F104 Rocket Car...

ww2John · **Posted:** Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:56 pm

...from the AP Wire...

"PALMDALE, Calif. (AP) - An airplane that once helped set speed records returned home for a visit this weekend - in the form of a rocket car its owners also hope will go very fast.

The fuselage of an F-104 Starfighter jet that was flown by such renowned test pilots as Chuck Yeager and Scott Crossfield at Edwards Air Force Base has been wrapped around a rocket engine and will try to break the land speed record some time next year.

The plane has been renamed the North American Eagle and its new owners hope it will recapture the record of 763 mph now held by Andy Green of the United Kingdom."

The car's driver, Ed Shadle, and co-owner Keith Zanghi found the aircraft frame at a scrap yard in Maine. The pair later discovered that the plane was used in the 1950s and 1960s to train the pilots who would later fly the record-setting X-15 rocket plane.

The North American Eagle was displayed over the weekend in Palmdale and will be tested next month on the El Mirage dry lake in San Bernardino County.

The new owners hope to attempt the record on July 4, 2007."

...more information & pictures at the North American Eagle web site:

http://www.landspeed.com/

And DS, before you get started with your "what does this have to do with warbirds" rant, this WAS a warbird, once upon a time...

:roll:

Broken-Wrench · **Joined:** Sun Oct 24, 2004 12:37 pm **Posts:** 1197

He must be a maroon!! Why go Mach 1 in the dirt when you can go Mach 2? Trashed a perfectly good bird!!!! :evil:

Shay · **Posted:** Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:51 pm

Broken-Wrench wrote:

He must be a maroon!! Why go Mach 1 in the dirt when you can go Mach 2? Trashed a perfectly good bird!!!! :evil:

My understanding is that the Starfighter was already trashed when they found and recovered it. Surely by now if they hadn't saved it you'd be drink your favorite soft drink out of it.

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis

Randy Haskin · **Posted:** Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:56 pm

Doesn't look like it was "perfectly good" to me...

Shay · **Posted:** Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:58 pm

Broken-Wrench wrote:

He must be a maroon!! Why go Mach 1 in the dirt when you can go Mach 2? Trashed a perfectly good bird!!!! :evil:

You're right.

Ahhh Apple of my eye. What a Sweet Kick @SS looking Starfighter.

Dude What the F@ck. They totally hosed that plane. That piece of crap looks like a big red shiney turd. :lol:

Just mess'n with ya Broken Wrench. :wink:

Actually I like what they have done. They gave a great aircraft a new lease on life. And who knows it might end up in a museum or one day go back in the air for some new records.

Best of luck to them

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis

Jack Cook · **Posted:** Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:34 pm

I met this fellow at Arlington a few years back. Very nice and a bottomless pit of F-104 knowledge. Glad to see them ready to roll.

Broken-Wrench · **Joined:** Sun Oct 24, 2004 12:37 pm **Posts:** 1197

You see junk in a hanger I see a rebuildable carcass. Anything can be but back together. Even something like that in the hanger.. But now that they put all of that internal suspension aassemblies inside the airframe they had to have cut some structrual members and that bird will never fly again without spending some big bucks :cry:

Broken-Wrench · **Joined:** Sun Oct 24, 2004 12:37 pm **Posts:** 1197

Randy Haskin wrote:

Doesn't look like it was "perfectly good" to me...

I was expecting that answer from you! Your a pilot!!! Pilots always look at planes in maintenance like a Preacher would look at a cast off condom in the church parking lot. :lol:

Randy Haskin · **Posted:** Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:05 am

Broken-Wrench wrote:

Pilots always look at planes in maintenance like a Preacher would look at a cast off condom in the church parking lot.

Hmmmmm, interesting analogy. <raising eyebrow> I think I have to go take a shower now, though.

I agree that in today's environment, almost any airframe can be returned to fly or good enough for display....but at what cost?

N3Njeff · **Posted:** Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:19 am

I find myself tied between 2 thoughts. Its too bad that she did not get saved and preserved like at PIMA with the X-15 and the B-52. I would think that it would have made one hell of a display and a tribute to all the men who "took it to the edge". But on the other hand, she once was a chase plane. She watched something else break the records, now she has been saved to make a attempt of her own record. I think thats pretty neat opon itself.

Eric Friedebach · **Posted:** Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:12 am

I posted this last fall. For whatever reason, it fell through the cracks.

Eric Friedebach wrote:

Stephen J. Mraz, Editor, Machine Design Magazine

Converting a Mach 2 jet fighter into the fastest car in the world is not as easy as it sounds.

When experienced racer Ed Shadle and aircraft plant manager Keith Zanghi caught wind of a junked F-104 Starfighter airframe and fuselage sitting in an aircraft dealer's hangar in Maine, the idea of breaking the world land speed record seemed a no-brainer. They'd just take the wingless 1950's fighter, slap a simple but reliable five-wheel suspension under it, and then find and install a version of the aircraft's original jet engine. After all, the airframe and skin, as well as the engine, were designed for Mach 2.2.

Complete Article

Shay · **Posted:** Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:26 am

Col. Rohr wrote:

So yea then I know about this airframe didn't realize the history of the aircraft and I'm guessing neither did Steve.

RER

I bet you're right about that. They didn't even know about the history of the Starfighter until after they brought it home and did some research.

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis

bdk · **Joined:** Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am **Posts:** 11324

So where is the rocket?

dbrown · **Posted:** Sun Jun 04, 2006 11:42 am

If they are going to go to Mach 1+ I would think those rear tires would not cut it. :shock:

I always thought the rail type tire (skinny, hard compound) would be needed for speeds that high. Also interesting to note that they have not integrated vertical stabs with the wheel units (like Craig did).

But hey - I have not run at Bonneville either. :wink:

Derek

airnutz · **Posted:** Sun Jun 04, 2006 2:16 pm

dbrown wrote:

If they are going to go to Mach 1+ I would think those rear tires would not cut it. :shock:

I always thought the rail type tire (skinny, hard compound) would be needed for speeds that high. Also interesting to note that they have not integrated vertical stabs with the wheel units (like Craig did).

But hey - I have not run at Bonneville either. :wink:

Derek

If you're referring to the rubber tires going Mach, then you are correct. The
rubber ones, which I believe the website stated, are original 104 tires and
used only for low speed runs. For high speed and record attempt they use
machined aluminium billet wheels. The ThrustSSC also used the machined
aluminium...alot of engineering study went into the solid wheels.

True, Breedlove's machine was a more attractive treatment of fairing-in
the rear suspension. There are few detail photos of the rear suspension the Eagle.
From what I've seen the assembly seems to be basically an A-frame, kinda
spindly, narrow and "dirty"...IMO..but I'm not an engineer, nor have I been to Bonneville.
I wonder what the parasitic drag numbers are comparing Spirit of America's
aerodynamic appearance versus the NA Eagle's design?

Warbird Information Exchange

F104 Rocket Car...

Who is online