Matt308
Glock Perfection
Oh and here is your sound, Airframes. Pretty cool indeed.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6K4iSxET6g
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6K4iSxET6g
F-104 Starfighter.....
- Thread starter Lucky13
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Thread starter
- #82
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
One of those birds that was as dangerous to the pilot that flew them as to the enemy....
Airframes
Benevolens Magister
Thanks Matt! Brought back memories, methinks the F104 might be on my 'build list' now!
Messy1
Master Sergeant
That was a cool video.
Butters
Senior Airman
A Ryan X-13 Vertijet engineer/test-pilot thought that the '104 could be made into the world's first Mach II attack helicopter. Here's what it might have looked like...
New Page 0
Snake sez: Let's just slowly back away, tiger...
JL
New Page 0
Snake sez: Let's just slowly back away, tiger...
JL
pbfoot
1st Lieutenant
Unfortunately the 104 garnered a reputation over time as a "killer" a/c and it is time this unfair reputation was put squarely in perspective
it was extremely honest aircraft as long as it was flown in the boundaries of its flight envelope and was treated with respect . It was utterly dependable When teh 104 entered service in the early 60's the technology afforded by the aircraft was quantum leap over over other the earlier over the earlier vintage jet a/c then in service and it took some time for the operators and maintainers to come ti grips with this new technology it made on pilot and technician alike and the The canadian accident rate is comparable to that of to other NATO member' s who operated the 104 .Although 113 of the 238 CF 104's were destroyed to In accidents during Canadian service it must remembered be remembered that this record represents 25 years continuous service In a very demanding enviroment Thirty- seven Canadian pilots forfeited their lives on CF104 operations needless to say, this record says a great deal for the escape system of the aircraft and there were a great many succesful ejections even in marginal conditions The biggest accident cause factor was the role to which the aircraft was exposed the high speed low-level arena where opportunities to err are legion Since the jet was only equipped with one engine, If you lost that engine at low altitude! you were In a world of hurt Some years ago I reviewed all the 104 accidents that had occurred in the NATO consortium. and at is truly amazing how in few were attributable to unexpected mechanical failures, other than a number in its early service service days when various teething troubles were being ironed out and recurring catastrophic engine failures due to bird strikes at low level . It wasn't a devious airplane it just demanded respect and punishment for a major transgression was often swift and final .By and large ,104's did not kill pilots . Pilots killed pilots and 104's
The article closed with thanks for the memories Kelly Johnson
also the 104s in Canadian service had about 6000 hours on each airframe
By Maj Dave Bashow with 3500hrs of fighter time including 2500 in the 104
Thanks for the input gentlemen. Yes, I was asking why the F-104s needed to cross each other at the high point of the loop. To me it would add more danger to the manoeuvre - high speed jets running the risk of hitting each other in a tense combat situation.
I've consumed a bottle of New Zealand red so the diagram is lousy, but prior to your answers I thought it would have been simpler to remain parallel to each other. Of course at some point each aircraft has to rotate 180 degrees prior to the downward leg of the attack...
Hi Graeme,
>To me it would add more danger to the manoeuvre - high speed jets running the risk of hitting each other in a tense combat situation.
Not necessarily ... since you can use the third dimension to avoid a collision, other considerations are more important.
Shaw's "Fighter Combat" lists the alternative turn you described as "in-place turn", and the main drawback is that the section leader (on the right in your example) loses sight of his wingman for much of the manoeuvre, which means that he can't watch the tail of his wingman at that instance.
The "tac turn" with both fighters crossing over has the advantage of minimizing the time during which each one is without visual cover, which makes it safer to perform when bogeys are around.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
>To me it would add more danger to the manoeuvre - high speed jets running the risk of hitting each other in a tense combat situation.
Not necessarily ... since you can use the third dimension to avoid a collision, other considerations are more important.
Shaw's "Fighter Combat" lists the alternative turn you described as "in-place turn", and the main drawback is that the section leader (on the right in your example) loses sight of his wingman for much of the manoeuvre, which means that he can't watch the tail of his wingman at that instance.
The "tac turn" with both fighters crossing over has the advantage of minimizing the time during which each one is without visual cover, which makes it safer to perform when bogeys are around.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Also consider folks that these guys trained to do these maneuvers so it wasn't like they were going out there cold an attempting this.
Matt308
Glock Perfection
You have to think about it in 3-dimensions.
With two blue force F-104s in leader-wingman formation, committing to a rolling loop against 5 red force airplanes will necessarily force their paths to cross in a 2-dimension perspective, but not in 3-dimensions. They simply roll around a common longitudinal axis. However, from a drawing perspective they appear to cross paths. Just hold out your two hands a simulate a rolling loop, where the wingman follows the flight leader. At the top of the loop they appear to cross in 2-D.
My crude MSPaint drawing...
With two blue force F-104s in leader-wingman formation, committing to a rolling loop against 5 red force airplanes will necessarily force their paths to cross in a 2-dimension perspective, but not in 3-dimensions. They simply roll around a common longitudinal axis. However, from a drawing perspective they appear to cross paths. Just hold out your two hands a simulate a rolling loop, where the wingman follows the flight leader. At the top of the loop they appear to cross in 2-D.
My crude MSPaint drawing...
Perfect! That's what I was TRYING to illustrate Matt.
Ahhh...so I've misinterpreted the drawing, believing that at the indicated arrow the flight paths physically crossed each other...
mkloby
Senior Master Sergeant
A crossover is not a part of tac turns.
Junkers88A1
Staff Sergeant
shipped the last over with C-130 a few years ago 
Junkers88A1
Staff Sergeant
the now three F-104`s flying private in USA are all former norwegian starfighters..swoops been made.. the last was deivered a few years ago..here i am in the cockpit before we packed it into the C-130 and shipped it over ..i have planty of pics from the loading into the C-130 but all on paper..if any interest i can find some and scan
Attachments
pbfoot
1st Lieutenant
are they not CF104's that were originally Canadian
Junkers88A1
Staff Sergeant
that is correct..the only F-104`s we have are americanbuildt two seaters..like the first picture i posted--the single seaters are all Cf`s..my mistake..its 3.20am so off to bed with a not so well working brain..hehe
Matt308
Glock Perfection
Ahhh...so I've misinterpreted the drawing, believing that at the indicated arrow the flight paths physically crossed each other...
What is left out of the cartoon is the rather large loop diameter of the F-104. Assuming that the two F-104s succeed in initiating the attack at the beginning of the rolling-loop, the red airplanes will likely immediately break. As the F-104s with their poor loop performance complete their maneuver they will likely NOT end up in a zero deflection rear engagement. I'm no F-104 pilot by any stretch, but imagine the F-104 to fight similarly as the P-38. Energy management is its forte'. You wouldn't want to fight in a Luftberry with a Starfighter. But you would definitely want to fight in slashing attacks. Phonebooth tactics are sure killers to a Starfighter pilot. But cloverleafs and altitude preserve the F-104s advantage.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Actually there are 10 F-104s regestered in the US. I believe "one or two" of these have been flying around for a number of years.
I worked on this one "a little."
Here's a good site showing civilian 104s
Civil Starfighters
I worked on this one "a little."
Here's a good site showing civilian 104s
Civil Starfighters
Matt308
Glock Perfection
My God... is there an ugly F-104?? Me thinks not.
Butters
Senior Airman
Is there are such a thing as an ugly F-104?
Well...We certainly tried
Scramble Messageboard • View topic - 104's
JL
Well...We certainly tried
Scramble Messageboard • View topic - 104's
JL
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
