Article

2004-03-09 Afghanistan/South Asia

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by tipper 2004-03-09 9:18:24 AM|| || Front Page|| [6 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Unfortunately its hard to bypass geography. The only practical access to Afghanistan is through PAkland, Iran or a couple of ex-soviet union stans, which in practice means Russian itself.

if we want to support Afghanistan then the only real alternative to dealing with the Paks is to detach Baluchistan from Pakistan.

Posted by Phil B 2004-3-9 9:30:33 AM|| 2004-3-9 9:30:33 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 "For these reasons the North Vietnamese Air Force usually avoided direct engagements with the F-104, according to US veterans." Not to take away from the engineering genius that created it, but I was under the impression that the F-104 had such a short range that the NVAF waited for them to turn back before attacking the strike aircraft in relative safety. That combined with the fact that it could not carry a large offensive load made it a poor choice for Southeast Asia.

Posted by War46 2004-3-9 10:20:36 AM|| 2004-3-9 10:20:36 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 to be honest pakland was a major ally of china during this time. doesn't surprise me one bit.

Posted by Dan 2004-3-9 10:42:17 AM|| 2004-3-9 10:42:17 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 I didn't even know the F-104 was deployed to SE Asia. Seems likely to have been useless as an escort.

Posted by Shipman 2004-3-9 10:47:26 AM|| 2004-3-9 10:47:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 The Denney memo and other documents obtained by the National Security Archive, a freedom of information group, and released over the weekend paint a picture of deep dissatisfaction with Pakistan within the US foreign policy community, which felt deceived by the countryâs leaders.

The National Security Archive is a left-wing organization that routinely takes positions that run counter to US interests. They want to have it both ways - on the one hand, they think that dictatorial regimes that are US allies (not friends, allies) are essentially propped up by the US, and on the other, they also attack these alliances on the basis that these countries stick it to the US. They can't seem to figure out that Pakistani betrayal is an indication that our allies can stick it to us and still survive - they are not our puppets - we don't keep them in power - they do. If we don't ally with them, they certainly have other options - including China. To paraphrase Marlon Brando in Godfather, we need to keep our friends close, but our allies closer.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-3-9 12:45:14 PM|| 2004-3-9 12:45:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 ..The -104 did go to Vietnam very early on during a brief period of panic by the USAF, which was convinced that the then-almost nonexistent PVNAF was going to come charging south. (The F-102 was also sent there too, and a certain TXANG Lt named Bush wanted to volunteer to go over with them, but that's another story) The -104 was not one of the USAF's favorite aircraft, and it was very badly suited for service in SVN - it demanded a heavy duty, fixed maintenance support network, it developed some problems in service there that hadn't appeared stateside (most notably a bad habit of blowing off cannon access covers) and was horribly vulnerable to ground fire.
The important thing to remember was that by this point, the F-104 was at best a second-line aircraft, almost completely in service with the ANG, and rapidly being pulled out from there. Whatever the Soviets got from the Paki -104s told them nothing more than the fact that the USAF had built an extremely fast US version of the MiG-21.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2004-3-9 1:12:53 PM|| 2004-3-9 1:12:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 The F104 carried a limited payload and was thus completely unadequate for ground atack roles so I don't see why anyone would have flown it low enough
to take ground fire.

It was designed to be an interceptor ie a plane who can go from ground to the position and, very important, altitude than the bad guys in record times. This needed a fast plane with, for that tiume, a very high climb rate from the deck even at the cost of maneuverability (a smart F104 pilot would not allow himself in aturning duel against another fighter but would use the vertical).

Posted by JFM 2004-3-9 2:11:30 PM|| 2004-3-9 2:11:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 THe F-104 was called the "Widowmaker" by the German Air Force, for good reason. It's strictly an air defense fighter, and virtually worthless in any other role. It's pirmary puprose was to take out Soviet bombers coming over the North Pole. By 1965, the majority of them had been retired or transferred to the Air National Guard. China may have learned something from the F-104s in Pakistan, but the best lesson would have been to steer clear of the "Widowmaker".

Posted by Old Patriot 2004-3-9 2:33:57 PM|| [http://users.codenet.net/mweather/default.htm] 2004-3-9 2:33:57 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 My info was that the high accident rate in German Starfighters was due to local modifications who spoiled the aircraft: something about increasing the payload beyond the original specifications.

Posted by JFM 2004-3-9 2:45:09 PM|| 2004-3-9 2:45:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 THe F-104 was called the "Widowmaker
I vaguely remember it being called the KarutKiller or some such.

Posted by Shipman 2004-3-9 5:53:08 PM|| 2004-3-9 5:53:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 Only the F-104C was deployed to Viet Nam. It did have a short range, but it was used in some early MiG-Cap missions.

The F-104C didn't have the "big engine" which was the GE J79 (the same general engine that was used in pairs in the F-4, although there were specific differences between the engines). Another big difference was the refueling mechanism. The F-104C used the drogue and probe method and the F-104G was set up to take fuel from a "boomer" like the F-105 and F-4 (from a normal KC-135 tanker).

The Starfighter was in country for about 18 months to two years and then was removed from the combat zone.

The aircraft was designed as an interceptor and dogfigther and wasn't designed to deal with the conditions in Viet Nam.

Hope the comments help.

Posted by BB-AZ 2004-04-25 7:55:39 PM|| 2004-04-25 7:55:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 The F-104's nickname of "Widowaker" was not entirely justified. The plane had its tendencies and a pilot needed to know how to deal with them. One of the reasons for the high accident rate on take-off was a function of the airplanes design.

It took a tremendous amount of fuel to get the plane airborne. With the big engine at 100% military power (or greater) and the afterburner in operation, the plane could empty its tanks in a couple of minutes. Because of the fuel burn, the centers of lift would shift forward as the fuel burned off. This would cause, under the right weather conditions, the airplane to "sink" about 24 to 60 inches. When a pilot is trying to get his craft airbone, a sudden sink of 2 to 5 feet gets noticed.

The sink happened often in warm dry conditions, but wasn't as common in cold weather. Based on these conditions, a number of Starfighter pilots around here said that the high accident rate was caused by the "sink" suddenly happening on some pilot overseas who hadn't felt it for months or years. When they felt the plane sink, the natural course of action for any pilot is to "do something." Unfortunately, doing something in that situation could get you killed. You had to just "ride it out" and wait for the airplane to catch up with itself.

Whether the story is true or not, it makes a good story and a lot of former Starfighter pilots all told the same story.

In terms of being a dogfighter, there are a lot of Starfighter pilots (Fighter Weapons School graduates, etc) that swore by the Starfighter in a tight fight. They regularly took out F-4's in air-to air training. When the F-15 first came out, the Starfighter training programs were still going on and there were a number of training missions between the two aircraft. The story around here was that the Eagle could take the Starfighter out at a distance because of the advanced radar and weapons systems, but in a close range fight (using the visual engagement rules that were required in a lot of the Viet Nam war), a good Starfighter pilot and his plane could more than hold their own against the Eagle drivers.

The general rule was "Don't let the Starfighters get close."

Posted by BB-AZ 2004-04-25 8:10:01 PM|| 2004-04-25 8:10:01 PM|| Front Page Top

20:10 BB-AZ
19:55 BB-AZ
02:00 SON OF TOLUI
01:15 Zhang Fei
00:07 tu3031
00:05 .com
23:37 Rivrdog
23:19 Old Patriot
23:16 Grunter
23:03 tu3031
22:59 tu3031
22:58 cingold
22:54 Paul Moloney
22:51 Bomb-a-rama
22:45 Bomb-a-rama
22:41 tu3031
22:39 Old Patriot
22:19 tu3031
22:18 Carl in NH
22:15 cingold
22:13 tu3031
22:09 Old Patriot
22:09 tu3031
22:01 milford