Coop: What was the F-104 really like?

Bush: Ah!! The eternal question...what was the F-104 really like?

Coop, the F-104 has probably been the focal point of more semi-informed opinion than any other fighter since the Korean War. As an answer to the critics, I can only point out that the airplane flew for the first time in 1954(or 53, I can't remember) and it is still in active service. Now, for a design that is according to some so disastrous, that ain't a shabby record.

Here's my opinion...I flew the G model for over three years...most of that time, I was an instructor in the USAF/GAF Fighter Weapons School(FWS). I can say without reservation that no one flew the F-104 any closer to the edge than we did. And we had Canadian and German pilot instructors in the school...it wasn't just an American effort. One of the things we did, and I was personally involved in this, was to demonstrate an ability to turn that was far in excess of the popularly held convention.

This capability was demonstrated in 1978 at the USN Fighter Weapons School (TOPGUN) in flying exercises pairing the 104 against TOPGUN F-5Es. The F-104 FWS sent two pilots to TOPGUN to conduct the tests. One was a RCAF pilot...the other was me.

The objective of the exercise was to use the 104 in one of TOPGUN missions that was used to teach the TOPGUN students how to effectively use their energy advantage against a MiG-21 type aircraft. Usually, the mission was flown with the TOPGUN students flying F-4s. Our belief was that the F-104 could fly the mission as effectively as the F-4 or better.

In the mission, the F-104 was flown against the F-5E in a "flat scissors"...not exactly the type of maneuver that the typical semi-informed reader would would have high hopes for the chances of the 104. Without going into lengthy detail, just let me say that the TOPGUN instructor that I was flying against was recorded as saying "I don't f***ing believe it" over the radio as we were maneuvering against each other. Now this is no reflection of my flying ability...in fact, I'm just an average pilot...instead it is factual evidence of a capability that was there...it just needed an opportunity to come to everyone's attention.

Click for larger. Photo by Ton van der Zeeuw

To answer your specific questions, we taught our FWS students to fly the airplane fast....we could easily do 600 KIAS in military thrust. We taught them to turn only when necessary, and then to turn hard...that meant maneuver flaps, full burner and 6-7 g's. Our desire was to fly fast and in straight lines...if we had to turn we would decell to corner and then turn at max rate...we could sustain 6-7 g's below 15,000 ft at typical a/a gross weights and configuration. There was nothing unique in this...most well-trained pilots flew the same way regardless of a/c type. And the airplane had a considerable vertical ability...in a hard turning fight with a F-5, we demonstrated the ability to yo-yo off and gain as much as 12,000ft altitude over the F-5... the F-5 could not match that level of vertical capability.

Now, having said all of that, am I trying to say that the F-104 was a dogfighting wonder? No way. But, the jet was not a turkey either, and in the hands of a properly trained pilot, the airplane could take care of itself.

Besides, as every one knows, there are only two kinds of fighter pilots...those that flew the 104 and those that wanted to!!!

The F-104 was pure sex...in its time there was nothing to compare to it.

Andy

Later the discussion continued....

The Luftwaffe had a unique experience with the 104...no other air force suffered from a similar accident rate...not the Dutch, the Danes, the Norwegians, the Belgians, the Spanish, the Japanese, the Italians, etc...

The German press and public blamed the jet...this was a bum rap. The GAF transitioned to the 104 from F-86s and F-84s...subsonic, non-afterburning, day VFR fighters. What they got in the 104 was a double sonic, afterburning, all-weather interceptor and strike aircraft. Throw in European weather conditions, 8000' strips, 180 KIAS+ approach speeds, and a maintenance organization unprepared for the complexity of the a/c, and you have potential problems. In the case of the GAF, these potential problems became all too real.

As for how the jet handled in the traffic pattern, it did require that the pilot pay attention. Speeds had to be computed and flown. Was the jet difficult...absolutely not. But if the pilot was complacent or distracted...not paying attention...he could get real dead, real fast. The 104 was not very forgiving of ham-fisted mistakes. Such is life.

I enjoyed the F-4 and the A-10...great airplanes and all that...but the 104 was in a league by itself. Andy

Alexander Chernyshov aka "Russky" responded...

: Very, very interesting! Especially for me 'cos here in Russia we had almost no information about F-104 except TASS reports about their crashes in Germany. Propaganda also admitted that German pilots nicknamed F-104 as "Flying Coffin".

: As you said, you were an instructor in GAF FWS and probably know a lot about incidents with this planes. My guess is that because of very small and thin wings F-104 requires *very* accurate handling on landing and that most of the accidents took place right there. Am I right, and what were the most common causes of F-104 losses?

: P.S. I've read your contest in jet forum and want to add some to your fighters nickname collection. Here's the names given by Russian pilots to American aircraft:

: "Cross" = F-84 - for it's plan view
: "Humpback" = F-4 - for its distinctive cockpits

More comments from Andy:

As for the planes I flew in the AF, I started out as a T-37 instructor in 1969. I volunteered for Vietnam and finally got a F-4 assignment in 1972. I went to Ubon AB in Thailand and flew day and night close air support missions in Cambodia. From there I went to Europe and flew air defense missions out of a little Dutch base near Amsterdam. Then it was back to the States and an airplane change to F-104s. I spent four years in Arizona, mostly as a Fighter Weapons School instructor teaching US and European students. A desk job followed and after that time in purgatory (g), I transitioned to the A-10. I flew the Hog for four years in Europe and two more in the US before I retired in '88.

Check out Mark Berent's books on Vietnam F-4 stories. He was in the same squadron as I was..although several years earlier...and his books are authentic. For additional Vietnam reading I strongly recommend Tom Wilson's books...particularly Termite Hill. David Ployer writes a series of novels following the career of a USN surface officer. Even thought the central figure is not a pilot, Ployer's books are excellent in their discussion of courage, character, and honor. His books are probably not on Bill Clinton's "must read" list...:-)

The low altitude speed record is flown over a closed course...two high speed dashes connected with a high g minimum time 180 degree turn. The aircraft has to be able to accelerate very quickly since the straight line leg is relatively short. As a result, it's not absolute max speed that counts, it's the ability to accel to a high speed over a measured distance. I do not forsee the AF making the effort to beat Greenameyer's speed.

I really don't know which airplane is fastest these days...if I had to bet, I would think the F-111 is still hard to beat. The MiG-23 is also very fast. I've flown on the deck in a 104 while on the wing of a 111 and we were outrunning everything around. Our 104s were easily capable of 800 knots indicated...we could go faster but that was the airframe limit. Let me tell you..800 knots at 200' is really smoking!!

My favorite?!! They all were! But the 104 was "first amongst equals!!