Wings of the Free World: What If The Avro Arrow entered service?

[tallwingedgoat]

If you look at its history, it was in fact designed as a carrier-based interceptor. It was only after it's introduction into service that the multirole potential of the aircraft was developed. Hence why it has the maneuverability of a flying bathtub.

A lot of great planes were design accidents. The F-86 wasn't designed to manuever, and the F-15E started life with the "not a pound for air-to-ground" mantra. The F-4 turned out to be versatile because it was big enough to have a lot of range, but not too big and clumsy for dogfights. A happy accident.

The Arrow just cannot be the F-4, just as the MiG-25 cannot be the F-4.

 

[Reichenfaust]

This would have been a great thing, speaking asa canadian, and as a soldier, Unification has made the canadian military great and weak, strong but arrogant, efficient but chaotic, and also thoughtful but arrogant and resistant to change. Go Arrow TTL!!!

 

[Ming777]

A lot of great planes were design accidents. The F-86 wasn't designed to manuever, and the F-15E started life with the "not a pound for air-to-ground" mantra. The F-4 turned out to be versatile because it was big enough to have a lot of range, but not too big and clumsy for dogfights. A happy accident.

The Arrow just cannot be the F-4, just as the MiG-25 cannot be the F-4.

Indeed, did I forget to mention that from the start, the Arrow had integrated ground-mapping radar and radar altimeter plus flight control system to allow a serious strike/reconnaissance role?

The plane has potential. There is a reason why the internal weapons bays are long enough for ASMs.

 

[Ming777]

I'm guessing that Pearson might not become PM, let alone Trudeau. So, no unification of the armed forces in '68 and no bass-ackwards defence policies (among many other things) in the '70s...

Well, in the future, they have to streamline the command no matter what. There would still be some merging at the top brass (ie, a Joint Chief Council led by a Chief of Defense), but nothing close to Hellyer's stupidity. All the ranks are retained, though the pay-grades are synchronized. Uniforms remain the same, and the RCAF and RCN retain their names.

 

[Russell]

A lot of great planes were design accidents. The F-86 wasn't designed to manuever, and the F-15E started life with the "not a pound for air-to-ground" mantra. The F-4 turned out to be versatile because it was big enough to have a lot of range, but not too big and clumsy for dogfights. A happy accident.

The Arrow just cannot be the F-4, just as the MiG-25 cannot be the F-4.

I hate to agree, but I do. The Arrow would have the worlds finest interceptor but thats all - a pure bred stallion of an interceptor. It's not in the same league as the F-4 which was designed from the ground up to be both a fleet interceptor and a bomb truck, not to mention cheap enough to not be too worried about losing the odd aircraft here and there as a result of battle. The Arrow was in the same league as the EE Lightning, Delta Dart and MIG 25 - missile trucks, designed purely to go up, shoot down, return and repeat. There was virtually no mention of an Arrow to be used for ATG roles - all future development seemed to revolve around going higher and faster.

Indeed, did I forget to mention that from the start, the Arrow had integrated ground-mapping radar and radar altimeter plus flight control system to allow a serious strike/reconnaissance role?

Ground-mapping radar was not uncommon. The Arrow was an all weather interceptor, meaning that it had to be able to take off and land from it's bases in the wild Canadian North, regardless of the weather. The Radar was to largly to prevent it smacking into the ground upon return to base in whiteout conditions.

If you look at its history, it was in fact designed as a carrier-based interceptor

It may have been concieved as a carrier based interceptor (I can't find any refence, could you help?), but that was in the early 50's. By the time it was designed it had grown in size considerably and would never have fit onto a carrier bar perhaps an American super.

The Arrow was not just cancelled because of "evil politicians" and "interfering Americans" as I so often hear (and hear of many other OTT cancelled projects, ala TSR-2). The fact is that by the early 60's, the Soviet Plan of attack was gradually shifting away from bomb bearing nuclear bombers to ICBM carrying subs. Between 1960 and 1962, the Soviets commisioned no less than 12 Ballistic missile subs. By the end of the decade there were nearly 40 with more planned. The nuclear threat from bombers was dimishing, a fact well known by even the late 50's - we were after all spying on the Soviets as well as building our own SSBN's. The ultimate tragedy of the Arrow was not that it was cancelled, but that it was designed and built to face a threat that was fast diminishing (at least in it's current form). The military became increasingly Navy orientated in order to combat the new threat at sea, while NORAD was largly relegated to sitting and waiting for land based ICBM's to come over the North pole and then doing nothing about it. The Arrow suffered the same fate as other aircraft in the same catagory - the XF-108 Rapier the British F-155 requirement - all were cancelled and fund either directed elsewhere or greatly reduced. Their relevancy had declined.

The Arrow evokes the same misty eyed heart throb in Canadians that the BAC TSR-2 does amongst us Brits, but you could easily argue that the cancelling of both was probably for the best. Head over heart.

Regardless, keep going Ming - I want to see where this TL goes.

Russell

 

[Ming777]

Russell, IIRC, one of the main issues was the radar and weapons suite. If they just went with off the shelf equipment, they could have avoided the more significant delays and cost overruns. With no need to divert funds for the Sparrow II and Velvet Glove, butterflies could have the engineers devise a way to adapt the plane to also perform strike roles. Five years of altered development can do alot for the Arrow.

BTW, the wiki page for the Phamtom II clearly states that the design was modified from a pure interceptor role to a more multirole mission profile. Even so, they were used more for interception missions as the A-4 Skyhawk and F-8 Crusader handled the ground attack and dogfighting role. Hence why it's terrible maneuverability, lack of guns, two man crew, and impressive speed.

Also note that in terms of range, the Arrow would have to cross over long distances. Even the most northernly RCAF Station was Cold Lake and it's still a good distance away from the edge of Canadian airspace.

So overall this Arrow is a high performance, long ranged, potentially adaptable aircraft. It's like having an Aston DB9
Before the Lambo Diablo even made it to the drawing board.

 

[Riain]

The EE Lighting, designed as a short-range, fast-climb, missile-only NATO interceptor saw action only once; bombing and strafing tribesmen in Yemen. So within 7 years of its introduction it had gained the ability to do the exact opposite of what it was designed for, gaining fuel capacity, guns and bombs. So lets not get too hung up on what the Arrow was and wasn't designed to do, once it goes into production it will be pushed into whatever job comes up and do it well because the 60s was the era of classic long-lived aircraft.

 

[Ming777]

1959:

The year proved to be a watershed for Avro Canada. While deliveries of the CF-105 Arrow to the Royal Canadian Air Force continued unabated by politics, the Royal Air Force was looking closely at the Arrows in operation. The Canadians found that the aircraft performed as expected, with smooth control responses, wicked speed, and even a decent amount of maneuverability for such a massive interceptor. It may not do well against dedicated dogfighters, but it could still hold out against Soviet interceptors and other aircraft.

The weapons systems were also being tested, though Avro was looking for more capable systems. Since the Arrow used the same radar and missiles as the current F-102 and F-106 interceptors, the Arrow was likely to integrate into NORAD operations quite well. The United States was still badgering for Ottawa to purchase Bombarcs, but due to budget pressure and an anti-nuclear lobby in Canada, the best the Americans could do was get Ottawa to lease strategic locations for the USAF to install their own Bomarc Batteries.

Avro Canada at this point were beginning to get ideas regarding the future of the Arrow. Recent reports of the Soviet Union developing the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile meant that the bomber was no longer the major threat to North America. A few engineers were now looking at how the Arrow's mission and capabilities could evolve. The massive size of the aircraft meant that the plane could hold a significant payload. The lead electrical engineers proposed modifying the integrated ground-track radar so it could be used to aim at ground targets. The aircraft may not be a good dog-fighter, but it could perform precision airstrikes on enemy buildings.

A visiting officer of the Royal Navy's Fleet Air Arm who was completely enamored with the Arrow also suggested the use of the Arrow as a maritime strike platform. The weapons bays were long enough to fit plenty of bombs, and the addition of removable hardpoints could allow for an increased payload.

The Brits were deeply interested in the Arrow as it seemed to match their desired specs for the F.155 Project. This was coupled with several setbacks and delays among the major British manufacturers in creating their proposals for a supersonic interceptor. MoD was already looking to lease a large number of arrows with the option of purchasing the planes should the indigenous interceptor program be killed. On January 29, 1959, the British Government Announces the purchase of 110 Avro Arrow Mk.2 interceptors, as a stop-gap aircraft. This began to get many NATO and US-allied nations interested. The Arrow was seen to be superior to the proposed Lockheed F-104 Starfighter (as in faster and less delicate), superior to the current soviet interceptors, and was already entering Canadian service. Several air forces were now sending pilots to evaluate the aircraft at the Malton facility, which was beginning to churn out more Arrows.

There had been a few minor incidents with the prototypes but engineers were working hard on fixing that. Since many of the technologies implemented in the Arrow were the first of their kind, bugs were expected to happen. Modifications to existing airframes were constant, and engineers continued to think about ways to improve the Arrow.

 

[tallwingedgoat]

The EE Lighting, designed as a short-range, fast-climb, missile-only NATO interceptor saw action only once; bombing and strafing tribesmen in Yemen. So within 7 years of its introduction it had gained the ability to do the exact opposite of what it was designed for, gaining fuel capacity, guns and bombs. So lets not get too hung up on what the Arrow was and wasn't designed to do, once it goes into production it will be pushed into whatever job comes up and do it well because the 60s was the era of classic long-lived aircraft.

Well the Sovies never built a bomber worthy of the Arrow. In this timeline we'll see a lot of photos of Arrows intercepting Bears.

 

[Riain]

I could envisage the Arrow being tasked with taking on large numbers of Soviet fighters. Perhaps the RAAF gets a flight or sqn operating out of Thailand from 1965 and it is tasked with escorting Rolling Thunder Thuds, 6 Arrows at a time taking on dozens of Mig 17s and 21s.

 

[Archibald]

Good tiemline Ming, keep on the good work !

Consider the following elements

Avro Arrow for the RAF

According to Tony Buttler, the RAF really considered the Arrow as an interceptor, circa 1956.

The RAF problem was to find a successor to the Gloster Javelin. Enlarged, moire powerfull Javelin were pushed by Gloster - called P.356 to P. 376, the latter a monster with a couple of powerful Olympus engines and a so called thin-wing.
The Javelin, however, had a very serious drag problem: even with a thin wing and two Olympus it was barely supersonic.
That's why the RAF started the F-155T spec, which produced monstruous designs such as the Armstrong Withworth AW-169, the Fairey Delta III, Saro 187, Vickers 559... incredible brute-looking machines !
Buttler clearly states the Arrow was no match for F-155T, but the RAF still considered it to fill the gap and replace the Javelin.
The F-155T, however, was far beyond GB finances of the time, and fell victim to Britain own Diefenbacker, namely Duncan Sandys !
So perhaps they could buy some Arrows to replace the Javelin, but not before 1962 at best.

Arrow potential evolution

I don't know if in your TL the F-108 Rapier is cancelled or not in September 1959.
That interceptor very powerful radar and missiles (AN/ASG-18 and AIM-47 Falcon) ended on a B-58 testbed, then on the YF-12.

I'd like to see an Arrow replacing that B-58 as testbed for that very powerful radar and missiles.

Then, when in 1967 the Mig-25 would be seen at that Domodedovo airshow, the Arrow would be the only interceptor able to shoot it.
Israeli and Iranian Phantoms could not shot Mig-25, that's why they bought Tomcat and Eagle in the late 70's.
Perhaps they could buy CF-105 right from 1969 ?

 

[Ming777]

Thank-you so much for the comments!

What I'm going for is that in 1960, Japan decides to purchase the Arrow, this is followed by Saudi Arabia purchasing Arrows for the RSAF. Not willing to be behind the Saudis, Israel purchases the Arrow in the early to mid 60s, rather than the Mirage III (this will lead to Dassault rebuilding Mirages so they can use the Orenda Iroquois Engine). At that time, the engineers in Avro Canada will also fit two 20 mm cannons to the Arrow, with Israel also doing the same to theirs. The Israelis will also help Avro Canada in turning the interceptor into a more multirole plane, just before the Six-Day War.

As for the testbed, the USAF will lease at least one Arrow for such a purpose. The tests will lead to Avro Canada fitting the AIM-47 and later the AIM-54 in future Marks of the Arrow.

 

[Ming777]

At this time, ITTL, the RCAF planned the following squadrons with the CF-105 Arrow. Every Arrow Squadron is designated as an All-Weather Fighter Squadron

No. 409- 16 Arrows, RCAF Comox
No. 410- 16 Arrows, RCAF Uplands, later transferred to RCAF Cold Lake
No. 414- 16 Arrows, RCAF North Bay
No. 416- 16 Arrows, RCAF Chatham
No. 425- 16 Arrows, Operational Training Squadron, RCAF Malton; will later become an operational unit at RCAF Bagotville
No. 428- 16 Arrows, RCAF Uplands

Eventually...
No. 3- 16 Arrows OTU, RCAF Cold Lake/Bagotville, will be standard Training Unit
No. 419- 16 Arrows, RCAF Baden-Soellingen
No. 423- 16 Arrows, RCAF Cold Lake
No. 432- 16 Arrows, RCAF Bagotville
No. 433- 16 Arrows, RCAF Zweibrücken
No. 440- 16 Arrows, RCAF Winnipeg
Any suggestions for a smaller dogfighter to serve alongside the Arrow?

 

[Russell]

Any suggestions for a smaller dogfighter to serve alongside the Arrow?

Mirage? Especially if it uses the Iroquois engine(which may be too heavy for the Mirage III, but ideal for the Mirage IV).

Russell

 

[Ming777]

Late 1959

The first 22 pilots of the RCAF to fully qualify on the Avro Arrow graduated from No. 425 RCAF, the squadron temporarily assigned for pilot transitioning, in a ceremony at RCAF Malton on September 9. All were former pilots on the old CF-100 "Clunk" and found the transition hard but doable. 16 pilots will be assigned to the No. 410 Squadron RCAF, based in RCAF Uplands. It will be the first operational unit to operate the new Interceptor. The other six pilots, among the top of their class, were assigned as instructors to 425 Squadron to help train the next batch of pilots. Ottawa at this time was contemplating a second operational training unit to speed up pilot transition to the Arrow. As well, the first RAF pilots to transition to the Arrow were also training in this second batch of pilots.

In the Avro Canada R&D facility, some engineers were arguing for the addition of 20mm cannons to the nose of the aircraft. The senior engineers were reluctant, though later on, several conflicts will change their reluctance. Even so, all Arrows on the assembly line were being modified to accept but not fitted with the M79 20 mm cannon, and a few of the older aircraft were being sent in to see if the modifications could be implemented on delivered aircraft.

Across the pacific, the JASDF top brass were advocating the purchase of the Arrow to defend themselves against PRC, DPRK, and Soviet bombers.

 

[RCAF Brat]

At this time, ITTL, the RCAF planned the following squadrons with the CF-105 Arrow. Every Arrow Squadron is designated as an All-Weather Fighter Squadron

No. 409- 16 Arrows, RCAF Comox
No. 410- 16 Arrows, RCAF Uplands, later transferred to RCAF Cold Lake
No. 414- 16 Arrows, RCAF North Bay
No. 416- 16 Arrows, RCAF Chatham
No. 425- 16 Arrows, Operational Training Squadron, RCAF Malton; will later become an operational unit at RCAF Bagotville
No. 428- 16 Arrows, RCAF Uplands

Eventually...
No. 3- 16 Arrows OTU, RCAF Cold Lake/Bagotville, will be standard Training Unit
No. 419- 16 Arrows, RCAF Baden-Soellingen
No. 423- 16 Arrows, RCAF Cold Lake
No. 432- 16 Arrows, RCAF Bagotville
No. 433- 16 Arrows, RCAF Zweibrücken
No. 440- 16 Arrows, RCAF Winnipeg

Any suggestions for a smaller dogfighter to serve alongside the Arrow?

Like OTL it'll have to be something cheap and 'multirole'. Why not have the RCAF still get stuck with the F-5A Freedom Fighter (CF-116)? It'd be a good way to show what happens when the CF-105 eats up the lion's share of an admittedly larger RCAF budget.

ITTL with the better aviation industry and a larger pool of engineers, Canadair might be able to turn the F-5 into something more like the YF-17/F-20. (The YF-17 became the base for the F-18 Hornet) As in take the existing airframe and fiddle with it, give it new engines and wind up taking it to it's full potential.

 

[Ming777]

That could work. It could show that even with crappy little fighters, they could be tweaked up and greatly improved. At least it won't fall out of the sky while turning in a circle.

 

[Riain]

The RCAF woud have both axes covered, the Arrow to fight in the vertical and the F5 to fight in the horizontal.

 

[Ming777]

Perhaps Orenda decides to make a scaled down version of the Iroquois engine for the CF-166s

 

[RCAF Brat]

Perhaps Orenda decides to make a scaled down version of the Iroquois engine for the CF-166s

Orenda producing a better engine for the F-5 was sort of what I had in mind.

The idea was for a budget constrained RCAF to buy the F-5 as a replacement for the CF-86 and the CF-100. Like with the CF-86 Sabre, Canadair will contracted to build most of the planes under license. So the mid-60s CF-116 is basically the OTL plane. Once the deficiencies begin to show, things get interesting. Like with the Sabre, Canadair builds an improved version that performs far above the original. (IIRC North American, the manufacturer of the Sabre in the US, shaved quite a bit off of the license fee in return for being able to build the 'Canadian' Sabre for the USAF and others.) So the CF-116 MK II becomes the definitive version of the F-5. But the designers still think that they can do better than that. So the MK III, with better engines and some glaring changes to the tail become more or less a miniature F-18.

And then end of it, Northrop (the company that designed the F-5A in the first place) has nothing good to say about Canadair swiping the entire export market for 'their' plane.