Ice's take on the Petraeus scandal

Let's start off by saying, extra-marital affairs in the political world aren't exactly something new. Some of the most revered governmental figures (e.g. Lyndon B. Johnson, Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton, etc) have engaged in such acts and they're still viewed by the general public as successful, even beloved. I'm not condoning such behavior, however.

I find the fact that this is all coming up, right out in the open, after the election and before the Benghazi hearings very interesting. I'm not going to call it a conspiracy, but it seems that people in the current administration do not want to hear Petraeus's take on what went on at the US consulate on 9/11/12. 

The fact of the matter is, there's no man as qualified for the job as the director of the Central Intelligence Agency as him. His success in the Global War on Terrorism proves that. The problem here, is that lawyers and sponsored attorneys can, in fact, prove that his testimony is worthless on the grounds that his judgement might have been impaired or otherwise affected. That's when things get sticky. 

I, for one, would very much appreciate the opportunity to hear what he has to say about the CIA's involvement, especially considering the fact that most mainstream news outlets claim that they played a major part in what went on that fateful day. 

As for the affair part... well, as I said, I'm not condoning it in any way, but this was a sign of weakness in an otherwise perfect and stellar career. Cut him some slack folks, LBJ had his way with dozens of women, even with his wife fully knowledgeable of his affairs, and people still celebrate him as a hardworking, trustworthy man.

Iceman out.

Myths of the Arrow.

Just a day back, I took a trip over to the Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum just on the outskirts of Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. After a personal tour and a most exhilarating joy-ride in an older trainer, I noticed a group heading out onto the tarmac to see some of the static aircraft parked outside. As the outside tour was coming to a close, there were a few of us walking with the guide, listening in to what he had to say about the Avro Arrow. A gentleman piped up and seemed to be extremely supportive of the Arrow, sorrowful for its demise and adamant that it could "fly circles around ANYTHING the Americans have flying today" ('anything' is capitalized, as at that point in time, the guy got a little loud in support of his beloved aircraft).

This isn't the first time I've heard such support of the Arrow. I used to work at a museum that housed a full-size replica of the Arrow itself. In fact, just as a kind of a cool side note, one of the guides at that museum was one of the original engineers working on the Arrow's wing structures. It was a truly amazing opportunity to get to speak to such a man and learn what he had to say about his career and the various airframes he worked on.
I've seen words likes the ones the man at the CWHM voiced, in textbooks! No kidding! So, do they have any justification or backing behind them? I mean, was the Arrow such an advanced jet? Was there a conspiracy behind the program's shutdown?

Let's talk.

According to the website CanadianBullshit.com (aptly named, it seems), the CF-105 apparently was "the most advanced aircraft of it's type in the world". Granted, the Arrow was ahead of it's time in some aspects, most notably its employment of a fly-by-wire flight control system. First non-experimental aircraft to use it, actually. Pretty cool, considering the next airframe to incorporate FBW was Concorde, 11 years later in 1969. The Mk1 Arrow was equipped with twin Pratt&Whitney J75-P-3 turbojets, outputting 23,500 lbs of thrust with afterburners engaged. That'd be able to push it to around Mach 2+. In tests, the Arrow came to about Mach 1.98, but was built to go a little faster. Supposedly, the Orenda engines that were designed to be fitted into the later models could give the 105 a supercruise capability, but in the end, barely anything came from that. Not to mention, the Arrow was a seriously large aircraft... relatively gigantic compared to other fighter aircraft of the time, and onward. The Arrow would've been pretty outgunned in a dogfight, unable to maneuver tightly.

For its mission, it was pretty well-built. It needed to operate from remote northern bases, intercept Soviet strategic bombers and engage other fighter/interceptor aircraft escorting said bombers. It had the engines to reach the incoming attackers relatively fast, and it was capable of a sizable weapons payload. Not bad at all. It was Canadian-designed, manufactured and a source of national pride. I'd definitely agree with it being a pretty swell jet. But, there wasn't anything to show for all the millions of dollars poured into the Arrow program. The unit cost steadily rose to $3.5 million, and that's when the Canadian government decided to cut the program. Our "buddies" over at CanadianBullshit.com list the price of the 105 (in 1958 Canadian Dollars) and compare that to the current general cost of an F-35 Lightning II (according to them, it's around $115 mil US).

Really?

Taking into account, inflation, economic growth, etc, the Arrow would've cost more than $26,087,869 to build in 2010. Fair price... for an archaic, outclassed piece of machinery. I mean, how in the hell can you compare an F-35, the next generation of air-superiority fighters to something so outdated and obsolete? Is the Arrow a multi-role capable aircraft in the same manner an F-35 is? Is the Arrow built with advanced stealth technology? Is the Arrow built with ultra-sophisticated targeting and e-warfare systems? Not only no, but hell no!

At this point, you're comparing apples to refrigerators. Yeah. Refrigerators.

They go on to talk about how the 105 is bigger and faster than the F-35, voice an opinion on how the US bribes Canadians to buy their aircraft, and talk in a pretty uneducated way concerning the development and procurement of fighter aircraft.

Okay, let's get back on track.

Yeah, the Arrow was definitely worthy of the attention and Canadian pride it received. The sad reality, however, is that when they attempted to sell the Arrow to foreign buyers, nobody wanted it. Why? Cause the French, American and British were building aircraft that were slightly cheaper, a lot more agile, fuel-efficient, and equally (if not more) fast. There WERE worthy competitors to the 105.

As for the conspiracies... American bribery, jealousy, etc.... unfounded. Were other countries so jealous of a fighter that they'd pressure the Canadian government into closing the program down? Highly doubtful. As I said, other NATO countries were building highly-capable aircraft that could match and in some cases, exceed, what the Arrow could do. Reasons for fear? I can't really think of any good ones. Bribery? Doubtful. The Canadian government could have just as easily started a newer fighter design and procurement competition, then project, and have come up with another jet.

Check out the following link for an interesting comparison between the Arrow and other fighter jets of the era, and more modern ones.

Comparing the Arrow to other fighter jets.

CanadianBullshit.com's take on the Arrow