us.

[Thomas Hinderks]

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/fac...eet.asp?id=391

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/fac...et.asp?id=2307

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/fac...et.asp?id=2312

Gee the numbers are different...then look at the source

Mind you these numbers note the need for external fuel...something the pre production Arrows were never equipped with.

Then again all the specs are cherry picked to make the aircraft look as pleasing as possible.

Then there are the operational pilot reports which differ even more than the manufacturers data.

The Arrow for it's mission far out performed aircraft of the day, as a pre produciton.

The throw arounds you are using are for aircraft developed in service and modified.
EG...the early 104 without tip tanks had abysmal range.

It does not take much imagination to look at what the Arrow would have developed into over time, as happens with all in service aircraft.

Bout the only place we will agree on is there were far more to blame than just poor old Dief.

Tom

[Murray B]

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

Gee the numbers are different...then look at the source

You are comparing completely different metrics. Ferry range and combat range are not equivalent. The combat range is almost always significantly less than the ferry range. Also, USAF combat radii are not necessarily the same as RCAF combat radii and these radii are generally much less than half of the range because they include loiter time. Because these things are measured against known standards there is generally good agreement between similar measures.

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

Mind you these numbers note the need for external fuel...something the pre production Arrows were never equipped with.

The low speed combat radius for each aircraft is for internal fuel as far as I know. The Voodoo still outranged the Arrow by 50%.

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

Then again all the specs are cherry picked to make the aircraft look as pleasing as possible.

No, the Arrow zealots are fabricating their specs. For example, the thrust rating of the Iroquois has always been 25,000 lbs. with reheat. It was never rated for 26,500 or 30,000 or anything else. The rating was 25,000 back then and it remains the same, no matter how much they twist history.

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

The Arrow for it's mission far out performed aircraft of the day, as a pre produciton.

If this were true then why didn’t the Chiefs of Staff mention it in their reports? The government relied on their judgement.

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

The throw arounds you are using are for aircraft developed in service and modified. EG...the early 104 without tip tanks had abysmal range.

Don’t put words in my mouth. At no time did I mention the Starfighter’s range. What I pointed out was that it set records for speed and altitude that the Arrow did not match. These achievements are a matter of record and can be found in a good library.

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

It does not take much imagination to look at what the Arrow would have developed into over time, as happens with all in service aircraft.

I can imagine one with an Oscillation Overthruster flying at mach 1.5 through the magma at 31,000 feet below sea level. Give it a Flux Capacitor and 1.2 GW fusion generator and it could fly through time as well, providing it reduced speed to 888 mph. What does imagination have to do with the facts?

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

Bout the only place we will agree on is there were far more to blame than just poor old Dief.

What should he have done? Ignore the reports and recommendations of his technical advisors? That really would have been scandalous. Despite the politically motivated blizzard of lies, Diefenbaker’s actual role in this story was simply to heed the advice of his advisors. It was the sensible thing to do.

Now, consider what General Foulkes said back then.. From the Montreal Gazette, Oct. 23, 1963:

Gen. Charles Foulkes, chairman of the chiefs of staff committee from 1951 to 1960 testified yesterday that the Liberal Government of Prime Minister St. Laurent decided in 1957 it would cancel the Arrow interceptor program as soon as it was returned to power in that years election...Gen. Foulkes confirmed the 1959 statement of Mr. Diefenbaker that the chiefs of staff had recommended cancellation of the Arrow...the chiefs concluded it didn't make sense to produce an $8,000,000 interceptor in Canada when one could be obtained in the U.S. for $2,000,000.

[$8M was the lowest price ever quoted for the Arrow.]

The Liberals were going to cancel it too! So why did lieberals across the continent begin screaming that evil, old, American lackey Diefenbaker had murdered our precious ‘unicorn’ if they would have done the same? Think about it.

[bpeters]

Murray, what is an Arrow zealot?

Wasn't S.A.G.E. in turn phased out because of it's ineffectiveness to ICBM's? (Hmmm.....the alleged reason the Arrow program was cancelled)
Could the underdeveloped Arrow (here's the important part) have been outfitted with S.A.G.E. if it was the be-all, end-all system at the time?

History shows first generation solid state electronics were not as reliable as the vacuum-tube systems they were meant to replace. Yes, time rectified that, but time was something the Arrow did not have.

We can compare notes all day. You call the Arrow 'a white elephant', you've made your choice. Their fault, his fault, Uncle Sam's fault, whatever.

But answer this. Why cut those Arrows to pieces?

And you didn't have a retort to Thomas's statement of brain drain to the US. That is undeniable and well documented and a direct result of short-sightedness, narrow-mindedness, and lack of vision by some supposed intelligent people. Think bigger Murray, this isn't just about a plane.

[Murray B]

Originally Posted by quiksilver

Murray, what is an Arrow zealot?

An arrow zealot is a worshpper of the great white interceptor. Their faith that the Arrow was absolutely the best aircraft ever made in the history of the universe causes them to ignore all facts and rewrite history to suit. I’m not sure if it qualifies as bona fide idol worship but it is close.

Originally Posted by quiksilver

Wasn't S.A.G.E. in turn phased out because of it's ineffectiveness to ICBM's? (Hmmm.....the alleged reason the Arrow program was cancelled)Could the underdeveloped Arrow (here's the important part) have been outfitted with S.A.G.E. if it was the be-all, end-all system at the time?

SAGE was not phased out but replaced with other systems in the early eighties. It was never intended to intercept ICBMs only bombers. Even today many countries have bombers with nuclear weapons. Some old timers maintain that the attack on the World Trade Center would not have happened if SAGE were still in operaton. SAGE identified all aircraft that deviated from their flight plan as possible attackers. It would have automatically deployed interceptors within minutes of the deviation and those pilots would have determined if the aircraft posed a threat.

There is no doubt that the huge Arrow could have been modified to have proper SAGE capability but that would have cost a lot more money. Adding a million or two more to an aircraft that is already two to four times as much as its competition does not make it a better value. Adding more weight would also not improve its range.

Originally Posted by quiksilver

History shows first generation solid state electronics were not as reliable as the vacuum-tube systems they were meant to replace. Yes, time rectified that, but time was something the Arrow did not have.

Actually history shows nothing of the sort. Even the transistors of the late fifties were many times more reliable than vacuum tubes. Their problem in military use was extreme vulnerability to the electromagnetic pulse generated by a nuclear explosion. This was partially rectified by surrounding the circuits with Faraday cages. This was not required with vacuum tubes since they are almost immune to EMP effects. [Even today Siemens still makes lightning arrestors that are vacuum tubes.] You are obviously not very technical otherwise you would have known all this already.

Originally Posted by quiksilver

We can compare notes all day. You call the Arrow 'a white elephant', you've made your choice. Their fault, his fault, Uncle Sam's fault, whatever.

There are facts about the Arrow and there is also a great deal of fiction. There is no reason to read the fiction. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings is a lot better read than most of the Arrow stuff.

Originally Posted by quiksilver

But answer this. Why cut those Arrows to pieces?

Easily done. The disposition of airframes and engines is covered by a memo of 26 Mar 59 from Air Marshal Hugh Campbell, Chief of the Air Staff to “The Minister” [presumably the MND]. It says, in part, “... the disposition of the airframes and the Iroquois engines...subsequent embarrassment...is most undesirable...[recommend] Relinquishing any DND interest in the airframes and engines to DDP for ultimate disposal...DDP can reduce it to scrap.”

So they cut the Arrows to pieces to avoid “subsequent embarrassment”. They could do that because the aircraft were DND (government) property. There is no mention of what to do about the jigs, tooling, blueprints and such since they were clearly the property of the contractors and sub-contractors.

The directive to destroy all the other evidence can only have come from card-carrying Liberal, Crawford Gordon himself. He fired everybody even as cabinet was trying to find other work for the company. Because of this destruction there never will be any practical way to have Avro account for the $308 million that was spent.

Originally Posted by quiksilver

And you didn't have a retort to Thomas's statement of brain drain to the US. That is undeniable and well documented and a direct result of short-sightedness, narrow-mindedness, and lack of vision by some supposed intelligent people.

That is because the drain claim is so absurd. All of Avro’s top people came from outside Canada. This created a glut of mediocre foreigners feeding off the rich government teat. After five years and $308 million dollars they managed to produce an aircraft with performance “comparable” to a Voodoo that was one quarter the cost. If that had been public knowledge at the time, which it wasn’t, they would have been lucky to find any job at all. For the Canadian born employees the Arrow program was just too inefficient a way to create jobs. Keep in mind that 2 billion ’58 dollars was much more than the same amount today. [For example a new 1958 Cadillac Sedan DeVille was about $5,500 back then. One Arrow was the price of about 1455 Cadillacs.]

Originally Posted by quiksilver

Think bigger Murray, this isn't just about a plane.

Of course the Avro myth is not just about the plane. The lies told about the Arrow were very effective in ousting John Diefenbaker and are still useful against conservatives today. Google Stephen Harper and Avro Arrow to see some modern examples.

Back in the sixties there was even bi-national lieberal cooperation to get rid of the “paranoid” PM from Saskatchewan. There are a few interesting notes about that program here:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/SAN303D.html

Maybe “The Chief” was not so “paranoid” seeing as THEY could have actually been out to get him.

Now, Quicksilver, you think bigger, way bigger. This is not just about a plane or even Canada. It is international in scope and whatever was going on it resulted in several overthrown leaders and an assassinated president. That is about as big as it ever gets.

[PJC]

Originally Posted by Murray B

Now, Quicksilver, you think bigger, way bigger. This is not just about a plane or even Canada. It is international in scope and whatever was going on it resulted in several overthrown leaders and an assassinated president. That is about as big as it ever gets.

Uh huh. Riiiiighhht.

[RichardS]

...I so love the Arrow story...yet another what if, and look at...with the conspiracy theories going onward to assassinations and the like...

...while not an Arrow "zealot", I will echo a sentiment by a show I saw on Discovery Wings a while back...the subject...the Avro Aerocar...

...it went along the lines of...while not commercially viable...it represents a large technological achievement by a "tiny" nation when it rallies its resources to a cause...

...in other words...Canadians can do extraordinary things when they are allowed to be extraordinary...we can achieve...instead of our great self-deprecating attitudes getting in the way...we're a pretty cool nation...

...Arrow...sure...in the years since folklore can take hold...when doesn't it when the what if's take over...but for the time...it was a great plane

...argue specs all you want...argue costs...but what military/government funded project of the cold war wasn't over budget...shrouded in conflicting performance statistics...often over hyped...heck, this was the day of the $20 hammer...when the average joe bought one for $.50...

...and destroying prototypes isn't new...$$$ cover up...all the way to not letting anyone else get their hands on the technology...the boneyards were full of multi million dollar projects that people will wax fondly over...but were never practical..

[bpeters]

What? That was Crawford Gordon on the grassy knoll?

[bpeters]

1) So, Canada buys Voodoos with SAGE capability (by your own admission) designed for bomber interception?
2) Wasn't one of the reasons (not THE reason) for the cancellation of the Arrow program because the threat from the Soviets was deemed to be missiles, thus no need for a long range interceptor?
3) Or was there no need for THIS long range interceptor?
4) Was/is this 'missile threat' more propaganda put out by the zealots?

SAGE. phased-out? replaced? semantics. Obsolescence.

I never professed to be an electronics geek. But really, until the integrated circuit became the norm, early transistor tech (and the boards they were mounted on) in military applications were not without their issues. My point being, none of this tech couldn't be applied to the Arrow. (insert your 'at huge cost' statement here).
The brain drain? I'm not refering to their birth certificates. They were employed in Canada, at a Canadian company, developing cutting edge innovations in aeronautics.

I'm hardly a zealot, just a interested party in the Arrow history (not a myth). You can't seem to find one redeeming or valuable quality about the program. Too bad, really. The Arrow had some warts, no doubt. But it is a fascinating story.

So if the lies ousted Dief, why couldn't the truth have saved him? Sounds pretty simple: "The Arrow program was costing the taxpayers way too much money. It is simply too much burden on the Canadian taxpayer."
Sounds like a responsible thing for a PM to do and say. Hell, I would have voted for him.

[moahunter]

I agree with others that the Arrow "story" is more myth than reality. I understand that people want to feel good about something that was made at home, and its a nice conspiracy that the US was behind its cancellation, but it doesn't really stack up. The Arrow was an average for its time, interceptor. The concept of an interceptor died shortly thereafter (as nuclear bombers were largely replaced with ICBM's), which is why later planes were not as quick - the focus was instead on other attributes, like dog-fighting maneuverability, which interceptors were horrible at, or air dominance, like the F15 (which is basically a massive radar with wings - still going strong).

Even Concord could super cruise, but did that make it better as a military weapon than a modern fighter that can't? It has only been recently that the technology to combine super-cruise with other useful attributes has arisen for fighters. The Arrow wasn't ahead of its time (despite some interesting features), it was just superseded by time. That might not have happened, if it had been designed and built at a more economic and speedy pace.

[bpeters]

What's this 'myth' thing? NewsFlash! This Just In! The Arrow actually existed!

Despite notions of conjecture and false specs, as a fan of the aircraft and what it symbolized, I think the fact that there are still discussions like this 50 years later, pays tribute to the Arrow and it's mystique (though others would have you believe it's demise was pretty cut and dried). Not bad for an 'average' airplane.

It's a cool bird and a cool story.

[moahunter]

Originally Posted by quiksilver

What's this 'myth' thing? NewsFlash! This Just In! The Arrow actually existed!

The myth is that it was world class. It wasn't, it didn't even make it to production. It looked pretty though. As other cancelled projects didn't have pretty designs, I guess they didn't get the same attention. It would have been one of the most beautiful military planes ever...

[bpeters]

easy moa, I was being facetious. haha.

Given the existing technology and other aircraft of it's day, I do think it was world class. (bad zealot).

[moahunter]

^It was beautiful, I'll agree with that

[RichardS]

It is a neat story...but considering I couldn't have affected the decision one way or another...a story is what it is...

[Murray B]

Originally Posted by quiksilver

What? That was Crawford Gordon on the grassy knoll?

It is unclear to me if you are saying JFK was not assassinated or if there was no conspiracy against Diefenbaker.

History is full of conspiracies but it is just as full of mass delusions. Perhaps the delusions facilitate the conspiracies.

Here is the definition of the word “conspiracy” that I use. It is posted at: http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/conspiracy?view=uk

conspiracy • noun (pl. conspiracies)
1 a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
2 the action of conspiring.

Now take a look at a facimile of a 1963 article in TIME magazine posted at: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...875369,00.html

Diefenbaker quickly recovered his fighting spirit and stayed on to contest the 1963 elections—in which, says Newman, Kennedy unofficially lent the anti-Diefenbaker Liberals the services of Political Pollster Lou Harris, whose studies of Canadian voting behavior proved invaluable to Pearson.

TIME is not known for publishing “conspiracy theories”. If JFK unofficially and secretly lent his pollster to Canadian Liberals to harm Diefenbaker’s chance of election then the secret and harmful plan is a conspiracy by definition. The conspiracy has been public knowledge for years but the extent of it is still unknown. The real story may never be revealed since Kennedy was assassinated around that time and things became very chaotic after that.

As an Edmontonian born and raised for more than a half century I remember that the Arrow lies were very divisive. Few taxpayers in the west believed the crap about the wonderful Avro Arrow or that Diefenbaker was “paranoid”. The central Canadian lieberal “elites” could not fault his sensible governance so they invented lies to defeat him. What I find most intolerable about this continuing campaign of fibs is how many young people in the outer provinces today have been turned into “vipers” by fifty years of lieberal propaganda. It is even worse that the lies have often been paid for by our taxes. [Those lies in the anti-conservative and anti-western CBC crock-u-drama were paid for by us.] Now they teach our young people in school how the evil PM from Saskatchewan murdered our precious ‘unicorn’. This continues despite the fact that most bona fide historians have repeatedly stated that most such claims are false. The Chiefs of Staff killed the ‘unicorn’ and it wasn’t a unicorn. It was just an ugly great white ***** that ate children. Okay, so maybe it didn’t eat that many children, but the Chiefs did kill it and we all owe them for that.

Anyway, none of this matters much because I expect that it is only a matter of time before one PM or another invokes what I call the “never vote again clause” in the lieberal constitution. What happens after that is anybody’s guess.

[Thomas Hinderks]

Had a longer response here but on reflection the better one is...

Anonymous source claiming people lying...but doesn't specify who. Validity?
Spending 10 minutes on the net researching will give more answers than this thread, More accurately
The aviation historians I am meeting with this week in Winnipeg all had a good laugh at the claims made

Don't feed the Trolls

Tom

[Thomas Hinderks]

As an Edmontonian born and raised for more than a half century I remember that the Arrow lies were very divisive. Few taxpayers in the west believed the crap about the wonderful Avro Arrow or that Diefenbaker was “paranoid”. The central Canadian lieberal “elites” could not fault his sensible governance so they invented lies to defeat him. What I find most intolerable about this continuing campaign of fibs is how many young people in the outer provinces today have been turned into “vipers” by fifty years of lieberal propaganda. It is even worse that the lies have often been paid for by our taxes. [Those lies in the anti-conservative and anti-western CBC crock-u-drama were paid for by us.] Now they teach our young people in school how the evil PM from Saskatchewan murdered our precious ‘unicorn’. This continues despite the fact that most bona fide historians have repeatedly stated that most such claims are false. The Chiefs of Staff killed the ‘unicorn’ and it wasn’t a unicorn. It was just an ugly great white ***** that ate children. Okay, so maybe it didn’t eat that many children, but the Chiefs did kill it and we all owe them for that.

Anyway, none of this matters much because I expect that it is only a matter of time before one PM or another invokes what I call the “never vote again clause” in the lieberal constitution. What happens after that is anybody’s guess.

And reading this tells me what this is really all about...make up your own mind

Tom

[Murray B]

Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks

And reading this tells me what this is really all about...make up your own mind

You are no mind reader and that is not what this is about. I know it is difficult when someone proves that the great white interceptor is a false god but that is no reason to make personal attacks.

Here is what I’m really about. Our supposedly Progressive Conservative government is using our tax dollars to promote politically motivated anti-conservative lies about the Avro Arrow. The museum in Wetaskiwin is a provincial museum. The only thing it needs to put on display regarding our national “embarrassment” is a facsimile of the cabinet minutes where the Chiefs of Staff recommended cancellation. Diefenbaker's government was told the Arrow’s would cost about $10 million each and that “comparable” aircraft were much less expensive. The Voodoos that were purchased were only $2 million each and they already had S.A.G.E. capability.

It is bad when any government in Canada uses tax money to spew propaganda but it is completely insane when Conservatives use it to promote anti-conservative myths. What the heck is going on here? Are they CINO (Conservative In Name Only), stupid, incompetent, a combination of the three, or something completely different? This is what this is really about.

[RichardS]

This thread is so going to tangent...

...let's keep this about the Arrow...CINO or any reasonable facsimile can be discussed in the Politics forum.

...feel free to create a thread at will...or is that wilco...?

[Murray B]

Originally Posted by RichardS

This thread is so going to tangent...

...let's keep this about the Arrow...CINO or any reasonable facsimile can be discussed in the Politics forum.

I’m sorry that I have misinterpreted what this thread is about. I thought that “Avro Arrow makes a return to museum” was talking about the facsimile of the great white interceptor returning to the museum in Wetaskiwin. If that is wrong then I apologize.

Repeating the Arrow myth or glorifying the aircraft is a political act because the lies were created for a political purpose. Only the facts are apolitical, not the lies.

That means this thread started off political even if it does not appear to be.

After a half-century of lies it is time for the facts to come out, Eh?

[RichardS]

Talk Arrow...OK.

Tangent into Conservatives allegedly lying about other Conservatives and taking tax money to do so...and the potential myriad of combinations therein...that breeds a tangent...

[Thomas Hinderks]

RichardS

I agree we have gone onto a tangent. After this post I shall discontinue on the thread.

MurraryB

At no time have I made a personal attack, simply pointed out the flaw of the argument and invited others to draw their own conclusion based on the posts presented.

For each link and claim you have made there are dozens of links and thousands of pages that, unlike your inferences and accusations, have stood the challenges of the the public forum, media scrutiny, peer review, the test of time and the ability to have been challenged in the legal system.

The story of the Arrow is not so much a story of the loss of a great aircraft, but the continuing lack of vision and support that Federal Governments of both parties have demonstrated to our ability to rise above being merely hewers of wood and bearers of water.

From the AVRO Jetliner through to the recent military purchase of Mercedes G-Wagon and the impending contract for the CASA (Spanish built) SAR aircraft the attitude, regardless of party, is don't build it here...buy it somewhere else.

Heaven forbid we buy Canadian.

For those interested in the AVRO Arrow story I suggest a search of the internet and a visit to the library to get the real information rather than rantings from extremes on both sides.

Tom

[bpeters]

Well put, Thomas. As mentioned by others the Arrow saga is a better than good read.

and Murray, regardless of your stance on this saga it can't be denied its gets attention 50 years later.

[Murray B]

Originally Posted by RichardS

Talk Arrow...OK.

Tangent into Conservatives allegedly lying about other Conservatives and taking tax money to do so...and the potential myriad of combinations therein...that breeds a tangent...

Roger, wilco.

In “Storms of Controversy” second edition on page 115 regarding a 21 Oct 58 letter from [Fred] Smye it says,

The new figures made the Arrow more than comparable in cost with U.S. aircraft since all previous estimates had been assuming a flyaway price of $5 million per aircraft, not $3.5 or $3.75.

Palmiro’s English cannot be too good because if we look at the facsimile of the letter printed in Zuuring’s, “The Arrow Scrapbook” on page 106 it is clear that Mr. Campagna left out some important bits.

The $3.5 million figure is given.

...it is now estimated that we can produce and deliver 100 operational Arrow aircraft, complete in all respects for approximately $3,500,000. each.

So far so good but look at the next sentence.

This excludes the development and tooling costs which it is assumed would continue in accordance with existing contracts, and the small amount of GFE presently proposed.

Something like $308 million had been spent on development at that point so the cost to the taxpayer would have been substantially more than $3.something million but how much would it have been? Going through mounds of government documents and putting it all in spreadsheet is not necessary because General Foulkes was kind enough to give us the figure way back in 1963. The actual cost of the Arrow to the taxpayer, even at the post-cancellation sale price, was about “$8,000,000” each. The Voodoos cost about $2 million so I am glad they chose it instead of the Arrow.

Palmiro, presumably by accident, forgot the “excludes” part of Mr. Smye’s letter but us taxpayers have the right to know what the total cost of thing would really have been. $8 million is the actual and apolitical price.

[Here I beg to differ with myself. Even $8 million is political. The apolitical cost given at cancellation was nearer to $10 million and that is the figure the government used in making their decision. There is no guarantee of a lower price if the program had not been cancelled.]

[I am not unanimous in that! Avro probably would have reduced the price so the $8 million figure is valid.]

See where Arrow cultists have led me? Now I’m fighting with myself.

[Ouch...don’t do that again...No! You wouldn’t!...Aiyeee...thud............

[jagators63]

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories...#ixzz1gxHDIZHz