Well given the picture, the takeoff obviously worked - at least once. But I'm wondering how the attempted landing turned out. :hmmm:

Well, no, but out of those 15 countries at least two of them lost pilots, the Luftwaffe crashed 292 and lost 110 pilots to it, Canada crashed 110 of them too, Belgium crashed forty one, Italy lost 137, Japan lost 36, and the US had 30.63 accidents for every 100,000 flight hours which was the highest of the 'century' series fighters. So at the very least (not including US losses) some 616 F-104s crashed in service. That's nearly 30% of all aircraft built (I don't know the precise number, too late to work it out).

Ok, the aircraft itself when used in the proper role was good, but it was used in the wrong role too often and in the wrong weather and then...splat, Tent peg time.

Plus, it severely burnt and took two finger tips from Chuck Yeager! I mean, the guy knows his aircraft but the F-104 chewed him up and spat him out.
Stopped his record attempts too.

Was a bit of an Icarus, reached for the sky but then burnt its wings off.

The P-59 Airacomet

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_P-59_Airacomet

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/9...9airacomet.jpg

A jet inferior to the prop aircraft it was to replace. Only 1 squadron received them. :doh:

What wings? :O:

Those stubs they put the fuel tanks and 'winders on? :haha:

That hardly makes an aircraft bad. I would ratchet that up to poor leadership at an strategic level.

EDIT: Don't forget the F-104 was the first jet with the M61 cannon. A 100% pure piece of whoopass.

That went better than I expected. :D

On the other hand... the Pogo? :har:

You're right, it was the 'Bombing Experimental 2', not the 'Fighter Experimental 2'. And it was a bad plane after fighters came along, but that wasn't a concept when the plane was designed. The later development, the RE.8, was not really better, but they had to use what was available.

Here's one for you, the actual FE.2b.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_A..._Factory_F.E.2

The front gun was great for shooting at another two-seater, but notice the procedure for shooting at a fighter approaching from behind.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a3...E2d_gunner.jpg

"No, Tim! Don't turn! DON'T TURN!"

The FE2 and DH2 both were effective when going against the Eindeker. Thus they can't be considered flops.

If you want ugly, used in combat and totally ineffective, I nominate the Do 335 push/pull design. Fast, but thats about it. A bloody ugly bird to boot!

Only 11 fighters were finished. It was also capable of outrunning just about anything the Allies had at the time (except maybe the Meteor). Not bad just unproven.

The Messerschmitt Me 163B-1
 

http://imgur.com/Uz083.jpg

http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircr...ircraft_id=107

They couldn't fix it, so they made it more ugly and gave it more problems!

Short Sturgeon

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/6291/sturgeonsb3.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_Sturgeon

Short's must have been on to something (or on something...)

Short SB.6 Seamew

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/3581/shortseamew.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_Seamew

China's "improved" Mig-21 (only took them 20 to start production!)

Shenyang J-8 "Finback"

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/765...ghterchina.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-8

And to finish it off (sorry no photo), a steam powered plane!:o

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Tramp

But the AEW version didn't serve with distinction, and was ugly to boot!

http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/7825/x0030270003.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AEW_Nimrod#AEW3

Is this what you're looking for might,
 

I would almost nominate the A-5 Vigilante, but overall it probably wasn't a bad aircraft. It did have an unusual method for delivering payloads, which never really panned out as a reliable system. So instead, I nominate the "stores train" of said aircraft.

"Cleanup on aisle 2, please." :shifty:

The Ejection Site