Was stationed at Avro in 1956-57 as part of the RCAF CEPE group and saw this magnificent aircraft every day. I cannot find the word to express my feelings at its cancellation. I was absolutely grateful to find and view this will watch it many time over coming years. Must say a little tear let me down.
very cool mode, but why did you not incorporate the wing anhedral angle that the real avro arrow had? they added it due to stability issues after the initial design.
actually they drooped the wings to keep from having to shorten the gear for stowage too much ... that is why the 4 deg slant on the wings .. it saved them 6 inches or screw thread on the main strut to actually fit the gear into the wing and leave extra room for fuel storage ... and yes it also added stability ...
Your last Avro Arrow flight video was 4 years ago? Could you post more of the Arrow flights and advise if the model you built is available for purchase? Also please post without music, just want to hear the engines. Thanks.
It looked like it needed your undivided attention. Unsure why the landing was done downwind, at least it looked that way judging by the fellas hat with the ear flaps :) Fabulous that you got it down in one piece. Congratulations!
Iam interested in doing one with twin turbines. I have a pair of Wrens or Kingtechs for the job. What could be done to get a fuse etc. to make it happen?
thanks for posting. some late thoughts. at 1:11, the apparent contours of the wing upper surface cause me to suspect that airfoil/profile 'transition' towards the wingtips, is less-than ideal. fan size is What. the intake area may/may not be optimal. most people do NOT understand that an edf has a Minimum Optimal intake AREA. intake area should be at Least, the area of the fan, Minus the area of the forward spinner/cone. ( r-sqrd x pi equals area ) one can only wonder, how much Excess Mass, came with the decision to use fiberglass, at the fuselage. most people do not understand that Every (component) part of an airframe has a dom; distribution of mass (that is a part of the whole). in this case, the span-wise dom of the wing is, probably, less-than ideal. cheers googletranslate
actually the arrow wing was a trapezoid ... with the leading edge top being the longer of the two edges ... it was designed to handle mach 7 with that inner wing air foil ... the outer wing is a standard rounded top flat bottom for low speed lift ... also the air dam just before the middle of the wing span (about 6 inches on the real one) is slightly canted towards the main body to create a small vorticular flow pulling the high speed air (above mach.8) back and towards the engine ... and yes it isnt straight back it moves towards the tail by 6 inches as well ... which also gives the airflow at high mach added thrust ... as it also pushes the plane forward ... about 1% on the real version ... and that is the other reason they had the rear gear screw themselves up shorter to fit in ... the other was the wing droop to accomodate the shorter gear to avoid high stress on the threaded portion of the gear when landing and reduce mean time before replacement of them .. the rear gear also turned slightly to angle into the wing shape better with the front of the rear gear moving about 3 inches to slot into the inner wing behind the main fuel storage area and not leave a bump on the lower wing
I never saw the Arrow but I do remember hearing the sonic boom from my home in west-end Toronto when it broke the sound barrier on one of its few test flights. I'll never forgive Diefenbaker for cancelling the project on the promise of Eisenhower to provide all the aircraft would ever need. On the plus side is the fact that all the engineers went to the U.S. and helped put man on the moon.
how did you solve the pitch up problem, are you sure this aircraft had a 1-1 power output, i think you know what your doing, did you add some weight forward as 2nd flight was good, i got 17" laptop and had problems seeing it. well done for bringing the AVRO ARROW back to life,
the arrow was 1.1 to 1 thrust to weight ... actually ... no weapons ... as for the pitch up that was most likely because the tail was plywood being over heavy he may have just moved some weight forward and brought the center of gravity towards the leading edge of the wing root where it belongs
Super model and video! Can you give an update ? Have you done any development on the model since that video? Is their any models for sale? Just a retired AIRFORCE interest ...
the air 7.3 specification the arrow was designed to STILL HAS NOT BEEN MET ... not a single fighter interceptor produced the world over has even matched that specification ... to this date ... that includes all 3 variants of the f35 the f22 and even the f18 ... the closest was the prototype f22 the americans canceled ... now thats 70 years since the first design was worked on (1951 was the original design start 1956 was the first production plane build start with the first flight being 1957) ... and unlike all other planes there was NO PROTOTYPE made it was a production run plane from the very start ...
PM John Diefenbaker got rolled by the Americans. He was a fool for killing the Avro Arrow CF-105. Canada would have greatly benefited from the entire program.
It looks nice in the air but scary unstable, I wonder if a flight stabilizer would help it to fly better. Good luck wit the sale, I hope you find a new home for it after all the hard work invested into it.
no droop and the inner wing was longer than it should be ... and the air dam was not slanted towards the body it was furthest from the body at the front and closest at the tail it literally is a 6 inch difference on the real thing ... and the reason the air dam was angled in was to create a vortices generator that would also add about 1 to 4% more thrust to the plane just from air pressure also the ailerons were slightly tapered as the hydraulics had to be moved backwards to allow the rear gear to fit in ... and the elevons were even across the outer wing
part of the problem with retracting gear is they not only need to lift in but angle up the front of the rear wheels up and shorten them a bit to fit within the inner wing space and behind the fuel storage area ... the reason they drooped the wings was to lessen the repair and replace time between the screw gear failure from repeated landings ... the wing droop also added stability ... and the inner wing along the air dam actually cants slightly towards the rear of the plane ... the front edge is actually 6 inches further out than the trailing edge .. and the air dam was angled towards the main body at the very top and bottom making it also a vortices generator increasing thrust from 1 to 4% over it's flight envelope ... they put a ;lot of little tricks into that plane ... and it still has the 15 still used firsts of all jet fighters ... and once had 22 of the firsts ..7 of the firsts were changed ... . dont forget the inner wing is a high mach airfoil it is a trapezoid ... with the longest side on the bottom back then top back then top front and finally bottom front ... while the outer wing was a standard airfoil with flat bottom and curved top ... the inner wing was best at high speed and the outer was best at low speed .... the difference partially covered stall speed ... as the stall would start almost at the rear end of the inner wing ... but with the outer wing compensating with the majority of the low speed lift .. at high speeds (mach 1.5+ the outer wing would stall more near the tip and work in BUT the inner wing was providing about 95% of the lift of the plane
Congratulation master sir... 👏 wonderful and successful fly. I so much admire this arrow. Got 1avro arrow from hobbyking, ducted model but never install. I wish to copy and built another model. To install ducted and test fly. May need ur advice later sir
ok you almost got the low rear correct it actually sits about an 8 deg angle slant from back to front ....also dont forget the actual rear gear also had to shorten to stow as they had to make room for the fuel storage area ... wihs you had used a turbine engine instead of the ducted fan ... though ... would have sounded better ;)
better relabel it rl 238 ... the next one on the production line ... as 37 of them were in process total ... 206 being the only one finished but unflown
Beautiful job! I just wonder if the engineers who projected the Arrow in the 50’s could have had access to fly a model like yours during their test, how much easier could be their work!!! Lol Maybe if someone creates a time machine, we could smuggle it back there...😜
Don't you know, that federal government abandoned that project and not permitted of any future fly of the Avro "ARROW" ???? :::::: F_ck them all :o)) Thanks to your effort and passion the ARROW CF-105 is flying again. Canadian designed unique avionics system works perfectly !!!! AMEN.
actually future flights of the arrow ... are NOT restricted ... the government (Canada as a country) cant design ANY fighter jets ... BUT us Civilians CAN ... loop holes are fun ;)
lol i have no problem getting it into the air or flying it .. even comming down ... landing where I intended to ... well lets just say I can try laguardia and land on the brooklyn bridge no problem ... ok it is at the bottom of the hudson when im done but IM on it
Avro had wild flight characteristics, that huge delta wing . Great job keeping that beast hood up. That plain was 40 years advanced in its day . The U2 would of been doomed ! reason they wiped out the program! Yanks were pissed off.
um the specification it was designed and BUILT to is 70 years old ... it started it's design in 1951 fall and was first built on the production line in 56 and flew in october of 57 ... the air 7.3 specification ... is still UN MET to this day ... NOTHING made anywhere in the world has met that spec yet .... and thats makes it 70 years and COUNTING it also was NEVER prototyped it was always a full production run plane ... all 37 of them ... although only 6 got fully built and 5 only flew ...
thanks to deifenbaker ... Canada as a country CANT design any new fighter jets ... as part of the bomarc deal he signed away our right to do that ... BUT civilians have no restriction on rebuilding and updating it ... Currently have the engine bay and engine iintake duct 3d planned out ... working on the wing drop inner and outter wings now ... and then its the weapons bay and cockpit then the front gear and the nose cone ... with the rear gear going last as they not only fold up but turn and shorten also when being stowed ... the absolute final bit will be the air dam design ... as it not only moves towards the tail but slants towards the top and bottom of the main fuselage on the outer most edges ...after that it's on to the turbine ... updating a 70 year old design of the iriquois engine ... after all of that its virtual wind tunnel and then a small scale model and flight ... and then onto the 6th gen and 7th gen versions I have planned ... and then to find a few people who can find others to source the materials for construction of a 1:1 version of each iteration ...
Was stationed at Avro in 1956-57 as part of the RCAF CEPE group and saw this magnificent aircraft every day. I cannot find the word to express my feelings at its cancellation. I was absolutely grateful to find and view this will watch it many time over coming years. Must say a little tear let me down.
i can but they are mostly four letters ... with diefenbaker tossed in for good measure ... ;)
Watched your first flight (a couple years back) good to see you didn't give up on the dream. Nice to see it in the air and back safely!
Congratulations on a beautiful model. Loved the flight and the landing.
I saw the Avro Arrow fly over our house in Etobicoke quite a few times in 1958. It was definitely a sight to behold.
Wow! Looks great. Seems to land just about as hot as the real one! Exciting to watch.
What a fantastic video! I've just taught my kids about the Avro Arrow, and my 11 yr old is itching to build one with me!
I've always loved the Avro Arrow and your scale model makes me love it all the more!
Amazing and I'm also glad you did not stop from the crash of last time.. One day I will have too get over too your store.. Thanks for sharing..
Congratulations! Incredible design,,,,Awesome.
By the way ..... RL 201 was a first time flying of being held in the hands of the Polish test pilot, airman Jan Zurakowski "ZURA" (R.I.P.)
Very nice, excellent job and congratulations to the pilot as well.
I really enjoyed watching that Arrow fly. Thanks for sharing. Great work!
Super! Glad to see your back! Thanks for not giving up!
This is phenomenal! i teared up.
Just imagine where our aerospace industry would be today if this wasnt cancelled.
Me to
Great to see the Arrow is still flying :)
Congratulation for the work and result. Very beatiful model.
Sweet success, a beautiful tribute to a great aircraft.
Beautiful.
It looks so graceful. Beautiful design.
Just seen this video...nice build ! I have the DVD on the history of the Avro Arrow...Great history there !
Great sound too ! Lovely plane could have been a world beater , reminds me of our TSR2 story , sad . Wales UK
very cool mode, but why did you not incorporate the wing anhedral angle that the real avro arrow had?
they added it due to stability issues after the initial design.
actually they drooped the wings to keep from having to shorten the gear for stowage too much ... that is why the 4 deg slant on the wings .. it saved them 6 inches or screw thread on the main strut to actually fit the gear into the wing and leave extra room for fuel storage ... and yes it also added stability ...
Your last Avro Arrow flight video was 4 years ago?
Could you post more of the Arrow flights and advise if the model you built is available for purchase? Also please post without music, just want to hear the engines. Thanks.
Excellent version of the Arrow.
Great work, nice model! Have you considered doing a turbine version? I can't find anyone who has done one yet...
Search for brad maddog metcalf on here. He did a turbine 1/8 scale arrow similar to this.
It looked like it needed your undivided attention. Unsure why the landing was done downwind, at least it looked that way judging by the fellas hat with the ear flaps :) Fabulous that you got it down in one piece. Congratulations!
Thanks for your effort.....Made me cry out-loud.
A belated congratulations. Well done.
Iam interested in doing one with twin turbines. I have a pair of Wrens or Kingtechs for the job. What could be done to get a fuse etc. to make it happen?
thanks for posting. some late thoughts. at 1:11, the apparent contours of the wing upper surface cause me to suspect that airfoil/profile 'transition' towards the wingtips, is less-than ideal. fan size is What. the intake area may/may not be optimal. most people do NOT understand that an edf has a Minimum Optimal intake AREA. intake area should be at Least, the area of the fan, Minus the area of the forward spinner/cone. ( r-sqrd x pi equals area ) one can only wonder, how much Excess Mass, came with the decision to use fiberglass, at the fuselage. most people do not understand that Every (component) part of an airframe has a dom; distribution of mass (that is a part of the whole). in this case, the span-wise dom of the wing is, probably, less-than ideal. cheers googletranslate
actually the arrow wing was a trapezoid ... with the leading edge top being the longer of the two edges ... it was designed to handle mach 7 with that inner wing air foil ... the outer wing is a standard rounded top flat bottom for low speed lift ... also the air dam just before the middle of the wing span (about 6 inches on the real one) is slightly canted towards the main body to create a small vorticular flow pulling the high speed air (above mach.8) back and towards the engine ... and yes it isnt straight back it moves towards the tail by 6 inches as well ... which also gives the airflow at high mach added thrust ... as it also pushes the plane forward ... about 1% on the real version
... and that is the other reason they had the rear gear screw themselves up shorter to fit in ... the other was the wing droop to accomodate the shorter gear to avoid high stress on the threaded portion of the gear when landing and reduce mean time before replacement of them .. the rear gear also turned slightly to angle into the wing shape better with the front of the rear gear moving about 3 inches to slot into the inner wing behind the main fuel storage area and not leave a bump on the lower wing
I am glad your apart of Friends of Project206. When we have the rollout of the 1:1, we will be giving you a call
Please post that online. I would love to see it!
I never saw the Arrow but I do remember hearing the sonic boom from my home in west-end Toronto when it broke the sound barrier on one of its few test flights. I'll never forgive Diefenbaker for cancelling the project on the promise of Eisenhower to provide all the aircraft would ever need. On the plus side is the fact that all the engineers went to the U.S. and helped put man on the moon.
Now, that's a nice site to see. Avro Arrow in the air. :)
site - location .... sight - to see ... my sight was clouded because the job site was on fire
@@0623kaboom Sorry, English is not my first language so I do make mistakes. English is my fifth, how many do you speak?
Excellent, so nice to see the Arrow with the wind under her wings. Maybe time to represent 🇨🇦 at
R/C airshows,?
Beautiful job!
how did you solve the pitch up problem, are you sure this aircraft had a 1-1 power output, i think you know what your doing, did you add some weight forward as 2nd flight was good, i got 17" laptop and had problems seeing it.
well done for bringing the AVRO ARROW back to life,
the arrow was 1.1 to 1 thrust to weight ... actually ... no weapons ... as for the pitch up that was most likely because the tail was plywood being over heavy he may have just moved some weight forward and brought the center of gravity towards the leading edge of the wing root where it belongs
great flight!!!!
I'd still like to bring one to Edmonton..... I have a pair Kingtech K80s that need a home...
still hoping.
Super model and video! Can you give an update ? Have you done any development on the model since that video? Is their any models for sale? Just a retired AIRFORCE interest ...
My uncle worked on the original arrow said it was away a head of it time .heard it could accelerate faster fully loaded then empty f35 .
the air 7.3 specification the arrow was designed to STILL HAS NOT BEEN MET ... not a single fighter interceptor produced the world over has even matched that specification ... to this date ... that includes all 3 variants of the f35 the f22 and even the f18 ... the closest was the prototype f22 the americans canceled ... now thats 70 years since the first design was worked on (1951 was the original design start 1956 was the first production plane build start with the first flight being 1957) ... and unlike all other planes there was NO PROTOTYPE made it was a production run plane from the very start ...
Great Job.....needs a couple turbines. Did you work out retracts later?
Gorgeous! A true labour of love!
....and you stuck the landing. Beautiful bird you’ve got there. 👍
Would be such an attraction on any Canadian Airforce Day!
What wing profile did you use? The Clark y seems too deep (fat) for this project.
Wow. Are there shows where you fly it? I would pay to see it.
PM John Diefenbaker got rolled by the Americans. He was a fool for killing the Avro Arrow CF-105. Canada would have greatly benefited from the entire program.
It looks nice in the air but scary unstable, I wonder if a flight stabilizer would help it to fly better. Good luck wit the sale, I hope you find a new home for it after all the hard work invested into it.
Nice plane
Did not look too stable in the air..
When will we see it fly with the gear up?
Beautiful!!!!!!!!
I'd like to ask why your flag is upside down..
Wicked model. I dint catch it, but how much does it weigh?
a little over 44lbs ... he said in the first flight test that crashed ... (about 4 years before this flight)
@gavinBach @sirgavinsir What was your take off speed and cruise speed?
A very nice stand off scale model. It looks good in the air for sure and flies really nice. But, I could see right away the wing was not to scale.
no droop and the inner wing was longer than it should be ... and the air dam was not slanted towards the body it was furthest from the body at the front and closest at the tail it literally is a 6 inch difference on the real thing ... and the reason the air dam was angled in was to create a vortices generator that would also add about 1 to 4% more thrust to the plane just from air pressure also the ailerons were slightly tapered as the hydraulics had to be moved backwards to allow the rear gear to fit in ... and the elevons were even across the outer wing
ARROW 201 CLEARED FOR TAKEOFF .
Why does such a large model not have retractable gear?
Will retracted wheels give it more stability? can you do it?
part of the problem with retracting gear is they not only need to lift in but angle up the front of the rear wheels up and shorten them a bit to fit within the inner wing space and behind the fuel storage area ... the reason they drooped the wings was to lessen the repair and replace time between the screw gear failure from repeated landings ... the wing droop also added stability ... and the inner wing along the air dam actually cants slightly towards the rear of the plane ... the front edge is actually 6 inches further out than the trailing edge .. and the air dam was angled towards the main body at the very top and bottom making it also a vortices generator increasing thrust from 1 to 4% over it's flight envelope ... they put a ;lot of little tricks into that plane ... and it still has the 15 still used firsts of all jet fighters ... and once had 22 of the firsts ..7 of the firsts were changed ...
.
dont forget the inner wing is a high mach airfoil it is a trapezoid ... with the longest side on the bottom back then top back then top front and finally bottom front ... while the outer wing was a standard airfoil with flat bottom and curved top ... the inner wing was best at high speed and the outer was best at low speed .... the difference partially covered stall speed ... as the stall would start almost at the rear end of the inner wing ... but with the outer wing compensating with the majority of the low speed lift .. at high speeds (mach 1.5+ the outer wing would stall more near the tip and work in BUT the inner wing was providing about 95% of the lift of the plane
hi, do you sell the kit? if so how much shipped to Texas? thank you> AWESOME JET***** Gary
SCRATCH built ... what kit ...
perhaps he might have plans he may be willing to sell ...
Awesome model…Great job…
Shame that the real Avro Canada CF-105 never made it to production
Retractable gears, eventually?
Fantastic! I need the project
Congratulation master sir... 👏 wonderful and successful fly.
I so much admire this arrow. Got 1avro arrow from hobbyking, ducted model but never install.
I wish to copy and built another model. To install ducted and test fly.
May need ur advice later sir
Fantastic. Flight
What a beautiful plane
It needs retracts. Amazing jet.
ok you almost got the low rear correct it actually sits about an 8 deg angle slant from back to front ....also dont forget the actual rear gear also had to shorten to stow as they had to make room for the fuel storage area ... wihs you had used a turbine engine instead of the ducted fan ... though ... would have sounded better ;)
nice to see the 201 fly again , now , double the power output and re label it the 206 ...
better relabel it rl 238 ... the next one on the production line ... as 37 of them were in process total ... 206 being the only one finished but unflown
Beautiful job! I just wonder if the engineers who projected the Arrow in the 50’s could have had access to fly a model like yours during their test, how much easier could be their work!!! Lol Maybe if someone creates a time machine, we could smuggle it back there...😜
They actually tested aerodynamics on scale models powered by rockets! (Apparently, they were all crash landed into an Ontario lake for safe keeping)
Have You use gyro systen in the plane?
no need the engines act as gyros ... and they should be level when in flight
the 20000lbs of thrust wasnt available before the 206. you should have scale for about 16000lbs in the 201
Great model, shame the camera has no zoom, dots in the sky are not too great to look at sadly!!
Don't you know, that federal government abandoned that project and not permitted of any future fly of the Avro "ARROW" ???? :::::: F_ck them all :o)) Thanks to your effort and passion the ARROW CF-105 is flying again. Canadian designed unique avionics system works perfectly !!!! AMEN.
actually future flights of the arrow ... are NOT restricted ... the government (Canada as a country) cant design ANY fighter jets ... BUT us Civilians CAN ... loop holes are fun ;)
Am I hearing a version of the cartoon "HE-MAN" Theme?
Nice, I would never make it back to the ground in one piece :-).
lol i have no problem getting it into the air or flying it .. even comming down ... landing where I intended to ... well lets just say I can try laguardia and land on the brooklyn bridge no problem ... ok it is at the bottom of the hudson when im done but IM on it
so nice to see the ARROW fly again. { Bloody Politicians }
Avro had wild flight characteristics, that huge delta wing . Great job keeping that beast hood up. That plain was 40 years advanced in its day . The U2 would of been doomed ! reason they wiped out the program! Yanks were pissed off.
um the specification it was designed and BUILT to is 70 years old ... it started it's design in 1951 fall and was first built on the production line in 56 and flew in october of 57 ... the air 7.3 specification ... is still UN MET to this day ... NOTHING made anywhere in the world has met that spec yet .... and thats makes it 70 years and COUNTING
it also was NEVER prototyped it was always a full production run plane ... all 37 of them ... although only 6 got fully built and 5 only flew ...
Impressive, too bad you couldn't have shown John Diefenbaker
Awesome!
Awesome
''Very nice''!!
Wish Canada gets the real deal back in a 2020 format.
Foolish politics has denied aviation some absolute gems.
thanks to deifenbaker ... Canada as a country CANT design any new fighter jets ... as part of the bomarc deal he signed away our right to do that ... BUT civilians have no restriction on rebuilding and updating it ... Currently have the engine bay and engine iintake duct 3d planned out ... working on the wing drop inner and outter wings now ... and then its the weapons bay and cockpit then the front gear and the nose cone ... with the rear gear going last as they not only fold up but turn and shorten also when being stowed ... the absolute final bit will be the air dam design ... as it not only moves towards the tail but slants towards the top and bottom of the main fuselage on the outer most edges ...after that it's on to the turbine ... updating a 70 year old design of the iriquois engine ... after all of that its virtual wind tunnel and then a small scale model and flight ... and then onto the 6th gen and 7th gen versions I have planned ... and then to find a few people who can find others to source the materials for construction of a 1:1 version of each iteration ...
id love one. but its about 10 pounds to heavy and way under powered! great video***** Gary
Why do you have that annoying
music on this video. I love to hear the sound of the plane.
CIA is going to Jamb your remote control ! LOL!
ACE
Nice plane, but the footage of it flying is about worthless. It's nothing but a speck on the screen most of the time.
Music sucks and jet flown too far away!
Fortunately, no pilot eh.
😷
Great looking plane terrible video couldn’t see the plane most of the time in the air