Lockheed F-104G TR « Twin Starfighter » design

[Apophenia]

I have some unknown drawing to me. Could anyone help me identify it, please?
[picture re-attached below — Mod.]

This is the F-104G-TR 'Twin Starfighter'. And opinion seems to be divided as to whether this was a genuine project or not.

According to web sources, the F-104G-TR was to be an escort fighter using a maximum of Starfighter parts. Entwicklungsring Süd did the study. A navigator was to sit in one of the two cockpits (not clear on which one).

I don't think that this concept got very far ... which is probably just as well.

 

[boxkite]

Hmm ... Hans-Jürgen Becker describes such a twin Starfighter in his F-104 book as F-104Z (I believe 'Z' is for 'Zwilling'). Apophenia, what's your source for F-104G-TR? Btw, I've seen a photo from a model kit exhibition showing this twin with '1968' as year of origin.

 

[Apophenia]

Hmm ... Hans-Jürgen Becker describes such a twin Starfighter in his F-104 book as F-104Z (I believe 'Z' is for 'Zwilling'). Apophenia, what's your source for F-104G-TR? Btw, I've seen a photo from a model kit exhibition showing this twin with '1968' as year of origin.

Hi boxkite,

I had a two-view similar to (but simpler than) the one posted by Justo. It was from EADS and although titled "Doppelrumpf F-104G", the label F-104G TR is just visible in the bottom right corner.

There is also a date ... I'd have guessed Februar 1966 but it is really muddy and could just as easily be 1968. On the Flugzeugforum, there is a thread titled "F-104G: Projekt Doppelrumpf (F-104G TR)". They give a start date of 1964.

They used the term Begleitjäger which I'm assuming is escort fighter.

http://www.flugzeugforum.de/forum/archive/index.php?t-32038.html

 

[Michel Van]

http://www.flugzeugforum.de/forum/archive/index.php?t-32038.html
for those how cant not understand German

in short in simple English

F-104G TR
EWR-Bericht Nr. 19-64
February 1964.

EWR= EntWicklungRing Süd (Heinkel, Messerschmitt & Bölkow ) later became MBB
start in 1963 study ,,Twin Starfighter’’ for longrange escort fighter for German Navy "Breguet Atlantic" aircraft.
they take two F-104G connected with new wing (Messerschmitt old bf109 Z in newform ;D)
F-104G TR has 2 cockpits one Pilot the other Navigator (with backup controls)
and new longrange Radar.
at the middle wing is a third Drogue parachute (and as addition a Rocket Booster (ZELL ??))
the Sidewinder are replaced by the Sparrow rocket. no M61 Gatling guns on board.

but the F-104G TR had major problem: only 9.760 kg fuel not enough as longrange escort fighter.
(Need 8000 km for "Breguet Atlantic")
so EWR Süd canceled the Study begin 1964

TR can stands for Trainer / Reconnaissance
with 2 Cockpits and Longrange Radars make sense

has some one the 1/2001 FLUGZEUG magazine ?
there is a article about ,,Twin Starfighter" by Hans-Jürgen Becker.

 

[boxkite]

After reading all your comments, guys, I believe that F-104G TR is a more trustworthy designation than F-104Z (the drawing seems to be from EWR-Süd origins).

Regards,
Thomas

 

[Apophenia]

Thomas,

Re-reading the Flugzeugforum forum, I noticed that the label was written out there all along!

F-104G TR
Quelle: EWR-Bericht Nr. 19-64
Februar 1964

So now we have confirmation of the EWR-Süd source and the date. Might the TR = Taktische-Recce (as in current Tornado-Recce)?

 

[Stargazer]

New topic split from an old thread.

Here is a link (in German) that borovik provided elsewhere at some point:
http://www.bredow-web.de/Luftwaffenmuseum/Kampfjets/Starfighter/F-104_Geschichte/f-104_geschichte.html

Has it been settled or not whether or not the "Zwilling Starfighter" was a genuine Lockheed and/or German Air Force project?

 

[LowObservable]

To quote Robin Williams on luging: "What drunken German gynecologist dreamed that up?"

 

[Jemiba]

Has it been settled or not whether or not the "Zwilling Starfighter" was a genuine Lockheed and/or German Air Force project?

As the F-104 G HA (High Altitude) concepts (project may be a bit far-fetched) those F-104 derivatives were drawn
by the Entwicklungsring Süd GmbH.

 

[chuck4]

The torque on that ultra-thin center wing has to be something else. Perhaps they would connect the horizontal stabilizers as well so as to relieve the torque on the wings.

 

[Stargazer]

The torque on that ultra-thin center wing has to be something else. Perhaps they would connect the horizontal stabilizers as well so as to relieve the torque on the wings.

Well, that's what I would've done. That's what I do to all the fake zwillings I do in photoedition form (and I've done quite a few). To me it doesn't make sense for the two aircraft to be joined only by the wings, it will likely exert a lot of torsion on the longerons. Warping, creaking and the like may result. With props I guess it wouldn't be too bad, but with jets, it would be more of a problem I think.

 

[Sundog]

Well, that's what I would've done. That's what I do to all the fake zwillings I do in photoedition form (and I've done quite a few). To me it doesn't make sense for the two aircraft to be joined only by the wings, it will likely exert a lot of torsion on the longerons. Warping, creaking and the like may result. With props I guess it wouldn't be too bad, but with jets, it would be more of a problem I think.

It partly depends on how you develop the control system when designing a plane like this, in terms of load alleviation. For example, see the White Knight. Granted, it has a thicker center wing section, but it is possible to design such an aircraft without the tails connected. Of course, the White Knight also did it because of the turbulence behind SS1.

Having said that, connecting the tails would have made a lot of sense on the F-104 Zwilling, and I think it would have looked better as well. I'm just making the point that the tails don't necessarily need to be connected.

 

[Kryptid]

Would both radomes have retained a radar? That could have lead to some interesting versatility in terms of tracking multiple targets.

 

[Jemiba]

In the link giving the original source it is said, that this twin was intended for long-range
fighter patrols over the sea, so I think increasing the fuel volume and having a second
pilot probably was the main aim.

 

[RanulfC]

Well, that's what I would've done. That's what I do to all the fake zwillings I do in photoedition form (and I've done quite a few). To me it doesn't make sense for the two aircraft to be joined only by the wings, it will likely exert a lot of torsion on the longerons. Warping, creaking and the like may result. With props I guess it wouldn't be too bad, but with jets, it would be more of a problem I think.

It partly depends on how you develop the control system when designing a plane like this, in terms of load alleviation. For example, see the White Knight. Granted, it has a thicker center wing section, but it is possible to design such an aircraft without the tails connected. Of course, the White Knight also did it because of the turbulence behind SS1.

Having said that, connecting the tails would have made a lot of sense on the F-104 Zwilling, and I think it would have looked better as well. I'm just making the point that the tails don't necessarily need to be connected.

Considering that the tails are "all-flying" surfaces would connecting them been even possible? I suspect it would have taken a whole new tail assembly and different high speed control system.

RAndy

 

[Jemiba]

I don't see a problem in the all flying tailplane, the only one may be, that by simply connecting
the inner tail surfaces would result in a much larger area, than before. So perhaps the outer parts
could be omitted and the connected inner parts would have roughly the same tail plane area,
than the two independent ones before.

 

[chuck4]

How would the shockwaves from one fuselage effect the aerodyanmics of the other during supersonic flight?

 

[Jemiba]

A good question, I think. I only know very few supersonic twin fuselage designs (the Bristol-Siddeley
Mach 3 passenger aircraft comes to my mind). Couild there be problems with the inner intakes, due
to the shockwaves from each fuselage ?

 

[Kryptid]

This is just a guess on my part, but perhaps the inlets are far enough downstream for the shocks to weaken significantly before reaching them? Even if the shocks could enter the inlets, they still might not make it to the engine face.

 

[Jemiba]

For those other variants of the F-104G proposed by EWR it was stated in the "Fliegerkalender" article, that
the first steps of their developments were done. And for a professional designer, those problems should strike
the eye at once. Or not ? :-\