Avro Arrow RL-206

[Dissident]

Considering that the Arrow was freaking huge (for a fighter), it would be pretty hard to hide it, especially for 50 years.  I've also been around long enough to know that keeping a secret of this magnitude is pretty much impossible.  The Government doesn't cover things up, not because it doesn't want to, but because it is entirely incapable of doing so.

Well, I don't think if it was spirited away it was done by or for the govt of the time.

What would be interesting to find out was what was the range of the aircraft, where could it have flown/possible runways, anything happened at those runways in the time frame quoted?

 

[Jammer]

...it's the demo bird for the 2010 airshow season. SURPRISE!!

 

[SeanNewman]

The more research one does into it, the more that they'll find out it was far from the exact story as told on the CBC's Arrow movie production.

Diefenbaker wasn't anywhere near as evil as he appeared to be, and arguably even try to salvage some of it. 

To keep the performance you always hear about they'd have to refuel almost constantly with the day's technology, and none of the other systems that it was supposed to use were ready anyway.

Yes it is still something to be proud of as a Canadian and yes it was a great jet for its day, but to suggest that we'd still be flying them today is crazy.

At most it could have been viewed as the father of something like the F4 Phantom, but those aren't exactly first line anymore and they were a decade newer.

I'm as big of a fan of them as anyone...I've got the $20 coin, the Sushu painting/print, the posters, the models, etc, but let us be realistic here and not base our opinions on some docutainment.

Just like every other front line fighter (F22, F35), you almost break the bank of the country if you try to research and build these things unless you're at war.

 

[karl28]

George Wallace

              Great photo thanks for sharing it . I wonder if that is the full size static display replica a group was working on a couple of years ago looks great that is for sure .

 

[Neill McKay]

Considering that the Arrow was freaking huge (for a fighter), it would be pretty hard to hide it, especially for 50 years.  I've also been around long enough to know that keeping a secret of this magnitude is pretty much impossible.  The Government doesn't cover things up, not because it doesn't want to, but because it is entirely incapable of doing so.

Which is exactly why every schoolboy knows about this one!

Kidding aside, I don't honestly believe that they saved one of them this way, but it does make for a great story.

Yes it is still something to be proud of as a Canadian and yes it was a great jet for its day, but to suggest that we'd still be flying them today is crazy.

Don't be so sure: had the project gone ahead the first production Arrows would have been going into service only slightly (if at all) earlier than the Sea Kings.

 

[Jammer]

The Arrow and the Phantom II were being developed at the same time. The F4 is still in frontline use with several countries.
Greece
Turkey
Japan
Germany
Iran (yes they still fly!)
South Korea
Spain

The Arrow's potential was unlimited and used technologies that already were proven in the CF-100. for example the retractable weapons pack. However there was enormous political pressure by the US on the Cdn Gov't of the day not to proceed with full scale production.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

;D

Guess what I saw this afternoon at an undisclosed location?

Looks like French markings on the side. Not one of the French Mirage 2000/4000 prototypes?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Shutting the program down based on costs was acceptable, scrapping the aircraft and destroying drawings was not. The prototypes would have made useful testbeds and likely a limited testing program would have generated economic spinoff without major costs. Mind you the US Aerospace industry would lose out. Whoever ordered the aircraft scrapped should have been jailed.

 

[Jammer]

The US aerospace industry gained....by leaps and bounds. Many of the Canadians who helped design the Arrow moved on to NASA, McDonnell Douglas, Boeing, Lockheed.

The legacy of the Arrow lives in in the F-15, F-16, F-18, and numerous experimantal aircraft of the 70, 80s, and 90s.

 

[time expired]

PETAMOCTO, at last a I can totally agree with.

The Avro Arrow was a one trick pony that, had it gone into service ,would have been a very expensive answer
to a threat that had all but  disappeared,the manned bomber. It would also have required a tanker fleet that
Canada did not possess and given the cost of the Arrow itself  would  have been unable to afford.

The Arrow shares aerodynamic features with two other aircraft that were being developed at about the same
time,the British TSR 2 and the North American A3J Vigilante,these were a relatively large wing area and a long
slab-sided forward fuselage area.These features were very good for an aircraft operating at high altitude but
poor for the low altitude that these aircraft  would have been forced to operate in by a SAM equipped air defence
system.

The Vigilante was the only one of the three that entered service and it was found that at low altitude the gust
response loads placed on the crew and aircraft were so high as to render the crew almost unable to do their
jobs and would have resulted in structural damage to the aircraft in a very short time.This and a problem with
the nuclear delivery system caused the US Navy to turn the Vigilante into a recce platform and it did good work
in Vietnam.

I bring this up to counter the argument that the Arrow could have been used in any role other than a  North
American  interceptor,as an air superiority fighter or a ground attack it would have been next to useless due
its lack of maneuverability and the airframe limitations mentioned above.

All that being said we did soldier on with the F104 in the ground attack role for many year so anything is
possible,and it would have looked great at airshows.

                                                  Regards

 

[observor 69]

Many books have been written on the Arrow and it's fate.
The link is to Amazon.ca and some of those books.

 

[Jammer]

However the F-15 was conceived as a purely air superiority fighter with the tagline "Not a pound for air to ground."

The F-15E Strike Eagle seems to put to rest the argument that the Arrow would never have been used (or could have), been used in this role.
The F-104 was the worst possible choice for an air to ground platform. There are many good men who paid the ultimate price for this folly.

 

[Loachman]

the British TSR 2 and the North American A3J Vigilante,these were a relatively large wing area and a long
slab-sided forward fuselage area.These features were very good for an aircraft operating at high altitude but
poor for the low altitude that these aircraft  would have been forced to operate in by a SAM equipped air defence
system.

TSR2 was designed as a low-level strike and reconnaissance aircraft. Its wing area was a little more than half that of Arrow.

 

[time expired]

LOACHMAN,
        You are correct that strike and recce was the planned role of the TRS2 ,however it was designed to
to operate in a low high low configuration and would not have flown low level to and from its target.

It is also correct to point out that it had less wing area but its long slab-sided fuselage would generated the
same lateral gust responce loads if it had been forced to spend more time at low level by Soviet missile
defences

                                  Regards

 

[vonGarvin]

All that being said we did soldier on with the F104 in the ground attack role for many year so anything is possible,and it would have looked great at airshows.

The CF-104 Starfighter was perfect for its role as part of NATO's nuclear deterrance role.  Under the NATO policy of "Nuclear Sharing", Canada hosted US nuclear weapons for use on Canadian jets:

Canada had Bomarc nuclear-armed anti-aircraft missiles, Honest John surface-to-surface missiles and the AIR-2 Genie nuclear-armed air-to-air rocket, as well as tactical nuclear bombs for the CF-104 fighter.

(Source)
Jets such as the CF-104, which could fly, oh, so fast (over MACH 2) would find their way on a one-way mission to glory and drop those bombs on columns of Soviet tanks.  Or so the plan was. 
(More stuff here)

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Looks like French markings on the side. Not one of the French Mirage 2000/4000 prototypes?

Fooled myself. The marking threw me for a loop. Here is a better shot of our phantom aircraft:

 

[Retired AF Guy]

The legacy of the Arrow lives in in the F-15, F-16, F-18, and numerous experimantal aircraft of the 70, 80s, and 90s.

Funny you should say that. During the mid-80's when I was stationed at CFB Cold Lake, the base each year, ran a Fighter Weapons Instructors Course (FWIC). Part of the course included guest lecturers, who would talk on variety of subjects, some of which were unclassified and open to anyone. I remember one year they had two lecturers from the U.S. who were pushing their idea of a new fighter with supercruise ability (able to fly supersonic without using afterburner if I remember correctly). Anyway, it turned out that one, if not both, had worked as engineers on the Arrow project and the aircraft they were flogging looked, in my mind anyway, suspiciously like the Arrow. Unfortunately, I can't remember the names of the two lecturers or their project name.

 

[George Wallace]

time expired

You seem to forget that at the time, Canada had more Fighters stationed at four Bases in 1 CAD in Europe than the CF has at all its Bases today in Canada.  I am sure that at the time the RCAF was not going to scrap all its aircraft and maintain only one, that being the Arrow.  The Arrow had its role, and other aircraft filled other roles.  The economy was booming.  The future looked quite rosy for the RCAF.

As for you comments about the ending of "Manned Bombers", it seems to me that even as I type this, there are Soviet Bears flying in the Arctic Circle.  Like the B-52, I am sure the Arrow could still be flying today, had the Government had the will.

 

[observor 69]

Looking back on it one is staggered to think that a Bomarc missile with a "nuclear" warhead would be used to shoot down an enemy aircraft.
http://rcaf.com/Aircraft/aircraftDetail.php?BOMARC-239

The CF-101 Voodoo also had the Genie nuclear warhead missile for air to air intercept. When we (416 Sqn) went to Maple Flag in the late 70's we would be dog fighting against modern jet fighters with our dated Voodoo and it's air to air nuclear weapon. How's that for leveling the playing field.  ;D
http://rcaf.com/Aircraft/aircraftDetail.php?VOODOO-36

 

[aesop081]

That the Arrow could still be flying today is a possibility.

That it could still be usefull today... not so much.

The Arrow is no F-4 either. You wouldnt have seen too many Arrows being able to mix it up with Migs.

The fact that Russian bombers still show up now and then is neither here nor there. The threat back them was from large ammounts of Soviet bombers coming over the north not the "ones-and-twos " that remain in international airspace just to keep us on our toes. The Russian bomber force is a shadow of its former self these days.