Arrow's options

Alot of the misunderstandgin likeley comes from our snapshot exposure to the story as grade 10 students. The story gets dumbed down for highschool kids. We were shown the Dan Akroyd movie and we figure we know the whole story from 3 classes back in 10th grade.

I like mustang’s parallel to the UK TSR2. This is another aircraft that arouses nationalist passions for no good reason.

The Arrow was a nice looking aircraft but we managed without it. The TSR2 was the same.
Both cancellations aroused levels of anti-US feelings because American aircraft were eventually bought to plug the defensive gaps.

This 'Arrow-agenda' is usually pushed by the fair-weather nationalists and particularly those who measure their patriotism with how anti-American they are.

Sure some of the designers etc left for the US but after the Arrow program had finished, do you not think they would have moved to the next hi-tech opportunity (most likely in the US) anyway?

After the TSR2, the UK embarked on multi-national aerospace projects such as the Concorde, Jaguar, Puma, Tornado, Typhoon etc, mostly with European allies money and know-how. Some projects that the UK started reached their design pinnacle with US help, (the Harrier).

Canada, being half the size and having it’s major industries closely linked with the US, had a very small aerospace industry in comparison. Canada really was punching above it’s weight and it was a very expensive experiment that didn’t quite work out. End ex.

Those looking for rose rimmed outcomes that would have moved us to “…the broad sunlit uplands…” should maybe delve much more deeply into this project.

Many costly mistakes were made by all the major aircraft producing nations in the postwar period. The Avro Arrow was Canada’s.

That would be a matter of opinion. Many 'believers' in the TSR2 would differ with yours. Many in the UK believe the aircraft was cancelled prior to the program getting a 'good shake'.
The advanced systems, terrain following and side looking radar were years ahead of it's time.
The cancellation was seen as more a political measure than a military one.

Also, the controversy surrounding the cancellation was mired in the ‘aircraft vs missile’ debate that came from the infamous 1957 white paper that lingered in Whitehall.
There were also other political factors linked to procurement, that being the Americans were prepared to give the F111’s at a knock down price.

I find that there are many similarities in the two programs, granted the CF105 was a more finished product but the TSR2 could have got there too.

I have a great interest in this subject and I actually met a designer from the project when I was involved in another failed UK project, the AEW Nimrod.

Much of my post could be chalked up to opinion, but my opinions come more from being a pilot and a mechanical engineer than a Canadian I think.

The wings being built by one company, the fuselage by another, then the engine by another etc etc and none of it fitting when they tried to bolt the first two together is fact. As are the many documented problems afterward.

The Eurofighter Typhoon was originally built by three? I think? Companies and went off without a hitch.

The Arrow had a flawless first flight.

I think a major problem is that the perception of the Arrow is a lost or, worse, denied icon/treasure of Canadian history.

Unfortunately, history doesn't lend itself well to emotional story-telling; it's concern is a relentless pursuit of the truth.

And the truth of the Arrow is that it was too expensive, too late and too bad. People have to let their emotions go on this one. Canada is full of tons of examples of button-bursting pride, let's not sully ourselves with delusions the Americans stole something from us.

Well, having been involved in several procurement projects in the late 1980's and early '90's, I have a good handle on some of the amazingly stupid fuck-ups that contractors to BAE and the MOD are prone to!