First F-104 delivered today

When I was stationed in Gila Bend, AZ we supported 4 ranges that were used for strafing and bombing practice. The Germans were training in the 104 and they used a pop-up strafing technique. They would scream along the desert floor then pop up and do their strafing run. While sitting in the desert working on a telephone cable they would kind of sneak up on you and scare the dickens out of you.
 
One of my favorite in the history of flight. Just to see one you wonder how they even got off the ground with those stubby little razor thin wings but brute force wins the day.
 
I never understood why you'd build an aircraft with almost no wings. When you consider that it was supposed to be fighter, it makes even less sense.
 
Cooter said:
I never understood why you'd build an aircraft with almost no wings. When you consider that it was supposed to be fighter, it makes even less sense.
Click to expand...

It wasn't intended as a dogfighter. It was built to climb to altitude as fast as possible, accelerate into range and fire a missile to shoot down a bomber - pure interceptor.
 
When I was stationed at Zweibrucken Air Base in W. Germany (at the time) in the 70s German F-104s would fly attack runs on the base hauling ass. Army had some type of mobile anti-aircraft gun w/ a radar dish on the side and a gunner inside it. That thing locked on that F-104 as it approached and as it flew overhead, guns locked on it. It was an exercise which we had ALL the time during the Cold War years. We also had 5 F-4Ds on alert w/ tactical nucs, B61s maybe.
 
ateamer said:
It wasn't intended as a dogfighter. It was built to climb to altitude as fast as possible, accelerate into range and fire a missile to shoot down a bomber - pure interceptor.
Click to expand...
According to the link above, it couldn't carry radar missiles and wasn't primarily intended to be an interceptor. I don't know the history, but the wing design would definitely limit the roles in which it would be effective. Just by appearances, dogfighting should be ruled out. I've had similar questions about the T-38 design.
 
ateamer said:
It wasn't intended as a dogfighter. It was built to climb to altitude as fast as possible, accelerate into range and fire a missile to shoot down a bomber - pure interceptor.
Click to expand...

The F-102 was designed from outset to be a bomber interceptor. The F-104 was designed to be a dogfighter. It didn't didn't do either role very well.
 
I love the story about Chuck Yeager and the NF-104 he took to ~102,000ft and flat spinned it when it re-entered the atmosphere. Ended up punching out over the desert.
 
Velocity173 said:
The F-102 was designed from outset to be a bomber interceptor. The F-104 was designed to be a dogfighter. It didn't didn't do either role very well.
Click to expand...

I think the F-102 was a pure interceptor, although like most Air Force jets they put them on other missions. F-106 was an improvement of the F-102 and used entirely for the air defense mission of our country, so they had to find a use for the F-102s. They actually sent some to Vietnam but I don't believe they were over there very long, and the F-104 spent some time in Vietnam too. But the F-104s mission was purely intended as an interceptor. Doesn't mean the Air Force trued them on other missions either.The German AF and Italian AF were big operators of the F-104.
 
Last edited:
mscard88 said:
I think the F-102 was a pure interceptor, although like most Air Force jets they put them on other missions. F-106 was an improvement of the F-102 and used entirely for the air defense mission of our country, so they had to find a use for the F-102s. They actually sent some to Vietnam but I don't believe they were over there very long, and the F-104 spent some time in Vietnam too. The German AF and Italian AF were big operators of the F-104.
Click to expand...

Yes and because of what was learned the area rule "coke bottle" fuse on the F-102, the Raptor will do 300 kts on only 260 HP. :D
 
Bill Jennings said:
I love the story about Chuck Yeager and the NF-104 he took to ~102,000ft and flat spinned it when it re-entered the atmosphere. Ended up punching out over the desert.
Click to expand...

"The Right Stuff" movie (not sure about the book) had that scene in it. That other pilot is none other than Levon Helm, drummer/singer of The Band.

 
Cooter said:
I never understood why you'd build an aircraft with almost no wings. When you consider that it was supposed to be fighter, it makes even less sense.
Click to expand...
Ateamer is correct.
It wasn't designed to be a fighter, it was designed to be an Interceptor. Big difference in the mission.
All it was originally intended to do was get off the ground in under 5 minutes, get to altitude and launch missiles at approaching Russian bomber.

One of the huge disappointments of my Air Force career was never getting a chance to fly the Starfighter. It wasn't for lack of trying. They had already been pulled out of service by the time I got my wings.
 
Shepherd said:
Ateamer is correct.
It wasn't designed to be a fighter, it was designed to be an Interceptor. Big difference in the mission.
All it was originally intended to do was get off the ground in under 5 minutes, get to altitude and launch missiles at approaching Russian bomber.

One of the huge disappointments of my Air Force career was never getting a chance to fly the Starfighter. It wasn't for lack of trying. They had already been pulled out of service by the time I got my wings.
Click to expand...
For that, it makes sense. I was going by the article linked. Now, I see that it was linked to the DailyKos.
 
Bill Jennings said:
I love the story about Chuck Yeager and the NF-104 he took to ~102,000ft and flat spinned it when it re-entered the atmosphere. Ended up punching out over the desert.
Click to expand...

Did I read correctly that the F-104 had a "bottom out" ejection seat?? o_O
 
EppyGA said:
When I was stationed in Gila Bend, AZ we supported 4 ranges that were used for strafing and bombing practice. The Germans were training in the 104 and they used a pop-up strafing technique. They would scream along the desert floor then pop up and do their strafing run. While sitting in the desert working on a telephone cable they would kind of sneak up on you and scare the dickens out of you.
Click to expand...

Reading about the tendency for the horizontal stabilizer to rapidly lose effect and cause a stall or uncontrollable pitching at high AoA, this tactic seems extremely dangerous at low altitude...
 
PaulMKE said:
Reading about the tendency for the horizontal stabilizer to rapidly lose effect and cause a stall or uncontrollable pitching at high AoA, this tactic seems extremely dangerous at low altitude...
Click to expand...

Maybe it needed one of Maui Wowie's AOAs? :dunno:
 
Cooter said:
For that, it makes sense. I was going by the article linked. Now, I see that it was linked to the DailyKos.
Click to expand...

Well, everything I've read says Kelly designed to be a fair weather air superiority fighter. The design was born from the results in the Korean War. The pilots wanted a MIG killer that was simple, light, fast and manuverable.

It wasn't designed with any great range, fire power or a radar system to be a bomber interceptor. It took later modifications to fulfill that role.

https://fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airdef/f-104.htm
 
In the years after the introduction into the west german airforce an 'Ace' was any pilot who had to turn in more than 2 'lost property' reports with a F104 on it.

Out of 920 delivered, the german air-force and navy had 350 hull losses and 115 pilot casualties (+ some civilians on the ground). All in peacetime. Lots of reasons for the dismal record and a good illustration that corruption is not a victimless crime.
 
Last edited:
From IMDB:

Parachute stuntman Joseph Leonard Svec was killed in an accident while filming the scene where Chuck Yeager loses control of an experimental aircraft and bails out. Svec's helmet filled with smoke and he lost consciousness. He never pulled his ripcord and died on impact. During the real-life bailout this scene represented, Yeager collided with his ejection seat, breaking open the face-shield of his helmet. Molten explosive materials struck Yeager in the face, burning him severely and likewise filling his helmet with smoke.
 
Maker of the F104, Lockheed, has a history of ripping off the taxpayer not only in the USA but Germany as well. They had/have effective lobbyist and used bribes to caused aircraft like the C5(Boeing should have got that contract), C130(Newt Gingrich kept it in production way too long), the F104's mission was obsolete by the time it went into production(did not keep Germany from buying them - probably bribes, the 1011 airliner that cost the UK tax payer and the beat goes on. No need the great cost overruns on the F35 is there.
 
Another little known fact about one of my favorite movies...

The bartender that chews out Gordon Cooper, calling him a "rookie" and a "pud-knocker", is Florence Lowe "Pancho" Barnes, and she is well within her rights to put Cooper in his place. Barnes earned her pilot's license in 1928. She flew solo, she crashed a plane, she held the women's world speed record (taking it from Amelia Earhart), and she worked as a stunt pilot in several Hollywood productions, all before any of the Mercury Seven astronauts reached the tender age of 10 years old. As a pioneering aviatrix, she was truly made of "the right stuff".
 
PaulMKE said:
Did I read correctly that the F-104 had a "bottom out" ejection seat?? o_O
Click to expand...
Only the earliest block of the aircraft had the downward ejection seat.

Wikipedia credits the downward firing ejection seat with 21 fatalities. I was looking for a count of how many were produced with downward firing seats and later fitted with upward firing seats.
 
Clark1961 said:
Only the earliest block of the aircraft had the downward ejection seat.

Wikipedia credits the downward firing ejection seat with 21 fatalities. I was looking for a count of how many were produced with downward firing seats and later fitted with upward firing seats.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected. Didn't know that.
 
mscard88 said:
I stand corrected. Didn't know that.
Click to expand...
No correction. The aircraft certainly did have a downward firing ejection seat during development and initial production. I wonder if they issued single shot pistols along with the aircraft before the seat was changed.
 
Clark1961 said:
No correction. The aircraft certainly did have a downward firing ejection seat during development and initial production. I wonder if they issued single shot pistols along with the aircraft before the seat was changed.
Click to expand...

I had basically told another poster it didn't in a thread back a bit.
 
jimwomble said:
the F104's mission was obsolete by the time it went into production(did not keep Germany from buying them - probably bribes, the
Click to expand...

Mr Strauss, the defense minister at the time of the decision, was born as the son of a smalltown butcher and worked in government service all his life. For some reason, in later years he could afford to own a Citation and died a wealthy man. As someone who still owns some real estate in his little kingdom, I will not accuse him of corruption as it was never proven in a court of law ;) .

I always liked this quote from his NYT obit:

Above all, he stood out in the colorless world of present-day German politics as a fighter who played politics with the same passion he devoted to hunting, flying and drinking.


198px-Franz_Josef_Strau%C3%9F_1982.jpg




As a cautionary tale for modern day US politics, his undoing on the federal level was when he had journalists who dared to call him on some lies arrested for treason o_O .
 
Timbeck2 said:
Another little known fact about one of my favorite movies...

The bartender that chews out Gordon Cooper, calling him a "rookie" and a "pud-knocker", is Florence Lowe "Pancho" Barnes, and she is well within her rights to put Cooper in his place. Barnes earned her pilot's license in 1928. She flew solo, she crashed a plane, she held the women's world speed record (taking it from Amelia Earhart), and she worked as a stunt pilot in several Hollywood productions, all before any of the Mercury Seven astronauts reached the tender age of 10 years old. As a pioneering aviatrix, she was truly made of "the right stuff".
Click to expand...

It's sad how she got railroaded by the AF. A time when political correctness was taking hold and establishments like hers were becoming off limits. Died a lonely death in a trailer in the middle of nowhere. I remember in Yeager's book he expressed disappointment in how all that went down.

The Legend of Pancho Barnes and the Happy Bottom Riding Club is an excellent DVD if you get around to watching it.
 
Velocity173 said:
Well, everything I've read says Kelly designed to be a fair weather air superiority fighter. The design was born from the results in the Korean War. The pilots wanted a MIG killer that was simple, light, fast and manuverable.

It wasn't designed with any great range, fire power or a radar system to be a bomber interceptor. It took later modifications to fulfill that role.

https://fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airdef/f-104.htm
Click to expand...
No radar missile capability and wings too small to carry much more than the aircraft itself. At least it got the go-fast part right.:)
if I got into a dogfight I would love to look out and see that as the bandit! One hard turn should be out about all it takes.

I've never really read much about it but it is certainly an interesting airplane. I would love to get a chance to fly one.
 
The folks who flew the F-104 and flew it well really liked it. Used properly, it fought in the vertical and could out-climb and out accelerate anything up to the F-15, and could hang with the F-15. It was figuratively the sharpest knife in the drawer - people who know how to use a sharp knife really appreciate it, but those who don't end up hurting themselves. There was an ex-F104 guy named Walt Bjorneby who posted on Rec.Aviation.Military back in the day. His F-104 stories were amazing - supercruise at FL 73, easy intercepts of U-2's at 68k', simple maintenance, excellent acceleration and climb, boom and zoom tactics, etc. Here are a couple of links to his write-up's:

http://www.916-starfighter.de/Zipping at FL 730.htm

Some comments in this thread: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.aviation.military/TCtp4LVIbTo

And here's another thread that he joined pretty early: http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?20750-Flying-the-F-104&highlight=walt
 
jimwomble said:
Maker of the F104, Lockheed, has a history of ripping off the taxpayer not only in the USA but Germany as well. They had/have effective lobbyist and used bribes to caused aircraft like the C5(Boeing should have got that contract), C130(Newt Gingrich kept it in production way too long), the F104's mission was obsolete by the time it went into production(did not keep Germany from buying them - probably bribes, the 1011 airliner that cost the UK tax payer and the beat goes on. No need the great cost overruns on the F35 is there.
Click to expand...

So where did you get that from?
 
Almost forgot this story. On the base we had a nice long runway in case an emergency arose and they could make it to the runway from whatever range was being used that day. One day one the Germans had a light comes on and they headed for what they thought was the base. They ended landing at the municipal airport in town and burned the tires off the 104 getting it stopped. Base commander came down to take a look and told them to put new tires on it and it got rolled out to the highway for take off back to Luke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top