A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

request for fighter pilot statistic



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 11th 05, 06:18 PM
gatt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default request for fighter pilot statistic


Anybody have any leads to reputable information about fighter pilot fatality
statistics?

For example, in terms of miles, is commuting more dangerous than flying a
fighter plane? (I say no, many say yes.)

Context: Can a Coward Become a Fighter Pilot? (Yeah, I know. That's so
2000.)

-chris
PP-ASEL-IA


  #2  
Old November 11th 05, 06:23 PM
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default request for fighter pilot statistic

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:18:36 GMT, "gatt"
wrote in
::

Anybody have any leads to reputable information about fighter pilot fatality
statistics?

For example, in terms of miles, is commuting more dangerous than flying a
fighter plane? (I say no, many say yes.)

Context: Can a Coward Become a Fighter Pilot? (Yeah, I know. That's so
2000.)


I'll bet lots of folks who frequent rec.aviation.military can respond
to your inquiry. I'll crosspost this followup there for you.
  #3  
Old November 11th 05, 09:52 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default request for fighter pilot statistic

You can get statistics on each individual plane in terms of accidents
per hour.

http://afsafety.af.mil/ is the main page
You probably want this page
http://afsafety.af.mil/AFSC/RDBMS/Fl...aft_stats.html

This is the website where you file FOIAs to get crash information. Lots
of sleaze-bags on the net charge for this information.

Shrub flew the F-104. It is really an intercept aircraft, so it
wouldn't be likely to see a dog fight, especially in Alabama. In
Shrub's favor, while it would be the plane of choice to fly in the
theater if you didn't want to see action, the F-104 was a deathtrap
compared to other aircraft, strictly from an operational standpoint.

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:18:36 GMT, "gatt"
wrote in
::

Anybody have any leads to reputable information about fighter pilot fatality
statistics?

For example, in terms of miles, is commuting more dangerous than flying a
fighter plane? (I say no, many say yes.)

Context: Can a Coward Become a Fighter Pilot? (Yeah, I know. That's so
2000.)


I'll bet lots of folks who frequent rec.aviation.military can respond
to your inquiry. I'll crosspost this followup there for you.


  #5  
Old November 11th 05, 11:02 PM
Ed Rasimus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default request for fighter pilot statistic

I assume that "Shrub" is your intellectual colloquialism for the
President of the United States. If so, you should then have some
command of facts before spouting off.

The aircraft the President flew while in Texas Air National Guard
service was the F-102, NOT the F-104. He flew the Deuce in Texas, not
in Alabama. He flew AF jets for more than five years (more than twice
as long as John Kerry's military service).

The F-102 was a single-seat, single-engine delta winged interceptor.
Like all Century series single-seat, single-engine jets it could kill
you on any given day.

  #6  
Old November 12th 05, 02:16 AM
Jase Vanover
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default request for fighter pilot statistic

I've always heard that the F-104 was a superb aircraft for what it was
designed for (high speed, high altitude intercept), but by the time it was
operational the needs had changed, and the attempts to adapt it to the needs
of the time played to it's weaknesses.

It was freakin' fast (first plane capable of sustained Mach 2+), and held
records of the day for altitude and time to climb. I've seen a parked one
at the museum in Ottawa, Canada. Smallish in nature, but hot lines... a
looker and real "sports car."

The "missle with the man in it" is indeed an interesting, if not
particularly successful aircraft.

wrote in message
oups.com...
You can get statistics on each individual plane in terms of accidents
per hour.

http://afsafety.af.mil/ is the main page
You probably want this page
http://afsafety.af.mil/AFSC/RDBMS/Fl...aft_stats.html

This is the website where you file FOIAs to get crash information. Lots
of sleaze-bags on the net charge for this information.

Shrub flew the F-104. It is really an intercept aircraft, so it
wouldn't be likely to see a dog fight, especially in Alabama. In
Shrub's favor, while it would be the plane of choice to fly in the
theater if you didn't want to see action, the F-104 was a deathtrap
compared to other aircraft, strictly from an operational standpoint.

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:18:36 GMT, "gatt"
wrote in
::

Anybody have any leads to reputable information about fighter pilot
fatality
statistics?

For example, in terms of miles, is commuting more dangerous than flying
a
fighter plane? (I say no, many say yes.)

Context: Can a Coward Become a Fighter Pilot? (Yeah, I know. That's
so
2000.)


I'll bet lots of folks who frequent rec.aviation.military can respond
to your inquiry. I'll crosspost this followup there for you.




  #7  
Old November 12th 05, 02:34 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default request for fighter pilot statistic

I got the number wrong. However, I do recall comments about what Shrub
flew not being particularly safe.

Jase Vanover wrote:
I've always heard that the F-104 was a superb aircraft for what it was
designed for (high speed, high altitude intercept), but by the time it was
operational the needs had changed, and the attempts to adapt it to the needs
of the time played to it's weaknesses.

It was freakin' fast (first plane capable of sustained Mach 2+), and held
records of the day for altitude and time to climb. I've seen a parked one
at the museum in Ottawa, Canada. Smallish in nature, but hot lines... a
looker and real "sports car."

The "missle with the man in it" is indeed an interesting, if not
particularly successful aircraft.

wrote in message
oups.com...
You can get statistics on each individual plane in terms of accidents
per hour.

http://afsafety.af.mil/ is the main page
You probably want this page
http://afsafety.af.mil/AFSC/RDBMS/Fl...aft_stats.html

This is the website where you file FOIAs to get crash information. Lots
of sleaze-bags on the net charge for this information.

Shrub flew the F-104. It is really an intercept aircraft, so it
wouldn't be likely to see a dog fight, especially in Alabama. In
Shrub's favor, while it would be the plane of choice to fly in the
theater if you didn't want to see action, the F-104 was a deathtrap
compared to other aircraft, strictly from an operational standpoint.

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:18:36 GMT, "gatt"
wrote in
::

Anybody have any leads to reputable information about fighter pilot
fatality
statistics?

For example, in terms of miles, is commuting more dangerous than flying
a
fighter plane? (I say no, many say yes.)

Context: Can a Coward Become a Fighter Pilot? (Yeah, I know. That's
so
2000.)

I'll bet lots of folks who frequent rec.aviation.military can respond
to your inquiry. I'll crosspost this followup there for you.



  #8  
Old November 12th 05, 03:01 PM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default request for fighter pilot statistic


wrote in message
oups.com...
I got the number wrong. However, I do recall comments about what Shrub
flew not being particularly safe.

And intercept missions, due to the profiles at the time (late 60's) were
essentially suicide missions.


  #9  
Old November 13th 05, 05:22 AM
Big John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default request for fighter pilot statistic

miso

Duce didn't have a bad reputation. Only down for the A/C was that in
Squadrons it was not supersonic in level flight. J-57 was a good
reliable engine. Bird had a gear that was restricted to a 20mph cross
wind on landing so you had to watch that but how often do you have to
land in a cross wind component that high?

Follow on delta was the 106 which had the coke bottle fuselage drag
reduction and bigger engine (J-75) and was supersonic in level flight.

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` `````````````````````

On 11 Nov 2005 18:34:15 -0800, wrote:

I got the number wrong. However, I do recall comments about what Shrub
flew not being particularly safe.

Jase Vanover wrote:
I've always heard that the F-104 was a superb aircraft for what it was
designed for (high speed, high altitude intercept), but by the time it was
operational the needs had changed, and the attempts to adapt it to the needs
of the time played to it's weaknesses.

It was freakin' fast (first plane capable of sustained Mach 2+), and held
records of the day for altitude and time to climb. I've seen a parked one
at the museum in Ottawa, Canada. Smallish in nature, but hot lines... a
looker and real "sports car."

The "missle with the man in it" is indeed an interesting, if not
particularly successful aircraft.

wrote in message
oups.com...
You can get statistics on each individual plane in terms of accidents
per hour.

http://afsafety.af.mil/ is the main page
You probably want this page
http://afsafety.af.mil/AFSC/RDBMS/Fl...aft_stats.html

This is the website where you file FOIAs to get crash information. Lots
of sleaze-bags on the net charge for this information.

Shrub flew the F-104. It is really an intercept aircraft, so it
wouldn't be likely to see a dog fight, especially in Alabama. In
Shrub's favor, while it would be the plane of choice to fly in the
theater if you didn't want to see action, the F-104 was a deathtrap
compared to other aircraft, strictly from an operational standpoint.

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:18:36 GMT, "gatt"
wrote in
::

Anybody have any leads to reputable information about fighter pilot
fatality
statistics?

For example, in terms of miles, is commuting more dangerous than flying
a
fighter plane? (I say no, many say yes.)

Context: Can a Coward Become a Fighter Pilot? (Yeah, I know. That's
so
2000.)

I'll bet lots of folks who frequent rec.aviation.military can respond
to your inquiry. I'll crosspost this followup there for you.


  #10  
Old November 12th 05, 03:26 PM
Ed Rasimus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default request for fighter pilot statistic

Partially true. The F-104A was originally a high altitude interceptor,
but in the hands of the 435th TFW/479th TFW, it was a very capable
air-to-air day fighter. They developed a lot of the modern mutual
support, split-plane maneuvering modern tactics for low-aspect
air-to-air.

The greatest production of the F-104 was the F-104G model and variants
of that version operated by allied AFs world-wide for more than 40
years. A very capable nuclear strike platform as well as a pretty
competitive A/A fighter, particularly in versions like the Italian
F-104S model that had Sparrow capability.

I'd say a very successful aircraft.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 02:26 PM
Most reliable homebuilt helicopter? tom pettit Home Built 35 September 29th 05 02:24 PM
AmeriFlight Crash C J Campbell Piloting 5 December 1st 03 02:13 PM
Single-Seat Accident Records (Was BD-5B) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 41 November 20th 03 05:39 AM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.