4 ms·

I'm sure the answer is probably fairly mundane, but it's birthed a whole lineage of nationalist semi-conspirational explanations (US colonial masters chewed Die

I'm sure the answer is probably fairly mundane, but it's birthed a whole lineage of nationalist semi-conspirational explanations (US colonial masters chewed Diefenbaker out, demanded the total cessation and destruction of the project, etc.) I suspect it makes absolutely zero sense for Canada of the 50s to be designing and building its own fighter-bomber jets, but the mythos is strong. And the vibe of the whole thing is very topical, of course, with the US basically demanding we spend more money subsidizing their defense industry by buying their overpriced armaments from them while at the same time key people in the administration openly musing about the elimination of our sovereignty. The US: having it both ways ("be our subservient raw resource provider and nothing else" and "oh, but it costs so much to defend you") since forever.

preommr 2y ago
> And the vibe of the whole thing is very topical, of course, with the US basically demanding we spend more money subsidizing their defense industry by buying their overpriced armaments from them while at the same time key people in the administration openly musing about the elimination of our sovereignty. Surprised this doesn't get mentioned more. If Canada wanted to, we could easily scale military spending by investing it in homegrown projects instead of spending it at the altar of the mililtary industrial complex. It's easy for America to complain about other countries not spending as much when it's the one that owns the market we all shop at.
- multiplegeorges 2y ago
  > If Canada wanted to, we could easily scale military spending by investing it in homegrown projects instead of spending it at the altar of the mililtary industrial complex. We're about to find out if we want to. This is a major point in Carney's defence plan.
  - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
    We shall see. Big words, but this country has a history of doubling down on mediocrity and parochial interests. I personally would love to contribute in whatever way I could to homegrown manufacturing, tech, and maybe even defence sector, and am willing to put in the hours and even compensation cut to make things happen in this country. I just hope there's investors out there willing to make things happen, and that the gov't doesn't just do its usual thing of protecting a few existing corporate buddies.
  - hylaride 2y ago
    As a Canadian, I have mixed feeling about this. You can develop and build domestic defence industries, but it only becomes economical if you can develop an export market. Even then, the inputs for parts/resources are still global. Sweden has one heck of a domestic defence industry, but it's tailor made for its requirements and expensive. The SAAB Gripen is one of the best planes in the world for what it was designed to do: operate dispersed off of regional roads when your main infrastructure is destroyed or unavailable. But its flyway cost is the same as an F-35 because hundreds have been built instead of thousands. And the Gripen's engine is still from General Electric. The NLAW anti-tank weapon is a good example of export success. It was developed jointly with the British and has had a lot of exports and proven success in Ukraine. On top of that, Canada's defence civil service is terrible at procurement. Even when we buy foreign, we manage to drive up the costs to the point where its rediculously price just to shove in some domestic "advantage", rather than focusing that money on stuff we are really good at (we tend to kick ass at sonar and anti-sub tech, for example).
    - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
      "On top of that, Canada's defence civil service is terrible at procurement." You could remove "defence" from that and describe almost every large company or gov't in this country, too. We need a moral and civil reform in this country, to really build again like we used to. Civic spirit revival. Look at the joke of the Eglinton LRT, or even more so the Hamilton LRT. Even when we commit to building things, it turns into a swamp of mismanagement and a game of political hot potato. Most embarassing thing about the Eglinton LRT is it sounds like its our (software) profession that is to blame for the latest series of dysfunctions. I'm disgusted.
      - hylaride 2y ago
        Yeah, I was trying to remain in scope to defence-related issues, but I don't disagree with you. I'm holding out some small sliver of hope that all the recent geopolitical events will finally wake us up, but I'm not holding my breath.
    - rjsw 2y ago
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  > If Canada wanted to, we could easily scale military spending by investing it in homegrown projects instead of spending it at the altar of the mililtary industrial complex. That doesn't mean no longer spending money at the altar of the military-industrial complex, it just means having your own altar. Which you're free to do, by the way. You don't have to buy our stuff. Canadians seem to consistently ignore the effects that a strong military-industrial complex has had on the US (and UK, to a lesser extent), particularly on foreign policy. When major components of the TSX Composite need sales, they're going to start lobbying MPs to get them. It's not a coincidence that a lot of the defense industry is based in Northern Virginia. As far as the sovereignty... I don't think you have to worry about that.
  - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
    "You don't have to buy our stuff." You should see what happens when we even make motions like we're not going to. https://skiesmag.com/news/bombardier-concerned-about-u-s-retaliation-from-f-35-purchase-review/ https://skiesmag.com/news/bombardier-concerned-about-u-s-ret... a legit concern because: https://www.ctvnews.ca/montreal/article/us-government-slaps-bombardier-with-massive-tariff/ https://www.ctvnews.ca/montreal/article/us-government-slaps-... and then again https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bombardier-cseries-boeing-1.4343262 https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bombardier-cseries-boeing-1... I seem to recall this being tied to our review the F-35 programme last time, but I can't find a reference to it. In any case, not buying F35s will have huge consequences with the US, if it doesn't happen.
    - lenerdenator 2y ago
      Okay? So you might be selling fewer Bombardier aircraft in the US. There's still Europe, China, and the rest. That's not a mortal threat to Canadian manufacturing and the country's defense sector. Unless, of course, Canada really is as reliant on American dollars as Trump makes the country out to be, which is why he feels he can be a pain in the ass and push tariffs higher.
      - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
speed_spread 2y ago
It was a long range bomber interceptor and it made sense until ICBMs happened. Canadian territory is vast and mostly barren in a way that no other NATO country is, having specialized equipment to defend it can make a big difference.
- the_af 2y ago
  I understand the cancelation, I'm actually asking about the memory-holing of the project (destroying blueprints, not even keeping an airframe for a museum, etc).
- cf100clunk 2y ago
  It was an interceptor. Ideas for conversion to a bomber role were only ideas.
  - speed_spread 2y ago
    My bad, I meant it was an interceptor against bombers.
    - cf100clunk 2y ago
      Re-reading, I now see that you meant interceptor of bombers.
the_af 2y ago
Keep in mind I'm not asking why the project was canceled, but why even the blueprints were destroyed! It seems overkill, or even spite.
cf100clunk 2y ago
> designing and building its own fighter-bomber jets The Avro Arrow was only proposed as an interceptor but neither a fighter nor bomber. There were spitball ideas of future bomber adaptations but they were never part of the project.

preommr 2y ago

> And the vibe of the whole thing is very topical, of course, with the US basically demanding we spend more money subsidizing their defense industry by buying their overpriced armaments from them while at the same time key people in the administration openly musing about the elimination of our sovereignty. Surprised this doesn't get mentioned more. If Canada wanted to, we could easily scale military spending by investing it in homegrown projects instead of spending it at the altar of the mililtary industrial complex. It's easy for America to complain about other countries not spending as much when it's the one that owns the market we all shop at.

multiplegeorges 2y ago
> If Canada wanted to, we could easily scale military spending by investing it in homegrown projects instead of spending it at the altar of the mililtary industrial complex. We're about to find out if we want to. This is a major point in Carney's defence plan.
- cmrdporcupine 2y ago
  We shall see. Big words, but this country has a history of doubling down on mediocrity and parochial interests. I personally would love to contribute in whatever way I could to homegrown manufacturing, tech, and maybe even defence sector, and am willing to put in the hours and even compensation cut to make things happen in this country. I just hope there's investors out there willing to make things happen, and that the gov't doesn't just do its usual thing of protecting a few existing corporate buddies.
- hylaride 2y ago
  As a Canadian, I have mixed feeling about this. You can develop and build domestic defence industries, but it only becomes economical if you can develop an export market. Even then, the inputs for parts/resources are still global. Sweden has one heck of a domestic defence industry, but it's tailor made for its requirements and expensive. The SAAB Gripen is one of the best planes in the world for what it was designed to do: operate dispersed off of regional roads when your main infrastructure is destroyed or unavailable. But its flyway cost is the same as an F-35 because hundreds have been built instead of thousands. And the Gripen's engine is still from General Electric. The NLAW anti-tank weapon is a good example of export success. It was developed jointly with the British and has had a lot of exports and proven success in Ukraine. On top of that, Canada's defence civil service is terrible at procurement. Even when we buy foreign, we manage to drive up the costs to the point where its rediculously price just to shove in some domestic "advantage", rather than focusing that money on stuff we are really good at (we tend to kick ass at sonar and anti-sub tech, for example).
  - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
    "On top of that, Canada's defence civil service is terrible at procurement." You could remove "defence" from that and describe almost every large company or gov't in this country, too. We need a moral and civil reform in this country, to really build again like we used to. Civic spirit revival. Look at the joke of the Eglinton LRT, or even more so the Hamilton LRT. Even when we commit to building things, it turns into a swamp of mismanagement and a game of political hot potato. Most embarassing thing about the Eglinton LRT is it sounds like its our (software) profession that is to blame for the latest series of dysfunctions. I'm disgusted.
    - hylaride 2y ago
      Yeah, I was trying to remain in scope to defence-related issues, but I don't disagree with you. I'm holding out some small sliver of hope that all the recent geopolitical events will finally wake us up, but I'm not holding my breath.
  - rjsw 2y ago
lenerdenator 2y ago
> If Canada wanted to, we could easily scale military spending by investing it in homegrown projects instead of spending it at the altar of the mililtary industrial complex. That doesn't mean no longer spending money at the altar of the military-industrial complex, it just means having your own altar. Which you're free to do, by the way. You don't have to buy our stuff. Canadians seem to consistently ignore the effects that a strong military-industrial complex has had on the US (and UK, to a lesser extent), particularly on foreign policy. When major components of the TSX Composite need sales, they're going to start lobbying MPs to get them. It's not a coincidence that a lot of the defense industry is based in Northern Virginia. As far as the sovereignty... I don't think you have to worry about that.
- cmrdporcupine 2y ago
  "You don't have to buy our stuff." You should see what happens when we even make motions like we're not going to. https://skiesmag.com/news/bombardier-concerned-about-u-s-retaliation-from-f-35-purchase-review/ https://skiesmag.com/news/bombardier-concerned-about-u-s-ret... a legit concern because: https://www.ctvnews.ca/montreal/article/us-government-slaps-bombardier-with-massive-tariff/ https://www.ctvnews.ca/montreal/article/us-government-slaps-... and then again https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bombardier-cseries-boeing-1.4343262 https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bombardier-cseries-boeing-1... I seem to recall this being tied to our review the F-35 programme last time, but I can't find a reference to it. In any case, not buying F35s will have huge consequences with the US, if it doesn't happen.
  - lenerdenator 2y ago
    Okay? So you might be selling fewer Bombardier aircraft in the US. There's still Europe, China, and the rest. That's not a mortal threat to Canadian manufacturing and the country's defense sector. Unless, of course, Canada really is as reliant on American dollars as Trump makes the country out to be, which is why he feels he can be a pain in the ass and push tariffs higher.
    - cmrdporcupine 2y ago

speed_spread 2y ago

It was a long range bomber interceptor and it made sense until ICBMs happened. Canadian territory is vast and mostly barren in a way that no other NATO country is, having specialized equipment to defend it can make a big difference.

the_af 2y ago
I understand the cancelation, I'm actually asking about the memory-holing of the project (destroying blueprints, not even keeping an airframe for a museum, etc).
cf100clunk 2y ago
It was an interceptor. Ideas for conversion to a bomber role were only ideas.
- speed_spread 2y ago
  My bad, I meant it was an interceptor against bombers.
  - cf100clunk 2y ago
    Re-reading, I now see that you meant interceptor of bombers.

the_af 2y ago

Keep in mind I'm not asking why the project was canceled, but why even the blueprints were destroyed! It seems overkill, or even spite.

cf100clunk 2y ago

> designing and building its own fighter-bomber jets The Avro Arrow was only proposed as an interceptor but neither a fighter nor bomber. There were spitball ideas of future bomber adaptations but they were never part of the project.