A new Avro Arrow (or Super Arrow) instead of the F-35 (Merged thread)

[Maxadia]

And what weapons would the modernized CF-105 carry? The original version was designed to deliver air-to-air nuclear weapons and detonate them over northern Canada.

I believe the Sparrow was chosen as a weapons system for the Arrow?

 

[Shrek1985]

This makes everyone involved look stupid.

I agree that the F-35 is the wrong aircraft for us, but the role it is intended to fill, it could do very well. problem is; it's totally the wrong role for us to fill with an aircraft this expensive.

We don not need the Avro Arrow, unless we're talking the MKIV, ect, we need an aircraft LIKE the arrow. High Speed, High Altitude, Long Range. Something we can double in the strike and air-defence suppression role. such as the latest version of the MIG-31.

The F-35 is a completely different kind of aircraft than the Arrow was. They play different games, entirely. It's like matching up a hockey and water polo team.

now...if you were to, for instance develop a weapon effective against stealth aircraft and put it on a mach 3+, 90,000 ft + ceiling airframe, then it's not even a contest.

 

[aesop081]

I believe the Sparrow was chosen as a weapons system for the Arrow?

Sparrow II to be exact. After the United States decided to abandon development in 1956, Canada was left alone to bear the cost and risk. That obviously did not go anywhere and contributed to the downfall of the CF-105.

 

[Ostrozac]

While the Arrow was orginally supposed to have Sparrow II -- my understanding is that because Sparrow II simply didn't work, that the primary armament was then changed to the AIR-2 Genie nuclear weapon, the same one that we eventually used on the CF-101 Voodoos.

 

[GAP]

Mods...I think a split off of the F-35 thread to it's own Arrow resurrection thread is due....

 

[aesop081]

While the Arrow was orginally supposed to have Sparrow II -- my understanding is that because Sparrow II simply didn't work, that the primary armament was then changed to the AIR-2 Genie nuclear weapon, the same one that we eventually used on the CF-101 Voodoos.

After the cancelation of the Sparrow II project by the US in 1956, Canadair was brought in to continue its development in Canada. Avro argued that the Falcon missile was a better choice. The canadian development of Sparrow II was not cancelled until 1959, cancellation of the Arrow was requested in 1958. I don't think the Genie was ever intended for use with the CF-105

 

[Journeyman]

I agree that the F-35 is the wrong aircraft for us, but the role it is intended to fill, it could do very well. problem is; it's totally the wrong role for us to fill with an aircraft this expensive.

What RCAF roles are you advocating/arbitrarily dismissing...and based on what?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

What RCAF roles are you advocating/arbitrarily dismissing...and based on what?

If he choses to answer that, it can be in the F-35 thread lest we interlock the topics again.

 

[Journeyman]

flat wrong. Look it up; Avro aircraft and cold war aviation by Whitcomb

OK, instead of "flat wrong; look it up," would it not be more useful for you to post the CF-105 / F-4 stats with sources, rather than having each and every reader here go out and purchase Whitcomb's book?
After all, Amazon says they have only five used in stock (from $77.58); by the time we all swapped addresses and passed the book around, the thread would be long dead.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I think it's high time to redevelop the mosquito as a stealthy intruder using proven technology and domestically sourced materials. The Bristol Beaufort can play the part of our Marine Sovereignty mission supported by Sutherland flying boats.

 

[Gorgo]

There is a lobby group who are pushing for the Avro Arrow to come back from the grave as Canada's next front line fighter.  Maj. Gen (Ret) Lewis MacKenzie is leading the charge, but getting no real bites in Ottawa.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/will-legendary-avro-arrow-make-lazarus-like-return/article4530724/

My God!  Who's insane dope-dream IS this?!

I agree with many of the people who have contributed to this thread.  The Arrow is an interceptor.  We have no need for such a plane these days.

We'd be better off buying the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet instead of the F-35.  The latter design hasn't been proven by ANY stretch of the imagination and even if we're just getting the standard non-V/STOL version of the plane to equip 3 and 4 Wings, the complete boondoggle of the development process in America is just going to slow down development on all versions and jack up the costs even more.  Besides, given our fighter pilots' experience with the CF-188 - which is an F/A-18A - converting over to a CF-188E Super Hornet would be as simple as pie and not require so much in the way of infrastructure changes.

Why on Earth didn't the Air Force consider THAT?!

 

[Haletown]

I think it's high time to redevelop the mosquito as a stealthy intruder using proven technology and domestically sourced materials. The Bristol Beaufort can play the part of our Marine Sovereignty mission supported by Sutherland flying boats.

Excellent idea       

I heard a rumor that the plans for the Sopwith Camel went home with those workers and it would an uber stealthy aircraft,  flying so low and slow nothing could touch it.

 

[PuckChaser]

Why on Earth didn't the Air Force consider THAT?!

Because, as stated earlier, the production line is closing and the US is planning on replacing the Super Hornet in 10 years with the F-35. They're not going to keep parts plants open for our 65 airframes.

 

[armyguy1]

Reading all of this stuff about what fighter people think we should get makes me wonder, if there wasn't all of these issues and obstacles to overcome to get a specific aircraft what actually is the best fighter out there to date?

 

[aesop081]

Why on Earth didn't the Air Force consider THAT?!

The RCAF did not have the benefit of your insights at time.  :

which is an F/A-18A

...and F/A-18B............We have those too.........

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

The Banshee, Voodoo and Starfighter were far along the curve when they were bought. The Sabres were about halfway by the time they really got going.

The only ones the RCAF was in on from the beginning were the CF-100's (for obvious reasons) and the CF-18's.

 

[observor 69]

When we retired the Voodoo it was so far over the hill in technology and airframe hours that I am not sure it could have survived in a real war.
The 104 was designed for a high speed high altitude intercept but being used to attack ground targets. And like the Voodoo,at the end, was struggling for parts and support.
So now we are looking at buying the most advanced state of the art aircraft, and who wouldn't love that!
But with our record it wouldn't be all that unusual if we bought a Super Hornet compromise buy?

 

[Remius]

Well if we are thinking of resurecting the Arrow, it is only fitting we bring back some other worthwhile projects like this one (for the Navy):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Habakkuk

Project Habakkuk would accomplish many things and likely complement the Arrow.  For one, we have plenty of the source materials to build at least two (to start).  It hits all the marks.  Low cost, locally built, arctic soverignty, environmental, low upkeep, very little crew required etc etc.

Plus as a bonus, we could get a pile of sea faring nations to buy into this early so as to receive a lower price and share in upkeep and materials.  Heck, I'm sure we can convince caribeean nations to buy in due to low costs.

I'm writing someone about this as we speak...

 

[dapaterson]

Bah!  We need to look to the future, not the past.  F-35, not CF-105.  SCSC, not Project Habakkuk.  And CASW, not 60mm mortars!

 

[Pat in Halifax]

Bah!  We need to look to the future, not the past.  F-35, not CF-105.  SCSC, not Project Habakkuk.  And CASW, not 60mm mortars!

SCSC has been superseded by CSC (Canadian Surface Combatant) Admittedly, it is the 4th kick at the cat on that one:
CADRE;
SCSC:
DR, and now
CSC