B)
Avro CF-105 "Arrow" Aircraft Preliminary Progress Report - 1957 Educational Documentary
Mock-ups, models, and early design tests of a Canadian advanced interceptor aircraft.

The Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow was a delta-winged interceptor aircraft designed and built by Avro Canada. The Arrow is considered to have been an advanced technical and aerodynamic achievement for the Canadian aviation industry. The CF-105 (Mark 2) held the promise of near-Mach 2 speeds at altitudes of 50,000 feet (15,000 m) and was intended to serve as the Royal Canadian Air Force's (RCAF) primary interceptor in the 1960s and beyond.

On 20 February 1959, the development of the Arrow and its Iroquois engines was abruptly halted before the project review had taken place. Two months later, the assembly line, tooling, plans and existing airframes and engines were ordered to be destroyed. The cancellation was the topic of considerable political controversy at the time, and the subsequent destruction of the aircraft in production remains a topic for debate among historians and industry pundits. Officially, the reason given for the destruction order from cabinet and the chiefs of staff was to destroy classified and "secret" materials used in the Arrow and Iroquois programs. The action has been attributed to Royal Canadian Mounted Police fears that a Soviet "mole" had infiltrated Avro, later confirmed to some degree in the Mitrokhin archives.
View: https://youtu.be/dG031_iPGI4

Code:
https://youtu.be/dG031_iPGI4
Dear mods, if someone else posted this video before, please delate this post!
 
NACA Research Memorandum

LONGITUDINAL AND LATERAL STABILITY, CONTROL CHARACTERISTICS, AND VERTICAL-TAIL-LOAD MEASUREMENTS FOR 0.03-SCALE MODEL OF THE AVRO CF-105 AIRPLANE AT MACH NUMBER 1.41

 

Attachments

  • 20050028458-18.jpg
    20050028458-18.jpg
    188.6 KB · Views: 1,238
Orionblamblam said:
if there is a mass migration of Canucks, they're bring their problems with them, and we'll soon be overrun with wendols and poutine and Celine Dion.

;D ;D ;D

PaulMM (Overscan) said:
Browsing his stuff I found a "Korean British AVRO Vulcan Reference Book"
Wow, the little-known Korean British Avro Vulcan.

More like a Korean "British Avro Vulcan" Reference Book to me...
 
No..

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Korean-British-AVRO-Vulcan-Reference-Book-/221894469904?hash=item33a9f0e910:g:SMkAAOSwHjNWAwv~

I *think* given he has labelled other stuff as "WW2" and "Post WW2" he is thinking Vulcan is a Korean war era aeroplane. Well, the prototype did first fly in 1952 and the Korean war dragged on to 1953, but I really can't see how that makes it "Korean War era" when it didn't enter service until 3 years after the war ended.
 

Attachments

  • 7825827_orig.jpg
    7825827_orig.jpg
    55.9 KB · Views: 506
  • plan views.gif
    plan views.gif
    79.1 KB · Views: 453
  • birds eye view.gif
    birds eye view.gif
    114.3 KB · Views: 378
  • original side view 2.jpg
    original side view 2.jpg
    49.5 KB · Views: 331
  • original stractural drawing.jpg
    original stractural drawing.jpg
    303.7 KB · Views: 350
  • Avro-CF-105-Arrow.jpg
    Avro-CF-105-Arrow.jpg
    82.4 KB · Views: 368
  • 7384263_orig.jpg
    7384263_orig.jpg
    200.4 KB · Views: 856
  • original three side view drawing.gif
    original three side view drawing.gif
    100.9 KB · Views: 854
  • original front and side view.jpg
    original front and side view.jpg
    136.9 KB · Views: 832
  • original plan view.jpg
    original plan view.jpg
    121.9 KB · Views: 862
Hi!
The Avro Arrow: A Picture History, Lawrence Miller

 
Petrus said:
You may find it interesting, for it contains info (incl. drawings) of C104 versions, details of CF-105 and even info on planned infrastructure at RCAF bases.

https://documents.techno-science.ca/documents/CASM-Aircrafthistories-AvroCanadaCF-105Arrownose.pdf

Piotr

Amazing find my dear Pertrus.
 

Attachments

  • 7.png
    7.png
    162.1 KB · Views: 550
  • 6.png
    6.png
    142.9 KB · Views: 522
  • 5.png
    5.png
    207.5 KB · Views: 474
  • 4.png
    4.png
    202 KB · Views: 471
  • 3.png
    3.png
    228.8 KB · Views: 492
  • 2.png
    2.png
    152 KB · Views: 492
  • 1.png
    1.png
    148.3 KB · Views: 484
Hi!
Source : AIR ENTHUSIAST 89.
 

Attachments

  • PAGE 42.jpg
    PAGE 42.jpg
    708.4 KB · Views: 371
  • PAGE 41.jpg
    PAGE 41.jpg
    570.6 KB · Views: 350
  • PAGE 40.jpg
    PAGE 40.jpg
    684.2 KB · Views: 328
  • PAGE 39.jpg
    PAGE 39.jpg
    627.7 KB · Views: 335
  • PAGE 38.jpg
    PAGE 38.jpg
    594.9 KB · Views: 330
  • PAGE 37.jpg
    PAGE 37.jpg
    645.2 KB · Views: 363
  • PAGE 36.jpg
    PAGE 36.jpg
    580.2 KB · Views: 380
  • PAGE 35.jpg
    PAGE 35.jpg
    780.1 KB · Views: 349
  • PAGE 34.jpg
    PAGE 34.jpg
    826.7 KB · Views: 355
  • PAGE 43.jpg
    PAGE 43.jpg
    711 KB · Views: 404
Hi!

How the Avro Arrow was built.(Video)

Construction and unveiling of the Arrow(Video).

Iroquois engine rollout.(Picture)


Side view source, Missiles : 8 Hughes Falcon or 4 Douglas Sparrow Ⅱs(Cancelled).

Control panel.
Boundary layer control.
 

Attachments

  • Irocuois engine.jpg
    Irocuois engine.jpg
    108.5 KB · Views: 444
  • profil.jpg
    profil.jpg
    250.7 KB · Views: 489
  • missiles.jpg
    missiles.jpg
    255.5 KB · Views: 519
  • Boundary Layer Control.jpg
    Boundary Layer Control.jpg
    87.9 KB · Views: 508
  • 3767_arrow_cockpit_7_lg.jpg
    3767_arrow_cockpit_7_lg.jpg
    64.9 KB · Views: 472
And this picture (from the document referred to at http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,729.msg303325.html#msg303325) explains why the canopies of the Arrow's cockpit opened in such an extraordinary way. The crew apparently would get into the cockpit not from below, using ladders (as in many other jet-fighters), but rather from above, coming to the place via the catwalk leading from the crew-room at the 'Q shed' (as it is called in the RAF).

;)

Piotr
 

Attachments

  • CF-105 Q shed.png
    CF-105 Q shed.png
    261.7 KB · Views: 449
I was wondering about the canopy lately. What is the advantage of getting into the aircraft from the catwalk in the Q shed versus a ladder? When they have to get out, does the ground crew have to back the aircraft into the shed? OK, I get that you save a few seconds but the rest of the time it would be a pain in the ass. You also get one more canopy seam to seal.
 
Archibald said:
Wait, the aviation museum of Canada has closed ?

The Canadian Air And Space Museum in Toronto closed in 2011. The Canadian Aviation and Space Museum in Ottawa is still open.
 
Vertical take-off Avro Arrow, A.V. Roe Canada Ltd., 1958.
 

Attachments

  • Avro.jpg
    Avro.jpg
    227.6 KB · Views: 542
  • cf-104 2.png
    cf-104 2.png
    670.4 KB · Views: 499
  • cf-104.png
    cf-104.png
    665.7 KB · Views: 482
  • cf-105 mk-2a.png
    cf-105 mk-2a.png
    726 KB · Views: 506
Last edited:

Attachments

  • 105.png
    105.png
    2.3 MB · Views: 404
  • avro 105 1.jpg
    avro 105 1.jpg
    407.3 KB · Views: 412
  • avro 105.jpg
    avro 105.jpg
    754.6 KB · Views: 405
Last edited:
I'm not seeing the VTOL here. Zero-length launch just refers to the use of Rocket assist and a launch rail to get a basically conventional aircraft airborne without a runway. Landing would still require a strip of some sort.
 
Johnbr said:
Vertical take-off and landing Avro Arrow, A.V. Roe Canada Ltd., 1958.

Nice find John,and I displayed some of them in reply # 82.
 
Okay so some words about that connexion between the Arrow and France (Dassault). I checked on google books and now the picture gets clearer. Dassault considered the PS.13 Iroquois TWICE
- for the Mirage IVB, the fat Mirage IV that didn't needed KC-135s
And another time, before that date.
The Mirage III was frozen around the Atar 9 early 1957 but the twin Atar 9 Mirage IVA took two more years.

Between these two dates the Mirage IV design somewhat "floated" around three major designs
- a twin Atar 9 heavy fighter the size of a Phantom - the AdA said "no thanks = the fighter is the Mirage III, the two-atar will become a bomber > Mirage IV-01 and IV-A
- the Mirage IVB monster
- a single-engine fighter with only ONE engine - a scaled-up Mirage III called the Mirage IVC which encompassed both F-106 and Phantom, single and two seater, one or two engine.
Well, that's where the Iroquois enters the picture. Dassault, quite simply, wanted his own... F-106. A scaled-up Mirage IIIC that would need 9 to 12 tons of thrust. The Iroquois was right there. SNECMA was nowhere to be found.
What is quite interesting is to think that between 1956 and 1960 the Mirage III family encompassed many sizes - broadly > FD-2, F-106, Arrow, TSR-2, and B-58 in size and weights.

imagine, if the Arrow had been canned yet SNECMA had rescued Orenda and taken a licence for the Iroquois... hostie de callisse de chrisse, tabernacle, how cool would that be...
 
- a single-engine fighter with only ONE engine - a scaled-up Mirage III called the Mirage IVC which encompassed both F-106 and Phantom, single and two seater, one or two engine.
Well, that's where the Iroquois enters the picture. Dassault, quite simply, wanted his own... F-106. A scaled-up Mirage IIIC that would need 9 to 12 tons of thrust. The Iroquois was right there.

That would be an interesting design. Do you have any more information?
 
Maybe I have a picture in one of Jean Cuny book from the 80's... there must be further pictures in all those recent, fabulous books about Mirages.

My earlier phrase was unclear. I wanted to say the Mirage IVC existed in both single-engine (bigger Mirage IIIC) and two-engine (small Mirage IVA) variants. The former would have been F-106 like, the later was more like a Phantom, except with delta wing. Smaller than the Arrow which really huge.
It was really a bridge between the III-C and the IV-A.

attached some pages of Cuny books related to the varied Mirage IV, the naval one included.
 

Attachments

  • Page_113.JPG
    Page_113.JPG
    200.6 KB · Views: 346
  • Page_124.JPG
    Page_124.JPG
    446.8 KB · Views: 312
  • Page_240.JPG
    Page_240.JPG
    265.8 KB · Views: 303
  • Page_241.JPG
    Page_241.JPG
    188 KB · Views: 310
  • Page_242.JPG
    Page_242.JPG
    210.3 KB · Views: 330
Last edited:
It doesn't contain drawings but the book, Requiem for a Giant by Palmiro Campagna, exposes the decision to cancel the Arrow. Apparently, the US convinced Canada to not buy, or build, l,ocal.
 
From the book, The Avro Arrow,for the record.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    73 KB · Views: 250
  • 2.png
    2.png
    53.5 KB · Views: 235
  • 3.png
    3.png
    68.5 KB · Views: 226
  • 4.png
    4.png
    62.2 KB · Views: 225
  • 5.png
    5.png
    49 KB · Views: 223
  • 6.png
    6.png
    101.3 KB · Views: 304
With its big weapons bay could the Arrow have carried the big Hughes missile developed for the YF12A?
Although it was not possible in real life the Arrow looks so right in the early 60s high visibility RAF Lightning squadron colours. Some years ago I had couple of 1/72 scale kits made up for me in those colours. They are in store at the moment.
 
I wish I could find a detailed account about the CF-105 Arrow analog FBW - how and who invented that, and its legacy (IMHO, it went into the Mercury and Gemini capsules). Was there any relation to the Concorde system (1969) ?

Incidentally, were Dynasoar controls full analog FBW ?

In Computers take flight, the author(s) made very clear nobody knew about the Arrow in 1971. Both NASA or USAF modifying Crusaders or Phantoms into FBW laboratories, were unaware of that previous achievement.
(page 32, 47, 62, 80 )
 
With its big weapons bay could the Arrow have carried the big Hughes missile developed for the YF12A?

Yes. I've compared them 15 years ago, and they matches.
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-47.html has AIM-47 length at slightly less than 13 ft, the Arrow bay was 16 ft. As for width, it could have carried two side by side. Three would be too tightly packled.

When I made my Hobbycraft Arrow in Imperial Iran (= Tomcat) AF livery, I dug small recesses into the CF-105 belly and put 4*AIM-47 there - two fore, two aft. There is length aplenty - the bird was HUGE. Wing pylons would be for drop tanks with Sparrows or Sidewinders on side pylons.

 
Last edited:

Attachments

  • RAF_QRA.jpg
    RAF_QRA.jpg
    26.1 KB · Views: 301
Did anybody ever made a better 1/72 scale kit for the Arrow than the old Hobbycraft (hobbycrap ?) piece of junk ? during my Arrowmaniac period (2001-2004) I made two of them, enough to hate this kit for the rest of my life...
 
My two are the old Hobby ones. Sadly bits keep falling off them. I also have a Philippine desk model with undercart which didnt work out too well. Its in the same scheme as the one above..The kits are in RAFG green and 74sqn Tiger black tail scheme.
I also have a very heavy diecast Hobbymaster 1/72 scale version which was made a while back and is hard to find. There is also a crude metal toy version in about 1/144 and various 1/200 models.
I remain an Arrow fan and it fits nicely into my crazy 1975 world.
 

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom