Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dciem.UUCP
Path: utzoo!dciem!mmt
From: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Canadian Military & Industry
Message-ID: <1334@dciem.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 27-Jan-85 12:35:49 EST
Article-I.D.: dciem.1334
Posted: Sun Jan 27 12:35:49 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 27-Jan-85 16:19:31 EST
References: <395@utcs.UUCP> <looking.221>
Reply-To: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada
Lines: 48
Summary: 


>If Canadians design another plane as good as the Arrow, it will likely
>get the same fate as the Arrow.  The Americans refuse will to believe
>that the best fighter in the world is made outside the U.S.A. and they
>thus won't buy it, and will thus pressure Canada to scrap it.  Ask
>Avro.
>-- 
>Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. - Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473

This was NOT true of the Arrow.  Having just refreshed my memory of
the Arrow from a pretty detailed book on its technical aspects, I can
refute this insult to the US military.  The US was VERY interested
in the Arrow.  They supplied a modified B-52 (at the time quite a
secret aircraft) for testing the Iroquois engine.  When the Arrow was
cancelled by Diefenbaker, they tried to buy the five completed aircraft,
but Diefenbaker insisted that all plans and photographs be destroyed
and all planes be cut up and sold as scrap.  Incidentally, the UK and
the Belgians also wanted the Arrow.

As for the quality of the Arrow, no plane for 2 decades had its specs
for continued supersonic fighting ability, and no engine had the
thrust/weight ratio of the Iroquois over the same period.  No flying
Arrow had an Iroquois engine fitted.  That was supposed to go into
Arrow No. 6, which was 98% complete at the time of cancellation.  Even
so, one test flight was made at Mach 1.92, in a series of tests at
increasing speeds.

If Diefenbaker had not cancelled the Arrow, would the US have got men
on the moon by the target date of 1970?  I wonder.

The US, generally, has been much better than Canada at recognizing the
quality of Canadian work in all fields, whether technological or social.
The US bought more Ferranti FP6000 computers than Canada, for example,
before the plans had to be sold to the UK (where they became the basis
of much of the UK computer industry in the form of the ICL 1900 series).
The main reason the plans had to be sold was lack of support in Canada.

Even now, the US contracts in Canada for work they would like Canadians
to support; when Canada won't join in, they go ahead on their own, supporting
Canadian innovation.  There's lots to complain about in the US, but
anti-Canadian chauvinism in technology is not one of them.
If you want to complain about anti-Canadian chauvinism, just look around
at home.
-- 

Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt
{uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsrgv!dciem!mmt