Avro Arrow Case Study
Avro Arrow
The Avro Arrow should have been canceled. The Diefenbaker Government was completely correct about terminating the Arrow project because it caused cutbacks in other products, being threatened from the ballistic missile and it costing too much.
The Avro arrow affected a lot more than we all thought. The aircraft caused cutbacks in other products so that they could afford to make the Avro arrow. In 1958, the conservative government terminated Canadian fire control and ships such as the Restigouche. The ships were important; they were used to defend against missiles that were launched from submarines. The Minster of defense George Pearkes states that “If we continued with the CF-105...it might have meant that we would have had to stop …show more content…
The Avro arrow costs to produce were slowly adding up, increasing the costs of the aircraft. The costs for the project then began to skyrocket and there was nothing else to do but cancel the project. The high prices then made it hard for people and countries to buy it. The liberal government then considered canceling it, “Costs for the project were beginning to skyrocket” (Liberal Government, 127). This shows that Canada’s prices were too high for the purchase of the Avro Arrow. Along with the expensive cost, the government would also spent additional money just to produce it and would have no one investing in it. The rising cost of the Avro arrow led to the suggestion of selling the Avro arrow to other nations, but then this plan failed as well. This example helped contribute to the cancellation of the Avro arrow.
In conclusion, the Avro Arrow should have been terminated. Due to its cut back in other products, costing of production and the replacement agreement with the two North American Nations. The cancellation of the Arrow was a mix of politics, timing, and bad luck. The Diefenbaker Government made the right decision on terminating the Avro arrow project because it saved Canadians
The Avro Arrow should have been canceled. The Diefenbaker Government was completely correct about terminating the Arrow project because it caused cutbacks in other products, being threatened from the ballistic missile and it costing too much.
The Avro arrow affected a lot more than we all thought. The aircraft caused cutbacks in other products so that they could afford to make the Avro arrow. In 1958, the conservative government terminated Canadian fire control and ships such as the Restigouche. The ships were important; they were used to defend against missiles that were launched from submarines. The Minster of defense George Pearkes states that “If we continued with the CF-105...it might have meant that we would have had to stop …show more content…
The Avro arrow costs to produce were slowly adding up, increasing the costs of the aircraft. The costs for the project then began to skyrocket and there was nothing else to do but cancel the project. The high prices then made it hard for people and countries to buy it. The liberal government then considered canceling it, “Costs for the project were beginning to skyrocket” (Liberal Government, 127). This shows that Canada’s prices were too high for the purchase of the Avro Arrow. Along with the expensive cost, the government would also spent additional money just to produce it and would have no one investing in it. The rising cost of the Avro arrow led to the suggestion of selling the Avro arrow to other nations, but then this plan failed as well. This example helped contribute to the cancellation of the Avro arrow.
In conclusion, the Avro Arrow should have been terminated. Due to its cut back in other products, costing of production and the replacement agreement with the two North American Nations. The cancellation of the Arrow was a mix of politics, timing, and bad luck. The Diefenbaker Government made the right decision on terminating the Avro arrow project because it saved Canadians