Hey /n/! Could you guys tell me some pros and cons about the Avro Arrow project? I'm trying to argue with my friend why it was a good idea
>pic related
>>912453
it was an outstanding design and would have been better than any of its compeition except for the F-4 and F-8. I was better than the Mirage III, F-104, Mig-21 and would have out sold all those jets if it was ever put into production.
No, sorry, we can't. This is a board about transportation. Although the Avro was intended to transport cans of whoop ass to enemies of Canada, it is actually considered a weapon (as per the rules of 4chan) and should be discussed in /k/. Sweet if you could delete this thread and repost on /k/ and we can discuss it there.
>>912466
Alright I'll do that now, thanks
>>912466
No one on /k/ knows what the fuck they're talking about, though. That's not even the big problem with that board; the fact that they act like they do is.
>>912465
>what is the F-106
>>912453
The Arrow would have never outcompeted the F-106 Delta Dart which would have likely been able to fit the Orenda engine that gave the Arrow its unique identity. The F-106 would have also have been much cheaper while having a longer range.
Plus, it was an era when the interceptor was starting to be obsolete due to advances in missiles.
>>912509
> Said the person who has no idea what he's talking about.
>>912531
F-106 is a mediocre comparison - the CF-105 was more than double the wing area and double the weight.
Another interesting aircraft to compare it to would be the canceled F-108, a high speed intercepter even larger and faster than the CF-105.
But yes, the late 50s were the last gasp of the high-speed, high-altitude fighter intended to intercept long ranger bombers - ICBMs made giant strategic bombers largely obsolete.
The Arrow itself wouldn't have made a huge impact on the world - like most fighters of that era, it would have had a very short service life (well under 20 years, possibly as short as a decade), but it WOULD have kept the Canadian aerospace industry alive. The cancelation was extremely depressing, there weren't any other major projects funded, and their neighbors to the south were going to the moon... Canada's aerospace industry suffered huge brain-drain as a result and never really recovered.
>>912557
Isn't Bombardier Canadian? And doesn't Bell have a massive operation going in Canada?
>>912564
Pretty sure he's referring to the *military* aerospace industry. Bombardier/Canadair only manufacture civilian planes.
Reminds me of the IAI Lavi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAI_Lavi) in the sense that it was an abortive attempt by the local aerospace industry to get in on current-generation jet fighter manufacturer club.
>>912564
Bombardier makes various aircraft including airliners, and Bell has a Canadian helicopter factory. That makes a large and respectable aviation industry, but not an industry with the capability to manufacture jet fighters. I'd say that the Canadians could license-manufacture a jet if they really wanted to, but they didn't even bother to do that when they acquired Hornets in the 80's.
Whether or not it makes sense to invest in your own indigenous jet fighter manufacturing capability, especially when you're already America's hat, is a different matter.
>>912557
>ICBMs made giant strategic bombers largely obsolete.
>>912564
Bombardier got their start by buying Canadair (a struggling Canadian aerospace manufacturer that mostly license-built other company's designs) in the mid 80s, and buying Learjet (a US light jet manufacturer) in the early 90s. They've only really been a global competitor for the past 10-15 years or so. They all use P&W or Rolls engines; no more jet turbines designed and built in Canada.
Bell is a US company with a factory in Canada.
Yes, there is a small aerospace industry in Canada, but it's no longer as large nor as prestigious as it once was
>>912595
>They all use P&W or Rolls engines; no more jet turbines designed and built in Canada.
>he doesn't know about P&W Canada
We still design and build engines in this country you know.
>>912595
Also it's funny that you mention engine design and construction in a thread about the Arrow considering that thing used engines designed in the States.
>>912577
The US is just south, and builds some of the best fighters in the world. Why bother?
Also, Bell produces a metric shit-ton of military choppers
>>912595
Just because the aviation industry isn't at cyberpunk dystopia levels in Canada the way it is in Seattle doesn't necessarily mean it's "small".
>>912594
I think he meant long-range strategic bombers like the Valkyrie or Hustler.
The XF-108 would have been superior.
>>912598
>The Orenda PS.13 Iroquois was an advanced turbojet engine designed for military use. It was developed by the Canadian aircraft engine manufacturer Orenda Engines, a part of the Avro Canada group.
Designed and built entirely in Canada. Had a lot of similarities with Rolls engines (UK based).
>>913039
Oh shit you're right. Sorry I always forget about the Iroquois engines since those weren't fitted onto the prototypes.
>>912453
They should make the Mk III.
I never understood why it had those split-top canopies. It seems like it makes boarding tougher, and gives you a large structure joint blocking part of the view overhead.
