The Avro Arrow was the Best Jet in the World and it was Canadian

[@Chuck-PK]

My dad was a Hungarian who immigrated here after during 1956 Revolution and got a job at a machine shop that made some of the parts for The Arrow. Years later my Dad along with all the others who worked on it there were gifted a copy of "Avro Arrow: The Story of the Avro Arrow from Its Evolution to Its Extinction" I still have it and treasure it to this day.

[@paulperry1871]

⁷⁸😮😮

[@stephenfoster7177]

I would love to see someone rebuild the Arrow. It would be such a hit at air shows.

[@PhuketWord]

Good to learn about Canada's contribution to aviation innovation!

[@batman1169]

I mentioned above, they were huge in the USA for space but never get mentioned.

[@tomasjakovac7950]

The Orenda Iroquois engines were also an in-house design which Avro was looking to sell to France, who I believe had expressed interest in using them in the Mirage fighter.

[@winternow2242]

That wasn't likely to happen without Arrow, or some other aircraft using the Iroquois. France wasn't going to take over the development costs of someone else's turbojet.

[@number1trucker]

I wish more of these videos would talk about WHY these engines would have been the most revolutionary engines to date.

[@winternow2242]

@@number1trucker They did have an excellent thrust-to-weight ratio for its time.

[@pwc7475]

@@winternow2242 Why do you think anyone had to take over Iroquois costs, the engines where ready for the 206

[@winternow2242]

@@pwc7475 Because they needed engines for more than just 206. Canada needed to develop the engine for mass production, and that never happened. Odd that, nearly a year after it was flown on a B-47, the Iroquois was never used to fly an Arrow.

[@calvinhobbes7504]

I'm an American, but I've always been a fan of Canada - always will be. The Arrow was an awesome (and beautiful) aircraft that could have outperformed the US F-102 and F-106 .... if it were built in numbers, it would have really "stuck it" to the Soviet Union, and made them do a re-think of their over-the-pole bomber doctrine against North America.

[@maximilliancunningham6091]

I would say, quite comperable to the F-106. Maybe better range and payload though.

[@maximilliancunningham6091]

And probably 100mph faster. Being that the F-106 was no slouch either.

[@BradFalck-mn3pc]

Canada has always had one Achilles heel.......the bloviating nabobs of OTTAWA

[@edwardcarberry1095]

CANADA LIKE MOST COUNTRIES HAVE THE PROBLEMS OF CORRUPTION CONTROLLING THEM. CANADIANS ARE TOO DUMBED DOWN TO REALIZE THIS!

[@maximilliancunningham6091]

Nothing has changed, as of July 2024. Why the hell, are we buying a "strike fighter" to defend North American airspace, and arctic sovereignty ?

[@calvinnickel9995]

@maximilliancunningham6091 It’s called a multirole fighter like the CF-18. And unlike the Arrow it won’t be out of gas before it even reaches the Arctic. Seriously.. if you launched a CF-101 from CFB North Bay it would make it to Frobisher Bay (Iqaluit) for fuel. The Arrow would have to turn back over James Bay.

[@DigbyOdel-et3xx]

​@@maximilliancunningham6091 Because F-35 is the future of modern combat jets for allies of the USA.

[@BuckyBeaver666]

The CF-105 Avro Arrow was the: 1) First a/c designed with digital computers being used for both aerodynamic analysis and designing the structural matrix (and a whole lot more). * ( The claim that it was the first aircraft designed/tested using the IBM 704 cannot conclusively made. It is known that the unit at AVRoe was the only 704 sold in Canada.) 2) First a/c design to have major components machined by CNC (computer numeric control); i.e., from electronic data that controlled the machine. 3) First a/c to be developed using an early form of “computational fluid dynamics” with an integrated “lifting body” type of theory rather than the typical (and obsolete) “blade element” theory. 4) First a/c to have marginal stability designed into the pitch axis for better maneuverability, speed and altitude performance. 5) First a/c to have negative stability designed into the yaw axis to save weight and cut drag, also boosting performance. 6) First a/c to fly on an electronic signal from the stick and pedals. i.e., first fly-by-wire a/c. 7) First a/c to fly with fly by wire AND artificial feedback (feel). Not even the first F-16’s had this. 8) First a/c designed to be data-link flyable from the ground. 9) First a/c designed with integrated navigation, weapons release, automatic search and track radar, datalink inputs, home-on-jamming, infrared detection, electronic countermeasures and counter-countermeasures operating through a DIGITAL brain. * (We are researching some of these claims. Stay tuned for an update.) 10) First high wing jet fighter that made the entire upper surface a lifting body. The F-15, F-22, Su-27 etc., MiG-29, MiG 25 and others certainly used that idea. 11) First sophisticated bleed-bypass system for both intake AND engine/exhaust. Everybody uses that now. 12) First by-pass engine design. (all current fighters have by-pass engines). 13) First combination of the last two points with an “ejector” nozzle that used the bypass air to create thrust at the exhaust nozzle while also improving intake flow. The F-106 didn’t even have a nozzle, just a pipe. 14) Use of Titanium for significant portions of the aircraft structure and engine. 15) Use of metal composites (not the first, but they made thoughtful use of them and were researching and engineering new ones). 16) Use of a drooped leading edge and aerodynamic “twist” on the wing. 17) Use of engines at the rear to allow both a lighter structure and significant payload at the centre of gravity. Everybody copied that. 18) Use of a LONG internal weapons bay to allow carriage of specialized, long-range standoff and cruise missiles. (not copied yet really) 19) Integration of ground-mapping radar and the radar altimeter plus flight control system to allow an interceptor/reconnaissance role. The first to propose an aircraft be equally adept at those roles while being THE air-superiority fighter at the same time. (Few have even tried to copy that, although the F-15E is an interesting exception.) 20) First missile-armed a/c to have a combat weight thrust to weight ratio approaching 1 to 1. Few have been able to copy that. 21) First flying 4,000 psi hydraulic system to allow lighter and smaller components. 22) First oxygen-injection re-light system. 23) First engine to have only two main bearing assemblies on a two-shaft design. 24) First to use a variable stator on a two-shaft engine. 25) First use of a trans-sonic first compressor stage on a turbojet engine. 26) First “hot-streak” type of afterburner ignition. 27) First engine to use only 10 compressor sections in a two-shaft design. (The competition was using 17!!)

[@calvinnickel9995]

The CF-105 Avro Arrow was the: 1) First a/c designed with digital computers being used for both aerodynamic analysis and designing the structural matrix (and a whole lot more). * ( The claim that it was the first aircraft designed/tested using the IBM 704 cannot conclusively made. It is known that the unit at AVRoe was the only 704 sold in Canada.) *NACA had IBM 704s years before the Arrow was designed. It’s literally the first photo on the Wikipedia page for the 704. None of these computers were capable of computational fluid dynamics-which wouldn’t happen until the 1970s for the design of the Space Shuttle.* 2) First a/c design to have major components machined by CNC (computer numeric control); i.e., from electronic data that controlled the machine. *You’ve obviously never heard of a Jacquard Loom. Programmable machines have been around for centuries. There’s no way the Arrow was the first to use electronic data.* 3) First a/c to be developed using an early form of “computational fluid dynamics” with an integrated “lifting body” type of theory rather than the typical (and obsolete) “blade element” theory. *Blade element theory is used to this day (as the fuselage can be included as a blade element though an inefficient one) and no computer of the era could even approach what could even crudely be called “computational fluid dynamics” which would require supercomputers two decades later to only approximate.* 4) First a/c to have marginal stability designed into the pitch axis for better maneuverability, speed and altitude performance. *Negative. The Arrow was a wholly stable aircraft. Just look at its design with massive surface area behind the centre of gravity and high and highly swept wings with a very tall tail ensuring massive lateral stability. The slight anhedral is partially because it was too stable.. and like most non-tailed deltas its maneuverability was horrible.* 5) First a/c to have negative stability designed into the yaw axis to save weight and cut drag, also boosting performance. *No aircraft has negative yaw stability.* *PERIOD.* *Especially not a multi engine one.* *Ever wonder why the F14 and F15 and F18 and F22 have two vertical tails?* 6) First a/c to fly on an electronic signal from the stick and pedals. i.e., first fly-by-wire a/c. *This was lifted off the Avro Vulcan which used the same system years previously.* 7) First a/c to fly with fly by wire AND artificial feedback (feel). Not even the first F-16’s had this. *Negative. Artificial feel was introduced with the first aircraft with powered controls like the P-80.* 8) First a/c designed to be data-link flyable from the ground. *LOL. This is so wrong! The one huge disadvantage of the Arrow is it was one of the few interceptor aircraft of the era that COULDN’T be flown from the ground as it didn’t have nor have the provisions for a NORAD SAGE computer. The F-102 did, and the F-101 (which we ultimately bought) and the F-106.* 9) First a/c designed with integrated navigation, weapons release, automatic search and track radar, datalink inputs, home-on-jamming, infrared detection, electronic countermeasures and counter-countermeasures operating through a DIGITAL brain. * (We are researching some of these claims. Stay tuned for an update.) *Uh.. the CF-100 had this.. and it wasn’t anything special. No digital brain unless you count flat pack flip flops as “digital”.* 10) First high wing jet fighter that made the entire upper surface a lifting body. The F-15, F-22, Su-27 etc., MiG-29, MiG 25 and others certainly used that idea. *Only if you don’t count the F4D Skyray, the F7U Cutlass, the F-8 Crusader. And the Arrow had the fuselage aerodynamics of a brick. Any lift provided by the fuselage was incidental to its design.* 11) First sophisticated bleed-bypass system for both intake AND engine/exhaust. Everybody uses that now. *Never used other than bleed air from the compressor to run pressurization, air conditioning, and ice protection like on every jet ever made.* 12) First by-pass engine design. (all current fighters have by-pass engines). *The Arrow DID NOT use a bypass engine.* 13) First combination of the last two points with an “ejector” nozzle that used the bypass air to create thrust at the exhaust nozzle while also improving intake flow. The F-106 didn’t even have a nozzle, just a pipe. *Negative. Neither the J75 or the Iroquois was a bypass engine. The RR Conway and Spey were the first.* 14) Use of Titanium for significant portions of the aircraft structure and engine. *The F-100 used titanium from the early 1950s.* 15) Use of metal composites (not the first, but they made thoughtful use of them and were researching and engineering new ones). *There is no such thing as metal composites.* 16) Use of a drooped leading edge and aerodynamic “twist” on the wing. *Handley Page was using drooped leading edges since WWI. The wing twist is called “washout” and is a basic feature of all aircraft.. ensuring the wing tips stall last.* 17) Use of engines at the rear to allow both a lighter structure and significant payload at the centre of gravity. Everybody copied that. *The P-80 from WWII uses engines at the rear. The XF-92 from 1948 combines rear engines and delta wings and the F-102 from 1953 has the same configuration as the Arrow in an operational combat aircraft.* 18) Use of a LONG internal weapons bay to allow carriage of specialized, long-range standoff and cruise missiles. (not copied yet really) *The Arrow was incapable of carrying missiles larger than the AIM-7 Sparrow. The A3J had an extremely long weapons bay to carry multiple nuclear weapons.* 19) Integration of ground-mapping radar and the radar altimeter plus flight control system to allow an interceptor/reconnaissance role. The first to propose an aircraft be equally adept at those roles while being THE air-superiority fighter at the same time. (Few have even tried to copy that, although the F-15E is an interesting exception.) *The Arrow would never have been an air superiority fighter. It was too heavy and deltas are not very maneuverable (unless they are tailed like the Mig-21 and F-16 or have canards like the Viggen and Eurofighter or have cranked leading edges like the Draken-none of which the Arrow has) and create too much drag.* 20) First missile-armed a/c to have a combat weight thrust to weight ratio approaching 1 to 1. Few have been able to copy that. *Negative. Unless by “approaching” you mean 0.75:1 which is typical of the F4, Lightning, Mig-21, etc or when it’s absolutely stripped of armament and fuel.* 21) First flying 4,000 psi hydraulic system to allow lighter and smaller components. *3000 psi.. just like every other aircraft of the era.* 22) First oxygen-injection re-light system. *WTF? Why would you use this instead of the igniters that are already installed. I’m calling BS on using pure oxygen next to an engine.* 23) First engine to have only two main bearing assemblies on a two-shaft design. *Bye bye durability. Also physically impossible as you have to have at least one ball bearing to take thrust loads and one roller bearing to allow for expansion on each shaft. That means at least four bearings minimum.* 24) First to use a variable stator on a two-shaft engine. *That’s because smart engine designers use one or the other rather than making it needlessly complicated. And with only ten stages (your data) the surge margins are far higher not needing any of that. The pressure ratios of both the J75 and J79 are an order of magnitude higher. The first **_successful_** engines to use both were the high bypass turbofans made by GE in the late 1960s.* 25) First use of a trans-sonic first compressor stage on a turbojet engine. *Negative. The Arrow intake like the very similar F4 intake is designed so airflow is subsonic by the time it reaches the first stage compressor.* 26) First “hot-streak” type of afterburner ignition. *“Hot streak” sounds like a marketing term..lol.* 27) First engine to use only 10 compressor sections in a two-shaft design. (The competition was using 17!!) *More compressors are better. The Mig 25 also uses fewer and has horrible efficiency.*

If you think the Arrow was built by hacks please explain why EVERY u.s. aircraft manufacturer and NASA scooped up almost every single fired engineer who lost their job when the project was canceled except for the ones hired to work on the Concorde

[@BuckyBeaver666]

@@calvinnickel9995 21) First flying 4,000 psi hydraulic system to allow lighter and smaller components. 3000 psi.. just like every other aircraft of the era. Incorrect. The Arrow's thin wing required aviation's first 4,000 lb/in2 (28 MPa) hydraulic system to supply enough force to the control surfaces,[citation needed] while using small actuators and piping. A rudimentary fly-by-wire system was employed, in which the pilot's input was detected by a series of pressure-sensitive transducers in the stick, and their signal was sent to an electronic control servo that operated the valves in the hydraulic system to move the various flight controls. This resulted in a lack of control feel; because the control stick input was not mechanically connected to the hydraulic system, the variations in back-pressure from the flight control surfaces that would normally be felt by the pilot could no longer be transmitted back into the stick. To re-create a sense of feel, the same electronic control box rapidly responded to the hydraulic back-pressure fluctuations and triggered actuators in the stick, making it move slightly; this system, called "artificial feel", was also a first.[41] Check the actual Functional Test Procedure documents published by the NRC. They verify pressures of 4,000 PSI. Your ignorance of this one obvious fact, and that most of your comments seem like like casual red herring smoke screen, lead me to the conclusion you have little actual knowledge of the Arrow.

[@winternow2242]

Where did anyone say that Arrow was designed by hacks?

[@daweller]

Such a beauty design.

[@1joshjosh1]

As a Canadian I'm not crying about this but I say you packed a lot of info into this. I did not know about SAGE. Interesting video.

Considering that the F4 PHANTOM program was started in 1955 the CF 105 was hardly the only mach 2 fighter in development at the time

[@EdmontonRails]

The mach 2 variant was merely an underpowered prototype. The new variant, that had just been completed and had a scheduled test flight the week after the program's sabotage, was ready to challenge mach 3.

[@winternow2242]

​@@EdmontonRailsthere was virtually no chance of mach 3, and very little of going much faster than that "underpowered" airplane that couldn't break mach 2. The j75 powered Arrow, on internal fuelz had virtually the same thrust-weight ratio as an F-106, which achieved speeds well above mach 2. The improvements in thrust-weight ratio wouldn't have been that significant, from .67 to .74, about the same difference between the F-5E and the F-104G. Arrow also had a higher thrust-weight ratio than XB-70A, SR-71, MiG-25 and Mirage 3, all of which were significantly faster than Arrow. Aerodynamics obviously had more to do with Arrow's speed than its engine, which incidentally had no problem taking the F-106, F-105 and the Super Crusader well past mach 2. Had Arrow 2 gotten its Orenda engines, it would have had a lighter empty weight than Arrow 1, by about 4 thousand pounds. However, Arrow 2 was going to carry about 400 imp. Gal more fuel, which translate to another 3200 lbs in fuel, and that's before adding the MA1 weapons system (about 2500 lbs) and 8 Falcon missiles (nearly half a ton), meaning that that mach 3 airplane would have had virtually the same thrust-weight ratio as the plane that couldn't break mach 2 in a dive. Arrow wasn't sabotaged. It was cancelled by a government that couldn't afford it.

[@alecrichard9395]

fun fact, look at the air intakes of the phantom and the arrow...... you will be pleasantly surprised.

[@winternow2242]

@@alecrichard9395 what fact is that?

[@maximilliancunningham6091]

@@winternow2242 Splitter vane intakes, with variable ramps. Keeps the airflow subsonic for the engines to ingest, despite supersonic speeds. I think it was realistic to assume that the CF-105 would have achieved Mach 2.5, or better. A little or maybe a lot faster than the F-106 F-104, or F-4.

[@HeavyMetal82]

The fastest ww2 era plane was not the P-47 thunderbolt, it was actually the German rocket powered Komet which was over 700mph. There were several faster aircraft than the P-47, notably the P-51 mustang reached 440mph and of course the ME 262 was 560mph. All of these were WW2 aircraft.

[@RPMZ11]

Propeller driven a/c.

[@HeavyMetal82]

@@RPMZ11yeah...... P-51 is a propeller driven aircraft

[@RPMZ11]

@@HeavyMetal82 OK....and?

[@HeavyMetal82]

@@RPMZ11 and your point?

[@advanceaustralia3321]

CANZUK should coordinate the design, development and production of all its military equipment.

[@agnosticsaint]

@seanprice7645😂

[@arricammarques1955]

US suffered from Arrow envy. The US air force couldn't allow the RCAF to fly Arrows.

[@winternow2242]

What about Arrow would make anyone envious? Virtually all of the developed nations had mach 2 interceptors. The us had F-106 which used the same weapons, and was much faster. Also the F-4 Phantom was faster, more mission flexible, carried better missiles and was cheaper. Apparently Americans weren't envious of Lightning, Mirage, Draken and the MiG-21, even though all of those aircraft were superior to Arrow. How do you explain that?

[@BuckyBeaver666]

@@winternow2242 The F-106 was disappointing performance. The Arrow travelled at 1,510 mph Nov 11 1958 when the current speed record held by an F-104 was 1,404. This was with temporary test J75 engines. The Orenda Iroquois engines slated for production were lighter, more powerful and the Arrow had to be ballast weighted in the nose to balance the heavier engine during testing. The F-106 only set a speed record just slightly faster than what the Arrow had done in testing over a year earlier, in Dec of 1959 of 1,525 mph. (Interesting how that worked out). Anyway not a very envious achievement to put it mildly.

[@winternow2242]

@@BuckyBeaver666 “The F-106 was disappointing performance.” Really? 1,525 MPH in 1959. Admittedly that was after Canada cancelled Arrow, but not long after. USAF achieved those speeds on a light, single engine interceptor. I’d sday they had little to be disappointed with. “The Arrow travelled at 1,510 mph Nov 11 1958” I’ve seen that figure before, but can’t find a record source that that was a speed Arrow actually had reached - you wouldn’t happen to rremember your source, would you? In any event, F-106 easily cleared Mach 2 by the end of 1959. “when the current speed record held by an F-104 was 1,404.” To be accurate, that record had been set in 1956, when F-104 became 1 of the earliest aircraft capable of mach 2 speeds in level, flight , about a year before Arrow rolled out. “This was with temporary test J75 engines.” So temporary, that over nearly a year, they were only engines used in all Arrow flights. Also oddly enough, American aircraft that used those same J75 engines were known to achieve mach 2+ speeds at will, and those were single engine aircraft. “The Orenda Iroquois engines slated for production were lighter, more powerful” …and the Arrows that might have flown with them would have been seen a weight incr4ease in fuel, weapons and offensive/defensive systems, enough to narrow, if not offset PS13’s thrust/weight advantage. Arrow-J75 had an empty weight of 49,000 lbs, and a fuel capacity of about 2,900 imperial gallons, which comes to about 3,500 US gallons. At 6.8 pounds of JP-5/gallon, that adds about 23,660 lbs of fuel, bringing weight up to 72,655 lbs, and giving that plane a thrust-weight ratio of about .66, compared to about .69 for F-106.. (Oddly enough, I calculated the MiG-25 as weighing about 1,500 lbs more than that, and it’s still faster than Arrow). As for Arrow-Iroquois, CASM’s site gives that plane an empty weight of 45,000 lbs, but a fuel capacity of 3,300 imperial gallons, which works out to about 26,900 lbs of fuel, bringing aircraft+internal fuel weight above 71,900 lbs, only 700 lbs lighter than the American plane. Adding to that the combined weight of the MA-1 fire control hardware (estimated to weigh over 2,000 lbs) and 6 AIM-47 missiles (another 900 lbs), and the lighter Arrow Mk II is now a bout a ton heavier than that underpowered American-engined plane. Against that weight gain, 2 Orenda engines, with a combined afterburner thrust of 52,000 lbs, will lonely give Mk II a thrust-weight ratio of .695, a marginal improvement.. Of course that’s me being an amateur - if you’ve got contrary numbers, please provide them. As for those Orenda engines that were slated for production, did we ever find out why they never went into production? The UK had an Iroquois in storage, yet never used it or developed from it. Also, did we ever find out why that engine was never flown in an Arrow? A loaned B-47 test-flew the PS13 in 1957, only about 2 years after the J-75’s first flgith. Seems like they were in the same generation, so the Canadian engine should have been good to go after the 1st several Arrow flights. Instead, after nearly a year of testing, none of the Arrows had flown the Canadian engine, and no one developed the engine further. “and the Arrow had to be ballast weighted in the nose to balance the heavier engine during testing.” I think I’ve covered that in enough detail. Arrow II wouldn’t have needed ballast, given how overweight it was. “The F-106 only set a speed record just slightly faster than what the Arrow had done in testing over a year earlier” Probably because F-106 had a future, something Arrow didn’t have. Ultimately, F-106 reached a speed record of at least Mach 2.3, which, to put it mildy, is not just slightly above 1.9 for Arrow. So, getting back to my initial question, I had asked why the US (or anyone else) should have been envious of the Avro Arrow. Was this your way of agreeing that nobody had to?

[@BuckyBeaver666]

@@winternow2242 Ya it was cancelled. And you tell me why the Iroquois was in England. Why would it have been there if it was garbage? 40 engineers went to NASA, many went to other projects including the concorde. Tell me the people who made the Arrow etc were shit. Go ahead. Just a big coincidence right? Everyone knows what happened don't be coy. That's the name of the game and still is today. Hey if I was an american i'd be gloating. We made you cancel like little pu$$ies, and we still own you to this day.

[@jerryg53125]

@@BuckyBeaver666 I can tell you why the Iroquois were in England .Orenda was owned by A.V.Roe Canada which was owned by Avro Aircraft of London England which was owned by Hawker-Siddeley another British company. .A.V. Roe was not a Canadian company. The Iroquois were never developed because there were to many problems. Hawker sold both engines of to get some money back out of them.

[@RCXploits]

Not a bad video, but I don't remember you mentioning the titanium construction.

[@turkeytrac1]

Here's the rub of the situation, that usually get down played a lot. The design phase of the Arrow was well over 5 years, way to long, by the time they got to testing the prototypes, both the USSR and the USA had moved on to ICBMs delivering most of the nuclear warheads to target. Literally, the technology had been bypassed, and most of it due to a design phase that took to long.

Basically the 1950s version of the F15 Eagle

[@batman1169]

A lot of Canadians were making this more then it was. It was a good plane but the country could not afford to keep it going for its size. Fortunately Canadas loss in Engineering was a huge gain for the newly formed NASA space program where 25+ Canadian engineers were converted to American asap to develop their Apollo program, Gemini program and other space craft designs, some went to Boeing, and some went to England to help out with the Concorde.

[@EdmontonRails]

Canada lost thousands of its most intelligent, capable of talented citizens following the sabotage of the Arrow program. The average IQ of Canada dropped that year.

[@coreyandnathanielchartier3749]

Did those Canucks really think the Soviets were just going to fly directly at the Arrow bases. 350 mile range won't take you far in that vast territory.

[@DigbyOdel-et3xx]

Lack of range was one of the issues. Maybe air to air refueling would have come along one day in the Arrow's life. The Arrow would have been a capable interceptor, but was just too costly without foreign sales. Ironically the interceptor that fulfilled this role for Canada was to be the McDonell CF-101B/F Voodoo. This aircraft was more than capable of intercepting Soviet Bombers, had long range and was very affordable. The Voodoo served in the interceptor role for Canada from. 1959-1986.

[@soloperformer5598]

The USA has got a lot to answer for.

[@winternow2242]

Like what?

[@nizm0man]

@@winternow2242 e.g. Look up the Lockheed bribery scandals.

[@ronjon7942]

Right. That point of view will dead end quickly.

[@winternow2242]

​@@nizm0manlooked up. Also know that American aircraft have served Canada well for years. As for Lockheed bribery scandals, they're irrelevant to Arrow.

[@BuckyBeaver666]

Nothing's changed. The US killed Bombardier's C-series too.

[@palletcolorato]

Cruise the skies in the CF-105! Click for Full-Screen View. www.etsy.com/ca/listing/1279673807/buzzing-buffalo

[@PHUSHEY]

Canook???? lol

[@simo-dv5xk]

Would putting the engines on the top of the wings make this more stealthier? Similar to the Saab A36 supersonic bomber design.

[@martindubreuil6289]

It's too bad we didn't have kept the arrow and today we'd have a 5th Generation.😢

[@calvinnickel9995]

It’s very good we didn’t otherwise we’d be bankrupt. Even the Pentagon nearly choked at the cost of the F-22 and F-35.

[@johnziegelbauer4999]

Unfortunately , they were on the way to becoming obsolete very quickly.

[@skxj]

Oh, is that why many of its features and design innovations ended up on US aircraft in later years ?

[@dukeford8893]

@@skxj Dream on.

[@skxj]

@@dukeford8893No dreaming here, it's a fact look into it. Canada was ahead of the US in titanium manufacturing. When the Arrow was cancelled Lockheed Martin bought the machines and hired the guys to run em in the US. All the titanium sheets were bought and sent down for the SR71. Fly by wire was invented in Canada and used on the Arrow first. the Arrow was designed with a concealed missle bay long before it was seen on the f35 and f22. Why ya think all the Arrows engineers were hired up by NASA, Lockheed Martin etc. When the Arrow was cancelled ?

[@dukeford]

@@skxj Fly-by-wire was developed by the Germans, not Canada. The F-106 flew three years before the Arrow, and had an internal weapons bay (it was also faster and had better range). Lockheed developed new titanium manufacturing techniques for the SR-71; if the Canadians had something to do with that, I've never heard of it. Provide some proof.

[@skxj]

@@dukeford here is a few firsts in aviation , 6) First a/c to fly on an electronic signal from the stick and pedals. i.e., first fly-by-wire a/c. 7) First a/c to fly with fly by wire AND artificial feedback (feel). Not even the first F-16’s had this. 8) First a/c designed to be data-link flyable from the ground.

[@dukeford8893]

The Arrow was a decent airplane with some interesting features, but "the best"? Not even close.

[@badouplus1304]

Would you care to develop? Which ones were better as Interceptors, at the time of course, and why?

[@calvinnickel9995]

@badouplus1304 F4 Phantom. Not only as fast, but better armed and more versatile-as it was also a carrier aircraft, air superiority fighter, strike aircraft, and reconnaissance aircraft. In effect, the world’s first multi role jet fighter. The English Electric Lightning. It was faster and cheaper-developed as a private venture rather than a bottomless cost-plus-fee project. The Mig-25. Perhaps the best interceptor in the world with a very high top speed and powerful radar and missiles. The XF-108. While it was cancelled in 1959 for the same reasons as the Arrow, it was a true Mach 3 interceptor that used advanced brazed stainless steel honeycomb construction. The YF-12.. another Mach 3 interceptor that was based on the A-12 and was the progenitor to the SR-71.

[@JackNiles-hc8yz]

@@badouplus1304 The F-106 was equal or superior in all respects.

[@gareth204]

This is luftwaffle

[@barracuda7018]

Greatest jet that never achieved anything, nobody wanted, it remained a prototype. Today its a fairytale.

[@arrow-lo7jf]

This jet did not get its fair chance, first jet to be made of Titanium which we used in our SR 71 Black Bird, this jet would have hit Mach 2.5 with those new engines or more, the whole thing was sabotaged, 70 thousand feet ceiling, when I really studied and watched different docs on this jet, the US was going to invest , so were the French and then all of a sudden nobody wanted it, then when they herd they were being destroyed, the phone rang and every Country wanted it ? My US Government , the French and even the Brits did not want Canada to have this jet, it would have sliced into their pie, and a small Country should not have a jet better then the big 5 Countries in the air plane business. Just my opinion as a US citizen now living in Canada I understand now how Canadians really hurt over this even to this day. And to say this jet had no impact is ridiculous, the Canadians are very innovated and that jet looks like so many that came after the Arrow, even the Concorde looks like it.The Canadians came close to getting to the moon with this thing, a launch off the Arrows back was in the planning. History may have been different.

[@calvinnickel9995]

The Arrow was not made of titanium. It might have used titanium for small high heat areas just as the F-100 Super Sabre did 5 years previously. No.. it used riveted aluminum just like the Lancaster Bombers they built in WWII.. and was limited to a maximum speed of Mach 2.2 because of it.

[@stephenfoster7177]

Does anyone ever wonder why the US came out with the Delta Dart and Dagger, in short order at about the same time.

[@winternow2242]

Nope. Because they didn't. The F-106 first flew in late 1956, months before Arrow was even rolled out, and over a year before the first Arrow flight. F-102A flew on Halloween, 1955, a little over 2 years after the YF-102's disappointing first flight. Convair's initial design, in 1950, was based on the XF-92A, which first flew in the summer of 1948.

[@DysfunctionalParrot]

A good plane. But it was not by any means the best at the time.

[@kenm4678]

Unproven Orenda engines, plane with a few (single digit) flights, vs existing Mach 2 interceptors with better range. Not quite the best in the world, and not fully developed. If's do not amount to are.

[@calvinnickel9995]

Exactly. Also the J75s were likely the optimum engine for it. The Iroquois would reduce its already very short range.

Orenda engine was fully proven and used in f86 Sabres aswell

[@kenm4678]

TR5 and the Iroquois are quite different engines.

[@MizMite2002]

Mig 21 was better.