Greatest Fighter Aircraft of All Time

plan_D · 03-05-2006, 10:37 AM

Don't discount the Lightning as a fighter-bomber, I have mentioned it's usage in the past. It seems to have been well used, and well adapted to the ground attack role. It was a strong airframe, and could escape from the danger zone very quickly.

I'm not going to say it's the best, or anything of the sort. But it did have potential in that area. And yes, it was used in that role at least once.

In the dogfighter role, I wouldn't put it down either. Since the Lightning could out-climb anything by a long shot. Many a pilot would be troubled when reaching the tail of the Lightning then seeing it pull vertical and climb up and away ...way past their own ceiling too, if it wanted to. And in super-sonic combat the Lightning's full-flight tail plane gave it an edge.

Wild Weasel ... it's a fast climber ... !

Anyway, I'm not saying it's the best. It certainly was no air superiority fighter , but it should not just be given up and said it could only intercept because that's not true. It's just that's basically all it did. Longer legs could have been given to the Lightning ...

Oh well, "could have, would have, should have ..."

pbfoot · 03-05-2006, 03:50 PM

looking at this poll there is one glaring ommission in my point of view the f 104 easy to maintain 2 hour engine swap ... all the black boxes could be swapped at end of rwy in under 20 minutes ....holds records for speed at lo level...... easily the king of hi flyers even higher then lightning and its still flying operationally 50 years later

plan_D · 03-05-2006, 05:13 PM

Excuse me? The F-104 could not fly higher than the Lightning - the opposite is the truth. Since when has the F-104 been able to reach 88,000 feet ?!

And low level flight, the Lightning and F-104 were in dead heat during acceleration according to the pilots that raced the planes !

Get a freakin' clue - just read all the stats I reeled off to your previous crap 'bout the Lightning being inferior to these piles!

syscom3 · 03-05-2006, 05:45 PM

There was a modified F104 that reached 130,000 ft. I could be wrong...... perhaps flyboyj knows more of the details.

plan_D · 03-05-2006, 05:47 PM

The F-104 could not even reach 60,000 feet . I want to see this 130,000 feet ! Especially since I was not believed instantly when I mentioned the Lightning climbed to 88,000 feet !

FLYBOYJ · 03-05-2006, 06:17 PM

The 104 had a service ceiling of under 60,000 feet, although modified ones have broke world altitude and speed records. The NF-104 had a rocket motor in the tail, it was supposed to be an "Astronaut Trainer." Here's a BIG photo from Edwards AFB PAO

Here's a great site about the NF-104...

http://www.nf104.com/index.html

In one of my many discussions with Tony LeVier, he once told me the F-104 suffered a similar fate as the P-38 did in Europe. It got a bad rap due to poor pilot transition training, had its mission change several times during it's gestation, and was never operated to its fullest potential. Remember the -104 came from the input of Korean War pilots and their desires in an air-to-air combat aircraft. I've met several Canadian and Marineflieger pilots who loved the -104 and hated to give it up, on the other side I met several pilots who didn't think too highly of it, one of them being Dick Rutan who had some time in it. In his words, "Take off, go real fast, turn, almost stall, land real fast..........

pbfoot · 03-05-2006, 06:17 PM

I wasn't slamming your lightning I was suggesting an a/c that should be on the list due to numbers produced , length of service , its ability to remain a viable alternative the fact it was very easy to maintain The bloody thing was at home in any realm it found itself in it was flown by just about any modern western air service and its still sitting on QRA in Italy and easy to work on 50 years after Kelly Johnston spawned it come on its slam dunk to be on that list and the thing "the zipper"still holds recognized records for speed and altitude

plan_D · 03-05-2006, 06:49 PM

No, you were suggesting that the F-104 could climb higher than the Lightning and that it was also faster than the Lightning. Both being untrue , unless you want to count the NF-104 which would be stupid since it wasn't even a fighter. It was the Starfighter with a kick up the ass, no combat use what so ever.

A F.6 Lightning vs. F-104S would provide the best results in combat, and in the interception role the Lightning would prove superior. It could climb faster, accelerate faster, climb higher and was faster all round.

syscom3 · 03-05-2006, 07:08 PM

I didnt know that NF-104 was modified so extensively. Therefore, I will agree that the Lightning still holds top honors for cold war era interceptor.

F4 is still a better jet though, just for its versatility. It was "good" enough in most roles to make it the best jet for the years between the end of the Korean War, to the end of the cold war.

pbfoot · 03-05-2006, 07:18 PM

I can suggest this link i believe you might believe this document from the national aviation museum of canada and read about the 104 from its library well sourced and documented
http://www.aviation.technomuses.ca/collections/
http://www.aviation.technomuses.ca/p...ghter_F104.pdf
its in the research papers aircraft histories and in it it gives factory 104 as capable of 90000ft zoom

plan_D · 03-05-2006, 07:58 PM

It states the service ceiling of the CF-104 being 58,000 feet, and normal operation at 48,500 feet also. I will admit that it's zoom-climb ability is impressive, but that's factory fresh. And the CF-104 that achieved Canada's altitude record was modified.

If I wanted I could state the Lightning can beat the F-15 in a sustained climb to 30,000 feet because a stripped down T.5 Lightning did so. The F.3 Lightning that zoom-climbed to 88,000 feet was fully laden.

I do not believe the F-104 could achieve greater heights, or speeds than the Lightning without modification which would make it incapable of combat.

The F-104 never had a thrust:weight ratio that equalled 1:1 , the Lightning would do at some point in it's climb. The Lightning was actually faster than the F-104 anyway, at Mach 2.3 recorded. Since the real records for the Lightning have yet to be released , the zoom-climb to 88,000 feet is just a story. The official records are yet to be released , and I'm eagerly awaiting them.

Anyone with a bit of sense would realise the Lightning can out-climb and out-pace the F-104. You rely too much on world records without realising that world records open the abilities to the public - think if the SR-71 true records were released !

syscom3 · 03-05-2006, 08:12 PM

Theres no reason to hold secret the Lightnings true performance figures.

pbfoot · 03-05-2006, 08:21 PM

please I don't want to get in a lightning/ 104 pissing contest but the thing is century series fighter and its its almost outlasting the F4 its got more years of service then any other a/c on that list up top with maybe the exception of the MiG 21 and they probably fly those Kampuchea. I don't have any personal 104 experience other then transit a/c but upon investigating the 104 slowly became impressed and no longer think of the 104 only as the German lawn dart .I wonder what Hartman thought of it

plan_D · 03-05-2006, 08:40 PM

syscom, the British government still hides information from World War II ! The Lightning was reported at 60,000 feet for decades , and the official figures of the Lightning are not it's true ability. There's every reason to keep it a secret - surprise is a great weapon.

The shortest life of a secret in Britain is 25 years from the end of it's importance. The Lightning left service in 1989 ... we have another seven years to wait .

FLYBOYJ · 03-05-2006, 11:08 PM

The -104 was never intended as a pure "heavy" interceptor (bomber killer) in the sense of the Lightning - the 104 was supposed to be an air superiority fighter such as the F-86 but with far superior performance. Through the 50s and into the 60s the thing was pushed into roles that it wasn't intended to do - low level Minni nuclear bomber, interceptor, fighter bomber, etc.

I recently met through work a fellow by the name of Kieth Phillips, he's a retired USAF Col. who flew the -104. Keith was an IP at Luke and worked with Luftwaffe folks. He worked with Hartman and never heard Hartman say any bad things to say about the -104 (at least to him) but he did say that he (Hartman) was the best pilot he ever flew with...

Keith had nothing but praise for the -104 and he thought is was the best fighter of its day when flown as an air-to-air fighter....