Hatman335 Posted December 25, 2024 Posted December 25, 2024 As far as I know, Aerges hasn't discussed anything regarding the specific subvariant or expected list of capabilities yet, so I thought it would be interesting to discuss what we can expect based on what we know so far. I have compiled a set of pictures that compare the showcased in game cockpit with real cockpits, I uploaded this to a separate imgur folder to avoid cluttering the post with so many images: https://imgur.com/a/AGtmoji Before I start the rest of the discussion, I have one very important question/request: can anyone find any pictures of the cockpit of the Spanish variant of the G model? I've looked a lot but I haven't managed to find a single picture or video. With that out of the way, let's look at the pictures and try to figure out which variant it's matching. I have access to the combined T/F/RF-104 -1 and -34 (dated 1973 and 1975), which cover various countries, including Spain and Germany in a single, combined publication. There are also 4 subvariants that are described in the publications; MAP, consortium and ECP 2015 and 2012 modifications. The consortium and MAP variants are, as far as I can tell refer to where the actual aircraft have been manufactured, either license built by the European consortium or provided by the US under the military aid program. The differences between these two variants are slight variations of switchology. As for the ECP 2012 and 2015 modifications, those are somewhat more relevant, since these change the functionality of the radar and implement additional capabilities. ECP 2012 is referred to as the interceptor variant and ECP 2015 as the fighter bomber variant, the former has a B scope and the latter has offset radar bombing capabilities, the ability to set a desired ground speed and get indications for the deviation from that ground speed. The Aerges cockpit doesn't match either of these variants perfectly (at least as they are described in the manuals I have access to), the radar control panel is different and the radar display also has slight differences. However, it does match available photos and videos of the cockpit of the German F-104G, aside from the fact that the ground speed selector panel may be missing, but the ground speed error indicator is present. (It could also be obscured due to the angles shown in the video.) Since, we do know that the Germans made modifications on their aircraft even into the late 70s, it's feasible that the discrepancy between the manuals and the photos is due to the fact that they were modelling it off of a modified German aircraft. So the questions that I have is will the aircraft be: -modelled off of a German variant post 1975? -equipped with ECM? -utilizing the M-2 bombing computer, the Lear dual timer or something different entirely? -able to use the Kormoran missile? Sources: https://www.aviaspotter.it/2020-uno-spillone-a-volandia/?lang=en https://www.916-starfighter.de/F-104_LCC_WorldwideF-104program.pdf https://www.916-starfighter.de/F-104_MAP_F-104manual_LCC1963.PDF https://www.916-starfighter.de/EuropeanProduction_FlightInternational_03.1963.PDF https://www.916-starfighter.de/Large/2191.htm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkw1N332zDI T/R/F-104 -1 and -34 Siegfried Wache, Flugzeuge der Bundeswehr 2
Silver_Dragon Posted December 25, 2024 Posted December 25, 2024 Aerges has buiding a Spanish Air Force F-104G/TF-104G. Dont expect a German/Italian, etc version.Enviado desde mi CPH2197 mediante Tapatalk 1
Hatman335 Posted December 25, 2024 Author Posted December 25, 2024 3 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said: Aerges has buiding a Spanish Air Force F-104G/TF-104G. Dont expect a German/Italian, etc version. Based on what evidence? 1
Silver_Dragon Posted December 25, 2024 Posted December 25, 2024 (edited) 1 hour ago, Hatman335 said: Based on what evidence? Aerges has a Spanish 3rd Party team, and all your products has based on the Spanish Air Force aircrafts, documents and manuals (C-101 Mirlo, Mirage F-1CE/EE/M Abuela, F-104G/TF-104G "Hacedor de Viudas"), that is the evidence, as the Mirage F-1 module has not builded a France/Iraq/South African, etc version, only as AI. Has many factors with the future modules continue builing more and more SASF/FLOAN as the Mirage IIIEE, T-33A, HA-200, SH-3D, MD-500M, CH-9E, AB-204, C-212, CN-235, CN-295 and others. Edited December 25, 2024 by Silver_Dragon 3
Hatman335 Posted December 25, 2024 Author Posted December 25, 2024 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said: Aerges has a Spanish 3rd Party team, and all your products has based on the Spanish Air Force aircrafts, documents and manuals (C-101 Mirlo, Mirage F-1CE/EE/M Abuela, F-104G/TF-104G "Hacedor de Viudas"), that is the evidence, as the Mirage F-1 module has not builded a France/Iraq/South African, etc version, only as AI. Just because their previous two aircraft have been based on Spanish models doesn't automatically mean that their next one is also going to be based on a Spanish variant. According to this website: https://www.i-f-s.nl/squadrons-spanish-air-force/ the Spanish F-104s were officially withdrawn from service in 1972. It's a fairly reasonable assumption that a manual dated 1969 with the latest change in 1973 would be applicable here. This is further supported by the fact that on the very cover of the manual, the Spanish Air Force's roundel is being listed and it's clearly said to be a common manual, intended for use by all the European nations that fly the aircraft. The Spanish were also flying the MAP variant of the G, and this variant is described in the manual. The publication also states that (and I'm paraphrasing here) the actual location of the various elements and switches may be different between nations, but the functions of the controls would be the same. Therefore, it's very reasonable to assume that the MAP variant depicted by this manual would be the one that Spain used, at least in terms of functionality. And yet neither the radar panel nor the radar display is matching that. It also has the ground speed deviation indicator, which is listed to be an ECP 2015 item. Is that something that's applicable to the Spanish G? This is all well supported speculation, not necessarily concrete evidence, but without having any actual evidence to the contrary (such as Aerges commenting on it, seeing the cockpit of a Spanish 104G, comments by SMEs who were in the Spanish Air Force at the time etc.), it's perfectly reasonable to assume that they are making a German variant. And your counterargument that Aerges is a Spanish team thus they must be modelling a Spanish variant cannot be supported by any sort of empirical evidence. A Spanish team, with a history of making Spanish aircraft could very easily decide to change their approach with this aircraft for a wide variety of potential reasons. 28 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said: Has many factors with the future modules continue builing more and more SASF/FLOAN as the Mirage IIIEE, T-33A, HA-200, SH-3D, MD-500M, CH-9E, AB-204, C-212, CN-235, CN-295 and others. I have no idea what you are talking about here honestly. Who is making these modules? Why are they relevant to the F-104G by Aerges? Edited December 25, 2024 by Hatman335 1
Hatman335 Posted December 25, 2024 Author Posted December 25, 2024 6 minutes ago, KlarSnow said: From the developers. Man, I have no idea how I missed that, I'm blind. Thank you.
TLTeo Posted December 25, 2024 Posted December 25, 2024 Consortium still doesn't tell us whether it's an interceptor or fighter bomber jet. My personal uninformed feeling is on the former given that it's a bit more applicable to DCS (e.g. I think it the interceptor jets have some sort of radar boresight acquisition mode), a lot of the fighter bomber functionality (like offset bombing modes) were mainly for nuclear delivery which we don't really have.
Hatman335 Posted December 25, 2024 Author Posted December 25, 2024 5 hours ago, TLTeo said: Consortium still doesn't tell us whether it's an interceptor or fighter bomber jet. My personal uninformed feeling is on the former given that it's a bit more applicable to DCS (e.g. I think it the interceptor jets have some sort of radar boresight acquisition mode), a lot of the fighter bomber functionality (like offset bombing modes) were mainly for nuclear delivery which we don't really have. Offset bombing mode might be a bit niche, but based on Rolf Stünkel's 10PT interview, doing convetional radar bombing with the aircraft is a tactically valid option. As for whether it's a fighter bomber or interceptor variant, I think the ground speed deviation indicator is implying a fighter bomber variant. 2
303_Kermit Posted January 1 Posted January 1 On 12/26/2024 at 12:11 AM, Hatman335 said: Offset bombing mode might be a bit niche, but based on Rolf Stünkel's 10PT interview, doing convetional radar bombing with the aircraft is a tactically valid option. As for whether it's a fighter bomber or interceptor variant, I think the ground speed deviation indicator is implying a fighter bomber variant. If someone can confirm or deny it would be nice: 1. Is it true , that Spanish Air Forces were the only one, where there was not accidents involving F-104 2. Is it true , that Spanish AF never used Starfighter in ground attack role? (mainly because it's hard to find a plane less suited for that role) If both are true that would rather imply interceptor. In ground attack F-104(G) is helplessly useless anyway. 1
Tarres Posted January 1 Posted January 1 Yes, the Spanish Air Force never had an accident with the F-104G (7 years, around 17000 hours) and served only as an interceptor. Ala 16 (Fighter Wing 16), Escuadrón 161 (Squadron 161), later renamed Escuadrón 104 (Squadron 104) 1
TLTeo Posted January 1 Posted January 1 The interceptor only thing is a myth. There are pictures of Spanish F-104s training for a2g on this very forum. 1
Tarres Posted January 1 Posted January 1 Yes, primary as an interceptor. It was the only "modern" airplane in the EdA, so air defense was the primary mission until Mirage IIIEE arrived in 1970. 1
Hatman335 Posted January 1 Author Posted January 1 7 hours ago, 303_Kermit said: If both are true that would rather imply interceptor. In ground attack F-104(G) is helplessly useless anyway. They are making a German variant so personally I wouldn't read too much into what the Spanish Air Force did or didn't do. 1
TLTeo Posted January 1 Posted January 1 Besides, the notion that the F-104G is a bad ground attack aircraft compared to its peers is also wrong. 1
303_Kermit Posted January 2 Posted January 2 (edited) 5 hours ago, TLTeo said: Besides, the notion that the F-104G is a bad ground attack aircraft compared to its peers is also wrong. Don't get me wrong. I am a huge fan of that plane, and I truly think , that it's great supersonic fighter of '50-'60. Definitely I'll put my hart into mastering that plane, but I'm also standing firm on earth. A2G on cold war jets was difficult. F-105, MiG-21 - first practice and results were disaster. Whole squadrons on practice flight managed to miss targets terribly. It's hard. -in F-104 you have to make it all even faster, -in spite of it, you have to work even gentler with the stick, -if you won't - it's not a forgiving plane. Unlike for example MiG-21. Having a choice in A2G I would choose F9F or A-1... Even F-86F. Older, better, more agile. Wouldn't you? Edited January 2 by 303_Kermit 1
Vee.A Posted January 2 Posted January 2 (edited) 2 hours ago, 303_Kermit said: Don't get me wrong. I am a huge fan of that plane, and I truly think , that it's great supersonic fighter of '50-'60. Definitely I'll put my hart into mastering that plane, but I'm also standing firm on earth. A2G on cold war jets was difficult. F-105, MiG-21 - first practice and results were disaster. Whole squadrons on practice flight managed to miss targets terribly. It's hard. -in F-104 you have to make it all even faster, -in spite of it, you have to work even gentler with the stick, -if you won't - it's not a forgiving plane. Unlike for example MiG-21. Having a choice in A2G I would choose F9F or A-1... Even F-86F. Older, better, more agile. Wouldn't you? At the end of day, using an airplane that was clearly originally designed as a very fast interceptor with little focus on maintaining good low speed handling as a fighter-bomber is quite the strange choice. The RCAF also used it in the strike role. You have to wonder if there were some political games going on behind the scenes as well. Nonetheless, it's a very cool airplane, and I'll be getting it. Edited January 2 by Vee.A 5
ThePops Posted January 3 Posted January 3 On 1/1/2025 at 11:11 AM, 303_Kermit said: 1. Is it true , that Spanish Air Forces were the only one, where there was not accidents involving F-104 No (ish). Norway had F-104G from 1963 at the 331 sqd at Bodø. These came directly from Lockheed as RF-104G, but modified during production, having the "R" equipment removed and cannon installed. These, some 20, were used as fighter bombers the first 3-4 years, then as interceptors from 1967 when the USSR abruptly increased their activity with heavy Tupolevs coming from Kola (just love the Kola map ) Anyway, from 1963 to 1970, not a single accident happened with the F-104 (lots with the F-5 though, which Norway also had at that time). The 331 sq had F-104 until 1981-82 when they received the F-16. In 1972 the 334 sqd at Bodø switched from F-5 to CF-104G (built in Canada). They were used largely as fighter bombers (naval mainly), while the 331 sqd was intercepting only. In 82-84 they were all replaced with F-16. From 1972 to about 1982, Bodø was all F-104, while squadrons further south had F-5. The Starfighters at 331 sqd had typical "interceptor colors", white and metal, while the 334 sqd was olive. (Don't know which one looks coolest actually, I mean blond vs brunette impossible choice) I think more F-16s were lost the first 10 years than F-104 during 20 years. But, there were more F-16s than F-104 also (90 vs 40 approximately). The only flying Starfighter in Europe today is at Bodø. It is owned by this group : https://starfighter.no/ I don't care what kind of "G" variant we get, as long as it is a G. Anything else would be silly and pretty useless. The G variant was built by Lockheed, Canadair, Fiat, Fokker, MBB, Messerschmitt, SABCA and Mitsubishi, and in many different versions, and they were modified throughout their lives, but still pretty much the same. A Messerschmitt ? why not 4
ThePops Posted January 6 Posted January 6 On 1/2/2025 at 5:04 AM, Vee.A said: At the end of day, using an airplane that was clearly originally designed as a very fast interceptor with little focus on maintaining good low speed handling as a fighter-bomber is quite the strange choice Not really. This is more about $ than most other things. There's only one reason to build a dedicated fighter bomber/attack aircraft, and that is to get the cost per boom down. For this to pay off, you have to drop a huge number of bombs. It also demands that you are able to do it without getting shot down, impossible without air superiority in a sitting duck like the A-10 for instance. In the cold war, if it should turn hot, there was no such thing as air superiority. The only way to do it was with speed. Get there fast, release some bombs/rockets/missiles, get out even faster. A fighter bomber and an interceptor therefore essentially had to operate with the same parameters, at least initially, which was the only thing that counted. Today we have long range Air to Air, SAMs and cruise missiles instead. And of course (suicide) drones which has created a new set of logics entirely. In most ways, the F-104 was the perfect fighter bomber in it's time and in the environment it should operate IMO. More like a manned cruise missile. 1
Bigskill Posted January 7 Posted January 7 Italy flown the F104 in ASA/M till the 2004, and that variant was solid and most of the problem were resolved. Was a very reliable platform, non easy to operate, but reliable compared previous variants. 1
Ala13_ManOWar Posted January 9 Posted January 9 (edited) On 1/1/2025 at 11:11 AM, 303_Kermit said: If someone can confirm or deny it would be nice: 1. Is it true , that Spanish Air Forces were the only one, where there was not accidents involving F-104 2. Is it true , that Spanish AF never used Starfighter in ground attack role? (mainly because it's hard to find a plane less suited for that role) If both are true that would rather imply interceptor. In ground attack F-104(G) is helplessly useless anyway. 1. true, but bear in mind the short time of service and low number of aeroplanes involved helped a lot with that 2. I wouldn't really know if they "ever" performed any at all, but it's true they mostly were interceptors for sure. Still, there're a few pictures of them with locally produced Mk.83 bombs loaded (those BR.500 painted in orange you can see in C-101, yeah), maybe just tests for the bombs themselves or whatever, don't really know. Since they obviously weren't ever used in any conflict, well, you could say they weren't used in ground attack role. They trained a little bit, guns mostly, but "used" in the role? well, you know. Edited January 9 by Ala13_ManOWar 1 "I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war." -- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice
TLTeo Posted January 9 Posted January 9 52 minutes ago, Ala13_ManOWar said: Since they obviously weren't ever used in any conflict, well, you could say they weren't used in ground attack role. By this definition, no NATO country ever used the F-104 in the ground attack role. 2
Bremspropeller Posted January 9 Posted January 9 IIRC Turkey used theirs in Cyprus. 2 So ein Feuerball, JUNGE!
Bremspropeller Posted January 9 Posted January 9 (edited) And of course the USAF flew CAS in South Vietnam with their 104Cs https://www.i-f-s.nl/da-nang-aircraft-part-1/ Edited January 9 by Bremspropeller 1 1 So ein Feuerball, JUNGE!
Recommended Posts