The CF-105 Avro Arrow was often referred to as the most advanced
fighter/interceptor of the day. First fly-by-wire, autonomous intercept
capability, etc. Sadly it was cancelled with all proto-types destroyed.
Many of the design engineers headed south and contributed to the American
space program. Reading the press at the time, you would think that this was
so far advanced that there was no competition! During more or less the same
period the British F-1 Lightning, the Mig-21, the F-104, F-101, F-106, F-8,
and F-4 Phantom were in or entering production. I wonder how these aircraft
would stack up to the Arrow? I guess we will never know for sure as it
never flew with the Iroquois engine. After the Arrow was cancelled the RCAF
re-equipped with the Cf-101 Voodoo for NORAD and the CF-104 for NATO in a
strike-recon configuration. Both served well until retirement.

Ed Majden > wrote:

: The CF-105 Avro Arrow was often referred to as the most advanced
: fighter/interceptor of the day.

Yes, and that is about what was wrong with it :-). The
CF-105 had the misfortune of being a very big, very
expensive, highly specialised interceptor with all major
elements of the programme being very ambitious: Not only
the airframe, but also the engines, the avionics, and
the missiles. For a country like Canada, this was really
overstretching it, and something was bound to go wrong.
The risk might have been acceptable if the CF-105 had
had the all-round potential of the F-4, but it was
probably not flexible enough.

For a more sensible approach, look at Sweden, which has
similar air defense problems, and has designed several
generations of excellent fighter aircraft by staying with
more modest (but very effective) and flexible designs,
and using imported engines and weapons.

--
Emmanuel Gustin

>From: "Moose"
>Date: 2/22/2004 1:00 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Hi
>
>I wish people would get the designation straight. It was the Avro CF-105
>Arrow not the CF-105 Avro Arrow or any other combination.
>
>Cheers...Chris
>

Not the Avro C Avro - Avro 1 Avro 0 Avro 5 Avro Arrow?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

From: "Ed Majden" >
To: "Emmanuel.Gustin" >
Subject: Re: CF-105 AVRO Arrow etc.
Date: February 22, 2004 8:37 AM


----- Original Message -----
From: "Emmanuel.Gustin"
Subject: Re: CF-105 AVRO Arrow etc.


>> For a more sensible approach, look at Sweden, which has
> similar air defense problems, and has designed several
> generations of excellent fighter aircraft by staying with
> more modest (but very effective) and flexible designs,
> and using imported engines and weapons.
>
> --
Emmanuel:
From Canada's air defence needs, the Arrow was the right aircraft for
the job presented at an unfortunate or wrong time. Canada was in the midst
of a recession and a change of government had just taken place. The new
government was hostile to any programs presented by the old so the project
was cancelled. Also, the beginnings of the space race and the missile
threat had some influence, though a wrong one. Unlike Sweden, the threat
over the vast north of Canada was not the same. We needed an advanced
interceptor to go after the manned bomber threat. A multi purpose fighter
was not required as fighter to fighter dog fights were most unlikely and
ground support to take out invading armies was also not a threat. The Arrow
was in fact replaced by two Bomarc SAM units and the American F-101 Voodoo,
neither of them being multi purpose systems. The cancellation greatly
damaged Canada's role in the aviation industry and it took many years to
recover from this. Another case of short sighted government policy as I see
it!

Hi

I wish people would get the designation straight. It was the Avro CF-105
Arrow not the CF-105 Avro Arrow or any other combination.

Cheers...Chris