It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The solution adopted by Lockheed was a small, lightweight design with a powerful engine called the F-104 Starfighter. Though capable of speeds exceeding Mach 2 and of reaching altitudes exceeding 90,000 ft, the Starfighter suffered from limited range, poor turn radius, limited payload capacity, and unforgiving flight characteristics. The F-104 was used for a time by both the Strategic Air Command as an interceptor and the Tactical Air Command as a fighter bomber. Due to its limitations, however, production was stopped in 1959 and the aircraft withdrawn from front-line service in 1960.
The sole armament of the F-104A was the heat-seeking AIM-9B Sidewinder, with one carried on each wingtip.
In fact, at the outset its most noticeable characteristic was its high accident rate, with 49 lost up to 1961. Partly the problem was the type's unprecedented high performance; partly the problem was its immaturity, J79 engine failures being a particular sore point; and partly the problem was that even when everything was working right, it was was a demanding aircraft and not friendly to inexperienced pilots.
The downward-firing ejection seat was a particularly unpopular feature, since it meant that surviving a failure at low altitude was very unlikely. Pilots were supposed to try to roll the aircraft over for a low-altitude escape, but this was not always easy to do. Famed test pilot and ace Iven C. Kincheloe was killed in an F-104A at Edwards AFB on 26 July 1958. He tried to roll over but ended up punching out sideways.
The F-104A's combat utility was marginal at best. It lacked the combat avionics of a proper interceptor and in hindsight its armament was inadequate. Many sources complain about its limited range, but the type's defenders insist that it was comparable to other fast combat jets of the time, none of which had very good range if the afterburner was engaged for more than short times. The F-104C was more satisfactory, basically the machine that Kelly Johnson had been hoping to build.
In the attack role, although the Starfighter lacked the ruggedness needed to survive enemy air defenses, its tiny wing gave it a fast smooth ride at low level.
The Lightning continues to hold certain categories in climb to altitude records and is justifiably admired for its vertical climb performance.
The USAF seemed to be more or less sold on the F-104, awarding Lockheed a contract on 2 March 1956 for an initial batch of production aircraft. The contract actually specified four different Starfighter variants:
The "F-104A" single-seat daylight interceptor for the USAF Air Defense Command (ADC).
The "F-104B" two-seat trainer derivative of the F-104A.
The "F-104C" single-seat fighter-bomber for the USAF Tactical Air Command (TAC).
The "F-104D" two-seat trainer variant of the F-104C.
Originally posted by ZPE StarPilot
The A-4 is pretty much everything done right in a very small fighter.
Originally posted by Seekerof
the F-104 was designed as a multirole fighter
Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
Originally posted by Seekerof
the F-104 was designed as a multirole fighter
......did ground workers on the Lightning ever have to wear thick clothes and gloves and place protective guards on the leading edges of the wings/tailplanes to avoid being cut and injured on their sharpness?
(is that a Starfighter myth, anyone know?)
Originally posted by waynos
No emile, the book isn't wrong. As seekerof has posted; the F-104A was an interceptor and thus directly comparable with the Lightning F.1, the F-104C was a fighter bomber, they were both ordered at the same time, hence the multi-role classification.