Hey all......since I brought the topic of the Avro Arrow up in another forum....was just curious to know how many of you have built a model of this fine beast of an aircraft?

I have a 1/48 Hobbycraft kit of one....ultimatly I woud like to have 3-8 kits of this bird(all 6 prototypes and 2 what if AC), but they are hard to come by, pricey once you do get your hands on one.

Has anyone built the Hobbycraft one? In either 1/72, 1/48 scales......yeah I know its not much of a kit.....hobbycraft stuff never was....but it is the only maker of this AC, so there isn't much of a choice!!!

Of those of you that have built it.....did you build it as a stock AC, ie: prototype? Or did you do a "What If" scheme.

Would be interested in seeing pics of it!!!

I read your comments in the other Thread - and I'd agree wholeheartedly. It's development should always be a source of pride for Canada - it's ultimate fate is exasperating. That aircraft has a wonderfully interesting history. I haven't built one, but sure would like too. Problem is, I don't even have a model kit of it . I'd be eager to see pics of a finished model here too!

Gunnie

I'm not sure of what an Avro Arrow is. I do know I have a huge Hobbycraft CF-100(?) Avro aircraft. I think it is a "Canuck" in 1/48 scale. Bought it on a spur of the moment because it was a sidewalk sale kit that was real big and low priced. May even build it some day.

No Rob, that's a whole different bird. The Arrow was the CF-105. A real beauty. Kinda reminds me of a stocky A-5 Vigilante.

Hey all.....was sort of away from my computer for the weekend....so I couldn't give you any links to anything regarding the Arrow.

Sabot...the CF-100 was what the Arrow was to replace....this aircraft obvioulsly also built by Avro Canada, was the chase AC for the Arrow.

Here are a couple of pics to wet the appitite::




Here are some of the specifiacations of the RCAF, and what they wanted in a new interceptor, namely why the Arrow was to be built......everyone else said it couldn't be done....but Avro(whom also produced the first jetliner) set out to do it....and would have had it not been for the change in Canadian Gov't at the time;

Had to be a twin engine, 2 seat aircraft.
Able to operate from a 6000ft runway.
Have a range of 600nm.
It was to cruise and combat at Mach 1.5 at an altitude of 50,000 feet and be capable of pulling 2g in maneuvers with no loss of speed or altitude.
It was to be equipped with a sophisticated fire control system, and to have an all-missile weapon system which would operate either independently or as part of an integrated defence system.
The high speed mission radius was to be at least 200 nautical miles. The time from a signal to start the engines to the aircraft's reaching an altitude of 50,000 feet and a speed of Mach 1.5 was to be less than five minutes.
The turn around time on the ground was to be less than ten minutes.

Specifications

Wing Span: 50 ft (15.2 m)
Length: 85 ft 6 in (26.1 m)
Height: 21 ft 3 in (6.5 m)
Weight, Empty: 43,960 lb (19,935 kg)
Weight, Gross: 62,431 lb (28,319 kg)
Cruising Speed: 701 mph (1,128 km/h)
Max Speed: 1,524 mph (2,453 km/h)
Rate of Climb: 50,000 ft (15,240 m)/4 min 24 sec
Service Ceiling: 58,500 ft (17,830 m)
Range: 820 mi (1,330 km)
Crew: two
Power Plant: two Orenda Iroquois axial flow turbojet engines, 26,000 lb (11,791 kg) static thrust, with afterburner


Now you have to keep in mind.....these were wants of an interceptor in 1953.

Not to mention that it was the first AC to be equipped with fly by wire controls, with artificial feedback.....yep....in 1953, fly by wire was being invented for a Canadian AC. The F-16 doesn't even have this....it has the FBW....but not the feedback...here is a link to other "Firsts" the aircraft was!!
http://www.avroarrow.org/arrowfirsts.asp

This aircraft was a technological wonder.....there are few if any aircraft today that match the Specs of the Arrow.....the only one that comes close....and very close I will admit, is the F-22....but how many years has it taken? And if the Arrow had of been allowed to go into production, with the technologies the Arrow produced...and with the advancement in computers and computer aided controls, I truly believe that the Arrow would still be flying today, in some itteration, maybe in many different itterations, as the cheif designer had visions of using the Arrow as a satellite launch platform.....bigger engines....designed to operate on liitle or no oxygen, a larger cargo bay, to accomidate satellites, and the AC able to reach 100000ft in altitude. Basica profile would be to take off from a normal runway, rocket to altitude....roll over onto its back with the cargo/weapons bay pointed to space...open the cargo bay, and lauch the satellite into orbit, then rotate back around, and land like a normal aircraft......sound like something similar to what NASA is flying today? The reason for this is that the Chief Designer and engineer for the Arrow project, went on to work for NASA helping to design the Redstone and Apollo capsules and lunar lander, as well had a major hand in designing the Space Shuttle

I will post some links to some great Avro Arrow sites...one of the best is the Discovery Wings site. Take a look at this aircraft....take a look at its technologies.....now take a look at the aircraft, and aircraft technology produced by such companies as McD, Boeing, Lockheed, even NASA since the Arrow was scrapped....and you will see direct results of Arrow enginering.....

OK....enough bantering on this subject for now....I feel very strongly about this aircraft..and what it could/could have acheived that I could go on all night!!!!

http://www.maverick2.com/ArrowMain.htm
http://www.arrow-alliance.com/main.html
http://www.avroarrow.org/
http://exn.ca/flightdeck/arrow/
http://www.angelfire.com/ab/avroarrow/frames.html


Hope this wets people's appitites for the best (still best as the F-22 isn't quite into production) military aircraft the world has seen!!!!!!

I'm building the Hobbycraft 1/72 right now. I'm on my.... 4th (or was it 5th?) putty session, trying to get rid of the seams, gaps and inconsistencies of the kit. Definitely not much of a kit.

I'm going to build it as the prototype, with gear up on a flight stand of some sort. It's really sad to see such an awe-inspiring aircraft with such a poor kit. Even the gear doors are at least 1mm too big for the gear bays. Man, how I wish a company like Hasegawa would put out an arrow kit that lives up to the aircraft.

I have two of the Hobbycraft kits. I have one that I bought 20 years ago that has the underside pannel lines on the upper wing, and a newer, more correct kit.

Hey all.....well I still haven't tackled my kit......too many other things on the go I guess. I was going to build it OOB and make it the 206 prototype.....but I am having second thoughts....I have this vision of building it the way that I believe it would look if it was still flying today.

Canards up front, new nose section with new cockpit, a gun (the one deficency I say in the original Arrow), weapon stations on the wings, and the missile bay closed to house more fuel, while more weapon stations on the belly. I have an old Monogram F-14 that is going to be the donor for the nose and cockpit section, and probably the belly weapon stations....got some other scrap planes that I can rob other stuff from as well....canards I may have to scratch build...but shouldn't be too bad.

As this is going to turn into a major project....this is probably the reason why it has been put off...as I get a little more comfortable in cutting stuff apart and putting it back together, and scratchbuilding stuff.....should be quite the beast if I can get if finished even close to my vision. And of course....pics will follow....when ever its done!!

Sounds like a great project. I'd love to see some of the finished models.

I admire Scotts enthusiasm for the Arrow. But can I just add a sobering thought or two?

The Arrow was not the only advanced aircraft to fall victim of short sighted politicians in the fifties/early sixties. The British white paper of 1957 ended a number of projects that make current technology look old hat. One survivor, the Harrier (although these days claimed by the Americans) is still unique after over forty years.

Indeed many of todays operational aircraft have ancestry that can be traced back to the fifties, which makes you wonder what all the whizz kids have been up to for the last half century.

The greatest loss was the BAC TSR2. I would suggest this aircraft would at least equal the Arrow in terms of advanced technology and thinking, although intended for different operational use.

Oh, and please remind me of the Avro jetliner that was a first.

Regards Dave


We all have to believe in somethoing. I believe I will have another drink.