Author Topic: CF-104  (Read 23909 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Garry

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -25
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 398
  • Retired
Re: CF-104
« Reply #25 on: January 09, 2006, 13:06:12 »
Any of you old enough to have ever seen one fly? (104)

Yer killin' me.............

CFIT- there were some discussions on the low level mission and supersonic speeds.  Friend died in Europe )one of many) and his accident investigation revealed things that no one had thought of before. Reduced vis, low level, high speed, he flew into a mountain. Investigation found that the pilot was not at fault. Seems that by the time the light bounced off the mountain, into the pilots eyes, up to the brain, brain realised that this was a mountain,  recognised the danger,analyzed the response, and then sent the message to the hand to pull up, the plane had impacted the mountain. That fast.

Low level is inherently dangerous- make it low level and supersonic, it's an accident waiting to happen.

Having said that, the Cold War was on in full by the time the Century Series of fighters were flying. This war drove the exploration of flying like no other- right place, right time- and new designs were literally conceived, built, tested, and into production in as litle as a  year. Amazing.

The F-104 did a great job. Maybe the best testament of all is to ask a fighter pilot in the 80's what aircraft he'd pick for a joyride- near every single one said the 104.

No one said that Military Aviation was inherently safe, nor for everyone. Military Pilots sacrifice for freedom every day.

Cheers-Garry

Offline Blue Max

  • Member
  • ****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 186
Re: CF-104
« Reply #26 on: January 10, 2006, 14:09:34 »
I have recently downloaded some very interesting videos; one of the last Italian interceptor squadron's which was recently still flying the F104.

French pilots are putting out some very good video's, most not done by any official group and the resolution is incredible. Anyway the best French video's I have seen are training flights in Chad and Djubuti. The pilots practice flying very, very low and strafing cars on the highway. Some of these guys are flying so low that they would end up taking off the top of a truck if it had been driving  down the road.
"We will preserve our tradition of being most ready when the nation is least read. While this mission is our number one priority, we also have the responsibility to prepare for the future."
Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. Michael W. Hagee

Offline baboon6

  • Member
  • ****
  • 230
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 143
Re: CF-104
« Reply #27 on: January 10, 2006, 18:47:39 »
Any of you old enough to have ever seen one fly? (104)

Yer killin' me.............

CFIT- there were some discussions on the low level mission and supersonic speeds.  Friend died in Europe )one of many) and his accident investigation revealed things that no one had thought of before. Reduced vis, low level, high speed, he flew into a mountain. Investigation found that the pilot was not at fault. Seems that by the time the light bounced off the mountain, into the pilots eyes, up to the brain, brain realised that this was a mountain,  recognised the danger,analyzed the response, and then sent the message to the hand to pull up, the plane had impacted the mountain. That fast.

Low level is inherently dangerous- make it low level and supersonic, it's an accident waiting to happen.

Having said that, the Cold War was on in full by the time the Century Series of fighters were flying. This war drove the exploration of flying like no other- right place, right time- and new designs were literally conceived, built, tested, and into production in as litle as a  year. Amazing.

The F-104 did a great job. Maybe the best testament of all is to ask a fighter pilot in the 80's what aircraft he'd pick for a joyride- near every single one said the 104.

No one said that Military Aviation was inherently safe, nor for everyone. Military Pilots sacrifice for freedom every day.

Cheers-Garry

Yes great for a joy ride, even as an interceptor, but as a strike aircraft? 4000lb warload? Not very good low-level performance? Very short range? The US Air Force certainly didn't think so, they got F-4s (originally a navy aircraft) instead. A few were in fact sent to Vietnam but proved fairly useless.

Offline blueboy

  • New Member
  • **
  • 20
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 43
Re: CF-104
« Reply #28 on: January 20, 2006, 20:13:18 »
I grew up in Cold Lake as a base brat and often heard the howl of the big J-79 as it would hurddle itself through the air. The engine would howl as the pilot would throttle back on his base-leg getting lined up for final.   
It's better to live one day as a lion, than a thousand years as a lamb.   Middle Eastern Proverb

Offline 3rd Herd

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 215
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,446
  • Cave ab homine unius libri
Re: CF-104
« Reply #29 on: January 21, 2006, 16:35:41 »
my experience with the Starfighter was in two respects. the first was a choice of spending the summer vacation in the back set of the family car with siblings or going and visiting a cousin who was base CO at Comox, no brainier as to where summers were spent. My second experience was about twenty years later in Wainwright as a inf rad op in the bn cp during a brigade ex in which we were demonstrating our expertise in calling down close air support to destroy units of the 52nd Fanastian Motor Rifle Brigade. our pnr. plt had spent the morning setting up a  pyrotechnic result of a simulated napham delivery. With a various assortment of multi service brass looking on a Starfighter came screaming down the valley minimum agl. just as he reached the boom zone the pnr plt Co ignited his display. Result one silver starfighter now sooty black and as high as he could go. Several multi service gentleman crowding in the door of the cp all demanding to know wether a plane was down and had a no duff been declared. Radio chaos on several nets all requesting immediate sit reps and over top of it all the unfortunate pilot using provocitives that clearly were leading to a contest with the RSM over inventituers to the English language. All in a days work.
"if he was to be hanged for it, he told his brother, he could not accuse a man whom he believed had meant well, and whose error was one of judgment, not of intention"
Wellington

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 26,410
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,648
Re: CF-104
« Reply #30 on: January 21, 2006, 18:18:03 »
The Widowmaker moniker was coined in West Germany though it ended up being applied to all Starfighters. If memory serves me right, a number of our CF104s and CF5s were sold to Turkey. Wasn't there something about Amnesty International or someone griping about the Aricraft going to a country who'se track record on civic rights leaves something to be desired.
Chimo!

Offline 3rd Herd

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 215
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,446
  • Cave ab homine unius libri
Re: CF-104
« Reply #31 on: January 21, 2006, 18:28:34 »
Geo,
"Canadian export control guidelines call for close control of military exports to countries involved in, or under threat from, hostilities. They also call for control of sales to persistent violators of human rights, unless there is "no reasonable risk" of the equipment being used against civilian populations. These guidelines have not prevented extensive arms transfers to Turkey since the onset of the Turkish conflict. In addition to nearly $58 million in fluctuating commercial arms sales to Turkey reported since 1984, the government provided 50 CF-104 fighter aircraft and spares valued at over $67 million under the "Assistance to Developing NATO Nations Program" in 1986. Ignoring subsequent evidence of the use of F-104 aircraft in the internal conflict, in 1995 Canada also was prepared to sell upgraded CF-5 fighter aircraft to Turkey from Department of National Defence surplus stocks. A major invasion by Turkish forces into northern Iraq at the time brought temporary media and parliamentary attention to the proposed deal but, in the absence of a government announcement to the contrary, the CF-5 sale may yet proceed."
 see also;
WEAPONS TRANSFERS AND VIOLATIONS  OF THE LAWS OF WAR IN TURKEY
http://hrw.org/reports/1995/Turkey.htm


« Last Edit: January 21, 2006, 18:32:49 by 3rd Herd »
"if he was to be hanged for it, he told his brother, he could not accuse a man whom he believed had meant well, and whose error was one of judgment, not of intention"
Wellington

Offline old medic

  • Medical Forum Moderator
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 27,555
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,725
Re: CF-104
« Reply #32 on: January 21, 2006, 18:34:02 »
CF-5's
http://www.rcaf.com/aircraft/fighters/freedomfighter/index.php

CF-104's
http://www.rcaf.com/aircraft/fighters/starfighter/index.php?name=Starfighter
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f104_27.html

Quote
A number of former Canadian Forces single-seat CF-104 fighter-bombers and CF-104D two-seat trainers were transferred to Denmark and Norway after having been brought up to F-104G/TF-104G standards..... Canada then offered Turkey an initial batch of 20 CF-104s, later increased to 52, including six CF-104Ds. Twenty of these were sent to MBB at Manching in Germany in March of 1986 for inspection before being transferred to Turkey. The remainder were broken down for spares. 
re-answering vision questions since 2004.

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 26,410
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,648
Re: CF-104
« Reply #33 on: January 21, 2006, 23:20:29 »
Yeah - that's the story. But, Turkey being a NATO ally AND being the neighbor of two or threee archnemesis of NATO (USSR & Iraq/Iran) - was surprised when the CF104s were picked out for protest. The starfighters were not particularly well suited for ground support (though we certainly figured out how to do some)
Chimo!