Bringing back the Avro (Canada) Arrow

[fleigle]

Seriously, I kid you not.

Will legendary Avro Arrow make Lazarus-like return? - The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/will-legendary-avro-arrow-make-lazarus-like-return/article4530724/)

Surely this would be the Canadian equivalent of turning something like a civilian airliner into..... a long range patrol AWACS or something...:E

Let the fun begin. ;)
Cheers, f

[Finnpog]

Some of the comments are great.
I suppose that it makes a useful stalking horse to demonstrate the displeasure felt with the F-35 programme.

Similar to the UK threads...why not buy Super Hornets // Growlers for a lot less money?

[goates]

Surely this would be the Canadian equivalent of turning something like a civilian airliner into..... a long range patrol AWACS or something...

It's more like the Canadian equivalent of letting nostalgia override common sense. They claim this Arrow II would cost less than an F-35, despite the fact it would basically require building a new aircraft from scratch, with all the associated risks. And of course there would be all kinds of political interference regarding who gets to design, build and support it.

Similar to the UK threads...why not buy Super Hornets // Growlers for a lot less money?

As someone who's taxes will going to paying for new fighters, Super Hornets would seem to make more sense. Supposedly Hornets were chosen over F-16s in large part because of the extra engine. Now that doesn't seem to matter?? It would be nice if they could at least prove they looked at and evaluated all available options to support whatever they do buy in the end.

More great comments attached to this article:

Ottawa accused of axing Avro Arrow revival too soon - Canada - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/09/10/avro-arrow-revival-plan.html)

Even better, we should call this guy: :}

THE DEFENDER - YouTube

[500N]

Maybe talk to the Australian Politicians as we have now gone down the
Super Hornet / Growler buying path.

For once that and the C17 buys actually seem to have gone quite well.
.

[Tashengurt]

It raises an interesting (or stupid?) question I've wondered about in the past.
Is there a case for revisiting old proven designs, say the Hunter for example and rebuilding them using new technologies?

[tartare]

Couldn't agree more - I think the naysayers are all being a bit hasty.
Lop the tail off, add some chines, some radar absorbing paint (black of course) and gold plated canopy for stealth.
Update the flight control software and turn the elevons into drag rudders...
Easy... ;)

[Pontius Navigator]

TG, often thought that too. The Canberra was, in a way, like that with many marks and the PR9 being quite different from the original.

An updated Buccaneer would have been better than a GR1 in range and payload but not politically acceptable. The Vulcan with updated kit etc would have made a good ALCM carrier etc etc.

The Arrow also has a passing resemblance to the TSR2 and could have been a Lightning or thin wing Javelin. Shame we never considered joint UK-CA cooperation.

[Willard Whyte]

Similar to the UK threads...why not buy Super Hornets // Growlers for a lot less money?

TSR-2, surely?

[Pontius Navigator]

Don't call me Shirely.

[ian16th]

the Hunter for example and rebuilding them using new technologies?

Why only go back to the Hunter?

With modern computer controlled machine tools we could probably build reliable Napier Sabre engines and bring back the Hawker Typhoon :rolleyes:

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

If we are going to use it for blowing ragheads off the back of pick-up trucks, then the Tiffie Mk1 (updated) would make a lot of sense. I still think the Government/Waste-of-Space could manage to make it cost 80% of the current Tiffie Mk2 though, which would rather defeat the point....

[Willard Whyte]

There's always the Vickers-Armstrong Type 559

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d5/Vickers559_03.jpg/268px-Vickers559_03.jpg

[dfv8]

Lot's more to select from in the late Derek Woods' book Project Cancelled.

[Pontius Navigator]

There's always the Vickers-Armstrong Type 559

Rather proved the point that if it looks right . . .

[Tashengurt]

With modern computer controlled machine tools we could probably build reliable Napier Sabre engines and bring back the Hawker Typhoon :rolleyes:
Isn't this essentially what the USAF were trying to do when they trialled the Texan II and super Tucano? Kind of makes my point.

[Party Animal]

It raises an interesting (or stupid?) question I've wondered about in the past.
Is there a case for revisiting old proven designs, say the Hunter for example and rebuilding them using new technologies?


We could revisit the Comet design and turn it into a world beating MPA!! ;)

[mike-wsm]

If we're going to bring back all these nice aeroplanes couldn't we build a nice old-style carrier with proper steam catapults to launch them?


US cousins - Context: The uk is building two very expensive all-electric carriers with tee-hee ha-ha ho-ho no cats.

[EyesFront]

Went to look at the new-build RE8 and Albatros DVa at Old Warden the other day. Awesome crafmanship. I'm sure TVAL could scale up their production if they got a Government order...

[glad rag]

And they probably make the computer work this time as well....

[ORAC]

Me-262 Project (http://www.stormbirds.com/project/index.html)

AafXIWIMUlI&feature=player_embedded

[Rocket2]

Aready been done;

Canadian Air & Space Museum | Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow (http://www.casmuseum.org/avro_cf105_arrow.php#about)

Ok so its a static replica but having seen her a few years ago a pretty darn good one!

Out of interest I was once told that the navigator on the Arrow test programme was the same guy that flew in the back of TSR 2 - probably an urban myth so please don't flame me ;)

[esa-aardvark]

As someone who knew a little about these things at the time,
the GEC4080 computer which was used for company reasons
had by no means sufficient power. Other computers were available which would have been OK, but 'not invented here'

[Dr Jekyll]

Isn't this essentially what the USAF were trying to do when they trialled the Texan II and super Tucano? Kind of makes my point.

I always thought Supermarine missed a trick by not putting a Rolls Royce Dart on the Spiteful.

[Justin Cyder-Belvoir]

I have a cunning plan, My Lord.

Why don't we buy really, really expensive stealth jets.

Then put them on an aircraft carrier with the radar cross section of Yorkshire.

[Willard Whyte]

Or why not get a short range version that has to based so close to the enemy they won't need a radar to find them, just a pair of glasses and an ear trumpet (assuming they're either blind or deaf).

[goofer3]

BGG. Something like this?

http://i981.photobucket.com/albums/ae294/goofer33/Nimwacs2.jpg?t=1347484060

[goates]

Ok so its a static replica but having seen her a few years ago a pretty darn good one!

Maybe we should just get these guys to add a couple of guns.

Arrow II Replica (http://142.179.170.230/avro/wiki/DirectoryReplica)

Fuselage Assembly (http://142.179.170.230/avro/wiki/Arrow2Photos_2010_Nov)

[GreenKnight121]

I always thought Supermarine missed a trick by not putting a Rolls Royce Dart on the Spiteful.

The Piper PA-48 Enforcer was a turboprop powered light close air support/ground-attack aircraft built by Piper Aircraft Corp., Lakeland, Florida. It was the ultimate development of the original World War II North American P-51 Mustang.The original prototype (conversion of a WW2-built P-51 by the Cavalier Aircraft Co.) used a Rolls-Royce Dart 510.
The 4 PA-48 prototypes built (2 converted from P-51s in 1971 & 2 more new-built* in 1984) used a Lycoming T-55L-9.


* less than 10% of the airframe was common with the P-51.

Cavalier Turbo Mustang III - converted P-51 N6167U Rolls-Royce Dart 510
http://www.mustangsmustangs.com/p-51/p51survivors/pages/picfiles/44-63775/44-63775_8501_uk1.jpg


Piper PA-48 - converted P-51 N201PE (Lycoming T-55L-9)
http://www.crazyhorseap.be/Mustangs/History/CavalierEnforcer/Cavalier08.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Piper_Enforcer.jpg

[Dr Jekyll]

As I recall the turbo Mustang came close to catching on, which is why I think an equivalent 20 years earlier might have been a success.

[ShyTorque]

By coincidence I was walking around and under the TSR-2 prototype only yesterday and thinking...."What the hell were they thinking of, cancelling this fine, amazing beast of an aeroplane?"

The airframe still looks modern to me. All they have to do is put some modern, relatively miniaturised avionics and a pair of decent engines in there and Bob's yer uncle....