I understand that it takes enough authentic data to recreate a fighter jet in DCS. Yet I still think it worthwhile to introduce CF-105 into DCS for the following reason: The meaning/merit of DCS. Even though DCS stands for Digital Combat Simulator, however, in my opinion, DCS is also a Digital Combat plane muSeum. In DCS, those legendary fighter jets or propeller aircrafts are not sunk into the past old aviation history, but revive as fully functional alive flying planes. The F-14 Tomcat is not just static cold metal pieces in museums, but can still serve in the DCS army, achieving the dreams of tens of thousands of people to become the Top Gun. For those propeller aircrafts, no matter it is I-16, or Mustang, or Spitfire, or FW-190, etc. Those legendary 80 years old fighters are not just for some demonstration flights in some air show, but really open the door for everyone to become an ACE pilot. Therefore, DCS is a digital museum in which those aviation relics are not relics anymore, but are lively creatures recording and making people experience by themselves the miracle and legendary flybirds and campaigns in human aviation history. Thus, no matter it is a WWII aircraft or a jet aircraft, no matter it is a 1st generation fighter or 3rd generation fighter, the core spirit, delicacy and craftness in the design of the aircrafts are preserved in DCS, and I personally think those points are equally important or could be more important than the aim of depicting and restoring real authentic airplanes for combat. Thus, even though some sub systems of the CF-105 Arrow are not fully developed before its cancellation (for example, its intended weapon system of its radar and the AIM-7B active radar homing air to air missiles were not developed before its cancellation), I think it is still OK to revive CF-105 Arrow without some of the non-critical systems (like the radar and the missiles). Indeed, only for flying this big bird at nearly Mach 2.5 with afterburner on in the nearly 70000 feet dark blue sky with the 1950s' technologies is already astonishing and tempting to many many fly-sim fans. Or I think maybe it is even OK for ED to just develop an official module of CF-105 based on the as available data as possible. This official module may not have full completed functions, yet it enables community members to develop fully functional community CF-105 modules based on it. After all, since it is OK to develop community modules of F-22, Su-57, Rafale, Su-35, etc. in DCS which are far from being authentic, then it should also be OK to provide DCS players with the opportunity to develop community-level CF-105. Or I think ED (or some community players) may just use some reasonable alternatives, like the Hughes' MA-1 fire control system and AIM-4 missiles from F-106 Delta Dart or the AIM-7C/D/E semi-active radar homing missiles (who must have enough correct data to model) from F-4 Phantom II in the early 1960s to replace the AIM-7B to fill in the combat part of the legendary interceptor, and set up and put it in a sub-series of DCS modules called Fantasy DCS module series which is specially for realizing (still based on as authentic as possible data) some of the legendary but cancelled projects, like Mikoyan's Ye-152, Ye-8, BA-349 in WWII, Convair's F2Y, Israel Lavi, Northrop's F-20 Tigershark, A-9 attacker, etc. Those cancelled planes should not be forgotten, they deserve respect and memory. And DCS is such a great platform to recreate them, since it is really meaningful to build a digital memorial museum that lively records, preserves and revives those legendary aircrafts in the long aviation history.
Therefore, I think there are lots of reasons to develop CF-105 in DCS world without violating ED's principle of using authentic data.
