Beyond The Sprues
Modelling => Ideas & Inspiration => Aero-space => Topic started by: The Big Gimper on December 21, 2011, 10:45:04 AM
-
F-104 with Lots of AIM-9s:
Folks:
I am thinking a whiffing a F-104 with 2-3 AIM-9s per wing tip. I would like to build a Multiple Ejector Rack (MER) but with launch rails. Any thoughts on what an official Missile MER would have looked like? One AIM-9 on top, middle and bottom like a T fallen on its side.
Carl
-
I guess it'd be similar to the twin AIM-9 setup I've seen on F-14s but with another rail in place of the pylon attachment point. There's a sort of precedent to the T format with F-4s & Tonkas having AAMs over other ordnance in that config (albeit vertical). About the only potential issue would be seperation, but the Jag had overwing pylons so it mustn't be that much of an issue.
Regards,
John
-
Also you can use dual missle rails from MiG-23 ( http://airwar.ru/image/idop/fighter/mig23m/mig23m-8.jpg ), and put right on the left wing, and left on the right wing, so the "side" missles from photo would be on the "lower side" of the wing.
-
If you have enough ground clearance and space available on your wing station, you might be able to get away with an "H" pattern with a pair of missiles mounted on either side of the pylon and a fifth mounted directly to the pylon on the bottom. Pretty much what you see on the F-15 and F-4 but with a dash of the F-8 Crusader thrown into the mix (remember the Zuni air to ground rockets on the Sidewinder mounts).
-
Thanks for the suggestions. I'll peruse the stash over the holidays, do some dry-its to see what fits/looks the part.
Carl
-
Folks, I have renamed this thread "F-104 Ideas and Inspiration" so as to allow for broader discussions.
To start with - Delta F-104 anyone:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/CAC23/F104-3.gif)
Regards,
Greg
-
How about a "delta F-104" with a delta T-tail? Alternatively, one that looks like a cross beween a F-104 and a scaled-up HA-300?
-
Missile Madness Missile-with-a-man-in-it
(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/ChernayaAkula/WhIf/F104-missile-madness-2.gif)
The missiles are the same scale as the Starfighter.
2x AIM-9 under the belly
2x AIM-9 under the outboard wing pylons
6x AIM-120 on the inboard wing pylons
I guess the triple launchers could be a set-up similar to the LAU-115 twin launcher seen on Hornets, but with a spacer and third pylon straight down. Weight shouldn't be a problem.
Since the wingtips are strong enough to hold the big tanks, I reckon you could also put another AIM-120 or two (over/under) there. In that case, though, you'd better scramble your tanker before your QRA bird.
If you use an angled pylon adapter canted outwards, you could probably use AIM-120s on the belly launchers as well. If you use the AIM-9 launchers for AIM-120s, you'd run into a space problem with the longer AIM-120. The angled pylon would allow them to sit next to the front landing gear doors.
Oh, and a single-piece windscreen for this one. ;) 'cause it's cool.
-
Italian I presume...the umpteenth upgrade? I wonder how you would go adding in some sort of conformal fuel tank system on the upper surfaces? Maybe also give it a more modern and fuel efficient engine.
Either way, simply outstanding! :)
-
Italian I presume...the umpteenth upgrade? I wonder how you would go adding in some sort of conformal fuel tank system on the upper surfaces? Maybe also give it a more modern and fuel efficient engine.
Either way, simply outstanding! :)
Re-engined with either a PW1120 or a F414 and fitted with conformal fuel tanks filling out the interesection between the intakes and the fuselage?
That would be a suitable companion for the overloaded Super Tiger that Grumman played with.
-
Could certainly be Italian. But when I pictured the modernised Starfighter before my mind's eye, it carried Finnish markings. Don't ask me why, but it did. Single-piece windscreen, AMRAAMs and AIM-9X, LERXes, new engine, adorned in Finnish markings and flying over a snowy landscape at sunset. ???
Maybe the Italians pushed the modernisation and the Finns bought some refurb'ed ex-Luftwaffe Starfighters? Dunno, maybe the Finns were serious about the "peace dividend" after the Iron Curtain came down, vowing to buy surplus only. Maybe the peace dividend also caused the Italians to abandon the Eurofighter and rather look at another Starfighter upgrade? Whipping history into shape to make the whifs appear plausible. >:(
Regarding the conformal fuel tanks, maybe something along the lines of the F-104 CCV's ballast tanks? I don't know how much volume these actually had, but they could be a start. Maybe widened and lengthened a little?
(http://www.arrse.co.uk/attachment.php?attachmentid=50232&d=1315607745)
And LERXes?
Or canards? Not necessarily a second tail as per the CCV, but maybe some fixed canards à la Kfir?
-
ISTR that Lockheed schemed some Starfighter derivatives with canards. I'm not sure where to find the info, though.
-
Missile Madness Missile-with-a-man-in-it
([url]http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/ChernayaAkula/WhIf/F104-missile-madness-2.gif[/url])
The missiles are the same scale as the Starfighter.
2x AIM-9 under the belly
2x AIM-9 under the outboard wing pylons
6x AIM-120 on the inboard wing pylons
I guess the triple launchers could be a set-up similar to the LAU-115 twin launcher seen on Hornets, but with a spacer and third pylon straight down. Weight shouldn't be a problem.
Since the wingtips are strong enough to hold the big tanks, I reckon you could also put another AIM-120 or two (over/under) there. In that case, though, you'd better scramble your tanker before your QRA bird.
If you use an angled pylon adapter canted outwards, you could probably use AIM-120s on the belly launchers as well. If you use the AIM-9 launchers for AIM-120s, you'd run into a space problem with the longer AIM-120. The angled pylon would allow them to sit next to the front landing gear doors.
Oh, and a single-piece windscreen for this one. ;) 'cause it's cool.
Tres cool.
My F-104L WHIF was to have a pure AIM-9 load out. Could I ask you to create a modified version which has
2x AIM-9 under the belly
2x AIM-9 under the outboard wing pylons
Fuel tanks on the inboard wing pylons
2 or 3 AIM-9 on the wing tips. Need to build a launcher for this.
Thanks, Carl
-
Here you go, Carl! (http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/ChernayaAkula/Emoticons/70.gif)
(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/ChernayaAkula/WhIf/F104-missile-madness-3.gif)
-
That's just crazy! ;D
-
Lockheed built CL-1200 variant of F-104.
-
Here you go, Carl! ([url]http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/ChernayaAkula/Emoticons/70.gif[/url])
([url]http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/ChernayaAkula/WhIf/F104-missile-madness-3.gif[/url])
Now that's what I call air superiority. ;D
Mucho Thanks.
-
Folks, I have renamed this thread "F-104 Ideas and Inspiration" so as to allow for broader discussions.
To start with - Delta F-104 anyone:
([url]http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/CAC23/F104-3.gif[/url])
Regards,
Greg
Someone built one of those and posted it on What-If ages ago - looked every bit as good in the plastic as yours does in the pixels.... 8)
My personal thoughts on the best way to "improve" a Starfighter revolve around replacing the radar with a guidance system and the cockpit with a large warhead, thereby turning it into the missile-without-a-man-in-it..... >:D
Vortices from canards could have some "interesting" interactions with the tailplane at high AoAs: it might be possible to exploit them to positive effect of course, but I suspect they be more of a problem than a benefit. One solution might be to eliminate the tailplane altogether: extend the intake ducts to put them just behind the cockpit, then fit tailplane-size canards on them, at about the same distance from the CofG as the tailplanes were. You could leave the intakes as-is, or you could replace them with F-15 style horizontal ramp ones to really exploit the pressure-recovery of having the canards above them...
-
Detachable Recon Nose:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/RF104.jpg)
-
F-104 Viper:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/F104-Viper.jpg)
-
Viper version - thatz it, a kit bash in waiting for someone on this forum.
Bill
-
Did someone suggest a missile without a man in it?
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/More%20Creations/GAM-104.gif)
-
<...>
Vortices from canards could have some "interesting" interactions with the tailplane at high AoAs: it might be possible to exploit them to positive effect of course, but I suspect they be more of a problem than a benefit. One solution might be to eliminate the tailplane altogether: extend the intake ducts to put them just behind the cockpit, then fit tailplane-size canards on them, at about the same distance from the CofG as the tailplanes were. You could leave the intakes as-is, or you could replace them with F-15 style horizontal ramp ones to really exploit the pressure-recovery of having the canards above them...
Something like this, then?
The F-15 intakes have been cut to about 2/3 of their original width.
(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/ChernayaAkula/WhIf/F104-canard.png)
-
Yes please!!!! :-*
-
ooh, that's starting to look very Russian, ChernayaAkula !!
Stick some red stars on it :)
-
^ I'm not really sure just what it reminds me of, but it does ring a few (distant) bells.... ALR Prinaha? Convair 200 VTOL design?
--------------
Take a whif... and whif it even further. Cross-whiffing? Whif-bashing? :-\
(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/ChernayaAkula/WhIf/F104-canard-delta.png)
-
I think I prefer your first one - looked more natural.
-
^ I'm not really sure just what it reminds me of, but it does ring a few (distant) bells.... ALR Prinaha? Convair 200 VTOL design?
Reminds me a bit of the XFV-12:
(http://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints-depot/modernplanes/modern-qr/rockwell-xfv-12.gif)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/83/XFV-12A_mockpu_NAColumbus_NAN9-73.jpg)
or obviously, the F-104CCV:
(http://i44.tinypic.com/2u53tzm.jpg)
(http://i43.tinypic.com/2euqu5x.jpg)
-
F-15 intakes - 8)
Probablly build that with 1/100 F-15 intakes on 1/72 F-104.
-
F-15 intakes - 8)
Probablly build that with 1/100 F-15 intakes on 1/72 F-104.
You'd need to do a bit of work, but an exhaust nozzle from that 1/100 F-15 could be used as a starting point to put a PW1120 on that project.
-
F-15 intakes - 8)
Probablly build that with 1/100 F-15 intakes on 1/72 F-104.
You'd need to do a bit of work, but an exhaust nozzle from that 1/100 F-15 could be used as a starting point to put a PW1120 on that project.
And I've got both just sitting around in a box because all I've used is the flying surfaces off the 1/100 F-15 I've got. The intakes will need some outside faces though.
-
Delta F-104 anyone...
Included here for completeness......
(Because I got around scanning that book page......)
(http://i846.photobucket.com/albums/ab22/dy031101/IDF_development_starfighterDerivatives.jpg)
-
Those conceptual designs look great!
-
^^ Some really nice stuff! :)
------------------------------------------------
Just... because! >:D
(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/ChernayaAkula/WhIf/F104X.png)
-
:)
-
This reminds me of a question: does anyone have a rough idea on how big a space for radar a F-104G/S/ASA has compared to...... a Sea Harrier FA.2?
-
Some mindless image manipulation:
The new Tu-22U is escorted by a Yak-31 fighter. ;)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/TU-22UD3015ODRAPYF-104DANESONORUEGO09-1991_zps5c266507.jpg)
-
Anyone tried modelling a Lancer?
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/X-27_mockup.jpg)
-
Does anyone have a photo of the cathedral made from 1:48 F-104s?
-
Given the Monogram 1:48 F-104s have wings and horizontal stabs are markedly larger than the Hasegawa kit's, it's been tempting to add somewhere between 1/4" and 1/2" to each main wing tip of the American kit, rescribe, and display beside the Japanese kit. Munitions to be determined.
-
Beautiful delta-winged V-tailed Belgian Starfighter built by Patrick H:
http://highandlow.org/scale%20models/SF_114.html (http://highandlow.org/scale%20models/SF_114.html)
(http://highandlow.org/scale%20models/SF%20114%20(2).JPG)
-
Wow! Invited?
-
Here's a question for our technically minded friends, what do you need to make the F-104 carrier friendly?
This is purely an engineering exercise though
First off is to slow the thing down a bit.
According to Wiki, the F-104 has Boundary layer control (BLC) for the trailing edge flaps, which helps a bit. It also mentions the take off & landing speeds (with BLC?) is 219mph (352km/h) & 207mph (333km/h) respectively.
That's damn fast.
So suggestions, larger wing? (21ft 9in /6.36m) increase span to A-4 size (26ft 6in /8.38m) without the need for wing folding?
I look forward to your comments & suggestions
Ken...
-
In a way there was a real world naval, carrier based version of the F-104. This was the CL-1400N ( see pic below). To get from here to the F-104 you need to follow the path below:
The CL-1400N was derived from the CL-1400 concept and had the cockpit moved to the front for better view during landing.
The CL-1400 was itself basically a derivative of the CL-1200 proposal with longer fuselage, more powerful engine and increased range.
The Lockheed CL-1200 Lancer was a company-funded proposal for a derivative of the F-104 Starfighter intended for the export market. The CL-1200 design retained the F-104 fuselage, though with a shoulder-mounted wing of larger area moved further aft and a changed tailsection to a more convential shape. It was proposed in August 1970. This project was not successful since more low cost fighters had been introduced to the market like the Northrop F-5.
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/photo_zpsae5e7e88.jpg)
-
Then of course there is this one...
(http://www.internetmodeler.com/2004/april/aviation/F-104E-5.jpg) (http://www.internetmodeler.com/2004/april/aviation/f-104e.php)
Click on pic for more...and read carefully ;)
-
WIthout reading (I'm at work), I have to ask if it's a whif or if it's one of the F-104A's that China Lake flew?
-
Have the Seattle area peeps tell the story, specifically Terry if he drops by here. ;D
-
Have the Seattle area peeps tell the story, specifically Terry if he drops by here. ;D
Terry is already a member here at BTS under the member name of Braincells37. I got him signed up at the Seattle IPMS show last year via my cell phone :)
-
Hi folks,
Quick question for you, what other engine could fit inside an F-104?
I'm thinking along the lines of the Spey to replace the J79.
Any other suggestions?
Ken...
-
Prob need to make a bit of room for the Spey. F-4s needed some extra room to swap J79s for Speys and they were already huge ;D
F404 from F/A-18s? Its a bid smaller and lighter but basically the same power, plenty more with an afterburner. Not sure how much gas the 104 carried though.
Could go nuts, bulge the after fuselage heavily, and give it an F110 from the F-14s. If it could get off the ground it'd need plenty of drop tanks and a tanker ;D
-
Well, the CL1200 and CL 1400 derivatives (see above) were planned with TF30s IIRC.
-
Well, the CL1200 and CL 1400 derivatives (see above) were planned with TF30s IIRC.
CL1200 variants with F100 engines were proposed; the larger inlets come from TF30 proposals and these.
-
CL-704 VTOL-Starfighter built by Thomas Brückelt using the Matchbox 1:72nd scale F-104. (http://www.modellversium.de/galerie/8-flugzeuge-modern/10563-cl-704-vtol-starfighter-matchbox.html)
Click on thumbnail or html to view at Modellversium.de.
(http://www.modellversium.de/galerie/bilder/5/6/3/10563-tumb.jpg) (http://www.modellversium.de/galerie/8-flugzeuge-modern/10563-cl-704-vtol-starfighter-matchbox.html)
-
Now that is well done! :)
-
Sweden adopts the ZELL system for a handful of RF-104G's outfitted with slightly extended wing tips and in full splinter paint.
-
Sweden adopts the ZELL system for a handful of RF-104G's outfitted with slightly extended wing tips and in full splinter paint.
oooohhh! Yes. :)
-
DACO is developing an injection molded plastic detail set intended for the 1:48th scale Hasegawa F-104 Starfighter as an improvement and correction set (http://ultra.glo.be/daco/KDCC4802.html) that many of you will find to your liking. Hopefully this will be available for consumption soon.
(http://ultra.glo.be/daco/F104sprues3m.jpg) (http://ultra.glo.be/daco/KDCC4802.html)
Link to the DACO home page (http://ultra.glo.be/daco/)
-
Danny had the test shots at Telford, but try as I might I couldn't get him to do the same in 1/72.
-
Or, taking ideas in a different direction... what could we do with Chuck Yeager's NF-104A using today's technology? Thinking to shoot for more power, shaving weight wherever practical, with wingtip booster rockets in place of tiptanks--and this thing needs to do it's zoom-climb to Astronaut Wings Qualification while still packing a decent attack radar and a pair of Sidewinders or maybe AMRAAMs for self-defense.
Oh, by the way, the bird I envision has to do all that WITH the extra drag of dragging around a two-seater's extended canopy bulge... Will an F120 fit without a total back-half redesign, or am I stuck at F414?
-
A F120 is sufficiently larger tha a J79 so as to require significant back-end redesign as well as enlarged inlets. It's a more modest increase in Full-AB power, but a PW1120 at 20,000 lbt in full burner would fit with no major changes (it was intended as a J79 replacement, after all). If memory serves me correctly, you also get a bit of a weight reduction. I'm willing to bet that a PW1120 built off the very latest F100/JTF22 core might be even more powerful as P&W was competing with GE for the 32,000 engine for the F-16E/F and the PW1120 was derived from an earlier version.
-
Or, taking ideas in a different direction... what could we do with Chuck Yeager's NF-104A using today's technology? Thinking to shoot for more power, shaving weight wherever practical, with wingtip booster rockets in place of tiptanks--and this thing needs to do it's zoom-climb to Astronaut Wings Qualification while still packing a decent attack radar and a pair of Sidewinders or maybe AMRAAMs for self-defense.
Oh, by the way, the bird I envision has to do all that WITH the extra drag of dragging around a two-seater's extended canopy bulge... Will an F120 fit without a total back-half redesign, or am I stuck at F414?
Yeager's NF-104A? Not, he had nothing to do with the design and crashed it because he was too
arrogant to learn how to correctly fly the bugger.
http://www.kalimera.org/nf104/stories/stories_11.html (http://www.kalimera.org/nf104/stories/stories_11.html)
http://www.nf104.com (http://www.nf104.com)
Click the Mission link and read the whole story.
-
JCF, I only cited Yeager to differentiate the "Astronaut Trainer" variant from other experimental and nonstandard F-104 configurations, just in ccase there was more than one configuration of NF-104 out there--not saying that he had anything to do with design or construction.
-
:icon_beer: F-104 with F-16XL wings (slightly smaller scale than the F-104) and twin tails from an F/A-18 (sized to look "right" - may or may not be to scale)
(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/ChernayaAkula/WhIf/F-104XL_zpscf9313ea.png)
-
Random Idea: RAAF F-104C in Vietnam.
-
Random Idea: RAAF F-104C in Vietnam.
More probable that it would have been an F-104G variant considering the time period.
-
I didn't actually mean to adding the "C" bit - case of fat fingers... :-[ ;)
-
I didn't actually mean to adding the "C" bit - case of fat fingers... :-[ ;)
:) Fault lies between user fingers and keyboard interface
-
Wasn't the C the model the RAAF was looking at in the late 50s but was rejected as too complex and a final batch of Sabres were ordered instead?
-
F-104XL :-*
-
Here's one I built from an actual project for a VTOL F-104, using a rotating triangular wing with corners able to fold.
Italeri, with plastic card extras.
-
What scale?
-
I've got the Unicraft conversion for that -- 1/72
-
How about an X-wing Starfighter, one set of standard wings set to 15deg anhedral and another set at 15deg dihedral. the lower wing set with under wing stores and the upper set with over wing stores (think Jaguar and Lightning).
The other thought is a Lightning style wing either mid mounted as per the Starfighters original mounting point, or high mounted as on the lancer.
Another option is an F/A-18 wing, either "Classic" or "Rhino" maybe scaleorama for a better fit, mounted as per the original Starfighter wing.
-
How about an X-wing Starfighter, one set of standard wings set to 15deg anhedral and another set at 15deg dihedral. the lower wing set with under wing stores and the upper set with over wing stores (think Jaguar and Lightning).
The other thought is a Lightning style wing either mid mounted as per the Starfighters original mounting point, or high mounted as on the lancer.
Another option is an F/A-18 wing, either "Classic" or "Rhino" maybe scaleorama for a better fit, mounted as per the original Starfighter wing.
Sounds like something retro like the early versions of the Viper from BSG. Where to put an R2 unit?
-
How about an X-wing Starfighter, one set of standard wings set to 15deg anhedral and another set at 15deg dihedral. the lower wing set with under wing stores and the upper set with over wing stores (think Jaguar and Lightning).
The other thought is a Lightning style wing either mid mounted as per the Starfighters original mounting point, or high mounted as on the lancer.
Another option is an F/A-18 wing, either "Classic" or "Rhino" maybe scaleorama for a better fit, mounted as per the original Starfighter wing.
Sounds like something retro like the early versions of the Viper from BSG. Where to put an R2 unit?
Behind the cockpit in the EE bay would be the obvious location.
(http://designer.home.xs4all.nl/models/f104/rfc11.jpg)
-
Stop giving me ideas...
-
Stop giving me ideas...
???
I thought that that was what this forum was for! :-\
-
How about an X-wing Starfighter, one set of standard wings set to 15deg anhedral and another set at 15deg dihedral. the lower wing set with under wing stores and the upper set with over wing stores (think Jaguar and Lightning).
The other thought is a Lightning style wing either mid mounted as per the Starfighters original mounting point, or high mounted as on the lancer.
Another option is an F/A-18 wing, either "Classic" or "Rhino" maybe scaleorama for a better fit, mounted as per the original Starfighter wing.
Sounds like something retro like the early versions of the Viper from BSG. Where to put an R2 unit?
Behind the cockpit in the EE bay would be the obvious location.
([url]http://designer.home.xs4all.nl/models/f104/rfc11.jpg[/url])
Then move the cockpit back to just in front of the wings. Then attach tank parts!
-
Interesting image:
(http://www.cuorealfista.com/Public/data/starfighter/2011715104015_F-104_VTOL.jpg)
-
F-104 with Bill's (aka Finsrin) ultimate car:
(http://assets.blog.hemmings.com/wp-content/uploads//2013/08/FirebirdIIIad_2000.jpg)
-
Has anyone ever seen a photo of an F-104 carrying Laser Guided bombs? I was thinking it could be interesting to see a late model one (say an Italian ASA version) with a LGB under each wing and perhaps a guidance pod on the centreline or fuselage pylons.
-
Has anyone ever seen a photo of an F-104 carrying Laser Guided bombs? I was thinking it could be interesting to see a late model one (say an Italian ASA version) with a LGB under each wing and perhaps a guidance pod on the centreline or fuselage pylons.
Perhaps gut the cameras from a RF-104G and put the guts of a pod in their place?
-
John Lacey just created these. Great inspiration. SAAF F-104s
(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtl1/v/t1.0-9/13087689_1694810814107033_8708546576380971810_n.jpg?oh=e535099785f26689795af5e81ddbcc6f&oe=57ABC831)
(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13082763_1694810817440366_2223173855815210400_n.jpg?oh=6a615d82ec1bb2c24fb69c9e24cb35cc&oe=57B96C98)
(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13096284_1694810820773699_2067829397122126389_n.jpg?oh=98baba54b9dee1b81969e658bc4cb18c&oe=579E6D0F)
(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13087755_1694810857440362_9036423461303671957_n.jpg?oh=8354cb839d95e1f3a79b9c7b5a3238ad&oe=57E73E4A)
Source: Facebook - John's Aircraft & Armour Profile Page
-
One could do up several 1/32 Starfighters as the old game of Jarts.
-
Has anyone ever seen a photo of an F-104 carrying Laser Guided bombs? I was thinking it could be interesting to see a late model one (say an Italian ASA version) with a LGB under each wing and perhaps a guidance pod on the centreline or fuselage pylons.
No, but I don't see any reason why not in principle. There's certainly room on the centreline for a targeting pod, and it's usefully far forwards too, giving it some view to the side. You might imagine a TF-104 with the pod and four tanks as the designator (or with the gut of a pod in place of the radar as per Elmayerle's suggestion), while standard F-104s tote the LGBs.
Another thing that would look good is an ATLIS II pod on the centreline and two AS.30Ls under the wings. It would ring true because, IIRC, Luftwaffe F-104s were cleared for the AS.20 from which AS.30 was developed.
Here's another thought: how about a pair of Mavericks under the wings? I don't think there'd be clearance for a Maverick under the fuselage, but the wingtips might be an option for two more: the standard tip tanks must be pretty heavy.
-
How about an updated F-104 with a long proboscis such as that found on the Atlas Cheetah or Kfir C10:
(http://cdn-www.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/6/3/2201369.jpg?v=v20)
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Pq2qOxr103w/VHJm0AN7a9I/AAAAAAAAESI/N3aeNSsPJbU/s1600/Kfir%2BCOA%2BFuerza%2Baerea%2Bcolombiana%2BFAC3059.jpg)
Maybe even in Sth American scheme such as those shown above?
-
Has anyone ever seen a photo of an F-104 carrying Laser Guided bombs? I was thinking it could be interesting to see a late model one (say an Italian ASA version) with a LGB under each wing and perhaps a guidance pod on the centreline or fuselage pylons.
No, but I don't see any reason why not in principle. There's certainly room on the centreline for a targeting pod, and it's usefully far forwards too, giving it some view to the side. You might imagine a TF-104 with the pod and four tanks as the designator (or with the gut of a pod in place of the radar as per Elmayerle's suggestion), while standard F-104s tote the LGBs.
Another thing that would look good is an ATLIS II pod on the centreline and two AS.30Ls under the wings. It would ring true because, IIRC, Luftwaffe F-104s were cleared for the AS.20 from which AS.30 was developed.
Here's another thought: how about a pair of Mavericks under the wings? I don't think there'd be clearance for a Maverick under the fuselage, but the wingtips might be an option for two more: the standard tip tanks must be pretty heavy.
Actually, I was thinking of putting the guts of the pod in one of the already developed recce camera pods on the underside of the aircraft. I figure that with two As,30Ls and tanks on the wingtips would be quite suitable.
-
Found on YouTube this afternoon: F-104 Starfighter Zero Length Launcher (ZELL) "ZELL FOR DEFENSE" (Lockheed/U.S. Navy) https://youtu.be/XCbegiIhLGg
Includes some decent clips of various test launches in Germany and USA plus some interesting clips of the F-104 launching and recovering from the SATS (Short Airfield for Tactical Support).
-
Interesting video. I wish there was a 1/48 ZELL conversion available.
It could be interesting to do a truck mounted operational version. I ship based system could also be interesting as a kind of modernism CAM fighter.
-
This kit seems to have the right length booster Greg. Could be a place to start
http://www.oldmodelkits.com/jpegs/h/Hawk48%20Guerilla.JPG (http://www.oldmodelkits.com/jpegs/h/Hawk48%20Guerilla.JPG)
-
This kit seems to have the right length booster Greg. Could be a place to start
[url]http://www.oldmodelkits.com/jpegs/h/Hawk48%20Guerilla.JPG[/url] ([url]http://www.oldmodelkits.com/jpegs/h/Hawk48%20Guerilla.JPG[/url])
Yeah, I have seen that kit before - they can go for a pretty penny (e.g. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hawk-Guerrilla-Combat-Team-Model-Kit-300-300-Rare-1963-Vintage-/302237999114 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hawk-Guerrilla-Combat-Team-Model-Kit-300-300-Rare-1963-Vintage-/302237999114)). I also wouldn't necessarily want more than the launch equipment (and maybe the truck...) so it would be nice if there was a simple resin version available to purchase. One could then use that for a number of ideas.
-
This kit seems to have the right length booster Greg. Could be a place to start
[url]http://www.oldmodelkits.com/jpegs/h/Hawk48%20Guerilla.JPG[/url] ([url]http://www.oldmodelkits.com/jpegs/h/Hawk48%20Guerilla.JPG[/url])
Ah, yes, the old Hawk 1/48 ZELL Thunderjet. I don't remember seeing one mentioned in "Runways of Fire", but it's plausible. I know they did a fair bit of testing with an F-100; found out a few things not to do, too.
-
The guy who built this kit:
http://www.arcair.com/Gal6/5601-5700/gal5625-F-104-Murphy/00.shtm (http://www.arcair.com/Gal6/5601-5700/gal5625-F-104-Murphy/00.shtm)
Said he would put the conversion into rubber, whether he did or not I don't know.
-
The guy who built this kit:
[url]http://www.arcair.com/Gal6/5601-5700/gal5625-F-104-Murphy/00.shtm[/url] ([url]http://www.arcair.com/Gal6/5601-5700/gal5625-F-104-Murphy/00.shtm[/url])
Said he would put the conversion into rubber, whether he did or not I don't know.
Nicely done! He's even got the booster nozzle canted to put the exhaust vector through the CG of the combined assemblage. That's very important from controllability requirements. "Runways of Fire" talks about a F-100 ZELL trial where everything was fitted up and then sat most of the day in the sun where differential heating curved the fuselage and shifted the CG to where the pilot had quite a sporty ride when they did fire it off.
-
The guy who built this kit:
[url]http://www.arcair.com/Gal6/5601-5700/gal5625-F-104-Murphy/00.shtm[/url] ([url]http://www.arcair.com/Gal6/5601-5700/gal5625-F-104-Murphy/00.shtm[/url])
Said he would put the conversion into rubber, whether he did or not I don't know.
Have just emailed him to ask.
-
One that I wasn't previously aware of: apparently back before they settled on the Mirage III there was Australian interest in a RR Avon powered version of the F-104:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/RR%20F104-1_zpsccbhtcog.jpg)(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/RR%20F104-2_zpsisdcbuau.jpg)
-
Now that could have been interesting. 'Twould be an interesting subject to model, particularly if a later model than "A" airframe was used as the basis.
-
This does suggest the possibility of a French counter-offer, installing an ATAR 9C, to be later replaced by an ATAR 9K, in a F-104. From that point, perhaps Lockheed offering a French F-104 with ATAR and two DEFA cannon replacing the M61?
-
Now that could have been interesting. 'Twould be an interesting subject to model, particularly if a later model than "A" airframe was used as the basis.
It certainly could have been an interesting version. Although it's hard to do a direct comparison and noting that the J79 was a revolutionary engine, a quick comparison indicates that a Avon powered version, especially some of the latter more powerful variants, could have proven interesting wrt performance.
A RAAF version based upon the F-104G would certainly be interesting.
-
Found it on http://conceptships.blogspot.rs/ (http://conceptships.blogspot.rs/) Starstealth, Darkfighter,...? ;)
-
Oh, my! :-* :-\
-
Nice!
-
Freakin' huge based on canopy size. :icon_fsm:
-
True - what are we talking about? Maybe a 1.5 - 2 times increase?
-
^ That is soooo gorgeous! :-*
-
Odd thought, an Italian upgrade beyond the F-104ASA with the J79 replaced by a modern engine (RB.199, EJ200, F404/F414, or PW1120), modern avionics, and carrying Meteor missiles instead of Sparrows.
-
Odd thought, an Italian upgrade beyond the F-104ASA with the J79 replaced by a modern engine (RB.199, EJ200, F404/F414, or PW1120), modern avionics, and carrying Meteor missiles instead of Sparrows.
Is a good thought !
-
Perhaps also with IRIS-T missiles in place of Sidewinders?
-
Oh, oh, oh :smiley:
-
Odd thought, an Italian upgrade beyond the F-104ASA with the J79 replaced by a modern engine (RB.199, EJ200, F404/F414, or PW1120), modern avionics, and carrying Meteor missiles instead of Sparrows.
Is a good thought !
That would require different intakes I suppose??
-
Odd thought, an Italian upgrade beyond the F-104ASA with the J79 replaced by a modern engine (RB.199, EJ200, F404/F414, or PW1120), modern avionics, and carrying Meteor missiles instead of Sparrows.
Is a good thought !
That would require different intakes I suppose??
Nope, I believe the airflow for most of those is close to that of the J79; certainly the PW1120 was to replace the J79 in Phantom II's without inlet change and it is the most powerful of those listed.
-
Hmm. I had a look around and it turns out I have nozzles for most of the engines under discussion in the thread laying around, as well as an F-104G kit, all in 1/72, so I did bit of comparing. No photos because I have crap lighting and I seriously need to clean my workbench, but here are some verbal findings:
General Electric J79 (Revell F-4F): Since I had the kit in the same box (60th anniversary of the Luftwaffe gift set), I figured I'd check if they were the same size. They are - though the build process is different and you can't use the Phantom nozzles in the F-104 kit without cutting off the burner can and installing it separately. It does mean that any engine you can install in the F-104, you can install in the Phantom, though.
General Electric F110 (Revell F-16C-50): Forget it, the nozzle on the F-16 is so big you could stick the J79 nozzle inside it with room to spare. While I know "physically impossible" tends to be answered with "challenge accepted", this just wouldn't work without an entirely new tail.
General Electric F404 (Academy F/A-18C): I couldn't find the actual nozzles, but it looks like they're a tiny bit smaller in diameter than the J79 nozzles. They're also longer, and in the contracted position, rather than fully open like the J79 nozzles, so they'd look very different.
General Electric F414 (Italeri JAS-39 Gripen): I actually have a Revell Super Hornet I was looking for the parts to so I could compare those, but I couldn't find it. Checking the Gripen nozzles against the tail end of the Revell kit though says they're the same size. And the Gripen nozzle is also the same diameter as the J79 nozzle. Like the F404, they're molded in the contracted position, and they're kind of long (even longer than the F404s) so they'll stick out further from the fuselage shroud thingy around the F-4's exhausts.
General Electric F101 (Revell B-1B): Tested this for a laugh, if the F-16 nozzle was large then this is ridiculous. If the B-1B nozzles were fully open, you could fit the F-16 nozzles inside them like you could the J79 into the F110... (While I was looking for nozzles I also found an F100 nozzle from Revell's F-15E in 1/48 - it's only a little too large for the B-1's engine mounts!)
Eurojet EJ200 (Revell Typhoon): The nozzles for these, while available in both open and closed in the same kit, and therefore leaving you with a spare pair of nozzles after every build, are also sadly *slightly* smaller in diameter than the J79 nozzles. You may be able to make it work however.
Turbo Union RB199 (Revell Tornado): These are around the same diameter as the EJ200 engines, but they only come in the fully dilated position, and it has those thrust reversers which won't fit inside the engine shroud on the F-104 (or the F-4). I think this would be kind of difficult to execute.
Pratt and Whitney F100 (no manufacturer): I actually don't have any of these except the F-16 version which is just as huge as the others. I have built a few F-15 kits though, and the F100 as presented on those is a little smaller in diameter. Not sufficiently to fit on the F-104 though.
Pratt and Whitney TF30 (Esci F-111A): These are, once again, a bit too large for the F-104, plus they're in the dilated position, which means they're really short and would not be visible from any aspect except the rear. TF30 engines from a Tomcat kit with converged nozzles would stick out more.. but they still wouldn't fit due to the larger diameter.
SNECMA M88 (Hobby Boss Rafale C): I didn't actually find these but I found the airframe and the part where the nozzles connect to. These are similar in diameter to the EJ200 nozzles, i.e. slightly too small for the F-104, but possibly doable.
-
Found it on [url]http://conceptships.blogspot.rs/[/url] ([url]http://conceptships.blogspot.rs/[/url]) Starstealth, Darkfighter,...? ;)
Perfect! :smiley:
-
Thanks - - - - hmmm
;)
-
General Electric F414 (Italeri JAS-39 Gripen): I actually have a Revell Super Hornet I was looking for the parts to so I could compare those, but I couldn't find it. Checking the Gripen nozzles against the tail end of the Revell kit though says they're the same size. And the Gripen nozzle is also the same diameter as the J79 nozzle. Like the F404, they're molded in the contracted position, and they're kind of long (even longer than the F404s) so they'll stick out further from the fuselage shroud thingy around the F-4's
Errr...apart from the most recent Gripen E/F, of which I'm pretty sure there is no kit yet, all the Gripens have RM12 engines which are essentially GE F404s.
-
To do a PW1120 engine, you need to use a 1/72 F100 nozzle on a 1/48 F-104 or a 1/100 F100 nozzle on a 1/72 F-104. The non-dimensionalized contours are the same, just scaled down, much as the F404/RM12/F414 nozzle contours are scaled up for the F110/F101DFE.
-
What I wanted to qualify as 'Perfect' is this. :smiley:
(http://i1080.photobucket.com/albums/j340/ysi_maniac/WRK/e_wo_kaku_peter_05.jpg) (http://s1080.photobucket.com/user/ysi_maniac/media/WRK/e_wo_kaku_peter_05.jpg.html)
-
So, an EJ-200 powered T/F-104G-ASA with the original intakes is ok. What about the C of G? The engine is shorter than the J-79, and lighter, so it could be mounted further back without lengthening the overall length of the aircraft - is that right/OK for a Wif? ???
-
Works for this engineer.
-
Works for this engineer.
;)
I have a cunning plan probably in 1/144th
-
What I wanted to qualify as 'Perfect' is this. :smiley:
([url]http://i1080.photobucket.com/albums/j340/ysi_maniac/WRK/e_wo_kaku_peter_05.jpg[/url]) ([url]http://s1080.photobucket.com/user/ysi_maniac/media/WRK/e_wo_kaku_peter_05.jpg.html[/url])
Presumably it drops its tip tanks when it needs to go "full stealth" as they make, both by themselves and in the sharp intersections with the leading and trailing edges, excellent radar reflectors. You might be able to reduce it by making them of composite with RAM incorporated in it, but that still leaves the intersections to create reflectors.
-
If you're going full sci-fi like that, there's always this thing (which I was astonished not to see in the thread already):
(http://ww3.sinaimg.cn/orj480/5f6ff8c9gw1f57o3cx3p1j20m80de0uk.jpg)
The Sv-152 Svärd Variable Fighter (i.e. it transforms into a robot), designed by Shoji Kawamori. This is one of like three images that exists of it, it only featured as stills in flashbacks in Macross Delta, but despite some people's initial interpretations, this is very clearly an F-104-derived design...
-
What I wanted to qualify as 'Perfect' is this. :smiley:
([url]http://i1080.photobucket.com/albums/j340/ysi_maniac/WRK/e_wo_kaku_peter_05.jpg[/url]) ([url]http://s1080.photobucket.com/user/ysi_maniac/media/WRK/e_wo_kaku_peter_05.jpg.html[/url])
Presumably it drops its tip tanks when it needs to go "full stealth" as they make, both by themselves and in the sharp intersections with the leading and trailing edges, excellent radar reflectors. You might be able to reduce it by making them of composite with RAM incorporated in it, but that still leaves the intersections to create reflectors.
Or have them shaped like those multi-mission pods the F-35 is getting.
-
If you're going full sci-fi like that, there's always this thing (which I was astonished not to see in the thread already):
([url]http://ww3.sinaimg.cn/orj480/5f6ff8c9gw1f57o3cx3p1j20m80de0uk.jpg[/url])
The Sv-152 Svärd Variable Fighter (i.e. it transforms into a robot), designed by Shoji Kawamori. This is one of like three images that exists of it, it only featured as stills in flashbacks in Macross Delta, but despite some people's initial interpretations, this is very clearly an F-104-derived design...
Thank you for posting this on Sebastian. I have a line drawing of this one but no color shots.
You can definitely see the F-104 lineage of the design.
-
Thinking of a F-104J-Kai with bits of the F-104ASA from Alenia, possibly sharing a radar with the Mitsubishi F-2, as well as a re-engining with PW1120 or F404 or F414; perhaps borrow a canard set from a Kfir to add to the mix for color.
Addendum: Armament would be a mix of Japanese AAM-3 and AAM-4 missiles.
-
Could the fuselage of a 1/144 kit be used to house a fountain pen?
-
Could the fuselage of a 1/144 kit be used to house a fountain pen?
"Skywriting" out the exhaust nozzle? I could see that as a joke/novelty item for aviation buffs.
-
Model L-242 for the USN - kind of a naval F-104:
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-TFF5074NhMo/WQTRPXUKNRI/AAAAAAAAKjM/854pqrSNsNUkeWHVqC-GAFaNqwp9U58JwCLcB/s1600/Lockheed%2B242%2BArtists%2BConcept%2BDarkened.jpg)
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cHWtcrfu_f0/WQTSbXK9gUI/AAAAAAAAKjU/WdLrhulU9XcsDz-3hrmWCQaRw7omeuYkgCLcB/s1600/F-104N%2BThree%2BView%2BComparison.jpg)
More info (https://retromechanix.com/lockheed-l-242-navalized-star-fighter/nggallery/image/artists-impression-of-the-lockheed-l-242-vf-day-fighter-essentially-a-navalized-version-of-the-f-104-starfighter-submitted-to-buaer-on-february-26-1953-to-fulfill-the-requirements-of-os-130)
Some interesting armament options investigated in this:
(https://d1kqib0uq4v1gs.cloudfront.net/wp-content/gallery/lockheed_l-242_a/l-242-figure-09.gif)
(https://d1kqib0uq4v1gs.cloudfront.net/wp-content/gallery/lockheed_l-242_a/L-242-Figure-10.gif)
(https://d1kqib0uq4v1gs.cloudfront.net/wp-content/gallery/lockheed_l-242_a/L-242-Figure-11.gif)
(https://d1kqib0uq4v1gs.cloudfront.net/wp-content/gallery/lockheed_l-242_a/L-242-Figure-12.gif)
Finally, I will leave you with this:
(https://d1kqib0uq4v1gs.cloudfront.net/wp-content/gallery/lockheed_l-242_a/L-242-Figure-16.gif)
-
Without steering the Air Superiority Fighter thread off-topic, here's an idea: if the Naval Starfighter had significantly lower stall speed (implying higher lift), why not base the fighter-bomber version offered internationally on that? One would think that sacrificing some of the top speed at altitude (Mach 2 capable fighters spend 0,01% of their flight time at Mach 2+) would have been worth of improved lift and much better low-speed handling at low altitudes.
I'll answer myself: even when the F-104G was offered, the Starfighter's air-to-ground mission was envisioned as delivering "special weapons" flying fast in a straight line (or alternatively, "tossing" The Bomb in a half-loop), it was not anticipated it would be required to carry heavy conventional loads and turn tightly low and slow, hugging the terrain and dodging flak while providing close air support.
Still, later on when F-104S was being developed (and the need for conventional weapons capability reaffirmed), maybe the idea could have been realized (Italy obviously wanted an interceptor first, but other potential customers...)
-
Navalized original F-104 design, note the shorter OAL similar to the XF-104.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f2/XF-104_drawing.jpg/800px-XF-104_drawing.jpg)
-
Via Facebook.
(https://scontent.fxds1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/54419799_2910394682518349_8476763260312354816_o.jpg?_nc_cat=104&_nc_ht=scontent.fxds1-1.fna&oh=d360c3c1fc989455d7af2343849268be&oe=5D1E666E)
-
Mach 2 troop transport? :o ;D
-
Mach 2 troop transport? :o ;D
More like a very fast VIP transport vehicle. I think this would look great in VIP squadron markings.
-
Or maybe in Air Force One scheme - when the US president absolutely needs to get somewhere (or get out of somewhere) fast.
-
This video appeared in my YouTube feed this afternoon. Looks nice and definitely sounds great.
Click on thumbnail or html to view at YouTube: XXXL RC F-104 STARFIGHTER - FLIGHT DEMO (https://youtu.be/pRtBSssDDHA)
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/pRtBSssDDHA/hqdefault.jpg?sqp=-oaymwEiCNIBEHZIWvKriqkDFQgBFQAAAAAYASUAAMhCPQCAokN4AQ==&rs=AOn4CLA0IlwKNz1j5qyO6YRkk9wXyGqj4Q) (https://youtu.be/pRtBSssDDHA)
-
Nice video --- :smiley:
-
That's awesome! Taxiing & (once the controller got the feel of it) flying you'd think it was the real thing! :D :smiley: 8)
-
All that was missing was the smoke trail :smiley:
-
All that was missing was the smoke trail :smiley:
And the proper sound ;D
I saw the two civilian F-104s run by StarFighters display team some years ago at Cold Lake Airshow, they had a very distinctive sound to them ---
-
Crossing F-104 and F-16
(https://i1080.photobucket.com/albums/j340/ysi_maniac/Drawing/F-104_F-16.jpg) (http://s1080.photobucket.com/user/ysi_maniac/media/Drawing/F-104_F-16.jpg.html)
-
Ryan proposal for a lift-fan VTOL F-104G.
(http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS-2/i-gpPdmW2/0/a3af6e4f/XL/LOCKHEED_RYAN_MODEL190_01-XL.png)
(http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS-2/i-Q94Z2xq/0/3d042160/M/LOCKHEED_RYAN_MODEL190_02-M.png)
-
I wonder if that is meant to say two "J85-GE-1" engines?
-
I wonder if that is meant to say two "J85-GE-1" engines?
suspect GE-1 is correct. ISTR that was a series of study engines that lead to the J101 and F404/412/414 family.
-
Along the lines of Mareinflieger F-104G's with two Komoran missiles, how about a JASDF F-104J in over-water camouflage and carrying two ASM-1 missiles?
-
Along the lines of Mareinflieger F-104G's with two Komoran missiles, how about a JASDF F-104J in over-water camouflage and carrying two ASM-1 missiles?
Interesting idea. This sort of scheme I presume:
(http://www.i-f-s.nl/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/76-8702-F-104J-204-sqn-two-tone-blue-camouflage-scheme-ACM-meet-1980_FB.jpg)
The only potential issue might be that the F-104Js served from October 1962 to 1986 whereas the ASM-1 only entered service in 1980. Its certainly not an impossible pairing though.
-
Crossing F-104 and F-16
([url]https://i1080.photobucket.com/albums/j340/ysi_maniac/Drawing/F-104_F-16.jpg[/url]) ([url]http://s1080.photobucket.com/user/ysi_maniac/media/Drawing/F-104_F-16.jpg.html[/url])
If I built one of these I would have to swap the wings as well as the tail!
-
Question:
The premise WIP (posted here to better explain my motive behind the question- I wish to be able to at least semi-accurately portray the feature in question; final version will be posted in my mental note thread instead)
(https://i.imgur.com/uvwnEs8.png)
What does the circled area, between the fuselage and the intake shock cone, look like? Is there a splitter plate?
(https://i.imgur.com/WvRreUk.png)
Thanks in advance.
-
I would say flush.
Attached are three images from the Special Project Forum (https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/ (https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/)) which I highly recommend you join. There are another 15 or images on this model and another CL-1200 design.
-
What does the circled area, between the fuselage and the intake shock cone, look like? Is there a splitter plate?
(https://i.imgur.com/WvRreUk.png)
IF you build the configuration in this image, then, yes, that area indicated is a splitter plate. If you build the configuration as shown in Big Gimper's images, then there is no splitter plate. The with/without splitter may be a functin of when the images were generated in the concept process. I wouldn't place too much faith in the pictures of the models as these models were not necessarily the most accurate and a fine detail like a splitter might not be represented in a presentation model.
So, in the end, you get to pick. :)
Paul
-
Does this help:
(https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/x-27-cl-1200.jpg)
(https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/x-27-side.jpg)
I always preferred the later CL-1600 with different intakes:
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcSoDydYgmUKwWx0UT5Pk5K1tha3Fe6NqgJyYE4i-827EvGqU_7u)
-
Thanks again, guys :smiley:
I always preferred the later CL-1600 with different intakes
The impression that I got from Secret Projects post thread and American Secret Projects book is that the box intakes and the two ventral fins seem to be tied to either its X-27 engine trial aircraft identity or some iterations of the design that use the F100 turbofan. The mock-up in the first two pictures appears to be the very first version of the CL-1200-1.
-
Maybe. I still prefer the look though.
-
The splitter plate shape is a mistake, they've drawn the weird reflection-shadow (reflec-dow, shad-ection?)
of the intake that appears in various shapes and intensities in some photos of highly polished F-104s.
(https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/images/306509main_E-6511_full.jpg)
(https://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/F-104/Large/E-3009.jpg)
-
I shall do my part adding to the confusion. From American Secret Projects book. Granted, even this doesn't look nearly like the line drawing or F-104's reflection-shadow, and worse...... could it simply be some kind of modelling seam on the shock cone?
-
The F-104 intake half-cone is attached to the fuselage, it does not stand off.
That’s what you’re seeing in the model photo.
(https://b-domke.de/AviationImages/Starfighter/Images/F-104G-5977.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2823/9674547230_81ebc7a0b7_b.jpg)
-
Random idea: French F-104
-
^Interesting.
Twin DEFAs, fixed IFR probe à la Mirage F.1, Magic, Super 530s (both the old and more modern versions,....
Exocets for maritime strike.
These weird combined rocket pod/drop tanks.
-
Indeed. Matra JL-100s on the wingtips would be cool:
(https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=176549&d=1516612315)
The F-104 did come with a suitably obvious refuelling probe:
(https://airrefuelingarchive.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/lockheed-f104-starfighter_13.jpg)
-
Twin DEFAs, fixed IFR probe à la Mirage F.1, Magic, Super 530s (both the old and more modern versions,...
And maybe locally-assembled with Atar 09Bs?
-
Random idea: French F-104
Great idea :-*
Have to see if I can find a cheap Haseg in 1/48.
If then, I think I will go with those mod':
- JL100
- ATAR 9B/C (B if a F-104C and C if F-104G/J)
- a pair Magic
- Martin Baker Mk-4
- no IFR probe (or I keep the original of the F-104)
- same paint scheme as Mirage IIIC (blue or a brown/sand as worn on Djibouti aircraft)
-
If it's around late enough to carry a pair of Magics, might it also be upgraded to an ATAR 9K?
-
Thanks for the suggestion :smiley:
As exhaust are the same between Atar 9C and 9K (for the visible part), and to mark the difference, maybe I should add 2 scoop in the rear end of the fuselage as those we can see on Mirage F-1/Mirage 50EV with the 9K50
(https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/images/emoji.php/v9/tee/1/32/1f914.png)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e0/Venezuelan_Air_Force_Dassault_Mirage_50EV_Schleiffert-1.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e0/Venezuelan_Air_Force_Dassault_Mirage_50EV_Schleiffert-1.jpg)
http://bdd.deltareflex.com/cns_affiche.php?image=9526 (http://bdd.deltareflex.com/cns_affiche.php?image=9526)
-
Why would you want to go from the J79 to the Atar? That would be a massive backward step.
-
Why would you want to go from the J79 to the Atar? That would be a massive backward step.
More French content? Much like a French F-4E derivative with ATAR 9K50s and a version of the twin-DEFA cannon package, trialed by the Israelis, in place of the Gatling
I agree, the ATAR 9K50 is a generation behind the J79 which introduced variable stators in the compressor section to production engines.
-
Why would you want to go from the J79 to the Atar? That would be a massive backward step.
As said by Elmayerle, it's to put more french content (the same I did with the M-88 instead of F-404 on my T-50 last year). But I'm not even sure to have a spare ATAR 9C/K exhaust so I might stay with the original J-79.
I found one Hasegawa kit from a friend stash. So as soon as my workshop is installed in my new apartment next month, I will start to work on this project in parallel with a real-word F-104J (Kinetic) :smiley:
-
<...>
The F-104 did come with a suitably obvious refuelling probe:
(https://airrefuelingarchive.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/lockheed-f104-starfighter_13.jpg)
Yes, of course, but I think the Mirage F.1-style looks a bit more refined.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49622642887_182d6a10c6_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iAZ1Up)
French-F-104 (https://flic.kr/p/2iAZ1Up) by Motschke (https://www.flickr.com/photos/151156765@N03/), on Flickr
-
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49622642887_182d6a10c6_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iAZ1Up)
French-F-104 (https://flic.kr/p/2iAZ1Up) by Motschke (https://www.flickr.com/photos/151156765@N03/), on Flickr
:-*
Did you plan do colour this profile ?
If yes, can I ask you to do one in Mirage IIIC colours' ? The sand/brown scheme of aircraft deployed in Djibouti:
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/75/fe/2d/75fe2d5e820e919d075006e41eb7a84a.jpg)
-
:smiley:
-
:-*
Did you plan do colour this profile ?
If yes, can I ask you to do one in Mirage IIIC colours' ? The sand/brown scheme of aircraft deployed in Djibouti:
Thanks! :smiley: Alas, I haven't got any plans for colouring the profile. I'm just too slow. :-[ I agree that it would look good in Djibouti colours. Then again, the grey-green wrap-around of the Mirage F.1/2000D or the 2000C air superiority colours would also look great. It's a pity the wheel well doors would get in the way of an "Iraquien" F.1 drop tank on the centreline....
-
Thanks for you reply. No problem if you don't plan to colour it. At least, you gave me some idea with S530D installed underwing. After some research, I found that AS-30 was tested on german F-104 by the french CEV (centre d'essai en vol - Fly test center) with German:
(http://aviateurs.e-monsite.com/medias/images/f-104-as-30.jpg)
http://aviateurs.e-monsite.com/pages/1946-et-annees-suivantes/mes-800-heures-sur-f-104-1.html (http://aviateurs.e-monsite.com/pages/1946-et-annees-suivantes/mes-800-heures-sur-f-104-1.html)
(http://www.916-starfighter.de/916starfighter/pics/camo/%2723+81%27%20F-104G%20pres%20Jagel%201993.jpg)
http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Pole/2081po.htm (http://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/Pole/2081po.htm)
So I thinking to change my backstory from a "Djibouti deployed aircraft" to a "former Djibouti deployed aircraft used by CEV for armement integration test". Of course, I keep the worn Djibouti camo but with fresh paint on insignia and squadron marking and add a freshly new painted black/dark grey CEV logo on the tail fin):
(https://www.avionslegendaires.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/ecusson-CEV.jpg)
-
Look quickly or perhaps squint and you can almost see a French F-104 (or perhaps a German Mirage) in this photo:
(https://laststandonzombieisland.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/french-mirage-german-f-104-starfighter-italian-rcaf-canadian-raf-buccanier-netherlands-air-force-nato-usaf-f-105-thunderchief-operation-seven-up.jpg?w=1798)
Oh, and someone obviously forgot to tell the Brits that the dress for the day was non-camouflaged...
-
My takes on the French F-104 ... or SAPAC-LL (Lockheed-Latécoère) L-246F Guerrier Étoilés.
Single-seat - http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=351.msg166845#msg166845 (http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=351.msg166845#msg166845)
Two-seater - http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=351.msg166846#msg166846 (http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=351.msg166846#msg166846)
-
What if the Italians (or another user) had done a further upgrade post the F-104S-ASA/M? Maybe add new engine to replace the J79, maybe even with thrust vectoring? New radar? More modern weapons such as MICA, ASRAAM. AMRAAM? Full glass cockpit? HMD?
-
An F-104 in the markings from the episode of Star Trek where the Enterprise gets intercepted by the 1960s USAF? For the Sci Fi group build of course.
-
Found this on Facebook:
(https://scontent-cdt1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/89526079_10157000117787157_4579242793251110912_o.jpg?_nc_cat=103&_nc_sid=e007fa&_nc_ohc=e2sPakSNJywAX_4J1aK&_nc_ht=scontent-cdt1-1.xx&oh=239b21150bdcd0545b023a5c6ea87b50&oe=5E9011C9)
Other pics here: https://www.facebook.com/andrew.prentis/media_set?set=a.10157000117177157&type=3 (https://www.facebook.com/andrew.prentis/media_set?set=a.10157000117177157&type=3)
-
:smiley:
-
What about an oblique wing F-104?
-
What about an oblique wing F-104?
I wonder if that would require ditching the T-Tail?
-
Found this on Facebook:
(https://scontent-cdt1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/89526079_10157000117787157_4579242793251110912_o.jpg?_nc_cat=103&_nc_sid=e007fa&_nc_ohc=e2sPakSNJywAX_4J1aK&_nc_ht=scontent-cdt1-1.xx&oh=239b21150bdcd0545b023a5c6ea87b50&oe=5E9011C9)
Other pics here: https://www.facebook.com/andrew.prentis/media_set?set=a.10157000117177157&type=3 (https://www.facebook.com/andrew.prentis/media_set?set=a.10157000117177157&type=3)
Now that is just sooooo cool
Mog
>^-.-^<
-
What about an oblique wing F-104?
I wonder if that would require ditching the T-Tail?
Maybe...maybe not.
The AD-1 (below) had a low set tail but that doesn't mean the F-104 would necessarily need one...at least in the whiffverse.
(https://www.boldmethod.com/images/blog/lists/2014/12/9-strange-aircraft-wing-designs/1.jpg)
-
What about an Israeli one in this scheme:
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/97/40/36/97403629ff0c659252b097914221ab64.jpg)
-
This is somewhat close:
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh173/SPINNERS1961/WHAT%2520IF%25202010/WHAT%2520IF%2520ALBUM%2520A/IDF%2520F-104C%2520STARFIGHTER.05_zpsycvhwlyy.jpg&key=a12c2ca35d7be9dce506a00b01dd7cdf1fb18de9d838083f4f5251eedb554723)
-
There's also this:
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh173/SPINNERS1961/WHAT%2520IF%25202010/WHAT%2520IF%2520ALBUM%2520A/IDF%2520F-104I%2520STARFIGHTER.01_zpsebicpymf.jpg&key=073842a487474cb1a8814d4f3827eaf44595505d53bb0aeb814628b0168771dc)
-
Nice :smiley:
-
Hmmmm.....
I have those decals!
-
The RAAF came very close to being a F-104 operator in the real world. Here is some inspiration of what could have been:
(https://combatace.com/applications/downloads/interface/legacy/screenshot.php?path=/monthly_02_2016/0f10e9d1921edeef569bbadb8b7ed36b-img01669.jpg)
(https://combatace.com/applications/downloads/interface/legacy/screenshot.php?path=/monthly_02_2016/f1eaa22b8c3395e8a3ba2278fc2dd826-img01670.jpg)
(https://combatace.com/applications/downloads/interface/legacy/screenshot.php?path=/monthly_02_2016/b5bbe058330b502adb0a97d78650a0f2-img01679.jpg)
I plan to model something similar to the last though mine will be a two seater.
-
Nice! :-*
-
Fanta! Needs some Fantanas! (https://youtu.be/F614uU3DsqM?t=14)
-
The RAAF came very close to being a F-104 operator in the real world. Here is some inspiration of what could have been:
The top two look very much like the RCAF schemes with RAAF roundels and squadron markings.
-
Based very much on real RAAF Mirage III schemes:
(http://www.adf-gallery.com.au/gallery/albums/Mirage-III-A3-3a/Mirage_A3_3.jpg)(https://www.aviationmegastore.com/img/prod/full/4/7/137271_0.jpg)(https://live.staticflickr.com/4207/35128539255_d59a9c7e43_b.jpg)
(https://cdn2.bigcommerce.com/server3100/41ee3/products/208/images/162/HPD072001_IN1_revA__39346.1306371180.1280.1280.jpg?c=2)
(http://www.adf-gallery.com.au/gallery/albums/Mirage-III-A3-11/Mirage_A3_11.sized.jpg)
-
First pic is one of those crappy Google image things that doesn't work properly, Greg. Can't see it. :(
-
First pic is one of those crappy Google image things that doesn't work properly, Greg. Can't see it. :(
Same here. Am I correct in presuming it's an image of a "Fanta-can" Mirage IIIO?
-
How's that?
-
How's that?
Much better!!
-
How's that?
Much better!!
:smiley:
-
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/Gekko_1/Israel1.jpg)
-
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/Gekko_1/RAAFmagpie1.jpg)
-
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/Gekko_1/fin-3.jpg)
-
^ The code in the Finnish one conflicts with the codes of the Saab 91 Safir trainer, used from early 1960s.
-
Perhaps a "ST" or "SR" code instead?
-
Perhaps a "ST" or "SR" code instead?
LD ?
-
LD works. Could go combo LS for Lockheed Starfighter - like the Ilmavoimat Learjet 35 (LJ) and Fouga Magister (FM). Or keep it simple - LO for Lockheed?
-
ST is taken: Fieseler Storch.
SR, LD, and many others are feasible.
https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luettelo_Suomen_ilmavoimien_ilma-aluksista
-
(http://aviadejavu.ru/Images6/HI/HI-14/129-1.jpg)
-
One way increase your home's curb appeal :smiley:
-
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh173/SPINNERS1961/WHAT%2520IF%25202010/WHAT%2520IF%2520ALBUM%2520A/RAF%2520STARFIGHTER%2520F2.03_zps2ehbmmgg.jpg&key=92418045236824ee32cec9771ea6e972b7b70bb5044745a7ebfa6623f1b07123)
-
:-* Gorgeous!
-
Love the RAF ones!
Just a thought the Belgian AF was offered a stripped down and simplified version of the "G" when they bought the Mirage 5. Might have gone to other M5 users as well??? :-*
Also if the RAAF had gone with the F-104G, perhaps the earlier "C"s used in Vietnam by the USAF might have ended up in NZ? (Having read the RAAF threads I am not getting into that too deeply)
-
Something different:
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=https://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh173/SPINNERS1961/WHAT%2520IF%25202010/WHAT%2520IF%2520ALBUM%2520B/RAAF%2520F-104CA%2520STARFIGHTER.04_zpsl1meu5sh.jpg&key=1c86048141587a1a6782b7b447a5e45db3c52cbd865cb3e6ff056baf591058be)
-
More:
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh173/SPINNERS1961/WHAT%2520IF%25202013/RAFSTARFIGHTERF2A07_zps52c493ff.jpg&key=51bea428742fc874f951a82f14edac0f3a6bce8ef913b761c9e8181a285b9ad1)
-
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh173/SPINNERS1961/WHAT%2520IF%25202013/IAFF-104CSTARFIGHTER01_zps9ea7c5d5.jpg&key=6ae7317d2745d2934f07542b58014564d45b09ef82d8bfb58f87089bfeebd4b1)
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh173/SPINNERS1961/WHAT%2520IF%25202013/IAFF-104CSTARFIGHTER02_zps52259685.jpg&key=b866ef7d78f8ba3554cbe5c12aa220821d84a70c4549e335e3125f62d4e047a9)
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh173/SPINNERS1961/WHAT%2520IF%25202013/IAFF-104CSTARFIGHTER03_zpsaf8b265c.jpg&key=5ca91de68a6d8b6a12b1495147f99dc432bf1e64db12b43aeafe509768648b0e)
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh173/SPINNERS1961/WHAT%2520IF%25202013/IAFF-104CSTARFIGHTER04_zps7d1a3321.jpg&key=8a67fbcd161747f58f97931be75cd2c77454784c8922ec55ca44ee2da828247f)
-
StarFitter
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/j340/ysi_maniac/StarFitter.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) (https://app.photobucket.com/u/ysi_maniac/a/caec78e4-057f-4fe9-82f4-083a43455765/p/4ccb2745-6906-42ae-a335-3952cb51871c)
-
StarLightning
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/j340/ysi_maniac/StarLightning.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) (https://app.photobucket.com/u/ysi_maniac/a/caec78e4-057f-4fe9-82f4-083a43455765/p/3f9e832c-1b90-4f1d-9904-1958670c8447)
-
StarSabre
F-104 (Viggen intakes) with F-100 flying surfaces. Alternative tail fin: 2nd one looks a F-100 with lateral intakes
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/j340/ysi_maniac/StarSabre.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) (https://app.photobucket.com/u/ysi_maniac/a/caec78e4-057f-4fe9-82f4-083a43455765/p/a320438c-0df9-476f-8cc7-94f9ae6d0800)
-
Mirage-F104
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/j340/ysi_maniac/Mirage-F104.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) (https://app.photobucket.com/u/ysi_maniac/a/caec78e4-057f-4fe9-82f4-083a43455765/p/90ce4280-e0e1-442e-8e7f-862ddc283470)
-
Triggered by AeroplanDriver's great work here: http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=10194.new#new (http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=10194.new#new)
What about a Luftwaffe SEAD TF-104G loaded initially with AGM-45 Shrike but then later AGM-88 HARM?
-
Small F-104 (with Mirage-F1 nose)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/j340/ysi_maniac/F-104_F1.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) (https://app.photobucket.com/u/ysi_maniac/a/caec78e4-057f-4fe9-82f4-083a43455765/p/624a6d98-7136-4fc0-a590-a564a5700dc0)
-
Hello Mr. Stubby! :smiley:
-
New look for Starfighter
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/j340/ysi_maniac/F-104_F4.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) (https://app.photobucket.com/u/ysi_maniac/a/caec78e4-057f-4fe9-82f4-083a43455765/p/d17f3103-4d1c-44f2-be27-e360546823b7)
-
Hellenic inspiration
https://militaryaiworks.com/download-hangar/files-by-newest/download/7-aircraft-models-fs9/665-ai-lockheed-f-104-starfighter-hellenic-af-f-104g-mpai
-
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51847402872_6c499f4c8b_b.jpg&key=5340ed5388168484ee5ba1bdd37319e78d52993c29a6596eacaac2255b1d8613)
-
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51838607011_d88d3d17ea_b.jpg&key=22aa059700bfe65607fdef759dddb28918a5713bfa1bb5510e3fa63a0923cdfb)
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51832628613_701682be26_b.jpg&key=8fddfe97233e94a0c2b471f15223c56173981b96fb316c561c6ed5ab8fcec3b0)
-
Love the Wild Weasel '104 ... and very timely :smiley:
-
(https://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_01_2017/post-79989-0-33478800-1485423494.jpg)
-
Drew this years ago.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52020723028_a01744527c_w.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2nfTNzJ)F-204 (https://flic.kr/p/2nfTNzJ) by Dave Bailey (https://www.flickr.com/photos/190327384@N02/), on Flickr
-
Drew this years ago.
A bit of Nord 1500 Griffon going on there :smiley:
-
Look up the Lockheed CL-1000 for a Starfighter with a different look.
-
Iranian anyone:
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52086136402_d51d720732_b.jpg&key=99f06023e72a4c49baae73a5c96ff3a9c82cc692114d571103a37ba1dae4e579)
(https://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_2022_06/F104IIAF_1.thumb.jpg.b77414738d6965cce396daba7339d0d2.jpg)
(https://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_2022_06/F104IIAF_2.thumb.jpg.d13070d654aa544eaeaeb84e7ebfd6f6.jpg)
-
Iranian anyone:
Were those forward fuselage hardpoints actually used for the carriage of bombs?
MAD
(https://combatace.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52086136402_d51d720732_b.jpg&key=99f06023e72a4c49baae73a5c96ff3a9c82cc692114d571103a37ba1dae4e579)
(https://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_2022_06/F104IIAF_1.thumb.jpg.b77414738d6965cce396daba7339d0d2.jpg)
(https://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_2022_06/F104IIAF_2.thumb.jpg.d13070d654aa544eaeaeb84e7ebfd6f6.jpg)
-
(https://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_2020_11/AF-104S.JPG.7d2548fb433d099711a04b3f6df74e42.JPG)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/104-a_zps097a385c.jpg)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/104-b_zpsc10a38ea.jpg)
CFBVs
-
Need takeoff speed of 300+ mph to get off ground with that load !
-
Target better be at the end of the runway too!
-
It obviously wouldn't fly with everything loaded like that. what I was trying to show though was that it was possible to fit bombs on the fuselage pylons.
-
Yeah that’s just a show off photo with every bomb and missile they could find. However, it does make the wings seem to angle downwards more than usual! :o ;)
-
Iranian anyone:
<...>
(https://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_2022_06/F104IIAF_1.thumb.jpg.b77414738d6965cce396daba7339d0d2.jpg)
Nice! :smiley:
With Sea Eagles, in this scheme?
(https://live.staticflickr.com/909/41395639284_78582fd0a0_b.jpg)
-
(https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/0246dd0e-5d49-4d08-a8ae-daa09f0b309f/dev2784-f7325e5b-1c4f-4541-916d-5e86c0dba2ab.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcLzAyNDZkZDBlLTVkNDktNGQwOC1hOGFlLWRhYTA5ZjBiMzA5ZlwvZGV2Mjc4NC1mNzMyNWU1Yi0xYzRmLTQ1NDEtOTE2ZC01ZTg2YzBkYmEyYWIuanBnIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.zU7jYbVhSmIjOWkizsLU1m6aUXwh2zUsYPgEP60dKWQ)
CFBV
-
Zombite build
-
:smiley:
-
WOA! 8)
-
Don't remember if I mentioned this earlier, but how about a F-104J-Kai, equivalent to a F-104ASA but with Japanese radar and, depending on timeframe, AAM-1 and AAM-2 missiles or AAM-3 and AAM-4 missiles - in each case, the first is a Sidewinder replacement and the second is a Sparrow or AMRAAM replacememt.
-
Interesting concept
-
What if the German Re-unification went the other way and we ended up with West German aircraft in East German schemes:
(https://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_2022_11/LSK_zipper02.jpg.95cc20bfcc53e881866d074a71cbbc0b.jpg)
(https://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_2022_11/LSK_zipper01.jpg.4a25b2dbdc4fa292a4715f28e0868c57.jpg)
CFBVs
-
What if the German Re-unification went the other way and we ended up with West German aircraft in East German schemes:
CFBVs
I always thought that if the DDR had taken the BRDs offer of a bail out we might have ended up with the 2 Germanys in a close defence alliance after a change of government in the east.
I love the F-104s, but they might have initially used F-4F (ICE) Phantoms, and then moved up to operating Typhoons like Austria in an integrated system
-
Low tail plane Starfighter
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/j340/ysi_maniac/F104-tail_sp_nCTjHpMrZ96BAi2hkkY5a4.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) (http://"http://"https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/j340/ysi_maniac/F104-tail_sp_nCTjHpMrZ96BAi2hkkY5a4.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds"")
-
Interesting
-
Now that's an intriguing proposition...
-
Lockheed CL-1200 Lancer aka X-27 . . . ;)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_CL-1200_Lancer
cheers,
Robin.
-
Oh, the Lancer...I have so many ideas for kits!!
-
Just a cool photo:
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/77/28/c3/7728c39b7f15da10e5cd7f0c10e5dfca.jpg)
-
Sharkmouth looks really good on the 104! 8)
Loving the camo'ed missile rails, too. :-*
-
... Loving the camo'ed missile rails, too. :-*
Good eye! I missed that the first time around ... :-[
-
That would be a nice build.
-
Random inspiration:
(https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/attachments/104wc705bl-jpg.726241/)
CFBV
-
Chin intake Starfighter
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/j340/ysi_maniac/F-104-chin_jxkMzPU7hE9aL4iEqrcPyk.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) (http://"https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/j340/ysi_maniac/F-104-chin_jxkMzPU7hE9aL4iEqrcPyk.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds")