MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > 'B' ECHELON > Tributes

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-06-14, 05:58
rob love rob love is offline
carrier mech
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
Posts: 7,597
Default

Well Marc, since the craft were destroyed, and the plans shredded, I guess we will never know if somehow Canada was about to produce a first rate plane. I guess we will have to rely on the patriotic hopes and fantasies.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-06-14, 12:40
Marc Montgomery's Avatar
Marc Montgomery Marc Montgomery is offline
aut viam inveniam aut fac
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 608
Default

fantasies Rob? with the less powerful test engine it had a higher cieling, and went faster. These are facts and not patriotic fantasies

agreed the "potential" will never be known, but the fact remains that Canadian engineers built a space age jet, using and advancing on ww2 technology.

It is also true that when the plant was closed, many engineers went to work in the US aerospace industry and NASA creating subsequent generations of advanced fighters and for the space programme

I fail to understand your antipathy. Why denigrate an amazing Canadian accomplishment?

Had it proceeded, would the original be competitive today, almost surely not, and would various subsequent Mk's be around today...also highly unlikely. It was designed for a fairly specific role, but could however have been the basis for an entire new Canadian aerospace industry. The CF-86 Canadian Orenda powered jets with other Cdn mods were faster better planes than the -GE powered F-86 for example (or so the books and pilots seem to indicate)
__________________
I see you stand like greyhounds in the slips,
Straining upon the start. The game's afoot!

Last edited by Marc Montgomery; 02-06-14 at 14:19.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-06-14, 18:53
rob love rob love is offline
carrier mech
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
Posts: 7,597
Default

Well Marc, I suppose as long as we only wanted to wage war with the Northern USA, and didn't mind the 10 mile turn radius, then the Arrow it was.

At the time of the development, there were plenty of stories already about the problems with this craft. With no real hours put on them, then any hype as to it's long term superiority is just that: Hype.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-06-14, 02:58
Marc Montgomery's Avatar
Marc Montgomery Marc Montgomery is offline
aut viam inveniam aut fac
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 608
Default

2G turn at 50,000 ft at Mach 1.5 maintain speed and altitude... pretty darn good if you ask me..
Ive read several books on the Arrow, and lots of "papers" and opinions.. dont recall much complaining (um none?) on handling or performance.
Admittedly 70 hours of trials is not a lot, I guess, but otherwise you have to be amazed at what it actually did, and what its potential was, so at this point I think we've dragged this out enough.. so I leave you with your opinion, and me with the right one. ;-)
__________________
I see you stand like greyhounds in the slips,
Straining upon the start. The game's afoot!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-06-14, 22:21
John McGillivray's Avatar
John McGillivray John McGillivray is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Quebec
Posts: 1,089
Default

The Arrow was a single role fighter. It was designed to intercept and shoot down Soviet supersonic bombers. Since the soviets never built the large fleets of those bombers, the arrow was a plane without a mission.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-06-14, 00:43
Marc Montgomery's Avatar
Marc Montgomery Marc Montgomery is offline
aut viam inveniam aut fac
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 608
Default

the CF 104 was designed for the same "single" role..supersonic interceptor, a 1950s jet -older than the Arrow !!! which we held on to until the late 80s

It was later roled as nuclear strike carrier and recon, then as a bomber, then as a fighter (although with large stabilizers passing for wings, was probably less manoueverable than the arrow ,,,they couldnt turn worth crap....(-and I flew in one- after passing HAI and viewing the film. 104 ways you will die in this plane... not the actual title, but basically that was the subject, I think the stall recovery needed was 25,000 ft, got to fly it for a few minutes too)

also the 104 was re-modelled as the U2-- so pretty sure the arrow could- maybe would- have been re-adapted for other roles

(by the way, the existence of the CIA- U2 and Russian overflights was long publicly denied by the US-although the Russians knew it... but couldnt prove it- and some higher ups in the CIA were very anxious about the Arrows ability in speed and height to intercept an "unidentified" aircraft if ti happened to fly over Canadian airspace and thus confirm its existence (conspiracy theory starts-and so tried to put the kibosh on the Arrow..and succeeded in 1959)

...1960-eventually the Russians built a SAM-2 capable of going high enough to hit the U2 and Gary Powers- who was supposed to take a cyanide pill but didnt and was also supposed to activate the plane's self destruct explosives..but didnt and the Soviets recovered lots of info from the plane which surprisingly crashed without catastophic damage.- one investigation blamed him, another didnt. he died in a TV helicopter crash in 77, and is buried in Arlington.
__________________
I see you stand like greyhounds in the slips,
Straining upon the start. The game's afoot!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 00:01.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016