Joe Jordan's F-104 Record Altitude Flight (1959)

[@bbbmmm1713]

The 104 still looks futuristic.

[@j.griffin]

The F-104 descended from the X-3 Stiletto which commenced in 1949. If you are unfamiliar with the Stiletto, you should look it up. It is even more visually impressive, especially for the time period.

[@roger_thatrn]

Thats my grandpa!!! Awesome!

[@elmundir]

Jennifer Rogers the earth is flat

[@BornAgain77757]

Elmundo...Sphere.

[@elmundir]

David Williams haha nice one

[@danr308]

That's really cool. Makes you very proud I bet.

[@383mazda]

Jennifer Rogers Way cool! My grandfather flew the time to climb trials in the 70's with the F15 when the USAF broke all the old records again. He passed when I was little, but I remember him saying out of all the planes he flew, the Starfighter was his favorite.

[@2serveand2protect]

I knew some pilots assigned to fly on those and they used to say to me that was the most UNFORGIVING plane they ever encountered - WORTH TO NOTE! - they didn't say it was a "bad" aircraft, just a very "UNFORGIVING" one - meaning: the tiniest mistake and you were burned meat. They described the experience as "tryng to fly a powerful rocket with tiny little wings!" Basically - if you flew it plain and straight (and FAST!) - NO PROBLEM! - everything was perfectly okay. AS SOON as you had to manouver, you had to watch for every vibration, or you'd fall into pieces in mid-air - even way before falling to the ground! That's at least how they described it - quote: "a rocket with tiny wings." :) My ex base-commander had to eject himself three times from the 104, which - as far as I could tell - was some sort of a "record", given the fact that he never even flew a war-mission - AND (quite possibly!) the fact that he survived ALL three times! ...although the last time he ejected something malfunctioned and he slammed at about 8-9G straight into the ...how do you say it in English? - that "bubble" that protects the pilot in flight??..."CANOPY" I think! (that's the word!) - his pilot-seat slammed straight into it, while the "canopy" was not not supposed to be above him anymore. After landing he was in a coma for 3 weeks - woke up but never fully recovered. He couldn't walk straight anymore and had his right arm paralyzed, so they gave him a desk job ... and even a MEDAL! (but not a RAISE!) ...tough luck! "Aeronautica Militare Italiana"! - "Italian Air Forces"! :)

[@michaelgray7847]

Eric winkle Brown test flew F104 and had some reservations about the F104.

[@kimisdaman]

When the plane is shown taxying, it has the larger vertical tail of the trainers and later single-seaters, but the plane shown taking off has the small rudder of the A/C models. Composite video is better than no video.

[@cowboybob7093]

885 Was the record setting flight article. 2:00 - Good eye on the edit.

[@dennisgarrison7315]

WE HAD THE F-104'S WHEN I WAS STATIONED AT GEORGE AIR FORCE BASE IN 1961,1962. A GREAT FIGHTER JET.

[@dennisgarrison7315]

@@afantini1 You are welcome.

[@gregtaylor6146]

It was NEVER a 'fighter' ...... interceptor, yes, but an air-to-air fighter, forget it!

[@dennisgarrison7315]

@@gregtaylor6146 then what does the "F " stand for????

[@gregtaylor6146]

@@dennisgarrison7315 - It's what the manufacturers (and their/your government) HOPED to sell the thing as, around the world, but it wasn't, and they didn't. Next?

[@dennisgarrison7315]

@@gregtaylor6146 Gee I was stationed in TAC Fighter Wing. Strange.

[@endwood]

Shows the days of pride at all costs, ah the good old days!:-)

[@RFKFANTS67]

It will always be my favorite jet. That unique howl:}}} and for piston driven aircraft my favourite P51D and Spitfire

[@winfriedfischer3558]

RFKFANTS67 , And don't forgett the ME 109, Greetings from Germany

[@MrClean417]

Always like the TA-152 more.

[@brucesheehe6305]

Kelly Johnson's genius at work again! Pilot needed to be absolutely perfect to fly this missile. He designed many planes - Electra, Constellation, SR-71, P-38, F-104, U2, etc.

[@terifarley4770]

A parker pen with open matchbook for wings! Howling zipper! Nice to see wingtip sidewinder and refuling fit at the end!

[@radcam69]

Missile with a man in it. The F-104.

[@danmulcrone6581]

Thanks Bo: Of the Century Series aircraft, the F-104 was the 'rocket' of them all.

[@pelagic6]

That run must have burned a lot of fuel... The F-104 has always been one of my favorites, it just looks fast.

[@scootergeorge9576]

Like "A missile with a man in it."

[@MrLuvOldies]

Thanks. Great video,and a very Great Airplane---Lockheed F104 Starfighter.

[@mrFalconlem]

There were a few still flying for the German Air Force till just a few years ago, now a couple tour air show, imagine what some good Air Force Thunderbirds could do with these, their sound is so fast that high pitched whistle is so cool.

[@Tigershark_3082]

The Thunderbirds would've had to do a hell of a lot of overhauls. There were a lot of issues with engine flameouts (mainly in the early models). Also, the maintenance personnel would've required a huge amount of additional training. Then, there's the fact that the Starfighter couldn't do a whole lot of stunts

[@gregtaylor6146]

@@Tigershark_3082 - Exactly, THIS thing (pretty as it is) was never made to go round corners.

[@orange70383]

That's freaking impressive.

[@ynotnilknarf39]

the Yanks equivalent to the Lightning, a very fine aircraft indeed. I remember doing 'tech' drawings of both of them as a kid when around 10/11yrs old, also the F-111B, SR71A and a few other US military aircraft. Saw a fair few at Lakenheath BITD and Farnborough.

[@Randomadventurelife]

There was no equivalent to the f104 at the time.

[@michaelgray7847]

@@Randomadventurelife Flight lieutenant Mike Hale of the RAF took part in a time to height and acceleration trials against the F104 starfighter and reported that the Lightening won all the races easily except that for low level supersonic acceleration , which was a dead heat . Most interesting .

[@douglasparise3986]

I did the same

[@michaelgray7847]

@@dukeford8893 Dream on Duke .

[@lousanto1054]

4 years before Michael Jordan was born, there was the ORIGINAL Air Jordan!!!!

[@ranchero50]

Love the electrical tape angle of climb marker on the canopy.

[@jasons757]

Love it! Thanks. I'd sure like to find the original US training films for this airplane.

[@raymondtyree5300]

Back when American was proud of things they did and strong and no pants around their ankles

[@lucasng4712]

sod off

[@Tigershark_3082]

This was also back when we hid our war crimes behind a false picture. In modern times, the US is becoming better than it was in the past, especially since we're finally pulling out of a conflict we never should have been involved with in the first place.

[@Sparringvids94]

With a splash of racial hatred

[@WARFARENINJA]

Hahah He parked that plane like a cadillac

[@hossahunter22]

Hey Ridley, you got any Beemans?

[@phil123711]

Thanks for telling me about Chuck Yeager. I wasn't aware of that.

[@bcraig15]

It was designed as an interceptor, where going high and fast is everything. Stability and low-speed handling were sacrificed, making the plane a bit finicky and a handful to fly. Landing was difficult, final approach was around 200mph. Landing characteristics were so dubious that if the flaps failed, it was often recommended for pilots to eject rather than land. In many cases, they were lost to accidents at nearly twice the rate of other contemporary fighters, leading to the widow maker name.

[@tomcline5631]

This bird ate German Air Force pilots like peanuts during the 60's.

[@TheSirjohn2012]

At one time this was the fastest fighter jet of that time era and the jets after that beat it by 10 miles and one of them is and was the MCDONNEL DOUGLAS F-15 which had held an altitude record of 100,000 feet and if a SR-71 was around the pilots would be showing thumbs up and then drop down back to base.

[@michaelusswisconsin6002]

A-12 had a max altitude of 90,000 ft

[@Robert-uj3gz]

@@michaelusswisconsin6002 I am no expert but I believe that 90,000’ was the a-12s max operating altitude I’m sure it could fly much higher for short durations like the star fighter was doing. And I’m sure it did

[@amramjose]

Damn! I was 4 yrs old when this happened!

[@canadiannuclearman]

What a great name. STARFIGHTER who named it?

[@daffidavit]

It is a great name for a jet especially one that was built before the movie Star Wars was made.

[@danmulcrone6581]

Thanks!

[@cyberdyn1]

lovely 104s

[@emmedigi89]

and it was Italy's top and only fighter plane until 2003 if I remember well, when USAF lent us some F-16s waiting for the EFA that was late and still is. It actually should be becoming completely operational in the Areonautica Militare in these months.

[@danmulcrone6581]

Thanks Talk--I'm not familiar with the KH space stations. But thank you very much for letting me know that the F-104 WAS modified later for the jumps. I didn't attend the Academy, but received my commission in '71 through OTS. We always called them 'zoomies' as they knocked their rings. However, we all worked as a team, always depending on each other. Familiar with ARIA?

[@ertana268]

When the f-104 is mentioned, the Lockheed scandal is the first thing that comes to mind.

[@henrysanchez4810]

F-104 one of the best..

[@Thunder_6278]

Every plane is a 'widowmaker' if not flown as the mfr. directed. That includes a Piper cub....

[@donaldbadowski6048]

They let the guy hit Mach 2.4 to accomplish this. But the F-104 was normally "redlined" at 2.2, Having an aluminum frame, anything over that speed would cause too much aerodynamic heating and damage the air frame.

[@thornefroemming7796]

Helmsman Lojur: "She'll fly apart!" Captain Hikaru Sulu: "Fly her apart then!" (Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country)

[@donaldbadowski6048]

Thorne Froemming , not the same without Scottie rolling his R's. "Aye Captain, she won't take this stress very much longerrrrrrrrr!"

[@Yosemite-George-61]

Wrong... he speed limiting factor is compressor intake temperature and cockpit hood integrity...

[@AvengerII]

Someone reportedly took an F-104 to Mach 2.5 but Mach 2.4 has been repeated enough times that I can believe Mach 2.5... Yeah, it's mainly about the temperature of the plane -- generally the engine is what we're talking about. Aluminum is good to about Mach 2.6 although an F-111F briefly went to Mach 2.73 They may have done the speed runs in the F-104 with modded shock cones. The NF-104A had a metal nosecone, extended wingtips, AND modded shock cones for the inlets. The plane DIDN'T have variable geometry inlets but Lockheed modded the outer cones that go flush against the sides a few times to increase the speed limit of the plane. It reshaped the airflow into the engine a bit. With the second F-4 built, they installed a water-injection system for the inlet to COOL DOWN the air entering the engines and that F-4 went to Mach 2.62! Last I heard, that F-4 STILL exists but it's in storage pending sale to a museum... Most of the F-4s that set THE IMPORTANT records for the type were A-models (including the XF4H prototypes) and B-models. The B-models were used mainly for the climb-to-altitude attempts and the A's and surviving second prototype set the ultimate speed records at altitude and low level.

[@daffidavit]

@@thornefroemming7796 Spock: Captain, the aircraft that is following us is identified as an interceptor possibly equipped nuclear missiles. If he hits us with one we might not be able to recover in our present condition". Kirk: "Scotty, use the tractor beam on that aircraft" Spock: "Captain, I'm afraid that aircraft might be too fragile for our tractor beam". Kirk: "Transporter room, try and beam that pilot aboard". Cpt. Christopher: "Who are you, where am I". Kirk: "Relax Captain, you're among friends". "Tomorrow is Yesterday" Star Trek TOS season 1 episode. 20

[@fireengineer]

The F-104, the plane nobody wanted but everyone got.

[@jamescarter8311]

If you don't like the Starfighter, you're a commie.

[@hackneysaregreat]

amazing...

[@jkorshak]

Senators, Congressmen, thank you for your attention to this presentation.

[@canadiannuclearman]

Question: How can the F104 get so high in altatude with the short stubby wings ??? its not like the U2 with its large wing span!

[@yusufdemiroglu5952]

Some versions of F104 have a rocket on tail. Also they have rcs system to adjust orientation in high altitude where effectiveness of control surfaces is not enough.

[@Randomadventurelife]

The way a rocket gets there with zero wings. Power!

[@telosfd]

The first time I saw the F-104 I thought that with those wings it was impossible to fly!

[@keithboyd1847]

Meet your maker in the Window Maker F-104

[@jameshowland7393]

NOTHING sounds like an F-104!

[@dalesfailssagaofasuslord783]

The missle with a man in it.

[@eddyredmond7758]

F 104 is my favorite.

[@georgechrist2886]

Was that f104 modified in anyway compaired to a standard one?

[@TheMrPeteChannel]

Standard but NASA did make a few with a rocket in the tail.

[@Tigershark_3082]

@@TheMrPeteChannel Yep, the NF-104A. Along with the rocket at the base of the vertical stabilizer, it also had hydrogen-peroxide RCS thrusters in the nose, and slightly longer wings.

[@allgood6760]

Awesome!.. cool plane 👍

[@ellsworth1956]

The F-104 was designed as an Interceptor. That it did extremely well, but for any other role it sucked.

[@78logistics]

ellsworth1956 as an interceptor it sucked. F-104 A:Limited range , a fire control radar that was severely lacking, and a missile armament inferior to the F-101, F-102 and F-106. Hence they were gone from ADC to the National Guard by 1960.

[@rickravenrumney]

Yeah the Germans arw still blaming us for using it in the ground attack role. What about short stubby wings says ground attack?

[@karlhubben8009]

But the germans had to learn a very bloody sad lesson about this! It was an interceptor....and nothing else! Fine at good flying conditions.....but in eurpean foggy dusty rainy wether as a ground attack fighter? At least the surviving german pilots must have been remarkable well!

[@ellsworth1956]

@@dukeford8893 Although the F-104 was designed as an air-superiority fighter, the United States Air Force's immediate need at the time was for a supersonic interceptor. In the late 1950s, the United States government believed it was significantly behind the USSR in terms of the size of its jet-powered bomber fleet. In response, the USAF had ordered two interceptors from Convair, the F-102 Delta Dagger and the F-106 Delta Dart, but both aircraft were experiencing long development delays. The Starfighter's speed and rate-of-climb performance intrigued the Air Force, who pressed the F-104A into service as an interim interceptor with the Air Defense Command (ADC), even though its range and armament were not well-suited for the role. On 26 February 1958, the first unit to become operational with the F-104A was the 83rd Fighter Interceptor Squadron (FIS) at Hamilton AFB, California.

[@Hornet135]

@@ellsworth1956 You wrote all of that to contradict your original post. Correct, it was not designed as an interceptor.

[@jamesbottger5894]

The 104 was definitely bad ass...

[@ahargrov1]

"hey guys I'm just going to tske a shit be right back".... 21 minutes later" alright you ready to do this?....... What? "

[@kmfiz]

Andrew LoL

[@keithboyd1847]

Meet your maker in the widow maker F-104

[@Viking-rd7ps]

The Starfighter has not aged a bit !

[@sferrin2]

That wasn't the NF-104. The NF-104 hit 126,000 feet.

[@kenjordan1541]

Yeah NF-104 a completely different aircraft. Probable the highest performing aircraft ever that could take off and land under its own power! Incredible aircraft. Yeager crashed it!

[@tinahaynes696]

No peroxide rocket or reaction control systems yet.

[@kenjordan1541]

That’s my Dad!

[@prof2yousmithe444]

Wow!!!!!😊

[@mudskipper0075]

What’s the saying ,if you want an F104 buy an acre of land and wait...🤣🤣🤣

[@Satisfyinglyowned]

I’m currently trying to achieve this on Microsoft flight simulator. So far my record is 74,000 ft lol

[@Satisfyinglyowned]

Update: managed to get to 80k feet

[@sulufest]

It blows my mind that the F-104 could get well over 100,000 ft but the SR-71 couldn’t?? 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@ConanMcDonnell]

I think this was a zoom climb, i.e. the plane's momentum took it to the max altitude before it started to fall again, like when you throw a ball in the air. It didn't operate in level flight at that altitude.

[@terrencejohnson85]

Why wouldn’t they perform this in the middle of winter, when there are more lifties in the air?

[@scootergeorge9576]

Cold air is denser. Jet's actually perform better in cool air. Takeoff runs from places like Yuma AZ in the summer could be long.

[@mauricewilsondaddybob1307]

Is that the same engine as the u2 engine?

[@scootergeorge9576]

No. The F-104 used the General Electric J-79. Similar to the engines in the F-4 Phantom II. The U-2 used a version of the Pratt and Whitney J-75.

[@aj-2savage896]

"Beat the Russians by a mile and a half. Beat the Navy by a half mile." LOL

[@billr8667]

And wasted more American taxpayers' money! Too bad there was and is no accountability for $$$ spent for no good purpose other than egos.

[@michaelrualzakhuma2992]

@@billr8667,. Don't be rediculous. USA is a super power due mainly to its technological advancement.

[@Tigershark_3082]

@@billr8667 setting records isn't exactly wasting resources. If anything, it's contributing to technological and scientific research. Take the NF-104 for example: people often see that plane as a waste, because it was just a modified F-104. However, it was devised as an aerospace trainer for the X-15 program.

[@sahibshakka1942]

Jf17 thunder always reminds me of f104 Star fighter and fast

[@人民领袖-s9z]

How stupid?! They are each other's enemies!!

[@vitakyo982]

Fedotov 1977 on a Mig 25 : 37 650 m .

[@Rondo2ooo]

Yeah... many, many Siberian winters later.

[@tom7601]

Pre-NASA, still NACA (I think).

[@hage3760]

「未亡人製造機」の異名を持つスターファイター。 それを乗りこなしていた航空自衛隊のパイロットが如何に優秀か。 僕が小学生の頃、新田原基地から飛来するスターファイターを目で追いながら、 ジェット戦闘機に憧れを持ったものです。F-104は空飛ぶ芸術品でした。

[@danmulcrone6581]

Sorry, I meant rocket assisted.

[@TalksWithDirt]

Look up MOL or KH-10. Amazing stuff. I'll look up ARIA. I don't know what it was/is.

[@PumaTwoU]

The F 104 is not a huge airplane. Razor thing wings, like a dart to be thrown, very fast.

[@ThatIsJustCrazyTalk]

Proof positive that if you put enough thrust behind a brick it too will fly.

[@lawrencegenereux8567]

That was the design philosophy of the F4, not the F104.

[@buminsoyoguz1115]

It is called "flying coffin"

[@robertgantry2118]

...and, if I'm not mistaken, the F-104 Starfighter only stayed in service for two years. It was plagued with problems, most notably it's inherent difficulty to handle. I think this may be the part of the reason it rolled into an XB-70 Valkyrie during one of IT'S test flights. At least the F-104 fared better than the Valkyrie, as the Valkyrie was never put into service at all.

[@MrClean417]

No, it got into the XB-70's tip vortexes, they'll flip any light plane over. That's the reason there is a big gap in between an airliner taking off and a light plane. Two little tornados that form off the wingtips of any plane. On a big, heavy plane with a wing making lots of lift, the vortexes are monstrous.

[@vq37vhr12]

the f104 was retired from the Italian air force in 2004 so it had been in service for a good 40 years

[@Foxhound617]

Love the F-104 and its thin design but America still haven't beaten Russia's height record of 123,000ft in a Mig-25. Don't think any country bothers with time to altitude or altitude records anymore wish it could all come back

[@-GrimEngineer-1337]

SR-71 smashed it. We just can't talk about it.

[@vitakyo982]

Grim Engineer No , that's not true . The altitude record belongs to the mig 25 ( 37 650 meters )

[@wessendorf15]

i guess that's because we decided to go to the moon instead

[@daffidavit]

Great answer. I guess we beat the Russians on the altitude record for human distance from the ground.

[@jshepard152]

@@wessendorf15 Exactly.

[@emmedigi89]

that was the NF-104 which almost killed Chuck Yeager, but it was first tested in the early '60s and so it shouldn't be the same as Joe Jordan's

[@Randomadventurelife]

No

[@redkobra4965]

Love this plane in War Thunder lmao

[@MajSolo]

if it was not rocket assisted it was very good

[@taylorahern3755]

And to think that that courageous fighter pilot's parents were probably born in a log cabin with no running water, indoor plumbing, heat or electricity back in 1900, while the family's main mode of transportation was this this horse drawn buggy & a few lumbering mules that got giddy feasting on their own crap, all in a very isolated area that was miles away from a train station, having their photos being taken with cameras that were already 20 years old, where the term "airplane" was something out of a science fiction novel, water was drawn from the well, farming one's own land was the norm, baths were taken in an old wooden tub, leaves were used to wipe shitty asses, Civil War veterans were still in abundance & raising kids, & ol' grandma was always nostalgically reminiscing about the good ol' days before railroads, Morse Code, photography, steam ships, before the Westward migration, before Kansas saw more than 150 white settlers & back when "savage hostile natives" still held much hegemonic sway & could raid your icebox for fresh beers with relative impunity (1830s-50s). Now speed ahead 59 years to 1959 & you have telephone wires connecting the whole country, streets lit up via electrical lighting, home appliances, refrigerators & televisions for virtually every household, highways clogged with gas chugging vehicles, these huge computers that can process a gazillion bits of info & break any type of esoteric code, ballistic missiles that can rocket powerfully into space & travel halfway across the planet in half an hour, satellites orbiting the Earth from 250 miles up, & super hi tech supersonic jet planes like the one featured above breaking speed & altitude records on an almost weekly basis, easily reaching the stratosphere & being able to travel from the East Coast to the West Coast in less than 90 minutes (& that's not mentioning the easy luxury of sophisticated indoor plumbing along with cheap & unlimited toilet paper that folks in remote Appalachia had access to!), with all those incredibly transcendent technological breakthroughs, innovations, lifestyle improvements & developments taking place in less than 4 decades, at breakneck speed, in quantum leaping, unprecedented fashion, thoroughly bringing much of Western Society well into the late 20th Century yet happening in the middle of it, the 1930s-the 1950s, as so much magically transpired in only a few decades, perhaps one generation, from the late Victorian Era to the Space Age in less than 50 years (from leaves to soft toilet paper, mules to jet travel)! Mind bending!

[@danmulcrone6581]

OK, help me out here. I'm an old AF retiree. Few questions: wasn't the 104 the 'starfighter', also dubbed the 'widow maker', and for some reason, I thought it had jet assist for its altitude record?

[@billr8667]

That was a very cool aeronautical feat, but what a waste of resources.

[@javiermac5885]

F104 really looks like a missile. Widow Maker.

[@MrClean417]

The list of planes, in every service, that have been called widow maker kinda makes the term moot.

[@gregsdrummer]

MrClean417 this plane deserves the title the most

[@agt155]

Was also called the flying coffin.

[@dogsbd]

@@gregsdrummer No it got that name mainly because of the Germans. They never should have gone to such a high performance aircraft so quickly, given they had practically no high performance flight experience for about 10 years after WWII. Eric Hartmann warned them against it.

[@northernpike56]

Omg was that a chemtrail in 1959???

[@leifvejby8023]

they had them in the 30s too

[@alpteknbaser7773]

👍

[@usaf4ever1824]

103,000 with no space suit? Yikes lol

[@SeamusMcGillicuddy0]

A tribute to Czechoslovakian engineering and craftsmanship 🙄 !!!

[@scootergeorge9576]

A tribute to the American aeronautical engineer, Kelly Johnson!

[@charletonzimmerman4205]

"ZOOMER" !

[@nervechews6781]

This is so badass. God I hate the 21st century.

[@cliffords2315]

Yeager almost went into orbit in one LOL

[@RMB42]

I assume you're joking? I heard it was actually Bill Brasky.

[@BTeamHooligan]

Yeager actually screwed up. He used his connections to have himself shoehorned into the lineup for the NF-104A zoom flights in order to set an altitude record. The zoom program used the NF-104A that actually had a rocket engine situated at the base of the vertical fin, as well as a reaction control system. The normal flight profile was to put the NF-104A into a controlled clime at a specific angle in afterburn. At about 35k feet, the rocket would be ignited and the pilot would have to maintain about 3.5 g's while maintaining a specific climb angle. As the 104 reach around 70k feet the jet engine would stall due to lack of oxygen. As the 104 started to reach the maximum altitude the craft slowed to the point that the conventional control surfaces could not be used to control it. At that point the pilot had to switch over to the reactive control system (RCS) that used thrusters in the wing tips and nose to control the craft, much like the space shuttle or other spacecraft use in space. Once the pilot was able to bring the nose down and begin the descent, the jet engine could be restarted using the flow of air through the turbines at the appropriate altitude. When Yeager wanted to break the record, he had not been part of the program at the time. He was briefed by one of the pilots, Bob Smith, in the program regarding the specifics of the flight profile. There was very little room for error. Smith also briefed Yeager on the use of the RCS, which when activated actually works opposite of the normal controls. This means that when using RCS if you want to move the nose of the craft downward, you actually pull back on the stick instead of forward. Yeager made three or four flights prior to the flight that resulted in the accident. The flight data from all of his previous zoom flights showed him not climbing at a steep enough angle, and not using the RCS controls properly. According to Smith, Yeager was insistent that he knew how to do it, and more or less blew off the smith's instruction. When Yeager started flying the the NF-104A zoom climbs, his first mistake was not maintaining a high enough angle of climb in order to reach the desired altitude. On the day of the accident he had, his dive was to shallow and he was unable to breach the upper atmosphere to make the RCS able to bring the nose over. The result was that at the top of the climb, the 104 stayed positioned with the nose up, and it could not be brought in to a nose first descent to restart the engine. This caused the flat spin, and the rest is history. According to Smith the data in the subsequent flight data revealed that there had been no malfunctions of any sort, the 104 performed as it was supposed to. The accident was caused by pilot error, however the Colonel in charge of the accident board was unwilling to call Yeager out for the mistakes made. I was always a huge fan of Yeager, but was kind of disappointed by the events that cause the NF-104A incident. This does not diminish the man's achievements, but the facts are facts.

[@Qartoffeln1]

Clifford S Amazing explanation. Thanks!

[@dbaider9467]

Hooligan - really enjoyed reading that!

[@bennylofgren3208]

BTeamHooligan General Yeager achieved many things in his career and you're right, that shouldn't be taken away from him, but I've heard from so many credible sources that he was an absolute asshole as a human being. Which is kind of sad, really.

[@ericfermin8347]

Lawn darts

[@texasfathead]

The Russians have owned the absolute altitude record I think for the last 50 years us Americans don't make airplanes as good as they do just saying

[@reneeverlaan3056]

2:35 30000 meters? can't they use metric all the time??📏📏📏📏

[@niklasnotgreta]

They wouldn't have any chance against the NVA!

[@pegbars]

Ewww! Interlaced video!

[@elmundir]

the earth is flat

[@johnthatcher2349]

English electric lightning far better

[@dogsbd]

Nope, the Lightings best zoom altitude was much lower than the F-104

[@michaelgray7847]

@@dogsbd I don't think Flight Lieutenant Mike Hale of the RAF would agree with you .

[@dogsbd]

@@michaelgray7847 Actually I'm pretty sure he's very aware that the highest Lightning zoom altitude ever reported of not quite 90,000 feet wasn't as high as the record set by an F-104C in 1959 which zoomed to over 103,000 feet.