Better aircraft...????? You have not seen anything... want engine problems, avionics issues, etc. etc.? Parts availability???? Russian planes... They are junk. Canada doesn't need an Air Force anyway... do they?
I believe Canada has NATO commitments ? Everyone knows the Canadians have always been superb soldiers, sailors, and airmen. Over the years, Russia has produced quality airplanes. Polikarpov, AN-2, Sturmovik, Bear, Mig-15/21/29, and SU-27. The client states have often used poor tactics and training.
Yup, but there are only 66,000 of them for all three services, last time I looked. NATO commitment was 5000 troops at one time.
It's interesting because of the unqiue requirements we need, and it doesn't seem to qualify at all. One of the big ones that sticks out for me is the fact that its a singal engine aircraft, and its fuel range it very short compaired to the large amount of territory we need to cover. One of the biggest requirements of the Avro program, (I know back in the 50's!!) was the fact the aircraft must been twin engined, with a long range at subsonc speeds. Plus a bunch of other very strict guidlines. Its seem these have been relaxed with this aircraft. I guess times change, but our country is still the same size. Our CF-18's are getting long in the tooth, and definatly do require replacment..but I can't help but think this aircaft may turn into a huge boondoggle for us. Any ideas on turn around time on the ground? Ease of maintaince..this is really what killed the Arrow along with cost over runs.
You can change an engine on an F-35 in less than an hour and other maintenance is similarly less time consuming than 4th generation aircraft. USAF screwed up trying to go to all 5th generation fighter aircraft. Nobody knew what a political target they would become and how strung out development would be and how that would increase fly-away cost. We should have been like the USN and bought more 4th generation F-15Es, maybe even F-15Cs, and late block F-16s to keep fleet size up and age down. Eventually what that meant was we got 21 or 22 B-2s instead of 132, and less than 200 F-22s instead of 700+. If the same thing happens to the F-35, which is possible, fly-away cost will increase and the same vicious cycle will repeat itself. Incidentally, the comments on single engine are not substantiated by the facts. The F-16 has longer legs than the F-4 and equivalent range to the F/A-18. The last single engine fighter/attack aircraft on aircraft cariers was the A-7, because two engines are handy overwater. Statistically, though, probability of an engine problem nearly doubles with two engines. Not so catastrophic when one fails, however. Plus I have brought back aircraft numerous times with one engine shut down or idling. Not a choice with a single engine aircraft.
That's only a small part of it... Canada was on the ropes financially. You had a new government that was cutting programs right and left; not just the Arrow. And... the US was pressuring Canada to buy US planes, not build your own. US needed to sell planes... The Arrow was a great plane. I was always astonished that they 'chopped up' the existing planes...
Thought they were pretty underpowered and engine development was part of the problem. Great looking airplane, like something out of a science fiction movie.
She was underpowered with the j-75's. But she still hit 1.8. Orenda had delivered the orenda iroquois engine to be istalled in rl-206, but the programe was canceled, before that could happen. That engine was quite the thing for the time. Avro continualy failed to meet the strict standards the airforce had set in place. Apparently you could only replace the stabalizer 3 times before the entire airframe needed to be scrapped. Heald on by some 500 rivits, which all needed to be drilled out by hand. Changing an aleron ram was also a huge endevor, some 100 hours were required. This was unacceptable. The airplane was well ahead of its time, but maybe too much so. Deffenbugger canceled it under pressure from the usa, and the fact there was a lack of buyers for the aircraft. And obviously obsence cost over runs. We ended up with the beaumark missle system which was even worse. But everybody thought at the time manned combat air plane would be a thing of the past. The arrow is surrounded by a lot of folk lore up here. But when you dig deeper, the plane could never have succeeded, just too many things wrong with it to serve as a practical weapon. They scrapped the things because of the cold war that was raging at the time. Terrable decision, as it was and is a peice of canadian history. She was a beautiful thing in flight. On to the Avro car!! lol
Bomarc missle? There was a big issue w/ the US as to wheather the US Bomarc AA missles in Canada should be nuclear tipped. Lots of friction between the US and Canada in those days.
Well on the plus side if things keep going this direction it will fix the problem of fighter pilot manning which is also a disaster due to mismanagement. I had a good laugh at the news story this week where the AF said that the F-22 all good to go but that the pesky cough the pilots develop is to be expected and they will just have to get used to it. I think it was in the Early Bird if you have acces to that.
Yes Bomarc..I don't know what is wrong with my spelling lately. Kinda bugging me. Canada is/was a bigger contributor to the US nuke program then most realize. It was a very interesting point in time for both countries.
Compelling documentary here in Australia regarding our commitment to the F35 and the fiasco of limited flight envelope and ongoing budget issues...very balanced IMO REACH FOR THE SKY - Four Corners
