ADA-FAQ: Arrow Questions-AVRO CF-105 ARROW
About Us | Contact Us |
Home
Arrow Recovery Canada
Avro Arrow
Avro Jetliner
Avro Car
Free Flight Models
Modern Arrows
 
FAQ: Arrow Questions
| INTERESTING
INFO | RANDALL
WHITCOMB | PALMIRO
CAMPAGNA |
Ask The Expert
We
urge you to please check Jim Floyds Lecture and Palmiros
PEO article on this website, before submitting questions.
Most answers are already here!
[JIM
FLOYDS RAeS LECTURE] [PALMIROS
PEO ARTICLE] [REBUILDING
THE ARROW]
[REGISTER
YOUR QUESTION]
[Page
1]
[Page
2]
[Page
3]
[Page
4]
QUESTION
If the plans for the body construction we to be auctioned how much
would they fetch at auction if they were to be sold, how many blue
prints are left?
Catlin
Alberta
Thousands
of blueprints were created. I have no idea what they
would fetch but I suspect it would not be very much
unless some collector was truly interested in them.
Sir, a while back the missing third Iroquois (of the three ordered
saved in the Government documents) turned up in England. While some
may say this is not surprising, what else would this discovery lead
us to believe may still be in England.
Alex
Dundas
In
fact, there is documentation which clearly shows
one of the 14 engines went to Bristol in England.
That is the one that has turned up. The documents
doesn't reveal much else other than technical documentation.
For a while there was talk that one or two Arrows
might be sent there. Is that where 202 is? I don't
think it is and it does not appear 202 exists eventhough
it does not show up in any of the destruction photos.
What was the deal with the United
States wanting to buy The Avro Arrow before it got
cancelled?
Briana
Barrie
There
was no such deal. The US always expressed an interest
and there were several high ranking Generals who
wanted to have it, like General D.C. Putt but everything
was squashed by the Secretary of the Air Force and
the Secretary of State John Foster Dulles. Full details
are in Storms.
How was the Canadian military and military policy affected by the
cancellation of the Arrow? How has the Canadian military been affected
or influenced by the US after purchasing the Bomarc missiles as a
replacement for the Arrow?
Josh
These
are complex questions that require considerable study.
I am not so sure that policy was affected in so far
as we just ended up purchasing American aircraft
instead. Our military industry, potential civilian
product spin-off and economy was affected. We purchased
the Bomarc as part of a continental defense system
for the US. We are now in the midst of a similar
debate concerning the Northern Command the US is
establishing. We have quite often been influenced
by the US but then the US is our greatest ally. It
makes sense that we work together with them. It is
unfortunate though that the US did not see and our
politicians did not push the Arrow as our contribution
to continental defense. Some American officials did
but not those in a position to make and take decisions.
What was the net weapons payload, in lbs or kilograms, of the Arrow
Mk. 2, when loaded with full internal fuel? ( The figures I've found
indicate variously 21,613 lbs or 21,270 lbs total internal fuel )
Sandy
One
of my technical brochures contains the following
info
I am not clear on your question and numbers. Total fuel capacity
I have as 2,897 Imperial Gallons with total useable fuel as 2508
Imperial gallons. I don't have the weights of the falcon missiles
or sparrows. Now in terms of aircraft weight I have
Take-off weight with 17,270 lb fuel is 62, 431 lb
Max take-off gross weight 68,847 lb
Operational weight empty 45, 161lb
Combat weight 53, 796 lb
Normal design landing gross weight as per Air 7-4 47,743 lb
I suspect these numbers would have changed as Arrow 2 was tested.
The operational aircraft was designated as the 21st to come off the
line so things would have changed by then.
How much original data would be required to be able to rebuild one
functioning Avro Arrow? Do we have access to said information, how
much would it approximately cost to do such a operation. Also, if
we could rebuild one original, would that make it easier to make
a 'updated' version of the Arrow?
Nathan
Calgary
These
are all good questions but I urge you to read my
article on exactly this topic, on this web site.
The original data is now useless because of the different
materials used in today's aircraft designs. Everything
would need to be recalculated and retested because
due to different weights, structural stresses, thermal
properties etc for these new materials. The cost
would be astronomical. You final product might have
the same outline as the Arrow but it would not be
an Arrow in my opinion.
What exactlly happened to that arrow on death row with the CF-100
in front? Is there still an arrow out there somewhere?
Tyler
Taber
None
of the "destruction photos" show all
5 Arrows being destroyed. As I reported in Storms,
there was some evidence that one had been taken
apart in the hangar; but is that really the solution
to the mystery? I tend to doubt there is one out
there but that is purely my own speculation.
Is there any truth to the story of the Russians basing their Mig-25
Foxbat on the Arrow? The Foxbat does look different, however it has
many operational similarities.
Shaun
Kamloops
This
is a good question and all I can do is stick to the
facts. It is a fact that some Arrow related information
was provided to the Soviets by a mole. Whether or
not that information was used or could be used in
any way is not known for certain.
I have studied the avro-car for years and my original
interest started when I heard that German engineers
that had worked on sucessfull flying discs at the
Wars end came over to Canada along with the USA,
how is it that Germans were able to fly prototypes
in Germany then come over here and only get a "hovercraft" off the ground.
remember the first "sightings" of flying saucers were
close to the Canadian border by Kenneth Arnald, actually they were
delta shaped aircraft, perhaps did the Avro co. produce something
far more superior??
Michael
California
I
have not seen any hard evidence that the Germans
or Avro were successful though many stories persist.
Some of my friends in Europe agree. Having said that,
rumors continue that while the avrocar was being
built, the US was secretly building something else
that allegedly worked. You may wish to check out
the 26 July 2000 Jane's Defence Weekly for a story
on a saucer vehicle based on the theory of elctrogravitics.
Did it actually fly?
I have an article printed in may 10 1959 the American weekly, about
flying saucers and nylon tanks. avro designed it for the U S Air
Force the article states but funding was cut and the before the prototype
was built. what ever happened to this project? is it possible some
of the saucer sightings could be from this engineering design effort?
also in the same article, it mentions a shoulder fired anti aircraft
missles. (what is used today in Afganistan) and also talks about
fuel cells for enegry to reduce oil dependence. this was 1959, fuel
cells still have not made it into cars and trucks yet 43yrs. later.
can you provide information on any of these?
Jim
Toronto
On
the flying saucer, pleasse see my article on the
Avrocar. All the details are there. I have heard
of some of these other developments but have no information
on them. After the Arrow cancellation, A.V. Roe tried
getting in to a number of projects. They had a design
concept for a monorail and had even put in a bid
to develop a hydrofoil. They were also trying their
hand at aluminum luxury boats as well as vending
machines. They purchased a number of other companies
and had a special products division. It is possible
the products you mentioned were attempted there but
never had a chance to develop properly before A.V.
Roe shut down for good.
I understand that all blueprints to the avro arrow
were destroyed (officially). Unofficially they still
exist. On the plans it is stamped "Top
Secret". Can you still get arrested and charged with some
Federal law for possessing these blue prints?
Bill
Malton
As
I understand it, there is no longer a problem of
being charged, for possessing Arrow blueprints stamped
Top Secret or otherwise. These blueprints are now
well out of date. If you still have a concern, you
can always contact the Directorate of History at
DND in Ottawa. With documents, the situation is a
little different in that if these documents contain
information pertaining to another country, eventhough
they are so old, they should still be presented for
proper declassification according to our access to
information act.
WHY
is the avro still being debated??? thanks
Jill
Wiarton
The
Arrow is still being debated because it affected
so many people and impacted all our lives over the
last 40 years. It is being debated because of the
way the decision was taken, with little or no explanation
to Canadians. It is being debated because of all
the rumors that sprang up about poor engineering,
political interference, soviet moles etc. It is still
being debated because there remains more truth to
be told. It is still being debated because those
who were maligned unnecessarily over the years will
not forget. It is still being debated because the
historians have only partially admitted they have
been wrong over all these years. (Some of them finally
conceded the Arrow was technically superior but they
still erroneously claim it was costing too much.)
There are many more reasons than this.
  Palmiro
Campagna is an Engineer with the Department of National
Defence. He has been researching the Arrow story since
the early eighties and has been responsible for the declassification
of many of the Arrow files thought to have been destroyed
back in 1959. His books are based on those files. He
is also the author of The UFO Files: The Canadian Connection
Exposed, which has a detailed chapter on the Avrocar,
Avro's flying saucer for the USAF/US ARMY.
ONLINE
STORE FEATURED ITEM:
| HOME | STORE | NEW
INFO | CONTACT US | ABOUT
US |
© C© Copyright
AvroArrow.Org, 2009. Materials may be freely
copied and distributed subject to the inclusion of
the copyright notice, and credit must be given to AvroArrow.Org. The
site is intended for historical and informational purposes.
This site contains links to other Internet sites. These
links are not endorsements of any products or services
in such sites, and no information in such sites has
been endorsed or approved by this site.
WEB
SITE HOSTING PROVIDED BY CAPITOL TECHNOLOGIES
 
Copyright © 2008 Arrow Digital Archives| Site Map | Privacy Policy