Comments by "Gort" (@gort8203) on "Best Fighter Never Built? The Grumman F11F-1F Super Tiger" video.

@emaheiwa8174 Every high performance single-engine fighter of that era had high mishap rates compared to today, and every country flying them lost pilots. The F-104 mishap rate was not that different overall, but was much higher in service with Germany than it was in countries such as the U.S., Canada, and Italy. To repeat myself, his was not due to the design of the airplane, but to the way it was operated. You can read up on it if you are really interested.
4
Tired old dramatization of the F-104 accident rate has been debunked so many times it is sad to see it again here. The accident rate in German service was atypical, and was not due to the design, but to the way the airplane was operated. The F-11 would likely have suffered an atypical mishap rate there as well.
3
If this were not YouTube I wouldn't be able to understand why there are so many gushing comments about this airplane. Folks, it was just another one of many also-rans in the story of military aviation. The Navy already had the F-8. For USAF this jet might have outperformed the existing F-100 at a couple of the margins, which was no reason to buy it when superior aircraft were in the pipeline. This was another failed attempt by a manufacturer to get a new lease on life for an existing product that could not compete with newer designs during an era of rapid aviation progress.
3
@emaheiwa8174 Not true. Every country "has issues" with every plane, but Germany's F-104 mishap rate was higher than any other.
2
@emaheiwa8174 You don't know what you are talking about. Canada flew the plane in the same role Germany did and did not crash anywhere near as many. Germany flew the plane in the role for which they bought it, just as Canada did. That role was to provide NATO with high-speed low-level strike capability. That was an inherently difficult role, especially given weather conditions in Europe, and lack of operational experience led to a steep learning curve and high mishap rate for Germany. The F-105 would have been a better but more expensive choice, and the F-104 was a suitable substitute once equipped with the necessary systems. Stop watching videos and TV shows and do some reading.
2
@ronjon7942 The uneducated will continue to adhere to the first story they hear on any subject and refuse to accept new information. Holding on to what they assume is settled knowledge takes much less effort than learning. That is sad enough, but they are also allowed to vote and reproduce.
1
@Cancer McAids You're dreaming if you think it would have had most of the capability of the F-4. But that alone is not the reason to cancel the super tiger. The basic F-11 significantly under-performed compared to the F-100. I mean, Mach 1.1 isn't a real supersonic airplane. If you wanted to upgrade an existing fighter instead of buying the F-4 or F-104, a better choice would be to upgrade the F-8 Crusader, which was already a good performer. It would then have eaten the Super Tiger for lunch. There are many more F-8 fanboys than F-11 fanboys on the internet, but maybe you can convince them the F-11 would have been a better choice for upgrade.
1
@ronjon7942 Hey, don't sell yourself short. 😉
1