How much havo/k/ could Jow Forums cause with a MIG-21

>empty weight is close to 13k lbs
>is supersonic
Why would you even need weapons? Going supersonic and on a nice ballistic trajectory, you could probably poke through the containment of a nuke plant if you kamikaze it...
Even if there is no leak, you'd still have ppl loosing their shit because most retards actually believe a nuke plant can actually detonate like an A-bomb.

Atleast it isnt a super entendard

About zero, because when an unidentified MiG shows up on radar you'll have an F16 up your ass before you could even think of finding a target

You could shoot down at least three F-35s before running out of fuel.

kek

>Italians love the F-104
>Japanese love the F-104
Germans:
>Waah, Allies killed all our good pilots and we don't have effective training resources to learn how to fly the plane we specified the requirements for
Krauts are worse pilots than women.

I don't know about the OG model, but Chang and the Pakis have a decent modernization on the market
better performance than an F-5, would be fun as a trainer

Attached: greyjf-17.jpg (1024x768, 315K)

Hmm, since modern atc systems use transponders, I’d register my MiG as a gulf stream. Then I’d break the sound barrier right in the middle of LA just to see all the glass break.

>you could probably poke through the containment of a nuke plant if you kamikaze it...
Wait I saw a video about this once and your plan doesn't work.

youtube.com/watch?v=RZjhxuhTmGk

you could shoot down an F-16

The F-104 was a decent plane in general, but forced into roles that were never ment for political reasons resulting in a large number of inicidents. Germany wanted access to nukes in the event of a larger war with the soviet union, the french werent interested in giving those to germany, the US was willing but they were only selling the F-104 a day interceptor, while germany was looking for a plane with multirole abilities. So germany took the F-104 for the nuke option and tried to turn the day interceptor F-104 into a all weather fighter bomber, which didnt go well at all.

t. german

>the pilots were at fault
Are you the same samefagging retard that got butthurt about the Leopard 2 in that other thread or you think picking up a history book is too hard?

>So germany took the F-104 for the nuke option and tried to turn the day interceptor F-104 into a all weather fighter bomber, which didnt go well at all.
And yet they still performed reasonably well outside of Germany.
The F-104G is, generally speaking, a flop. It's trying to retrofit a plane for a role almost entirely opposite of its original design with no consideration for its capabilites and ignoring even the most basic logic.
The countries which did try using fighter-bomber F-104s (including the US) found that the plane was capable, but poorly suited to the role. Particularly since aircraft like the F-105 could do the same role for the USAF better.
Couple that with the whole "Lockmart bribing German officials" fiasco and there's a lot of things that went wrong with the entire design, production, acquisition, and operation of the F-104G.
But the fact remains that the Luftwaffe had a noticeably worse accident rate than every other country that operated the plane. Could some of that be due to the fact that Germans were flying more F-104Gs more often than other countries? Sure, nothing exists in a vacuum of course.
German flight instructors tried to blame it on the lack of veteran pilots after WWII, but when other former Axis countries can operate the exact same aircraft with a substantially smaller accident rate, one has to question how valid that argument really is.
>Are you the same samefagging retard that got butthurt about the Leopard 2
I don't give a shit about tanks beyond that putting an antitank artillery crew on tracks and behind a bunch of armor is pretty neat.
Also pic.

Attached: SmartSelect_20190606-175953_Clover.jpg (1080x389, 133K)

>And yet they still performed reasonably well outside of Germany.
Which used mostly different versions and were used in its intentional role of interceptors.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-104_Starfighter#German_service
>One contributing factor to this was the operational assignment of the F-104 in German service: it was mainly used as a fighter-bomber, as opposed to the original design of a high-speed, high-altitude fighter/interceptor. In addition to the much lower-level mission profiles, the installation of additional avionic equipment in the F-104G version, such as the inertial navigation system, added far more distraction to the pilot and additional weight that further hampered the flying abilities of the plane. In contemporary German magazine articles highlighting the Starfighter safety problems, the aircraft was portrayed as "overburdened" with technology, which was considered a latent overstrain on the aircrews.[65]
So the german F-104g:
-was used mostly as a fighter bomber, which was not its initial role
-different avionics
-the plane weight more through recontructed hull and wings
-inertial navigation system that distracted the pilot even further

So blaming the pilots is nothing but ignorance to what has happened.

Explain why theres so many more german corpses compared to americans who flew the F-104 then faggot

The F-104G was the most prolific variant in non-US service, and were used primarily as fighter-bombers. It's an apples-to-apples comparison.
And Germans still crashed it more.

Alternatively you could explain why you are wanting answers for things that were already answered with the information from the post before, only thing you need to do now is to connect the dots on your own. If you are even capable of doing that, but your demand for explanations for something that simple makes me really doubt it.

I am going offline now, it is 2 am over here.

Did you just watch this OP? Be honest now.

youtube.com/watch?v=FN5p97pQYRI

Short answer? They had about third of what germany had, way less fighter bomber variants and a different type of fighter bomber, and got rid of the plane earlier.

i-f-s.nl/f-104-operators/
>The USAF has used in total two XF-104 prototype aircraft, 17 pre-production YF-104A, 153 F-104A Interceptors, 26 F-104B Trainers, 77 F-104C Fighter-Bombers and 21 F-104D Training aircraft.
297 planes in total, about 26% are fighter bomber.

>The German Air Force and Navy used a large number of F-104G (for Germany) aircraft for intersception, recconaisance and fighter bomber roles. Also 137 TF-104G and initially 30 F-104F aircraft were bought. In total the Germans used 916 Starfighters being the biggest 104 operator in the world.
916 planes in total
translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&u=https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-104
>the Bundeswehr deployed a total of 916 Starfighters (30 F-104F, 586 F-104G, 163 RF-104G and 137 TF-104G, 35 of them in the USA).
64% are F-104G, while 97% of all planes in total are based on the F-104G, only 3% are actual interceptor variants.

>Of these, just under a third, namely 269 machines, was lost due to crashes. A total of 300 machines had to be written off due to accidents. Including the last fatal accident in 1984, 116 pilots died fatally (108 Germans and eight Americans).
About 29% lost in the service time of the plane from 1962 to 1991.
>From February 1962 to May 1991, a total of 1,975,646 hours

airvectors.net/avf104_1.html
>The Starfighter had a generally short-lived and undistinguished career in USAF service, with the Air Force buying less than half the total number of machines initially planned. In fact, at the outset the Starfighter's most noticeable characteristic was its high accident rate, with 49 lost up to 1961.
Lost 16% of all of the planes til 1961 alone and recuded its usage after that.

That is were you are wrong though, countries that actually used them as fighter bombers had similar losses if not worse and germany had like half of all the F-104G ever built. Belgium lost 38 of their 101 F-104G, Italy lost 38% of all its 149 G variant F-104s. Spain on the other hand who operated their 22 F-104G as interceptors and mainly flew in very good weather lost non, Denmark who had 25 F-104G and used them as interceptors also lost non.
If you cant see the pattern there, you cant be helped.

That would depend upon the speed and trajectory at the moment it impacts the ground. Assuming it even gets airborne, that is.

Posts like this are the reason why i keep coming back to this place.

>Most flying aces out of any country in history
>worse pilots than women

Attached: ultra brainlet wojak.jpg (276x300, 14K)

>get someone to make me a suppressor for the 23mm cannon.
>notify the ATF
>fly around the city
>ATF searches every house my plane flys over and shoots their dogs.
>people get mad at the ATF for killing their dogs
>ATF removed

alternatively
>sit there in the cockpit making jet noises because i dont know how to start the fucking thing.
>jack off
>cry
a regular night for but this time i have a soviet fighter jet.

Attached: FUCK.png (93x133, 22K)

Topkek to the last part.

How many of those flying aces died because of the allies
How many of them were aces because Russians cant be competent

>Most flying aces out of any country in history

Thanks to slaughtering IL-2 formations and Nazis overworking their aces to shit.

If you can get a non-export variant, they can carry air-dropped nukes.