Jow Forums?

I can see how the NASA thing would be big what with it being the 50's and the Gemini and Apollo programs were ramping up, but not really the second part. I've heard stories as to how it was a means to cut off Canada's legs for aerial hegemony over its airspace or even to keep us under the US umbrella in terms of defense.

Is it true one got away and wasn't destroyed?

Attached: Arrow05.jpg (576x342, 16K)

It was too expensive (about 3-4 times as much as the F-106 per aircraft, in projected costs). Without a large foreign order, Canada could barley afford to build the prototypes.

We used to have this thread on Jow Forums all the time. There's all sorts of finger pointing and recriminations, but the facts boil down to the fact that the Arrow was a dedicated interceptor at a time when air forces were transitioning to multirole and air superiority types. The Arrow flew in 1958 and achieved a top speed of MACH 1.9. The McDonald Douglas Phantom II, and air superiority design with provisions for the multi role mission achieved MACH 2.3 a few months later. The writing was on the wall. The dedicated interceptor was a dying concept and the Arrow could not be easily adapted to other roles. Another 1958 casualty of the F-4 was the Chance-Vought F8U-3 Super Crusader, an upgrade of the F8U-2 Crusader. It achieved MACH 2.8 in testing, but like the Arrow could not be easily adapted to the multirole mission.

Attached: NF87B.jpg (900x1166, 270K)

The Arrow was replaced by the F-104, not the F-4.
The USAF equivalent of the Arrow would of been the XF-108, which was cancelled.

Soviets got deep into it and the mig 25 foxbat was the result

it was a shitty plane and the russian interceptors of the tiem were more impressive

teh f-111 btfo of all them and so did the a-12 which came only a few years later

leafs are obsessed with this plaen for some reason though because they have shitty self esteem

Attached: 2a90bdd855c0t (1).jpg (400x328, 18K)

What does the Arrow have to do with the MiG-25?

One is a successful concept (the foxbat is fast, therefore, fit for interception) the other a failed one (the avro was average or slower than fighters).

The federal government are incompetent fucks that couldn't even run a popcorn stand. They've always been like that

Can we still blame ((them)) in this?

Average, if not sub-par interceptor that wasn't easily adaptable to other roles (CAS, bombing, multi-role, etc.).

Attached: SovietPepeGrimaceAKCigarette.png (414x419, 273K)

>MiG-25

Attached: MiG25.png (947x237, 53K)

The Feds can't even function not even back then without leeching off the western provinces. No wonder the Feds killed off the avro company they only subsidize bombardier

>interceptor has the performance of an interceptor
>aircraft with avionics designed in the late 50s/early 60s has electronics from the late 50s/early 60s
>blaming the Soviets for the US thinking (for budgetary purposes) that the MiG-25 was a super fighter
How interesting

It's an old design.
Who cares anymore?

We never really got to see where and if it could be improved upon. Plus, with all the faggoty post-national state horseshit our current frog-nigger in charge is spouting around when he isn' tsuucking dick and crying, its a little piece of history that we have a little bit to be proud of. We mustn't lose touch of that.

Plus, it was one of the first craft to reach the stratosphere

Absolutely

You're suppose to buy expensive second hand US aircraft with backdoor custom firmware not to do your own thing but to be dependent and to get btfo when you don't play how you should.

>the russian interceptors of the tiem were more impressive
fucking churchill, giving the russians jet tech