Irrelevant to what?
The USAF was less than satisfied with the Starfighter and procured only 296 examples in single-seat and two-seat versions. At the time, USAF doctrine placed little importance on air superiority (the fighter-to-fighter mission), and the Starfighter was deemed inadequate for either the interceptor (meaning fighter-to-bomber) or tactical fighter-bomber role, lacking both payload capability and endurance compared to other USAF aircraft. Its U.S. service was quickly wound down after 1965. The last F-104As in regular USAF service were re-engined with more powerful and more reliable J79-GE-19 engines in 1967.
The last USAF Starfighters left active service in 1969. It continued in use with the Puerto Rico Air National Guard until 1975
OH my– over a decade before those expansive F-106 aeroplanes were retired.
I don’t deny that the F-104 was unsuccessful in USAF service for the above mentioned reasons – are you going to argue that a SAAB Draken, Mirage III or MiG-21 would have been any more successful?
As for your inept total ignorance, as you see, F-104 was created for the same reason the Six was created.
No they weren’t – although both original roles for each aircraft did involve shooting down enemy aircraft.
That European Air Forces were gullible enough to buy a pig-in-poke was their fault for falling for marvelous salesman hype.
9 European countries bought the F-104, along with many others – are you saying they all fell for salesman hype?:rolleyes:
The 104 was a nice looking airplane just lacking in too many ways.
In what ways was the F-104 ‘lacking’?
Sign In
