I grew up in a small village inside a low-flying area of the Luftwaffe in the seventies and eighties. On a sunny day there was always a good chance to see some F-104 pretty close and hear the sonic booms. Back then there was a joke in Germay: What is the easiest way to get your own Starfighter? Buy a piece of land and wait.
When my parents immigrated to Israel, we here living in a small town, about 5km away from an air force base. Sonic booms were the norm. It was mostly F16's. Sometimes they were flying so low, you could see the pilot. When they were turning the afterburner on at night, the noise these things make... when i was a kid, this was mesmerizing to me.
I live in a low flying area in the Netherlands. Sonic booms are extremely rare, but helicopters do a lot of interesting things like a Chinook who flies under the tree tops at a decent speed, an Apache making an extremely thight turn less then 20 meters in front of me and my mother, which is cool. The downsides are the night flights, restricted drone/rc plane flying and back in 2008 a helicopter took out the main power cable so we didn't have electricity for three days. All on all it can be really awsome to see the low flying aircraft.
As I'm typing this, I'm having the Patrouille de France (French acrobatic team) train over my house. I live barely 3 or 4 km away from the Salon de Provence base. When I moved here it was awesome. 4 years later, I wish I could take a nap in peace.
I live in assam, India .. near a airforce station. Mirage 2000s and Su 30s are a regular view.. I've never seen anything as beautiful as a su 30MKI .. just gorgeous...
@@cosmicwakes6443 Yeah, their engineering was... poor. At best Soviet designs did the job, but did so with very little polish and seemed like a half-assed effort a lot of the time. They also lagged being cripplingly in computers and telecommunications.
Cosmic Wakes You suffer from a truly cosmic inferiority complex. And the Soviet Union took ITSELF down through it's own stupidity. I know they've brainwashed you to think Russians are so stupid that the rest of the world is responsible for all their failures...but it's not true. Have some self respect.
The scientific and technological accomplishments of the Soviet Union were impressive even though the command economy was ultimately unable to compete with free market capitalism without serious reform.
I've watched a couple of this channel's videos on British aeronautics and it seems that every time the two main causes for failure are: the utter incompetence of Her Majesty's Government and US sabotage. Have I just watched too few videos or has anyone else spotted this ?!
Hmm, well regarding the incompetence of the government, it is easy with hindsight to condemn the decisions of a cash-strapped government trying to meet the defence needs of the nation. The SR-177, and the much more lamented TSR-2, MIGHT have become great aircraft, that were suitable for considerable further development, served for many years and had significant export potential, OR they might have had prolonged and troublesome developments that sucked money into a black-hole before they ever achieved their design intent (eg the Supermarine Scimitar); we just can't be sure now, as they certainly couldn't foretell at the time. Cancelling might have been the best decision in the long term. I'm not saying the decisions to cancel such aircraft were right or wrong, just that we can't be sure how they would have turned out - there really wasn't the money to fund all the high potential projects put forward. As to sabotage - I can't comment on the details - maybe British aerospace industry were rather naive and inexperienced at competing in the global export market. Not to condone bribery, but maybe they should have been more on the look out for corruption and flag it than they appear to have been.
Scott Manly has voiced some cynicism over the British Government being the only cold war power to voluntarily disband a viable and successful space program with lots of potential, basically because the government in power at the time weren't interested. There was lots of that stuffiness among successive British governments in those days: It's also why British aircraft carriers have those distinctive long superstructures - to make them look more like regular surface ships on the blueprints for the members of parliament who wanted to minimise the Royal Navy's air capability, so convinced they were it was a superfluous function and waste of money.
@@hypervious8878 If you think her Majesty's government was intimidated by the Americans, what about the Avro Arrow? The US bulleyed Canada to cancel it because it was the most advanced fighter in the world, decades ahead of anything else that existed at the time.
@@hypervious8878 Sir Reginald Civil-Servant: "What's this Mr. Smith? I hear you want to send a rocket to the moon?" Mr. Engineer-Smith: "Yes, sir. I think it will greatly enhance our society and world standing in science." Sir Reginald Civil-Servant:: "What's wrong with staying here on the ground in good ol' blighty, eh? You'll not get a decent cup of tea up there! Go to the moon? You're getting ideas above your station. Project cancelled." Mr. Engineer-Smith: "Very good, sir."
@@hypervious8878 The reason that the British canned their rocket program was because they couldn't launch anything commercially useful with either Black Arrow or Europa. Black Arrow could only just make LEO with a small payload and unless they put a launch site in somewhere else in the world put anything into a non polar orbit. While Europa could only put a Ton into LEO and not reach GEO without a lot of extra development on the Blue Streak which the UK could not afford. The British had the option to build rockets or the payloads. They selected the later, and have been quite successful at it, However the industry has become very pan European and no deal Brexit will damage it if not kill it.
Typical, corruption then corruption now. Sigh As a kid I loved the Zipper. I new it was dangerous but I never knew she took that many pilots. What a scandal!
Eisenhower was a rat who oversaw the death of thousands of German soldiers in the Rhine Meadow (death) camps where even US soldiers had sympathy for the shit state the German soldiers were kept in and then died in. Eisenhower thought he was part of the 'emerging club' after WWII but didn't enjoy it when he realised he was just a puppet (who'd done their bidding earlier) which led him to warn of the Military Industrial Complex together with the 'Deep State' that was referenced by more US presidents in the 60's and onward.
Canada's record with the F-86 Sabre was far worse. The Royal Canadian Air Force suffered 112 pilot fatalities during the F-86's twelve years of service. In comparison only 37 pilots were lost over the CF-104's twenty five years of operation.
@@thatoneguy8355 I'm sure your snipers are quite good, but probably no better than ours. Vietnam was the first war in which the US military really used snipers, since they are very useful in counterinsurgency warfare. In conventional war, soldiers with sniper skills are more useful for reconnaissance and radio fire control- an airstrike or artillery barrage does a lot more damage than a bolt-action rifle! ; )
The F-104 Starfighter's safety record was so abysmal in West Germany, they used to tell this joke. How do you get your own Starfighter? Buy a large piece of land and wait.
Little discussed fact about Sputnik, it was also a geodetic satellite. It's reflective surface was well suited for reflecting radar signals. When tracked with radar Sputnik's orbit revealed information about the Earth's shape and gravity. This was useful for navigation and perhaps more concerning, for precise calculation of ICBM trajectory calculation.
@@mickkidston7344 I thought that the lease-lend tap was abruptly turned off in 1945. Britain still had delusions of being a power to rival the US and the USSR but the lack of cash was the reality that could not be denied.
TSR2 - proof that you can polish a turd. The aircraft was full of design flaws that couldn't be fixed without a total redesign. Had the Tory's won the 1964 election, they would have canned it as well. Arrow, again a project that was is deeper trouble than the people building it let on, it is very doubtful if the Canadians would ever have got the weapon system on it to work, specifically, the Sparrow II active radar homing AAM, planned to the aircraft. SR-177, bad idea, the HTP oxidier was nasty stuff, putting it in a fighter which needed a fast launching reaction time was a barking plan and would have caused a lot of accidents.
@@Seafox0011 - The SABRE engine is not a project commissioned by the UK government. They will either give it extra funding or not, the project will continue either way. Skylon meanwhile is a proposed use for the engine, no one has yet said they would actually build one. It gets even less likely as rockets get cheaper. (The engine should still see use though, the pre-cooler has uses in supersonic flight.)
Just wanted to say that you're the most professional and accurate people I've seen on youtube, by this day! Keep on the good work! You're like that teacher I never had! :)
“Beware of the military industrial complex.” Eisenhower 1960 The British aerospace industry was superb in the 50’s and 60’s and so was the American. But you can only have one winner. It’s a shame I wish there could have some how been more cooperation between the two nations. Would love to have seen some amazing joint venture planes.
The AV-8B is a great example of this. Invented by the British and innovated by the Americans. The F-35 has plenty of British tech inside and the UK is the only Tier 1 partner. Plus, BAE is developing the Tempest. It would be very nice for, let's say, Lockheed and BAE to truly be 50/50 partners on a project. It would be impossible for those two together to produce anything but the world's best. I'd love to see a carrier-borne version of the Tempest compete for the US Navy's F/A-XX project. Perhaps BAE could make the "regular" Tempest and L-M or N-G, etc., could make a navalised variant.
That was a persistent rumor, as the CAF purchased F-100 Voodoo aircraft, which did not match the capabilities of the Arrow. But this was at a time when Sputnik (which launched the same day the Arrow was introduced to the public) had all of NATO fearing ICBMs more than long range bombers; aka the "Missile Gap". Britain shuttered the F-155/SR-177 program and the US stopped designing the F-103 and F-108 Interceptors. Furthermore the US invited Canada to share in the NORAD system, including basing of the Bormarc anti-aircraft missile system. The additional argument by the Canadian Army and Navy Chiefs of Staff against the Arrow for it's substantial bite out of the military budget did the program no favors. It was the newly elected Conservative government though that pulled the plug, citing a program that was too expensive and ultimately obsolete to continue. Ironically, many of the Engineers fled south to NASA's manned space program.
MAC SandSquid the abandonment of the F-103 and F-108 kinda shows that it wasn’t just foreign competitors being crushed. Kinda wonder how the F-106 fits in this discussion, though.
I wouldn't be surprised. They say that Eisenhower exerted pressure on Diefenbaker quite considerably over the Bomarc and I would be surprised to hear that he would have even resorted to sanctions if Avro had been funded to continue the Arrow project. This is an interesting read: www.avro-arrow.org/Arrow/avrostory.html
If anyone is interested, the Database section of October 2019 edition of Aeroplane Monthly (due out 12 September) will be about Saunders-Roe rocket fighters!
There were quite a few other factors over and above the 1957 Defence White Paper and the Starfighter that brought about the demise of the SR177. In the mid to late 1950s, the UK government realised that there were far too many airframe manufacturers in the UK and they tried to persuade these manufacturers to merge. It took until 1960 or so for this to happen. In the meantime, these manufacturers, such as Saunders Roe, produced a stream of interesting (but not alwys effective) one off test and prototype aircraft. The SR53 was one example. Saunders Roe was actually fairly small company with one factory based on Cowes on the Isle of Wight. For many years they were flying boat specialists and then became primarily a helicopter manufacturer. In the early 1960s, they gave up aircraft manufacturing and concentrated on hovercraft development. Other countries also looked into "mixed power" interceptors too and none of them entered production so the concept did not really produce workable fighter aircraft.. There were even mixed power versions of the F-104 - one of which appear in the video (the NF-104). The Germans also experimented with rocket launching F-104Gs although that idea didn't enter service either. Although there is no doubt that bribery played a big part in the Starfighter winning the "Deal of the Century", a large factor in the Germans opting for it was also down to the licence manufacturing deal that Lockheed offered. As a result, most of the European Starfighters were actually manufactured in Europe - by Spain, Holland and Germany.
Eric, The UK government _forced_ those mergers rather than let free market work things out. Thus you had government bureaucrats deciding that they knew best how the "companies created by committees" should wind up. As with anything government sticks its nose into, the results were a huge, wasteful, mess. The SR177 had some great potential because its airframe had more growth potential than the Starfighter's and its overall design was kept as simple as possible. For a relatively simple but high performance interceptor serving the needs of the NATO air forces it would've been ideal. And it could've done wonders for the British aerospace industry. It's premature death was just in line with the mindset of the politicians running the UK at the time.
@@Thorr97 The UK government wanted the companies to merge - and the companies agreed that was what needed to happen. However, they could not agree amongst themselves who should merge with whom. They all knew there was not enough business to go around all of them when mostly the only customer for their products was the UK taxpayer. In the end, the government grew tired of the impasse and more or less told the individual companies who they needed to merge with.
@@Thorr97 I agree the mergers were "forced". But that was because the individual companies could not agree on the needed mergers without government insistence. You also need to remember that one of the two eventual groupings, Hawker Siddeley, already existed and had done so since the 1930s. The original Hawker Siddeley was made up of Hawkers, Armstrong-Whitworth and Glosters. The later version added De Havilland and Avro. Some elements of BAC were already merged companies - such as Vickers-Armstrong and Supermarine and Hunting-Percival. If free markets had their way, virtually all of the UK companies would have gone bust by the mid 1960s. If the mixed power interceptor was such a great idea, why did not one single air force anywhere in the world, on either side of the Iron Curtain, put one into service? A great book on the subject is "Empire of the Clouds" by James Hamilton-Patterson - highly recommended.
*YES* a new Curious Droid episode, keep 'em coming guys! I love this channel so very much! Thanks for your continuing hard work and excellently-researched videos @Curious Droid :D
A shame projects like these got smacked with the no funding for you bat :( And killed most of our British jet industry (outside of engines from Rolls Royce) though many factors did indeed lead to this
battered walrus Not only that but the British government sold those newly developed Rolls Royce jet engines to the Soviet government - and then they were used in Soviet planes that fought and out flew American fighter plans in the Korean War. More shame and opprobrium to be heaped on UK politicians - a rotten lot at the best of times.
@@Seafox0011 The Nene and the Derwent were already considered obsolete in light of more advanced Axial Flow engines under development at the time and the former was only used in two British Aircraft (Seahawk and Attacker). The Soviet version of the Nene was a much more powerful engine than its UK original version and Mig 15 aerodynamically was streets ahead of any UK aircraft. The UK was broke in 1946 and the Soviets offered to pay for them in items the UK needed and didn't have the money to buy. The Russians could have copied any of the German engines they captured and improved them, but they just happened to like the British ones.
Richard Vernon Where do you get your information from, the Nene engine was a fantastic engine, and the Soviet version of the Nene was a carbon copy of the original Rolls-Royce design, Basically what happened was the Russians had captured a lot of nazi jet engines from ww2 and reverse engineered them to be put into a new aircraft they was developing at the time, and once testing these new aircraft's they discovered the engines were too slow and they wouldnt meet the requirements of the design, so they went back to the drawing board and discovered if they changed a few things and redesigned the engine a little they could possibly meet the requirements, so they tried to but they ran into a problem, the engine was so much better and ran that hot it would melt the blades inside the engine, and at that time the Soviets could not figure out how to make metal alloys strong enough to withstand such heat and forces, so they put the project on the back burner. A few years later the lead Soviet designer was invited to london to meet with british Rolls-Royce engineers, with a possible deal to buy secrets from the british, while he was taking a tour of the Rolls-Royce factory he stopped by the part of the factory that was responsible for blades Manufacture and on the floor next to a lath he stole a load of metal shaving from the blades themselves, and after being analysed in a lab back in russia they discovered how to make the alloys that they needed for their engines, and made the deal for the plans of the Nene engine too, so it fixed a lot of problems that the russians was dealing with at that time and gave them a huge technologic boost, ruclips.net/video/sBcC_TY2lBA/видео.html ,
The pronunciation on the german names is almost perfect. Thank you for taking so much effort in this. Normally it does not annoy me at all, but when you speak it correct it makes the entire video so much more enjoyable. Great video as always.
Every time a British aircraft (or other technology, for that matter) is scrapped in favour of an unreliable product from abroad (insert whatever country you like here), I suspect dirty tricks. Your video hits the nail on the head.
While Lockheed was involved in a lot of shady practices during that period, I don't think they can take the blame for canceling the SR-177; the British government at the time was making a lot of dunderheaded decisions to try and be cheap, and this was just one of many. The one that stands out in my mind is the assumption that the surface-to-air missile would shortly make fighter planes obsolete for defending the home islands, a classic case of believing what you want to believe. I am sympathetic to the fact that the UK wasn't swimming in cash at the time, but some of those decisions were hard to believe.
Then they forced the entire industry to merge so they can pull the strings of the entire industry because the government will be its only contractor. Now where have I heard that before?
Okay, the SR stands for Saunders Roe. When I first saw it, I was confused by the designation since it was a fighter. SR usually stands for Strategic Reconnaissance. Thanks for putting that in there. I love your channel.
- The F-104 was Johnsons answer to the Air Force requirement for the fastest fighter in the air to counter the Mig-21 threat. It was essentially a jet engine with wings & a chair. And It did the job it was specifically designed to do spectauraly. - But no sooner did the plane become operational, the fickeled Air Force started to change its requirements into wanting a multi role aircraft. All the add-ons made the plane unforgiving to pilot error. Deviate from the focus of flying this "hell with wings" would cause it to immediately take you back to the ground. Hence the name, (& one of several); The F-104 "Super Sonic Ground Spike"!
R Blakehole The Starfighter was a hot plane and it had to be flown "By the numbers" ignore that and you died !!! same with all hot and great handling planes, they all verge on uncontrolable to get the performances !!
Cool video. It's always an interesting exercise to speculate what might have happened if X plane was adopted over Y plane. Thanks for the great information.
One of the biggest corruptions and betrayals was after the war when the Labour government instructed Rolls Royce to supply a sample of their new jet engine to the Soviets. The Soviets of course reverse engineered it and built their new Mig fighter around it. The net result being that RAF and USAF fighters were being shot out of the sky in Korea by Rolls Royce powered jets.
@@interman7715 It could be for the better who knows. Without the soviets, we probably wouldnt of gone to the moon and have the soviet union go completely broke afterwards.
This is our world... where the best don't always win... but the wicked quit often take over.. at high costs... but still get away with it and gain from it.
So Lockheed went from bribing to milking slash extorting and suing to get ahead, which is why I respect their machines and engineers but not the corporate douchbags who run it. Oh and Glock thank you and can't wait for the next update.
I wonder if there's a very high value contract for fighter jets for multiple countries that was based on poorly planned specifications, over hyped capabilities and constant huge cost overruns due to weird issues. Hmm, what is it called I wonder? Joint Strike Fighter?
I dont trust corporate owners in general, but you gotta admit, Lockheed does have a good reputation of plane making. At least, they got the legacy of the SR-71 and spacecraft. I dont see why they need to bribe, they should use their engineers to legitimately gain business. I guess CEOs will be CEOs though.
@@robrocksea - No, they are three separate companies. On occasion they will team up on a project. The only aerospace merger that's possible is Boeing and Embraer, but after the 737 debacle, that might be a no-go.
CD: F-104 used all over the world had almost 1/3 crash rate (in role for which it was never designed) Also CD: Brilliant British interceptor using undesirable mixed propulsion had 50% crash rate and never got past prototypes
I agree youtube is pretty dodgey but if you refresh the page a few times the disparity of views to likes is accurate - lags a bit. 2 dislikes now most likely from the tin foil hat people out of 4,776 views 53 minutes after your comment. Like an upset stomach, it takes a while to settle lol.
We, in Belgium, "have to" buy new bombers to replace our F-16s and to comply with NATO standards. The choice has fallen on the F-35. A plane plagued with problems. A Lockheed-Martin plane. Thank you for posting this story about what amounts to Lockheed-Martin corruption.
To be Fair while loockeed did bribe officials. And that is wrong at all levels and not debatable the idea that the SR-177 could perform better in the same role of the F-104G seems a bit farfetched. The SR-177 was a pure high-altitude High-Speed interceptor. The F-104G was a multirole fighter. It could intercept enemies. It could provide close air support. it could strike static targets. It could perform anti-shipping missions. It could deliver a nuclear payload. While the SR-177 could've been a perfect interceptor it could not be what the F-104G ended up being. Its not random chance that Japan was the last nation interested in the SR-177. It was because it did not need a bomber. The last problem is comparing safety records. From my point of view we lack most indications of how the SR-177 could've performed in that regard. Let us not forget that the Air Forces that had the most issues with the 104 were those that switched from sub-sonic fighters straight into it. Their pilots never did had the chance to familiarize with other tricky planes to fly, like the F-100. Changes in the training regime, change in proceduress and overall improvment of safety features greatly improved the overall safety of the F-104. While it still remained a very tricky plane to fly the ones that did fly it came to like its positive attributes in the end. But the reputation of being tricky is well deserved. The SR-177 on the other hand has two engines, of different working principle. Mantaining it and flying it would not had been a joke either. And if developed to do the job of the 104 it could have easily become as tricky as the 104. If not more. Lets not forget that complexity plays a part. The F-104 was simple. While the SR-177 was not as much. My personal two cents are that the SR-177 failed because of its very concept. It was narrow minded as a plane destroyer. One can tell this by lookig, for example, at its windshield. It was woefully inadequate as a fighter. The pilot situational awareness would've been terrible. It also lacked an Air-To-Air cannon. It only carried two missiles and completely lacked the provisions to add any form of additional payload due to low clearance and very stubby wings. The fact that Loocked did bribe officials was surely a factor in the selection of its F-104 over other competitors, like the sale of F-11s to Japan, but I really dont think it as a factor for the failiure of the SR-177. It was one of those planes that the moment was born it was already outdated. Much like the F-104 really. But where the F-104 had room to improve with minimal modifications (the only 104 variant that really had massive changes was the S variant and was safer and a better plane overall) the SR-177 simply could not do the same and was thus put into a museum as a final proof that rocket interceptors, while an interesting concept, were doomed against the rise of better jet engines.
Alvi410 you make several valid points but let's not forget that the F-104G could not do the job that the F-104G was designed to do either... an airframe with such high wing loading is incredibly ill suited to low level strike and CAS... It wasn't just German pilots that had appalling safety records, canadian and Italian strike 104 units had terrible attrition as well... dedicated italian fighter interceptor squadrons had much lower losses.
There actually were schemes to add underwing pylons for bombs and/or drop tanks to the SR.177. You're basically right though: the rocket/jet interceptor concept came from the very early days of jet aircraft, but by the time the SR.177 was on the table, jet engines had improved enormously and gained afterburners, making the mixed-power concept redundant. The DH Spectre rocket engine in the SR.177 also used High-Test Peroxide as it's oxidiser, which is dangerous and treacherous stuff. To be fair, it's no worse that other rocket oxiders (there's no such thing as 'nice' rocket fuel!) and is safe enough when used for the occasional, very carefully prepared space launch, but that's a million miles away from having it stored at every RAF base and used under wartime conditions by conscript mechanics. The F-104G was almost totally different to the earlier Starfighter versions. Although it looked similar it was completely re-stressed to operate at much higher weights (which didn't help the maneuverability one bit) and had a much more complicated avionics system. The 'S' was basically a 'G' modified in Italy for BVR combat, with a much better radar and Aspide (Sparrow-ish) medium-range AAMs.
@FallenPhoenix Actually a high wing-loading is very suitable for low-level strike, since it reduces the ferocious buffeting experienced by high-speed aircraft in low-level flight. Pretty much all dedicated low-level strike aircraft such as the Buccaneer, Tornado, TSR.2, F-111 etc.. have a high wing-loading. The real problem was the lethal mixture of inexperienced pilots, the high cockpit workload that came from being a single-seater, and the no-room-for-error nature of low-level flight. Aircraft like the Tornado have two crewmen to share the load, and sophisticated avionics to help them.
I don't know if this was a big thing yet or not, but I'd like to congratulate Curious Droid on the half million subscriber milestone! Quality stuff sir, for all the reasons.
No, a group of german pilot widows contacted a famous US lawyer and sued Lockheed, but the case was eventually settled with Lockheed paying them some money.
Extremely brave men at 3:18!! Also, at 10:10, you see one of the three NF-104A used for high altitude control research and set altitude records...it mounted a rocket motor above the J-79 turbojet.
Political engineering. If Lockheed doesnt sell, politicians lose votes because selling those American made planes gets jobs. So they promise those jobs in hopes of looking good by making high skill engineering jobs open in states
Britain is looking into its own home grown Stealthy fighter code-named Tempest! I expect that Uncle Sam will kill it, especially if it looks any good!!
@@welshparamedic - That's doubtful. The Tempest is a sixth-gen air superiority platform that (given the development stage) is probably going to be the first of its kind. There won't be an American alternative until the Navy's F/A-XX sixth-gen plane hits production. Just like there's plenty of British tech in the F-35, there will likely be a decent amount of American tech in the Tempest through subcontracting. And it will most certainly utilize some American munitions mixed with the Meteor and some laser tech. It's going to be an awesome plane. Frankly, it's *good* for the American aircraft industry to have its closest ally developing aerospace tech on the same level. Partnerships with a hint of friendly competition can be a very valuable thing.
The F-35 competes on the world stage with tons of other multirole planes. And if you don't want to buy from the Chinese, it's the only fifth-gen plane in serial production and ready for foreign military sales. The reason it's getting so many orders is because the price has been dropped substantially, to the point where it's only a few million dollars more than the Gripen, Rafale, etc. Then there's the fact that the F-35 is actually three separate planes. It is literally a perfect fit for the UK's carriers and Japan's helicopter carriers, the 'A' variant is perfect for network fusion between NATO forces (the USAF and RAF have been teaming up the F-35 and Typhoon, for example) and the 'C' will give the USN stealth tech until a new air superiority platform can be designed. The 'C' would be compatible with France's aircraft carrier but they're going to stick with the Rafale-M. Despite being trashed in the press (unfairly, by the way) the plane has proven itself to be very impressive. It is gaining customers on merit now that the kinks have been worked out, the pilots have learned how to fly it and the price has come down. Not everything is some big conspiracy.
I only recently discovered this channel, and obviously love it, my only worry is I’m rapidly consuming your back catalog so need you to pick up a gear, ...love the channel massive thumbs up for all your effort.
Those germans, not even a dangerous rocket engine and stability problems stopped them from trying to reach transsonic flight. I read that they even mounted experimental yaw paddles to the rocket engine, could that have been to counter effects of the shockwave hitting the control surfaces and make the plane controllable? Their is one report of Heini Dittmar breaking the sound barrier while in a dive with losing controll and just getting controll back through the lucky coincident that the rocket engine would stall as soon as the aircraft nose tips down due to the effect of the supersonic shockwave on the wings (therefor reducing speed under the critical Mach number of 85 i think). It is just an astonishing bird even if the rumors aren't true. Just imagine the Space Shuttle, the BI-1 (-2,-3), the Me 163 (a,b,c,d) and the Mig 270 in a row :D.
I like today's one but not normally a fan of that style. They do suit him though and work well in these vids. It wouldn't be the same if Paul did these wearing a dirty ol jumper hehehe.
Thank you for your blessing. But, better we Brits gained some sense and learned to run with the Devil, and let our American cousins 'trust in God'. We are, after all, a tribe of Pagans who got suckered into subscribing to the idea of following the teachings of some mainland continentals spouting off about following Jesus like gentle sheep. We Brits have been paying for it ever since. Our biggest cross to bear is the repeated attacks upon our British souls by our British Politicos working for masters of foreign face - bent upon the destruction of anything that sneaks of British endeavour. There are those out there around the globe who tremble at the very thought of the British re- emerging as a global force. Who can blame them, like I said, we True Brits are a Pagan people by nature, with a DNA blessed with the influx of many historic fusions that has created an instinct for wanting to 'march over the hill and clobber anyone who does not fit the bill'. I know, I know, it's not playing cricket and all that - but who said anything about playing fair? That's an English thing, we are talking about True Brits, and that is something else. We, as True Brits, just like any other decent people in the western world, are sick and tired of our nation's family silver being sold off by those people who we are supposed to trust. Now, I do believe the chair for World President is presently vacant - I am thinking of running for it. I have to say, I am not in to patting babies heads, mud baths or eating live Guinea pigs - that sort of thing. But I will appreciate your support.
When I were a lad in the '50s I made a model each of the SR-53 and SR-177 from balsa wood kits. Still got them on the sideboard. Interested to come across this video and learn the story, thanks.
the one that offers a bribe is dirty to some extent, but the one that takes the bribe, especially if it hurts others, is the one that is really really dirty
There was some poetic, if tragic, justice though: the German defence minister who took one of the massive bribe, and his son was subsequently killed in a Starfighter...
Nope TSR2 was not brilliant engineering at all. A piece of good engineering will allow an engine change to be done without having to take the engine to bits first to take it out or put it back in. A good bit of engineering means that the equipment can met its operational specifications or even exceed them, not fail to meet any of them.
@@richardvernon317 My advice, Richard. Don't come around Preston, Lancashire, and talk like that. At least not for another 10 years when most of the EE/BAC workers involved in building the aircraft have died off. You'll get the seat of your pants torn off, given a good spanking and thrown in the river Ribble. It's a very sensitive issue around these parts, even with the grown up grandchildren. I remember seeing the TSR2 flying over Preston. Considering it was a prototype it still had mechanical things to sort out - like most aircraft at that stage. After the TSR2 cancellation fiasco many aero-workers were drawn to an advert in the local newspaper, 'Wanted by well known North American Aviation Manufacturer based in Seattle'. Now we all know who that was. BAC's loss of skilled workers who emigrated was that company's gain as soon afterwards the 747 came in to being. It has been repeated over the years ever since. Every so often BAE Systems has a 4 or 5 year staff lay off, soon followed by the usual advert in the local paper, 'Wanted... blah blah blah'. It's a continual brain drain thats been going on since the 1950's, train the workforce in the UK then ship 'em out to the US/Australia and Canada. It's so easy to criticise design and production methods of 50-60 years ago when seen from a modern perspective - but even the US, Germans and Russians' of that era pretty much experienced similar problems when it came to aero engineering. What made the British problem what it was, was purely down to British politics, American financial persuasions, Soviet led industrial unrest and a workforce wondering what the hell came next. I know a lot about this era - I was around at the time. Political propaganda, being what it is, is a wonderful tool to distort the truth. However, both the test pilots and the workers had great faith in the TSR2 - that says it all. As did the Canadian workers with the 'Avro Arrow'.
Hi,the reason theTSR2 was abandoned was due to Minister Harold Wilson, who,had been warned by the Russians on one of his frequent visits to Moscow when Leader of Opposition,that if he became Prime Minister,he must cut the program,otherwise the Russians would seek to counter this extremely potent aircraft,with a similar one. And cut he certainly did! After spending over 600 million pounds,on building around 6 aircraft plus the research and development costs,the Defence Minister Dennis Healey,ordered that all of the aircraft built plus others under construction be smashed up with sledgehammers! That was without a doubt the biggest act of criminal destruction by any government. But the manufacturer managed to hide some aircraft,which are on display today.
The British established the welfare state in Britain after WW2. That is why there was not enough funds for the development of military equipment. RIP the UK.
Ermm, or maybe it's because it had just spent 6 years at war running up a huge tab with Uncle Sam's arm factories. You only have to compare the US economy in 1939 and 1945 to see where the money ended up. You realise the UK only finished paying off a loan it had to take in 1946 (to avoid the country going bankrupt) in 2006 don't you?
Steve Evans A government budget is a zero sum game. The more you spend on one thing the less there is to spend on others. In the UK today at 50% of the budget is spent on welfare type items. This means that there is less money available for the government to spend on things such as military equipment. RIP the UK. Once the global super power is turning into a 3rd world country. Just look at London if yo do not believe me.
@@justinpeanuts9767 I can make no comments on UK politics but can agree what a cash sink hole welfare is and the systems are usually rampant with fraud too.
David I also have a model of the SR.53. Like many other Airfix (and FROG) models the moulds ended up all over the world. My SR.53 was from Poland! I never found the Airfix model of the Bristol 188 though!
Mine was in bad condition for many years. In my 20s I restored her with a new tailplane, canopy (pilot) and a new paintjob. She is proudly displayed with my other 1/72 kits
@@SaturnCanuck Amongst my ginormous model collection (with the obligatory Spitfires and Hurricanes) are 5 research/prototype jets (all British). They are among my favourite models, along with a 1/9th scale Laverda SF2 motorcycle (the one that got away!) and a 1/400th scale model of the French battleship Richelieu.
F104 was a good plane if you respected its parameters. Back in the 50s and 60s being a combat jet pilot was hazardous all around. The number of test pilots killed developing each new aircraft was dramatic.
There was also a high performance interceptor developped in France, also using a combination of turbo jet and rocket engines, the SO 9000 which evolved into the SO 9050, but in was also dropped because of funding cut, and replaced by the Mirage... It had been designed by Lucien Servanty, who later managed the french part of the Concorde.
The US didn't want to put its money into the SR-177 because a rocket/jet powered dedicated interceptor is a "one trick pony". That was one of the reasons the US quickly phased out the few F-104s it bought. The Germans had bought the F-104 to kill large numbers of Russian bombers that were never made, and because they didn't want to let that money go to waste they tried putting it to uses it was unsuited for. When the F-104 was being designed, there was a saying about designing dedicated interceptors, "not a pound for air to ground". No wonder the F-104 made a poor Fighter-bomber. The SR-177 would have faced the same problem if it had won the interceptor contract.
In the early fifties, a rocket jet figher was also developped in France, the SNCASO SO9000/SO9050 Trident, but the program was cancelled in 1957. It had been designed by Lucien Servanty who later became head of the french part of the Concorde program.
Well, the Netherlands experienced it's fair share of this so called Lockheed affaire, in which even a member of the Dutch Royal family was involved and what almost caused a royal crisis. Bernard, prince of the Netherlands and the husband of the Queen at that time was stripped of his military rights and honour and forbidden to wear a uniforme for the rest of his live. And I can still remember the noise of the sonic booms in the 60's and the dagger sight of the F104 in the sky. Or the howling noise as they passed over low and fast.
Great to get a more wholesome view on why the Starfighter got pushed into service in west germany. As a child I just heard that it was called the "Witwenmacher" (widow maker) and my dad worked on them during his time in the military.
I grew up in a small village inside a low-flying area of the Luftwaffe in the seventies and eighties.
On a sunny day there was always a good chance to see some F-104 pretty close and hear the sonic booms.
Back then there was a joke in Germay:
What is the easiest way to get your own Starfighter?
Buy a piece of land and wait.
When my parents immigrated to Israel, we here living in a small town, about 5km away from an air force base.
Sonic booms were the norm. It was mostly F16's. Sometimes they were flying so low, you could see the pilot.
When they were turning the afterburner on at night, the noise these things make... when i was a kid, this was mesmerizing to me.
Stanislav G. Every kids pipe dream and you had it
I live in a low flying area in the Netherlands. Sonic booms are extremely rare, but helicopters do a lot of interesting things like a Chinook who flies under the tree tops at a decent speed, an Apache making an extremely thight turn less then 20 meters in front of me and my mother, which is cool. The downsides are the night flights, restricted drone/rc plane flying and back in 2008 a helicopter took out the main power cable so we didn't have electricity for three days. All on all it can be really awsome to see the low flying aircraft.
As I'm typing this, I'm having the Patrouille de France (French acrobatic team) train over my house. I live barely 3 or 4 km away from the Salon de Provence base.
When I moved here it was awesome. 4 years later, I wish I could take a nap in peace.
I live in assam, India .. near a airforce station. Mirage 2000s and Su 30s are a regular view.. I've never seen anything as beautiful as a su 30MKI .. just gorgeous...
Here is an old German joke, how do you define an optimist? a starfighter pilot who gives up smoking!!
@@cosmicwakes6443 except it didn't
@@cosmicwakes6443 Yeah, their engineering was... poor. At best Soviet designs did the job, but did so with very little polish and seemed like a half-assed effort a lot of the time. They also lagged being cripplingly in computers and telecommunications.
Cosmic Wakes You suffer from a truly cosmic inferiority complex. And the Soviet Union took ITSELF down through it's own stupidity. I know they've brainwashed you to think Russians are so stupid that the rest of the world is responsible for all their failures...but it's not true. Have some self respect.
The scientific and technological accomplishments of the Soviet Union were impressive even though the command economy was ultimately unable to compete with free market capitalism without serious reform.
Another old German joke:
What is the easiest way to get your own Starfighter?
.
.
.
.
.
Buy a piece of land and wait.
Glad to know that such crazy plane concepts aren't just limited to Kerbal Space Program!
Getting around as usual Haven't seen you later tho
I found you early.. finally.
Hello, Justin Y
You... You’ve been replaced by Kremit... but YOU are the OG.
Hey! hadn't seen you in a while!
I sat in an Italian star jet ...scary..the wings are tiny. A flying dart. Good film Paul.
yeah but they go fast enough for those tiny wings to be plenty effective. just unstable
I've watched a couple of this channel's videos on British aeronautics and it seems that every time the two main causes for failure are: the utter incompetence of Her Majesty's Government and US sabotage. Have I just watched too few videos or has anyone else spotted this ?!
Hmm, well regarding the incompetence of the government, it is easy with hindsight to condemn the decisions of a cash-strapped government trying to meet the defence needs of the nation. The SR-177, and the much more lamented TSR-2, MIGHT have become great aircraft, that were suitable for considerable further development, served for many years and had significant export potential, OR they might have had prolonged and troublesome developments that sucked money into a black-hole before they ever achieved their design intent (eg the Supermarine Scimitar); we just can't be sure now, as they certainly couldn't foretell at the time. Cancelling might have been the best decision in the long term. I'm not saying the decisions to cancel such aircraft were right or wrong, just that we can't be sure how they would have turned out - there really wasn't the money to fund all the high potential projects put forward. As to sabotage - I can't comment on the details - maybe British aerospace industry were rather naive and inexperienced at competing in the global export market. Not to condone bribery, but maybe they should have been more on the look out for corruption and flag it than they appear to have been.
Scott Manly has voiced some cynicism over the British Government being the only cold war power to voluntarily disband a viable and successful space program with lots of potential, basically because the government in power at the time weren't interested. There was lots of that stuffiness among successive British governments in those days: It's also why British aircraft carriers have those distinctive long superstructures - to make them look more like regular surface ships on the blueprints for the members of parliament who wanted to minimise the Royal Navy's air capability, so convinced they were it was a superfluous function and waste of money.
@@hypervious8878
If you think her Majesty's government was intimidated by the Americans, what about the Avro Arrow? The US bulleyed Canada to cancel it because it was the most advanced fighter in the world, decades ahead of anything else that existed at the time.
@@hypervious8878
Sir Reginald Civil-Servant: "What's this Mr. Smith? I hear you want to send a rocket to the moon?"
Mr. Engineer-Smith: "Yes, sir. I think it will greatly enhance our society and world standing in science."
Sir Reginald Civil-Servant:: "What's wrong with staying here on the ground in good ol' blighty, eh? You'll not get a decent cup of tea up there! Go to the moon? You're getting ideas above your station. Project cancelled."
Mr. Engineer-Smith: "Very good, sir."
@@hypervious8878 The reason that the British canned their rocket program was because they couldn't launch anything commercially useful with either Black Arrow or Europa. Black Arrow could only just make LEO with a small payload and unless they put a launch site in somewhere else in the world put anything into a non polar orbit. While Europa could only put a Ton into LEO and not reach GEO without a lot of extra development on the Blue Streak which the UK could not afford. The British had the option to build rockets or the payloads. They selected the later, and have been quite successful at it, However the industry has become very pan European and no deal Brexit will damage it if not kill it.
I absolutely love curious Droid!! Please keep them coming
Eisenhower was prophetic when he warned us to “Beware the military industrial complex.”
Typical, corruption then corruption now. Sigh As a kid I loved the Zipper. I new it was dangerous but I never knew she took that many pilots. What a scandal!
@Xeno Phon the only thing we need to avoid this is a energy to matter converter... some one get on it
Eisenhower was a rat who oversaw the death of thousands of German soldiers in the Rhine Meadow (death) camps where even US soldiers had sympathy for the shit state the German soldiers were kept in and then died in.
Eisenhower thought he was part of the 'emerging club' after WWII but didn't enjoy it when he realised he was just a puppet (who'd done their bidding earlier) which led him to warn of the Military Industrial Complex together with the 'Deep State' that was referenced by more US presidents in the 60's and onward.
NO, Eisenhower was just being honest.
Why were military complexes being built in the first place while Eisenhower feared of it?
I am Canadian. We used to call the F104 the "Widow Maker." That kind of sums it up I think.
Canada had the highest loss rate of any F-104 user...1 in 2!!!!
Canada's record with the F-86 Sabre was far worse. The Royal Canadian Air Force suffered 112 pilot fatalities during the F-86's twelve years of service. In comparison only 37 pilots were lost over the CF-104's twenty five years of operation.
I am American. We called Germans and Canadians lousy pilots! : )
@@jameshay7247 We are better snipers, so watch your back.
@@thatoneguy8355 I'm sure your snipers are quite good, but probably no better than ours. Vietnam was the first war in which the US military really used snipers, since they are very useful in counterinsurgency warfare.
In conventional war, soldiers with sniper skills are more useful for reconnaissance and radio fire control- an airstrike or artillery barrage does a lot more damage than a bolt-action rifle! ; )
The F-104 Starfighter's safety record was so abysmal in West Germany, they used to tell this joke.
How do you get your own Starfighter? Buy a large piece of land and wait.
In Canada we called it the widow maker
@@jameson1239 in Italy: flying coffin
哈哈哈哈
Omg
I don’t think it was just us who called it the widow maker
This plane killed a lot of fine pilots
Little discussed fact about Sputnik, it was also a geodetic satellite. It's reflective surface was well suited for reflecting radar signals. When tracked with radar Sputnik's orbit revealed information about the Earth's shape and gravity. This was useful for navigation and perhaps more concerning, for precise calculation of ICBM trajectory calculation.
The British were miles ahead in plane design and function only to have a cowardly penny pinching government allow this lead to just fade away.
The reality is that the country was broke and its credit card was maxed out.
@@v8pilot the realty is the credit card issuer was the land of the free using the lend lease program, it's like loan sharking on a global scale ;)
@@mickkidston7344 I thought that the lease-lend tap was abruptly turned off in 1945. Britain still had delusions of being a power to rival the US and the USSR but the lack of cash was the reality that could not be denied.
@@v8pilot It's true, 2 world wars will do that to a nation on the front line. The thing that hurts is when your ally kicks you when your'e down.
Nothing new, they still do... lol.
tsr2 arrow and so many more wonderful design killed by politics and bribes...
TSR2 - proof that you can polish a turd. The aircraft was full of design flaws that couldn't be fixed without a total redesign. Had the Tory's won the 1964 election, they would have canned it as well. Arrow, again a project that was is deeper trouble than the people building it let on, it is very doubtful if the Canadians would ever have got the weapon system on it to work, specifically, the Sparrow II active radar homing AAM, planned to the aircraft. SR-177, bad idea, the HTP oxidier was nasty stuff, putting it in a fighter which needed a fast launching reaction time was a barking plan and would have caused a lot of accidents.
Jean Riffou Lets hope they don’t do the same with the Skylon concept plane and Sabre engine.
Richard Vernon But it was a research plane not likely the intended final irritation - did not the engine technology get used in Concord anyway?
BAE Systems Replica
was cancelled in favour of the F35. Lets hope we get to see the BAE Systems Tempest
.
@@Seafox0011 - The SABRE engine is not a project commissioned by the UK government. They will either give it extra funding or not, the project will continue either way. Skylon meanwhile is a proposed use for the engine, no one has yet said they would actually build one. It gets even less likely as rockets get cheaper. (The engine should still see use though, the pre-cooler has uses in supersonic flight.)
Saunders Roe is the most British sounding name in existence.
They built the first jet fighter /sea plane i think..
Nigel, now thats Brittish
I think Cholmondeley-Warner (pronounced Chumley-Warner) has it beat.
Just wanted to say that you're the most professional and accurate people I've seen on youtube, by this day! Keep on the good work! You're like that teacher I never had! :)
“Beware of the military industrial complex.” Eisenhower 1960
The British aerospace industry was superb in the 50’s and 60’s and so was the American. But you can only have one winner. It’s a shame I wish there could have some how been more cooperation between the two nations. Would love to have seen some amazing joint venture planes.
Today he would be denounced as a socialist.
The AV-8B is a great example of this. Invented by the British and innovated by the Americans. The F-35 has plenty of British tech inside and the UK is the only Tier 1 partner. Plus, BAE is developing the Tempest. It would be very nice for, let's say, Lockheed and BAE to truly be 50/50 partners on a project. It would be impossible for those two together to produce anything but the world's best. I'd love to see a carrier-borne version of the Tempest compete for the US Navy's F/A-XX project. Perhaps BAE could make the "regular" Tempest and L-M or N-G, etc., could make a navalised variant.
I wonder if the same bribes were used to kill the Canadian Avro Arrow?
Sounds very likely indeed.
The US likes to maintain dominance whether friends or adversaries, eg f35 program
That was a persistent rumor, as the CAF purchased F-100 Voodoo aircraft, which did not match the capabilities of the Arrow. But this was at a time when Sputnik (which launched the same day the Arrow was introduced to the public) had all of NATO fearing ICBMs more than long range bombers; aka the "Missile Gap". Britain shuttered the F-155/SR-177 program and the US stopped designing the F-103 and F-108 Interceptors. Furthermore the US invited Canada to share in the NORAD system, including basing of the Bormarc anti-aircraft missile system. The additional argument by the Canadian Army and Navy Chiefs of Staff against the Arrow for it's substantial bite out of the military budget did the program no favors. It was the newly elected Conservative government though that pulled the plug, citing a program that was too expensive and ultimately obsolete to continue. Ironically, many of the Engineers fled south to NASA's manned space program.
MAC SandSquid the abandonment of the F-103 and F-108 kinda shows that it wasn’t just foreign competitors being crushed.
Kinda wonder how the F-106 fits in this discussion, though.
I wouldn't be surprised. They say that Eisenhower exerted pressure on Diefenbaker quite considerably over the Bomarc and I would be surprised to hear that he would have even resorted to sanctions if Avro had been funded to continue the Arrow project.
This is an interesting read: www.avro-arrow.org/Arrow/avrostory.html
Would LOVE to see a video on the M-50! In all my experience Id never even heard of it before today!
If anyone is interested, the Database section of October 2019 edition of Aeroplane Monthly (due out 12 September) will be about Saunders-Roe rocket fighters!
I didn't hear my favorite nickname for the F-104 - "The missile with a man in it."
I do not understand why Curious Droid doesn't have at least 10 million subs. It's easily one the very best channels on YT...
There were quite a few other factors over and above the 1957 Defence White Paper and the Starfighter that brought about the demise of the SR177.
In the mid to late 1950s, the UK government realised that there were far too many airframe manufacturers in the UK and they tried to persuade these manufacturers to merge. It took until 1960 or so for this to happen. In the meantime, these manufacturers, such as Saunders Roe, produced a stream of interesting (but not alwys effective) one off test and prototype aircraft. The SR53 was one example.
Saunders Roe was actually fairly small company with one factory based on Cowes on the Isle of Wight. For many years they were flying boat specialists and then became primarily a helicopter manufacturer. In the early 1960s, they gave up aircraft manufacturing and concentrated on hovercraft development.
Other countries also looked into "mixed power" interceptors too and none of them entered production so the concept did not really produce workable fighter aircraft.. There were even mixed power versions of the F-104 - one of which appear in the video (the NF-104). The Germans also experimented with rocket launching F-104Gs although that idea didn't enter service either.
Although there is no doubt that bribery played a big part in the Starfighter winning the "Deal of the Century", a large factor in the Germans opting for it was also down to the licence manufacturing deal that Lockheed offered. As a result, most of the European Starfighters were actually manufactured in Europe - by Spain, Holland and Germany.
Eric,
The UK government _forced_ those mergers rather than let free market work things out. Thus you had government bureaucrats deciding that they knew best how the "companies created by committees" should wind up. As with anything government sticks its nose into, the results were a huge, wasteful, mess.
The SR177 had some great potential because its airframe had more growth potential than the Starfighter's and its overall design was kept as simple as possible. For a relatively simple but high performance interceptor serving the needs of the NATO air forces it would've been ideal. And it could've done wonders for the British aerospace industry. It's premature death was just in line with the mindset of the politicians running the UK at the time.
@@Thorr97 The UK government wanted the companies to merge - and the companies agreed that was what needed to happen. However, they could not agree amongst themselves who should merge with whom. They all knew there was not enough business to go around all of them when mostly the only customer for their products was the UK taxpayer. In the end, the government grew tired of the impasse and more or less told the individual companies who they needed to merge with.
@@Thorr97 I agree the mergers were "forced". But that was because the individual companies could not agree on the needed mergers without government insistence. You also need to remember that one of the two eventual groupings, Hawker Siddeley, already existed and had done so since the 1930s. The original Hawker Siddeley was made up of Hawkers, Armstrong-Whitworth and Glosters. The later version added De Havilland and Avro.
Some elements of BAC were already merged companies - such as Vickers-Armstrong and Supermarine and Hunting-Percival.
If free markets had their way, virtually all of the UK companies would have gone bust by the mid 1960s.
If the mixed power interceptor was such a great idea, why did not one single air force anywhere in the world, on either side of the Iron Curtain, put one into service?
A great book on the subject is "Empire of the Clouds" by James Hamilton-Patterson - highly recommended.
There was at least one mixed power interceptor that entered service. The Dassault Mirage III.
Paul you do an excellent job with your research, production, and presentation!
Always liked these series, you are my favorite RUclipsr. 5/5
6/5
5/7, perfect score
*YES* a new Curious Droid episode, keep 'em coming guys! I love this channel so very much! Thanks for your continuing hard work and excellently-researched videos @Curious Droid :D
A shame projects like these got smacked with the no funding for you bat :(
And killed most of our British jet industry (outside of engines from Rolls Royce) though many factors did indeed lead to this
battered walrus Not only that but the British government sold those newly developed Rolls Royce jet engines to the Soviet government - and then they were used in Soviet planes that fought and out flew American fighter plans in the Korean War. More shame and opprobrium to be heaped on UK politicians - a rotten lot at the best of times.
@@Seafox0011 The Nene and the Derwent were already considered obsolete in light of more advanced Axial Flow engines under development at the time and the former was only used in two British Aircraft (Seahawk and Attacker). The Soviet version of the Nene was a much more powerful engine than its UK original version and Mig 15 aerodynamically was streets ahead of any UK aircraft. The UK was broke in 1946 and the Soviets offered to pay for them in items the UK needed and didn't have the money to buy. The Russians could have copied any of the German engines they captured and improved them, but they just happened to like the British ones.
@@richardvernon317 I wouldn't say 'only' is the best description for the Nene. Its the most produced jet engine in history after all.
Richard Vernon
Where do you get your information from, the Nene engine was a fantastic engine, and the Soviet version of the Nene was a carbon copy of the original Rolls-Royce design,
Basically what happened was the Russians had captured a lot of nazi jet engines from ww2 and reverse engineered them to be put into a new aircraft they was developing at the time, and once testing these new aircraft's they discovered the engines were too slow and they wouldnt meet the requirements of the design, so they went back to the drawing board and discovered if they changed a few things and redesigned the
engine a little they could possibly meet the requirements, so they tried to but they ran into a problem, the engine was so much better and ran that hot it would melt the blades inside the engine, and at that time the Soviets could not figure out how to make metal alloys strong enough to withstand such heat and forces, so they put the project on the back burner.
A few years later the lead Soviet designer was invited to london to meet with british Rolls-Royce engineers, with a possible deal to buy secrets from the british, while he was taking a tour of the Rolls-Royce factory he stopped by the part of the factory that was responsible for blades Manufacture and on the floor next to a lath he stole a load of metal shaving from the blades themselves, and after being analysed in a lab back in russia they discovered how to make the alloys that they needed
for their engines, and made the deal for the plans of the Nene engine too, so it fixed a lot of problems that the russians was dealing with at that time and gave them a huge technologic boost, ruclips.net/video/sBcC_TY2lBA/видео.html ,
rolls royce makes awesome engines
The pronunciation on the german names is almost perfect. Thank you for taking so much effort in this. Normally it does not annoy me at all, but when you speak it correct it makes the entire video so much more enjoyable. Great video as always.
Every time a British aircraft (or other technology, for that matter) is scrapped in favour of an unreliable product from abroad (insert whatever country you like here), I suspect dirty tricks. Your video hits the nail on the head.
Awesome video. It's great you made a video about this story. It's a shortened version of that documentary.
While Lockheed was involved in a lot of shady practices during that period, I don't think they can take the blame for canceling the SR-177; the British government at the time was making a lot of dunderheaded decisions to try and be cheap, and this was just one of many. The one that stands out in my mind is the assumption that the surface-to-air missile would shortly make fighter planes obsolete for defending the home islands, a classic case of believing what you want to believe. I am sympathetic to the fact that the UK wasn't swimming in cash at the time, but some of those decisions were hard to believe.
Then they forced the entire industry to merge so they can pull the strings of the entire industry because the government will be its only contractor. Now where have I heard that before?
Okay, the SR stands for Saunders Roe. When I first saw it, I was confused by the designation since it was a fighter. SR usually stands for Strategic Reconnaissance. Thanks for putting that in there. I love your channel.
SR177, TSR2. Same old same old devious septic tanks.
Thanks for yet another great video of information, keep up the great work!
Amazing that the Starfighter was a Kelly Johnson design since he is justly famous for other designs.
- The F-104 was Johnsons answer to the Air Force requirement for the fastest fighter in the air to counter the Mig-21 threat. It was essentially a jet engine with wings & a chair. And It did the job it was specifically designed to do spectauraly.
- But no sooner did the plane become operational, the fickeled Air Force started to change its requirements into wanting a multi role aircraft. All the add-ons made the plane unforgiving to pilot error. Deviate from the focus of flying this "hell with wings" would cause it to immediately take you back to the ground. Hence the name, (& one of several);
The F-104 "Super Sonic Ground Spike"!
R Blakehole The Starfighter was a hot plane and it had to be flown "By the numbers" ignore that and you died !!! same with all hot and great handling planes, they all verge on uncontrolable to get the performances !!
Cool video. It's always an interesting exercise to speculate what might have happened if X plane was adopted over Y plane. Thanks for the great information.
One of the biggest corruptions and betrayals was after the war when the Labour government instructed Rolls Royce to supply a sample of their new jet engine to the Soviets. The Soviets of course reverse engineered it and built their new Mig fighter around it.
The net result being that RAF and USAF fighters were being shot out of the sky in Korea by Rolls Royce powered jets.
Francis Drake It's all planned mate,the Yanks gave Russia plans for the nukes in the fifties.
@@interman7715 It could be for the better who knows. Without the soviets, we probably wouldnt of gone to the moon and have the soviet union go completely broke afterwards.
@@interman7715 Hey dumb ass !!!!! Russian spies stole the info, but we hung them for their effort !!! DUUUUH!!!! The Rosenbergs !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 DUHHH, moron, Shows how much you know, the Rosenbergs were killed by electric chair, not hanging, IDIOT
paul, your channel is the very best. pure quality content. thank you.
This is our world... where the best don't always win... but the wicked quit often take over.. at high costs... but still get away with it and gain from it.
to be fair. The Sr-177 wouldnt of performed better. if not inferior to the star fighter.
What wonderful work you do. Mr Shillito, you are a treasure.
I’d love to see you do a video on the Avro Arrow
Yes pls
I second this.
Thirded
@@jonathanmatthews4774 Fourthted
I have seen one already.
This channel is really excellent. Please keep the videos coming and thanks for posting.
So Lockheed went from bribing to milking slash extorting and suing to get ahead, which is why I respect their machines and engineers but not the corporate douchbags who run it. Oh and Glock thank you and can't wait for the next update.
I wonder if there's a very high value contract for fighter jets for multiple countries that was based on poorly planned specifications, over hyped capabilities and constant huge cost overruns due to weird issues. Hmm, what is it called I wonder? Joint Strike Fighter?
@@Vespuchian Doesn't Boeing Own L-M and N-G now? or should I still say, yet? It has been sop for the last 35+ years.
I think *corporate douchebags* are a *BIG PROBLEM* these days....
I dont trust corporate owners in general, but you gotta admit, Lockheed does have a good reputation of plane making. At least, they got the legacy of the SR-71 and spacecraft.
I dont see why they need to bribe, they should use their engineers to legitimately gain business. I guess CEOs will be CEOs though.
@@robrocksea - No, they are three separate companies. On occasion they will team up on a project. The only aerospace merger that's possible is Boeing and Embraer, but after the 737 debacle, that might be a no-go.
CD: F-104 used all over the world had almost 1/3 crash rate (in role for which it was never designed)
Also CD: Brilliant British interceptor using undesirable mixed propulsion had 50% crash rate and never got past prototypes
49 likes with 47 views, you are doing something right!
I agree youtube is pretty dodgey but if you refresh the page a few times the disparity of views to likes is accurate - lags a bit. 2 dislikes now most likely from the tin foil hat people out of 4,776 views 53 minutes after your comment. Like an upset stomach, it takes a while to settle lol.
One of the best channel I've seen.
Thank you very much guys
Yes my fix is here
Ur the first
Once again, great stuff I didn't previously know about and well presented as always.
We, in Belgium, "have to" buy new bombers to replace our F-16s and to comply with NATO standards. The choice has fallen on the F-35. A plane plagued with problems. A Lockheed-Martin plane. Thank you for posting this story about what amounts to Lockheed-Martin corruption.
Every new plane will always have problems, just wait, the F35 will be fixed.
The Dutch got the straighter because the Queen's husband was a bribable crook. Now the Dutch are getting the F35, another high-concept jet.
@PakMan sigh
Let’s hope it will turn out differently with the F-35.
Excellent video Mr. Paul, one of your best in recent memory.
To be Fair while loockeed did bribe officials. And that is wrong at all levels and not debatable the idea that the SR-177 could perform better in the same role of the F-104G seems a bit farfetched.
The SR-177 was a pure high-altitude High-Speed interceptor. The F-104G was a multirole fighter. It could intercept enemies. It could provide close air support. it could strike static targets. It could perform anti-shipping missions. It could deliver a nuclear payload. While the SR-177 could've been a perfect interceptor it could not be what the F-104G ended up being.
Its not random chance that Japan was the last nation interested in the SR-177. It was because it did not need a bomber.
The last problem is comparing safety records. From my point of view we lack most indications of how the SR-177 could've performed in that regard. Let us not forget that the Air Forces that had the most issues with the 104 were those that switched from sub-sonic fighters straight into it. Their pilots never did had the chance to familiarize with other tricky planes to fly, like the F-100.
Changes in the training regime, change in proceduress and overall improvment of safety features greatly improved the overall safety of the F-104.
While it still remained a very tricky plane to fly the ones that did fly it came to like its positive attributes in the end. But the reputation of being tricky is well deserved.
The SR-177 on the other hand has two engines, of different working principle. Mantaining it and flying it would not had been a joke either. And if developed to do the job of the 104 it could have easily become as tricky as the 104. If not more. Lets not forget that complexity plays a part. The F-104 was simple. While the SR-177 was not as much.
My personal two cents are that the SR-177 failed because of its very concept. It was narrow minded as a plane destroyer. One can tell this by lookig, for example, at its windshield.
It was woefully inadequate as a fighter. The pilot situational awareness would've been terrible. It also lacked an Air-To-Air cannon. It only carried two missiles and completely lacked the provisions to add any form of additional payload due to low clearance and very stubby wings.
The fact that Loocked did bribe officials was surely a factor in the selection of its F-104 over other competitors, like the sale of F-11s to Japan, but I really dont think it as a factor for the failiure of the SR-177. It was one of those planes that the moment was born it was already outdated. Much like the F-104 really. But where the F-104 had room to improve with minimal modifications (the only 104 variant that really had massive changes was the S variant and was safer and a better plane overall) the SR-177 simply could not do the same and was thus put into a museum as a final proof that rocket interceptors, while an interesting concept, were doomed against the rise of better jet engines.
Entirely agree.
Like the F-103, F-108, the Arrow... lots of interceptors were discarded in that era.
Alvi410 you make several valid points but let's not forget that the F-104G could not do the job that the F-104G was designed to do either... an airframe with such high wing loading is incredibly ill suited to low level strike and CAS... It wasn't just German pilots that had appalling safety records, canadian and Italian strike 104 units had terrible attrition as well... dedicated italian fighter interceptor squadrons had much lower losses.
There actually were schemes to add underwing pylons for bombs and/or drop tanks to the SR.177. You're basically right though: the rocket/jet interceptor concept came from the very early days of jet aircraft, but by the time the SR.177 was on the table, jet engines had improved enormously and gained afterburners, making the mixed-power concept redundant. The DH Spectre rocket engine in the SR.177 also used High-Test Peroxide as it's oxidiser, which is dangerous and treacherous stuff. To be fair, it's no worse that other rocket oxiders (there's no such thing as 'nice' rocket fuel!) and is safe enough when used for the occasional, very carefully prepared space launch, but that's a million miles away from having it stored at every RAF base and used under wartime conditions by conscript mechanics.
The F-104G was almost totally different to the earlier Starfighter versions. Although it looked similar it was completely re-stressed to operate at much higher weights (which didn't help the maneuverability one bit) and had a much more complicated avionics system. The 'S' was basically a 'G' modified in Italy for BVR combat, with a much better radar and Aspide (Sparrow-ish) medium-range AAMs.
@FallenPhoenix Actually a high wing-loading is very suitable for low-level strike, since it reduces the ferocious buffeting experienced by high-speed aircraft in low-level flight. Pretty much all dedicated low-level strike aircraft such as the Buccaneer, Tornado, TSR.2, F-111 etc.. have a high wing-loading. The real problem was the lethal mixture of inexperienced pilots, the high cockpit workload that came from being a single-seater, and the no-room-for-error nature of low-level flight. Aircraft like the Tornado have two crewmen to share the load, and sophisticated avionics to help them.
I don't know if this was a big thing yet or not, but I'd like to congratulate Curious Droid on the half million subscriber milestone!
Quality stuff sir, for all the reasons.
Any person was hanged for Killing all these pilots?
No, a group of german pilot widows contacted a famous US lawyer and sued Lockheed, but the case was eventually settled with Lockheed paying them some money.
Extremely brave men at 3:18!!
Also, at 10:10, you see one of the three NF-104A used for high altitude control research and set altitude records...it mounted a rocket motor above the J-79 turbojet.
Hello from Ireland now let's get drinking 😀😀😀
I'll drink to that!
Hello from America! I drink with you! #ForWorldPeace
@@cosmicwakes6443 The Soviets were beaten.
Every new video is like a gift. This channels content should be presented in history lessons
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to why anyone is buying F-35s from that same company...
Because they are the best.
Political engineering. If Lockheed doesnt sell, politicians lose votes because selling those American made planes gets jobs. So they promise those jobs in hopes of looking good by making high skill engineering jobs open in states
Britain is looking into its own home grown Stealthy fighter code-named Tempest! I expect that Uncle Sam will kill it, especially if it looks any good!!
@@welshparamedic - That's doubtful. The Tempest is a sixth-gen air superiority platform that (given the development stage) is probably going to be the first of its kind. There won't be an American alternative until the Navy's F/A-XX sixth-gen plane hits production. Just like there's plenty of British tech in the F-35, there will likely be a decent amount of American tech in the Tempest through subcontracting. And it will most certainly utilize some American munitions mixed with the Meteor and some laser tech. It's going to be an awesome plane. Frankly, it's *good* for the American aircraft industry to have its closest ally developing aerospace tech on the same level. Partnerships with a hint of friendly competition can be a very valuable thing.
The F-35 competes on the world stage with tons of other multirole planes. And if you don't want to buy from the Chinese, it's the only fifth-gen plane in serial production and ready for foreign military sales. The reason it's getting so many orders is because the price has been dropped substantially, to the point where it's only a few million dollars more than the Gripen, Rafale, etc. Then there's the fact that the F-35 is actually three separate planes. It is literally a perfect fit for the UK's carriers and Japan's helicopter carriers, the 'A' variant is perfect for network fusion between NATO forces (the USAF and RAF have been teaming up the F-35 and Typhoon, for example) and the 'C' will give the USN stealth tech until a new air superiority platform can be designed. The 'C' would be compatible with France's aircraft carrier but they're going to stick with the Rafale-M. Despite being trashed in the press (unfairly, by the way) the plane has proven itself to be very impressive. It is gaining customers on merit now that the kinks have been worked out, the pilots have learned how to fly it and the price has come down. Not everything is some big conspiracy.
A most proper and brilliant presented presentation. Enjoyed it.
a law "banning US citizens or companies from bribing foreign government officials" made me laugh.
jur4x the Trent 1000 is a pile of shit !!! RR still has not sorted it out !!!
Isn't there a law banning US government officials from bribing government officials of OTHER countries?
Reminds me a bit of the Avro Arrow story. At least the SR-177 weren't all scrapped.
Love your videos!!!
Another excellent presentation!
Lockheed being Lockheed. They are the Intel® of the Defence industry.
they used to make cool stuff. Northrop kept them honest.
I only recently discovered this channel, and obviously love it, my only worry is I’m rapidly consuming your back catalog so need you to pick up a gear, ...love the channel massive thumbs up for all your effort.
Where does he get these amazing shirts ?
Brendan McAuliffe IKR?!!
Atom Retro
@@friendofships TY !
Some absolutely amazing rare footage in there.
Those germans, not even a dangerous rocket engine and stability problems stopped them from trying to reach transsonic flight. I read that they even mounted experimental yaw paddles to the rocket engine, could that have been to counter effects of the shockwave hitting the control surfaces and make the plane controllable? Their is one report of Heini Dittmar breaking the sound barrier while in a dive with losing controll and just getting controll back through the lucky coincident that the rocket engine would stall as soon as the aircraft nose tips down due to the effect of the supersonic shockwave on the wings (therefor reducing speed under the critical Mach number of 85 i think). It is just an astonishing bird even if the rumors aren't true. Just imagine the Space Shuttle, the BI-1 (-2,-3), the Me 163 (a,b,c,d) and the Mig 270 in a row :D.
The lightening is still an amazing thing to see in action beautiful engineering
Must Have Those Shirts. 😎
He gets a fair few of them from a store called Madcap.
@@CallanElliott . They would make for a good competition Billiards shirt.
I like today's one but not normally a fan of that style. They do suit him though and work well in these vids. It wouldn't be the same if Paul did these wearing a dirty ol jumper hehehe.
I love how the music stops when the plane's ultimate fate is revealed, in a museum...
God bless the UK!
Thank you for your blessing. But, better we Brits gained some sense and learned to run with the Devil, and let our American cousins 'trust in God'. We are, after all, a tribe of Pagans who got suckered into subscribing to the idea of following the teachings of some mainland continentals spouting off about following Jesus like gentle sheep. We Brits have been paying for it ever since. Our biggest cross to bear is the repeated attacks upon our British souls by our British Politicos working for masters of foreign face - bent upon the destruction of anything that sneaks of British endeavour. There are those out there around the globe who tremble at the very thought of the British re- emerging as a global force. Who can blame them, like I said, we True Brits are a Pagan people by nature, with a DNA blessed with the influx of many historic fusions that has created an instinct for wanting to 'march over the hill and clobber anyone who does not fit the bill'. I know, I know, it's not playing cricket and all that - but who said anything about playing fair? That's an English thing, we are talking about True Brits, and that is something else. We, as True Brits, just like any other decent people in the western world, are sick and tired of our nation's family silver being sold off by those people who we are supposed to trust. Now, I do believe the chair for World President is presently vacant - I am thinking of running for it. I have to say, I am not in to patting babies heads, mud baths or eating live Guinea pigs - that sort of thing. But I will appreciate your support.
When I were a lad in the '50s I made a model each of the SR-53 and SR-177 from balsa wood kits. Still got them on the sideboard. Interested to come across this video and learn the story, thanks.
the one that offers a bribe is dirty to some extent, but the one that takes the bribe, especially if it hurts others, is the one that is really really dirty
True that, because as the old saying goes it takes 2 to tango.
There was some poetic, if tragic, justice though: the German defence minister who took one of the massive bribe, and his son was subsequently killed in a Starfighter...
@@MrHws5mp Damn, I guess that's what ya get for taking the devils money.
I wiped my ass after this morning’s constitutional with a confederate flag and it still didn’t do something really really really dirty proper justice.
I love your narration. Your voice is so hypnotising. Keep it up!
Paul Shillito puts the "rock" back into rocket science!
I'd love to see a video about the Avro Arrow
I want to see one about the F-35, lol.
10:20 NF-104 with a rocket efine and a jet engine. What does that remind me of again?
Hell yeaaaa
Fantastic video! Your perspective is brilliant
TSR2 was much the same thing, brilliant British engineering dropped tp appease the US
Nope TSR2 was not brilliant engineering at all. A piece of good engineering will allow an engine change to be done without having to take the engine to bits first to take it out or put it back in. A good bit of engineering means that the equipment can met its operational specifications or even exceed them, not fail to meet any of them.
And a lot of infighting, to many hands were in the pot so to speak..
@@richardvernon317 My advice, Richard. Don't come around Preston, Lancashire, and talk like that. At least not for another 10 years when most of the EE/BAC workers involved in building the aircraft have died off. You'll get the seat of your pants torn off, given a good spanking and thrown in the river Ribble. It's a very sensitive issue around these parts, even with the grown up grandchildren. I remember seeing the TSR2 flying over Preston. Considering it was a prototype it still had mechanical things to sort out - like most aircraft at that stage. After the TSR2 cancellation fiasco many aero-workers were drawn to an advert in the local newspaper, 'Wanted by well known North American Aviation Manufacturer based in Seattle'. Now we all know who that was. BAC's loss of skilled workers who emigrated was that company's gain as soon afterwards the 747 came in to being. It has been repeated over the years ever since. Every so often BAE Systems has a 4 or 5 year staff lay off, soon followed by the usual advert in the local paper, 'Wanted... blah blah blah'. It's a continual brain drain thats been going on since the 1950's, train the workforce in the UK then ship 'em out to the US/Australia and Canada. It's so easy to criticise design and production methods of 50-60 years ago when seen from a modern perspective - but even the US, Germans and Russians' of that era pretty much experienced similar problems when it came to aero engineering. What made the British problem what it was, was purely down to British politics, American financial persuasions, Soviet led industrial unrest and a workforce wondering what the hell came next. I know a lot about this era - I was around at the time. Political propaganda, being what it is, is a wonderful tool to distort the truth. However, both the test pilots and the workers had great faith in the TSR2 - that says it all. As did the Canadian workers with the 'Avro Arrow'.
Hi,the reason theTSR2 was abandoned was due to Minister Harold Wilson, who,had been warned by the Russians on one of his frequent visits to Moscow when Leader of Opposition,that if he became Prime Minister,he must cut the program,otherwise the Russians would seek to counter this extremely potent aircraft,with a similar one.
And cut he certainly did! After spending over 600 million pounds,on building around 6 aircraft plus the research and development costs,the Defence Minister Dennis Healey,ordered that all of the aircraft built plus others under construction be smashed up with sledgehammers! That was without a doubt the biggest act of criminal destruction by any government.
But the manufacturer managed to hide some aircraft,which are on display today.
Fantastic story and terrific research. Keep them coming!
The British established the welfare state in Britain after WW2. That is why there was not enough funds for the development of military equipment. RIP the UK.
Ermm, or maybe it's because it had just spent 6 years at war running up a huge tab with Uncle Sam's arm factories. You only have to compare the US economy in 1939 and 1945 to see where the money ended up.
You realise the UK only finished paying off a loan it had to take in 1946 (to avoid the country going bankrupt) in 2006 don't you?
Steve Evans A government budget is a zero sum game. The more you spend on one thing the less there is to spend on others. In the UK today at 50% of the budget is spent on welfare type items. This means that there is less money available for the government to spend on things such as military equipment. RIP the UK.
Once the global super power is turning into a 3rd world country. Just look at London if yo do not believe me.
@@justinpeanuts9767 I can make no comments on UK politics but can agree what a cash sink hole welfare is and the systems are usually rampant with fraud too.
I'd rather have free healthcare than military hardware
@@aacalver Amen to that.
i love your videos, cant get enough of them
Very nice design and concept! Great piece of Aviation history.
Utterly fascinating. I’d not heard of the SR53 until this video.
I have seen thew last remaining SR.53 (XD145) at Cosford and also have a little produced 1/72 Airfix kit, now fully restored.
Cosford is well worth a day in.
David I also have a model of the SR.53. Like many other Airfix (and FROG) models the moulds ended up all over the world. My SR.53 was from Poland! I never found the Airfix model of the Bristol 188 though!
Mine was in bad condition for many years. In my 20s I restored her with a new tailplane, canopy (pilot) and a new paintjob. She is proudly displayed with my other 1/72 kits
@@SaturnCanuck Amongst my ginormous model collection (with the obligatory Spitfires and Hurricanes) are 5 research/prototype jets (all British). They are among my favourite models, along with a 1/9th scale Laverda SF2 motorcycle (the one that got away!) and a 1/400th scale model of the French battleship Richelieu.
F104 was a good plane if you respected its parameters. Back in the 50s and 60s being a combat jet pilot was hazardous all around. The number of test pilots killed developing each new aircraft was dramatic.
Wonderful informative video. Thanks. . Keep up the good work!
The Myasishev M-50 is so bizarre I feel it deserves its own Curious Droid video.
Interesting as always. Thanks for the upload.
Liked the Sr 177. Airfix. White. Very few parts. 5 decals. Still, got glue over all the joints...
Airfix never made the 177. Did do a kit of the 53.
There was also a high performance interceptor developped in France, also using a combination of turbo jet and rocket engines, the SO 9000 which evolved into the SO 9050, but in was also dropped because of funding cut, and replaced by the Mirage...
It had been designed by Lucien Servanty, who later managed the french part of the Concorde.
The US didn't want to put its money into the SR-177 because a rocket/jet powered dedicated interceptor is a "one trick pony". That was one of the reasons the US quickly phased out the few F-104s it bought. The Germans had bought the F-104 to kill large numbers of Russian bombers that were never made, and because they didn't want to let that money go to waste they tried putting it to uses it was unsuited for. When the F-104 was being designed, there was a saying about designing dedicated interceptors, "not a pound for air to ground". No wonder the F-104 made a poor Fighter-bomber. The SR-177 would have faced the same problem if it had won the interceptor contract.
Really good programmes, very informative.
Always excited to see a new video!
In the early fifties, a rocket jet figher was also developped in France, the SNCASO SO9000/SO9050 Trident, but the program was cancelled in 1957.
It had been designed by Lucien Servanty who later became head of the french part of the Concorde program.
A comparison of the earlier rocket/jet XF-91 interceptor to the SR-177 would be a worthwhile postscript
Great video as usual.... love your content....
Absolutely loving the Curious Droid intro!
Well, the Netherlands experienced it's fair share of this so called Lockheed affaire, in which even a member of the Dutch Royal family was involved and what almost caused a royal crisis. Bernard, prince of the Netherlands and the husband of the Queen at that time was stripped of his military rights and honour and forbidden to wear a uniforme for the rest of his live.
And I can still remember the noise of the sonic booms in the 60's and the dagger sight of the F104 in the sky. Or the howling noise as they passed over low and fast.
Great to get a more wholesome view on why the Starfighter got pushed into service in west germany. As a child I just heard that it was called the "Witwenmacher" (widow maker) and my dad worked on them during his time in the military.
Superb..grew up as an Air Force child. Love the tales..
3:19. "Hey Charles can you hear something's not right?"
"Donald, I can't hear you, I've got fingers in me ears"