The Iroquois never should have died. My father worked on the Iroquois, and there was intense interest from the French to outfit their Mirage fighters with the Iroquois, and an initial purchase of 200 units was being negotiated. Diefenbaker, in his stubbornness, axed the Iroquois as well and passed up a chance to a least recover the costs of the program. I have heard the entire cancellation referred to as an act of "political vandalism". Kudos to you for re-patriating a piece of our history. Canada lost her big chance to crawl out from under the American shadow and find our own place in the sun.
Wish I could like this comment more than once. Absolutely, all the effort should have gone into the Iroquois after the Arrow was cancelled. The engine was marketable, the airframe was not...
They should build back one plane and put those engine in it and really see once and for if that potential would be achieved and the number RL 202 escape destruction so it seems don't if true also the seat were in England but any how the only thing that could beat that plane is the mig 31 we spend alot of money on the f35 and no plane to account for lol
The reason I would never vote for the Conservative Party. Even years ago they were idiots. Look at how quick they were willing to buy the F-35? The liberals waited till they were tested and the price dropped and voila, a bad deal on an unproven fighter turned into a great deal on a fighter with the bugs worked out.
Dassault shelved the Iroquois in October1958, electing to go with the SNECMA Atar for the Mirage IV bomber. Orenda continued with Iroquois development right up until the Arrow's cancellation on February 20, 1959.
On a more serious note AVRO after the arrow cancellation cancelled the BOBCAT project. This was a Canadian designed APC for the Canadian Army.The prototype can be seen at the RCAC museum at CFB Borden. With 1950’s technology it had design features not seen until the US Bradly IFV. To wit: a turret with a machine-gun, sloped armour,pistol ports with ball turrets mounting Thompson smg’s for fighting onto the objective,it was amphibious and the troops dismounted out of rear doors.If we had built it and further developed it over the years the army would have had the best tracked carrier in the world. AVRO said we’ll never work with Canada again on any project.More than just the arrow was lost!!
i'M AN AUSSIE BUT HAVE WATCHED EVERYTHING i COULD FIND ON THE ARROW. DEAR CANADA, BE PROUD OF CREATING THE ARROW. IT WAS AN AMAZING AIRCRAFT. RESPECT !
Always happy to hear from our friends "Down under". It seems these days that Australia has taken the lead in terms of developing a proper Air defence. Kudos to you my friend. regards....Virtual
Dream Diction it wasn’t a copy of anything bud, it was one* of the very first deltas envisioned, n more than one design happened to come to the same conclusions around the same time period, it doesn’t necessarily mean they were derived from one another
@@ericsandrin8123 Good grief. Facts matter. Divide that number by 10 & you'll be much closer to the actual direct and indirect job losses incurred by the CF-105's cancellation. As well, Diefenbaker won the next election (1962), albeit with a minority. He was finally turfed in 1963.
I had a teacher in Engineering in the early 90's, John Stratton was one of Avro's Super's of tool design for that airplane. John could get our whole engineering class to weep tears in 10 minutes or less, listening to his stories from glory-to-betrayal by the govt. He would say "Yes I worked on that plane from Start to betrayal".
Dynamo....Yes, it was betrayal. I don't know if you have seen this series that coincides with the lost Arrow. There are four episodes and I am working on five. The series link follows....regards.....Virtual ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-AjuL9IM-1T0.html
Hey dynamo Joe - I am a happy customer - I also had a teacher that worked on the Arrow. Exact same experience. The most influential person in my life. We named our second son after him. What a waste of our intellectual potential.
It was more than a betrayal or a change in military needs and economic circumstances. It was a simple conspiracy between the Canadian and American governments to sacrifice our technological independence for security. Diefenbaker did not just cancel an expensive and risky military project, he traded the independent aerospace industry for free security from the Americans.
My father worked at Orenda Engines in Malton for the Arrow project. I still remember walking home from school and watching that beautiful aircraft flying . When the project was cancelled it was a dark day for Canada and Aviation in Canada. I still have a couple of compressor blades my dad gave me.
I remember in elementary school the boys in my class would excitedly draw pictures of the Arrow. It was special, even to the pre-teen set, because it was Canadian.
Thank you Robin for your perseverance, detective work, and the tremendous investiment of time, effort and resources needed to bring this engine back to Canadian soil. Clearly, you share the vision and the dream. You've spent many, many years on this project, and (Thank Heavens!) held it close the entire time. Just to know that it is in your good hands, and not at the mercy of our present government gives great joy and brings hope - the last thing to come from Pandora's Box. We MUST make a fully airworthy full-size Arrow "slip the surly bonds of Earth," and fly high, long and proud across Canadian skies. The existence of two intact, complete Iroquois engines that were destined for RL-206, s/n #116 and #117 - her full-power heart and lungs - could make this possible. Whether overhauled to certifiable, flight-ready condition, or used as "engineering templates" for building a new, similar engine incorporating all that we have learned, along with modern materials and technology, they are the missing piece of the Arrow picture. We have learned a great deal about bringing aircraft back "from the dead" - one has only to look at all that has been learned from completely refurbishing DHC-2 Beavers to "zero-time" aircraft, (to give just one example) to see that it _is_ possible. Likewise, the work being done by Buffalo Airways and by the many aviation museums across Canada that have military restored aircraft from scrap-heap cast-offs to fully flight-certified status have shown that it's possible to re-create or rebuild any part of an airframe. The engines were the one part of the Arrow that would have been virtually impossible to re-create - the expense of starting engineering development from scratch would be unimaginable. But now, the two actual engines are here. There are many small pieces from actual Arrows, and at least one full-scale non-flying replica in central Alberta, for starters. Every other part is within the realm of possibility to re-make. It would not be easy, nor cheap - but from an engineering standpoint, it _is_ physically possible. Improvements in materials technology and manufacturing techniques actually can be used to our benefit in doing so. John Diefenbaker ripped the bleeding, still-beating heart out of Canada's hi-tech and aerospace industry in one day for his own petty machinations. In doing so he killed something special and vital in Canada's vision of its own national identity. We were at the bleeding edge of engineering and technology, with imagination and innovation better and more sophisticated than any to be found elsewhere. Yes, we build good aircraft today, but of a completely different type and scale. We know how, and we have improved our "trade skills'" over time. The Arrow, however, is more. There will always be nay-sayers whining that it's impossible, or it's not worth the time and effort, or any one of dozens of excuses. There are always such small-minded, short-sighted people - usually the loudest are also the most lacking in knowledge - many are members of our government, who cannot see beyond their perks and pensions. They have no place here. For those who say "we can't do it" the answer is simple: We have not had the means to try. If it has been worth restoring a WWII Lancaster to airworthy status, and if the Halifax restoration project is likewise a part of our collective aviation heritage, then RL-206 Mk.II is no less so. It can be done, and we should do it. The "spin-off" benefits alone to our collective engineering and technological skills we would develop, and the expertise we would gain would repay the effort many times over, but that would be a fortunate bonus. Canada has had no comparable engineering challenge, or any challenge that would bring together so much excellence in so many fields for decades. Some would say not since the building of the trans-Canada railroad has there been a project that would grip our national imagination in the way that this could. We must make the Arrow fly again.
HI Jim, Thank you for your comment. Your view has been penned many times, although not as concisely, on the several other Arrow videos on this site. I don't know if you have seen those. There is a group who is attempting such a feat as you propose. They are called "Friends of the Arrow". Although any Arrow press is good press, I believe this project will eventually morph to something else when the full weight of this project becomes clear to them. They have cited 60 million dollars to rebuild a non military version. Our team has put this figure more at 600 million to 1 billion dollars. 60 million might get you the landing gear and a couple of Iroquois. Having said that, the engineering on the Iroquois has been done, so building two new ones is not really a daunting task, but the entire aircraft is. Even though it would be possible to piece together a lot of the design dwgs, there were many parts not designed by AVRO. The mirad of companies that built smaller parts had their own dwgs. and these are gone. But, even more expensive is simply the operation and maintenance of a full Arrow. Just taking off and immediately returning to base with two Iroquois would cost ten thousand dollars. There is only one way that Arrows can fly again and that is if they are the current operational fighter of the RCAF and that would be better than the current offerings. regards..Virtual
@@Virtualenvirons Yes, I have seen your videos on this site, and I wish I had 1/10th of your skill as far as CGI animation is concerned. I've thoroughly enjoyed everything you've produced and posted, right up to the most recent in January 2019. Applause to you for your fine work, and I hope you'll do more of it in the future. I'll look forward to them! I am now retired, but I have a bit of experience in high-tech R&D engineering, and although it may be immodest to say so, some results of projects where I was the principal researcher in the 1990's have been incorporated as a standard part of engineering and production of a major product of (at least) one very large corporation - something that is high-value and widely used. It was only in 2014 that I received positive, detailed confirmation that the results of research first published in 1992 are now being built into hundreds of thousands of high-technology manufactured products. I don't make any claim to being an expert in modern aerospace engineering, but I have some experience, and some knowledge of what can be done, and the state of the art. I can't argue with your cost estimates; my own "thumbnail sketch" first approximation was about $750 million a few years ago. That said, there are a couple of other things to consider. One is that the RCAF definitely needs a new front-line fighter aircraft, and if history as well a current events are any indication, and we look at a globe, we may need more that 100 aircraft - I think 150 may be closer to the mark - my opinion only, of course. $750 million as an initial outlay _sounds_ like a tremendous amount of money, but consider this: our current government has just spent $700 million in "incentives" to get major media outlets "on-side" with the ambitions and messages of the party now in government. We have heard in recent weeks testimony from a very credible source that elected and permanent members at the very highest level of our government see this as a moderate and reasonable expense. This same administration has spent many times that much money on 'feel-good' projects that completely ignore hard facts. The amount of money needed to re-equip the RCAF with a Canadian-designed and built aircraft does not seem quite so impossible if we take these things into consideration. The author and journalist Gwynne Dyer once remarked to me that our next war "will be a 'come as you are' event" - we will not have the luxury of time to make aircraft in the numbers needed. This is true whether looking at license-built or "all up" purchased aircfaft from foreign manufacturers, or an aircraft designed and manufactured in Canada. The present government has displayed a remarkable lack of interest, if not outright contempt for the re-equipment needs of our armed forces, but they have shown us one thing: there are many billions of dollars now being spent on less-important initiatives. Suddenly, the dollar figures we all project do not seem quite so impossible when put into context. I think world events may leave us no choice about re-equipping the RCAF with first-line modern aircraft, and although I can't find fault with your cost figures, a modern Arrow may not be quite as out of reach as these numbers suggest. There are other reasons that may help make a modern Arrow a more serious contender. One is that the money would be spent in Canada, employing Canadian industry and workers. It would revitalize many sectors of our economy, and we would not be spending money to enrich others. A second is that a Canadian solution leaves us less dependent on suppliers tied to foreign governments, and to the political considerations or desires of other countries, whether or not they are nations with whom we share common interests at the present time. Again, a map, current events, and a projection of history make this factor much more important that it may seem at this moment. I agree that we can't underplay or underestimate the problems involved - any serious look at the whole thing make the size and scope of such a project very clear. At the same time, if we put it into perspective, it may be difficult, but it is not impossible, and in the end may be in our own best interests. I don't think that we can depend on "friendship" if we are giving honest consideration to our own borders and their defense. Likewise, I think we owe it to ourselves not to be an easy target. Our current government has no interest in or belief of the importance of our national borders. I don't think this view is shared by most citizens - at least, I hope not. The scale of such a project, or its possible problems can't be understated or ignored. In spite of that, I think it _is_ possible, and that in the Arrow we have a head start - a great deal of the design and testing has already been proven, something we may use to our advantage. It wouldn't be easy, and it wouldn't be cheap, but it may be our best option, if we do not want to repeat the errors of the past with respect to equipping the RCAF.
@@jimbaritone6429 Good morning Jim, I an also retired for 13 years now, I did my career at the National Research Council Ottawa. I have interfaced with NASA twice in my Career, as when NASA talks to Canada it does so through NRC. If you noticed episode four, I touch on the the problems relying of allies for defence as U.S. presidents are fickle. I love the way you can portray Canada's apathy towards defence with the spoken word. Not really my strong suit, so I use 3D. When I speak about the cost of rebuilding a modern Arrow, I don't mean to say that it is cost prohibitive, I think it is a bargain. We do need at least 150 fighters if not more. As the Arrow would be Canada specific fighter today as it was in 1959, it could be rebuilt as it was, except for modern avionics. Something not widely known was the Arrow was to a have bombing role, essentially much like the F-15 Strike eagle. Except for a lower G turn factor, it would be a strike eagle. In the interceptor role it would kill from afar like an Eagle. Clearly it would be outclassed by modern fighters in a dog fight, but that was recognized in 1959. The thinking then, was there will never be fighter bombers over Ottawa, unless they are American, but there might be bombers. That still holds true today. Canada is unique in the world that way, tied to the hip with the U.S., but a long way from all other countries in terms of military conquest, unless it was the U.S. Also, like Russia our terrain works well in our favour. So, the Arrow is still viable, once we leave our NATO commitment. That is the real reason we buy U.S. fighter bombers. As to restarting the Arrow program, I can't see any Federal Government doing that. It would have to be a coalition of interests like Bombardier and others in expanding their markets. If the initial development money was private, I think the government would then come to the table, it would have to. I may diverge after episode five and do a short movie on a modern Arrow, costs and benefits, etc. Nice chatting with you. regards....Virtual
Mr. Sipe Amazing story and effort by you to repatriate 116 to Canada. The ARROW program was one of Canada's greatest achievements and the Government's greatest failures. Canada's Aviation industry has never truly recovered. Unfortunately subsequent governments up to our current one does not have the will nor the intelligence to procure new aircraft let alone update and re-start the ARROW program. It would be great to hear 116 roar to life one day....and prove how they would've performed. Please post any updates. Thank You....
There is a 60% scale replica currently being built in Calgary Alberta Canada and there is also a full scale being built in Ontario at the original airport the avro arrow was originally built both are non military versions that will be flying at airshows and on display in museum's they are not exact replicas as far as drive train and electronics and there was a serious proposal submitted to the Canadian government as an alternative to the f35 with a cost of 12 billion a unit instead of the potentially if im not mistaken 23 billion for the f35 they turned it down sadly even though it still to this day rivals or dominates many modern planes there also was a firm that did a complete redesign of the avro arrow to make a avro arrow 2 it definitely looked like a modern plane and shared very little with its inspiration from the cf105 avro arrow So in the next few years expect the avro arrow to be back on the radar as i believe the 60% scale one is due to be flying in 2 years Ive also heard that one of the Iroquois engines has been in a test chamber or is scheduled to be in s test chamber im guessing it is 116 due to 117's status
@@dennisdragomir7572 116 is the one that they talk about comming from Britain the 117 is the one in the museum the only existing known completely original Iroquois also only one known to never been run
Hi, Folks. Although I am an Australian citizen, I have had a long fascination with the Arrow and Iroquois programs, mostly, I suspect, because they were so technically advanced for their time. I wish happy hunting and Godspeed to all those working toward restoration and re-creation of these two projects. I would love to at least hear one day that an Avro Arrow had flown with Iroquois engines and how the match had performed. Avionics may have left the Arrow behind but that is 'curable' and I suspect that the airframe could still be right up there with the best of them with little if any modification - - - - SIXTY years on. Maybe - a BIGGG MAYBE - canards added just behind the cockpit and perhaps twin vertical tails along with thrust vectoring????????????? I would also suggest that Diefenbaker was perhaps Canada's biggest mistake - - - - - at least until Trudeau Mk2. Just my 0.02. You all have a wonderful day, Best wishes. Deas Plant.
As an American, and retired USAF SR-71 maintainer, I LOVE the Arrow and the Iroquois engines...and hate what happened. I do have what I believe is a three-view large original drawing of the Arrow, found at an estate sale of one Canadian Colonel named "Best"... He was assigned to NORAD in Colorado Springs, and his family was essentially giving away many unique memorabilia items.
Hi Rocco, Thanks for your comment. Always appreciate hearing from our Southern neighbours. Do you have a picture of the drawing? If you could post it somehow, I am pretty sure we could verify the dwg. Working on SR-71's that must have been interesting and kept you very busy. From what I understand of the aircraft, it took a lot of prep for each flight. Amazing aircraft none the less....regards....Virtual
@@Virtualenvirons I have two pics for you. Although the ink looks black in the pics, it is actually blue. Working on SR-71s and U-2s, all of the parts were ordered from blueprints, so I have an idea of the original look and feel of drawings. This one was rolled up, sized about 2'x3'. I had it placed in a high-quality frame, as you will see in the pics, if I can figure a way to get them to you...
Hi Rocco. If you would like to send the pics to my colleague at "Amirault 3D", (email to follow), I will post them on the New Arrow Channel I created. I can credit Rocco with a bio of how you came into possession of them. Your real name can remain hidden unless you are OK with your real name. That is your call. This is his personal email. (pamirault1@cogeco.ca) If you have any problems let me know through this forum....regards....Virtual
In all honesty, to build one "2019 style" probably wouldn't make it a great aircraft. It was ground-breaking back when it was in development, and was THE most advanced aircraft in its day. Today with vectored thrust engines and canard wings for maneuverability, and newer and more stealthy advanced construction materials, the Arrow design (the actual shape of it) wouldn't be a viable aircraft by today's standards. Something new and stealthy and maneuverable by today's standards could be loosely based on the Arrow, but it most certainly wouldn't be near anything close to the original. You could call it Arrow II or something and sure it would be advanced and so on, but it wouldn't be "an Arrow". Besides, clean sheet designs in this country in this day and age would make it near impossible cost-wise. No government in Canada would fund it sadly, and who would the customers be? A glorious and proud part of our past, but sadly doomed to stay there.... in the past.
@@pugle1 I would put forward the A-5 Vigilante (1958) bested the Arrow from a technical standpoint, engines aside. Digital avionics, HUD, multi-mode terrain-following radar, BLC, FBW, radar-aided inertial nav system, full-view canopy - many of these highly advanced systems were not found on Avro's CF-105. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_A-5_Vigilante
@Raynus 1 An aircraft I wasn't aware of... what ever became of it? I read your link to the Wiki article, and thank you for that. I love to learn new things. Still, in Canada, the Arrow was an item of national pride. Was it the best at what it was designed to be? An interceptor? Who knows... maybe in its day. So many want to bring it back on line, and as much as I admire it for what it was, even with a redesign, it wouldn't be up to snuff by today's standards. I'm a realist... it would have to be a totally new aircraft to compete with today's vectored thrust / canard winged planes.... For the 1950's the Arrow was amazing.... Today, not so much... sadly. The Arrow wasn't a bomber as the A-5 was designed to be.... The A-5 however looks like it was an amazing aircraft in its own right. Don't forget too, that after "black Friday" (the cancellation of the Arrow program) than many of the engineers went to NA, Grumman, Lockheed and NASA .... Maybe there is a little bit of the Arrow in the A-5? Love your post and the article was interesting. Thanks :) I love discussions like this.... Cheers!
To this day, I curse the fed government for scrapping the Arrow. When they shut it down my father worked at A.V. Roe in the hangar next door to the Arrow. He was employed building the CF 100 Canuck I believe. When the workers were told to go home, he went into the hangar where they were building the Arrow, picked up a handful of bolts that were supposed to go into the Arrow and brought them home. I have them now, and I used them to build a tool for guitar building. I treasure them.
Thanks for sharing that story Wayne. My father also worked at A.V.Roe but as a sub contractor with Westinghouse installing the Radio comms equipment. Sadly I don't have anything from the build, but I have the memory of my father's story of how disappointed the entire build team were, because they ALL knew they had built the most advanced aircraft the world had seen at the time.
@Le Chameau Thanks for asking! My father was one of the lucky ones. He was building CF100 Canucks in the building next to the Arrow, so he didnt lose his job.
Trudeau Sr .... and Jr are, and will be the death of our military. I joined the Army reserve in the 70's and remember having to yell "bang-bang" on exercises because there was nothing in the budget for blank ammo. We used to have the 2nd largest navy in the world... an air force to be reckoned with, and an army 2nd to none.... I'm proud of our military and our history..... the Arrow and all things that were in development back in that era.... we lost it all to short sighted politicians. I'm a conservative by nature, but even my team messed it up huge! Dief made a colossal error.... Idiot!
Some say the Conservatives destroyed Canada, some say the Liberals. I say you are both right. Good cop, bad cop, both want to put you in jail. Every penny of national debt is by those two. Glad I can go to my grave never being dumb enough to be sucked into voting for either, as every Lib and Con voter shares that destruction. I would like to see this plane fly again with the Iroquois just to see if the numbers are fact or fiction. In original trim. Then see what a modern power plant and some wind tunnel _tweaks_ using modern technology produces.
Canada lost a lot of amazing minds to the U.S. after that cancellation. I worked with men that worked on The Arrow and they told me if the Iroquois engine had of been installed and tested it would have been very hard for Diefenbaker and party to cancel the program. I was lucky enough to see the Arrow fly and I worked in the buildings where they were built in the mid 60’s. 13,000 jobs lost in 1959.
In the 1970's I worked at an R+D company whose chief engineer was a former senior member of the Iroquois design team at Orenda. He told me many stories including flying to Europe to meet with aerospace firms looking at purchases of possibly hundreds of Iroquois engine that wanted to buy/license the design and was told this was politically impossible given the cancellation of the Arrow. He made it very clear to me that the "Rated" output of the engines was very very conservative and that both ground and flight testing indicated there room for at least a 10-20% improvement in overall performance for an upgraded version that had begun life on the drawing boards. He also told me something that I later confirmed at a christmas party in 1980 with an Arrow flight test engineer that the Arrow actually flew Mach 2.05+ during the last couple of test flights during flights back to Malton (official test data was gathered during 2 of 3 legs during each test run) and this were kept secret because it was feared that the Iroquois engine development would be cancelled because the plane had met Spec using the existing "lower" powered development engines.
Years ago I was friends with a now deceased engineer who said he worked on the Iroquois project, designing the water tank which dissipated heat from running the engine. The engine was so powerful that the holding clamps were only adequate to about 50% power. When someone required a full power test holding clamps shattered. It was a miracle the engine did not completely break free and shoot off.
We should have offered it to the Russians. That would have stopped the end of it. The US would HAVE to scrap what they had and build the Arrows. Billions of dollars wasted?
Koodo's Robin for bringing the Iroquois home. As for the repremand , make a plaque for it. After 21 yrs if needed or deemed necessary "ask for forgiveness later. Although in your particular situation id display that repremand with great pride. Offering no explanation ,let wise people do that themselves. Iam very greatful for your success 😂
There is a 60% scale replica currently being built in Calgary Alberta Canada and there is also a full scale being built in Ontario at the original airport the avro arrow was originally built both are non military versions that will be flying at airshows and on display in museum's they are not exact replicas as far as drive train and electronics and there was a serious proposal submitted to the Canadian government as an alternative to the f35 with a cost of 12 billion a unit instead of the potentially if im not mistaken 23 billion for the f35 they turned it down sadly even though it still to this day rivals or dominates many modern planes there also was a firm that did a complete redesign of the avro arrow to make a avro arrow 2 it definitely looked like a modern plane and shared very little with its inspiration from the cf105 avro arrow So in the next few years expect the avro arrow to be back on the radar as i believe the 60% scale one is due to be flying in 2 years Ive also heard that one of the Iroquois engines has been in a test chamber or is scheduled to be in s test chamber im guessing it is 116 due to 117's status
@@Kraigthecanadian The fullscale Arrow you refer to will be the former TAM mockup, which was built not at Malton but in a former deHavilland building at Downsview. With the demise of TAM it is now stored, complete, in a hangar at Edenvale. There was never any intention, nor any prospect, of that one being flyable, indeed its structure is externally braced. The scaled down airframe being built in Alberta, though, is intended to fly, on the power of a pair of turbines from a Learjet...Besides those two, the Reynolds-Alberta Museum probably still holds the 75% scale mockup built for the CBC miniseries "The Arrow" in the 90s.
@@StudeSteve62 i knew of the one that was built as a display and left in disrepair in corner of the peerson airport transported to be restored at edanvale and put back on display I have seen the one at the Reynolds museum in person and yes it is still there
@@StudeSteve62 there was also one in planning to build a 1 to 1 non militarized replica i think that one fizzled out tho and got cancelled since writing the comment
@@StudeSteve62 i see nothing has been posted on the avro aro 60% flying replica for a while so hopefully its still going just temporarily due to covid stalled or non publicized
very good my dad and uncle both worked on the arrow in the 50's just before l was borne wish i heard more about plane from them so i always watch anything relating to our history on plane
Please, please, please get the Avril Errol running again! To create and build this Canadian plane again it will give so much back to our country. From rebuilding an aerospace program again, give our young engineers opportunity to stay in Canada. Besides national pride, it would create new industry and spinoff jobs for our aeronautics engineers. 🇨🇦
Hello R. I was not aware of the lab fire. I have been focused more on the Arrow. This was an opportunity provided by Robin Sipe to do this. Below are the links to the Arrow series and documentary that we have made. regards...Virtual Series ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-AjuL9IM-1T0.html Documentary ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hMKAoryHVP8.html
When I was employed at Douglas Aircraft in Malton Ontario, many employees were past employees of Avro when the Arrow was being built. I was told the Iroquois engine was inside the bay and was destined to be installed in the next airframe. Unfortunately it was not to be. I was told they expected these engines would most likely push the aircraft past Mach 2 in speed. I’m just telling what I was told by ex employees of A.V. Roe. I was assembling Douglas DC9 wings at that time,1966.
About 1990 I was talking to an ex-Orenda employee who told me an unusual story about boxing up an engine and shipping it to England. It was very plausible, from a person who had a reputation to truth, but no proof. Guess he was right!
@@MrMrBigro Brits and France were going to buy the damn planes! The entire program was keeping low and slow until the Iroquois showed up. THEN they were going to push the sales. God, I'm falling into the rabbit hole again. Not good.
@@MrMrBigro The RAE would have had two Arrows for high speed research flying (remember, TSR2 was being built and Concorde designed at the time); the Brits were told to back off, but Bristol did get the (less conspicuous) Iroquois transferred to them for study, some of its features going into the Olympus...
No Arrow will ever fly again (other than a scaled down version like the one being built now in Alberta). However, it would be interesting to get an Iroquois serviceable, and test it in, say, an F-104 or a Mirage 5...
I could only wish to hear and see an original AVRO ARROW. But I would love to see the government to stick with Canadian build and this would be the perfect way to do it.
very lucky the RAF museum did this, they have told people in the UK who are recreating lost aircraft to just get lost when enquiring about parts they have in store and don't have any plans for
I remember when I was a boy of 10 yrs old going to town with my parents & seeing a model of the Arrow in a local store --I ended up buying 1 of the model boxes with my allowance & building it at home . I kept that model hanging from the ceiling in my room until we moved --the model disappeared in the move & I have missed it ever since.
Cancelling the Arrow Canada lost not just the Arrow, we lost the entire aeronautical industry and all the talented people. That's why Canada does not have what it take to build its own jet fighter nowadays.
DID I ACTUALLY WATCH a Lost AVRO Arrow Iroquois fire up? I was working for sub contractor for Bell Canada installing phone wire and systems. In the late 1980s I was working at the building where the Arrow was developed and built. I met some old fellows who were working on the Arrow, and they still had all kinds of technical drawings, models, and many other really cool items relating to that awesome jet! I was there with my team for almost two months and got to know some of those old boys pretty well. I hired my brother in law and one day while he was with me two of these old guys asked if we wanted to see something cool. They took us to a room with all kinds of old original massive computers with all kinds of dials, button,switches and glass windows! It looked like something out of an old 1950's sci-fy film and I LOVED it! We were thanking them and just blown away, and one of the old guys says, hey where ya going, the show hasn't even begun! There was a huge jet engine bolted to a floor in a room beside this control room. There was a thick glass window where we saw this amazing jet engine, it was just awesome! I could not believe these old guys were showing this to us! Then, they started pushing buttons and this jet engine kicked to life!! They unwound that monstrous engine with a tremendous roar and a blast of terrifying jet fuel on fire came whizzing out of the rear!! I was so stunned at this entire deal that I was a bumbling child again! I still kick myself at not asking if that was one of the original Arrow jet engines. I just assumed it was! It wasn't as though this was an operational set up! There was nobody except these old fellows and a few other people we were dealing with there. The huge buildings were essentially empty! It was as if these old guys just refused to leave when Diefenbaker was conned by a terrified U.S. Eisenhower who could not allow Canada to be leap years ahead of themselves!! Eisenhower convinced Dief that interceptor jets were passay and the bumbling fool cancelled the Arrow and bought the missile systems before the country had even thought about becoming a nuclear power!! The missiles were useless without the warheads! So he bought them, and Canadians were so disgusted at the loss of this amazing jet as well as all that Canadian brain power!!! Dief lost confadence of his own government and was soundly thrashed by Liberal PM Lester Pierson, who bought and took delivery of the nuclear warheads only to get rid of them in 69 when Canada signed onto the anti nuclear plan. SO, the U.S. easily conned Diefenbaker into not only destroying the Arrow, but the brain power were disgusted also and they all moved to the States and started putting NASA on the global map!! We lost over 25,000 jobs and the future of a country who developed an interceptor jet which was decades ahead of everybody else, would have gone on to lead the space race and the sky would have literally been the limit!! All that tasty juice went straight to the U.S. WAHH WAHH WAHHHH! BUMPADA TSHHHHH! sigh Jack ~'()'~ Canada manly!
Good show. Raised deeply negative issues squirrelled away for a long time.I lived in Rexdale Toronto as a kid when the project was cancelled.A lot of my neighbours and friends lost jobs and were forced to move.Not coincidentally to aerospace in the US.It was a very trying time of great uncertainty in the community. I was too young to understand much about it.A feeling we had been sold out to the Americans and the whole business of developing a discreet industrial sector had been thieved. From the top.If there was some way we could utiliize the engineering costs put into the technology to benefit our Canadian economy I would feel a lot better about the shit kicking we took all that time ago.Good luck.
Years ago I published the video "Avro Arrow. Original Footage of the Canadian Icon" under my company named Halin International. The video was sold at all major air museums across Canada for some time. I did not profit from this venture. I simply endeavoured to make the footage available to anyone interested in it. I had been gifted the footage by an elderly colleague when I worked as a radar and communication technician for NORAD. He had received his copies from those who rescued the films from A.V.Roe in their brief cases..... During my production of the video, I was introduced to several individuals, retired from the RCAF, who described when and where (in Britain) Arrow number RL206 was flown upon cancellation of the Arrow program. With Britain and France beginning the development of the Concorde, RL206 was reverse engineered for that purpose. I am certain this is the reason, as you have shown in this video, Iroquois engine 117 was found lingering in a hangar in Britain. The cockpit on display at the Ottawa air museum is (re)numbered RL206. It has been long known that individuals who helped construct the Arrow cockpits exclaimed that this is not the cockpit of RL206, but rather the cockpit of an earlier Arrow. Canada refused to sell or transfer the Arrow project to the USA on several fronts. (A.V.Roe had feared the USA would steal the project from canada. Hence, their secondary blueprint vault was located in Northern Ontario for this reason) Having refused the project to our neighbour and Cold War ally, Canada could not let the USA know RL206 was flown to Britain to be reverse engineered by Britain and France. So, the cockpit of an earlier Arrow was renumbered 206 and put on display at the Ottawa museum. Perhaps this is the fundamental reason the Canadian government spared this one cockpit from destruction, like most everything else succumbed to....
HI Lindsay. Thank you for this. This fits into a picture that I receive bits and pieces of as the author of the Arrow Series. Have you seen that series or just this video? There are four Episodes so far and can be found on my channel. I will include the link at the end of this post. In this series, 206 is squirrelled away to a vault in Northern Ontario. I am in Barbados at the moment and will be here until Mar 8. When I return, I would love to talk with you on the phone and share a little info. Would that be OK? regards...Virtual. Series link. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-AjuL9IM-1T0.html
@@thorengebretsen3738 HI Lindsey, I will he back in Canada Mar. 9. I will get in touch and we can make arrangements to talk. thanks....regards...Virtual.
@@thorengebretsen3738 Good catch on your part, they are playing "All My Loving" by the Beatles! I thought it was a great version and a terrific surprise.
There is another odd side-note to this story, one I've wondered about and tried to follow up while doing research engineering years later. It's often been mentioned in documentaries about the development of the Arrow that one key element of the design and manufacture was the extensive use of Titanium to make very large pieces of the Arrow airframe. In the late 1950's Titanium was something new in aviation engineering - a very strong and lightweight metal that was nonetheless extremely difficult to work with. One of the main sources was the USSR, which presented some unusual procurement problems. Whole new methods and machines for shaping and working Titanium had to be developed from scratch, since it had never before been used as it was in the design and building of the Arrow. After the sudden demolition of the Arrow project, there is very little mention of what became of either the large, specialized and purpose-built machinery, tooling, and the engineers, machinists and technicians who had learned how to manufacture large aircraft parts from Titanium. Curiously, very soon afterward, in the U.S.A., Lockheed Aircraft's chief designer Kelly Johnston and Lockheed's ultra-secret special-projects plant, known as the "Skunk Works," were comissioned by the CIA to build a very fast, very high-flying aircraft to overfly the USSR. This aircraft was the predecessor of the 2-seat SR-71, and was known simply as the A-12, code name "Oxcart". The A-12 flew at speeds well in excess of Mach 3 - three times the speed of sound, and at altitudes well above 80,000 ft - the exact numbers are still classified, as is much information about the single-seat A-12 aircraft and its program. Most of the A-12 aircraft are still in existence, parked in an unobtrusive location. This is unlike the fate of the later 2-seat SR-71, many of which have found their way into museums and are on public display. The A-12's, perhaps because they were a CIA project, are not featured in aviation museums as are the remaining SR-71 aircraft. One of the key technologies that made building the A-12 possible (and later the SR-71) was the extensive use of Titanium. The reasons for using it were the same ones that had prompted its use in the Arrow - very high structural strength, comparable to or exceeding steel, but with very light weight. The A-12, like the Arrow, was a large aircraft, and large and very specialized machines tools, presses and so on were needed to make the Titanium parts. Many of these tools have no use other than fabricating Tittanium structures. I've researched open-source material about both the CIA's A-12 "Oxcart" and the later USAF SR-71 programs. Some mention is made of difficulties encountered when making aircraft parts from Titanium, and that much special equipment, some of it very large, was required. Being a "black" super-secret project, the historical record is thin. I do not know if Lockheed independently developed the same or similar equipment for manufacturing Titanium aircraft sections as Avro Canada had done only about 2 - 2-1/2 years earlier. It is curious, however, that after the Arrow program was (literally) chopped to pieces in one day, there is very little mention of what became of the huge amount of very large and spcialized machinery and tooling used to make aircraft from Titanium. It more or less vanishes from the wreckage of the Arrow project with hardly any mention, and yet this was huge (and expensive) leading edge manufacturing technology that had been developed with great difficulty at at tremendous cost. The timing is, if nothing else, an interesting coincidence - all the more so for the silence that surrounds it.
Wow. This was so awesome to watch. Wow. Thanks for getting that engine back to Canada!!! Where the heck can I see it? I'm out here in Toronto. Thanks for putting this video together and for getting that engine from the UK. Amazing.
@@TheInsaneupsdriver No, what happens when you vote conservative is five brand new C-17 Globemaster III's, seventeen new C-130J's, fifteen new CH-47 Chinooks, one hundred Tanks, thirty-seven new state-of-the-art M777 howitzers, nineteen new S-92 naval helicopters (ordered), offshore patrol vessels (ordered), one large naval resupply vessel (ordered), and an attempt to order 65 F-35's (scuttled by skippy). What happens when you vote liberal? Eighteen clapped-out Aussie legacy Hornets, half of which will be cannibalized for parts.
The ending notes mentions how the Canadian government was unpleased with how Robin circumvented proper channels to repatriate the engine. Ironic, given how many Canadians are unpleased with how "government channels" were the cause of destroying Canadian heritage in the first place. Robin made the right choice by not trusting them.
HI Jordan....Yes it was. Below is a link to a short documentary on this channel that describes the advances. regards...Virtual ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hMKAoryHVP8.html
If I remember correctly, the F 16 was the first production aircraft to use fly by wire, in 1976. But the early F 16s didn't have feedback, which the Arrow did have.
I have two connections to the arrow... my FIL was an engineer on the Arrow and lost his job on that Black Friday. Second... in university we had a former Avro test pilot as a guest speaker. He told us his time as a chase pilot for the Arrow (and his time in spits in WWII) but the most amusing to me was what happened to him on Black Friday. He said he was at 20,000' in a Clunk when the tower radioed to tell him the Arrow was cancelled and AVRO was done. He said he radioed back... "so should I just punch out or bring this kite back in one piece?"
Groom lake LOL No need to go that far away... behind door 23 storage locker 76, sub level 3 of tunnel 93, in unknown, unnamed, location 26... we have here another Whoosiewhatsit, from reverse engineering department Mt. Saint Hellen double secret squirrel storage company... As a kid my Dad took me to work on one of those bring your kid to work days... in the Summer I remember it quite well ... beneath Detroit is a enormous amount of storage and habitat for humanity to have survived a nuclear weapons attack... with out getting into the weeds about the story... let's say 2 million people could have lived down there in the old salt mines for many years. So being like so many black holes under ground... many people who have worked with the Gubberment here know how secret squirrel storage places are and the stupid amounts of wasted money go into vast money pits... Smoke and mirrors... I'm visiting Oscoda for the VA clinic today so I'll see what I can do to inquire... my P.O.C. has not returned my text message he may be training, traveling or otherwise occupied...
Jason Moore ask yourself these two questions. Where is the need? If yes, could this hypothetical need already be filled more cheaply with a product already in production?
@@aidan11162 We need a long range interceptor not a ground attack aircraft. It would be 9 billion for a Canadian made plane vs 25 billion for the F35 except the 9 billion for the Arrow would all be spent in canada and create 200,000 jobs
@@aidan11162 its already under development. A design has been made for a 5th generation fighter. Major Geneneral Lewis McKenzie is working closely with a private company Bordeaux Industries ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-WjNA1d7Q0a0.html
@@aidan11162 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-WjNA1d7Q0a0.html That price is easy to hit . We have test data and blue prints from the original program. All we'd have to do is modernize electronics , computers and structural materials
My father worked for Rolls Royce when they passed on the drawings and preliminary research etc. to the Canadians. He told me this possibly apocryphal story. About what became the Iroquois engine after the engine project was cancelled in the UK. Eventually rumours of the prodigious thrust the Iroquois engine produced reached the engineers and designers in Britain ànd eventually a visiting Canadian engine boffin was cornered, had vast quantities of best bitter poured down his throat and was interogated to find out how the Canucks had achieved something Rolls Royce itself could not do. It was explained that the Canadian engine lasted only 10% of the UK engines MTBO and MTBF ( mean time between overhauls and mean time between failures) but that this did not matter as the Arrow designers had taken this into account and due to the design of special tools, jigs and a heated tent as well as the way the engines mounted in the airframe 4 RCAF aircraft engine fitters could do an engine swap in a snowstorm in under 4 hours! So the short lifespan of the engine did not affect the scramble ability and flight readiness for military purposes of the Arrow in the least if enough airframes and spare engines were purchased.
Hi Andrew. If this story is true (and it probably is), it was likely they were talking about the Mark 1 series Iroquois. An operational development engine. With S/N116 (Mark 2) which was the full operational engine, all of the durability problems were addressed. Bristol ran the engine extensively with no failures and it exceeded performance specs., 32,000 lbs. in reheat. It is not known how long or how many cycles were run, but it was extensive. When Bristol finished testing, they sent the engine to Cranfield University where it was dismantled and thoroughly inspected to see what made it so good. That engine today, In particular the hot section components appear to be in excellent condition. The engine, like the Arrow was simply ahead of its time or perhaps a better statement is ahead of it's competitors. I do thank you for sending the story. It is good to hear the voices from the past today through stories like yours. I think the fact that your father recounted this story to you is testament to how the appearance of the engine in his time was significant. regards....Virtual
@@VirtualenvironsPerhaps the Arrow engineers had learned from the EE lightning where to maintain almost anything required the removal of at least one engine ( and that did not take only 4 hours) Or even the Volkswagen Beetle/Kombi where the engine only lasts 100 000 kilometers but is held in with only 4 bolts and factory service exchange units were available at a reasonable cost :)
@@andrewallen9993 Hi Andrew, The EE lightning was an interesting design. Over and under design. I know someone who flew the Lightning and we talked about it this summer in Barbados. As sophisticated as the Iroquois was, the Arrow itself was much more. Below is a link on my channel that will explain. regards....Virtual. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hMKAoryHVP8.html
the good part of this video ... he does get to rebuilding it ... I think he finishes it close to 2020 ... there are some videos of him working on the rebuild for certain
btw 117 is not unrun ... it ran at NRC on the ottawa rideau river office for years as a backup generator and heat source as needed ... how do I know i was one of the two kids who asked about it at the old rockliffee museum back when it was in the hangars and not a purpose built building
btw it was 2 5 years olds who saw it under a tarp on the rolling rack and asked what plane it was for ... it took the staffer 20 minutes to find out it was a surviving arrow engine ... I was one of them the good ole days of 1969
btw 115 and 116 didnt do the taxi trials for the arrow .. they were the slightly smaller size .. the two in 206 on the fateful day were 117 and 116 ... 117 went to NRC where it was run like a bugger and 116 went to hawker sidley after all the planes were scrapped ... a total of 6 engines went complete ... and around 4 more in parts or mostly completed parts ...
tell the official to STUFF IT ... they had 70 years to get the parts back ... and didnt DO ANYTHING AT ALL .. and no they cant stop you from doing it either .. it is a private sale and they have no legal recourse .... as long as it is NOT classed as a treasure .... like stuff from egypt etc ..
@@Virtualenvirons Yes, Orenda used to have many parts still in storage until a few years ago and someone probably has a complete set of blue prints squirreled away.
Well, there is one that isn't so secret. The UK has one of the Iroquois engines. I saw a presentation where they have it in a museum with other old jet engines.
Ummm...did you watch the video? That's what the video is about, obtaining the Iroquois that was in a UK museum with other old jet engines. It's here in BC now.
I don't know much more than the movie. I have not really asked Robin where he is at with the engine. The parts he needs may be in Ottawa,. regards.....Virtual
What happened to the Iroquois Turbojet project??? . Thought Mr Sipe was going to obtain the awesome powerplant itself along with the rest of the parts from overseas and bring this Awesome Power plant back to life for the Pride of the Canadian People. Sept of 2012 was the Last update from Agent Jay Z on the update of rebuilding and planning to fire this afterburning 32000 PSI monster back to life after all of these years. After all the procuring, after all the obtaining, after all the debut with welcoming back , Daena at S&S doing all that hard work to clean and polish back in 2012....was it all for nothing???, or did the Brit's decide, after the trade for the Hampton they needed, that they didn't want the Canadians after all, to have a complete Orenda Iroquois engine?...Really confused after watching the Movie, Keeping up on video's at S&S, with the procurement of the unit with Sn#116 from the Brit's , all that hard elbow grease to bring it back to it's original awesome pristine where it all began on Canadian soil, to have it end like this???....So if S & S didn't complete assembly and fire it off, where then is Sn# 116 then?????
HI Chris, The engine that Mr. Sipe brought back is in his facility. Although the engine is largely intact, there are still a a lot of smaller parts that are missing. Some of those parts may be in a storage facility in Ottawa. Largely unknown to the public, there are a lot more Arrow parts stored away. Boxes of them, but they are uncataloqued and access to them is very difficult. Robin made a few attempts to access that facility, but to no avail. Will that engine ever roar again is unclear. Also, there is a huge financial cost to this and even someone with Robins resources might find it daunting. regards....Virtual
I wonder if Mr. Sipe ever thought about a Kickstarter or a GoFundMe campaign? I'd have to believe a number of people, worldwide aero-enthusiasts, would chip in to see the engine refurbished and run again. I wish I could do the same for Boeing's SST General Electric - 4 engine, which (I think) was the largest pure turbojet ever successfully tested.
This kind of supports the theory of the Arrow that got away. If engines Serial numbered 115 & 116 were used for the taxi tests and engine serial numbers 117 & 118 were for flight testing, then 117 as the video says was not installed in RL 206 & resides in the Ottawa museum and engine 118 was not delivered yet. So, as the cancellation of the Arrow project happened suddenly and the 2 engines for taxi testing were still installed in RL 206, I'd say the Arrow that got away at night flew to England and made a few fuel stops along the way. There were people that worked on the Arrow that swore that they heard the unique sound of Iroquois engines late at night. They know because they worked for AVRO. Now, that would explain why Serial number 116 ended up in the UK... no choice but to fly now before it's chopped. Much of the engineering of that engine seems to appear in the RR engines that powered the Concord a decade later. What about the pictures of the Arrows being cut up on the flight line taken from the air showing what looks like 206 on the side of one damaged fuselage? Well, I'd say if you wanted to cover up a flight getting away then all you need is to change the number with a quick paint job in no time flat. The assembly line was manufacturing airframes at the time of all the testing of the prototypes and factory pics prove that. RLs 201 - 206 were already painted and the rest of the assembly line in various stages of construction. Take one of the earlier ones and re-paint. Avro workers were kicked out & security by the military at Malton. Hmm. A few refinisher techs from the RCAF repainting a number... and a pilot flying 206 and ground crew prepping it. It's a long range interceptor with big fuel tanks. Refuel in Gander and then Iceland then to UK. Just a theory.....
HI John, If it were only so. Unfortunately the only way a full Arrow could make it to England was on a boat. Even getting to Gander would be a stretch. Planes of the era did not do mid air refuel or a least the Arrow did not. I don't know whether you have seen my channel. I think you should look at it. There is an Arrow series that follows a path that one got away and there is also a documentary that explains the Arrow fully. Below is the series link and you can find the documentary my Virtualenvirons channel. regards...Virtual ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-AjuL9IM-1T0.html
@@Virtualenvirons Thank you. Yes I know the Arrow was not equipped for mid air refueling but to fly from Toronto to Gander may be a stretch I understand. Bagotville could be one secure refueling stop on the way to Gander. I have a few books on the Arrow with specs and blueprints but I need to review the Arrow's range for long non combat sorties. I will have to recheck everything and watch your information as well. I retired from the CF in 2011 after serving 24 yrs in the RCAF.. Most of that time as ground crew and part of that was in Cold Lake on F-18s. I think I remember reading that the internal weapons bay that could be removed as complete units to facilitate rapid re-arming of the aircraft came in various configurations as thought out by the design engineers. Various rocket, bomb, AA missile configs including the new (at that time) sparrow, sidewinder, falcon & Velvet Glove Canadian design. And I think there might have been a removable internal fuel tank weapons bay config with quick disconnects designed specifically for long range non combat ferry flights. Very much like adding external fuel tanks for range but only internally. I need to recheck that one to be sure. Thanks for the information. :-)
@@johnyaniuk1254 Hi John, Our team was asked to do a talk on the Arrow. We produced this 20 minute documentary that I think you will really enjoy. It explains everything. The link is below. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hMKAoryHVP8.html
Hi Noah....If you are interested in more Arrow stuff, there is a series on my channel you may like. The channel is "Virtualenvirons". regards....Virtual
I'm just a gear head Mechanic type too from Michigan. Kalita Air in Oscoda MI, on the former Wurtsmith Air force base, has several turbine repair facilities, as well as some in California and further south near Detroit, at the historic Willow Run Airport, the former WWII manufacturing plant for (was it B17's or B24's) both here in Michigan have Museum's. Just wanted you to know there May be some one that has interest or even knows something about those Turbine Engines, still working ... In the Army I learned about institutional knowledge going out the door, never to be replaced...
@@Virtualenvirons No it is not me but I'll inquire with my friends that work up there ... I'm in the next town south. check in on me in no more than a week just in case I forget...
@@andrewostrelczuk406Hi Andrew. Good to know. I am in Kingston, Ontario, Lake Ontario. I am getting a lot of traffic from England, so wanted to know just where you were. I would be surprised is there is an Iroquois sitting around in that shop. Your Federal Government might have one buried away at Groom Lake, but a local shop would be surprising to say the least. regards...Virtual
From a technical standpoint, I feel the Iroquois programme and the Avro Jetliner were a bigger tragedy than the Arrow. The Arrow, while impressive, was a hard sell to anyone other than the RCAF. They should have given it more of a chance though.
Hi Dwayne. Yes, there is a good argument for that. I don't know if you have only seen this movie or the rest of them on my channel. Below is the series link. The newest episode (8) speaks to that and shows and Iroquois in ways you have never seen it before. regards....Virtual ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-AjuL9IM-1T0.html
But Jorge, if the liberals had won that election, records say that the least they would have done was to scale back the program if not outrightly cancel it as well. If the liberals had let AVRO produce the Jetliner to give them some cash flow maybe they would have been able to complete the Arrow on their own to prove it ut.
@@Virtualenvirons the engine had been up the for decades we all new what it was but never new how or when it was shipped there. to my recollection there was an ejector seat, some under carrage parts, and a few large boxes of stuff shoved up the rear shed { wqere it leaked alot } there was probly more but it was a huge storage place with several aircraft we were working on like the shorts sundedrland { big plane }. unfortunatly the site closed and is now a housing estate but all the remaining stock was shiped to either RAF hendon, or RAF cosford. one thing they dont do is throw stuff away so its still about somwere. we all herd rumers an arrow was flown over and striped and it made sence at the time but as to were the fusalarge etc went if it was ? who knows
As in 1957 when cancelled the reprimand once again should have been directed to the federal government for its complete failure to have secured 116 decades earlier for historical significance!
I thought it was just me, but there are similarity's between the TSR-2 and the AVRO ARROW both ending up with F1-11 both of our aircraft were year's ahead anything the world had to offer, F1-11 ended up costing the UK more than the TSR-2 program which several type's were made and testing was ongoing, was ordered to stop and destroy everything SHAME
The American had nothing that wood touch the Arrow and pedal the bow mark missile which was a waste of time and money it bothered the American to know that Canada had a plane that could fly twice as fast as theirs we are continually giving our techknowlage away
Americans had Mach 2.3 capable interceptors at the time, and the Project Gusto had already started, with the intent of producing a Mach 3.0 capable aircraft, which ended up being the A-12 and the YF-12, a Mach 3.0+ interceptor
Below are the comment from the first upload. That upload had the following comments. Unfortunately they cannot be replied to, but their Canadiana speaks for itself. regards..Virtual SHOCKWAVE THATS AWESOME,,,,, that also would be dreamy to see one run !!!! ty for this look back,,,,, why they did what they did is criminal!!!!!!!!!! rob t And from the scrap heap rose an engine, yet old, but oh so powerful, beyond its years by leaps and bounds...The Arrow flies again. Wishful thinking.. rob t ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-AjuL9IM-1T0.html AgentJayZ It is safely stored here. We have displayed it at the FSJ Airshow. Some of the spectators knew what it was, and were delighted. Virtualenvirons Hi AgentJayZ. I was watching one of your videos a few days ago, it was one of your engines running full power. Very interesting. regards...Virtual lawrence willard Knowing the importance oh this Engine, so glad it is back home. Congratulations! Bill Gealy WOW! This came up as I have been following Avro. Arrow more specifically. the Best news so far this year!!!!! Mark Dennis Thank you Robin,and thank you Virtual,INCREDIBLE!! cant wait for the day to see and hear the heart of the Arrow beat again. Peter French Thank You Robin, For Your Hard Work and Persistence, in Securing The Iriquois Engine, I can only imagine The Amazing Heritage it Represents and how Good it feels to have it back on Canadian Soil. David Beattie The Arrow/Iroquois story still makes my heart ache for what might have been. Thank you for preserving a relic from a time when Canadians dreamed big and led the world. S Bains Awesome Well done Let’s hear it run soon martin botincan Amazing!, and honest to goodness hard working Canadians today still understand respect all the significance the Arrow and Iroquois program had,& for their full potential. We need that bird & updated dress ,for our country as Canada is soo lacking. God bless ppl like him! Wish the feds would grow balls and stand for the ppl finally! William Poulsen Your a great Canadian Robin! Robert Lathe I was saddened by the cancellation of the CF-105 Arrow and later by the TRS-2. Such a shame for Canada and Britain to lose these fine aircraft, and I'm an American. These losses were caused by the American Government pressure on Canada & Britain. Andrew Barton I don't know about Canada and in Britain most people don't even know because it's always been an embarrassing thing for any UK government since but the USA right royally stitched the UK up with lend lease that had nothing to do with lending... And an aweful lot to do with screwing one over on us. We finished paying off loans to the USA i think some time in the late 1990's, over 50yrs after wars end. It's one of the main reasons Britain shrunk from one of the world's major powers.... Which of course benefited the USA. At the same time. Germany and Japan pretty much got rebuilt for free.... We didn't. We had to pay for everything at the same time paying the US for lend lease. I am guessing here that as Canada is a commonwealth county, they also got shafted by the good old boys on capitol Hill. James T. Griffith It's a fascinating story for sure and personal anecdote to follow but first the politics of the time saw the Liberals spending huge on this Fighter Interceptor project (way over budget) and there was no way the USA was going to allow the Arrow to compete with theirs in the market (to be scooped by the Russkies one way or the other) so because we couldn't afford to fly 100 of them and no foreign deals were helping to cut the cost, deal was dead when the Conservative Party (who campaigned on cost-cutting) took power from the Liberal Party. the real "black friday" detailed here; www.rcinet.ca/en/2014/02/20/black-friday-1959-avro-arrow-the-death-of-a-future-legend/ so the boys at Camp Picton (including my dad) were A/A practice firing off Pt Petre, knocking ARCATS out of the sky in the same area the Arrow models were fired in mid-50s (one recently found, finally) when the group would become 3RoyalCanadianHorseArtillery 1SSM Bty (Deployed) & 2SSM (Training) partly because... "buy our missiles, the future is missiles.." said the USA. my quote, just 1 part of the whole picture at the time that few Canadians even know about. 3RCHA 1SSM Bty' deployed to Germany (last ship-borne deployment by Canadian Military) with "Honest John" armed mobile launchers, based in Hemer and on "Alert" during the "Cuban Missile Crisis", cut back and totally disbanded by the P. E. Trudeau Liberal Gov't. by 1970, Canada's Atomic Artillery just an interesting chapter in Canadian Military history. James T. Griffith re. more politics of the day, JFK hated Diefenbaker so much that his administration did all they could to get the Pearson Liberals elected in early 60s which then lead to P.E.Trudeau taking over the Liberal Party of Canada in 68, thus becoming the P.M. and proceeded to gut Canada's Military while turning the country into a welfare state going broke while importing the excess population of the non-white world.. flash forward 50 yrs to the present degradation. #Progress mass I was a bit choked up as the video was ending. I shouldn't have kept reading. Now I'm pissed. It would not surprise me if I found out that the government representative belonged to a certain political party that had a previous connection to the Arrow program. Virtualenvirons Hi Mass. Don't be shy about saying the word Conservative. We all need to be aware of our mistakes so we don't make them again. In Episodes 2 and 4, I rake the Conservative over the coals. I have more episodes to come and I am sure the Conservative will take another shot somewhere. regards..Virtual mass I stopped for my sake, not for the conservatives sake. I tend to get myself too worked up and go into a long diatribe (I think I used that word correctly.) which does me no good and bothers me for a long while. Especially since every Conservative government that has been elected since has kicked around the idea of destroying the remaining remnants of the Arrow program. I hope that the remaining pieces are zealously guarded. That is all I could hope. I just don't want an accident to befall the holders or the pieces themselves. patrick dean Robin Sipe a Canadian hero Wayne Rudychuk Canada was ounce grate , it needs to become great again, wake the hell up you asleep idiot’s up here be fore it is too late!!!!!!! Paulus Heebink I see this engine everyday....I work at the Canadian Aviation and Space Museum. J Can du How the hell did an iriquois engine get to britain in the first place?? Mark Davis "Agentjayz" has a great channel that includes episodes about the S&S Iroquois. 5uwkn4 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-5SZuGFlMeQY.html
Hi Me....Thank you so much for the offer, but it is not a matter of cost, it is a question of parts. There may be some at the aviation museum in Ottawa, but this coved thing is screwing that up. regards...Virtual
AV Roe wasn't the only aeronautical tragedy in Canada. I remember living not too far from Northwest Industries as a kid and the government cancelling it's contracts with it, effectively killing the company. Since our relationship with the US has deteriorated so badly in the Trump years, it is time to build our own planes again and bring back the jobs to our country. We could do a better job than the makers of the 737.
I am seeing this video 4 years after its posting. Are there any updates on 116? There are thousands of aviation lovers who would be happy to invest in getting it finally airborne. Canada just placed an order for a bunch of fighter planes. The order should be cancelled and reordered for Arrows.
Hi Sherry. I don't think Robin has the time yet, he is still operating his company. There are other factors, the missing parts, smaller parts. There is a Government warehouse in Ottawa that may have them. There are boxes of Arrow parts that are un-catalogue and will likely never be. Robing tried to get access once, but there are hurdles he has to get over and I think he does not have the time. To be honest, he may never have, but at least the engine is home.....regards....Virtual
Hi Peter, The engine is with Robin at his facility, quiet safe. As for the Arrow program, I am afraid it is consigned to history for all time. It would cost close to one billion dollars to rebuild one full size Arrow. Having said that, each one after that would only cost ~ one hundred thousand. regards...Virtual
Virtualenvirons on that we both agree. It’s a part of history that needs to be remembered but the people on here calling for it to be revived and put into service are being unrealistic.
We can always be proud of the people who designed and built the Arrow (as opposed to the politicians who axed it, of whom we should be ashamed). But can we please end the claims of reinventing the Arrow. The plane being touted by Gen McKenzie and others is not the Arrow. It is a new aircraft using some of the capabilities built into the Arrow but with newer materials and new ideas. Call it Arrow II if you want but by using even that name leaves the impression that it is a 1950s aircraft we'd be buying and building. What is being proposed is a new aircraft. It would be built in Canada by Canadians. That would mean a pile of (good paying) jobs, a return of the necessary skills and return of some of the cost, in the form of income taxes. This latter fact is in contrast to the loss, to our economy, of the total cost of a non-Canadian manufactured, and maintained, machine. That money will pay foreign workers, etc with the taxes going to foreign governments.
It was a sad day for the aviation community at large but especially those in Canada when as so often happens the short sighted politicians interfere with armaments improvements of a country. The Arrow in it's time was so obviously superior to anything else then or even in the foreseeable future that it was a grave mistake to end the program so abruptly. It could have, had it been allowed to come to an operational state been the F-22 or F-35 of its day as no other country including the United States or the United Kingdom had anything close to its ability, with the possible exception of the English Electric. However, it fell short in many areas in comparison. Export sales alone would have been able to make up its cost over runs once in production.
Had the Arrow been so vastly superior, all subsequent fighters would've been modeled after it. They weren't. The age of the interceptor hit its zenith in the late 1950's & gave way to multirole types like the F-4 Phantom. In reality, the Arrow was a very large, very expensive single-platform weapons system. It was ill-suited for any tactical operations due to its immense size, limited payload (
And therein lies the biggest problem, neither the US or the UK had anything close to its ability. Like those two really wanted that to happen. Politically the UK could claim it was theirs as AV Roe was a UK company and Canada was part of the Commonwealth. But no way all the big boys down south would allow tiny-ass Canada to upshow them. That never goes over very well.
@@raynus1160 The Arrow was the platform for AVRO and Orenda to showcase their technologies the US knew this and they got the feeble minded Diefenbaker to kill the program. I laugh every time I see comments like yours in here, either you can't stomach the fact diefenbacker did this to Canada(selling out to the USA), part of the problem passive aggressive generation which believed everything in the US was better or you are from the US? The ARROW was just the new beginning for the company after the war.You I guess haven't noticed that from military programs in the US, came the civilian aircraft programs? You think the US didn't see the Comet from deHaviland? The TSR2 has the same story. You don't destroy prototypes,designs when a company goes bust, that is only done to kill the aerospace sector from developing in Canada. Same was done in the UK where a private company was even willing to pay UK government to collect test data from their prototype, some technology did survive and was used in the concord program. In AVRO's case the flight control system ended up being used on the NASA lunar lander, are you really that much of simpleton you could not see that as a selling feature for other aircraft like say Commercial airliners? LOL The Orenda engines would have found buyers in France with other countries to follow, they were better than anything the US or UK had at the time. In fact they were said to be 10%-20% better than specification. Orenda engine sales would have recouped money from the program, but it wasn't about money it was about doing the bidding of Diefenbaker masters. Other companies knew about the engines, why do you think they secreted one away to the UK? they knew it was valuable, but here you are saying what types like you always say. Instead Canada was coerced into buying US junk, the bomarc missile. No surprise to anyone but the Diefenbaker supporters that he killed the ARROW and instead bough a missile the USA was decommissioning when Canada was still building the bases for the missiles. LOL The USA got what they wanted, they got the engineers, GE got to steal some engine technology and a plane company that was nothing more than a plane assembler when they started became the biggest aircraft maker in the world. You think AVRO couldn't have beat Boeing? LOL And the money needed to finish the program was instead spent on US junk, bomarc to be decommissioned missiles and crap Voodoos. Instead went on to build the diefenbunker LOL France kept building their aircraft and today they build the Airbus which is wiping the floor with boeing. LOL There are some very interesting comments on this video which refute your comments and show the Arrow was much more than for posterity, it is more about learning how politics is a very dirty business.
@@pd4954 Good afternoon. Let's break down your rant and check some facts. "...the US knew this and they got the feeble minded Diefenbaker to kill the program" Diefenbaker nixed the CF-105 program for the exact reasons Eisenhower cancelled the LRIX/XF-108 program the same year - cost and ascendant missile technology. As well, Diefenbaker was quite anti-American, save a friendly relationship with Ike. "...which believed everything in the US was better or you are from the US?" Well...most things. Ford, GM, Chrysler - all of whom operate in Canada and are American companies. Most home electronics and desktops run American-designed software. America invented the airplane and perfected the modern aviation industry. Almost every piece of machinery that built (or flew over) Canada was/is of US-design. Canada used US-designed aircraft and tanks during WW2. God bless 'em. My Grandmother was born in N. Dakota. I'm Canadian. "You think the US didn't see the Comet from deHaviland(sic)?" Wonderful as the Comet was, the 707 and DC-8 were better, faster, designs. "...you can't stomach the fact diefenbacker(sic) did this to Canada (selling out to the USA)..." What did Dief "sell out" to the USA? A British-owned company? Even with the collapse of Avro Canada, Canada still became the 3rd-largest aircraft manufacturer on the planet. "...are you really that much of simpleton you could not see that as a selling feature for other aircraft like say Commercial airliners?" Again, no. AvCan's first offering was the C-102 Jetliner - cancelled by then Liberal Minister of Industry CD Howe. "..I guess haven't noticed that from military programs in the US, came the civilian aircraft programs?" Both Boeing and Douglas had better pre-war commercial aircraft designs than they did military aircraft. Convair, which had excellent military aircraft, didn't fare as well in the commercial aircraft business. "... the flight control system ended up being used on the NASA lunar lander" No. The LM was designed by Grumman Aircraft & used Raytheon-designed flight control systems. Both Raytheon and Grumman had been around for decades. "The Orenda engines would have found buyers in France with other countries to follow, they were better than anything the US or UK had at the time" Dassault rejected the PS.13 Iroquois in September, 1958. Orenda was having a difficult time with metallurgy, specifically in the compressor blades. In fact, RL206, the first Iroquois-equipped Arrow would've flown with derated PS.13's until improved blades were made available. As to performance - both P&W and GE were producing ~30,000lb-thrust turbojets in the 1950's. Britain's Olympus series turbojets produced nearly as much, in the 17,000-21,000lb dry thrust range. Orenda's PS.13 was rated at 25,600lbs in reheat...using an American-built Marquardt afterburner. "Orenda engine sales would have recouped money from the program" Had they found a buyer. "...he killed the ARROW and instead bough(sic) a missile the USA was decommissioning when Canada was still building the bases for the missiles" Both Canada and the USAF operated the Bomarc until 1972. "You think AVRO couldn't have beat Boeing? " Not likely. Boeing and its partners built 98,900 aircraft during WW2 alone. "...crap Voodoos" Canada's CF-101B's served well for 23 years. Though not as advanced as the Arrow, they were relatively fast and long-legged. They also carried the same Genie rockets and Falcon missiles operational Arrows would've carried. "...Airbus which is wiping the floor with boeing" Debatable. Max 8 issues aside, it's essentially been a draw for the past 30 years. "...GE got to steal some engine technology" GE's J93 was producing 29,000lbs thrust in the late 1950's. Orenda was still trying to deal with their aforementioned metallurgy issues. "...and a plane company that was nothing more than a plane assembler when they started became the biggest aircraft maker in the world" Boeing was mass-producing aircraft by the tens of thousands before AvCan was even a concept. "...why do you think they secreted one away to the UK? " Probably because Hawker-Siddeley, parent company of Avro Canada and Orenda, owned it. "...but here you are saying what types like you always say" I'm just keeping it real. Types like you apparently can't accept that. Cheers.
Avro program was ripped apart during cold war era, just as NASA establishes, July '58. "Arrows to the Moon" is about the Avro engineers who went to work at NASA, after the Avro Arrow was cancelled and destroyed in 1959. www.thebeaverton.com/2015/08/diefenbaker-cancels-arrow-program-after-discovering-aircraft-lacks-cupholder/
Apparently there are only 3 surviving Hamptons, all built from combining parts of originals. I guess two of the Hamptons were sitting right close by in Victoria and Langley
@@alexdunphy3716 HI Alex....I don't know the answer to your question. You would have to contact S & S Turbines in B.C. to get the answer. They are fairly friendly, try them. regards..Virtual
@@Virtualenvirons the Langley flight museum website indicates that they still had theirs past 2012 so it couldn't have been the same one involved in the deal.
I’ve spoken with a couple pilot with the R.C.A.F about 5 or 6 years ago give or take a few but anyway they didn’t believe at the time that Arrow or the Arrow 2 were a viable option for C.R.A.F the and the conversations were so brief that all they would say was the Arrow would never be brought back it’s out dated and wouldn’t stand a chance but they never said why other then that the conversation was dropped and the pilots left. Sure the Arrow had its problems in the prototype program but it could still be better then the F-35 for Canadians no the F35 isn’t a bad plane but it’d need a few modifications for Canadian weather Modifications the Arrow wouldn’t need like onboard heat for the Arctic
Hi Lance....The Arrow as it was in 1959 would not be viable. But, take the Arrow Mark 2 and add modern Avionics as is shown in the series on this channel and it would be deadly. The problem when you ask this question to a RCAF pilot is simple. The Canadian pilot is not thinking about Canadian Air defence, they are thinking about Europe or NATO. In Europe the F-35 will be in its element. The Arrow's mission was to defend Canada. In that role, a modern Arrow would smoke the F-35 in every area....except stealth. Below is the Series link. Ep. 8 details the conversion to a modern Arrow....regards.....Virtual ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-AjuL9IM-1T0.html
Wow... I just bumped into this story. I had a job interview in fort Saint John back around 1990 with west coast transmission for a jet engine mechanic. I was trained at British Airways and living in the Vancouver area. The interview went well I thought with a guy with one hand missing. Nut I never got the job....ahhh Shame. We may have been buddies...lol
Is there any indication of the degree of wear on engine 116? If it is a few dozen hours, that's one thing. If it's hundreds of hours, that's entirely different. The matching Arrow ejection seats found in the UK had hundreds, possibly a thousand hours of wear and UV fading. If there is modest wear on this engine, that would be further indication the rumors are true of 25202 being tested/operated in the UK with the Iroquois engines.
Hi Adam, There was only one engine taken there. It was tested extensively, but only in Lab conditions. It probably saved the Olympus project, if that is what they called it back then. The Olympus engine was having a hard time making 10,000 lbs. of thrust for one of its funding milestones. A few months after the Iroquois arrived in Britain, the Olympus engine delivered 20,000 lbs. of thrust. But, sadly no 25202. I am guessing at this explanation. Like the Iroquois, it is possible the ejection seats where made by a company in Canada owned by a British firm. As the technology would not have been secret, it is possible they simply brought one or ten back to Britain for testing. The ejection seat was quite advanced, but it would not have changed the balance of military power in the world. regards....Virtual
It's still unclear to me what the justification/rationale by the Canadian administration was for shutting down the Iroquois program along with the Arrow (in what seemed to effectively chop Canadian Aerospace off at the knees in a single blow). From what I gather Dassault were very keen to use the engine in a version the Mirage and were intimating that they might buy, what was it, hundreds of units? Or even a three figure number?
HI Scott. On my channel, there is a four episode series on the Arrow. Each episode is ~15 to 20 minutes long. I am working on five now. If you watch those videos, the answer to your questions may become clearer. These movies are quite entertaining. I will include the link to the series below. The Arrow only threatened one country and it was not Russia. My channel also has a 20 minute documentary that clarifies all the myths surrounding the Arrow's capabilities. It is called AVRO Arrow firsts. regards....Virtual ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-AjuL9IM-1T0.html
THE most interesting question is, will Canadians still be carping about the arrow in another 50 or so years? If the airframe and PowerPlant where that extraordinary do you really believe that political b******* would have trumped greed? Given the brilliant Aerospace mind's in Great Britain and the slim margins in the Aviation industry, post war as every single player having to invest enormously in R&D, do you really believe that these amazing engineers turned businessmen who drove the industry would let such an extraordinary power plant slip through their fingers? Having worked with BAE many times in the past 30 years I have had a number of opportunities to chat with Canadian aerospace engineers about the Arrow. The consensus? this is a great example of Canada's massive National insecurity complex....
Hi 105. I am in Barbados at the moment. Been here for a while working out the next episode. We will return to Canada Mar. 7 and I will start building the computer models, etc. Probably mid summer for War. Thanks for asking....regards....Virtual
At :40, a picture of the aircraft in the hangar appears with the canopies open. As a pilot myself, how was one supposed to get into an aircraft with clam shell canopies as pictured?
HI OC....Below is a link to a short movie explaining the Arrow in it's correct light. Shortly into this video, you will see how the pilots entered. Even with this design, it was not easy. On my channel is a Arrow series you might enjoy. regards....Virtual
@@Virtualenvirons But Avro. being a part of Hawker Siddely had access to more advanced designs like the early Bristol Olympus designs so this may have sped up the development somewhat.
Hi Jamie, I afraid it was the other way around. The British Olympus design was way behind the Iroquois. That is why they brought an Iroquois back to England. Bristol was in danger of losing funding for the engines four month before the Iroquois was smuggled in under great secrecy. They were barely able to make 10,000 lbs of thrust. Four months later, 20,000 lbs. Wonder where they got there ideas from. Regards....Virtual
@Shawn Bryan I don't disagree with you at all, especially on the last part of your statement regarding the A-10 / F-35. To redevelop the Iroquois to meet today's engine standards would be tough re: better fuel efficiency / higher performance than the original. Vectored thrust would help too. That's just the engines. I'm not saying it all couldn't be done... but at what cost? With governments running deficit budgets, how would we fund it. Avro being extinct as a company doesn't help either. I don't think any major manufacturer would be willing to take on a project like that without aid. A canard wing to help re: the Sukhoi su-57 Eurofighter Typhoon would be too. All that could be integrated and more. But to develop new weapon systems for it... Just saying it would be a daunting task. How the heck would it all be funded? I'm NOT an Arrow nay-sayer. I'd love to see a new generation of it more than anyone I know. I just don't see it being in the cards. I'm definitely not an engineer of any kind, but rather, just your run of the mill backyard aviation nut. I'm not agains't bringing it back... I just don't ever see it happening. Thanks for your reply and sorry I took so long to respond. You're reply to my comment was thoughtful and this is a topic worthy of discussion / debate ... I'm "pro", but pessimistic.
Hi Paul. There are really two questions when people say let's build the Arrow again. They are really saying let's build a new jet Canadian made. There is also the underlying question of lets rebuild one Arrow Mark 2 to see it fly, as that was decided AVRO engineers in 1959. Our team has put the cost of rebuilding one Arrow at ~ one Billion dollars. The technology required to build an Arrow in the 50's really only existed in Canada. Everyone else understood the Math but did not have the manufacturing technology in one place to build the plane. Today though, that manufacturing technology is readily available, so rebuilding an Arrow is quite feasible. It would be nice to see one fly, but it would have to be by a third party consortium as there is no reason to rebuild one from the governments point of view. Now, as for a new fighter, I think we should get back into the game as we have Bombardier in place. regards....Virtual
I will never understand any statement regarding "its too expensive. How would Canada pay for it?" Exactly the same way we keep paying America for planes that don't meet the original requirements. The money is going to be spent. If we can't afford to build our own, then we can't afford to purchase anyone else's either. So to me, the statement of "we can't afford to build our own plane" is an irrelevant statement. At the very least, if we build our own the money is spent in Canada, creating Canadian jobs, each and every one of which produces MASSIVE amounts of income tax which the gov't gets back. So I really don't understand the financial argument against. It makes no sense to me.
