The reported low airframe g limit would remove the Foxbat from any consideration as a “dogfighter”.

Maybe just a lot of speculation, but I still think there is more to it.

More to what?

Maybe a question of opinion, but in my mind the traditional definition of “fighter” means the ability to do interdiction/escort over enemy lines. Don’t think the F-104 had the legs or maneuverability at subsonic speeds to do that, it was tailored for the quick-reaction interceptor role.

The F-104 was designed as a day fighter from lessons learned in the Korean War.

Interdiction is a ground attack mission type, not air-to-air. As a day fighter, the F-104 was not intended to be an escort fighter.

F-104 subsonic maneuvering capability was excellent in its operating envelope. It had an equivalent range to most of its contemporaries.

IIRC, the F-104’s record as a ground-attack aircraft in Vietnam was less than stellar.

In Vietnam, the F-104 flew ground attack mostly in the CAS role. Not the “low level strike mission” role which is what you were responding to with your “not suited” comment.

What’s the engagement window with a Mach 4-5 closure rate? I can’t have been more than a few seconds, which makes me wonder about the effectiveness of the Mach 3 interceptor concept. And could the F-12 have slowed down & turned around fast enough to re-engage?

Pure speculation on your part. The fact remains that the YF-12 demonstrated an intercept capability with what became the Phoenix missile that nothing else came close to at that time.

Could it be interesting to have a poll on the most “misunderstood” a/c ?

I think I would nominate the F-105: A figher with an internal bomb bay? no.
SAC platform, No. Agile: well, no. escort: no. TAC, well, no.

Nuclear platform, but used for something else.

Well?

Misunderstood?

Maybe so…particularly if you mean the difference between the reality of the actual airplane as compared to all the myths, bar talk, and unfounded and misleading so-called ‘facts’ that have grown over the years.

…but would F-4 losses have been more scattered?

Yes…the F-4 was used in all of the Vietnam War target areas, whereas the F-105 was used primarily in NV and Laos. Also, the single seat F-105 left Vietnam in 1970, leaving the F-4 to continue the fight for three more years.

I’m not sure that the losses in the Vietnam War would have had much consequence, at least not for decision makers who were competent. Given the conditions that the F-105 pilots flew in, it is unrealistic to think that any other aircraft type would have done better.

Were the Eagle pilots aware/surprised the 104 could corner at 400 KIAS and 7g?

They were surprised by a number of things that day.

They forgot an important rule…never underestimate your opponent…particularly when you don’t know much about him…and what you do know is mostly bar talk and BS.

But, yes…they were surprised at our best turn capability.

Funny how did didn’t make use of the vertical with boom n zoom tactics.

At that time early in the F-15 program, the F-15 pilots were still focused in on the slow speed turning ability of the F-15 as compared to the F-4 (from where most of the first Eagle pilots came from).

On the other hand, we flew nothing but BnZ tactics, conceptually no different than what the Flying Tigers practiced in China.

Why only one engagement? Surely there was lots of fuel for a few more or did you want to end it on a high note?

We were out of fuel. The engagement area was 100+ nm from our base. It took a lot of AB to operate at the speeds we used.

700+ KIAS at 10,000 ft is around M1.2

Yep. 800KIAS wasn’t hard to get at low altitude.

Did anyone overlay the Ps charts for the Eagle and Zipper?

Don’t know. There wasn’t much point to it. There wasn’t going to be a slow speed area where the F-104 might be competitive. But, get the fight to higher speeds…400KIAS or more…and now the jets were closer since g was the limiting factor.

How does the Eagle perform in the high Mach region (1-1.5+) compared to the Zipper?

Don’t know. Probably has a better acceleration.

Does the Eagle struggle to reach Mach 2+ or does the 104 do it easier?

Don’t know. Probably not…but most fighters take a while to reach this speed, only at higher altitudes, and only when relatively clean. In normal ops, Mach 2 was seldom a consideration.

@alfakilo
What was meant by my statement was nothing else than the high alpha pass often demonstrated during airshows…Hope that clears up what was meant.

It does. Thanks much.