Slitherine

huertgenwald wrote:Why impractical planes ?
The german pilots were very fond of them !

with all due respect those were just a few...if from about 900 F-104 in german service 300 are lost due to accidents/crashes and 116 pilots are killed then even the most enthusiastic F-104 lover can not ignore the fact that these planes were utter crap technically spoken...there were half a dozen of very serious problems with the plane given the right situation and pilots had to use special "tricks" in order to maintain control or trying to avoid these situations at all which was impossibe and prooven by all the deaths this flying coffin caused. Not even mentioning that under real combat conditions the amount of accidents most probably would have multiplicatd exponentionally as pilots would have been busy with combat instead of dominating an unreliable flying drama queen...

ivanov wrote:That's why the Luftwaffe is operating the Phantoms to this day

well...there is just a few left...we even offer them for free to other countrys just to get rid of them

Lol @ dominating an unreliable flying drama queen.

We had stationed in Portugal two German Squadron of F-104. Very beautiful plane, IMO.
But like the A7 Corsair not much reliable, according to what I've read.

chris10 wrote: well...there is just a few left...we even offer them for free to other countrys just to get rid of them

What do you expect after more than 40 years of service? Still, such a long period of time is quite awe inspiring...

prooven by all the deaths this flying coffin caused...

The few pilots and some more technicians i could speak to in those days had a completely different opinion about the Starfighter !
I don't know about crash statitistics in other airforces, but i was told these losses mostly were due to misconfiguration (use as fighter bomber)
and unsuitable aerodynamic manoeuvers (dive bombing , Loopings, etc..) with a tiny wingspan of just 6,36m.

In essence the F104 was a fast flying manned rocket (quite like the Me 163) and EXCELLENT if used as such.

huertgenwald wrote: The few pilots and some more technicians i could speak to in those days had a completely different opinion about the Starfighter !
I don't know about crash statitistics in other airforces, but i was told these losses mostly were due to misconfiguration (use as fighter bomber)
and unsuitable aerodynamic manoeuvers (dive bombing , Loopings, etc..) with a tiny wingspan of just 6,36m.
In essence the F104 was a fast flying manned rocket (quite like the Me 163) and EXCELLENT if used as such.

ahh cmon ...ignoring the offical record is denial..we had 900 F-104 and 300 ! crashed killing 116 pilots in peace time..so gimme a break with "I dunno about crash statistics" ...this is 30% of crash for the total of planes and all due to misconfiguration ?..Das kann ja wohl nich Dein Ernst sein...
How big the % of other military Bundesluftwaffe aircraft crashing in peacetime according to Type ?..I put you in the picture...
The Tornados IDS crashed cause some incompetent idiot ordered the installing of an electronical jammer called Cerberus which just jammed the Tornado groundfollowradar too while flying over water so the cause is well known and has been dealt with
http://www.military-info.de/Bundeswehr/absturz.htm



.

"Nice" chart Chris!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F ... ety_record

"The safety record of the F-104 Starfighter became high-profile news, especially in Germany, in the mid-1960s. Some operators lost a large proportion of their aircraft through accidents, although the accident rate varied widely depending on the user and operating conditions; 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.
The Class A mishap rate (write off) of the F-104 in USAF service was 26.7 accidents per 100,000 flight hours as of June 1977, (30.63 through the end of 2007), the highest accident rate of any USAF Century Series fighter. By comparison, the rate of the Convair F-102 Delta Dagger was 14.2/100,000 (13.69 through 2007), and the mishap rate for the North American F-100 Super Sabre was 16.25 accidents per 100,000 flight hours"

A 30% or 300 aircraft lost by the Luftwaffe is a stagering loss rate. By comparison the USAF aircraft that took the highest losses during the Vietnam War, was F-105 - 382 were lost ( nearly 50% of all the aircraft of that type produced ). But the "Thuds" were bearing the brunt of the operation "Rolling Thunder" and had to face, probably the most formidable anti-aircraft defence system, ever deployed during the history of the air wars.

ivanov wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F ... ety_record

"The safety record of the F-104 Starfighter became high-profile news, especially in Germany, in the mid-1960s. Some operators lost a large proportion of their aircraft through accidents, although the accident rate varied widely depending on the user and operating conditions; 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.
The Class A mishap rate (write off) of the F-104 in USAF service was 26.7 accidents per 100,000 flight hours as of June 1977, (30.63 through the end of 2007), the highest accident rate of any USAF Century Series fighter. By comparison, the rate of the Convair F-102 Delta Dagger was 14.2/100,000 (13.69 through 2007), and the mishap rate for the North American F-100 Super Sabre was 16.25 accidents per 100,000 flight hours"


A 30% or 300 aircraft lost by the Luftwaffe is a stagering loss rate. By comparison the USAF aircraft that took the highest losses during the Vietnam War, was F-105 - 382 were lost ( nearly 50% of all the aircraft of that type produced ). But the "Thuds" were bearing the brunt of the operation "Rolling Thunder" and had to face, probably the most formidable anti-aircraft defence system, ever deployed during the history of the air wars.

Spanish Air Force?... ..so Spain bought these after Francos death ?...well..I think they lost none cause they were actually not flying them but only watching them and anyway they must have had a very short service time in Spain

If the US wiki mentions it then they cant hide it cause the US-English Wiki is always super biased and not very critical when it comes to their own stuff and euipment...US Government and Military Industrial Complex has ghostwriter to change and influence content in their favor..same goes for the Atomic Industry..
The german Wiki gives a detailed record of the serious flaws the F-104 had and that Pilots had to use a lot fo tricks to maintain control in certain situations...dont forget the Military stuff is multibillion $ buisness and they never tell the truth

Well, this Wiki fragment just confirmes your claims, that 30% of the German and 50% of the Canadian F-104's were lost in accidents and that it was the USAF aircraft with the highest accident rate in the history of this formation up to this day.

I am not claiming that the Wikipedia is the best source of knowlege but at least it's easy to quote on the internet

I also don't see how this fragment is supporting the hidden agenda of the US military-industrial complex

chris10 wrote: Spanish Air Force?... ..so Spain bought these after Francos death ?...well..I think they lost none cause they were actually not flying them but only watching them and anyway they must have had a very short service time in Spain

Here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Lo ... _operators

The Spanish Air Force received their F-104s under the Military Assistance Program: 18 Canadair-built F-104Gs and three Lockheed-built TF-104Gs were delivered under MAP to Spain's Ejército del Aire in 1965.[13] These aircraft were transferred to Greece and Turkey when they were replaced by F-4 Phantoms in 1972. It is notable that no aircraft were lost through accidents during 17,000 hours of operational use in Spain although it should also be noted that the aircraft was used only in its intended role of an interceptor and mainly in very good flying weather.

ivanov wrote:

chris10 wrote: Spanish Air Force?... ..so Spain bought these after Francos death ?...well..I think they lost none cause they were actually not flying them but only watching them and anyway they must have had a very short service time in Spain

Here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Lo ... _operators

The Spanish Air Force received their F-104s under the Military Assistance Program: 18 Canadair-built F-104Gs and three Lockheed-built TF-104Gs were delivered under MAP to Spain's Ejército del Aire in 1965.[13] These aircraft were transferred to Greece and Turkey when they were replaced by F-4 Phantoms in 1972. It is notable that no aircraft were lost through accidents during 17,000 hours of operational use in Spain although it should also be noted that the aircraft was used only in its intended role of an interceptor and mainly in very good flying weather.

ahhh...now its clear why none got lost...only 21 planes and only 7 years...Iam not sure that qualifys as a character witness for the F-104

ivanov wrote:I also don't see how this fragment is supporting the hidden agenda of the US military-industrial complex

well..they can not fix the numbers of course but for starters the US article spares completely the serious technical problems the plane had: There is a tiny little section of early problems and late problems and thats it...One could imagine in the US they should have better and more detailed sources (Lockheed) after so many crashes but its like there is a black hole....one really wonders why this always affects the US articles

I think I saw something on weaponology about a starfighter. The pilot was talking about having to eject because his plane came apart.

There was also an Me262 pilot talking about how he had to eject himself out of his plane. That is badass. Pop the top and pushing yourself out of one of those things.

Me 262 wasn't equipped with the ejection seat.

chris10 wrote:

ivanov wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F ... ety_record

Spanish Air Force?... ..so Spain bought these after Francos death ?...well..I think they lost none cause they were actually not flying them but only watching them and anyway they must have had a very short service time in Spain

That sounded insulting. Many spanish civil war and blue squadron veterans were still flying during the late sixties. And The words "intended role" and "good weather" should hint you the causes of f-104 lack of accidents during service for the spanish air force. Scarcity has nothing to do with accident rate, as there are only 21 b-2 spirits built and yet 1 was lost and another almost destroyed during its short lifespan

Fokker wrote:

chris10 wrote:

ivanov wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F ... ety_record

Spanish Air Force?... ..so Spain bought these after Francos death ?...well..I think they lost none cause they were actually not flying them but only watching them and anyway they must have had a very short service time in Spain

That sounded insulting. Many spanish civil war and blue squadron veterans were still flying during the late sixties. And The words "intended role" and "good weather" should hint you the causes of f-104 lack of accidents during service for the spanish air force. Scarcity has nothing to do with accident rate, as there are only 21 b-2 spirits built and yet 1 was lost and another almost destroyed during its short lifespan

good help me pls...why there is always somebody taking every single word with a pinch of salt ? and yeah...probably all other accidents were the pilots faults, thats why hundreds of the F-104 fell from the sky all over the world...the plane was crap and I made a joke out of it and what ?....diosssssssss tio

ivanov wrote:Me 262 wasn't equipped with the ejection seat.

Exactly - that's why it's so badass, ivanov.

I missed your comment... too distracted trying to decide what to do with Bf109K fuel levels.