[NeonSamurai]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

Funny, the two German ground crews I talked to loved the F104. Actually the German F104 G had an average safety record over it's entire lifespan compared to other NATO aircraft. That means it started out badly which was also in part to lack of proper maintenance, rushed pilot training and slow upgrade speed when errors were discovered (non of that is an issue with the aircraft itself but because of pee poor planning and resource management in the Luftwaffe at that time which wasn't solved until Joahnnes Steinhoff became chief of staff of the Luftwaffe in 1966). But once that was rectified the safety record improved dramatically.

As long as you took precautions the plane was easy to work on. Don't and the plane could cut through gloves and pant legs.

In Canada its main nicknames were the widowmaker (press nickname), and the Lawn Dart or Aluminium Death Tube (what the pilots called it), and had a 46% loss rate in Canada over the time of its service, many attributable to teething problems as well. Of course our previous jet the F-86 saber had even higher losses, but then it flew in combat in Korea.

I only know of one prototype being lost because of cannon malfunction. I haven't heard of any difficulties with the production models (at least not 104G).

Canada and the US had problems with it where it caused a number of losses until they changed 20mm cannons to a linkless version. As Canada mainly used them as a high speed low altitude ground attack aircraft, that problem could be deadly. The G series wasn't affected because they had resolved it by the C series in the US.

It wasn't meant to be an all around fighter but it had some advantages over the MiG like acceleration, rate of climb and top speed at most altitudes IIRC.

It was designed as an interceptor, but many countries used it as a general purpose fighter or even a fighter bomber after the 'bomber threat' failed to materialize. It also failed very poorly in the India/Pakistan war, where in a 4/4 fight against MiG-21's all 4 F-104's were lost with no damage done to the MiGs. Now it may be an isolated incident, but still it is a very poor showing for the F-104. It's showing in Vietnam was also poor, where it had a number of losses (most from ground fire) over a total of about 5000 sorties, and zero kills.

This doesn't mean it was a bad plane as an interceptor, it just was rather poor at anything else, especially as missiles became more capable. To make use of its advantages takes an exceptional pilot, as you can't allow yourself to be drawn into a turning fight which is the natural impulse, as this plane can't turn. As the joke with Canadian pilots goes, 'banking with intent to turn'. To fight with it, your only option is to boom and zoom, as it was even less maneuverable than the F-4 Rhino.

Hartmann really didn't like it but that was in the beginning when it really had some issues. But name me one aircraft of that period that didn't. Most or even all of the faults were rectified throughout it's service career.

Still it is telling that he got drummed out of the Luftwaffe over it.

It's also a numbers game. You get two F104 for the cost of one F4. Two F104 can almost carry what one F4 carries but they can be at two different locations which one F4 can't.

Also means you need 2 fully qualified pilots, though the F-4 would need a RIO. I'm not entirely sure who would win a fight like that, but I think the F-4 may have the advantage, even if it was designed with the principle that you can make a brick fly if you give it enough power, as it could at least turn and be somewhat acrobatic.