Thank you for this. This may be the most complete recollection single source that I've heard about RCAF Starfighters in their initial nuclear role. It always amazed me to hear about their precision navigation to the second with just a strip map on their knees and the mark 1 eyeball at 500' and 500+ knots. Anyone who has flown even as a private pilot knows how challenging navigation can be at 500' and 100knots... amazing skills! And sadly, probably lost skills these days too. Thank you for your service and thank you for helping keep us safe.
Hey np, it's a pleasure to record and share these stories. You'll be pleased to know I have another CF104 episode here th-cam.com/video/2lraEN1xfAU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=jVlV_jbPOVrsz2y3
The CF-104 did have the LN3 inertial navigation system which would certainly have helped in navigating to the target. Theoretically it would fly the aircraft to the target once the coordinates were dialed in.
@@davefost Yes, I believe the LN3 was state of the art about the time the 104 entered service. I recall the order 'power on' for us technicians some minutes before the pilot arrived at the aircraft to go flying. We would then apply electrical power. This was to ensure the LN3 & it's gyros were warmed up & ready to go. The pilot carried the codes to enter into the LN3 for his mission. Several years before we retired the aircraft an updated nav system was installed. LW-33 if not mistaken. As a young Instrument Electrical technician learning the trade in Cold Lake, I recall the labs being permanently staffed by technical experts from Litton. I was fortunate to be given a high reliability soldering course during my rotation through labs. The nav system itself was the responsibility of our Comm/Radar technicians.
I was a technician at Baden Söllingen from 1979-83 working 1st line servicing (starts, turnarounds, daily inspections etc.) with 439 Squadron for 6 months on the CF-104. The rest of my tour was on T-33's & handling visiting NATO aircraft. It was quite amazing to see the amount of conventional ordinance the stubby winged bird could be loaded with. Much respect for our pilots who flew the low-level missions on a daily basis. 1st launch of the day was always out of a HAS (hardened aircraft shelter) & for the remainder of the day from whatever flight line was available on the squadron's dispersal or from the button in front of the HAS. During tactical exercises all launches & recoveries were in the HAS. The armourers would perform half a load & de-arm the same to simulate a full load. Their time was evaluated by a Tactical Evaluator. Everyone wore a NBCW suit with gas masks at the waist during the entire exercise. Even the pilots would wear their 'bunny suit' from the ops center bunker to the HAS where they took it off before climbing into the cockpit.
Hello, as I recall the Germans had around 800+ F104s. They lost over 220 aircraft - mostly due to the fact that they insisted to have the 104 converted to a firghter/bomber. That took the weight from around 9,4 tonnes up to more than 11 tonnes which was too much for the small wings and made control very difficult.The F/A decision was typical for Germany - and costly for the pilot-community . . I served with the Canadian airforce in the mid 80s at Lahr airbase in the air transport section for a time. (5AMU)
Once we converted from nuclear strike to conventional the CF ended up in much the same role. While our losses were not quite as dire as the Luftwaffe, we certainly lost a good number of our aircraft & pilots. If not mistaken the German losses were exacerbated by lack of training. A change in leadership correcting the issue reduced their losses significantly.
Are you so lacking in confidence in your own intellect that you insist on dragging politics into everything. Get a pencil and paper and look up the purchases of combat aircraft for the RCAF since 1950. You will discover (if you honestly research the date of orders placed) that Liberal PMs have out-purchased right-wing-nut-job PMs in combat aircraft by a wide margin. Canadair Sabres outnumber Tory jets by themselves. Harper alone talked a good fight but bought nothing and left Justin with no option but to buy the right jet in spite of personal embarrassment.
@@patrick764 Not everyone can afford $250 for a Shure SM-4 mic. For what it was recorded on, just a lappy mic or phone w/e it was excellent. I have heard far worse, raspier, tinnier recordings. But you are the sound engineer and I am just a no nothing musician. It's just voice chat, they're not in the studio trying to lay down tracks.
@@patrick764 Inaudible was clearly nonsense, even you acknowledged that - it was totally audible and therefore excellent, not studio quality, but excellent none the less by comparison to that. It's all relative, but whatever. If you feel so strongly about it and have way too much free time to argue over this trivial point, why don't you spend $250- 500 bucks to buy Allen French a top shelf Shure microphone for when he makes a comeback to chat to Ian. I would bet all my money you are one of these annoying audiophiles who lectures Techmoan that he doesn't know what he's talking about when reviewing speakers. I've been a musician all my life and loud Marshal stacks have ruined my hearing. SO I don't care what pointless, arrogant, opinionated audiophiles like you think. ok ? The sound was excellent or it would not have been released as a pod.The only thing more annoying than a russophile is an audiophile, goodbye!
Thank you for this. This may be the most complete recollection single source that I've heard about RCAF Starfighters in their initial nuclear role. It always amazed me to hear about their precision navigation to the second with just a strip map on their knees and the mark 1 eyeball at 500' and 500+ knots. Anyone who has flown even as a private pilot knows how challenging navigation can be at 500' and 100knots... amazing skills! And sadly, probably lost skills these days too. Thank you for your service and thank you for helping keep us safe.
Hey np, it's a pleasure to record and share these stories. You'll be pleased to know I have another CF104 episode here th-cam.com/video/2lraEN1xfAU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=jVlV_jbPOVrsz2y3
The CF-104 did have the LN3 inertial navigation system which would certainly have helped in navigating to the target. Theoretically it would fly the aircraft to the target once the coordinates were dialed in.
@@MikeSiemens88 Interesting! Thank you for that. Yet another application of Litton's amazing platform. And thank you for your comment and service.
@@davefost Yes, I believe the LN3 was state of the art about the time the 104 entered service. I recall the order 'power on' for us technicians some minutes before the pilot arrived at the aircraft to go flying. We would then apply electrical power. This was to ensure the LN3 & it's gyros were warmed up & ready to go. The pilot carried the codes to enter into the LN3 for his mission. Several years before we retired the aircraft an updated nav system was installed. LW-33 if not mistaken. As a young Instrument Electrical technician learning the trade in Cold Lake, I recall the labs being permanently staffed by technical experts from Litton. I was fortunate to be given a high reliability soldering course during my rotation through labs. The nav system itself was the responsibility of our Comm/Radar technicians.
Brilliant Ian. It's always a pleasure to hear about Canada's Cold War.
I was a technician at Baden Söllingen from 1979-83 working 1st line servicing (starts, turnarounds, daily inspections etc.) with 439 Squadron for 6 months on the CF-104. The rest of my tour was on T-33's & handling visiting NATO aircraft. It was quite amazing to see the amount of conventional ordinance the stubby winged bird could be loaded with. Much respect for our pilots who flew the low-level missions on a daily basis. 1st launch of the day was always out of a HAS (hardened aircraft shelter) & for the remainder of the day from whatever flight line was available on the squadron's dispersal or from the button in front of the HAS. During tactical exercises all launches & recoveries were in the HAS. The armourers would perform half a load & de-arm the same to simulate a full load. Their time was evaluated by a Tactical Evaluator. Everyone wore a NBCW suit with gas masks at the waist during the entire exercise. Even the pilots would wear their 'bunny suit' from the ops center bunker to the HAS where they took it off before climbing into the cockpit.
Great story. My dad was stationed at Coldlake in the early 60's as 104 and Tudor mechanic.
Thanks and thanks for sharing your father's service too.
Hello, as I recall the Germans had around 800+ F104s. They lost over 220 aircraft - mostly due to the fact that they insisted to have the 104 converted to a firghter/bomber. That took the weight from around 9,4 tonnes up to more than 11 tonnes which was too much for the small wings and made control very difficult.The F/A decision was typical for Germany - and costly for the pilot-community . . I served with the Canadian airforce in the mid 80s at Lahr airbase in the air transport section for a time. (5AMU)
Once we converted from nuclear strike to conventional the CF ended up in much the same role. While our losses were not quite as dire as the Luftwaffe, we certainly lost a good number of our aircraft & pilots. If not mistaken the German losses were exacerbated by lack of training. A change in leadership correcting the issue reduced their losses significantly.
Every time I hear the name Trudeau, I throw up a little in my mouth. Thank you sir for your service. I very much enjoyed this.
Are you so lacking in confidence in your own intellect that you insist on dragging politics into everything. Get a pencil and paper and look up the purchases of combat aircraft for the RCAF since 1950. You will discover (if you honestly research the date of orders placed) that Liberal PMs have out-purchased right-wing-nut-job PMs in combat aircraft by a wide margin. Canadair Sabres outnumber Tory jets by themselves. Harper alone talked a good fight but bought nothing and left Justin with no option but to buy the right jet in spite of personal embarrassment.
An episode about the Museum of Communism in Prague would be great.
Inaudible
@@timoakes450 The sound was excellent.
It’s not inaudible, but you’d have to have pretty low standards to call it “excellent”.
@@patrick764 Not everyone can afford $250 for a Shure SM-4 mic. For what it was recorded on, just a lappy mic or phone w/e it was excellent. I have heard far worse, raspier, tinnier recordings. But you are the sound engineer and I am just a no nothing musician. It's just voice chat, they're not in the studio trying to lay down tracks.
@@irongronNo kidding, dude. I said it was neither “inaudible” nor is it “excellent”. Any reasonable person can agree to that.
@@patrick764 Inaudible was clearly nonsense, even you acknowledged that - it was totally audible and therefore excellent, not studio quality, but excellent none the less by comparison to that. It's all relative, but whatever. If you feel so strongly about it and have way too much free time to argue over this trivial point, why don't you spend $250- 500 bucks to buy Allen French a top shelf Shure microphone for when he makes a comeback to chat to Ian. I would bet all my money you are one of these annoying audiophiles who lectures Techmoan that he doesn't know what he's talking about when reviewing speakers. I've been a musician all my life and loud Marshal stacks have ruined my hearing. SO I don't care what pointless, arrogant, opinionated audiophiles like you think. ok ? The sound was excellent or it would not have been released as a pod.The only thing more annoying than a russophile is an audiophile, goodbye!