|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Sept 30, 2017 10:32:32 GMT -7
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2017 16:57:32 GMT -7
This is what the Alaska patrol looks like now. A slightly different Lockheed product has taken over. Ugly but awesomeI wonder if the engine from an F-22 could fit in an F-104... Super cruise and vectored thrust... Maybe a Fly-By-Wire system and an F-35 helmet display. Put some new teeth in that old tiger. |
|
|
|
Post by rabid on Oct 24, 2017 10:04:23 GMT -7
wasn't that a really long lasting airframe already? I always wondered if there is a "resto-mod" community among aviators. That's like taking an old muscle car body but filling it with modern guts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2017 5:20:33 GMT -7
The F-104 had some pretty cool features. It was an "Interceptor", not really a fighter since it was very fast and had an excellent climb rate. It had a hard time in sustained turns though, so dogfighting was not its deal.
Those tiny wings meant that it had an unacceptably high landing speed, so Lockheed gave it boundary-layer-control flaps (bleed air from the engines was blown around the flap to increase its effectiveness. It was the first US fighter to carry the 20mm Vulcan canon (now found on every US fighter).
Add all the geewhizz fly-by-wire, improved modern engines, and new avionics (and the F-35 Helmet), and I think the old F-104 could raise a few eyebrows. I have often stated (to anyone who cared to hear) that we should add all these upgrades to the F-5/T-38's to create a small, cheap, capable fighter.
The F-22 and F-35 are basically amazing planes, but they are too expensive.
2ยข
|
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Oct 27, 2017 7:40:01 GMT -7
The F-20 Tigershark should have been bought in the thousands but, they focused on the F-16 (which is a fine aircraft too but...).
If you put a modern "super-cruise" engine in any airframe capable of handling the power, you should get a serious performance boost. Both cruise speed and potential range would be increased.
The main issue with these glorious "stealth" fighters is that the stealth features cost too much, and require absurd levels of maintenance - considering that there are several easy ways to bypass the stealth and spot the aircraft anyway (microwave radars can be tuned for that - other detection methods also exist).
If the military would just focus on building solid aircraft - with the "hard" stealth features (sharp chines to reduce returns, IR suppression etc. - no RAM) and then build those in quantity, we would be so much better off.
You could still build a modest number of high-stealth aircraft for first strike but, those will have slow turnarounds compared to something more conventional in design...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2017 15:25:54 GMT -7
Star Trek connection.
In "Tomorrow is Yesterday" Captain John Christopher was flying an F-104 in an attempt to intercept the UFO (USS Enterprise).
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Feb 27, 2018 10:11:13 GMT -7
Star Trek connection. In "Tomorrow is Yesterday" Captain John Christopher was flying an F-104 in an attempt to intercept the UFO (USS Enterprise). I love this episode, but they actually used the wrong aircraft for the time period. The F-104 Starfighter, one of the most wonderful aircraft ever designed, was mainly a tactical fighter/air superiority fighter. The USAF's main interceptor of the time was the F-106A Delta Dart, with a few F-102A Delta Daggers and late model F-89 Scorpion interceptors in the Air National Guard. The intercept and possible attack would be made by the interceptor being controlled by SAGE, that would direct the plane without voice communications. The method shown in the show was a GCI (ground control intercept) methods dating back to World War II. By using SAGE (Semi-automatic ground environment) the intercept would have been quicker and more efficient. But of course, SAGE was still classified at the time, and it wouldn't have made for a good show!!! |
|
