Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Normal
Ummm ... not really. 'Bonnie' may have been too small for most naval fighters but, as mentioned above, it was a role-priority recommendation from The Navy Board of Canada that put paid to RCN 'fast jets'. As such, by 1962, it wouldn't have mattered how long Bonaventure's fight deck was. (Apologies for continuing OT but this 'CA-4 for the RCN' myth just keeps going.)By the time that Douglas was pitching its Spey-powered CA-4, the sole audience was the RCAF. But the CF-104 had just entered service and it was Paul Hellyer (as Pearson's first MND) who oversaw the introduction of the low-level nuclear strike role for NATO. At the time, the CF-104 appeared to be the RCAF's ideal answer to both strike and photo-recce in Europe. Small wonder then that no-one in the RCAF recognized a need for A-4s.It was Hellyer and its 1964 Defence White Paper that pushed the idea of new strike aircraft - as an alternative to pricey F-4s. Hellyer wanted aircraft that could be readily deployed in Europe or Canada and shifted back-and-forth as needed. Obviously the CA-4 was not going to satisfy that role. Ironically, neither was the 'Tinker Toy' from Northrop.As for Paul Hellyer himself, yes he was an engineer but he never worked for Northrop ... at least, not in any pay-cheque sense.
Ummm ... not really. 'Bonnie' may have been too small for most naval fighters but, as mentioned above, it was a role-priority recommendation from The Navy Board of Canada that put paid to RCN 'fast jets'. As such, by 1962, it wouldn't have mattered how long Bonaventure's fight deck was. (Apologies for continuing OT but this 'CA-4 for the RCN' myth just keeps going.)
By the time that Douglas was pitching its Spey-powered CA-4, the sole audience was the RCAF. But the CF-104 had just entered service and it was Paul Hellyer (as Pearson's first MND) who oversaw the introduction of the low-level nuclear strike role for NATO. At the time, the CF-104 appeared to be the RCAF's ideal answer to both strike and photo-recce in Europe. Small wonder then that no-one in the RCAF recognized a need for A-4s.
It was Hellyer and its 1964 Defence White Paper that pushed the idea of new strike aircraft - as an alternative to pricey F-4s. Hellyer wanted aircraft that could be readily deployed in Europe or Canada and shifted back-and-forth as needed. Obviously the CA-4 was not going to satisfy that role. Ironically, neither was the 'Tinker Toy' from Northrop.
As for Paul Hellyer himself, yes he was an engineer but he never worked for Northrop ... at least, not in any pay-cheque sense.
