Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: hank2010 who wrote (31983)	2/5/2007 3:25:56 PM
From: E. Charters	Respond to of 78426

Why did the Avro really get cancelled? Was it going to cause global meltdown? It was far less expensive than the conservatives alleged. Factors may be: 1. The stealth bomber was on the drawing board. (stealth technology coatings and surface design in submarines and B2 type bombers had been on the drawing board for the luftwaffe for '46. The US had perfected the coatings by 1955 for industrial installations, but the trade over to military vehicles had strangely not been conceptualized by the aircraft manufacturers. 2. The semi-stealth SR52 and CIA J-7 were overflying Soviet airspace already at Mach 5. 3. The Russians were thought to be very nervous about overflights and the long range Arrow in its capability of overflying the Soviet airspace would have been a non-stealth direct provocation. (Cuban Missile Crisis) 4. The Arrow program eventually would have violated agreements about non anti-ICBM devices, although the Soviet Galosh system did too. The final arrow was to be rocket propelled, partially fly by wire, piloted and have a laser or missile for tropospheric ICBM interception. It was to be about 15 generations after the Arrow. The Arrow was a test bed for the fly by wire and super to hypersonic principles. This computerizedd fly by wire, Autocad-build was carried over to the CF-100 which had an extended lifetime because of its survivability in a nuclear attack. 5. The Arrow was far more capable of any aircraft right up to the F-15, but it was far larger. It's mission in Europe might have been interpreted to be a long range fighter bomber made to penetrate air defences with nuclear capability. In this it would have been far more survivable than a Starfighter, which had the same task. 6. Pressure from US interests who felt the Arrow duplicated the SR-52 tasks, and also interfered with US marketing its inferior fighters to NATO task forces. This industrial pressure being run interfence for by US government cannot be underestimated. What was good for General Dynamics was good for the USA. 7. The aircraft manufacturers in the States could get the benefit of the Arrow improvements in technology more by cancellation of the program than by seeing it developed. Neither the Brits nor the US have built an aircraft with remotely similar features since. There were over 50 untheretofore seen technological advances in the Arrow, and even by now not all have been adopted by modern aircraft. EC<:-}