What a beautiful airplane. I lived on a base with 104s on the field. I loved that airplane and of course built a plastic model of one. The closest I got to one was learning to fly in a Northrop T-38 to become a USAF pilot. Got a heavy, but will always remember the 38.
When I was a kid in the 1960s, we lived less than a mile from Canadair in Montreal, where CF104s were built. I'll never forget the sound as they screamed over our house. Definitely the most beautiful aircraft ever built!
@@Dronescapes Compare it's loss rate to that of the MiG-21, F-100 or Mirage 3/5. You'll struggle to find an early supersonic fighter that didn't have a terrible loss rate.
@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 I know, but it's also very much loved for some reason, perhaps because it is a very dangerous beast, or because it looks so beautifully raw. The name helps as well. This said, there is an interesting study on the specific "German" case that concludes: "Approximately 15-20% of the German F-104 accidents can be called ‘‘the price of doing business’’ with such an aircraft in the European environment. This includes the operation of a very demanding single-seat, single-engine turbojet fighter close to the ground-and in a bird-rich environment. Still, both German and U.S. F-104s had significantly elevated accident rates in comparison to other co-era types. The number of technical causations was grossly overrepresented in German F-104 accidents, while the number of human factor causations was underrepresented. Moreover, the engine was found to be a weak part in the design, which holds a negative record in the USAF even to this date. Hence, it can be concluded that the F-104 did crash for different reasons from those for other military aircraft, and it also crashed for other human factor reasons. Overall, the Starfighter was more accident-prone than its co-era types."
@@Dronescapes I'll see if I saved my notes from comparing F-104 service in Canadian, Italian, American, Germany and Japanese service against a number of contemporaries, but (after controlling for American losses over Vietnam, as well as trying to account for other forces combat losses) it didn't seem nearly as dramatic as is commonly made out. I'm sure several nation's media hyping them as particularly dangerous plays no role in their current reputation.
@dronescapes the history that you surface is simply beautiful. In today's f35 reality, people seem to have forgotten how exciting air development was. These things were developed in a near wild west mentality. The bravery and experience, lol if they lived, was pure magnificence. Thank you again for bringing history to the present. Good job
In The Netherlands we used to call them flying soldering irons. They made a very specific sound, I remember being a young boy on holiday in "De Veluwe" (centrally located woodlands) when you could hear them coming from far doing low passes. Very impressive.
The P38 was amazing but the the de Havilland mosquito, made of more than 74000 screws, it had a wooden airframe, it was capable of going over German territory and usually for reconnaissance, and outran every aircraft that the Germans had, RAF was quite pleased with her, she would travel more than 400 miles per hour and do reconnaissance photos over Germany, and she was made with balsa wood, that's something that everyone in England can make in their house, and she was armed with four 20 mm cannons, and Browning machine guns, devastating Firepower she had the range, and she also participated greatly in the rescue French Resistance Fighters that were about to be executed at a military installation that was surrounded by four walls and the Havoline mosquitoes flew in and knocked down that wall and were able to affect the rescue of the resistance God bless the resistance, the French Resistance it's better that they didn't fight the Germans because they had the Germans inside the country and we can get intelligence from them, and rescue Allied Pilots that had the parachute into France, and they were more effective that way a few of them are still around mostly the women, and the office of special services was the United States CIA at the time, I don't compare them to the CIA because it was different times, but the French Resistance gave us our eyes into the German Army and ability to rescue Pilots, and also tell us critical information about German positions there are where the stockpiles were they gave great information which made it easy to defeat the Germans in France win The Invasion came
Best video I've seen on UA-cam about this fantastic aircraft. My only quibble is calling it an "interceptor", which is misleading for people who draw incorrect conclusions from that term. The jet was designed as a clear air day fighter intended for the air superiority role. The A model was temporarily pressed into service with Air Defense Command fighter interceptor squadrons (FIS) when the F-102 and F-106 experienced delays in development. The F-101 and 104 were both pressed into service in that role even though not originally designed for it. Contrary to the online mythology the 104 was not incapable of maneuvering, and its spectacular performance made it a potent air to air fighter .
My favorite plane, unbelievable machine. Mach 2,6 in 1956 (i thing). Im an aircraft maintenance technitian and i worked with some german colleages and they worked with the Starfighter in the Bundeswehr. They love this Jet. The Germans just messed it up, they transformed an interceptor to a fighter bomber. The underwing bombs and missiles afected seriously the airodynamics. about 320 crashes with 182 deaths. The F-104 became fast obsolet because of the intercontinental nuclear weapons, the bomber era was over.
I recall the first time that I saw a picture of the F-104 Starfighter was on the cover of "HotRod" Magazine (of all the unlikely places) for the August 1963 issue. The magazine was featuring a futuristic roadster called the XR-6 built by a man named "Tex" Smith. (He may have had connections to the USAF at Edwards AFB in So, California.) The most distinctive aspect of the cover shot was both "Tex" and an Air Force Pilot standing next to each of their craft. The coolest thing of all was a sign on the F-104 proudly displayed that read "Free World Defender." It was so patriotic and the plane so gorgeous that it was etched into my memory for lo these 59 years. It's too bad that we as a country seemed to have lost that unique sense of pride in our military. I long for those days.
You're kidding right? Those tiny wings are actually ideal for a high speed, low altitude penetrator because they reduce buffeting significantly compared to an aircraft with lower wing loading. The low-level penetrator role was inherently dangerous and other designs that served in that role also had high losses.
@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 basically the F104s strike/penetrator role should’ve only been performed at high speeds and for single strikes by every experienced pilots. However the majority of losses were from the luftwaffe, who were essentially crippled after WW2, and thus sent F104s on low speed low altitude missions in poor weather with inexperienced pilots. Add in the bribery from Lockheed and it’s easy to see why people hate it, even if it’s not the aircrafts fault.
Many careers were cut short with this plane..place... either by being killed or by being forced to resign for being candid....the name Bubi comes to mind.....hardly a green pilot.
When judging the safety of the 104 and calling it a flying coffin and widowmaker and the like people should remember the lossess suffered by the previous fighter types like the f-84 and f-86 and also consider the period of operations - the kind of flight safety we have today was nor inducted into the air forces of the world until the mid 70'ties and some air forces still don't have such programmes
She was called the Widowmaker, because the compressibility problem in a dive, didn't have that are brake that only came out after the war was over, but it was ingenious aircraft
The F104 still flys today, in a way! The U2 is a direct descendant of the F104. Using really long wings and a smaller engine on a basic 104 style fuselage, the U2 was created!
They were loud.I remember standing at the start of the runway.They were maybe 30 feet above us.Crazy loud. Over 50 years ago.Such a beautiful airplane.Leeuwarden Air Base.
@@Idahoguy10157 yes, Some unproven claims by the Air Forces of Taiwan and India, the USAF was very keen to transfer his few F104 to the national guard. Still very far from being the ״best interceptor״
@@Idahoguy10157 reminds me of the Galil, the Israeli assault riffle developed back in the 80’s and was supposed to be the best of it’s kind with a bottle opener as a cutting edge feature meaning to prevent it’s users from opening bottles on the magazine lips (as done in my generation) or using your front teeth for this purpose if you were from special forces. Is appeared to be very heavy so gradually you saw the troops going back to the AK47 which made you look very special or the brand new promising Colt M16 which is still widely used despite it not having any kind of bottle opening feature
@@davidatrakchi2707 …. The conventional wars the United States was going to fight were not in North America. For the same reason the USAF didn’t use the F-5 series the F-104 wasn’t suitable; too short range. This wasn’t a concern for the Luftwaffe and most of NATO. Two points. I’m not saying the F-104 was the best answer for Europe. I’m not saying USAF procurement process was good. I am saying the nations that did buy the F-104 had their own criteria. As did the nations as to why they bought a different fighter.
I remember putting one to bed in a hardened aircraft shelter in Germany in the 70’s. The most striking thing was the leading edge, which was razor sharp. You could see where they filed the leading edge tip. It was a hard ass plane to fly.
That's not due to high wing loading, its due to the position of the horizontal stabilator and the high AOA achievable by the wing. The effect would be the same if the airplane were lighter.
Man that was a beauty even by today's standards I know I was aboard an aircraft carrier some of my navy career USS MIDWAY saw new designs come and go up to the tomcat.
KELLY JOHNSON WAS TO AVIATION DESIGN, AS JOHN MOSSES BROWNING WAS TO FIREARMS DESIGN. THE F 104 WAS STILL BEING FLOWN BY A GERMAN RECON BASE I WAS T.D.Y. AT CLOSE TO A TOWN CALLED LECK, IN NORTHERN GERMANY NEAR THE DENMARK BORDER BACK IN 1989. THE 104 WAS THE STATIC DISPLAY IN FRONT OF MY BASIC TRAINING DORMS , 3702 BMTS. A AWESOME AIRCRAFT!
I came to love the 104 due to two things..1) .When I was a kid ( in the 60's ), I saw a squadron of Japanese 104 taking on Godzilla.....2) Major Nelson of I Dream of Jeannie flew them...My favorite fighter ever since, lol
@@Azazello321 Strauss was corrupt and power hungry, but Lockheed needed the sales badly. There is footage of a full size plane that Lockhed had set up in a conference hall in Bonn for the negotiations! Never heard or seen that before or after. Strauss the defense minister at the time bought 916 starfighter 216 crashed and 116 pilots died, hence the widow maker. Several aspects contributed to the German 104 disaster The plane wasn't fully deveolped as all weather interceptor. It may have worked kind of ok in warm Texas and Arizona, but not so much in cold, rainy central northern Europe. The new Luftwaffe was only 4 years old. Both sales and maintenance personal lacked experience. The German negotiators were an easy prey for their American counterparts. Strauss was very eager to add more systems to the machine which made it heavy and hard to fly. The pilots had to read thousand of instruction pages, montoring several dozen controls and hardly any chance to look out. The maintenance instruction were about 150 kg of printed papers.
Because we Germans could produce the 104 in licence in former Messerschmitt plants (MBB), we could catch up with the jet standard of the US. The 104 was a great pusher for european aircraft industries.
The wing loading of the F-104G was not that much higher than that of the F-105, which is known for good handling qualities, and the G was heavier than early 104 due to the equipment added for the strike role. The much vaunted F-5 had similar wings and even higher wing loading than the 104. All such jets tend to resist entering a spin, but if they do enter one it tends to be flat and unrecoverable. The F-104 was not at all unusual in this regard.
@@Dronescapes It is adored for it breathtaking performance, and there was a long list of pilots fighting for the chance to fly it. It did not need to be tamed, it just needed to be handled properly. Don't get too slow is something every pilot learns.
Concerning Germany's high rate of a/c-pilot loss: We must remember that the 2nd world war was just 15 years b4 this a/c came online!! Germany lost most, (if not all), of their high quality pilots!!! If you are a pilot, then you know that almost anyone can fly a plane now. But back then, it required a considerable amount of work and intuition!!! Flying did not come easy to me, but I had friends who it came 2nd nature to. I can't imagine someone with my skills being placed in that high performance machine!!! I would most likely end up in a smoking hole in the ground as did many of their pilots!!! Its unfortunate, but true... My 2 cents 🙂
There’s a video on YT with Bill Weaver , the Lockheed test pilot who famously survived an SR-71 fully disintegrating at Mach 3. He was a test pilot also for the 104, and advised the Luftwaffe on the 104. He says because of the restart of the Luftwaffe the average experience of their pilots in the early 60s was under 400 hours
Excellent video but with a few minor corrections: Germany wasn't the only country to experience a high Starfighter loss rate. Canada lost 110 of its 238 Starfighters over 25 years of service, most of which to human factors. The last Starfighters to be withdrawn from active service was the Italian F-104S - in 2004, not the mid-1990's. The Starfighter attained Mach 2.12 on May 16, 1958. The video suggests it attained M2 in April, 1955. If anyone can confirm this with a link, please post. In addition to European manufacturers, Canadair (Montreal) license-built 200 CF-104's for the RCAF, and major airframe components for another 140 Luftwaffe F-104G's.
@@dukeford8893 I don't disagree - I'm speaking merely of airframe attrition across the service life of said aircraft. Luftwaffe and Bundesmarine F-104's also saw five extra years of service over their RCAF/CAF counterparts, albiet in somewhat dissimilar roles. Canadian Starfighters spent much of their quarter century of service at ~250' AGL and 450-plus kts in all sorts of weather, terrain, and bird-heavy environments.
Got to see F 104s while stationed at Homestead AFB in 69, they were parked outside the hanger I worked in. Where is a company called Starfighter Inc. That flys F 104s, they have 6 airworthy F104S at Cape Canaveral Florida, i see there videos on UA-cam
And, to all comments here, when the mirage was testflown by Walter krupinski, and of the best fighter aces pf ww2, he said the mirage would be better, but, and thats important too, the french denied the building the mirage by license, and that is something which was planned by nato members who were looking for a new aircraft. The f-104 was build by Messerschmitt, Fokker and fiat for example, and so the european aviation Industriy was able to catch up with its american competitors. In the end this led to Airbus, the only serious competitor against Boeing in the Airlines biz. This led also to the pa 200 tornado, which is far better in the wild weasel role than anything else. After the f-4g phantom the usaf thought about adopting the tornado for this role, but due to political decisions they put All that wild weasel stuff into the f-16 flying falcon
I remember them taking off from fuerstenfeldbruck (Germany) airport when I was really young. They didn't look like they should be able to fly. Rocket with paddles.
Around 18:00, is that Luke AFB, near Phoenix? Such a striking aircraft, my eyes just can’t soak it all in. The hottest thing in the sky, pilots flying in it must have thought THEY were the hottest guys in the sky. I really hope it does well in the warbird arena. Nice work.
I played club soccer as a child. There were adult leagues in our club that recruited German pilots from Luke Air Force Base in the early 80s. They were training at Luke and they’re camouflage 104s were bad ass!
Personally built and flew my own F104, without making a widow😂, thanks USA 🇺🇸 Kelly Johnson from American Citizen John Robert Bruffett Junior USA bruffettusa1 🇺🇸🇺🇸😎🇺🇸😎🇺🇸😎🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
They only got the contract because of criminal bribes they paid to various officials. The 104 was designed as a high altitude interceptor, but the Germans tried to use it as a low level nuclear penetrator, something it was never designed to do.
For what it's worth those tiny wings made the F-104 well-suited to the low-level penetrator role. High wing-loading = less buffeting = easier to control and less demanding on the pilot.
The most significant downside for the F-104 was the payola scandal which beset it throughout the European theatre. It is a shame that a very good aircraft came to be associated with these shenanigans, and one wonders why it was even necessary for the corrupt payments to officials.
this report completely forgets the dubious practices of Lookeed to sell its F104 notamen in Germany and Italy with the payment of bribes. We also ignore the incredibly high landing speed, its small range, its very high turning radius. In short, a beautiful plane but far from being the marvel presented in the video
Marketing practices should be outside the scope of a video focused on the airplane itself. If you think the F-104 was the only expensive program ever contracted for on the basis of politics or kickbacks then the subject might be interesting, but in its own video.
@@nicomeier8098 Actually, the plane was designed to be a clear air fighter for the air superiority role. Kelly Johnson asked Korean War fighter pilots what a jet needed to excel in air-to-air combat because it was designed to shoot down other fighters, not bombers, which is what the term interceptor implies. The F-102 and 106 were designed to shoot down bombers, hence their sophisticated (for the time) all-weather fire control systems and radar missiles.
Nice video, unfortunately you've overlooked the English Electric Lightning. Check out the video with this jet against the U2 and Concorde. It would have kicked the F104's ass in 99% of cases.
@@dukeford8893 Whatever the performance merits of Starfighter, Lightning had much more benign handling, but still had excellent performance, and its later marks, excellent manoeuvrability right up to the edge of its performance envelope.
What a super looking aircraft. The reality belied the looks unfortunately. If true, then the alleged criminality involved, sounded the death knell for several outstanding competitive designs
Dronescapes, indeed! Fascinating subject, but, my Heavens, the pace of the presentation was like walking through wet sand. We really don't need 6-second pauses between points, and the droning delivery was excruciating. The narrative would get bogged down into 120 seconds of absolute minutia that distracted from the main story. Please, have another cup of coffee!
Not even the dreamlike Mirage III manages to surpass the F-104's aeronautical, divine beauty. Given this fact, what role do its uselessness and lethality play? None!
Bought the model of this aircraft in the 60's, assembled it and foolishly brought it to grade school. An idiot grabbed it after leaving school for the day and smashed it.
I had the privilege of controlling Italian F-104s in 1991 while we were monitoring Libya during the troop shuttle to Saudi Arabia. USS Belknap (CG-26) was sitting south of Sicily near Malta as part of a radar screen across the Med. The F-104s were sitting alert at Trapani in case the Libyans tried to interfere with the air bridge.
@@Dronescapes It was an aircraft that requires an experienced pilot. That was the primary reason Germany's loss rate was so high. Erich Hartmann, the greatest fighter pilot in history, commanded JG-71 and warned the German government that the F-104 was a bad choice as a first jet taken into service by the Bundeswaffe. He was proved correct, but they ignored him.
Also legendary for the scale of corruption and bribery, selling the plane to NATO and other countries. It was never suited to its role of Fighter-Bomber which is what NATO wanted. It had also been rejected by the US Air Force for its very limited capability. It was a short range high performance point-defence interceptor, in combat Pakistani aircraft did not do well against the Indian MiG-21. The Lockheed Lancer may have been better, but it never progressed beyond mock-up stage, it was never in competition with the F-15. The Lancer was cancelled when it lost to the Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter in a lightweight fighter competition in 1970.
Back in the 1960s and 1970s, F104 can held it's own against MIG19 flown by inexperienced pilots. But when the when MIG19 was flown by experienced pilot, F104 had no chance due to it's bad turning capabilities.
@@ReviveHF The worst experience was that of the German Luftwaffe. They wanted a low level fighter-bomber and as a result of bribery and lies Lockheed sold them the F-104G. out of 916 purchased, 295 crached killing 116 pilots. At one stage an aircraft was crashing every week!
Absolutely not. Not at all. The F-104 was a clean slate design. The P-80 was by no means Kelly Johnson's "dream" jet. The P-80 was merely the first rushed step in jet fighter development.
The F104G's internal spars are made of bacofoil, all the strength was in the skin. I know because I have studied the ex gunnery range target one at the back of one of the German Technical Museums. This flimsy airframe had no business being dangerously loaded up as the G version was. Its no wonder the Germans had to retire what was left of the fleet early from metal fatigue.
The F-104 was inferior to the Mirage III in every respect in terms of operability. The Swiss, who were the first non-US pilots to fly the Starfighter, delivered a scathing verdict on the F-104. Luckily, the Swiss opted for the better Mirage III at the time, because of the exorbitant price of the F-104. The Germans, for whom the Mirage was also a candidate, adopted all the "improvement" suggestions made by the Swiss to Lockheed in order to be able to use the machine as a bad-weather fighter-bomber. Imagine what would have happened if the Swiss had bought the Starfighters; in no time they would have had no living pilots..or can anyone imagine the starfighters as fighter-bombers in narrow Swiss mountain valleys?
The Starfighter was intended as a fighter-interceptor air superiority aircraft. Putting the aircraft into a low level air too ground role was a mistake. A split order for a separate fighter bomber would have been wise. “Controlled flight into Terrain” was the conclusion of the accident reports. Would the Mirage III have been a better choice to handle both missions? I’ll accept the opinion that it would have been. But a split buy between the F-104 and the available A-4 Skyhawk would have worked well. The closest to a multirole warplane at the time was the F-4 Phantom II which wasn’t considered. Yes I know of Lockheed’s bribery scandal. However I don’t think bribes were unique to Lockheed.
@@dukeford8893 ….Had the the F-5E been available it would have been an option. However the original F-5 Freedom Fighter was deficient in electronics and capability compared to the F-104G and the Mirage III.
Bernhard Ecklin… IIRC the Swiss tasked their Hawker Hunter fleet for air too ground and using the Mirage III as an interceptor. I think we can presume a Swiss buy of F-104’s upgraded to the G standard would have been interceptors. Which is what Kelly Johnson at Lockheed had designed the Starfighter for. The Germans selection of the Starfighter affected all NATO air forces. The Germans knew whichever aircraft they bought by default would be NATO standard fighter for other countries. What other NATO countries wanted or didn’t want from whom was part of the German decision. BTW except for Canada no other air forces had the accident rates the Luftwaffe compiled. That should say something about Luftwaffe operations. As compared to other countries.
@@Idahoguy10157 Thank you for your comment. Your statements are partially true. A few clarifications need however to be made. Some of the Mirage III were equipped and used by Switzerland as fighters (Mirage IIIS) and others as reconnaissance airplanes (Mirage IIIRS). Incidentally, the conversions that led to the G -version of the F-104 were not due to German considerations, but first to the Swiss, who would have wanted to use the F-104 as a fighter-bomber (even nuclear weapon deliverability by the F-104 was discussed) as logically the German Air Force later did by adopting the Swiss ideas for changes almost completely. Either way, there is probably not a single fighter/fighter-bomber from the 1950s and 1960s that would have been less suitable for use in Switzerland's alpine airspace with its dozens of military airfields, almost all located in very narrow mountain valleys. Where you're absolutely right: The USAAF thought and used the F-104 purely as a fair-weather upper-air interceptor. That's what Kelly Johnson had intended him to do. Who doesn't believe it, read what the USAAF officials at the time thought of the F-104...nothing good for sure! And if that doesn't help, then maybe take another look at the Starfighter track record in Vietnam. When you buy a plane and like the Germans have a third of them (!) lost in a crash, killing 116 pilots, you haven't evaluated something quite right. Please excuse this macabre euphemism. Seen in this way, the first foreigners who were able to fly and test the F-104 - the Swiss - and luckily didn't buy them - were with their suggestions for changes to Lockheed indirectly a cause for the disastrous procurement and use of the Starfighter's G-versions by their German neighbour (What was the Swiss labelled F-104 S became for the Luftwaffe the F-104-G). Lockheed had transmitted the proposals made by the Swiss to the Germans. And why was it purchased even if it should have been obvious, that the F-104-G was about as suitable as a fighter-bomber as hydrochloric acid is for gargling? A mix of ingenious marketing and sales efforts by Lockheed, nowadays proven corruption, incompetence at the top of the German Air Force, and of course political considerations by the German government - keyword loyalty to the alliance, pressures by the US-Government which in turn was under pressure from Lockheed, who saw an opportunity to sell the F-104 abroad, since the USAAF no longer wanted the beautiful an useless beast- was used here under the dossier management of amateur pilot *Franz-Joseph Strauss and minister of defense in the Adenauer cabinet *Sidenote..Shadows but also sunny sides at FJS. RIP Franz-Joseph Strauss and thank you for AIRBUS, that without him would never have become a reality...but which probably does not comfort the widows and families of the killed pilots. In the Netherlands for instance the notorious and later convicted Prince Bernhard at the top allowed Lockheed to cover up the obvious weaknesses of the F-104 with money. Meanwhile, in the Federal Republic of Germany in 1962: the weekly newspaper DER SPIEGEL reported on corruption and inconsistencies in F-104 procurement. Minister Strauss then invented the accusation of treason, illegally searched the editorial offices of SPIEGEL, and had Hans-Rudolf Augstein arrested. DER SPIEGEL and its publisher Augstein were acquitted and Strauss had to resign.
Dukie@UChJ71PooKDcA6Xu59uoF0hg How pathetic comments can be from people just trolling around here to prove to others that they know everything while unwilling to learn new things. Regarding Switzerland and the F-104, loudmouth Dukie Ford has two options. He's either knowingly lying or offended that his lousy knowledge of the subject has been exposed in public. Anyone who knows the ignoramus with the alias Dukie (and I'm pretty sure to know who this troll and woke-groupie is hiding behind his rather ridiculous alias) knows that the second case is more likely. But we don't want to lose any more time with this mock debater. Unfortunately, for interested readers, I can only enclose a link to an article written in German by the most renowned Swiss military aviation journalist, Hans-Heiri Stapfer, who was able to view the corresponding released documents in the Federal Archives in Bern a few years ago. The dumbass Dukie should be advised that you do your research before you say anything stupid. www.svfw.ch/site/assets/files/1126/co-f-104-teil-1-juni-2018.pdf
A) The German contract for the 104 was only given because of hugh bribes paid by Lockheed to German government officials. Other nationals had similar experiences with Lockheed. B) the high accident rate of the German Luftwaffe was not due to poor maintainance and inexperience. The Luftwaffe was using large numbers of other aircraft and helicopter types and NONE of them had higher accident rates then their US and European counterparts. It was exclusive the f104 with more then 200 downed airplanes that was troubling. If it was incompetence or lack of experience, other types would have had also higher accident rates. The Canadians and the Italians (#2 And #3 largest costumers of the f104) had also very bad experiences with the 104. The difference was that they stoped pushing it to it's limits while Germany during the cold war had no other choice. It was true that the Luftwaffe asked for pretty redicolouse requirements for the f104 like ground attack, rocked boosted takeoff and arrested wire landing etc. Lockheed "delivered" everything to sell the plane transforming it into a death trap in the process.
The Germans allowed themselves to be bribed, they bought the airplane despite being warned by their air staff that it wasn't the best idea, then proceeded to screw up their entire program by putting low time pilots in a very demanding fighter and maintaining it with CONSCRIPTS. The German accident rate (losses per 100,000 flight hours) was higher than any other NATO operator. Almost twice that of the Canadians, for example, who flew their Starfighters three times as much. The German accident rate had nothing to do with the inherent qualities of the aircraft, or how it was used, since other operators used it in the same fashion and didn't have nearly the problems.
Please use Google translate and write in English, which is the common language of the channel. It was called flying coffin mainly by the Germans. The F-104 was not easy to fly if you were not a great pilot. Interestingly they had the same at the end of WWII with their utterly flawed Messerschmitt Me 262, which had a great airframe, but tragically flawed engine.
Certainly not, but all planes most planes have casualties and it seems that number in hand, the F-104 was not as lethal as it is commonly perceived. There are interesting studies regarding the F-104 accidents, including the specific German case.
"Issues" get used to that.....?" Produced from 1954 through 1983 in service until 2005, a full HALF CENTURY! ----Ooh sure such an "awful" aircraft! "Sniveling, little rat-faced git" I believe is the correct quote describing your head-glinting (more than an F 104's canopy at 103,000 feet above sea level!) "on air talent".
Click the link to watch more aircraft, heroes and their stories, missions: ua-cam.com/play/PLBI4gRjPKfnNx3Mp4xzYTtVARDWEr6nrT.html
2:05
Why is there an Orthodox Christian cross on the aircraft?
Forgot Chuck Yeager’s altitude crash. Controls went limp after the engine stalled and fell tail first and had to eject with injuries.
@@timmoles9259 Thanks for adding the reference.
The most beautiful looking deadly flying machine for both the enemy and pilots! Basically an engine with a pair of stub wings!
Basically it was all fuselage and tail no wings
perfectly to the point.
HAF 🇬🇷.My father was armourer of F 104G STARFIGHTER. What an an amazing aircraft. Passed out 2 months ago 🎖️
What a beautiful airplane. I lived on a base with 104s on the field. I loved that airplane and of course built a plastic model of one. The closest I got to one was learning to fly in a Northrop T-38 to become a USAF pilot. Got a heavy, but will always remember the 38.
T-38 the most beautiful plane ever made
@jacopofbargellini4005 Correction to that - The Hawker Hunter take that title
When I was a kid in the 1960s, we lived less than a mile from Canadair in Montreal, where CF104s were built. I'll never forget the sound as they screamed over our house. Definitely the most beautiful aircraft ever built!
Definitely wonderful and quite dangerous.
Not even close to beautiful and bloody dangerous to fly
@@Dronescapes
Compare it's loss rate to that of the MiG-21, F-100 or Mirage 3/5. You'll struggle to find an early supersonic fighter that didn't have a terrible loss rate.
@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 I know, but it's also very much loved for some reason, perhaps because it is a very dangerous beast, or because it looks so beautifully raw. The name helps as well. This said, there is an interesting study on the specific "German" case that concludes: "Approximately 15-20% of the German F-104 accidents can be called ‘‘the price of doing business’’ with such an aircraft in the European environment. This includes the operation of a very demanding single-seat, single-engine turbojet fighter close to the ground-and in a bird-rich environment. Still, both German and U.S. F-104s had significantly elevated accident rates in comparison to other co-era types. The number of technical causations was grossly overrepresented in German F-104 accidents, while the number of human factor causations was underrepresented. Moreover, the engine was found to be a weak part in the design, which holds a negative record in the USAF even to this date. Hence, it can be concluded that the F-104 did crash for different reasons from those for other military aircraft, and it also crashed for other human factor reasons. Overall, the Starfighter was more accident-prone than its co-era types."
@@Dronescapes
I'll see if I saved my notes from comparing F-104 service in Canadian, Italian, American, Germany and Japanese service against a number of contemporaries, but (after controlling for American losses over Vietnam, as well as trying to account for other forces combat losses) it didn't seem nearly as dramatic as is commonly made out.
I'm sure several nation's media hyping them as particularly dangerous plays no role in their current reputation.
@dronescapes the history that you surface is simply beautiful. In today's f35 reality, people seem to have forgotten how exciting air development was. These things were developed in a near wild west mentality. The bravery and experience, lol if they lived, was pure magnificence. Thank you again for bringing history to the present. Good job
In The Netherlands we used to call them flying soldering irons.
They made a very specific sound, I remember being a young boy on holiday in "De Veluwe" (centrally located woodlands) when you could hear them coming from far doing low passes. Very impressive.
I think every nation has a name for the F-104 :)
I never heard one but when I heard of his performance characteristics I was really impressed for that time
The P38 was amazing but the the de Havilland mosquito, made of more than 74000 screws, it had a wooden airframe, it was capable of going over German territory and usually for reconnaissance, and outran every aircraft that the Germans had, RAF was quite pleased with her, she would travel more than 400 miles per hour and do reconnaissance photos over Germany, and she was made with balsa wood, that's something that everyone in England can make in their house, and she was armed with four 20 mm cannons, and Browning machine guns, devastating Firepower she had the range, and she also participated greatly in the rescue French Resistance Fighters that were about to be executed at a military installation that was surrounded by four walls and the Havoline mosquitoes flew in and knocked down that wall and were able to affect the rescue of the resistance God bless the resistance, the French Resistance it's better that they didn't fight the Germans because they had the Germans inside the country and we can get intelligence from them, and rescue Allied Pilots that had the parachute into France, and they were more effective that way a few of them are still around mostly the women, and the office of special services was the United States CIA at the time, I don't compare them to the CIA because it was different times, but the French Resistance gave us our eyes into the German Army and ability to rescue Pilots, and also tell us critical information about German positions there are where the stockpiles were they gave great information which made it easy to defeat the Germans in France win The Invasion came
Best video I've seen on UA-cam about this fantastic aircraft. My only quibble is calling it an "interceptor", which is misleading for people who draw incorrect conclusions from that term. The jet was designed as a clear air day fighter intended for the air superiority role. The A model was temporarily pressed into service with Air Defense Command fighter interceptor squadrons (FIS) when the F-102 and F-106 experienced delays in development. The F-101 and 104 were both pressed into service in that role even though not originally designed for it. Contrary to the online mythology the 104 was not incapable of maneuvering, and its spectacular performance made it a potent air to air fighter .
I would entirely agree with your statement. This video is one of the best if not the best analysis of the 104. Many thanks.
My favorite plane, unbelievable machine. Mach 2,6 in 1956 (i thing). Im an aircraft maintenance technitian and i worked with some german colleages and they worked with the Starfighter in the Bundeswehr. They love this Jet. The Germans just messed it up, they transformed an interceptor to a fighter bomber. The underwing bombs and missiles afected seriously the airodynamics. about 320 crashes with 182 deaths. The F-104 became fast obsolet because of the intercontinental nuclear weapons, the bomber era was over.
I recall the first time that I saw a picture of the F-104 Starfighter was on the cover of "HotRod" Magazine (of all the unlikely places) for the August 1963 issue. The magazine was featuring a futuristic roadster called the XR-6 built by a man named "Tex" Smith. (He may have had connections to the USAF at Edwards AFB in So, California.) The most distinctive aspect of the cover shot was both "Tex" and an Air Force Pilot standing next to each of their craft. The coolest thing of all was a sign on the F-104 proudly displayed that read "Free World Defender." It was so patriotic and the plane so gorgeous that it was etched into my memory for lo these 59 years. It's too bad that we as a country seemed to have lost that unique sense of pride in our military. I long for those days.
👍👍
Some great images in this doc, a majority I’ve not seen before.
The F-104 is a great lesson of... "You don't use an aircraft designed for one purpose, to be used for another"
It's a great lesson of how easily money and power corrupts ... and how you can get away with it since as all know Lockheed is doing just fine today.
You're kidding right? Those tiny wings are actually ideal for a high speed, low altitude penetrator because they reduce buffeting significantly compared to an aircraft with lower wing loading.
The low-level penetrator role was inherently dangerous and other designs that served in that role also had high losses.
@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 Yeah, but it was also used for low speed roles where it DIDNT work as well
@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 basically the F104s strike/penetrator role should’ve only been performed at high speeds and for single strikes by every experienced pilots. However the majority of losses were from the luftwaffe, who were essentially crippled after WW2, and thus sent F104s on low speed low altitude missions in poor weather with inexperienced pilots. Add in the bribery from Lockheed and it’s easy to see why people hate it, even if it’s not the aircrafts fault.
Many careers were cut short with this plane..place... either by being killed or by being forced to resign for being candid....the name Bubi comes to mind.....hardly a green pilot.
When judging the safety of the 104 and calling it a flying coffin and widowmaker and the like people should remember the lossess suffered by the previous fighter types like the f-84 and f-86 and also consider the period of operations - the kind of flight safety we have today was nor inducted into the air forces of the world until the mid 70'ties and some air forces still don't have such programmes
One of the best docos on the starfighter good upload
🙏🙏🙏♥️♥️♥️
A plane that was was loved unconditionally ❤ by those who didn't die in it.
She was called the Widowmaker, because the compressibility problem in a dive, didn't have that are brake that only came out after the war was over, but it was ingenious aircraft
@@Dra741 total nonsense. It had no such problem.
Our world is full of iconic designs that never passed the stage of being "promising"
The F104 still flys today, in a way! The U2 is a direct descendant of the F104. Using really long wings and a smaller engine on a basic 104 style fuselage, the U2 was created!
True!
The F104 still flies today, period. Look up Starfighters Aerospace (aka Starfighters Inc)
@@MatthijsvanDuin yes it does.
No its a spy plane not interceptor
A wonderful introducing Documentary about F-104 Star Fighter & US Superiority in Aviation capability during First Cold War was Remarkable
They were loud.I remember standing at the start of the runway.They were maybe 30 feet above us.Crazy loud.
Over 50 years ago.Such a beautiful airplane.Leeuwarden Air Base.
The Starfighter is aviation's a Top Fuel Dragster. Love this airplane.
The best interceptor that never intercepted an enemy plane!!!!
😆
Not in Europe. In Asia and South Asia it was used in combat
@@Idahoguy10157 yes, Some unproven claims by the Air Forces of Taiwan and India, the USAF was very keen to transfer his few F104 to the national guard. Still very far from being the ״best interceptor״
@@Idahoguy10157 reminds me of the Galil, the Israeli assault riffle developed back in the 80’s and was supposed to be the best of it’s kind with a bottle opener as a cutting edge feature meaning to prevent it’s users from opening bottles on the magazine lips (as done in my generation) or using your front teeth for this purpose if you were from special forces. Is appeared to be very heavy so gradually you saw the troops going back to the AK47 which made you look very special or the brand new promising Colt M16 which is still widely used despite it not having any kind of bottle opening feature
@@davidatrakchi2707 …. The conventional wars the United States was going to fight were not in North America. For the same reason the USAF didn’t use the F-5 series the F-104 wasn’t suitable; too short range. This wasn’t a concern for the Luftwaffe and most of NATO.
Two points. I’m not saying the F-104 was the best answer for Europe. I’m not saying USAF procurement process was good. I am saying the nations that did buy the F-104 had their own criteria. As did the nations as to why they bought a different fighter.
I remember putting one to bed in a hardened aircraft shelter in Germany in the 70’s. The most striking thing was the leading edge, which was razor sharp. You could see where they filed the leading edge tip. It was a hard ass plane to fly.
22:02 very, very high wing loading meant AOA above 15deg results in pitch up to 60deg, yaw, roll and tumble as seen in this clip.
That's not due to high wing loading, its due to the position of the horizontal stabilator and the high AOA achievable by the wing. The effect would be the same if the airplane were lighter.
Man that was a beauty even by today's standards I know I was aboard an aircraft carrier some of my navy career USS MIDWAY saw new designs come and go up to the tomcat.
Excelente canal, merece muito mais inscritos! Muito obrigado por compartilhar! Congrats From Brazil 🇧🇷
🙏❤
Best aircraft name ever!
Yes, a wonderful name indeed
"Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth
And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;"
These documentaries are amazing! please keep them coming! I noticed how right after the documentary of the Valkyrie, you posted the F-104 Documentary!
KELLY JOHNSON WAS TO AVIATION DESIGN, AS JOHN MOSSES BROWNING WAS TO FIREARMS DESIGN.
THE F 104 WAS STILL BEING FLOWN BY A GERMAN RECON BASE I WAS T.D.Y. AT CLOSE TO A TOWN CALLED LECK, IN NORTHERN GERMANY NEAR THE DENMARK BORDER BACK IN 1989.
THE 104 WAS THE STATIC DISPLAY IN FRONT OF MY BASIC TRAINING DORMS , 3702 BMTS. A AWESOME AIRCRAFT!
I came to love the 104 due to two things..1) .When I was a kid ( in the 60's ), I saw a squadron of Japanese 104 taking on Godzilla.....2) Major Nelson of I Dream of Jeannie flew them...My favorite fighter ever since, lol
Amazing. An alternative reality for the 104. Even sans the bribery.
Former German Secretary of Defense, Mr. Franz-Josef Strauss agrees.
@@Azazello321
Strauss was corrupt and power hungry, but Lockheed needed the sales badly. There is footage of a full size plane that Lockhed had set up in a conference hall in Bonn for the negotiations! Never heard or seen that before or after.
Strauss the defense minister at the time bought 916 starfighter 216 crashed and 116 pilots died, hence the widow maker.
Several aspects contributed to the German 104 disaster
The plane wasn't fully deveolped as all weather interceptor. It may have worked kind of ok in warm Texas and Arizona, but not so much in cold, rainy central northern Europe.
The new Luftwaffe was only 4 years old. Both sales and maintenance personal lacked experience. The German negotiators were an easy prey for their American counterparts. Strauss was very eager to add more systems to the machine which made it heavy and hard to fly. The pilots had to read thousand of instruction pages, montoring several dozen controls and hardly any chance to look out. The maintenance instruction were about 150 kg of printed papers.
Great documentary. Thanks.
Italian F-104 pilots gave the USAF F-4 a good run for their money.
Because we Germans could produce the 104 in licence in former Messerschmitt plants (MBB), we could catch up with the jet standard of the US. The 104 was a great pusher for european aircraft industries.
Always read these air craft would go into unrecoverable spin! That's why no company has ever made an aircraft with such small wings since!
And yet it is still adored by many pilots. Perhaps it is because the F-104 is a beast that needs to be tamed, who knows...
The wing loading of the F-104G was not that much higher than that of the F-105, which is known for good handling qualities, and the G was heavier than early 104 due to the equipment added for the strike role. The much vaunted F-5 had similar wings and even higher wing loading than the 104.
All such jets tend to resist entering a spin, but if they do enter one it tends to be flat and unrecoverable. The F-104 was not at all unusual in this regard.
@@Dronescapes It is adored for it breathtaking performance, and there was a long list of pilots fighting for the chance to fly it. It did not need to be tamed, it just needed to be handled properly. Don't get too slow is something every pilot learns.
Rocket with wings, what a dart.
Concerning Germany's high rate of a/c-pilot loss: We must remember that the 2nd world war was just 15 years b4 this a/c came online!! Germany lost most, (if not all), of their high quality pilots!!! If you are a pilot, then you know that almost anyone can fly a plane now. But back then, it required a considerable amount of work and intuition!!! Flying did not come easy to me, but I had friends who it came 2nd nature to. I can't imagine someone with my skills being placed in that high performance machine!!! I would most likely end up in a smoking hole in the ground as did many of their pilots!!! Its unfortunate, but true... My 2 cents 🙂
There’s a video on YT with Bill Weaver , the Lockheed test pilot who famously survived an SR-71 fully disintegrating at Mach 3. He was a test pilot also for the 104, and advised the Luftwaffe on the 104. He says because of the restart of the Luftwaffe the average experience of their pilots in the early 60s was under 400 hours
Combine that with the inherently dangerous mission of low-level penetration and one would anticipate high loss rates.
Excellent video footage. Thanks
Michael Dorn's dream machine
Thank you so very much 😎🇺🇲🙏
👍🙏
Would love to own one. Saw one up for sale, formerly from the Canadian Airforce. Italy retired their last F-104S in 2004.
At 9:31 is that Prince Bernhard?
The F-104 is still a amazing plane.
Excellent video but with a few minor corrections:
Germany wasn't the only country to experience a high Starfighter loss rate. Canada lost 110 of its 238 Starfighters over 25 years of service, most of which to human factors.
The last Starfighters to be withdrawn from active service was the Italian F-104S - in 2004, not the mid-1990's.
The Starfighter attained Mach 2.12 on May 16, 1958. The video suggests it attained M2 in April, 1955. If anyone can confirm this with a link, please post.
In addition to European manufacturers, Canadair (Montreal) license-built 200 CF-104's for the RCAF, and major airframe components for another 140 Luftwaffe F-104G's.
@@dukeford8893
I don't disagree - I'm speaking merely of airframe attrition across the service life of said aircraft. Luftwaffe and Bundesmarine F-104's also saw five extra years of service over their RCAF/CAF counterparts, albiet in somewhat dissimilar roles.
Canadian Starfighters spent much of their quarter century of service at ~250' AGL and 450-plus kts in all sorts of weather, terrain, and bird-heavy environments.
In my town we have a Kelly Johnson Boulevard.
"Created by from"??
0:20 whoever the pilot is that flew plane 420 must've been the happiest pilot in the military
Everyone's at 65 000 feet and he's still higher.
Got to see F 104s while stationed at Homestead AFB in 69, they were parked outside the hanger I worked in. Where is a company called Starfighter Inc. That flys F 104s, they have 6 airworthy F104S at Cape Canaveral Florida, i see there videos on UA-cam
A controlled manned dart like missile like fighter!
Very much like that
The F-10 could have been better with the J-79 engine. The 106 could have been the US Mirage.
Was Kelly Johnson a pilot?
He was a flight test engineer, but not a pilot. Saying that, a FTE knows a lot about flying...
Aircraft designer
And, to all comments here, when the mirage was testflown by Walter krupinski, and of the best fighter aces pf ww2, he said the mirage would be better, but, and thats important too, the french denied the building the mirage by license, and that is something which was planned by nato members who were looking for a new aircraft. The f-104 was build by Messerschmitt, Fokker and fiat for example, and so the european aviation Industriy was able to catch up with its american competitors. In the end this led to Airbus, the only serious competitor against Boeing in the Airlines biz. This led also to the pa 200 tornado, which is far better in the wild weasel role than anything else. After the f-4g phantom the usaf thought about adopting the tornado for this role, but due to political decisions they put All that wild weasel stuff into the f-16 flying falcon
I remember them taking off from fuerstenfeldbruck (Germany) airport when I was really young. They didn't look like they should be able to fly. Rocket with paddles.
😆🙂
A deadly dart.
The F104 was the base platform for the U2.
👍
An interesting aircraft Hakwind made Album on them worth a listen called starfighter
And it had it's own big budget Hollywood movie The Starfighters
Around 18:00, is that Luke AFB, near Phoenix? Such a striking aircraft, my eyes just can’t soak it all in. The hottest thing in the sky, pilots flying in it must have thought THEY were the hottest guys in the sky. I really hope it does well in the warbird arena. Nice work.
I played club soccer as a child. There were adult leagues in our club that recruited German pilots from Luke Air Force Base in the early 80s. They were training at Luke and they’re camouflage 104s were bad ass!
Personally built and flew my own F104, without making a widow😂, thanks USA 🇺🇸 Kelly Johnson from American Citizen John Robert Bruffett Junior USA bruffettusa1 🇺🇸🇺🇸😎🇺🇸😎🇺🇸😎🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
They only got the contract because of criminal bribes they paid to various officials. The 104 was designed as a high altitude interceptor, but the Germans tried to use it as a low level nuclear penetrator, something it was never designed to do.
I've seen, indeed, a German version supposed to carry a nuclear weapon right below the belly
For what it's worth those tiny wings made the F-104 well-suited to the low-level penetrator role. High wing-loading = less buffeting = easier to control and less demanding on the pilot.
13:33 A fucking Full Send if I've ever seen one 💪🤣
20:15 really? F-104+ Lancer could compete w an F-15?! How? Not turn rate, not weapons load out, not range, not climb…
At an air show, I saw one do a low pass on afterburner. Maybe 10 m above the runway. Could smell the kerosene.
The luftwaffe called it the widowmaker as I recall.
Yes, they did
The ol' "Aluminum Death Tube" , we called it in Canada.
@@dmforsyth Still beautiful :)
@@Dronescapes can't disagree. Especially when compared to the brutish F4 Phantom.
The most significant downside for the F-104 was the payola scandal which beset it throughout the European theatre. It is a shame that a very good aircraft came to be associated with these shenanigans, and one wonders why it was even necessary for the corrupt payments to officials.
Widow maker!
we owe a LOT to men like Kelly Johnson
Brilliant man
Famoso fazedor de viúvas.
Among Italian aviators F104s were better known as the 'flying coffins'...
No Starfighter pilot would ever refer to it as a "flying coffin".
Germans call it "the Widowmaker" it killed 116 pilots in 28 years , and 292 out of 916 planes
Had more than a bit with the German pilots and common practices.
I read Germany had an even worse record w their F-84s. And other countries seemed to be able to handle it.
Compare those loss rates to other fighters of the era.
Somebody give the f104 Starfighter some thrust vectoring.
why?
104 pillots take offence at the term widow maker. No 104 pilot ever called it that.
I don't know what possessed Lockheed to make a fighter that couldn't turn as a foil to MIGs.
It was hated by the west Germans it was a dragster of plane, epic speed nothing else
The widow maker was one of it's nick names
It is
Roger Ramjet
BLAM !
this report completely forgets the dubious practices of Lookeed to sell its F104 notamen in Germany and Italy with the payment of bribes.
We also ignore the incredibly high landing speed, its small range, its very high turning radius. In short, a beautiful plane but far from being the marvel presented in the video
Buzzkill
Marketing practices should be outside the scope of a video focused on the airplane itself. If you think the F-104 was the only expensive program ever contracted for on the basis of politics or kickbacks then the subject might be interesting, but in its own video.
This plane was not designed to be the ultimate dogfighter but to be a very fast interceptor. Which it was, the best of its time.
@@nicomeier8098 Actually, the plane was designed to be a clear air fighter for the air superiority role. Kelly Johnson asked Korean War fighter pilots what a jet needed to excel in air-to-air combat because it was designed to shoot down other fighters, not bombers, which is what the term interceptor implies. The F-102 and 106 were designed to shoot down bombers, hence their sophisticated (for the time) all-weather fire control systems and radar missiles.
Nice video, unfortunately you've overlooked the English Electric Lightning. Check out the video with this jet against the U2 and Concorde. It would have kicked the F104's ass in 99% of cases.
It was a remarkable aircraft as well, you are right
@@dukeford8893 Whatever the performance merits of Starfighter, Lightning had much more benign handling, but still had excellent performance, and its later marks, excellent manoeuvrability right up to the edge of its performance envelope.
What a super looking aircraft.
The reality belied the looks unfortunately.
If true, then the alleged criminality involved, sounded the death knell for several outstanding competitive designs
Dronescapes, indeed! Fascinating subject, but, my Heavens, the pace of the presentation was like walking through wet sand. We really don't need 6-second pauses between points, and the droning delivery was excruciating. The narrative would get bogged down into 120 seconds of absolute minutia that distracted from the main story. Please, have another cup of coffee!
Not even the dreamlike Mirage III manages to surpass the F-104's aeronautical, divine beauty. Given this fact, what role do its uselessness and lethality play? None!
Bought the model of this aircraft in the 60's, assembled it and foolishly brought it to grade school. An idiot grabbed it after leaving school for the day and smashed it.
He did not have common sense , shame on him !
What a pity, what a shame!
Maybe it was a german kid whose luftwaffe dad died from the widow maker
And that's where you choke the kid until his eyes are bloodshot.
@@skaldlouiscyphre2453 The Christian grade school wouldn't have appreciated that very much.
I had the privilege of controlling Italian F-104s in 1991 while we were monitoring Libya during the troop shuttle to Saudi Arabia. USS Belknap (CG-26) was sitting south of Sicily near Malta as part of a radar screen across the Med. The F-104s were sitting alert at Trapani in case the Libyans tried to interfere with the air bridge.
Thank you for sharing Patrick. What do you think of the F-104?
@@Dronescapes It was an aircraft that requires an experienced pilot. That was the primary reason Germany's loss rate was so high. Erich Hartmann, the greatest fighter pilot in history, commanded JG-71 and warned the German government that the F-104 was a bad choice as a first jet taken into service by the Bundeswaffe. He was proved correct, but they ignored him.
Thank you Patrick
Yeah..... Sorry 'bout that west Germany of old!
Also legendary for the scale of corruption and bribery, selling the plane to NATO and other countries. It was never suited to its role of Fighter-Bomber which is what NATO wanted. It had also been rejected by the US Air Force for its very limited capability. It was a short range high performance point-defence interceptor, in combat Pakistani aircraft did not do well against the Indian MiG-21. The Lockheed Lancer may have been better, but it never progressed beyond mock-up stage, it was never in competition with the F-15. The Lancer was cancelled when it lost to the Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter in a lightweight fighter competition in 1970.
It is still adored by many pilots, no matter what. It is definitely an iconic aircraft.
Back in the 1960s and 1970s, F104 can held it's own against MIG19 flown by inexperienced pilots. But when the when MIG19 was flown by experienced pilot, F104 had no chance due to it's bad turning capabilities.
@@ReviveHF The worst experience was that of the German Luftwaffe. They wanted a low level fighter-bomber and as a result of bribery and lies Lockheed sold them the F-104G. out of 916 purchased, 295 crached killing 116 pilots. At one stage an aircraft was crashing every week!
Its derive from P-80, Kelly's dream jet.
Absolutely not. Not at all.
The F-104 was a clean slate design.
The P-80 was by no means Kelly Johnson's "dream" jet. The P-80 was merely the first rushed step in jet fighter development.
👍👍👍
🙏❤
The F104G's internal spars are made of bacofoil, all the strength was in the skin. I know because I have studied the ex gunnery range target one at the back of one of the German Technical Museums. This flimsy airframe had no business being dangerously loaded up as the G version was. Its no wonder the Germans had to retire what was left of the fleet early from metal fatigue.
👍
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
The F-104 was inferior to the Mirage III in every respect in terms of operability. The Swiss, who were the first non-US pilots to fly the Starfighter, delivered a scathing verdict on the F-104. Luckily, the Swiss opted for the better Mirage III at the time, because of the exorbitant price of the F-104. The Germans, for whom the Mirage was also a candidate, adopted all the "improvement" suggestions made by the Swiss to Lockheed in order to be able to use the machine as a bad-weather fighter-bomber. Imagine what would have happened if the Swiss had bought the Starfighters; in no time they would have had no living pilots..or can anyone imagine the starfighters as fighter-bombers in narrow Swiss mountain valleys?
The Starfighter was intended as a fighter-interceptor air superiority aircraft. Putting the aircraft into a low level air too ground role was a mistake. A split order for a separate fighter bomber would have been wise. “Controlled flight into Terrain” was the conclusion of the accident reports. Would the Mirage III have been a better choice to handle both missions? I’ll accept the opinion that it would have been. But a split buy between the F-104 and the available A-4 Skyhawk would have worked well. The closest to a multirole warplane at the time was the F-4 Phantom II which wasn’t considered. Yes I know of Lockheed’s bribery scandal. However I don’t think bribes were unique to Lockheed.
@@dukeford8893 ….Had the the F-5E been available it would have been an option. However the original F-5 Freedom Fighter was deficient in electronics and capability compared to the F-104G and the Mirage III.
Bernhard Ecklin… IIRC the Swiss tasked their Hawker Hunter fleet for air too ground and using the Mirage III as an interceptor. I think we can presume a Swiss buy of F-104’s upgraded to the G standard would have been interceptors. Which is what Kelly Johnson at Lockheed had designed the Starfighter for. The Germans selection of the Starfighter affected all NATO air forces. The Germans knew whichever aircraft they bought by default would be NATO standard fighter for other countries. What other NATO countries wanted or didn’t want from whom was part of the German decision. BTW except for Canada no other air forces had the accident rates the Luftwaffe compiled. That should say something about Luftwaffe operations. As compared to other countries.
@@Idahoguy10157 Thank you for your comment. Your statements are partially true.
A few clarifications need however to be made.
Some of the Mirage III were equipped and used by Switzerland as fighters (Mirage IIIS) and others as reconnaissance airplanes (Mirage IIIRS).
Incidentally, the conversions that led to the G -version of the F-104 were not due to German considerations, but first to the Swiss, who would have wanted to use the F-104 as a fighter-bomber (even nuclear weapon deliverability by the F-104 was discussed) as logically the German Air Force later did by adopting the Swiss ideas for changes almost completely.
Either way, there is probably not a single fighter/fighter-bomber from the 1950s and 1960s that would have been less suitable for use in Switzerland's alpine airspace with its dozens of military airfields, almost all located in very narrow mountain valleys.
Where you're absolutely right: The USAAF thought and used the F-104 purely as a fair-weather upper-air interceptor. That's what Kelly Johnson had intended him to do.
Who doesn't believe it, read what the USAAF officials at the time thought of the F-104...nothing good for sure! And if that doesn't help, then maybe take another look at the Starfighter track record in Vietnam.
When you buy a plane and like the Germans have a third of them (!) lost in a crash, killing 116 pilots, you haven't evaluated something quite right. Please excuse this macabre euphemism.
Seen in this way, the first foreigners who were able to fly and test the F-104 - the Swiss - and luckily didn't buy them - were with their suggestions for changes to Lockheed indirectly a cause for the disastrous procurement and use of the Starfighter's G-versions by their German neighbour (What was the Swiss labelled F-104 S became for the Luftwaffe the F-104-G).
Lockheed had transmitted the proposals made by the Swiss to the Germans.
And why was it purchased even if it should have been obvious, that the F-104-G was about as suitable as a fighter-bomber as hydrochloric acid is for gargling?
A mix of ingenious marketing and sales efforts by Lockheed, nowadays proven corruption, incompetence at the top of the German Air Force, and of course political considerations by the German government - keyword loyalty to the alliance, pressures by the US-Government which in turn was under pressure from Lockheed, who saw an opportunity to sell the F-104 abroad, since the USAAF no longer wanted the beautiful an useless beast- was used here under the dossier management of amateur pilot *Franz-Joseph Strauss and minister of defense in the Adenauer cabinet
*Sidenote..Shadows but also sunny sides at FJS. RIP Franz-Joseph Strauss and thank you for AIRBUS, that without him would never have become a reality...but which probably does not comfort the widows and families of the killed pilots.
In the Netherlands for instance the notorious and later convicted Prince Bernhard at the top allowed Lockheed to cover up the obvious weaknesses of the F-104 with money.
Meanwhile, in the Federal Republic of Germany in 1962: the weekly newspaper DER SPIEGEL reported on corruption and inconsistencies in F-104 procurement. Minister Strauss then invented the accusation of treason, illegally searched the editorial offices of SPIEGEL, and had Hans-Rudolf Augstein arrested. DER SPIEGEL and its publisher Augstein were acquitted and Strauss had to resign.
Dukie@UChJ71PooKDcA6Xu59uoF0hg How pathetic comments can be from people just trolling around here to prove to others that they know everything while unwilling to learn new things.
Regarding Switzerland and the F-104, loudmouth Dukie Ford has two options. He's either knowingly lying or offended that his lousy knowledge of the subject has been exposed in public. Anyone who knows the ignoramus with the alias Dukie (and I'm pretty sure to know who this troll and woke-groupie is hiding behind his rather ridiculous alias) knows that the second case is more likely.
But we don't want to lose any more time with this mock debater. Unfortunately, for interested readers, I can only enclose a link to an article written in German by the most renowned Swiss military aviation journalist, Hans-Heiri Stapfer, who was able to view the corresponding released documents in the Federal Archives in Bern a few years ago.
The dumbass Dukie should be advised that you do your research before you say anything stupid.
www.svfw.ch/site/assets/files/1126/co-f-104-teil-1-juni-2018.pdf
In the war between India and Pakistan the Fishbed was far better! 🤔
No, the pilots from India were better pilots.
the only good starfighter was the italian one, So italians can build good stuff
A) The German contract for the 104 was only given because of hugh bribes paid by Lockheed to German government officials. Other nationals had similar experiences with Lockheed.
B) the high accident rate of the German Luftwaffe was not due to poor maintainance and inexperience. The Luftwaffe was using large numbers of other aircraft and helicopter types and NONE of them had higher accident rates then their US and European counterparts. It was exclusive the f104 with more then 200 downed airplanes that was troubling. If it was incompetence or lack of experience, other types would have had also higher accident rates. The Canadians and the Italians (#2 And #3 largest costumers of the f104) had also very bad experiences with the 104. The difference was that they stoped pushing it to it's limits while Germany during the cold war had no other choice.
It was true that the Luftwaffe asked for pretty redicolouse requirements for the f104 like ground attack, rocked boosted takeoff and arrested wire landing etc. Lockheed "delivered" everything to sell the plane transforming it into a death trap in the process.
The Germans allowed themselves to be bribed, they bought the airplane despite being warned by their air staff that it wasn't the best idea, then proceeded to screw up their entire program by putting low time pilots in a very demanding fighter and maintaining it with CONSCRIPTS. The German accident rate (losses per 100,000 flight hours) was higher than any other NATO operator. Almost twice that of the Canadians, for example, who flew their Starfighters three times as much. The German accident rate had nothing to do with the inherent qualities of the aircraft, or how it was used, since other operators used it in the same fashion and didn't have nearly the problems.
"legendary" = license for b.s.
Летающий гроб
Please use Google translate and write in English, which is the common language of the channel.
It was called flying coffin mainly by the Germans.
The F-104 was not easy to fly if you were not a great pilot.
Interestingly they had the same at the end of WWII with their utterly flawed Messerschmitt Me 262, which had a great airframe, but tragically flawed engine.
ähh no EVERYONE had similiar problems belgium greece ect look on statistics
Widow maker! Sold to Germany thanks to bribary
It is a bit reductive to summarize the history of the F-104 in less than 10 words… 🙂
@@Dronescapes Great vid, but I do think the bribery involved in the German sales should have been mentioned.
If you want to buy a star fighter, buy a plot of land and wait.
I wonder why it is so loved no matter what
@@Dronescapes not by the widows 🤣
Certainly not, but all planes most planes have casualties and it seems that number in hand, the F-104 was not as lethal as it is commonly perceived. There are interesting studies regarding the F-104 accidents, including the specific German case.
"Issues" get used to that.....?" Produced from 1954 through 1983 in service until 2005, a full HALF CENTURY!
----Ooh sure such an "awful" aircraft!
"Sniveling, little rat-faced git" I believe is the correct quote describing your head-glinting (more than an F 104's canopy at 103,000 feet above sea level!) "on air talent".
"The design was totally unique for the time". Except that it was a copy of the Fokker G.1.
No, it was not.
Video totally ruined by stupid, unwanted, repetitive background music
So much information presented in this video is completely wrong.
What a goofy looking airplane
Goofy?
@@Dronescapes very goofy.
Many people consider it one of the best looking aircraft ever made
@@Dronescapes many people consider Hitler's points valid but just like them they're weird.