Guided tour around the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter - Century Series Ep. 4

[@PaulStewartAviation]

Thanks for watching everyone! If you are enjoying my videos from the National Museum of the USAF, please click the thumbs up button because they're not getting many views and your validation would be appreciated (and it'll make KZbin suggest it to more people). 🤣

[@DenisFerrari]

Nice video! Just couple of tiny notes: BLC blew air to trailing edge flaps, not leading edge flaps. And only when flaps were set over TO position, that is LD position (full flap).

[@flanerpete2040]

The 104 is my all-time favorite fighter design!

[@darold1966]

It is also interesting to note the F-104's child - the U2. The fuselage for the F-104 was modified into the U2 airframe with extended wings. Look closely and you will see the family resemblence.

[@NoManClatuer-pd8ck]

@@darold1966 Really great fact. Had forgotten about this. Nice work.

[@JackNiles-hc8yz]

Actually, the U-2 used the fuselage of the prototype XF-104, which was five feet shorter.

[@jason1440]

The Museum at Wright Patterson is a real treasure.

[@briandenison2325]

Next up is my favorite century series jet the F-105 Thud.

[@roberttalarsky4238]

Love the 100 series videos thanks for your hard work

[@PaulStewartAviation]

Glad to hear you enjoyed them! My century series videos did very poorly unfortunately,

[@flywheel986]

That big hole you showed was an F-104 impact crater near Luke AFB in AZ. My dad was a flight instructor and executive officer for the F-104 Deutsche Luftwaffe training squadron. They operated both single and tandem seat models. I was in elementary school on base, the 104 had a distinctive sound, so I knew that was what was flying low over us. A half minute later we heard a loud explosion. Might have been what caused the crater in the video. While dad was at Luke, his squadron lost 6 Germans to the Widowmaker, my dad had to eject from a single seater that lost it's engine. He flew a lot of aircraft while in the USAF, but he had a special love hate relationship with the Starfighter. Oh and, that aircraft was never intended to be a "fighter", it was a high speed/altitude bomber interceptor. One more thing dad knew and liked Yeager, served in the same F-86 squadron in Korea

[@JackNiles-hc8yz]

The "A" model was designed by Kelly Johnson as an air superiority fighter. It was never intended to be a bomber interceptor.

[@flywheel986]

@@JackNiles-hc8yz Check your references again. The original design purpose was high altitude nuclear bomber interception. The 104 was a straight line intercepter, and had poor dog fighting characteristics due to the stubby wings. The missiles that were operational in the early to mid sixties were strictly line of sight.

[@JackNiles-hc8yz]

@@flywheel986 I don't need to check my references (which are extensive). You're the one that needs to do some research. Like I said, the original USAF F-104A was designed by Kelly Johnson as an air superiority fighter to replace the F-100. This is a historical fact whether you choose to believe it or not. Any source that states otherwise (and there's plenty out there) is flat-out wrong. The F-104A was never intended to serve as a bomber interceptor. The only reason it was (briefly) used as such was due to the delays in F-106 production. Finally, the Starfighter can be a formidable dogfighter when flown to it's strengths. There's plenty of anecdotal testimony to that fact.

[@zoperxplex]

The most beautiful aircraft ever.

[@briandenison2325]

I think the F-105 was a better looker, but both look and fly extremely fast.

[@ronjon7942]

No way, the Starfighter all the way! :)

[@NoManClatuer-pd8ck]

@@zoperxplex Who is going to start a Go fund me for zoperxplex's new glasses??? 😂🤣😅 Ok, sorry bro, couldn't help it.

[@zoperxplex]

@@NoManClatuer-pd8ckHey man, to each his own.

[@RachelsSweetie]

The Starfighter was aptly named. One was scrambled to intercept the USS Enterprise in the Star Trek episode Tomorrow is Yesterday.

[@dougcastleman9518]

Unfortunately it just couldn't hold up under a tractor beam!

[@fixman88]

@@dougcastleman9518 Hee.

[@parkpunk2]

Those tiny wings! Amazing it can even get any lift at all.

[@roberttalarsky4238]

Love the 100 series

[@chrisbeauchamp5563]

I’m really looking forward to the next two videos.

[@Bad_Karma1968]

Paul another great vlog in the series

[@user-tn1vc1xz5d]

Looked amazing in bare metal. My joint favourite with the F-105 ❤🥰😍

[@Abbbb225]

really good video. Included some interesting trivia you don’t normally hear and no BS.

[@SaturnCanuck]

Kelly Johnson, as are NOT worthy! Loved this plane. Of course mine is the Canadair CF-104. Oh and pitch-up? On a T-Tail -- that never happens!

[@ironman7261]

Another good video paul I think the plane was good for what it was designed to be a high level interceptor. When they tried making it into a low level tactical bomber was when bad things started to happen. A version with larger wings was offered in competition to the F15 that Kelly johnson believed could outfly the eagle but the USAF wasn't interested. Spain had relatively few crashes with the type because they would fly them high

[@conradmcdougall3629]

Im still amazed that it can fly with those tiny wings.

[@Dan.d649]

The Lockheed F-104 "Starfighter" was a very fantastic airplane. With the GE J-79 afterburner turbojet, you could just barely see a glimpse of this beauty pass by. You can hear the "howl" of that turbojet, when the pilot makes a quick pass like a missile. Back in the day, the Air Force used these airplanes for getting pilots familiar with something more capable of flying at very high altitudes at high speed. A true classic airplane this was.

[@ronjon7942]

Yeah, that sound...like a banshee

[@rollertoaster812]

Thank you for doing this series, Paul! The century series are fascinating and so important to the development of modern fighter aircraft.

[@well-blazeredman6187]

And the design also formed the basis of ......... the U-2. Interesting video.

[@jimfinlaw4537]

Very nice and informative video regarding the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter. Thanks for sharing. The Lockheed F-104 Starfighter was actually developed from the Douglas X-3 Stelleto research plane. Both aircraft feature the same wing profile and design and both have downward ejection seats at least until later models of F-104's were equipped with more conventional ejection seats. Thats how the F-104 was developed in under a year.

[@dougcastleman9518]

Kelly Johnson used data from the X-3, but it wasn’t developed from it. The differences were many. As far as being developed in under a year….this was a time of very rapid advancement in aviation and a year of development wasn’t unusual. All 104s were retrofitted with the new ejection seats, not just later models, as soon as they became available.

[@ronjon7942]

@@dougcastleman9518Yeah, it absolutely wasn't developed from the X-3, do you have a source for this claim?

[@NoName-ds5uq]

Bummer! I seem to have skipped the F-102 video and started this one… I’ve been intrigued by this aircraft since I was a kid when it was still operated by the FRG(West Germany), Turkey(Türkiye)and Italy(Italy😉). I always found it difficult to believe it could fly with such a small, thin wing. It had a very high landing speed, and a small payload, so I always wondered what the thinking was turning it into a ground attack aircraft. Besides budget of course… I’ll have to go back and watch the Delta Dagger one now. 👍

[@anotherpewtertahoe]

I have an unofficial mission to take a picture in front of as many F104's as I can find, and got to cross this one off my list about two years ago. What a cool place.

[@billace90]

Many, many years ago the Puerto Rico Air National Guard (PRANG), had a couple squadrons of Starfighters. Unforgettable!

[@kawboy14]

My favorite jet.

[@hordboy]

Seeing it in person, it’s hard to believe it can fly. The wings are SO small.

[@petr-podrouzek]

Great job Paul 🙂

[@thomaskroyer3468]

Hi Paul, I really enjoy your videos, I would mention that the F 104s in the RDAF service only used the drag suit at landings, not wheel breaks, it was cheaper to have staff to pickup the suits do maintenance and pack them after use than keeping maintenance on tires as breaks, and in winter time it was safer to use the drag suits do to the F104s high landing speed, why RNAF also only use drag suit at landings with their F 104 fleet and continues do so with the F 16s and now with the new F 35 fleet. I did my national service in the RDAF and got assigned to be a "F 104 drag suit pickup'er from the runways, so I clearly remember the high hauling the J-79 today made, a very disgust sound ❤

[@Sturzi]

In a German museum in Oberpfaffenhofen, close to Munich, there's a cut through a wing where you can see how it looks inside, all the hinges and especially how the BLC works. Really interesting to study the real thing.

[@adrianw7011]

One of the most iconic aircraft ever built with incredible performance even by todays standards. It really did look like a missile with a man in it and compared to your next subject, the F105, almost tiny in comparison. Great video, looking forward to the next.

[@craigsawyer6453]

Great series - Very enjoyable!

[@smark1180]

4:30 Unless I'm mistaken, "013" is the F-104N that infamously collided with XB-70 AV2.

[@6rimR3ap3r]

I've once seen an F-104 at German museum in Munich. You really can't tell how tiny this is in real life without seeing it in person. Literally only a turbine and cockpit.

[@robertkeddie]

I like hearing technical details - more please.

[@erickenyon4457]

Yet another great video..

[@staralliancefan1245]

Interesting video Paul! Nice to see this video a little longer too! :D

[@PaulStewartAviation]

More to come!

[@vdubboy85225]

Thank you Paul. What a great series. So interesting to have them back to back and compare/contrast. Please keep them coming. ❤

[@therichieboy]

Fascinating. This has always been an oddly intriguing aircraft to me. Great series.

[@PaulStewartAviation]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@johno9507]

Oh Paul im disappointed, I was hoping you were going to demonstrate the howling sound the F-104 made on approach. 🙂🇦🇺

[@josephpiskac2781]

The 104 is very cool though considering everything I continue to like the 101 the best.

[@ronjon7942]

I always thought the RF-101 recce Voodoo was the cleanest looking model - very well proportioned

[@johndornoff]

Great video as always Paul and a great education on jet fighters.

[@nolanbroderick1234]

So glad I was an early subscriber bc this channel is a massive success and will continue to grow. Keep up the good work Paul🤙🏼

[@PaulStewartAviation]

Thanks so much!

[@alexmasraum7596]

Love the videos. Im finally going back to the museum this coming Sunday, I’m excited to finally see an Su-27! Keep up the great work.

[@TheHobartAviationFan]

This series continues to be excellent 👍

[@caspercat39]

Great video as always 👍

[@ravissary79]

I've been told that a privately owned, de-militarized 2 seater f-104 owned by the owners of a company called "jet executive", was once observed by local air traffic control achieving mach 3 over the gulf of Mexico... maybe 18-15 years ago. It wasn't repeated and it was very brief or momentary, not sustained more than a few seconds. I wasn't there and have tried to find corroborating accounts and can't find any. I had a friend who worked there and the owners were proud of their private F104 and it was the company brag story.

[@ravissary79]

Oh, this was out of the St.Petersburg/Clearwater Airport in Florida (Tampa Bay area), and Jet Executive used to fly Tom Cruise and John Travolta quite a bit back then because they're both into Scientology and the Meca of Scientology is Clearwater, Florida.

[@ravissary79]

I briefly followed up with someone who books rentals for flystarfighters, and apparently the ones currently used by NASA at Kenedy space center are privately owned by the guys who used to own jet executive. They are indeed the same starfighters. They're loaned on a contractual basis to NASA to do various supersonic research tasks, in addition to renting training flights out to the public if you have a flying license and deep pockets. Unfortunately my buddy is foggy on the top speed anecdote. No wonder its uncoroborated. It must have been a fish story that evolved from their stories about how easily they break the sound barrier in the F104, such that they have to be careful to be over international waters when doing so.

[@Calebs_Aviation]

EXCELLENT VIDEO MY FRIEND TRULY EXCELLENT! 😯 🤩 LOVE THIS SERIES SO GOOD! 😊 The F-101 Voo Doo, F-102 Delta Dagger which looks a lot like the Convair CV-102 Delta Dart are they the same? Also the F-104 Starfighter also cool but theF-102is my favorite of these jets in the series! I have a new video coming out soon from The Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum in Washington DC (Well the Dulles Location) and I’ll be sure to give you and this EXCELLENT Series a shout out for sure! 😊 😁 Cheers mate 🥂 -Caleb’s Aviation. 😮

[@smark1180]

F-102 = Delta Dagger F-106 = Delta Dart Convair CV-102 = ?????

[@flyingsushi313]

Awesome video as usual Paul, as a result of your extensive videos shot at the Air Force Museum I decided to make a detour on my way back from the east coast to go see it in person. It was an incredible 6 hours! Could've easily come back the following day to do another 6. Keep up the quality content!

[@fredsalfa]

Can just imagine the pilots complaining about downward ejecting seats! I would as well!

[@MrTmac9k]

This airplane was about as close as you'd ever get to saddling up a jet engine and riding it.

[@misterplow1]

Great one again. Strange looking plane and also nice to not have you promoting stuff

[@吳秉樺-b7j]

How does the F-104 cope with different speed with fixed intake while other designs use moveable one?

[@danielversion1.035]

I'm sure everyone reading the comments on this video would be well aware of Chuck Yeager's exploits in the NF-104... but just in case you haven't already, go pick up a copy of "The Right Stuff" (the book...) and have a read 👍👍

[@ronjon7942]

Ha - I just started watching The Right Stuff last night; stumbled across it on KZbin movies.

[@TheHappyRacket]

What happened to f103?

[@smark1180]

Google is your friend.

[@kiereluurs1243]

GIY.

[@user-tn1vc1xz5d]

I can imagine that dead stick landings were not viable and pilots may have wanted to eject instead 🤔 RIP Major Carl Cross, XB-70 co-pilot.

[@dukeford8893]

Dead stick landings in the F-104 were indeed possible. You needed plenty of altitude and to be right over the airfield.

[@wormyboot]

Why is there no F-103?

[@frostedbutts4340]

Number was probably held for the XF-103 , which was cancelled.

[@wormyboot]

@@frostedbutts4340 looks like I've got some learning to do.

[@RobertCraft-re5sf]

WOOOOOO this one was very cool back then and still is. US always ahead of the game. Still the NUMBER ONE manufacturer and exporter of high technology.

[@koh_ling]

Wow it really is a missile with a man

[@georgew.5639]

The F 104 is not a fighter as it was not at all maneuverable. It was designed to be an high speed interceptor. It’s mission was to intercept soviet bombers before they could strike their targets. Same with the F 102s and F 106s.

[@smark1180]

"It was designed to be an high speed interceptor." False. It was designed as a fighter but was subsequently assigned the interceptor roll because of F-102/F-106 issues. 26 January 1958 "The F-104A entered service 2 years late and not with TAC (as originally planned), but with ADC's 83rd Fighter Interceptor Squadron at Hamilton AFB. This April 1956 (11) shift rested on two factors: slippage of the F-104 operational due-date (causing TAC to make other arrangements) and ADC's urgent need of a fighter to fill the gap between the F-102 and F-106. The tiny F-104, (12) with its long nosed fuselage and razor-thin trapezoid wings, had *never been intended as an interceptor.* But ADC believed it could use it, due to its impressive performance." - Encyclopedia of U.S. Air Force Aircraft and Missile Systems

[@skyhigh1154]

Copy paste wiki..

[@JackNiles-hc8yz]

@@skyhigh1154 Whatever it takes. The Wiki Starfighter article is actually pretty decent.

[@ronjon7942]

Yeahhhh, fighter. Kelly Johnson asked the American fighter pilots who fought in the Korean War what they wanted in a FIGHTER plane, and they said SPEED. So Kelly gave them the fighter they asked for. An interceptor role just was not a design prerequisite of Johnson's. I'm sure it performed interceptions quite nicely, but even when the Air Force drafted the requirements, the Air Force still hadn't detailed an interceptor role. Sorry bud.

[@ItsKing32]

Ill always blame ge for killing the XB-70

[@judgyboi428]

Ooh early

[@kiereluurs1243]

63rd!!

[@NoManClatuer-pd8ck]

Death trap. Kelly's worst design even if it was what Korean war veterans were asking for. Junk.

[@jnavonoD]

Terrible aircraft - just look at the absence of an airfoil of any meaninful sort - but quite beautiful. Great vid.

[@kiereluurs1243]

'Airfoil'? 'Vid'?

[@jnavonoD]

@@kiereluurs1243 A wing is known as an 'airfoil'. A 'vid' is a video, which you have just watched.

[@JackNiles-hc8yz]

"Terrible"? lol

[@robertcoleman4861]

👍👍👍👍👍🍺