testtest

The Wonderfully Horrible Lockheed F-104 Starfighter

Awesome article Mike! We had a squadron of 101s at CFB Cold Lake while I was stationed there in the early 80s. You knew they were on approach because you could hear that telltale wail coming for miles...and then the black exhaust when they were visible. I turned many of them around on my tour there. LOX top ups and drag chute changes, and cockpit safety checks was my job. Loved those days!
 
The Grumman F-11F-1F (also known as the F11F-2 Super Tiger) Tiger (an enhanced version of the F11-1 Tiger) was in competition with the F-104 for a standard fighter for NATO and Japan but wasn't selected due to a multi-nation bribery scandal.

In many ways the Super Tiger was a more versatile and safer aircraft, than the F-104.

1717261442969.png




1717262866831.png






1717262655270.png



The Ginter/Meyer book on the Super Tiger is excellent, and tells the whole story.

1717261660703.png


 
Last edited:
Don't forget that the 104s bad reputation came from NATO allies repurposing the Interceptor to a ground attack platform, a job it was never designed to do. Our Italian and German brethren learned the hard way, well maybe.

Also remember the 104 was only a second or third generation jet aircraft at a time when a new type-model-series aircraft only got five or ten years use before obsolescence and replacement.

But, it is, what it is......
 
The Grumman F-11F-1F (also known as the F11F-2 Super Tiger) Tiger (an enhanced version of the F11-1 Tiger) was in competition with the F-104 for a standard fighter for NATO and Japan but wasn't selected due to a multi-nation bribery scandal.

In many ways the Super Tiger was a more versatile and safer aircraft, than the F-104.

View attachment 59292



View attachment 59298





View attachment 59297


The Ginter/Meyer book on the Super Tiger is excellent, and tells the whole story.

View attachment 59293


It and the F8U-3 Super Crusader
 
While it might have been better than the F-104 as an interceptor, Super Crusader was only in competition with the XF4H-1 Phantom II as a US Naval fleet defense interceptor, and wasn't offered to any allied country.

And the F-4 Phantom II was a much better multi-role platform.
 
While it might have been better than the F-104 as an interceptor, Super Crusader was only in competition with the XF4H-1 Phantom II as a US Naval fleet defense interceptor, and wasn't offered to any allied country.

And the F-4 Phantom II was a much better multi-role platform.

They both started out, well the F8U-3 was a straight up point or area defense interceptor, McDonnell had a head start on the Phantom and the ability to carry air to ground ordnance was designed into it before it became the Phantom.

And a canceled aircraft can't be offered to other countries because it never went into production........

The SC beat the Phantom in every category, weight, range, and speed. Even the Navy admitted it was the best aircraft they ever canceled.

And the ol' Spook (F-4 variants) was a mediocre fighter bomber at best, just like it's ultimate replacement was (the Hornet on the Marine side of the house), unlike the Tomcat on the Navy side. It was an air to air bird exclusively until the early 90s, and then it excelled as a multi-role aircraft
 
They both started out, well the F8U-3 was a straight up point or area defense interceptor, McDonnell had a head start on the Phantom and the ability to carry air to ground ordnance was designed into it before it became the Phantom.

And a canceled aircraft can't be offered to other countries because it never went into production........

The SC beat the Phantom in every category, weight, range, and speed. Even the Navy admitted it was the best aircraft they ever canceled.

And the ol' Spook (F-4 variants) was a mediocre fighter bomber at best, just like it's ultimate replacement was (the Hornet on the Marine side of the house), unlike the Tomcat on the Navy side. It was an air to air bird exclusively until the early 90s, and then it excelled as a multi-role aircraft
The F-4 was doing A2G work in VN, as well with another notable operator before the 90's.
 
Last edited:
The moral of this story is the F-104 really wasn't wonderful due to it's performance issues, and it was horrible due to it's safety record.

Unfortunately, allied nations took the burnt of F-104s problems because of Lockheed's shady business practices, while there were better options.

It looked cool but the USAF really didn't use it much because there were far superior other aircraft in the inventory.
 
Well, I don't claim to know even a little bit about airplanes, but I would like to know just how much faster does this plane go with that long spear in front punching a hole in the air ... than if it didn't have the spear in front???? LOL!
 
Back in the mid-50s, College friends and I were heading to Rocky Point, Mexico (when it was not much more than a rocky point). Between Gila Bend and the border was an USAF bombing range. As we passed, 104s were making bombing runs. We stopped and watched with binos. Accuracy was not impressive, they seemed hard to control at the slow speeds needed, based on plane movement. Couple of years later I was in the Nam watching A-4s and F-4s dish it out. Liked them better.
 
Back
Top