"In its planning, design and flight-test programme, this fighter, in almost every way the most advanced of all the fighters of the 1950s, was as impressive, and successful as any aircraft in history".
I crey every teim ;_;
>>1143056
>syrupniggers hyping up their sub-par obsolete interceptor
>again
The program was so infested with Soviet spies that it ended up becoming the Mig 25.
If it makes you feel better, the Mig 25 was really cool.
>>1143056
A microcosm of Canada
>>1143056
Sup MapleMiG?
Someone say F-105?
>>1143315
The Foxbat was a beast. It was so fast it could almost catch the Blackbird.
Almost.
>>1143056
Canada, why did you copy the Mig-21?
>>1143056
>"In its planning, design and flight-test programme, this fighter, in almost every way the most advanced of all the fighters of the 1950s, was as impressive, and successful as any aircraft in history".
The MK.1 has some small points of advantage over the F-106,a plane that was in service at the time. However for its role as Interceptor it lacked verus it in two very important areas: combat radius and top speed. Mach 1.98 to Mach 2.3 and 660 km to 926 km respectively.
On paper the North American XF-108 Rapier ,which was cancelled the same year as the Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow, blows both of those planes out of the water.
Why was it cancelled?
The Soviets were shifting to ballistic missiles missiles rather then bombers. Thus Interceptors became some thing the west did not need.
In short the Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow was a plane that others in service did its role better, there was other cancelled planes that would of widened that gap, and its core role was unneeded. The only thing special about it was who it was being developed by.
The cancellation of the TSR-2 was far more painful.
>>1144409
Nah the P.1154 was even worse
>tfw no supersonic Harrier in 1960
