Bringing back the Avro (Canada) Arrow
 

Seriously, I kid you not.

Will legendary Avro Arrow make Lazarus-like return? - The Globe and Mail

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

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?

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.

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

Even better, we should call this guy: :}

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.
.

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?

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... ;)

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.

TSR-2, surely?

Don't call me Shirely.

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:

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....

There's always the Vickers-Armstrong Type 559

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...kers559_03.jpg

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

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

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.

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

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.

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...

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