A new Avro Arrow (or Super Arrow) instead of the F-35 (Merged thread)

[dapaterson]

By 2030 or so, when it is time to retire the CF-35, technology could have gone in many different directions. Air combat might be waged by UCAV's, 747 sized carriers mounting megawatt lasers or drones the size of hummingbirds and insects, so looking to the past might only be helpful in very limited and specific situations.

Given the first CF-35 will not enter operational service before the early to mid 2020s, I do not expect to see them retiring before 2040 at the earliest.

 

[Shrek1985]

Anyone here tell me what the percieved requirements actually are, in as few words as possible, for a new canadian fighter?

I know what I think, what does DND think?

 

[JorgSlice]

Anyone here tell me what the percieved requirements actually are, in as few words as possible, for a new canadian fighter?

I know what I think, what does DND think?

One that can fly? Has wings, an engine or two of the jet propulsion variety, preferably made of Aircraft grade metal as to withstand wind, weather, and debris?

Oh and capable of delivering a payload in the form of, but not limited to: missiles, rockets, cannons, machine guns, and bombs?

;D

 

[HB_Pencil]

Anyone here tell me what the percieved requirements actually are, in as few words as possible, for a new canadian fighter?

I know what I think, what does DND think?

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/pri/2/pro-pro/ngfc-fs-ft/mcr-bce-eng.asp

You compare any potential competitor aircraft across those categories and its fairly apparent that the F-35 comes out ahead.

 

[OldSolduer]

One that can fly? Has wings, an engine or two of the jet propulsion variety, preferably made of Aircraft grade metal as to withstand wind, weather, and debris?

Oh and capable of delivering a payload in the form of, but not limited to: missiles, rockets, cannons, machine guns, and bombs?

;D

Or sharks with laser beams

 

[Canadian.Trucker]

Or sharks with laser beams

*sigh, I thought we talked about this Jim.  With the recent budget cuts we couldn't even afford Angry Seabass, so we had to go with mildly ill-tempered Pike.

 

[Michael OLeary]

*sigh, I thought we talked about this Jim.  With the recent budget cuts we couldn't even afford Angry Seabass, so we had to go with mildly ill-tempered Pike.

The Northern Snakehead has better weaponization potential, but not enough Canadian content.

 

[JorgSlice]

*sigh, I thought we talked about this Jim.  With the recent budget cuts we couldn't even afford Angry Seabass, so we had to go with mildly ill-tempered Pike.

Pike!? Here I was... listening to the Sgts weep as they were told that it had even been downgraded to grumpy Goldfish with pen lights! Not even water proof. 

 

[Canadian.Trucker]

Pike!? Here I was... listening to the Sgts weep as they were told that it had even been downgraded to grumpy Goldfish with pen lights! Not even water proof. 

With the recent cancellation of communiting assistance they found a little more funding to upgrade from grumpy Goldfish.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Thankfully an unitended benefit was realized by the low grade fish food that was bought for the goldfish, making them believe there was nothing left to live for, combined with endless series of diversity and harassment training course. They are now fully suicidal and ready to take out the first target of opportunity. I understand that the ISAF is gifting some to the ISI HQ in Pakistan to return the favours.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

One thing I find curious about this whole thing is that there is hardly any info out there on Marc Bourdeau, the guy heading up the consortium behind this proposal. The only thing I could find is that he is the President of Bourdeau F1 Limited and Bourdeau Industries, and former Chairman and CEO at Vector Motorsports Group Inc. The same goes for Bourdeau Industries, the company that he owns. I tired Google and there's hardly anything in the public domain.

Does about have any info about this guy or this consortium?

 

[Old Sweat]

One thing I find curious about this whole thing is that there is hardly any info out there on Marc Bourdeau, the guy heading up the consortium behind this proposal. The only thing I could find is that he is the President of Bourdeau F1 Limited and Bourdeau Industries, and former Chairman and CEO at Vector Motorsports Group Inc. The same goes for Bourdeau Industries, the company that he owns. I tired Google and there's hardly anything in the public domain.

Does about have any info about this guy or this consortium?

His interests in motorsports may explain Lew Mac being involved.

 

[Shrek1985]

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/pri/2/pro-pro/ngfc-fs-ft/mcr-bce-eng.asp

You compare any potential competitor aircraft across those categories and its fairly apparent that the F-35 comes out ahead.

What? are the numbers we asked for classified?

No, that's not how it's done; you put an actual value to your requirements; Range; 1500K, Endurance; 8 hours, Speed; Mach 2.5 sprint, mach 1.5 super cruise. I'm spitballing here, but this is more like a fill in the blanks sheet without the blanks. These are definitions for the values being looked at without actually stating what the standards sought are.

For instance, here's a set of German requirements for some super weapon or other from WWII; Speed; 1000kph, Range; 1000km, Payload; 1000lbs.

The only useful information is at the bottom; they wanted a stealth aircraft and unless i miss my guess, short of *GASP!* setting aside politics, the F-35 was the only available export-approved stealth aircraft.

How much of each value is actually required to actually do things laid out in these requirements? That's what I'm asking for.

 

[aesop081]

What? are the numbers we asked for classified?

Yes.

 

[RAGINCANADIAN]

Whoa wait, they're taking the Arrow out of storage in NDP HQ's basement?!?!?    With the No Defence Plan party behind them, they'll be flying in no time!  :facepalm:  But seriously, best overall buy is the plane we won't have to replace in 10-15 years and be at this point AGAIN. Too bad the Yanks never thought of an export version of the F-22 with the avionics and stealth capabilities of the F-35 export. It might be cheaper than the original F-22 but more than F-35. But that's a dead horse getting beat... Again. Anyways all that aside, To have a retired general get behind a 50+ year old design like that is just plain airheaded. We gave up our aircraft industry with the Arrow. If anyone thinks the F-35 is too much, just imagine how much money, time and overruns/delays we'd hit. You thought the SAR/Navy chopper acquisition was lenghty and horrible, imagine building our own 4+/5/6 gen multi-role fighter aircraft would be.... 

 

[Michael OLeary]

No, that's not how it's done; you put an actual value to your requirements; Range; 1500K, Endurance; 8 hours, Speed; Mach 2.5 sprint, mach 1.5 super cruise. I'm spitballing here, but this is more like a fill in the blanks sheet without the blanks. These are definitions for the values being looked at without actually stating what the standards sought are.

No, that's not how it's done [in Canada]. Here we identify the sexy new piece of kit we want, and then massage the estimate process to ensure it's the only possible contender.

 

[estoguy]

Yes it is such a shame that we scrapped it rather than continue development work alone (i.e. the weapons system) and bankrupt the entire defence budget as a result. It's not like the CF needed anything other than a new fighter at the time.

THIS.  For a major third year term paper, I did an essay on the Arrow.  The above is one of the many reasons it didn't work out. Nostalgia aside, technically, it WAS a great aircraft, but it really didn't meet all of our needs, and was rather mismanaged by Avro.  They only managed about 70 hours of flight time in them, which compared to the testing on most aircraft is a drop in the bucket.  Even the test pilots never understood why the plane wasn't more rigorously tested.

Not only that, but the foreign interest in it or any of the technology (engines, for example) dried up quickly when the costs came in. 

It was just too damn expensive, even with the things that got trimmed out.

And when the decision came to end the program, they had to be scrapped.  It was no secret that there were spies here from the other side.  The Arrow was leading edge tech that couldn't have been left sitting around and there really wasn't a practical use for a handful of what more or less prototype aircraft.

BTW - as an aside, my prof gave me an A+ on the paper and wrote on it "Best essay I have ever read on the Arrow. 'Nuff Said."

 

[OldSolduer]

:goodpost:

So.....no sharks then? With Laser Beams?

 

[estoguy]

Thanks Jim!  People who still cry over the Arrow really haven't delved deeply into the subject. It was a reason I tackled it.  I wanted to know if all the talk of greatness and woe were justified.  Whenever I get the chance, I try to educate the students I meet on it.  Even amongst some teens, they've gotten the message that it was some kind of travesty, which it wasn't.  We couldn't sustain it.  End of line.

But how would we fly a shark?  ???

 

[George Wallace]

But how would we fly a shark?  ???

Slung beneath a Black Helicopter.