[jjgilz]

Whew...at least this topic is back on subject...it was gettng creepy for a little bit. Almost made me stop looking at this thread!

I've heard the argument about investing money to "redevelop" the F-104 into an air to air fighter. I heard one of the reasons they never did was because of its original small (and thin) wing being optimized for high speed flight. The original design would've prevented competitive slow speed maneuvering. Any redesign would've probably required a new wing to expand its envelope. Redesigning a wing is one of the most expensive mods of an aircraft. Plus they did not have the advantage of CFD to compute more modern and robust designs like the F-16, F-22, Eurofighter. Any F-104 redesign would've needed additional wing root strengthening too to handle the additional loads associated with air-to-air maneuvering.

Other than a BS in Aero, I'm not an expert by any means. In short, I'm not saying it wasn't possible, I just would be curious to see where Stevenson got his information to back his claims.

[Rush104]

Originally Posted by jjgilz

Whew...at least this topic is back on subject...it was gettng creepy for a little bit. Almost made me stop looking at this thread!

I've heard the argument about investing money to "redevelop" the F-104 into an air to air fighter. I heard one of the reasons they never did was because of its original small (and thin) wing being optimized for high speed flight. The original design would've prevented competitive slow speed maneuvering. Any redesign would've probably required a new wing to expand its envelope. Redesigning a wing is one of the most expensive mods of an aircraft. Plus they did not have the advantage of CFD to compute more modern and robust designs like the F-16, F-22, Eurofighter. Any F-104 redesign would've needed additional wing root strengthening too to handle the additional loads associated with air-to-air maneuvering.

Other than a BS in Aero, I'm not an expert by any means. In short, I'm not saying it wasn't possible, I just would be curious to see where Stevenson got his information to back his claims.

No doubt a wing redesign would have been the single biggest factor in any F-104 upgrade. Lockheed did undertake some studies aimed at improving the Starfighter's maneuverability, the biggest one being the CL-1200 Lancer project (which lost out to the YF-16 and YF-17 for the LWF competition).
Here's a link to some other proposed 104 upgrades- specifically the CL-958 and the CL-1010:
F-104 Starfighter Projects

I think the point the author was trying to make was that the Air Force did not have a fighter in the classic sense with which to engage the MiGs. The Navy had the F-8, which was a much better dogfighter than the F-4 (at least the early models). The F-4 needed a lot of upgrading to improve its close-in dogfighting ability.

[smartd]

Originally Posted by Rush104

No doubt a wing redesign would have been the single biggest factor in any F-104 upgrade. Lockheed did undertake some studies aimed at improving the Starfighter's maneuverability, the biggest one being the CL-1200 Lancer project (which lost out to the YF-16 and YF-17 for the LWF competition).
Here's a link to some other proposed 104 upgrades- specifically the CL-958 and the CL-1010:
F-104 Starfighter Projects

Love the Doppelrumpf F104G, now where have we seen that idea before?

[roh_kudus]

Originally Posted by Rush104

You are correct about Israel requesting F-104s, however they made the request in 1960 due to the imminent Egyptian and Syrian purchases of MiG-21s. They also made requests to purchase the Saab 35 Draken and the BAC Lightning. All were turned down. At the time, Israel was looking to reduce its dependence on France as its main supplier of arms. The F-104s were refused to Israel due to a US arms embargo dating back to 1950. IIRC, the embargo was finally lifted when we decided to sell HAWK missiles to Israel in 1962. By that time, the Mirage III was on its way to Israel.
Concerning the F-104's service with the USAF- originally, the USAF was going to purchase 676 F-104s of the A/B/C/D models; however due to teething troubles with the 104 and the changing requirements for interceptors (wanting planes with advanced fire control systems, radar-guided missiles, lots of fuel for increased loiter time, etc) these orders were whittled down until only 296 models of all types were procured.
According to the book The Pentagon Paradox: The Development of the F-18, by James P. Stevenson, this abandonment of the F-104 may have hurt the Air Force during the Vietnam War. Of all the Century Series fighters, the only one that came close to possessing all of the characteristics of the traditional fighter was the F-104. The author makes a convincing (IMO) argument that the money used to upgrade the F-4 into an air-to-air capable fighter should have been put into the F-104 instead. He argues that it would have only taken 1/10th the amount of money that was sunk into the F-4 to turn the F-104 into the best fighter of the Vietnam War, one that was even better than the F-8 (which was the best air combat capable fighter we had).

Hei Rush thank you for the correction and some history lesson. This thread makes me feel bad not to purchase the Really George Starfighter. It wasn't particularly cheap and the fiddle bits but imo it's the best HM's jets out there.

[Rush104]

Originally Posted by roh_kudus

Hei Rush thank you for the correction and some history lesson. This thread makes me feel bad not to purchase the Really George Starfighter. It wasn't particularly cheap and the fiddle bits but imo it's the best HM's jets out there.

Thanks for the good words, Roh.
If you do decide to get Really George, I'd recommend HM's. I would not recommend FM/Armour's version. I violated my own rule concerning 1/48th to acquire the FM/A version, and it just doesn't impress me. I really like HM's version though.
I never got the Witty RG, it seems like that model got slammed in every review that I read of it, so I passed it up.

[roh_kudus]

I actually really like Witty Wings but I know that almost everyone gives bad press on their F-104.

Problem is no shop sells Witty Wings here. It's hard enough to spot HM planes. Some Gaincorps are also easy to find.

Everything else is Dragon's jets. I bought my first Dragon's F-14 and that was it. I don't like the fiddle bits(again)

[Rush104]

Originally Posted by roh_kudus

I actually really like Witty Wings but I know that almost everyone gives bad press on their F-104.

I like WW, too. I have some of their Sea Furies, Spits, F-16s and the Uzbek Su-27 (which I really like for the uniqueness factor). I don't know what happened with the F-104.
Speaking of F-104s- I've got the Corgi PAF F-104 on preorder from TFM. I've read that it is the HM mold (need clarification on this one). If that is true, it too should be a good model. The WW PAF bird looks horrendous- I've never seen any pics of the roundels with the black dots, nor have I ever seen a refuelling probe on any Pakistani Starfighters. But, WW must have gotten their info about this from somebody that's seen it...

[Lakota Mech]

The Witty Wings Pakistani F-104 doesn't come with a refueling probe. I checked it at at one of the hobby shops I do business with. If it did I would of got one so I could of used the probe on my Hobby Master Pussycat F-104 or my Corgi F-104C. At one time Hawkone said that any future 104s that had a refueling probe would come with a probe. I guess with ony two more F-104 liverys coming out this coming year that it is unlikely that they'll be F-104C's

[Rush104]

Originally Posted by Lakota Mech

The Witty Wings Pakistani F-104 doesn't come with a refueling probe. I checked it at at one of the hobby shops I do business with. If it did I would of got one so I could of used the probe on my Hobby Master Pussycat F-104 or my Corgi F-104C. At one time Hawkone said that any future 104s that had a refueling probe would come with a probe. I guess with ony two more F-104 liverys coming out this coming year that it is unlikely that they'll be F-104C's

So did WW decide to delete the probe after all? I haven't seen a WW PAF F-104 up close; all I've seen are the pics floating around the 'net. Good for them if they did delete it!
You're probably right about next year's F-104s not being C models.

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by Rush104

According to the book The Pentagon Paradox: The Development of the F-18, by James P. Stevenson, this abandonment of the F-104 may have hurt the Air Force during the Vietnam War.

I wouldn't put too much credence in whatever was in that idiotic book (which I did read, but boy, what a waste of time). Stevenson absolutely does not know what he is talking about when it comes to fighter development, design, and employment.

He has been promoting the so-called "fighter mafia" agenda for a long time now, but I can tell you their ideas are seen as a bit of a joke in the fighter pilot/crew community these days. It's not to say all their ideas were wrong, but they have pushed them to absurd lengths and have thus become irrelevant to any debate on that subject.

The F-104 was a lousy fighter, by the way, no question about it. It was OK as a pure point-defense interceptor, but even then, it's lack of substantial armament (quantity-wise, that is, even the S model) and range were severe limiting factors.

FVD