@@MrKydaman THere were actually 30 odd in the production line because the test versions were built from production tooling. There are photos of the line coming down high bay 3.
37 planes in one stage of build or another ... 6 flyable ... no it was never built ... wrong ... it was never put into full production ... when for the cost of the cancellation fees they could have made all 37 planes and then finished all the flight testing ... and then sales would be awesome
There were a number built in the 50's It was a beautiful jet that would suite the patrol requirements to protect the north. Diefenbaker listened to President Eisenhower and Canada ended up with nothing. The Avro jet had powerfull engines which have never been build again. The F35 does not meet the current requiremets to patrol the North. The jet has one engine with limited distance and limited speed. Its a fighter jet as opposed the Avro jet.
one thing has changed since the arrow ... diefenbaker signed away our right to design new jet fighters ... yes thats right the government literally signed an agreement with the usa saying we wont undertake any new fighter aircraft designs it was part and parcel of the bomarc agreement .... as a private design it can be done as a government funded one it cant be ... that is the sad truth ...
we needed a new fighter since the arrow was started ... if the pc's didnt scrap it and just finished it for the cost of cancelling it they would have had the Rothchilds comming to them for loans
He doesn't care, because he is what they used to a "peacenic", someone who hates war. It's against his Liberal upbringing. He cannot see a possible war. He won't have it. It's when someone as forceful (?) as Trumpet, saying "do this or else", he has no recourse, and he hates it.
yes we need the arrow built ... BUT thanks to the moron deifenbaker ... we cant build it as a country ... he signed a contract that wont allows us to develop military fighter craft ... but as private citizens we can ... hard part ... finding a person with the room to build it in their back yard ;)
@sonoftherepublic um the arrow is a fighter interceptor ... by design ... and by choice ... it has the first implementation of over 15 different modern use systems even the f35 currently employs like an air co .. and flight control redundancy and look down shoot down radar ... internal weapons bay ... quick service engines ... extensive use of titanium stainless steel and composite materials made with aluminium ... yes the arrow is NOT what you have been taught in the USA ... heck since the f15 every single fighter the usa has made uses tech the arrow perfected ... and that includes the sparrow missile system .... originally the astra fire control system .. from the arrow .. yes the arrow is old ... but it still can out perform and out survive the f35 and stay there longer ... while doing it all in the far north where the f35 sucks balls because of its single engine ... and small wing surface ... . the f35 is a multi-billion dollar test bed of failed ideas that wont work properly together at the sae time for extended periods of time ... it is no better than the x15 ... its a test and toss plane
The technology is timeless, its performance unmatched by current designs...as a pilot, an updated Arrow is far superior than anything available today, including the F-35.
Plus, they new how to build stuff that would last back in those days! I would be a proud canadian again and would finally be ok with giving the government tax free loans if they went along with this idea!!!
I certainly hope this will happen. I believe a political party (not like the Diefenbaker party and certainly not our present Liberal or NDP parties) could include this in their plan and Canadians would vote for this to happen.
I will state, plainly that I am a big fan of the original CF-105 Arrow project, that it was a major blow to Canada when it was cancelled and it is a shame it was.That being said, this is my objective view of the situation when it comes to reviving the CF-105 Arrow, It is actually quite feasible and even with our messed up budgets, if anyone has any real sense the CF_XX Super Arrow and CF-105 Revival projects put forth by industry leaders within Canada should be taken very seriously and pushed to the table earnestly, we can not continue to bow down to extra national pressure just because of their fear of losing Canadian business, they would not lose it, it would simply change direction, change pace, we would have our own aerial pride back and others could very well profit from it than simply Canadian interests, a nationally conceptualised, designed and built all weather/ multirole fighter aircraft is something we seriously need to have again.
Viewed objectively the resurrection of the Arrow, in a highly modified form, would probably be the best option for Canada, if the assumed mission is to defend Canadian airspace. The large-ish, twin engine delta wing interceptor would be ideal: long range, internal missile armament, lengthy loiter capability and high speed and altitude capability. I would imagine that a modification of the original design could be made to be relatively stealthy at least from a frontal aspect in the same way as the Eurofighter Typhoon is relatively stealthy from the same aspect. Such an aircraft would be ideal for air defence of a very large border area. It's no accident that the Russian PAK-FA is of a similar configuration, and for exactly the same reasons. A modified F-15 Eagle would also probably do as a stop-gap measure. The F-35 on the other hand would be totally unsuitable for the same mission profile and would be an utterly illogical purchase for that mission. Sure, the RCAF probably needs a strike fighter and/or CAS aircraft but that role could be ably filled with a fleet of A-10C's. As crazy as it may sound, for the mission parameters, the modernised CF-105 would be absolutely ideal.
Cen Blackwell I agree it is not that crazy, basically it is a return to a pure interceptor role away from the multirole trend, thus simplifying the design, and ending up with something that would probably look much like the original Arrow. With a pure design mission, costs could be reduced to make up for the design effort. If multirole is needed, one of the euro designs would work, for CAS, an A-6, A7 or Su-25 would be better than an A-10. Hell a mothballed CF-100 might work for CAS, if you ignore the need for sophisticated radar and fire control. Many Su-25 versions work this way, pretty much visual target identification.
Brad Johnson Agreed, but Super Hornet or Saab Grippen or both is the way to go if we need multi role but for a long range interceptor in the arctic or national sovereignty patrols, or no-fly zone enforcement, nothing but the CF-105 will do... if we cut our F-35 purchase in half, we could afford it! Another reason: the world is back in an arms race again and like it or not, Canada needs to compete.
The F-14 or F15 would be great, the problem is they are too expensive to build and maintain (and no longer available). A pure interceptor could get what we need out those aircraft for less cost. Agreed no point in reinventing the wheel for multi-role.
Brad Johnson Well actually there were modernization programs for the F-14 and F-15 and they would be cheaper to build than anything else on the list but they would provide only a temporary solution & not a lasting one, & Northrop Grumman took the F-18 super hornet and growler to the next level but even that is not a lasting solution. Only a home made program will provide a lasting solution. Northrop Grumman would love to have Canada's business no matter what we decide, thing is, who's economy and Nation does it serve, theirs or ours?
One of the original design engineers stated that plans were in the works to add rockets that would provide the Arrow space with flight capabilities. This fighter could have been built since this video first aired, instead the idiots is Ottawa are still talking about some foreign super expensive junk.
Compared to the Typhoon and Rafale, the CF-105 is indeed an antiquated design. Deltas, yes - but deltas equipped with canards, LEX, full-view canopies, guns, reduced RCS, etc. No contest, other than speed.
While i agree that we should make our own Plans, Tanks, ships ect, the biggest problem with rebuilding the arrow is that it will take the better part of a decade to get them to the deployment stage and our f-18s need to be replaced sooner then that.
Another thing i'd like to add is that it was canceled before it was "really" tested and tweeked back then , so had the project not been cancels there would have been some changes even back then with 1950s technology,if you add our knowledge today with little modifications would bring vast improvement to the original basic design. which i believe has more potential than most more modern designs.(stability in flight because of the way the wings support the crafts center of gravity).
I would be happy to contribute to a program where Canada builds it's own fighter aircraft. Not doing this has been a long time coming. The time has come to grow up.
Hi, Folks. Unless I am very much mistaken, the F35 was for a LONG time called the JSF, the Joint Strike Fighter. What this means is that it was mixture of requirements for various services and purposes - - - - which can at best be a bunch of compromises - which in turn means that it would have problems trying to satisfying all the needs of any one group, let alone ALL of the needs of ALL the services and purposes. Just my 0.02. You all have a wonderful day. Best wishes. Deas Plant.
The avro was scrapped for fears of tech in wrong hands , the PM of Canada then being convinced by the then USA president , including a good reason for full north America missile defense , and underlying deals and reasons on both parts , and the USA military hungry for a high mach plane when theirs were behind in tech , Canada took a big blow in the face and would have been a very different country today , watch firefox movie and ignore the voice activated helment , from some of us I can't speek for all of us , we humbly request to be allowed to retry this idea . This has left a common sense WHY? , and a knoit in the throat for many Canadians . If a newer version built by Canadians , and not politically influenced may be a mutually beneficial project . Signed with a tear
Even if you rebulid this jet can it match a F-22 or Su 35 in a dogfight? I don't think not it designed to be a attack aircraft at least the F-35 just proved a 15 to 1 kill ratio at Nellis red flag can this CF-105 do the same..... not!!!!!
Canada’s aerospace industry could use a shot in the arm,since we’ve lost Bombardier,due to dirty tarifs by the USA, and the resultant 5000 jobs that we will lose thanks to them. We owe nothing to the people south of us.They play dirty.We need to stand alone from them.The Arrow would be a good job creator,as well as a much needed fighter for our Air Force.
I totally understand why it's generally desirable to keep production local (which can be sometimes be difficult with differences in labor costs). When you're talking about a major weapons program requiring a large development expenditure and an end product that'll only continue being an economic drain, it's hard to tell the difference between a "stimulus package" and outright "reckless spending" (though the former usually falls in this category too). There are no "extra" dollars in doing this.
GSTENCE1897 it's simple they won't, they are completely different form of combat system & one that Canadian procurement programs have already considered & I won't say more because it's hush hush shit.
GSTENCE1897 It's possible that AI autonomous drones may obsolete piloted fighters and I think this is likely to be the case but there are efforts for international treaties banning full automation of weapon systems. I would suspect that by the time we could fully developed a fifth gen Arrow with the associated manufacturing base and integrate weapon systems, piloted fifth gen fighters would at best be on their last legs of economic viability. I would say that if you want an Arrow to fly again, open source those plans that were taken home and research scaled down arrow airframes as semi-autonomous 3d printed pilotless swarm drones with extreme range, speed and altitude. The general public would then be providing the 3d printing work of the admittedly ancient physical airframe and the research teams can focus on software and weapons integration.
Trudon't won't listen to the "great unwashed public". He's content with buying either some other country's garbage, like the used Australian F-18, and the UK's 4 used submarines. Which we can only find parts enough for 1 to put to sea. Great, isn't it? To top it all, Deifenbaker, killed the airplane manufacturing in Canada, and Trudeau would have killed the ship industry, but the fact that Trumpet told Trudeau that either he spend up to his NATO commitments or the US was going to pull out of NATO. So we are getting new ships, finally.
I have the original files of the Avro Arrow, and I have yet!!! to see any numbers that say the Avro Arrow could fly further and faster than a brand-new aircraft of today. The Avro Arrow was designated a Fighter Jet and an Interceptor and dated as far back as 1949. If the Avro Arrow had survived beyond 1962, then you could argue facts. Canada is a Nuclear Free Nation inside its borders, but outside Canada is still working with Nukes. We may not own them, but the 35 was designed to carry and deliver them. Hence the reason the 35 has been chosen and they were not giving up on it.
the arrow IS a FIGHTER/INTERCEPTOR ... by DESIGN ... to fit the northern patrol requirement it had to be a fighter interceptor ... there was no optional choice .... it was designed as one period
Folks, the 1st Sputnik was launched in 1957 and the Arrow 2 years later. Imagine what Canada could do now. It's not sentimental, we have done and we still can do exceptional accomplishment; it was a fact and it was reality, not a far-fetched dream.
No direct revenue, but if its built in Canada we are investing in ourselves If we buy it from anywhere else we are fueling their industries. What about approaching "Bombardier" they're plants might need little modifications for the actual manufacturing processes of such a project. and if it flops at least it got "Canadians" working for a while and the money is still within our boarders (consider it a "Stimulous package") the economy will have a few extra ,Taxable, dollars circulating within it.
"Outdated" designs get updated all the time because a) performance really hasn't increased that much; b) the basic designs are sound and feasible for upgrades; and c) what's "coming down the pike" doesn't make sense to manufacture! I'm an American and I think the F-35 is a waste, too. We'd all be better replacing the current aircraft with new frames with updated/more reliable electronics. Block 60 F-16s are the way to go along with updated F-15E variants. The US Navy is the service that's =>
@ 4:33 the interviewer says that he can list a number of aircraft (20) which do not have the delta wing design of the Avro Arrow. This is a misleading and narrow minded view of Military aircraft design, he said he could list 20 designs produced that don't have the design but I can list 31 production designs that do have a Delta design... here is the list: Atlas Cheetah, Avro Vulcan (- strategic bomber/stealthy), Buran Orbiter, Chengdu J-7 (- a Chinese development of MiG-21), Chengdu J-10, Concorde, Convair B-58 Hustler, Convair F-102 Delta Dagger, Convair F-106 Delta Dart, Dassault Mirage III, Dassault Mirage IV, Dassault Mirage 2000, Dassault Rafale, Douglas F4D Skyray, Eurofighter Typhoon (this is a big one), General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon (another big one how could he miss that), Gloster Javelin (- subsonic fighter), HAL Tejas, IAI Kfir (Israeli), Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird (another big one) McDonnell Douglas A-4 Skyhawk (- a "tailed" delta wing aircraft), Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 (- a "tailed" delta wing fighter) Saab 35 Draken, Saab 37 Viggen, Saab JAS 39 Gripen (another big one), Shenyang J-8 Space Shuttle Orbiter (how did you miss that), Sukhoi Su-9, Sukhoi Su-11, Sukhoi Su-15 (- early models), Tupolev Tu-144 ( Russias famous supersonic Jetliner). Like how could he miss that! No wonder why he had to ask the ex-General so many questions but I will applaud him for bringing light to the misunderstood Arrow debate!
I am not replying to myself here, I want to say a few more things about this issue...The F-35 flying armadillo is a strike fighter not an air superiority fighter or a multi-role fighter (like the F-18 it is supposed to replace), & it therefor WILL NOT meet the requirements to defend our national sovereignty or most of our common military roles in NATO. It would meet a limited need for our role in NATO, the price tag for that is enormously huge and therefor equally ridiculous as our neo-con governments rejection of a valid proposal to revive the avro arrow. The Beaverworks Super Arrow design is one of the most modern, competitive and advanced designs of military aviation history, It would compete and defeat the designs of every major fifth generation fighter program built today, would be attractive as an export to military allies, would create an enormous economic boost for Canada and Canadians & would meet all the major role requirements for our Armed forces and our commitments to our allies & our own sovereignty. Our current government are absolute idiot-morons to reject the revival of the Arrow program, the new super Arrow concept which is in conceptualization/prototype stage by a private company... It is the only way for Canada to go especially ever since the Fox news Redeye segment exposed what Americans really think about Canadian contributions to NATO. The current government should be voted out now because of this! Canadians wake up if you care about your country!
Another point i want to make is, that the American Aerospace programs are not reliable to deliver Armed combat systems to Canada anymore... they have international Agenda's that dwarf any commitments to their Canadian partner. Ask yourself, why did they sell to India over 50 000 modern anti-tank weapons, delivered them promptly but Canada saw only 1 of the 28 new helicopters promised in contract. They don't respect Canada no more and they have the hands in the pockets of our Neo-cons and everyone knows it. Some proof of their lack of reliability to Deliver to Canada in recent history is as follows: The CH-148/MH-92 Superhawk procurement program originally agreed in 2004 for 5 billion, experienced several major set back up to 2014, with 4 major contract renegotiation's due to mechanical malfunction, company strike, slow delivery and production time, & an outrageous cost for a faulty program; & finally in 2013 to 2014 a major contract Delivery failure resulted in a contract dispute and renegotiation that will see us get only 8 of the original 28 helicopters promised in the original contract and that will come in 2018 3 years after the Sea Kings get retired this year. That is utterly ridiculous, WTF is our government doing even considering these unreliable American companies that clearly don't care about us or our national sovereignty. We need to replace the Sea King several years ago, still not happening thanks to unreliable American ventures.
My Final point, The Original Avro Arrow was intended to be a Modifiable combat system that would have emerged into several different variants, at least 3 variants were planned (mk1, mk2,mk3,) when the first prototype was on the tarmac. A current Super Arrow Program which would be in every way superior, cheaper and more beneficial to Canada than the F-35 could include a variant program that would retrofit the modern fighter to various roles and environments for operational versatility. Stealth and 3 dimensional maneuvering tech can be integrated with superior speed and range performance of the original arrow & the retrofitting and variations would not be limited by contracts with a foreign power like the F-18 is. It would be a made in Canada solution and variant and retrofit production would not be limiting Canadian needs at all. It is an embarrassment to Canada that Canadian conservatives continue to subject us to these foreign power limitations. We don't buy the best, we buy the most limited that is touted as the best when it is not and place ourselves dependent on delivery from a foreign power. That is just pure COSTLY bullshit and benefits a foreign power more and not us as a nation.
Finally when will the current government stop embarrassing Canada this way! The neo-con national sovereignty pitch is a lie, It's got to stop now! We the people have to stop it now!
... aerodynamically she can maintain above mach without afterburner as is but even that could be improved on. There many options to update her... IMO the design is very versatile
What you’re describing is what they call “ Super Cruise “ correct? The fact that this plane was capable of it when so few jets today aren’t, really says a lot.
Both statements are completely unfounded. If you wish to keep reasserting these claims, it'd be nice if you could include some kind of direct and verifiable historical evidence.
Parvez Jamasji & yet many major Jet fighter programs were based off of the cancelled Avro Arrow program. Once again the world benefiting from Canada's awesome contributions. :)
Convair, SAAB, MiG, Fairey, and Dassault were building supersonic deltas several years before the Arrow took wing. One might even say Avro copied them to a degree. Boundary layer splitters and ejection bleed ports weren't exactly exclusive to Avro - McDonnell's F-4 had a very similar design.
my old commander MacKenzie (VP)rocks the issue again. He makes all the salient points clearly and succinctly. Canada should never be looking at first strike anything...Dump the F35 on the trash heap of history and use the Gripen to lever our way into the fighter building business again...A CF105 Avro 3 sounds wonderful, But the gripen deal gets us there.
I would be concerned of eventual(as in many years) metal fatigue on parts of the wings especially with the current landing gear design(repeated landings putting extra stress) ...but like i said its all updatable. ..maneuverability i can't say with absolute certainty(she was never battle tested) but i look at how much air those wings and tailfin could redirect and would have to say chances are good(shortening her lenght a little might be something to look into) cont...
Did General imply that F35 doesn't have an internal "bomb bay" and all the ordnance had to be carried on the underwing pilons? it has 4 internal "bomb bay" hardpoints to mount everything from JDAM and below, (in air interdiction, 4 AMRAAMs for ex, or 2 AMRAAMs and 2 JDAM for infiltration role) the external pilons would be used once the air superiority was established, with 2 AMRAAMs 2 Sidewinders and 6 JDAMS. For Canada, to patrol the airspace, the pylon version would suffice- first, no russian fighters follow their bombers during missions, thus no one will see the F35, even with external pilons, that can carry 14 AMRAAMs in total, or 10 AMRAAMs and 2 external fuel tanks. F35 is not a bad bird, just too damn expensive. Arrow looks sweet, if you make it stealthy though. Cause Mig 21 is also knocking saying hes just as good as any plane today if u throw in a modern avionics and weapons....
the internal bay on the f35 held what one quarter what the the arrow held as its basic load ... the f35 fully loaded was almost half the load of the basic loaded arrow
Why stimulate the Canadian job market when spend you can Canadian tax dollars in a foreign country. Design and build for Canadian defense needs by Canadians? that would make too much sense. There is no guess work this time, modern materials and construction techniques; literally all we have to do is build a few and start testing. The Arrow might have been everything we dream, it might not have been but we will never know. The government isn't going show how big of a mistake was made on black Friday. Argue a point until it is no longer relevant, welcome to the world of politics. She will forever fly in our hearts, a symbol of what this great country is capable of achieving.
What Canada needs is the F22. Although the US has banned export, they would certainly lift that ban for Canada, their NORAD partner and most loyal, trustworthy and stout ally in the world! I realize the assembly line has shut down, but what I propose, is that like the F86 Canadair Sabre, Canada builds its own version! We have one of the largest commercial aerospace industries in the world so we are more then capable! Like the F86, we could add and adapt our own tweaks to suit our needs! We could build stealth as well as non stealth versions, be able to maintain our own aircraft, support our own industry, and provide our boys with what they truly need, the BEST air to air defence interceptor there is!
If done financially responsible , Canada can build all of our own subs , planes , ect... , of course there is as always an option of buying of certain parts for all to and from our allies , which is a smart business cost saving attitude , if a product is out there , with no pride involved , save money while not reaching too far and doing all in house , we all save money . There are a lot of smart people in Canada and our allies .
mrryencoke The yanks have no friends! The are exceptional and look down their noses at everybody.I say don’t buy from them! Make CanadaGreatAgain! Make our own Planes!
Our aerospace industry has taken a real beating this last year ,thanks to 300% tarifs the Americans put on Bombardier. Since our”friends” to the south did that,we’ve lost Bombardier,,and soon will lose 5000 jobs as well! Screw the yanks! Buy elsewhere or make it here.Make Canada Great Again!
Most F-35 comparisons are apples to oranges. F-35 with load being compared to clean fighters is not a suitable comparison, yet that is most of the comparisons done. Cost is not due to the plane, but the stupid bureaucratic cart before the horse production process done.
On the economic side how much would the purchase of the f-35s add to the Canadian trade deficit? I just think that instead of shipping raw resources out of Country and having a finished product returned at an astronomical price and in the process devaluing our Dollar makes no sence at all to me , especialy when we have a good base design that in the end would (95% sure) be better than what we're getting at over double the price. even if over budget in time the money makes its way back in taxes
ok, double the cost for development,still 1 billion cheaper each. 1/2 the cost of your employees pays(it'll come back in taxes) now concider the billions spent are within Canada ,Canadian industry ...paying more taxes since industry is being fueled can't forget unemployment rates dropping. now lets say it gets tweeked to the point of where others countries are interested in buying,possible trade surpluses in the future. ...where was the problem again??
The Arrow was optimized for high-altitude interception of a threat that's no longer relevant. The Arrow's design, as it was, would not be kinematically competitive with true air superiority fighters, and it doesn't appear to have been optimized for the attack role at lower altitudes (which is where the majority of recent warfare seems to have been conducted). There's a pretty good number of reasons modern combat aircraft don't look like the Arrow.
This is something I would be VERY HAPPY to see my tax money going to fund! Let show the world what Canada is capable of producing! We were ROBBED of a chunk of history. It would be so nice to see it given back to us.
Hi Prepper I made a new post to your channel I think this one will be my last post. LOL BTW your data on the Arrow VS Raptor is right on the money! you could have added the turn for both was at 50,000 foot altitude.
The F35 is a fighter bomber like the Harrier or Jag the F18 is better as a fighter and the Arrow was made for a fighter so yes the F35 could be slower like the Harrier ! Also a lot of aircraft are using delta wings all around the world. I think Canada would be better off buying a Harrier type aircraft as you could hide them all over Canada as you don't need much take off space.
+Richard Maunder In the unlikely event that I live to be 100 I will not understand how the Harrier is less good than the F35. But then I have no shares in Lockheed Martin.
Former UN commander in Bosnia and Herzegovina, General Lewis Mackenzie, was alleged to have raped Bosnian women in Serb-extremist-run rape camps, in an anthology of survivor testimonies published in Sarajevo in 1999. There are disputes about one of the two Serb eyewitnesses to MacKenzie's presence at the camp, but the Association of Former Prison Camp Inmates of the Canton of Sarajevo has a detailed statement by a Bosnian woman alleged to be a rape victim. Nevertheless MacKenzie still refuses to assist the legal investigation of these events, long after the end of the conflict itself. Mackenzie is a total disgrace to his nation's armed forces who belongs in prison.
Hard to say what the industrial offsets will end up being (only assuming the F-35 purchase goes forward). The Arrow is not "a good base design that...would be better than..." It's an outdated interceptor design with no existing airframes or support infrastructure. The F-35 might well be missing the mark in a number of ways, but that doesn't make the Arrow any more relevent in addressing modern requirements. Let's not get too caught up in the romanticized hype.
Maj. Gen MacKenzie is right, though. The basic missions of interception/air superiority and surface attack are very different. Fact is it's easier to adapt air superiority fighter for the ground mission than the reverse... The politics of playing with the designations and pretending an attack plane is a fighter has resulted in overweight, hard to service planes like the F-111 and now the F-35. There's compromise in every design but when you start with a bad premise of turning a jack-of-all =>
As usual the Conservatives are kissing the US's ass again (saying it is not capable to be developed in Canada)... but if it was built in the US of course they would buy it... Cost shouldn't be an issue because they can double the costs of the plane to cover development costs and still be cheaper than the f-35. The Arrow out preforms the F-35 in every major category. ( shown at 00:54)
the interview question .. why the fundamental design is still believed to be good ... look at every single jet fighter since the arrow ... they still use the same technology as it developed .... so instead of a 50 pound basic radar made with tubes tech era stuff ... or the equivalent radar with modern tech weighing a few pounds ... all the current fighter jets worth anything all copy heavily from the arrow ... so yes the basic design is proven rock solid .... the problem is matching old material properties to their modern versions and figuring how the change will affect the aircraft ... after that it can be tested and tweeked in some cad program until you decide you want the first one to test in real life ... then just go for broke and CnC and what not all the bits as required ... . . still dont think all jets since copied the arrow ... before the arrow ... round scoops for the intake ... after oval or rectangular ... on board air conditioning ... and all the firsts it has ( all 15 or so appear on modern fighters still to this day)
The Canadian Government has flat out refused to consider the most compelling and best solution not only for the defense of Canadian Airspace against incursions by unfriendly powers, but also it would highlight even further the magnitude of the ineptitude in the Cancellation of this advanced piece of Canadian Technology and it's viability even Today. To further illustrate just how this could be true...Exhibit A the B-52 (1954/56 airframe) is still flying, & is expected to still be flying past the 100 year mark (2050-2080...by some projections) but they don't want to further tarnish Diefenbaker' s legacy/image (one of Canada's most gullible & foolish PM's).
@@wartmcbeighn don't know where you're going with that statement but the cs300 was a clean sheet design built by Bombardier, Viking De Havilland is manufacturing the Twin Otter .What we don't have is a Government of Canada that will hire its own people to fill a contract for a Military aircraft .
I think that minister is wrong. Secure Canada's spot in the hole CANZUK Union, (even if it becomes a real thing) and then make the sixth gen Super Arrow, for now I would stick with the F/A 18 Super Hornets.
Perhaps this pitch needs to be studied by a few other countries. IF another country, with an interest in the Arctic, were to consider purchasing this equipment it might pull Harpers head out of his ass ... and he'd realise the opportunity he is missing out on here!
BULLOCK1973 Disagreed. The modern made in Canada super Arrow design is in every way up to date, advance, superior to all others and capable of all modern tech advantages = proven fact! It would be cheaper, made in Canada, boost our economy and be one of the best damn manned fighters ever built in the history of the world so far. So the design prediction states clearly.
"o (The following is written by Super Arrow Bordeaux Industries(Official) on facebook a leading Canadian aircraft producer of the world)"....they produce nothing...having no facilities, no plan, no staff . no plans....nothing at all..lol
Too bad Harper dropped the ball on this! These kind of decisions get made by people with vision and courage, not a description of a Canadian PM in at least 100 yrs!!!!
The Arrow is outdated, and actually required a little artificial stability, but not nearly to the (intentional) extent seen in modern combat aircraft. Higher stability generally corresponds to greater inertia about the control axes, making maneuvering slower and more energy intensive. This isn't to say the Arrow would have a competitive ACM capability due to suboptimal aerodynamic configuration (tailless delta) and doubtful stress capacity.
Canada Promised the US to never try develop their fighter after the destruction of the Arrow so not likely to happen. The Arrow was to much forward thinking for it's time and scared the nations. That is why it had to go.
The 🇨🇦 avro arrow i say yes rebuild do what should have bin done years ago and im one of thousands that would 💘 to see the avro arrow in the skys. And that's because that's 🇨🇦 s avro arrow not there s. Like Canada s song gos we stand on gard and we don't just do that for Canada.
This is why i dont like reporters!there are alot of delta wing fighters and multi role aircraft out there?euro fighter, saab jas 39 Gripen, the Rafael ,
The fact that this plane was never built is insane. Imagine if it had been built and the amazing things Avro could have gone on to build after.
pretty sure they built 4 planes, flown and tested
@@NAPAuniversalJoints By built I meant put into production.
@@MrKydaman THere were actually 30 odd in the production line because the test versions were built from production tooling. There are photos of the line coming down high bay 3.
37 planes in one stage of build or another ... 6 flyable ... no it was never built ... wrong ... it was never put into full production ... when for the cost of the cancellation fees they could have made all 37 planes and then finished all the flight testing ... and then sales would be awesome
There were a number built in the 50's It was a beautiful jet that would suite the patrol requirements to protect the north. Diefenbaker listened to President Eisenhower and Canada ended up with nothing. The Avro jet had powerfull engines which have never been build again. The F35 does not meet the current requiremets to patrol the North. The jet has one engine with limited distance and limited speed. Its a fighter jet as opposed the Avro jet.
If we want a fighter interceptor that works for Canada we need to build it ourselves just like in the 50s. Nothing has changed.
one thing has changed since the arrow ... diefenbaker signed away our right to design new jet fighters ... yes thats right the government literally signed an agreement with the usa saying we wont undertake any new fighter aircraft designs it was part and parcel of the bomarc agreement .... as a private design it can be done as a government funded one it cant be ... that is the sad truth ...
@@0623kaboom We don't have bomarc missiles anymore.
This option needs to be looked at very seriously given today's climate
Even if it was the same price and performance the money should go to Canada first!
Come on guys, just follow your heart and believe.
Canadian plane ... Canadian built ... Canadian jobs ... I hope this can happen !!
Stephen Harper shut the plan down already.
@@Wilsnap another moron kill the plane
Hey trudeau! You want to get Canada back on the security council? Here's your solution!!!
james our dumb prime minister are drowning the country.
trudeau couldnt do anything for himself or this country he only has ever known how to be served by others ...
This is a very intelligent retired general
And its 2019 and we still need a new fighter. 😑
we needed a new fighter since the arrow was started ... if the pc's didnt scrap it and just finished it for the cost of cancelling it they would have had the Rothchilds comming to them for loans
He doesn't care, because he is what they used to a "peacenic", someone who hates war. It's against his Liberal upbringing. He cannot see a possible war. He won't have it. It's when someone as forceful (?) as Trumpet, saying "do this or else", he has no recourse, and he hates it.
And it's now 2021 and we still need a new fighter.
@@edwardbreadman9473 its just sad at this point
My god can we please do this. It gives jobs to Canadians! And we should do what Russia is doing and keep making interceptors.
Idiotic Stephen Harper shut the plan down.
yes we need the arrow built ... BUT thanks to the moron deifenbaker ... we cant build it as a country ... he signed a contract that wont allows us to develop military fighter craft ... but as private citizens we can ... hard part ... finding a person with the room to build it in their back yard ;)
@sonoftherepublic um the arrow is a fighter interceptor ... by design ... and by choice ... it has the first implementation of over 15 different modern use systems even the f35 currently employs like an air co .. and flight control redundancy and look down shoot down radar ... internal weapons bay ... quick service engines ... extensive use of titanium stainless steel and composite materials made with aluminium ... yes the arrow is NOT what you have been taught in the USA ... heck since the f15 every single fighter the usa has made uses tech the arrow perfected ... and that includes the sparrow missile system .... originally the astra fire control system .. from the arrow .. yes the arrow is old ... but it still can out perform and out survive the f35 and stay there longer ... while doing it all in the far north where the f35 sucks balls because of its single engine ... and small wing surface ...
.
the f35 is a multi-billion dollar test bed of failed ideas that wont work properly together at the sae time for extended periods of time ... it is no better than the x15 ... its a test and toss plane
I would like to see it fly, some old folks would like to see it.
The technology is timeless, its performance unmatched by current designs...as a pilot, an updated Arrow is far superior than anything available today, including the F-35.
You can always tell a pilot. But you can't tell him much.
Plus, they new how to build stuff that would last back in those days! I would be a proud canadian again and would finally be ok with giving the government tax free loans if they went along with this idea!!!
I certainly hope this will happen. I believe a political party (not like the Diefenbaker party and certainly not our present Liberal or NDP parties) could include this in their plan and Canadians would vote for this to happen.
I will state, plainly that I am a big fan of the original CF-105 Arrow project, that it was a major blow to Canada when it was cancelled and it is a shame it was.That being said, this is my objective view of the situation when it comes to reviving the CF-105 Arrow, It is actually quite feasible and even with our messed up budgets, if anyone has any real sense the CF_XX Super Arrow and CF-105 Revival projects put forth by industry leaders within Canada should be taken very seriously and pushed to the table earnestly, we can not continue to bow down to extra national pressure just because of their fear of losing Canadian business, they would not lose it, it would simply change direction, change pace, we would have our own aerial pride back and others could very well profit from it than simply Canadian interests, a nationally conceptualised, designed and built all weather/ multirole fighter aircraft is something we seriously need to have again.
Dad was there from '56 to black friday - then I did aerospace for 30 yeas - lets make this girl again!!
Viewed objectively the resurrection of the Arrow, in a highly modified form, would probably be the best option for Canada, if the assumed mission is to defend Canadian airspace. The large-ish, twin engine delta wing interceptor would be ideal: long range, internal missile armament, lengthy loiter capability and high speed and altitude capability. I would imagine that a modification of the original design could be made to be relatively stealthy at least from a frontal aspect in the same way as the Eurofighter Typhoon is relatively stealthy from the same aspect.
Such an aircraft would be ideal for air defence of a very large border area. It's no accident that the Russian PAK-FA is of a similar configuration, and for exactly the same reasons.
A modified F-15 Eagle would also probably do as a stop-gap measure. The F-35 on the other hand would be totally unsuitable for the same mission profile and would be an utterly illogical purchase for that mission.
Sure, the RCAF probably needs a strike fighter and/or CAS aircraft but that role could be ably filled with a fleet of A-10C's.
As crazy as it may sound, for the mission parameters, the modernised CF-105 would be absolutely ideal.
Cen Blackwell agreed.
Cen Blackwell I agree it is not that crazy, basically it is a return to a pure interceptor role away from the multirole trend, thus simplifying the design, and ending up with something that would probably look much like the original Arrow.
With a pure design mission, costs could be reduced to make up for the design effort.
If multirole is needed, one of the euro designs would work, for CAS, an A-6, A7 or Su-25 would be better than an A-10. Hell a mothballed CF-100 might work for CAS, if you ignore the need for sophisticated radar and fire control. Many Su-25 versions work this way, pretty much visual target identification.
Brad Johnson Agreed, but Super Hornet or Saab Grippen or both is the way to go if we need multi role but for a long range interceptor in the arctic or national sovereignty patrols, or no-fly zone enforcement, nothing but the CF-105 will do... if we cut our F-35 purchase in half, we could afford it!
Another reason: the world is back in an arms race again and like it or not, Canada needs to compete.
The F-14 or F15 would be great, the problem is they are too expensive to build and maintain (and no longer available). A pure interceptor could get what we need out those aircraft for less cost.
Agreed no point in reinventing the wheel for multi-role.
Brad Johnson Well actually there were modernization programs for the F-14 and F-15 and they would be cheaper to build than anything else on the list but they would provide only a temporary solution & not a lasting one, & Northrop Grumman took the F-18 super hornet and growler to the next level but even that is not a lasting solution. Only a home made program will provide a lasting solution. Northrop Grumman would love to have Canada's business no matter what we decide, thing is, who's economy and Nation does it serve, theirs or ours?
It's been 7 years. I think we could have built the planes by now. But I'm sure our new/used planes will be fine.
Looking to hear from the General avro on sales of the Avro arrow f18 and the and whats new? Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas Happy new Year.
2022 and we still need jets...bring back the Arrow
One of the original design engineers stated that plans were in the works to add rockets that would provide the Arrow space with flight capabilities. This fighter could have been built since this video first aired, instead the idiots is Ottawa are still talking about some foreign super expensive junk.
Compared to the Typhoon and Rafale, the CF-105 is indeed an antiquated design. Deltas, yes - but deltas equipped with canards, LEX, full-view canopies, guns, reduced RCS, etc. No contest, other than speed.
Yes if i have to spend my tax dollars on a fighting plane might as well being a canadien plane and job would stay in canada
While i agree that we should make our own Plans, Tanks, ships ect, the biggest problem with rebuilding the arrow is that it will take the better part of a decade to get them to the deployment stage and our f-18s need to be replaced sooner then that.
And 11 years later
Another thing i'd like to add is that it was canceled before it was "really" tested and tweeked back then , so had the project not been cancels there would have been some changes even back then with 1950s technology,if you add our knowledge today with little modifications would bring vast improvement to the original basic design.
which i believe has more potential than most more modern designs.(stability in flight because of the way the wings support the crafts center of gravity).
I would be happy to contribute to a program where Canada builds it's own fighter aircraft. Not doing this has been a long time coming. The time has come to grow up.
Hi, Folks.
Unless I am very much mistaken, the F35 was for a LONG time called the JSF, the Joint Strike Fighter. What this means is that it was mixture of requirements for various services and purposes - - - - which can at best be a bunch of compromises - which in turn means that it would have problems trying to satisfying all the needs of any one group, let alone ALL of the needs of ALL the services and purposes.
Just my 0.02.
You all have a wonderful day. Best wishes. Deas Plant.
And yet there is for some reason 0 competition for it, performance wise. Oh and guess what. All modern jets are multi-role.
The avro was scrapped for fears of tech in wrong hands , the PM of Canada then being convinced by the then USA president , including a good reason for full north America missile defense , and underlying deals and reasons on both parts , and the USA military hungry for a high mach plane when theirs were behind in tech , Canada took a big blow in the face and would have been a very different country today , watch firefox movie and ignore the voice activated helment , from some of us I can't speek for all of us , we humbly request to be allowed to retry this idea . This has left a common sense WHY? , and a knoit in the throat for many Canadians . If a newer version built by Canadians , and not politically influenced may be a mutually beneficial project . Signed with a tear
Even if you rebulid this jet can it match a F-22 or Su 35 in a dogfight? I don't think not it designed to be a attack aircraft at least the F-35 just proved a 15 to 1 kill ratio at Nellis red flag can this CF-105 do the same..... not!!!!!
Canada’s aerospace industry could use a shot in the arm,since we’ve lost Bombardier,due to dirty tarifs by the USA, and the resultant 5000 jobs that we will lose thanks to them.
We owe nothing to the people south of us.They play dirty.We need to stand alone from them.The Arrow would be a good job creator,as well as a much needed fighter for our Air Force.
I totally understand why it's generally desirable to keep production local (which can be sometimes be difficult with differences in labor costs).
When you're talking about a major weapons program requiring a large development expenditure and an end product that'll only continue being an economic drain, it's hard to tell the difference between a "stimulus package" and outright "reckless spending" (though the former usually falls in this category too). There are no "extra" dollars in doing this.
it's not an outdated design. the Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon have delta wings.
How will drones fit into this mix?
GSTENCE1897 it's simple they won't, they are completely different form of combat system & one that Canadian procurement programs have already considered & I won't say more because it's hush hush shit.
GSTENCE1897 It's possible that AI autonomous drones may obsolete piloted fighters and I think this is likely to be the case but there are efforts for international treaties banning full automation of weapon systems. I would suspect that by the time we could fully developed a fifth gen Arrow with the associated manufacturing base and integrate weapon systems, piloted fifth gen fighters would at best be on their last legs of economic viability. I would say that if you want an Arrow to fly again, open source those plans that were taken home and research scaled down arrow airframes as semi-autonomous 3d printed pilotless swarm drones with extreme range, speed and altitude. The general public would then be providing the 3d printing work of the admittedly ancient physical airframe and the research teams can focus on software and weapons integration.
7 years since this interview and we still have no new aircraft instead we buy used ones.
Trudon't won't listen to the "great unwashed public". He's content with buying either some other country's garbage, like the used Australian F-18, and the UK's 4 used submarines. Which we can only find parts enough for 1 to put to sea. Great, isn't it? To top it all, Deifenbaker, killed the airplane manufacturing in Canada, and Trudeau would have killed the ship industry, but the fact that Trumpet told Trudeau that either he spend up to his NATO commitments or the US was going to pull out of NATO. So we are getting new ships, finally.
I have the original files of the Avro Arrow, and I have yet!!! to see any numbers that say the Avro Arrow could fly further and faster than a brand-new aircraft of today. The Avro Arrow was designated a Fighter Jet and an Interceptor and dated as far back as 1949. If the Avro Arrow had survived beyond 1962, then you could argue facts. Canada is a Nuclear Free Nation inside its borders, but outside Canada is still working with Nukes. We may not own them, but the 35 was designed to carry and deliver them. Hence the reason the 35 has been chosen and they were not giving up on it.
The Arrow was an INTERCEPTOR. Not a Jet fighter.
the arrow IS a FIGHTER/INTERCEPTOR ... by DESIGN ... to fit the northern patrol requirement it had to be a fighter interceptor ... there was no optional choice .... it was designed as one period
Folks, the 1st Sputnik was launched in 1957 and the Arrow 2 years later. Imagine what Canada could do now. It's not sentimental, we have done and we still can do exceptional accomplishment; it was a fact and it was reality, not a far-fetched dream.
What do you mean nobody else has used a delta wing design?
No direct revenue, but if its built in Canada we are investing in ourselves
If we buy it from anywhere else we are fueling their industries.
What about approaching "Bombardier" they're plants might need little modifications for the actual manufacturing processes of such a project.
and if it flops at least it got "Canadians" working for a while and the money is still within our boarders (consider it a "Stimulous package") the economy will have a few extra ,Taxable, dollars circulating within it.
"Outdated" designs get updated all the time because a) performance really hasn't increased that much; b) the basic designs are sound and feasible for upgrades; and c) what's "coming down the pike" doesn't make sense to manufacture!
I'm an American and I think the F-35 is a waste, too. We'd all be better replacing the current aircraft with new frames with updated/more reliable electronics. Block 60 F-16s are the way to go along with updated F-15E variants.
The US Navy is the service that's =>
@ 4:33 the interviewer says that he can list a number of aircraft (20) which do not have the delta wing design of the Avro Arrow. This is a misleading and narrow minded view of Military aircraft design, he said he could list 20 designs produced that don't have the design but I can list 31 production designs that do have a Delta design... here is the list: Atlas Cheetah, Avro Vulcan (- strategic bomber/stealthy), Buran Orbiter, Chengdu J-7 (- a Chinese development of MiG-21), Chengdu J-10, Concorde, Convair B-58 Hustler,
Convair F-102 Delta Dagger, Convair F-106 Delta Dart, Dassault Mirage III, Dassault Mirage IV, Dassault Mirage 2000, Dassault Rafale, Douglas F4D Skyray, Eurofighter Typhoon (this is a big one), General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon (another big one how could he miss that), Gloster Javelin (- subsonic fighter), HAL Tejas, IAI Kfir (Israeli),
Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird (another big one) McDonnell Douglas A-4 Skyhawk (- a "tailed" delta wing aircraft), Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 (- a "tailed" delta wing fighter)
Saab 35 Draken, Saab 37 Viggen, Saab JAS 39 Gripen (another big one), Shenyang J-8
Space Shuttle Orbiter (how did you miss that), Sukhoi Su-9, Sukhoi Su-11, Sukhoi Su-15 (- early models), Tupolev Tu-144 ( Russias famous supersonic Jetliner).
Like how could he miss that! No wonder why he had to ask the ex-General so many questions but I will applaud him for bringing light to the misunderstood Arrow debate!
I am not replying to myself here, I want to say a few more things about this issue...The F-35 flying armadillo is a strike fighter not an air superiority fighter or a multi-role fighter (like the F-18 it is supposed to replace), & it therefor WILL NOT meet the requirements to defend our national sovereignty or most of our common military roles in NATO. It would meet a limited need for our role in NATO, the price tag for that is enormously huge and therefor equally ridiculous as our neo-con governments rejection of a valid proposal to revive the avro arrow. The Beaverworks Super Arrow design is one of the most modern, competitive and advanced designs of military aviation history, It would compete and defeat the designs of every major fifth generation fighter program built today, would be attractive as an export to military allies, would create an enormous economic boost for Canada and Canadians & would meet all the major role requirements for our Armed forces and our commitments to our allies & our own sovereignty. Our current government are absolute idiot-morons to reject the revival of the Arrow program, the new super Arrow concept which is in conceptualization/prototype stage by a private company... It is the only way for Canada to go especially ever since the Fox news Redeye segment exposed what Americans really think about Canadian contributions to NATO. The current government should be voted out now because of this! Canadians wake up if you care about your country!
Another point i want to make is, that the American Aerospace programs are not reliable to deliver Armed combat systems to Canada anymore... they have international Agenda's that dwarf any commitments to their Canadian partner. Ask yourself, why did they sell to India over 50 000 modern anti-tank weapons, delivered them promptly but Canada saw only 1 of the 28 new helicopters promised in contract. They don't respect Canada no more and they have the hands in the pockets of our Neo-cons and everyone knows it. Some proof of their lack of reliability to Deliver to Canada in recent history is as follows:
The CH-148/MH-92 Superhawk procurement program originally agreed in 2004 for 5 billion, experienced several major set back up to 2014, with 4 major contract renegotiation's due to mechanical malfunction, company strike, slow delivery and production time, & an outrageous cost for a faulty program; & finally in 2013 to 2014 a major contract Delivery failure resulted in a contract dispute and renegotiation that will see us get only 8 of the original 28 helicopters promised in the original contract and that will come in 2018 3 years after the Sea Kings get retired this year. That is utterly ridiculous, WTF is our government doing even considering these unreliable American companies that clearly don't care about us or our national sovereignty. We need to replace the Sea King several years ago, still not happening thanks to unreliable American ventures.
My Final point, The Original Avro Arrow was intended to be a Modifiable combat system that would have emerged into several different variants, at least 3 variants were planned (mk1, mk2,mk3,) when the first prototype was on the tarmac. A current Super Arrow Program which would be in every way superior, cheaper and more beneficial to Canada than the F-35 could include a variant program that would retrofit the modern fighter to various roles and environments for operational versatility. Stealth and 3 dimensional maneuvering tech can be integrated with superior speed and range performance of the original arrow & the retrofitting and variations would not be limited by contracts with a foreign power like the F-18 is. It would be a made in Canada solution and variant and retrofit production would not be limiting Canadian needs at all. It is an embarrassment to Canada that Canadian conservatives continue to subject us to these foreign power limitations. We don't buy the best, we buy the most limited that is touted as the best when it is not and place ourselves dependent on delivery from a foreign power. That is just pure COSTLY bullshit and benefits a foreign power more and not us as a nation.
Finally when will the current government stop embarrassing Canada this way! The neo-con national sovereignty pitch is a lie, It's got to stop now! We the people have to stop it now!
protectorian The production F-16 is no more of a delta wing than an F-18 - only the F-16XL Scamp experimental variant was delta planform.
ooooooohhhhhyes
...
aerodynamically she can maintain above mach without afterburner as is
but even that could be improved on.
There many options to update her...
IMO the design is very versatile
What you’re describing is what they call “ Super Cruise “ correct? The fact that this plane was capable of it when so few jets today aren’t, really says a lot.
You do Have a point there.
7 years old
Arrow more feared by allies than enemies
TSR 2 also more feared by allies than enemies
Both statements are completely unfounded.
If you wish to keep reasserting these claims, it'd be nice if you could include some kind of direct and verifiable historical evidence.
Parvez Jamasji & yet many major Jet fighter programs were based off of the cancelled Avro Arrow program.
Once again the world benefiting from Canada's awesome contributions. :)
Please name the fighter programs based on the CF-105.
Raynus 1 Everything with a delta wing and side intake configuration of which there are many around the whole world.
Convair, SAAB, MiG, Fairey, and Dassault were building supersonic deltas several years before the Arrow took wing. One might even say Avro copied them to a degree. Boundary layer splitters and ejection bleed ports weren't exactly exclusive to Avro - McDonnell's F-4 had a very similar design.
my old commander MacKenzie (VP)rocks the issue again. He makes all the salient points clearly and succinctly. Canada should never be looking at first strike anything...Dump the F35 on the trash heap of history and use the Gripen to lever our way into the fighter building business again...A CF105 Avro 3 sounds wonderful, But the gripen deal gets us there.
Half the price and the money stays in Canada
fk what a plane
I would be concerned of eventual(as in many years) metal fatigue on parts of the wings especially with the current landing gear design(repeated landings putting extra stress)
...but like i said its all updatable.
..maneuverability i can't say with absolute certainty(she was never battle tested)
but i look at how much air those wings and tailfin could redirect and would have to say chances are good(shortening her lenght a little might be something to look into)
cont...
Money, money, money
Did General imply that F35 doesn't have an internal "bomb bay" and all the ordnance had to be carried on the underwing pilons? it has 4 internal "bomb bay" hardpoints to mount everything from JDAM and below, (in air interdiction, 4 AMRAAMs for ex, or 2 AMRAAMs and 2 JDAM for infiltration role) the external pilons would be used once the air superiority was established, with 2 AMRAAMs 2 Sidewinders and 6 JDAMS. For Canada, to patrol the airspace, the pylon version would suffice- first, no russian fighters follow their bombers during missions, thus no one will see the F35, even with external pilons, that can carry 14 AMRAAMs in total, or 10 AMRAAMs and 2 external fuel tanks.
F35 is not a bad bird, just too damn expensive.
Arrow looks sweet, if you make it stealthy though. Cause Mig 21 is also knocking saying hes just as good as any plane today if u throw in a modern avionics and weapons....
the internal bay on the f35 held what one quarter what the the arrow held as its basic load ... the f35 fully loaded was almost half the load of the basic loaded arrow
Well its 2022 and we still don't have a replacement for the CF-18..............................
they won't do it. 1. this gov would rather waste are money on crap and no jobs here in Canada.
Why stimulate the Canadian job market when spend you can Canadian tax dollars in a foreign country. Design and build for Canadian defense needs by Canadians? that would make too much sense. There is no guess work this time, modern materials and construction techniques; literally all we have to do is build a few and start testing. The Arrow might have been everything we dream, it might not have been but we will never know. The government isn't going show how big of a mistake was made on black Friday. Argue a point until it is no longer relevant, welcome to the world of politics. She will forever fly in our hearts, a symbol of what this great country is capable of achieving.
The F 35 does not have 3D trust vectoring! AND the avro arrow can be refitted with stealh;3D trust vectoring;AESA radar and multi re capability
you can't just take a plane and put thrust vectoring on it. If that was the case we could just do that to the F-18. It's not that simple.
And liquid oxygen for liquid fuel burn w directional thrusters for space flight.
What Canada needs is the F22. Although the US has banned export, they would certainly lift that ban for Canada, their NORAD partner and most loyal, trustworthy and stout ally in the world! I realize the assembly line has shut down, but what I propose, is that like the F86 Canadair Sabre, Canada builds its own version! We have one of the largest commercial aerospace industries in the world so we are more then capable! Like the F86, we could add and adapt our own tweaks to suit our needs! We could build stealth as well as non stealth versions, be able to maintain our own aircraft, support our own industry, and provide our boys with what they truly need, the BEST air to air defence interceptor there is!
If done financially responsible , Canada can build all of our own subs , planes , ect... , of course there is as always an option of buying of certain parts for all to and from our allies , which is a smart business cost saving attitude , if a product is out there , with no pride involved , save money while not reaching too far and doing all in house , we all save money . There are a lot of smart people in Canada and our allies .
mrryencoke The yanks have no friends! The are exceptional and look down their noses at everybody.I say don’t buy from them! Make CanadaGreatAgain! Make our own Planes!
Our aerospace industry has taken a real beating this last year ,thanks to 300% tarifs the Americans put on Bombardier. Since our”friends” to the south did that,we’ve lost Bombardier,,and soon will lose 5000 jobs as well! Screw the yanks! Buy elsewhere or make it here.Make Canada Great Again!
Lots of jobs...not to mention other countries buying them
NOT ONE other country would buy it when it was new.
Most F-35 comparisons are apples to oranges. F-35 with load being compared to clean fighters is not a suitable comparison, yet that is most of the comparisons done. Cost is not due to the plane, but the stupid bureaucratic cart before the horse production process done.
How about Sweden's typhoon it can mop the floor with almost everything out there and it's a Delta wing.
On the economic side how much would the purchase of the f-35s add to the Canadian trade deficit?
I just think that instead of shipping raw resources out of Country and having a finished product returned at an astronomical price and in the process devaluing our Dollar makes no sence at all to me , especialy when we have a good base design that in the end would (95% sure) be better than what we're getting at over double the price.
even if over budget in time the money makes its way back in taxes
Lots of airplane "experts" in the comments section
Man thank god this guy isn't in the military anymore. We would still be in the 1960s it he had the coin purse.
If this aircraft were developed for the Canadian military, would there be a market for them in the Commonwealth nations?
+beaconrider Depends on what it would cost them to buy ??
+beaconrider Of course. That's what American a/c manufacturers are scared of. Losing market share . . . .
ok, double the cost for development,still 1 billion cheaper each.
1/2 the cost of your employees pays(it'll come back in taxes)
now concider the billions spent are within Canada ,Canadian industry ...paying more taxes since industry is being fueled
can't forget unemployment rates dropping.
now lets say it gets tweeked to the point of where others countries are interested in buying,possible trade surpluses in the future.
...where was the problem again??
KFX with CanaDa CF-105 together...Resurrection ~ !!!
Feb6 2019 still no jets, could have built a prototype already.
they could have...if they had ..facilities...staff..all that kind of stuff, plus a real aircraft manufacturer
The Arrow was optimized for high-altitude interception of a threat that's no longer relevant. The Arrow's design, as it was, would not be kinematically competitive with true air superiority fighters, and it doesn't appear to have been optimized for the attack role at lower altitudes (which is where the majority of recent warfare seems to have been conducted).
There's a pretty good number of reasons modern combat aircraft don't look like the Arrow.
Simple.. Just build one...
Kinda hard when Trudeau is busy giving terrorists 10 million dollars and spending the rest of tax payers money on the worlds largest duck.
This is something I would be VERY HAPPY to see my tax money going to fund! Let show the world what Canada is capable of producing!
We were ROBBED of a chunk of history. It would be so nice to see it given back to us.
never going to happen
GREAT IDEA we can do this and we should do this, our tax dollars well spent! In house!! Bring her back
Not going to happen
What planes can do a instantaneous 6g turn at mach 1.5? The Arrow could! (Raptor does 5g)
Hi Prepper I made a new post to your channel I think this one will be my last post. LOL BTW your data on the Arrow VS Raptor is right on the money! you could have added the turn for both was at 50,000 foot altitude.
The F35 is a fighter bomber like the Harrier or Jag the F18 is better as a fighter and the Arrow was made for a fighter so yes the F35 could be slower like the Harrier ! Also a lot of aircraft are using delta wings all around the world. I think Canada would be better off buying a Harrier type aircraft as you could hide them all over Canada as you don't need much take off space.
+Richard Maunder In the unlikely event that I live to be 100 I will not understand how the Harrier is less good than the F35. But then I have no shares in Lockheed Martin.
Former UN commander in Bosnia and Herzegovina, General Lewis Mackenzie, was alleged to have raped Bosnian women in Serb-extremist-run rape camps, in an anthology of survivor testimonies published in Sarajevo in 1999. There are disputes about one of the two Serb eyewitnesses to MacKenzie's presence at the camp, but the Association of Former Prison Camp Inmates of the Canton of Sarajevo has a detailed statement by a Bosnian woman alleged to be a rape victim. Nevertheless MacKenzie still refuses to assist the legal investigation of these events, long after the end of the conflict itself.
Mackenzie is a total disgrace to his nation's armed forces who belongs in prison.
Lets step up a bit, try clean nuclear engine, thorium powered and it could fly to the moon and back
for your info there are deltas all over the place.
6 years later and this is still the same problem shameful Canada shameful indeed
Canada should have and could have built it years ago. The F-35 will never be interceptor.
Hard to say what the industrial offsets will end up being (only assuming the F-35 purchase goes forward).
The Arrow is not "a good base design that...would be better than..." It's an outdated interceptor design with no existing airframes or support infrastructure.
The F-35 might well be missing the mark in a number of ways, but that doesn't make the Arrow any more relevent in addressing modern requirements. Let's not get too caught up in the romanticized hype.
avro arov test pilot was żurakowski polish pilot
Maj. Gen MacKenzie is right, though. The basic missions of interception/air superiority and surface attack are very different. Fact is it's easier to adapt air superiority fighter for the ground mission than the reverse... The politics of playing with the designations and pretending an attack plane is a fighter has resulted in overweight, hard to service planes like the F-111 and now the F-35. There's compromise in every design but when you start with a bad premise of turning a jack-of-all =>
As usual the Conservatives are kissing the US's ass again (saying it is not capable to be developed in Canada)... but if it was built in the US of course they would buy it... Cost shouldn't be an issue because they can double the costs of the plane to cover development costs and still be cheaper than the f-35. The Arrow out preforms the F-35 in every major category. ( shown at 00:54)
the interview question .. why the fundamental design is still believed to be good ... look at every single jet fighter since the arrow ... they still use the same technology as it developed .... so instead of a 50 pound basic radar made with tubes tech era stuff ... or the equivalent radar with modern tech weighing a few pounds ... all the current fighter jets worth anything all copy heavily from the arrow ... so yes the basic design is proven rock solid .... the problem is matching old material properties to their modern versions and figuring how the change will affect the aircraft ... after that it can be tested and tweeked in some cad program until you decide you want the first one to test in real life ... then just go for broke and CnC and what not all the bits as required ...
.
.
still dont think all jets since copied the arrow ... before the arrow ... round scoops for the intake ... after oval or rectangular ... on board air conditioning ... and all the firsts it has ( all 15 or so appear on modern fighters still to this day)
JAS 39 Gripen NG !
No stealth. No weapons systems were built for the aero and no current avionics.
every country on the flat earth would have bought that plane
The Canadian Government has flat out refused to consider the most compelling and best solution not only for the defense of Canadian Airspace against incursions by unfriendly powers, but also it would highlight even further the magnitude of the ineptitude in the Cancellation of this advanced piece of Canadian Technology and it's viability even Today. To further illustrate just how this could be true...Exhibit A the B-52 (1954/56 airframe) is still flying, & is expected to still be flying past the 100 year mark (2050-2080...by some projections) but they don't want to further tarnish Diefenbaker' s legacy/image (one of Canada's most gullible & foolish PM's).
What compelling and best solution??? There is no reputable company that could possibly build such a plane
build the Arrow
there are no companies that can...so not going to happen
@@wartmcbeighn The A220 not just happen
@@markgallicano true enough...but it was made by an actual aviation company with staff and facilities
@@wartmcbeighn don't know where you're going with that statement but the cs300 was a clean sheet design built by Bombardier, Viking De Havilland is manufacturing the Twin Otter .What we don't have is a Government of Canada that will hire its own people to fill a contract for a Military aircraft .
@@markgallicano what we don't have is an aerospace company that can build a fighter....can you name a company that could??
Brings Canada into aerospace development. The US fucked Canada with the Arrow
The young guy may be better off flipping burgers than try and throw off the adult in the room.
I think that minister is wrong. Secure Canada's spot in the hole CANZUK Union, (even if it becomes a real thing) and then make the sixth gen Super Arrow, for now I would stick with the F/A 18 Super Hornets.
6th gen super arrow???no such thing..lol.. who's going to build it
Perhaps this pitch needs to be studied by a few other countries. IF another country, with an interest in the Arctic, were to consider purchasing this equipment it might pull Harpers head out of his ass ... and he'd realise the opportunity he is missing out on here!
We need to let the Avto arrow go!! It's old old technology, america and Britain has had very similar jets to the arrow. Old design. It's a pipe dream.
BULLOCK1973 Disagreed. The modern made in Canada super Arrow design is in every way up to date, advance, superior to all others and capable of all modern tech advantages = proven fact! It would be cheaper, made in Canada, boost our economy and be one of the best damn manned fighters ever built in the history of the world so far. So the design prediction states clearly.
"o
(The following is written by Super Arrow Bordeaux Industries(Official) on facebook a leading Canadian aircraft producer of the world)"....they produce nothing...having no facilities, no plan, no staff
. no plans....nothing at all..lol
Too bad Harper dropped the ball on this! These kind of decisions get made by people with vision and courage, not a description of a Canadian PM in at least 100 yrs!!!!
All the hard work is done now we just have to take over our government
The Arrow is outdated, and actually required a little artificial stability, but not nearly to the (intentional) extent seen in modern combat aircraft. Higher stability generally corresponds to greater inertia about the control axes, making maneuvering slower and more energy intensive. This isn't to say the Arrow would have a competitive ACM capability due to suboptimal aerodynamic configuration (tailless delta) and doubtful stress capacity.
Canada Promised the US to never try develop their fighter after the destruction of the Arrow so not likely to happen. The Arrow was to much forward thinking for it's time and scared the nations. That is why it had to go.
Give us a link to this promise. You can', that is just an internet bullshit lie that keeps getting spread by idiots like you.
I mean who keeps promises? Didn’t we promise theUSSR that we wouldn’t advance NATO towards their borders?
The 🇨🇦 avro arrow i say yes rebuild do what should have bin done years ago and im one of thousands that would 💘 to see the avro arrow in the skys. And that's because that's 🇨🇦 s avro arrow not there s. Like Canada s song gos we stand on gard and we don't just do that for Canada.
We need long range better than slow too expensive ARRROW FOR CANADA we need it not f35 and long range helicopters
This is why i dont like reporters!there are alot of delta wing fighters and multi role aircraft out there?euro fighter, saab jas 39 Gripen, the Rafael ,