My father was on the team of engineers who developed the onboard auto-navigation system. I think he was very proud of the F-104. But from what he said, the retros and refits an ever-increasing number of new roles is what stalled and stymied the project's success. I've been up to F-104's sitting on the ground, but I've never seen one fly. I'm sure my father would have liked your video. I sure did. Thanks.
Many of these planes were built for purpose A, but got used for purpose B, C and Z, for which they were less effective. Your dad had an excellent point. Thanks for sharing!
That’s why it had all its problems but I still say it would have done better early on in Vietnam than the f4 against the migs but everyone just brings up the German pilots crashing them
I took my dad to Dayton to see the F-102. He remembered the serial# as he had worked on that plane while stationed in Iceland. Got a picture of him in front of it that is one of my favorites.
Nothing beats the howl of the 104. Even looking at the video from Italia a few weeks back, Typhoon, F-35, 104 and 86 in formation, and the howl from the 104 can easily be heard.
Back when they still had the CF-104's they went to Red Flag, where some of my prowler friends described their attack as "straight in at the speed of heat, right through the furball, leave, turn around and do it again. no turn and burn for them.
To be fair to the F-104, only the cream of the USAF pilots got to fly them. Whereas the Luftwaffe put rookie pilots in them. The results shouldn’t have been surprising. Also the USAF stores them in hangars, whereas the Luftwaffe left them outside in the elements. Europe can be a very wet and cold climate, not good for any cutting edge fighter plane.
@@Jones607 That's a myth no idea where you get that from: the Luftwaffe put rookie pilots in them here is one of several German documentaries. There are no rookies but older experienced pilots. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TdE4hBhXj6k.html And yet they loved it! 25 years of Starfighters in the Bundeswehr In reality the plane was "half baked" and what we would call today a beta version. Simply the central European weather caused problems. It was very different from a bright sunny Texas.
@@sindbad8411 For every documentary that says one thing, there’s another that says the opposite. It was a very select few American pilots who got to fly the F-104. Basically the F-104 was a missile with a man in it. The short stubby wings meant it was a pig to fly at low altitudes. It took the full length of the runway and then some to get airborne. Unlike their American counterparts, the Luftwaffe loses were high.
..in Germany in the early 70s our unit, 4/35 Armor was tasked on numerous occasions to provide security around F-104 crash sites..usually is was our Combat Support Company (CSC) that went out for 24 hrs to keep the curious...like me..away.. Ivwad s serious aircraft model builders and eould have loved to get close to ine...
The F-102 was pulled out of Vietnam in 1968 because it performed so poorly. It was designed to intercept Soviet bombers but in Vietnam it was used to escort EB-66s. Nowhere near as maneuverable as the Mig-21 and it's canopy gave the pilot very limited visibility in combat. It was simply doing a job it had never been designed to do. And there is a reason the F-104 saw widespread use outside of the United States: The U.S. Air Force did not want it. Fuel limited it had short legs. Unable to intercept bombers a great distance away, F-104s were practically doing it over their home base. The short wings gave it limited maneuverability, not really good for a combat aircraft. It's primary tactic was to make one pass at the target, keep on going because a reattack was so hard if it missed, and return to base. Not much help in an air defense environment with fleets of bombers coming at us. Yes, it looks great but great looks don't win air battles.
the F-102 and F-104 both suffered embarrassing losses in Vietnam with no air to air victories that I'm aware of. both were quickly pulled from Vietnam and replaced with better aircraft like the F-4. people try to make these aircraft out to be better than they were. The real aircraft the USAF and other nations should have gotten was the F11F-1.
Nice! I read Al Worden's book Falling to Earth and one chapter was devoted to his time as a test pilot flying the NF-104. His description of high altitude flights in it were pretty amazing. He also wrote that Chuck Yeager definitely screwed up when one of the NF-104's was lost. Everybody was walking on eggshells arouind him though as nobody dared mention it.
I'm surprised that the scandal involving the F-104 purchases was overlooked... It's hard to be objective about the Starfighter without considering that aspect of it's development.
The F-104 Starfighter was in service with the German Air Force until 2004 and it was used in Pakistan until 2014. I watched some of the last F-104s in service with the Air National Guard at Elmendorf Air Force Base in the 1970s when i was just a little bitty kid. It was astonishing to see them scramble at night when the flame from the afterburner stretched out 50 feet behind the in an almost vertical climb.
@@DennisMerwood-xk8wp According to this documentary the "four at a time" crash happened right the grand opening. They mention that Lockheed was not doing well being almost bankrupt and dire need of an order. The Bundeswehr ordered more than 700 but also signed a license to produce further planes in Europe which was the beginning of German and European Aero and later space industries. About third of it crashed and more than 100 plots died. Overall it seems it was a powerfull but delicate piece of equipment overloaded with lots of tasks. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Nc_hgeJBXCg.html with English subs
Interesting he did not drop the other shoe on the F-104… he mentions it being a widow maker in Europe but not the Lockheed bribery scandal associated with it
As said in the video it did have a bad safety record. In Germany there was a morbid joke about it: How do you get a starfighter? You buy a piece of land and sit down and wait.
@@Hartley_Hare yepp, Viel zu viele Abstürze kosteten 116 Piloten das Leben. Insgesamt verlor die Bundeswehr von 916 beschafften Flugzeugen 300 Stück, davon 269 durch Abstürze. Das war ein trauriger Rekord. Helmut Schmitt war damals ein Gegner der Beschaffung: zuviele verschiedene Aufgaben für nur 1 Flugzeug.
As an interceptor, I reckon if the 20mm and the AIM-9s where spent, just throttle it in the invading bomber, ejecting right before it went up the tailpipe of the bomber...missle that lost its pilot. 😊
The F-102 was a flying anachronism as it did nothing well! The F-106 Delta Dart was the most incredible of the American deltas. I had friends who flew the F-15’s at Eglin AFB and they loathed the F-106, the only aircraft that could openly best the F-15.
The F-102's were originally sent to Vietnam to counter IL-28 "Beagle" bombers that had been supplied to the North Vietnamese Air Force. That threat never really materialized, and the F-102 was utilized in a number of other roles for which they were not really designed for, including escorting B-52's, close air support using the FFAR's, and even using their IR seeker system to find and engage targets at night on the Ho Chi Minh trail using either FFAR's, the AIM-4 Genie's, or calling in another aircraft with better striking power against ground targets.
the G performed very well in Dutch service, and with several other countries. The main reason Germany had so many accidents was insufficient training, both of the pilots and maintenance crews. Basically F-86 and F-84 crews were thrown into a Mach 2 capable aircraft without much of any transition training at all. The larger turning radius, higher speeds, and thus shorter reaction times caused many of the accidents, the maintenance problems caused the rest. Dutch, Norwegian, and other countries' Gs had far lower accident rates while flying the same roles and missions.
@@jwenting …. Both the Luftwaffe and RCAF had high crash rates. Not anyone else’s air forces. That being said pressing an F-104 into a ground attack role was a poor choice. Versus procuring a dedicated light attack bomber for that job.
The F-104 gets a bad rap. The Hun actually had a worse safety record, and none of the century series were that great from an accident perspective. Given that they were designed barely 10 years after the first practical jet aircraft, not a surprise. That said, the MiG-21 is still in service and it’s easy to compare to the F-104.
the F-104 got a bad rap for sucking at everything practical. It had a 0:1 kill ratio, couldn't dogfight, sucked at CAS, etc. it was quickly pulled from frontline service in Vietnam after disastrous showing, just like the F-102. The aircraft the US, Japan, Canada, Germany, and many others should have gotten instead of the F-104 was the F11F-1. A superior aircraft that was defeated by Lockheed's political bribery.
@@dukeford8893 Wrong. First, I'm talking about the F11F-1F Super Tiger, not the F-11 Tiger. F-104 combat radius: 420mi F11 combat radius: 640mi F11F-1F combat radius: 770mi The F-104 could only carry 4000lb of payload. F-11 was 3000lb. Not much data on the more powerful F11F-1F. The Super Tiger was superior to the F-104, but bribery from Lockheed kept it from outselling teh F-104.
@@SoloRenegade Pretty hard to make that claim, since they only built two of the things, and it was never fully developed. The F-104G was all ready to go.
@@JackNiles-hc8yz No, it's very easy to make that claim, as they built them, did the calculations for the design, and tested them. You can't just dismiss hard evidence because you 're a F-104 lap dog. Lockheed's corruption regarding the F-104 is famous and well documented.
you forgot to mention the F-104 has a 0:1 kill ratio, and was defeated in air combat in Vietnam and replaced by the F-4 which was a better fighter. F-104 was proliferated globally due to Lockheed's bribery. The F11F-1 was the superior aircraft.
The F-104 was not defeated in combat over Vietnam, it never engaged an enemy fighter there. All the losses were due to ground fire or operational accidents. The one that was shot down over Hainan Island was lost due to navigational failure; the pilot didn't know where he was or even that he was under attack. It was indeed an air superiority fighter rather than an "interceptor", and it did perform ground attack in Vietnam in addition to escort and CAP.
@@gort8203 one was shot down by enemy aircraft. and it was not good at ground attack It was such a good fighter it was pulled from frontline service and replaced with the better F-4 which was a better Interceptor, Fighter, and Bomber overall, while being carrier capable.
There is still a missing F-102 somewhere in the Olympic mountains in Western Washington. Pilot, Captain Lucas was never recovered. Few guys are still looking for it ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-LabklkdfEWM.html
