Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
Sign in to follow this  
Stratospheremodels

This is a real joke...... Resurrecting a dinosaur, the new anti-F-35

Recommended Posts

Ok, when i thought i had seen everything on the (F-35 trademark) procurement program for new fighter jets for Canada, here`s what i just found:

Some guy with a 3D computer animation software and zero understanding of fighter aircraft design and modern technology "think" he can resurrect a dinosaur from the 1950's to perform the job of (fill the blank with Rafale, F-18E, Eurofighter, Gripen, F-35).

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Avro-Arrow-Bourdeau-Industries-Official/402158416505160?sk=photos_stream

The most laughable one is probably the one he is using as a banner on his Facebook page. Someone should have explained to him the concept of "extra drag", extra fuel consumption, range, added super-radar reflectivity to "his" design (aka an old A.V. Roe design from the 50's related to the Avro Arrow). Someone should have also explained to him that just because your aircraft have an internal missile bay does not make it into an-anti F-35... Nor does it work if you add a targeting pod to your dinosaurus. More pityfull however are the extremely uninformed comments from people who wrote highly emotional posts with quotes such as "i weeped of joy", and 'we should build this airplane, Canadian pride !", without even understanding what they were looking at nor having any historical notion of this long dead program. Got me thinking: the Arrow adorators sect is at it again...

Luckily there are at least some sane (but still very naive) voices:

(read and laugh):

http://paulsrants-paulsstuff.blogspot.ca/2012/12/the-virtual-reality-of-avro-arrow-f-35.html

This got me thinking: if all i have to do is post some computer graphics and a couple 1 minute animations of said graphics of something in grey camouflage with a Canadian roundel on it and with flames coming out at the rear, i might get myself a fanatical following of adorators in no time who will do all the work for me of convincing our dear government in Ottawa to dish out major amounts of loonies to build a spacecraft that can travel to Tau Centauri.

This is better than Kickstarter.

(Damn... i should not have posted the link to his Facebook page... now he will get more hits and their head will inflate to the size of a Zeppelin balloon when they will read:

1 BILLION HITS !)(insert Mini-Me here).

http://www.picturetrail.com/stratospheremodels

Edited by Stratospheremodels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's important too,

that's why i am shipping him a collection of my airplane designs from when i was 10 years old to further inspire our 3d artist "6th generation aircraft designer".

(I am most curious to know what he have smoked, i don't now what it is, but it must be really powerful).

http://www.picturetrail.com/stratospheremodels

Edited by Stratospheremodels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy... he even posted "a petition to resurrect the Arrow"... I am not going to post a link to this, but i found a link for it in Germany (someone really had time to waste in Germany).

Now i am suddenly thinking, with all the hoopla, this guy might actually be a marketing genius: with all the noise he is generating about this ectoplasm, he is going to really find a market for his 3D paintings and get himself a job as a 3D animator or something. And like i mentioned before, a whole bunch of people with zero knowledge of aviation are doing all the publicity job for him for free. That's wickedly brilliant.

I've got to run back home and make a few quick 3D models of something grey shaped like an arrow with thrust vectoring nozzles taken from the F-22 and with maple flag roundels on it and post it all on Facebook.

(I hope there are no engineers from Lockheed, Sukhoi and Chengdu reading this, or they must be rolling on the floor).

http://www.picturetrail.com/stratospheremodels

Edited by Stratospheremodels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forget this one AND the F-35. The Canadian Gov't just needs to call good 'ol Bob Diemert. He had it figured out years ago.

The Defender

For those who've never heard of Bob, please I beg you to watch this documentary, which should be subtitled "Red Green Builds An Airplane." He even has an assistant who bears an uncanny resemblance to Red's nephew Harold. It's all the more hilarious because this guy is absolutely dead serious. You gotta love his "wind tunnel" technique for testing airfoils: set up a fixture in the back of a pickup and drive like heck down a bumpy dirt road, measuring lift using a produce scale.

SN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Arrow was ahead of its time, not ahead of today. I'd love to see a Canadian option but this surely isn't it. Had the original arrow been put into production I'm sure we'd have an option to throw in the ring, a real modern design not done by a 5 year old. I often wonder what we would be using as a front line fighter today. Likely an updated version of the arrow similar to the mirage series but I don't think it would have been anything like was this person envisioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada has 1/10th the GDP of the U.S. The U.S. has financial difficulties with procuring new aircraft, imagine Canada's fiscal problems if they were still supporting indigenous aircraft industry. I know patriotism made that a bitter pill to swallow but the country's military is most likely better off purchasing other designs that have already been debugged and have an established support infrastructure. Same with Britain. There just isn't the industrial base to support that. How SAAB can do it is beyond me, even with heavy government support.

Edited by Slartibartfast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an amusing notion...but nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada has 1/10th the GDP of the U.S. The U.S. has financial difficulties with procuring new aircraft, imagine Canada's fiscal problems if they were still supporting indigenous aircraft industry. I know patriotism made that a bitter pill to swallow but the countries military is most likely better off purchasing other designs that have already been debugged and have an established support infrastructure. Same with Britain. There just isn't the industrial base to support that. How SAAB can do it is beyond me, even with heavy government support.

This is why most industrialized nations enter into manufacturing offsets when entering military procurement with the larger nations who still have solid military manufacturing abilities. Canada will make sure regardless of next fighter we buy to have some industrial offsets.

Edited by Les / Creative Edge Photo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Arrow was ahead of its time, not ahead of today. I'd love to see a Canadian option but this surely isn't it. Had the original arrow been put into production I'm sure we'd have an option to throw in the ring, a real modern design not done by a 5 year old. I often wonder what we would be using as a front line fighter today. Likely an updated version of the arrow similar to the mirage series but I don't think it would have been anything like was this person envisioned.

As a piece of technology of her day and as an interceptor, yes the CF-105 Arrow was looking to be very ahead of her day. But she was designed for one notable purpose. Fast, interceptor to at the time intercept and destroy Soviet nuclear bombers when over Northern Canada. For that she would have been a superb aircraft. She could also probably have been made into a credible tactical recon aircraft, but probably would not have been a very good strike aircraft, nor dog fighter.

The situation by the late 50's was that cheaper interceptors were coming available, hence the CF-101B Voodoo's we received. These more or less were able to provide interception of Soviet bombers had the Cold War turned hot. We had CF-104 Starfighters as believe it or not until 1968 to be used as tactical nuclear strike aircraft in Europe and as tactical recon aircraft as well. To which the Starfighter in RCAF service did these profiles well.

I love the Arrow for all she represented circa late 50's but her mission was very narrow and her time frame short especially with the advent of ICBM's and SLBM's. For her technology she was at the time the best in the world and yes she'd have served ably at a high purchase price for the RCAF and would have done us proud by being indigenous. But as I said we replaced her with CF-101 and CF-104 aircraft which both served in the RCAF ably for a few decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think that no matter what - navigation on this thing would have been a nightmare at the time if the mission is to intercept as close to the pole as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think that no matter what - navigation on this thing would have been a nightmare at the time if the mission is to intercept as close to the pole as possible.

Can't say for sure but with DEW line, NORAD would know very early where and how large a group or groups of Soviet Bombers coming over the Pole. These planes would be traveling at much lower speeds and likely quite prescribed routes (for time and fuel savings) to their eventual targets in the USA and Canada. Long range, fast interceptors probably would be vectored from numerous NORAD bases from Alaska through to New Foundland and at levels further and further south.

The Pine Tree Radar line was built by Canada to work with DEW line and once the invading force past by the DEW line. I'm certain that once the USAF and RCAF had jets fast enough to get into intercept position, by the late 50's early 60's that they were able to practice long range intercepts quite as standard practice.

I do have an old magazine article that noted before NORAD had fast (supersonic) interceptors and still had lots of holes in radar of the continent that they worried that the Soviet bombers would be spotted too late for what were still propeller driven and early jet driven interceptors. They even created a policy of ramming bombers as a last measure to try to take many down before they could drop their nuclear bomb loads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forget this one AND the F-35. The Canadian Gov't just needs to call good 'ol Bob Diemert. He had it figured out years ago.

For those who've never heard of Bob, please I beg you to watch this documentary, which should be subtitled "Red Green Builds An Airplane." He even has an assistant who bears an uncanny resemblance to Red's nephew Harold. It's all the more hilarious because this guy is absolutely dead serious. You gotta love his "wind tunnel" technique for testing airfoils: set up a fixture in the back of a pickup and drive like heck down a bumpy dirt road, measuring lift using a produce scale.

SN

Wow, Never actually seen that before. I can't believe people took him seriously, or that we used tax dollars to create that "documentary".

But as for the original post, a new arrow is just a pipe dream. We do not have the capacity or the money to design and build something like that today.

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forget this one AND the F-35. The Canadian Gov't just needs to call good 'ol Bob Diemert. He had it figured out years ago.

For those who've never heard of Bob, please I beg you to watch this documentary, which should be subtitled "Red Green Builds An Airplane." He even has an assistant who bears an uncanny resemblance to Red's nephew Harold. It's all the more hilarious because this guy is absolutely dead serious. You gotta love his "wind tunnel" technique for testing airfoils: set up a fixture in the back of a pickup and drive like heck down a bumpy dirt road, measuring lift using a produce scale.

SN

Hi Steve,

Saw the video, i must say, apart from the 'Defender'', you have to give credit to the guy for his warplanes restoration jobs. I found his restoration of the only japanese ZERO brought back to flying conditions extremely impressive, even though it took those 2 guys 5 years and where they did the job (in that old small wooden hangar on a farm). You had to have a lot of guts (and money) to go dig out a Zero out of a lost small jungle island in the Pacific with only the help of a 6 locals and a few machetes... I wonder how much the whole enterprise did cost him (plus the shipping cost for that Zero back to Canada). I even wonder if this kind of thing could still be done today (bringing back the plane as 'scrap'. Given how restrictive Tranport Canada officials seem to be when it comes to 'experimental' aircrafts (the category where they more or less lump together homebuilt aircrafts and i would think rebuilt warbirds as well, which are not even allowed to be flown further than within sight of their home base airport, 'if' you are given a flight certificate for them at all), it is amazing that he even took on this job. And it`s all the more amazing that he DID bring that Zero back to flight condition (i would have liked to learn more about how he did it, because he most likely had to rebuild and replace every single part that was made out of steel on that aircraft. Don`t know if the engine for the Zero was made of aluminum or steel (i would think it was probably aluminum, because i cannot imagine those 2 guys having to deal with a rusted mess that`s been under the rain for 40 years), but aluminum or steel, it must still have been an enormous undertaking just to clean up that engine and bring it back to working conditions !

However there was a world of difference between his restoration skills and his aircraft designer skills, to say the least.

When i think that in the USA you can fly F-4 Phantom and SU-27 warbirds (and all the old WWII fighters and many bombers), you guys are very lucky compared to us, and Transport Canada would do well to allow us the same here as what you have in the USA. Would be good for small businesses.

Stephane

Website: http://www.picturetrail.com/stratospheremodels

Edited by Stratospheremodels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a more serious note, there was a company here in Montreal called Venga Aerospace during the early 1990's. They are the only serious (?) attempt that was done (to my knowledge) to build a new military aircraft in Canada.

They were based in Ville St-Laurent near Dorval airport. Their design was for a small trainer and ground support twin-fin carbon fiber single jet aircraft called the Brushfire that would have filled the same job the CF-5's and their trainer versions were doing, more or less. Nothing much really came out of this project, they were a rather secretive bunch. I remember i tried to investigate the project a bit and i even phoned them, but i did not learn much. I am not even sure they build an actual mock-up or not, but one thing is sure, the project did not advance much due to lack of funds and lack of gov't support.

A few years later while they were having financial difficulties, the Chinese showed up in the picture as investors...

Then we never heard anything about this project again.

(Note: just checked and found out they were still active up to 2013 but thing do not seem to be doing too well for them:

http://vengasystems.webs.com/

And obviously they are no longer involved in any airframes or hardware design, despite the "aerospace" portion of their name).

I would not be surprised if the Chinese siphoned off all the technology related to carbon fiber on that project (this was at a time when carbon fiber use in military aircrafts and in civilian airafts was still in its infancy).

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1994/1994%20-%200541.html

We can probably say that today, it is not impossible that the J-10 Chengdu and the J-20 probably owe something to the Canadian Venga aircraft project when it comes to composite structures. No proof of course but i wouldn't be surprised.

About the Swedish military aircraft industry, well... Sweden have the highest taxation rate per citizen in the western world. That's a choice that they made as a society, and because of this they have very good public services, medicare, etc. But there are still trade-offs: with the population they have and the not-unlimited budget they have they can't design both a modern jet engine AND an airframe and all the electonic systems together. The Viggen was already starting to do some trade-off (versus its predecessor, the Draken) when they used a civilian jet engine and modified it use it as the powerplant for their fighter jet. With the Gripen they are using a foreign engine, and most likely (sorry i haven't followed the details) they probably also use at least some foreign sources for some of the electronic systems as well as for several of its weapons systems, and their marketing is now done by BAE. Also. obviously, they did not had the financial resources to build an twin engine aircraft that could be in the same category as the Rafale or the F-18 E for example. The Gripen is a smaller aircraft, designed originally to operate within the borders of a smaller country.

However, what might have seemed like a limitation (a small size aircraft) have actually worked quite better on the export front for Saab versus what Dassault have experienced with its Rafale, which is still looking for foreign customers, due mostly to its cost i would think (as well as other non-technical considerations)(even though the Rafale seems to be a marvelous aircraft, both technologically and operationally). The operational cost of bigger, twin engine aircrafts being obviously higher as well (i won't go into F-35 here...).

So it looks like smaller is sometimes better from a marketing point of view for fighter aircrafts.

Stephane

Website: http://www.picturetrail.com/stratospheremodels

Edited by Stratospheremodels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Venga Aerospace "Brushfire" was supposedly lost in a fire in May 1994, after the largest Chinese steel company as well as another Chinese company got involved in a co-project with Venga to develop all composite jet trainers for China, for which Venga claimed "86 soft orders" (that was prior to the fire). There was apparently a lawsuit following that fire and loss of the "only prototype".

No pictures of the actual aircraft were ever shown to the general public, only a photo of a small desk model for the concept.

If the City of Dorval fire services took pictures, post-fire, there is probably not much to be seen given how a fire makes a quick mass of inform slag and ashes out of carbon fiber...

Now i just found this reference to someone having actually (?) worked at building the prototype:

http://ca.linkedin.com/pub/jayson-rupert-mfa-bid/21/bb0/2b1

Edited by Stratospheremodels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steve,

Saw the video, i must say, apart from the 'Defender'', you have to give credit to the guy for his warplanes restoration jobs. I found his restoration of the only japanese ZERO brought back to flying conditions extremely impressive, even though it took those 2 guys 5 years and where they did the job (in that old small wooden hangar on a farm). You had to have a lot of guts (and money) to go dig out a Zero out of a lost small jungle island in the Pacific with only the help of a 6 locals and a few machetes... I wonder how much the whole enterprise did cost him (plus the shipping cost for that Zero back to Canada).

Don't give him too much credit. First off, it's not the only flying Zero in the world, but it is the only early model Zero capable of flight. Secondly, very little is original, as after 40+ years in the jungle, there was not too much that could be reused. While Diemert started the restoration, it was ultimately completed by a group of US restorers in Minnesota. I knew someone who was working on the restoration, and it was fascinating to listen to him talk about the restoration process...

Grant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steve,

Saw the video, i must say, apart from the 'Defender'', you have to give credit to the guy for his warplanes restoration jobs. I found his restoration of the only japanese ZERO brought back to flying conditions extremely impressive, even though it took those 2 guys 5 years and where they did the job (in that old small wooden hangar on a farm). You had to have a lot of guts (and money) to go dig out a Zero out of a lost small jungle island in the Pacific with only the help of a 6 locals and a few machetes... I wonder how much the whole enterprise did cost him (plus the shipping cost for that Zero back to Canada).

Don't give him too much credit. First off, it's not the only flying Zero in the world, but it is the only early model Zero capable of flight. Secondly, very little is original, as after 40+ years in the jungle, there was not too much that could be reused. While Diemert started the restoration, it was ultimately completed by a group of US restorers in Minnesota. I knew someone who was working on the restoration, and it was fascinating to listen to him talk about the restoration process...

Grant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what happened to the Venga!

Iran built it. At least that's what they said...

And that Defender. How silly of Canada to waste so many tax dollars on Hornets, when they could have had thousands of Defenders? I remember watching CBC news reports at the time, where they seemed to be taking that wingnut seriously.

Just think: instead of 1,200 CF-18 hours, if we had bought Defenders, with their low operating costs (and s-u-p-e-r s----l----o------w speed), I could have had 12,000 Defender hours! Somehow, I feel cheated by our spendthrift procurement folks... :crying2:

The sad thing about the Super Arrow is that some quite credible folks have been roped into selling the idea: Retired General L. McKenzie, for one.

And don't try to talk logic with the folks behind this idea. As soon as you start trotting out the risks, challenges, and outright impossibilities of developing a world-class 5th Gen fighter for less money than the F-35, they accuse you of being biased. I guess I'm not a proud enough Canadian, because I think this notion is total fantasy. Being against the idea makes me anti-Canadian... go figure! :rolleyes:

ALF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alvis hit this one out of the park a while ago :)

Here's my spin on what would likely be the outcome of this idea....

Ok, it's a given that the Arrow was a large plane. Here's an idea how large it was...(Barr and Johnson, National post)

width=768 height=576http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g102/Alvis3_1/Arrowstep1-1.jpg[/img]

Now, obviously, we'd have to scale the Arrow down a bit...

width=480 height=480http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g102/Alvis3_1/ArrowStep2.jpg[/img]

Intakes would need to be altered, as would the cockpit to reflect modern requirements such as visibility and stealthiness. The second crew member would be not necessary with modern avionics replacing them.

width=384 height=384http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g102/Alvis3_1/arrowstep3.jpg[/img]

The internal weapons bay could remain, but the wings aren't exactly designed for stealth or the roles we'd be using it in. Deltas have some negative handling characteristics at certain parts of the flight envelope, so a traditional wing and tailplane (albeit stealthified) would be installed. The fuselage would require reworking to fit the new systems and gear.

width=384 height=384http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g102/Alvis3_1/Arrowstep4.jpg[/img]

Along with the new avionics, a new engine would allow a reduction in maintenance and costs by going with a new, high reliability single engine.

width=384 height=384http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g102/Alvis3_1/Arrowstep5.jpg[/img]

The characteristic white scheme of the Arrow would have to be replaced with a modern grey over gray with low-vis markings, in the interest of aircraft survivability. Twin tails would allow for a lower profile and enhanced manueverability.

width=384 height=384http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g102/Alvis3_1/arrowstep6.jpg[/img]

Well, there you have it, a whole new Arrow only 25 years late and 5000 % higher than the F-35s would have cost from the factory, but hey, we got to build em ourselves! (With a bit of help from all those foreign suppliers)

:)

Alvis 3.1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...