The Avro Arrow

[punked]

We can argue what could have been till the cows come home. The end result was a canceled program and billions of lost tax dollars and thousands of lost jobs because of a political decision by the CONSERVATIVE government. They, the Conservatives, have an excellent track record of pissing away tax dollars for political reasons. At this point, there are few options.

The only real alternative to shipping jobs and tax dollars out of the country would be to have Bombardier recruited to provide the next generation of military aircraft for Canada.

They were Progressive Conservatives which is much different from the Regressive Conservatives we have today.

They had some progressiveness in them.

Edited January 5, 2009 by punked

[bush_cheney2004]

We can argue what could have been till the cows come home. The end result was a canceled program and billions of lost tax dollars and thousands of lost jobs because of a political decision by the CONSERVATIVE government. They, the Conservatives, have an excellent track record of pissing away tax dollars for political reasons. At this point, there are few options.

If you say so.....seems to me that Canada in general has a vexing problem with any such procurements, from used diesel boats to rotary winged aircraft. Then they like to beat themselves up over it...strange indeed.

The only real alternative to shipping jobs and tax dollars out of the country would be to have Bombardier recruited to provide the next generation of military aircraft for Canada.

Not anytime soon...methinks Canada is part of the F-35 Lightning II JSF consortium.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

If you say so.....seems to me that Canada in general has a vexing problem with any such procurements, from used diesel boats to rotary winged aircraft. Then they like to beat themselves up over it...strange indeed.

On this we agree! How refreshing!

Not anytime soon...methinks Canada is part of the F-35 Lightning II JSF consortium.

I am not sure about that. I know we funded a small portion of research but I am not aware of any planned purchases. I will look into this and get back to you.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

All that I can find in this regard is that we invested 150 million into the project. It seems we are upgrading the CF18 fleet and expect it to be servicable until 2017. No mention of buying the J35 was found on a quick google search.

[OddSox]

Canada has been involved in the Joint Strike Fighter Program from the very beginning, investing $10 million dollars US to be a "informed partner" during the evaluation process. Once Lockheed Martin was selected as the primary contractor for the JSF program, Canada then elected to become a level 3 participant along with Norway, Denmark, Turkey, and Australia on the JSF project, paying US$100 million from the Canadian Department of National Defence (DND) to be paid over 10 years and an additional $50 million dollars from Industry Canada, in 2002 as a early participant of the JSF program.

Canada's rationale for joining the JSF project was not a urgent need for replace Canada's fleet of CF-18 Hornets; instead it was driven primarily by economics. Through Canadian government investment in the JSF project, Canadian companies were allowed to compete for contracts within the JSF project, as there were fears that being shut out from industrial participation in such a large program could severely damage the Canadian aviation industry. It also allowed Canada access to information regarding the F-35 as a possible contender when Canada eventually does plan to replace the CF-18 Hornet fleet, improved interoperability with major allies, allowed the DND to gain insight on leading edge practices in composites, manufacturing and logistics, and the ability to recoup some investment if the government did decide to purchase the F-35.

As a result of Canadian government investment in the JSF project, 144 contracts were awarded to Canadian companies, universities and government facilities, for a combined contract value of $490 million US for the period 2002 to 2012, with an expected value of US$1.1 billion from current contracts between the period between 2013 to 2023, with a total potential estimated value of Canadian JSF involvement from US$4.8 billion to US$6.8 billion.

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/F-35_Lightning_II

[Moonbox]

Why is this thread still even alive?

The Avro Arrow was cancelled and scrapped for a reason.

It was NOT because the government was stupid at the time. The only thing that was stupid was allowing the project to continue as long as it did.

Why do you think that there were no foreign buyers for the project? The Arrow was obsolete or redundant with most of the world's militaries at the time.

People's opinions on the Arrow seem largely to have been nurtured by an assanine CBC special from 15 years ago or whatever.

Get over it already.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Why is this thread still even alive?

The Avro Arrow was cancelled and scrapped for a reason.

It was NOT because the government was stupid at the time. The only thing that was stupid was allowing the project to continue as long as it did.

Why do you think that there were no foreign buyers for the project? The Arrow was obsolete or redundant with most of the world's militaries at the time.

People's opinions on the Arrow seem largely to have been nurtured by an assanine CBC special from 15 years ago or whatever.

Get over it already.

The legend goes on because of fools who don't believe. There were no foreign buyers because the project was canceled.

[bush_cheney2004]

The legend goes on because of fools who don't believe. There were no foreign buyers because the project was canceled.

Now we're in chicken vs. egg mode....what's not to believe? Canada took a chance on a cutting edge interceptor with both risks and opportunities, and it wasn't the only nation to do so. The usual program issues and suspects rose up to dash any hope of realizing the ultimate goal.

It was not to be, just like hundreds of other programs from the drafting tables of history.

Maybe Canada should have built something like the B-36!

[Wilber]

There are other types with similar performance....like the 1960's - 70's MiG-25, with a top speed of Mach 3.2. But such performance comes with other trade-offs, and as you say, multirole mission requirements are more desired today.

The MiG yes but the Lightning was pretty much the last western aircraft purpose designed to get high fast in order to intercept incoming aircraft. It was very good at it but not much else.

From Wikipedia

In British Airways trials in April 1985, Concorde was offered as a target to NATO fighters including F-15s, F-16s, F-14s, Mirages, F-104s - but only Lightning XR749, flown by Mike Hale and described by him as "a very hot ship, even for a Lightning", managed to overtake Concorde on a stern conversion intercept.

Edited January 5, 2009 by Wilber

[Moonbox]

The legend goes on because of fools who don't believe. There were no foreign buyers because the project was canceled.

They had a working prototype. Avro scrambled desperately to find buyers for the project. They found none. The merits of the project weren't worth extending it further. The Americans had a similar project at the time. It was called the Rapier. Its role and performance would have been about the same as the Arrow. THEY cancelled their project as well.

The Avro's role was too limited and too focused to have remained in service. The role was too intercept and shoot down Soviet long range bombers (kind of like the B-52). By the late 50's it was already apparent that the long range bomber was becoming less and less a threat and long range ballistic missiles and ICBM's were the new inter continental threat.

The Avro was not a dog fighter. It was not a multi-role fighter. It would have become a high speed interceptor with nothing to intercept and it was not suited for any other role.

I don't 'believe' because I know it was a giant waste of money and an excellent example of poor planning.

The Arrow WAS a revolutionary design for the role it was intended. The sad fact, however, was that the role was no longer needed and has not been needed since. Take a look at the fighters of today. None of them are long range bomber interceptors. They were all designed for air superiority and multi-role bombing.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

They had a working prototype. Avro scrambled desperately to find buyers for the project. They found none. The merits of the project weren't worth extending it further. The Americans had a similar project at the time. It was called the Rapier. Its role and performance would have been about the same as the Arrow. THEY cancelled their project as well.

The Avro's role was too limited and too focused to have remained in service. The role was too intercept and shoot down Soviet long range bombers (kind of like the B-52). By the late 50's it was already apparent that the long range bomber was becoming less and less a threat and long range ballistic missiles and ICBM's were the new inter continental threat.

The Avro was not a dog fighter. It was not a multi-role fighter. It would have become a high speed interceptor with nothing to intercept and it was not suited for any other role.

I don't 'believe' because I know it was a giant waste of money and an excellent example of poor planning.

The Arrow WAS a revolutionary design for the role it was intended. The sad fact, however, was that the role was no longer needed and has not been needed since. Take a look at the fighters of today. None of them are long range bomber interceptors. They were all designed for air superiority and multi-role bombing.

The "buyer" was the Canadian Government of John Diefenbaker. Avro had a contract, which they had canceled under them. The government knew what it was getting into with the design and development of the program in the first place. It was going to be expensive, they knew that. The part that is hard to accept is that the money was wasted, every dime of it because of what the government did. There was money to finish each and every plane in the factory, and that included RL206-213 which were in various phases of completion. RL206 had the Iroquois engines installed and everything else was complete, it was scheduled for taxi tests within days when it was cut up. They cut up everything, at additional expense mind you. The government should have at least finished the run it had already paid for and used the platform for research if nothing else instead of wasting the money to destroy everything.

It would have been the highest flying and fastest interceptor in the world. It could have been reconfigured to do other things, but is was designed as an interceptor. The Americans pursued this course of action for years as did the Russians. The threat of bombers still exists today. Look at the Russian Backfire and the American B1 and B2. There is still a whole lot of Russian Bear Bombers out there, in fact we intercepted a few of them last year! The role was and is needed, and it is being filled with American aircraft bought for with Canadian tax dollars.

It was a waste of money to destroy the planes, not to build them. The myth of poor planning is the political legacy left by the "Chief" as an excuse for his own incompetence in canceling the program. Wannabe Americans and right wing nut Conservatives all lay claim to the intelligent decision to cancel the program, that speaks volumes all by itself.

[kimmy]

The idea that continuing to fund development of a product with no application and almost no customers would have been a boon to the nation seems rather odd.

It seems to rely on some kind of "perpetual motion machine" economic theory that I as yet have not been able to grasp.

We don't need huge military development program to engage in such an enterprise. All of our economic ills could be cured if the government would simply hire as many unemployed smart-people as possible to solve Sudoku puzzles, and hire as many unemployed dumb-people as possible to move large piles of sand from one place to another. Think of the spinoff benefits of all of this new employment! Think of the tax money could be raised from all of these newly employed people! Why, it would be some tiny fraction of the government money sunk into the project!

I would suggest that if we become of the belief that spending an enormous amount of tax money to stimulate employment were to be in the best interest of the country, there are many far better ways to spend it than on developing a military technology with extremely limited use.

-k

[M.Dancer]

The "buyer" was the Canadian Government of John Diefenbaker.

No the buyer was the Government of Louis St Laurent

It could have been reconfigured to do other things, but is was designed as an interceptor.

In other words it could have been reconfigured, at great cost to do what other existing airframes could already do. Planes meant to fly high, straight and fast do not easily convert to flying low and agile. I think the only mission it could have been used for would be high altitude air reconaissence, but given it's low fuel payload....

The Americans pursued this course of action for years as did the Russians.

And the Americans canceled theirs and only the Soviets continued....

The threat of bombers still exists today. Look at the Russian Backfire and the American B1 and B2.

Different threat, differnent doctrine. No where are massed formations of bombers considered in any military doctine leaving the need for a nuclear armed interceptor without a mission.

Wannabe Americans and right wing nut Conservatives all lay claim to the intelligent decision to cancel the program, that speaks volumes all by itself.

But not nearly as much as this statement above....

[Wilber]

I would suggest that if we become of the belief that spending an enormous amount of tax money to stimulate employment were to be in the best interest of the country, there are many far better ways to spend it than on developing a military technology with extremely limited use.

There are all kinds of spin offs to high tech industries but there are few countries in the world who can afford to develop advanced fighter systems on their own without major foreign customers. Canada is not one of them. Sweden's Saab is about the only company from a small country that has had any success at doing so and even it is limited. Saab is also a supplier and manufacturer of other major weapons systems and is the owner of Bofors. The US can and France did with the Raphael but it may be their last. The British, Germans and Italians learned some time ago that the cost effective way to develop leading edge military aircraft was to collaborate and have done so with aircraft such as the Jaguar, Tornado and most recently the Typhoon. The British have also partnered with the US on the F-35 as a Harrier replacement.

[Wild Bill]

They had a working prototype. Avro scrambled desperately to find buyers for the project. They found none.

Actually, they were forced to TURN DOWN orders! First off, they had developed the world's first jet airliner. They intended to use sales of this aircraft to bootstrap them into the military contracts. Howard Hughes took it as his personal plane and offered orders repeatedly. The Canadian government insisted that Avro allocate their production capability to their contracts.

Eventually of course, the new Conservative government cancelled those contracts, leaving Avro with nothing. The Americans and British both offered contracts and our government forbid Roe to accept them. The same countries then offered to purchase the engineering libraries and the prototypes, along with the Iroquois engine which was almost ready for delivery. That was forbidden as well. The rumours were that Dief's government had been naive and unaware about just how big a hit to jobs cancelling the Arrow was going to be. There is a documented quote from one staffer in Dief's PMO who phoned Avro to ask why the huge layoffs. When told that they had been left with no orders at all the question became "Couldn't you just retool and make tractors or something?"

No, when the Tories realized the size of issue they decided to bury it! The last thing they wanted was for another country to become successful with anything that was a result of the Arrow project. It would have been even more embarrassing. The prototypes were cut up, the libraries were burnt and the spin doctors were paid overtime to spread the story that the fighter was too expensive and never would have worked anyway!

When the Americans heard that they couldn't even buy the engineering work they decided that the Canadian government must either be crazy or a bunch of farmers! Some suspected they were both. Still, they quickly seized the opportunity to send employment scouts after all those laid off engineering and technical personnel. They formed quite a contingent for what eventually became NASA and were valued players in eventually putting Americans on the moon. Most stayed in the US and became citizens. One couldn't blame them, considering Canada had made it perfectly obvious how much they valued them.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Actually, they were forced to TURN DOWN orders! First off, they had developed the world's first jet airliner. They intended to use sales of this aircraft to bootstrap them into the military contracts. Howard Hughes took it as his personal plane and offered orders repeatedly. The Canadian government insisted that Avro allocate their production capability to their contracts.

Eventually of course, the new Conservative government cancelled those contracts, leaving Avro with nothing. The Americans and British both offered contracts and our government forbid Roe to accept them. The same countries then offered to purchase the engineering libraries and the prototypes, along with the Iroquois engine which was almost ready for delivery. That was forbidden as well. The rumours were that Dief's government had been naive and unaware about just how big a hit to jobs cancelling the Arrow was going to be. There is a documented quote from one staffer in Dief's PMO who phoned Avro to ask why the huge layoffs. When told that they had been left with no orders at all the question became "Couldn't you just retool and make tractors or something?"

No, when the Tories realized the size of issue they decided to bury it! The last thing they wanted was for another country to become successful with anything that was a result of the Arrow project. It would have been even more embarrassing. The prototypes were cut up, the libraries were burnt and the spin doctors were paid overtime to spread the story that the fighter was too expensive and never would have worked anyway!

When the Americans heard that they couldn't even buy the engineering work they decided that the Canadian government must either be crazy or a bunch of farmers! Some suspected they were both. Still, they quickly seized the opportunity to send employment scouts after all those laid off engineering and technical personnel. They formed quite a contingent for what eventually became NASA and were valued players in eventually putting Americans on the moon. Most stayed in the US and became citizens. One couldn't blame them, considering Canada had made it perfectly obvious how much they valued them.

Damned well said! RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

[Wilber]

Yup, people were falling all over themselves to buy it and use it.

Worldwide, the Arrow was not the only heavy high-speed interceptor design cancelled at that time; the Republic Aircraft XF-103 and the North American Aviation XF-108 Rapier, designed to have higher performance specifications than the Arrow, were cancelled in the mock-up stage of development at approximately the same time.[9][10]Even the Convair F-106 Delta Dart was very nearly terminated. In the UK, the ramifications of the 1957 Defence White Paper led to the cancellation of almost all manned fighter aircraft development.

Canada tried to sell the Arrow aircraft to the U.S. and Britain, but had no takers. The aircraft industry in both countries was and still is considered a national interest and purchasing foreign designs, despite some notable exceptions, was rare.[11]

From 1955 onwards, the UK had shown considerable interest in the Arrow; in April 1956, the UK's Air Council[12] recommended a purchase of 144 Arrows for the RAF to serve alongside the Saunders-Roe SR.177 mixed power interceptor, instead of the "thin-wing" Gloster Javelin then under study. The CF-105 would serve as a stopgap until the UK's F.155 project came to fruition. However with the F.155 due in 1963 and the Arrow not likely to reach the RAF before 1962, there was little point in proceeding, even if the costs of acquisition had not been so high. The infamous 1957 Defence White Paper, prompted by a general lack of funds, foretold an end to manned fighters and completely curtailed any likelihood of a purchase. In January 1959, the UK's final answer was no – with an offer to sell Canada the English Electric P.1 (the aircraft that would become the English Electric Lightning). The French government was prepared to buy some 200 Iroquois engines, but cancelled their order in 1958, being advised by persons unknown that the Arrow was going to be cancelled.

The US Air Force had already developed three aircraft with performance intended to be broadly similar to the Arrow, originally as part of their "1954 Interceptor" project -- the McDonnell F-101B Voodoo, Convair F-102 Delta Dagger and Convair F-102B (later Convair F-106 Delta Dart). Additionally, two more advanced interceptors (the Republic XF-103 and North American XF-108) were under development, although both would ultimately be cancelled in the early design and mock-up phases.[13] Nevertheless it appears the USAF was concerned about the effect the cancellation would have on Canada's defence industry. In 1958, Avro Aircraft Limited President and General Manager Fred Smye had elicited a promise from the USAF to "supply, free, the fire control system and missiles and if they would allow the free use of their flight test center at Muroc Lake in California (now known as Edwards AFB)".[14]

After cancellation

An attempt was made to provide the completed Arrows to the National Research Council of Canada as high-speed test aircraft. The NRC refused, noting that without sufficient spare parts and maintenance, as well as qualified pilots, the NRC could make no use of them. A similar project initiated by the Royal Aircraft Establishment (Boscombe Down) had resulted in Avro Vice-President (Engineering) Jim Floyd, preparing a transatlantic ferry operation. This proposal, like others from the United States, was never realized.

Wikipedia

[kimmy]

Yup, people were falling all over themselves to buy it and use it.

After cancellation

Wikipedia

And yet somehow the fantasy-inspired version has a romance that will keep people believing in spite of all evidence to the contrary. It is as if people who watched the CBC mini-series about the Arrow thought it was a documentary.

-k

[Wild Bill]

And yet somehow the fantasy-inspired version has a romance that will keep people believing in spite of all evidence to the contrary. It is as if people who watched the CBC mini-series about the Arrow thought it was a documentary.

-k

Because of the obvious political spin to justify the decision it requires reading more than one book or watching one documentary (has the CBC ever had an ACCURATE documentary?). I've read a lot of them over the years. I also had the pleasure of conversation with people who had worked in engineering and purchasing on the Arrow project, giving an insider's view.

There always seems to be a blurring of the reasons to cancel the project that cover up the incredibly strange action of destroying everything about it! It would not have cost much to keep at least one plane. Certainly the drawings and engineering papers. The government was within it's rights to cancel the project but the hatchet job looked like something done by Chucky from the slasher movie 'Child's Play'.

The best explanation for the cancellation I ever read was that it really was the fault of A V Roe company themselves. They had made little or no effort to keep the Tory opposition in the loop. When Dief won his election instead of immediately asking for a briefing session to educate his people on the situation they sat back in their offices taking it for granted that Dief would only be in power a short blip of time anyway and then the Natural Governing Party would be back.

So while it may have been ignorance on the Tory's part about how drastic a step would be canceling the project and putting 25,000 people out of work on one day (is this not an obvious political mistake? There are people alive in Ontario today who still won't vote Tory because of it! Perhaps it has a small effect on Harper's hopes for a majority. It was not only comparable if perhaps more spectacular than the effect of the NEP on Alberta) it was also arrogance on A V Roe's part to not properly promote their case with them.

Plus ca change, if you ask me.

Edited January 6, 2009 by Wild Bill

[Moonbox]

And yet somehow the fantasy-inspired version has a romance that will keep people believing in spite of all evidence to the contrary. It is as if people who watched the CBC mini-series about the Arrow thought it was a documentary.

-k

Haha exactly. I think a lot of the opinions on this thread are based entirely on that alone.

Sadly for them 50% of it was completely made up and possibly very politically motivated. The fact is that NOBODY wanted the AVRO and history is also on the side of that decision because war as it has evolved has shown a COMPLETE lack of need for high speed high altitude interceptors.

[Moonbox]

Because of the obvious political spin to justify the decision it requires reading more than one book or watching one documentary (has the CBC ever had an ACCURATE documentary?). I've read a lot of them over the years. I also had the pleasure of conversation with people who had worked in engineering and purchasing on the Arrow project, giving an insider's view.

You can't put any political spin on the fact that there was zero demand in the western world for the Arrow which in hindsight would have been obsolete when it entered production anyways. Also, not to be snide but I think you REALLY have to take an Avro insider's view of the situation with a grain of salt. That's kind of like taking a GM or Chevrolet employee's view on the auto fiasco as reputable.

There always seems to be a blurring of the reasons to cancel the project that cover up the incredibly strange action of destroying everything about it! It would not have cost much to keep at least one plane. Certainly the drawings and engineering papers. The government was within it's rights to cancel the project but the hatchet job looked like something done by Chucky from the slasher movie 'Child's Play'.

I'll agree it looked like they tried to dust everything under the carpet, but the reasons for cancelling the project were legit.

So while it may have been ignorance on the Tory's part about how drastic a step would be canceling the project and putting 25,000 people out of work on one day (is this not an obvious political mistake? There are people alive in Ontario today who still won't vote Tory because of it! Perhaps it has a small effect on Harper's hopes for a majority. It was not only comparable if perhaps more spectacular than the effect of the NEP on Alberta) it was also arrogance on A V Roe's part to not properly promote their case with them.

Those 25,000 jobs were costing the Canadian taxpayers billions to maintain. It was a good decision to pull the plug. If people are holding grudges against Tory governments of 50 years ago for making an intelligent decision that's totally their perogative. It really limits the options, however, and is a perfect example of blind and stupid voting.

[madmax]

Those 25,000 jobs were costing the Canadian taxpayers billions to maintain.

Do you have a reference for those $billions?

[Moonbox]

Do you have a reference for those $billions?

Go read a book because you're not going to find anything reputable on the internet really. I think the R&D costs for the Arrow were well over $100-200 million alone. When you factor inflation and the cost per aircraft being built we're easily looking a billions and billions for an airplane that history has proven most militaries had no interest in and did not need.

Keeping the Arrow in production would have been nothing more than a multi billion charity.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Those of us who have actually read the books, there are several of them, have already concluded that it was a political decision that cost the tax payer dearly, and that is no joke.

[Moonbox]

and keeping the Arrow program going would have cost the taxpayers even more. We would have ended up with planes we'd have no use for. Spending tax payer dollars to build things people don't need is a BAD strategy. Yes it can make sure jobs are kept but in the end the average tax payer is not better off.

Jerry please look a bit more into this very simple question. It's all I ask of you:

IF it was just an idiotic and vindictive decision on Dief's part then why on Earth did the vast majority of the world's militaries (including the United States, the world's premier military power) cancel all similar projects?

If the role is still needed, why are no militaries develloping pure long range bomber interceptors?

The bottom line here is that with the coming of ICBM's the threat of giant long range bomber fleets crossing the ocean dissapeared. There wasn't going to be any defence anymore against nuclear attack and MAD led to the mexican standoff of the Cold War. Nobody with the capability to send long range bombers across the ocean was going to attack North America and this is still the case today.

The world's militaries decided that it was smarter and more cost effective to build multi-purpose fighters that could fulfill limited high altitude and high speed interception roles along with dog fighting or air to ground support rolls instead of a pure interceptor. Since the Arrow was so far along when it was cancelled and because there was no way to turn the airframe into something altogether different.