Gents;
I was reminded by my supervisor at work that this is the 50th anniversary of the cancellation of the Avro Arrow. 14,000 A.V. Roe employees heard the Conservative govenernment’s announcement over the company’s P.A. system, and then walked out of the aircraft production buildings shortly thereafter. Our version of the TSR-2 I guess, except in our case, the aircraft, plans and everything findable was purposely destroyed. The biggest surviving piece is the nose section of aircraft RL-206 which resides in Ottawa’s Air Museum.
He brought it up because apparently there’s a large auditorium at a local playhouse tonight (Centrepointe Theater, 7:00 pm, for those who might read this and live in Ottawa), on what Canada’s Aerospace industry would be like had the cancellation not occurred.
Headed by Britain’s Jim Floyd, that project, plus the Iroquois engine turned out to be pretty amazing, and many of us have wondered what would have happened if……
Five Arrows were built and flown, several more were at various stages of production readiness, including #206 that was to be fitted with the new Iroquois engines and flown within weeks (some dispute that timetable, citing engine development problems). That test flight series never happened. The fastest the Arrow ever got to was Mach 1.96, in a shallow climb, on less than full throttle, and with the Pratt and Whitney J-75 P3 or P5 engines.
This aircraft and its new engine were not problem free by any means. But it’s still more than a simple “shame” that they were cancelled after showing such promise and performance.
Well, bye for now. Tom Kay, Ottawa.
By: Murray B - 30th March 2009 at 23:26
[
But it still would have ended in tears as it seems Canada long ago gave up on the concept of a meaningful combat air force.
Mr. Boyle I am sorry that the Arrow fans, who are mostly from Ontario, have dragged you into what is mostly a political argument.
One good reason that the Arrow was cancelled was its high price.
From the Montreal Star, October 23, 1963,” Gen. Charles Foulkes, charman of the chiefs of staff committee from 1951 to 1960 testified yesterday that the Liberal Government of Prime Minister St. Laurent decided in 1957 it would cancel the Arrow interceptor program as soon as it was returned to power…Gen. Foulkes confirmed the 1959 statement of Mr. Diefenbaker that the chiefs of staff had recommended cancellation of the Arrow…the chiefs concluded that it did not make any sense to produce an $8,000,000 interceptor in Canada when one could be obtained in the U.S. for $2,000,000…”
The General did not mention anything about performance, or the lack thereof, because that was classified as SECRET at the time and for many years after. The old Generals did warn the Arrow fans to let this dog sleep but they were ignored. It would have been much better to let the Arrow be forgotten but because of all the untruths that have been told the facts must now come out.
After a little reading I have found that Avro could not deliver an airframe that met specifications and the RCAF really did not want the aircraft.
The Canadian Department of National Defence seems to be responsible for two main things. It issued the specification for an interceptor and then checked to insure that the contractor was meeting specifications.
The original specification is interesting for its maneuverability requirement. They wanted a 2g turn at Mach 1.5 at 50,000 feet without loss of height or speed. This should have excluded a delta wing planform from the beginning since deltas don’t turn quickly without losing speed. Both the NAE and DRB [DND advisors] indicate that the aircraft had more drag then the contractor claimed. The project was cancelled in April ’53. Then something strange happened. For some reason it was decided to seek the opinion of an outside agency and NACA (NASA precursor) was asked to review the project..
A report of 19 NOVEMBER 1954 summarizes that NACA confirms that the drag is 50% higher than Avro claims. [That is basically what our guys said and I am proud that they knew that.] NACA also recommends “proper application of the area rule” and states that delta wings are “…poor planforms for high endurance and long range.”
[The NACA report is very interesting because it cost the Americans millions to discover the area rule, which was a trade secret, and they gave it to Canada for free. They also provided a B-47 bomber to test the Iroquois engine. I for one, am very sorry that for fifty years some Canadians have accused the Americans of wrongdoing without a shred of proof. It winds up that the Arrow was a completely “made in Canada” white elephant and the U.S. bears no responsibility for it.]
From an Arrow Mk 1 brochure it is clear that Avro did not change the wing planform much and only applied the area rule to the nose, intakes and tail section. Many other companies that succeeded in producing Mach 2+ aircraft applied the rule to the entire aircraft from tip to tail.
Clearly the aircraft still has a range problem after the fixes, based on information from a once secret memorandum dated 17 Jan 58 which states in part, “A reduction in ferry range to 1254 nm is not acceptable.”
The aircraft also may not have met the turn specification even though Avro managed to get it reduced to 1.5 g. In the report on “RCAF FLIGHT NUMBER TWO” that took place “28 Sep 58” they write, “…a level 180 degrees turn was attempted at Mach 1.5. Approximately 1.25G was required to maintain altitude at 45 degrees angle of bank. The altitude, however, did vary somewhat and the speed dropped to Mach 1.4.”
Not too long after that the program is cancelled for good and then, for some reason, all evidence was destroyed.
This is very strange. The Arrow’s performance was secret at the time and only four groups in Canada knew much about the problems. The government, the opposition parties, Avro management, and some people at the DND. Although the records seem to indicate that it is the DND that initiates the destruction of all traces of the aircraft they really don’t have any reason to do so. The DND is not responsible for a contractor failing to meet specifications. The Conservatives also have no worries since it was not their program. There is really only two of these four groups that benefits from the complete destruction of all evidence and they shall remain nameless.
From where I sit it does not look like the RCAF ever wanted the Arrow but an aircraft that met their specificatons. It looks like they are trying to get the Arrow cancelled from ’53 and keep getting overruled by politicians. Then they are ordered to take the Arrow and like it but that government gets defeated. Diefenbaker finally does the sensible thing and cancels the program as the DND recommends. The guilty parties then manage to shift the blame for the disaster onto Diefenbaker and the Americans and the rest is history.
By: J Boyle - 20th February 2009 at 23:21
Pity, they would have looked neat flying over the great white North…
But it still would have ended in tears as it seems Canada long ago gave up on the concept of a meaningful combat air force.
RIP Arrow
By: Steve T - 20th February 2009 at 23:20
…Another “20:20 hindsight” idea that’s just now popped into my head:
What if Avro/Orenda had built only the engine?
There would thus have been the possibility of a direct parallel with the highly successful Canadair Sabre 5/6 programme, to wit, licence-building of the best US fighter type of the time (in this case, the F4H/F-4 Phantom II, which made its first flight two months after the Arrow in 1958 and was in many respects a comparable design), fitted with Canadian engines and exported in large numbers under MDAP and other auspices as well as seeing long and extensive RCAF service.
Iroquois-engined CF-4s intercepting Tu95s over the High Arctic? Iroquois-engined Phantom FGR.1s thundering off Ark Royal’s deck? Iroquois-Phantoms in the Luftwaffe? Tangling with MiGs over Israel?
What if…eh?
S.
By: Steve T - 20th February 2009 at 23:07
Ah, the Arrow again…
It is indeed a shame and then some that the programme was cancelled. What rankles far more, of course, is the decision taken to destroy every trace.
Cancellation of the project, though, was almost certainly inevitable; the Diefenbaker Tory government probably acted more quickly to make that move than the Liberals would have, but the story would surely have had the same sad ending…the anniversary date we’re marking would simply have been a bit later one!
Hindsight’s 20:20, and in retrospect Avro ought probably to have built only the airframe, equipping it with off-the-shelf engines, weapons systems, et cetera. A totally-bespoke system like what they were trying to build was too closely tailored to Canadian requirements…thus unsaleable elsewhere even if costs could have been reined-in. Instead, Canadian industry created a gorgeous monster, which we couldn’t afford to keep.
The sorriest aspect of the Avro Canada story isn’t even the Arrow cancellation, though. A bigger error by far was the abandonment, despite such a promising start, of the C102 Jetliner. There were reasons that project fizzled, but none of them is valid in retrospect (unlike several of the reasons the Arrow was nixed)…and Avro’s departure from civilian aircraft production led inevitably to all their eggs being in the RCAF basket. Result: Canada’s largest high-tech industry of the day, almost instantaneously killed-off with a single announcement in Parliament fifty years ago today.
S.
By: oshawaflyboy - 20th February 2009 at 19:29
CF-105
Hi Tom,Your post is very timely,in the Toronto Sun today
The Toronto Aviation Museum is in a spot of trouble with
the landlords[crown] is going to start charging rent.
They have started a project for expanstion to house
the replica and expand floor space.LT-GOV David Onley
and Harrison Ford [owns a Beaver] is stating a fund
riasing effort.casmchallenge.com Let’s hope they
don’t to have to sell any a/c.I’d sure like to see
FM-104 fly.
Sign In
February 20, 2009 at 4:40 pm