Starfighter I.

This is coolbert:

"the 'missile with a man in it'"

From a comment to the blog by Steve:

"My father spent years trying to keep F104s flying for NATO air forces that had bought them not as they were designed . . . but as more general purpose planes."

The Starfighter, F-104.

"The Lockheed F-104 Starfighter is a single-engine, high-performance, supersonic interceptor aircraft originally developed for the United States Air Force (USAF) by Lockheed."

American warplane originally designed to function as an interceptor. Get very high very fast - - intercept and shoot down an intruder aircraft! An INTERCEPTOR!!

And in this regard the aircraft functioning in an admirable fashion, almost without peer.

In the hands of American pilots the plane flown relatively without incident, NOT causing alarm?

In  foreign hands, as sold to a number of nations that were members of NATO in particular, the toll of crashed aircraft seen as acute, concerns raised at a very high level as to the airworthiness and combat capability of the Starfighter.

Especially among the German Luftwaffe, the toll of crashed downed planes and dead pilots somewhat beyond the normal, even way beyond the normal? And for Canada too?

"During the 1960s, the 'Starfighter crisis' developed into a political issue, as many Lockheed F-104 Starfighters crashed after being modified to serve for Luftwaffe purposes – specifically for terrain, weather, and ground mechanic support issues. In Luftwaffe service, 292 of 916 Starfighters crashed, claiming the lives of 115 pilots and leading to cries that the Starfighter was fundamentally unsafe . . ."

"The Americans blamed the high loss rate of the Luftwaffe F-104s on the extreme low-level and aggressive flying of German pilots rather than any faults in the aircraft . . . some specifics in the training (a lack of mountain and foggy-weather training), combined with handling capabilities (sharp start high G turns) of the aircraft that could cause accidents."

"the F-104 never lived down its reputation as a widow-maker and was replaced much earlier by the Luftwaffe than other national air forces."

However, among other NATO operators of the F-104, the plane seeming to function almost without problem. Norway, Italy, Spain, all flying the Starfighter and NOT finding anything out of the ordinary! This all a riddle?

"the Luftwaffe lost about 30% of aircraft in accidents over its operating career, and Canada lost over 50% of its F-104s. The Spanish Air Force, however, lost none."

That Luftwaffe Starfighter not confined to the INTERCEPTOR mission. Was seen as a multi-role-combat-aircraft [MRCA], deployed in a manner for WHICH IT WAS NOT DESIGNED!

Strapping on fuel tanks, missiles, bombs, and adding electronic black boxes to the plane - - and flying low-level high-speed combat missions nape of the earth resulted in a warplane NOT suited for MRCA missions as desired by Luftwaffe commanders.

"Erich Hartmann, who had commanded one of Germany's first jet fighter-equipped squadrons and was a former World War II fighter ace [actually the ace of all aces and will always will be, unless the nature of modern warfare takes a drastic and unanticipated turn], had deemed the F-104 to be an unsafe aircraft with poor handling characteristics for aerial combat and had judged the fighter unfit for Luftwaffe use, even before its introduction"

And when Erich Hartmann speaks, everyone should listen?

As envisaged by the Lockheed design crew the Starfighter was a formidable opponent - - capable of top performance and able to successfully engage and defeat enemy intruder aircraft. Performing the role of interceptor the F-104 was "without peer" but as a MRCA the Starfighter was lacking? And this too is understood?



coolbert.