We had nukes in Canada til the late 70's just for the 101 . Out of curiosity which one of the 12 books plus are you getting your info from so i can read it by myself without your editing
Other guys had N weapons here but us Canadians never had any. We are just too nice for that.
Books are not that helpful in understanding what actually happened. Too often they are written by artsy types who are trying to explain things they do not understand. I like to read several books with a critical eye and then ask some veterans, if I can find any that will talk about it. Only then can I piece together a reasonably accurate picture of real events.
Almost twice that but again that was an estimation without the Orenda.
Orenda made other engines and the Arrow was supposed to use the Iroquois. It gave 30,000 lbs. of thrust which seems pretty good but it was 42" in diameter and 19.25 feet long. Isn't a normal non-bomber engine more like 32" in diameter? They could have used it for the Blackbird I suppose but Lockheed wanted it to have those sexy bumperettes and the Iroquois didn't have any. The SR-71 was the second sexiest aircraft ever made in the history of the world and needed those Madonna cones. [Maybe there were technical reasons like Mach 3 flight too.]
That would of proved or disproved many of the point brought up here.
Exactly my point. At the time only three groups knew about the Arrow's failings. The government, the opposition, and the Department of National Defence. The DND is not to blame for a contractor failing to meet specifications especially since other aircraft could meet them. The DND does order all traces destroyed but they are probably not the ones behind this destruction. Diefenbaker is not behind it either since it was the opposition's program and not his. There is only one group, who shall remain nameless, who benefits from destroying all of the evidence.
About 2000 miles but had they escorted Soviet Bombers it would of been a one way mission, but keep in mind the TU-28 was designed as in interceptor designed to operate within the Soviet Union. I'd also bet dollars to donuts that once fully loaded with weapons at burner speeds, the TU-28 had shorter legs than your report on the Arrow!
Gary Parrish once wrote what I like to call the Parrish principle and it goes something like this, "When confronted by the reality of defeat, a nation will modify systems in their inventory to meet the challenges of their adversaries." So I'm trying to understand what challenge caused the Soviets to modify a bomber into an interceptor. This thing killed any chance of the Arrow being the world's largest interceptor.
The greatest problem with the Arrow is the weapons system, which simply didn't work.
I expect that an aircraft that is nearly 50,000 pounds empty with a 40 inch radar dish can carry any kind of weapon system it wants. The system was a huge problem but that could have been changed for something that worked.
More troubling is the report of the final RCAF test flight that I just found. Avro claimed it could do Mach 1.98 with the J-75s but the report indicates that they were trying for Mach 1.9 but only achieved 1.7 at 100% throttle. This sounds to me like the contractor's drag estimate was still too low.
The other information you provide is golden. It sounds like you have experience with these weapons.
Its difficult to find information on the Iroquois engine...
The engine was never flight tested on the Arrow but the U.S. provided a B-47 for the purpose and as far as I can tell the engine did work. Here are the specs I have for the Iroquois. 42"D X 19.25 'L, 4650 lb. Weight. 23,000 lbs. thrust and 30,000 lbs. with reheat. Fuel consumption with reheat is listed as 1.8lb/lbf/hr using MIL-F-5621 fuel. I can't read the fuel consumption without reheat.
I'm sorry to go on about this but it is not just about the Arrow. They now teach our children that the entire Canadian aircraft industry was destroyed by the evil Americans. That is a giant lie and I can't be done until they stop lying to our young people.