Author Topic: Avro Arrow (Read 5713 times)

Crumpp · « **Reply #60 on:** July 09, 2004, 07:31:42 PM »

Quote

ROFLMAO! how long did you sit there going thru all those posts to type up all that? Its obvious we dont agree on much.

Don't waste your time with that idiot, Wldcard. He has the same modus operandi every time.

When questioned he attacks. When you fire back he attempts to blame you for attacking. Screw him, he's not worth wasting breath on.

Crumpp

Angus · « **Reply #61 on:** July 09, 2004, 07:40:18 PM »

For GScholz.
I had a visit to the F15 (C?) Squad up here in Iceland some 2 years ago.
The CO told us that the top speed was a tad above Mach 2.2
He did not mention altitude.
For a realistic interception he mentioned that from takeoff Keflavik to Akureyri at very high alt they needed 10 minutes. I think that was on a long range combat loading setting.
If you have any means to use that data for calculations etc, I'd be happy to know about what you get.
Best regards.
Angus

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #62 on:** July 09, 2004, 08:37:19 PM »

Coolridr
I would love a hunk of an F-14, damn shame the navy is getting rid of them!

Could you email me: gtora2@gmail.com

AVRO1 · « **Reply #63 on:** July 09, 2004, 09:17:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Coolridr
Back on Topic oe maybe not..Too bad my service with all of it's infinite "wisdom" Is decommissioning the F-14 by 2007 for that "Super" Hornet P.O.S.

What's wrong with the super Hornet exactly?

Pongo, It's a legend because it was a Canadian Fighter project which you can count on the fingers of one hand.
And also because it was years ahead of it's time.
Some features of the Iroquoi engines are now industry standard.
It's flight controls were a step toward Fly-by-Wire.

What more do you need to consider it a legend?

storch · « **Reply #64 on:** July 09, 2004, 09:26:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AVRO1
What's wrong with the super Hornet exactly?

Pongo, It's a legend because it was a Canadian Fighter project which you can count on the fingers of one hand.
And also because it was years ahead of it's time.
Some features of the Iroquoi engines are now industry standard.
It's flight controls were a step toward Fly-by-Wire.

What more do you need to consider it a legend?

categorically the most advanced fighter of it's day bar none and nothing even technically close until the '70s.

Crumpp · « **Reply #65 on:** July 09, 2004, 09:59:31 PM »

Yeah, Like when we invade Norway.

Crumpp

NUKE · « **Reply #66 on:** July 09, 2004, 10:17:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
An idiot named General Perkes (or some such) was convinced by the US military that missles were the way of the future and that fighters were obsolete...

...****.

It wasn't a fighter, it was an interceptor and it was obsolete as well as a waste of money.

What you may not realise is that it is actually a good thing these where canceled. They had no mission and no purpose. They had very short range and by that time, the US and Canada had already figured out that the ICBM was the main threat, not bombers.

The US canceled the mach 3 XB-70 and it's mach 3 escort, the Mach 3 Rapier as well for the same reason.

The Mig-25 was only ever clocked at Mach 3 when it's engines where running out of control and burning up. The XB-70 bomber ( 1950's) was faster than the Mig-25. The A-12 interceptor (1962 iirc) was MUCH faster than the Mig 25 and so was the Sr-71. ( 1964)

All said, Canada's plane served no purpose and was canceled.

J_A_B · « **Reply #67 on:** July 09, 2004, 10:56:41 PM »

F-18E/F's main advantage is that it is replacing practically everything (including the older F-18's). Even the EA-6 Prowlers are going to be replaced by F-18's.

This not only greatly simplifies logistics and training, it also gives our CV groups unheard of multi-role capacity.

J_A_B

WilldCrd · « **Reply #68 on:** July 10, 2004, 12:28:32 AM »

Hey coolrider if you CAN get an ejection handle for me that would be to cool! Im thinking of building a simpit and choirboys idea struck me as kinda novel
emails in sig

Coolridr · « **Reply #69 on:** July 10, 2004, 07:04:25 AM »

The seats have been removed so there are no ejection handles. There may be the Canopy jettison handle though since I believe those were on the right side of the cockpit. I'll look and see what I can find.

Thrawn · « **Reply #70 on:** July 10, 2004, 11:55:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
All said, Canada's plane served no purpose and was canceled.

Then why did was spend more money on purchasing a bunch of crappy Voodoos from the US after the Arrow was cancelled?

Crumpp · « **Reply #71 on:** July 10, 2004, 12:30:47 PM »

Quote

Then why did was spend more money on purchasing a bunch of crappy Voodoos from the US after the Arrow was cancelled?

Maybe they liked crappy Airplanes?

Crumpp

RTR · « **Reply #72 on:** July 10, 2004, 01:03:56 PM »

Actually the Voodoo was a very good aircraft.

But, it sure wasn't on par with the Arrow.

RTR

Furball · « **Reply #73 on:** July 10, 2004, 02:46:10 PM »

now this is an interceptor

WilldCrd · « **Reply #74 on:** July 10, 2004, 02:55:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Coolridr
The seats have been removed so there are no ejection handles. There may be the Canopy jettison handle though since I believe those were on the right side of the cockpit. I'll look and see what I can find.

cool thanx

Aces High Bulletin Board