F-104 touch-roll-touch

[Mcl5306]

In the 1960-s Belgian pilots Ongena and Jacobs became world famous with this impossible manouevre.
Looking around on Internet only a very few very short movies can be found and practically no photographs.
Why??
Are there no films available?

[DeltaWiskey]

for a vid, see here: http://www.aerodrome-gruyere.ch/video/touch-roll-touch/

[regi]

question is what the purpose of such a low level roll is.
Besides that it looks sensational, and besides it is dangerous because there is no room for mistakes, it could be that it is incorperated in older style defence during landing/take off.
The combat time of those jets was limited. It was a practice to follow the enemy to its landing base and knock it out during landing.
Maybe - I don't know - such a roll would misguide the attacker his canon fire or maybe also missiles. ( if the AA missiles could be fired in an angle towards the ground , in case it are radar guided missiles )

[smokejumper]

question is what the purpose of such a low level roll is.
Besides that it looks sensational, and besides it is dangerous because there is no room for mistakes, it could be that it is incorperated in older style defence during landing/take off.
The combat time of those jets was limited. It was a practice to follow the enemy to its landing base and knock it out during landing.
Maybe - I don't know - such a roll would misguide the attacker his canon fire or maybe also missiles. ( if the AA missiles could be fired in an angle towards the ground , in case it are radar guided missiles )

This was solely a demonstration. The F-104 had very short-thin wings which, led to a very high wing loading which in turn, was very unforgiving. Landing speeds were high to prevent stalls and maneuvering (especially at low altitude) was always touchy. When the F-104G was introduced to the European nations, a number of fatal crashes were experienced. Pilots were reluctant to fly it on the edge of the envelope.

Keep in mind also, that the F-104G (a fighter bomber) was considerably heavier than the F-104A (an interceptor used in the USAF), so its wing loading was even higher than the USAF version.

To show that the plane could be controlled at low speed and low altitude, Lockheed initiated a number of demonstration flights to show the plane's maneuverability. These Lockheed pilots (and several USAF pilots on loan as instructors) were GOOD!

As for combat applicability, such demonstration maneuvers showed that you could push the F-104 to the maximum and stay in a controlled flight condition.

[FlyA330]

It was also a very dangerous manouevre. Capt «susse» Jacobs was killed on 2 sept 1968 while doing this. After the roll the afterburner refused to ignite. He tried to save himself with his ejection seat, but he was too low.
Not long after this crash, the Touch-Roll-Touch was forbidden.

[galaxy]

It was during the taking of an episode of the French television series "Les Chevaliers du Ciel" the "touch-roll-touch-and-go" manoeuvre went wrong and Capt.Susse Jacobs was killed .

[regi]

So in fact it was just a sales demonstration , showing a dangerous maneuver , resulting in the death of pilots ?
They could perform this roll on a safer level, giving room for emergency action.
Shame on Lockheed.

[earthman]

So in fact it was just a sales demonstration , showing a dangerous maneuver , resulting in the death of pilots ?

Kind of like the A320 at Mulhouse...

[regi]

So in fact it was just a sales demonstration , showing a dangerous maneuver , resulting in the death of pilots ?

Kind of like the A320 at Mulhouse...

euh...right ! ( despite that the footage of the tree top trimming is not exactly the same as performing a roll with a A320 )

[simulator]

Slightly off-topic but nice to see for those interested in the F 104

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoL-KCFb ... r_embedded

ps: AFAIK the touch-roll-touch manoevre was only ever done by our Belgian pilots.... (correct me if wrong)

[Mcl5306]

The manoeuvre has been performed by others, in Germany a pilot was killed doing it as far as I know.
And there are two problems:
- the plane has to be well flown as it is difficult to fly a good roll at low altitude and low speed, especially with a F104
- on a very long runway you have room, but not on a normal standard nato runway of 2,5 km. On such a runway an afterburner hickup means serious problems.
Just to explain it, touch down at approx 180 knots, full power with AB, lift off, aileron roll at low altitude rolling out above runway again, out of afterburner, reduce speed and touch down, full power and afterburner again for lift off.
Several of these items could go wrong, and several give no room for error.
So, not allowing it was probably a good thing.....

[smokejumper]

So in fact it was just a sales demonstration , showing a dangerous maneuver , resulting in the death of pilots ?
They could perform this roll on a safer level, giving room for emergency action.
Shame on Lockheed.

This was a demonstration flight only to show what the plane was capable of; they never recommended that lesser trained pilots perform it. It, like many maneuvers, is safe, IF you have the skilll, training and experience.

If you recall, Boeing's chief Test Pilot "Tex" Johnson rolled the 707 prototype (-360) over Lake Washington to show that the large transport was maneuverable (this was done for the same reason). Boeing has never advocated that airline pilots perform this maneuver. So ... no shame on Lockheed.

see: http://vodpod.com/watch/2702335-boeing- ... ex-johnson

[smokejumper]

I always wanted to fly the F-104, but did not make the grade. In the USAF, all student pilots are graded at the end of their training. You get your pick of assignments depending on how high your scores are and even within the tier, higher scores get better picks.

Generally, those scoring highest select fighters; those in the second tier, generally pick bombers; those in the third tier fly transports and the fourth tier end up flying whatever is left.

In 1964, I scored in the first tier, but was not high enough to fly F-105’s (the fastest fighter (bomber) the USAF had) or the F-104. I got my third choice, the F-100, a beauty to fly – good performance and well behaved.

I had several friends who flew F-105’s (and were lost in Vietnam) and several who flew F-104s. Several in the F-104s crashed in low altitude maneuvers.

The moral of all this is that you should not attempt to do something that you are not trained to do, even though the manufacturer has shown that it is possible. It is not the manufacturer’s fault if you cannot do what an experienced test pilot shows is possible.

[regi]

So in fact it was just a sales demonstration , showing a dangerous maneuver , resulting in the death of pilots ?
They could perform this roll on a safer level, giving room for emergency action.
Shame on Lockheed.

This was a demonstration flight only to show what the plane was capable of; they never recommended that lesser trained pilots perform it. It, like many maneuvers, is safe, IF you have the skilll, training and experience.

If you recall, Boeing's chief Test Pilot "Tex" Johnson rolled the 707 prototype (-360) over Lake Washington to show that the large transport was maneuverable (this was done for the same reason). Boeing has never advocated that airline pilots perform this maneuver. So ... no shame on Lockheed.

see: http://vodpod.com/watch/2702335-boeing- ... ex-johnson

Great clip ! At least he did it above a lake and at greater altitude. Am I right that I saw a massive altitude drop during the roll ?
And his explanation was honnest: " I was selling airplanes"

[smokejumper]

Here’s one other thing that I just remembered. The USAF F-104 had a downward firing ejection seat - this is rather awkward if you need to eject at low latitude. For the F-104G, Lockheed installed the Martin-Baker upward ejection seat.

In 1954, when the F-104A was developed, ejection seat technology was not developed enough for a pilot to clear the tail at Mach 2; hence the downward seat. Minor issue, but I know of at least one instance in which the pilot ejected into the ground (actually a concrete runway) while experiencing a difficult landing. By the way, ejecting into a concrete runway is not comforting!

[regi]

Here’s one other thing that I just remembered. The USAF F-104 had a downward firing ejection seat - this is rather awkward if you need to eject at low latitude. For the F-104G, Lockheed installed the Martin-Baker upward ejection seat.

In 1954, when the F-104A was developed, ejection seat technology was not developed enough for a pilot to clear the tail at Mach 2; hence the downward seat. Minor issue, but I know of at least one instance in which the pilot ejected into the ground (actually a concrete runway) while experiencing a difficult landing. By the way, ejecting into a concrete runway is not comforting!

21 pilots would have died because of the inadequate ejection seat.

[smokejumper]

The downward ejection seat worked, but 400 feet AGL was about the minimum. Downward ejection was necessitated for Mach 2 ejection without striking the tail. There were some issues with the upward ejection Martin-Baker seat, but they were eventually corrected by Martin-Baker.

[FlyA330]

In 1986, they've tried the same with the Belgian Air Force Mirage V (BD05). During a pracatice of a solo display (done in a double-seater with the instructor in the back), the Mirage V slided during the roll and crashed. The front seat pilot died and the back seat pilot survived. The instructor pilot did it already a couple of times before with the Mirage V.

[smokejumper]

Which is why you always want to begin the roll in a climb (you'll lose altitude in any roll). I do not know the particulars with the Belgian Mirage V crash, but I'll bet that they initiated the roll with insufficient altitude or airspeed.

A delta wing aircraft exhibits some particular characteristics in any turn or roll and will bleed off some airspeed in such maneuvers; perhaps this contributed to the crash.

[regi]

It is sad that such a highly educated people as AF pilots do such a stupid things. There is no learning curve, the slightiest mistake makes 2 holes in the ground: the grave and the impact.
There is no room for fun and jokes with that equipment. Remember that I knew several victims of the Cavalese massacre in 1998.