F-104 Starfighter - Semi Scale (BT-60 + 3D printed Parts + Plywood Fins - BT-80 is next)

[BigMacDaddy]

The last couple of weeks I have spent a good bit of time on the F-104 (for those that did not see this on FB). I started with a BT-80 version but quickly shifted down to a BT-60 version so I could more quickly protoype and test for stability. BT-60 prototype is ready to fly but some storms are pushing the maiden launch till Sunday.

I am pretty pleased with how this is coming out and OR suggests that it does not need too much nose weight to be stable. I already made a number of revisions but definitely improving how I make plane-style nose cones. Ramjets took the most time - partly since I upped the resolution of the parts used in the print so more processing power but less sanding / smoothing of parts.



There are so many cool paint schemes and variations for this plane...


Earlier versions of ramjet. I wanted to avoid a seem in the outer shell and also wanted easy assembly / easy printing (not to mention scale accuracy -- for example, the front portion of the ramjet is away from the airframe). I definitely want this model to be better looking / more impressive than the current models that are on the market.

I also tweaked the nosecone canopy...


People have requested the NASA version so I guess I am going to create the top booster part as an optional add-on.

 

[NOLA_BAR]

I would definitely be interested in the BT-80 NASA version!

 

[NOLA_BAR]

Also, have you looked at using the 2.5” Pro Series tubing as an alternative to the BT-80?

 

[BigMacDaddy]

Also, have you looked at using the 2.5” Pro Series tubing as an alternative to the BT-80?

Yes, as a matter of fact have some coming in the mail so I can size for both. My understanding is that the ID is the same but the OD is different. I already put slightly larger edges on my 3D printed parts than the tubes they fit in since I think it looks better than if they wind up undersized so I would tentatively plan to size 3D parts to be flush with 2.6" tubes which would make them slightly larger than BT-80 but should look ok (need to test).

 

[BigMacDaddy]

I would definitely be interested in the BT-80 NASA version!

Other than the extra booster is there anything else that I need to change? Very open to feedback!!

 

[NOLA_BAR]

I never realized how good this would look.

I think it looks cleaner without the booster.
This one looks like it had wing tip pylons.

 

[KenECoyote]

I never realized how good this would look.
View attachment 551301
I think it looks cleaner without the booster.
This one looks like it had wing tip pylons.

View attachment 551306

THAT is actually the paint I had recently settled on for an upcoming Fat Cats F104 build. I think it would look incredible as a rocket and also be a great compliment to my 4" HP X-15.

 

[BigMacDaddy]

If anyone is looking for paint scheme variants there are a bunch on this page -- https://www.i-f-s.nl/f-104-types/

I like the Red Baron scheme...

 

[KenECoyote]

Earlier I was seriously considering this scheme and even bought the Monogram kit to copy the decals.

However choosing a paint for this plane is the toughest I've had yet of any rocket. There are also the shiny metal versions which would be amazing to copy. Too many great choices!

 

[Cape Byron]

People have requested the NASA version so I guess I am going to create the top booster part as an optional add-on.

Just sayin'...

 

[markschnell]

I know you're not asking for names yet, but when you do I want on the list. I'd kind of like the BT-60 version, just for storage space reasons.

 

[neil_w]

Just sayin'...

View attachment 551321

Man, that thing is bizarre even by Gerry Anderson standards.

 

[Cape Byron]

Man, that thing is bizarre even by Gerry Anderson standards.

I know. Isn't it brilliant?

I've been obsessed by this since I was a kid (AKA A really long time).

I'll just put this link here for anyone who has 45 minutes to waste...

 

[sriegel]

I would love one in this scheme! I was stationed at Ghedi AB for a couple of years.

Diavoli Rossi!

 

[mjennings]

Great looking build so far! The 104 is a fantastic open canvas. So many cool paint schemes. I did my Odd'l kit in the white and blue NASA scheme.

Mostly my F-18 build but has pics of the F-104 too https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/oddl-f-18.172031/#post-2294226

 

[NOLA_BAR]

Great looking build so far! The 104 is a fantastic open canvas. So many cool paint schemes. I did my Odd'l kit in the white and blue NASA scheme.

Mostly my F-18 build but has pics of the F-104 too https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/oddl-f-18.172031/#post-2294226

Yes, I agree. It would really hard to go wrong with any paint scheme.

I really like it with pods on the wing tips.

 

[jmasterj]

I really like wing tip pods. The Sidewinders also look good.

 

[BigMacDaddy]

Had a pretty successful launch today of this model. It was windy so the model windcocked right off the rail but then flew pretty straight after that initial adjustment (all my rockets windcocked today but wound up landing pretty close to us after their drift back during decent). Launched on a C5-3 with just .5oz in nosecone.



Here is the video:

 

[KenECoyote]

Great flight!

 

[BigMacDaddy]

This is definitely a labor of love... Lots of iterations over the last week or so... I think I have finalized my NASA version of this plane...



I was actually able to squeeze a 24mm motor mount in there (much more of a pain than you might think) and extended the tail a little bit to allow anything up to an E engine in this small plane / rocket. Looks like you need about 2oz of weight in nose if you want to launch with an E12-6.


The NASA version can also add a plugged mini engine in that top pod. It is on a slight angle per the prototype so more or less aims through the CG so may be possible -- although definitely OVERKILL!


Finally, I also streamlined the nosecone to be more prototypical...

 

[Cape Byron]

The NASA version can also add a plugged mini engine in that top pod. It is on a slight angle per the prototype so more or less aims through the CG so may be possible -- although definitely OVERKILL!

Overkill/options. Depends on your attitude.

 

[gsitexas]

Definitely go "optional" with the booster, the F-104 looks much better without it.

Please include me on the list for this kit, any idea when it might be offered?

 

[BigMacDaddy]

Definitely go "optional" with the booster, the F-104 looks much better without it.

Please include me on the list for this kit, any idea when it might be offered?

Thanks so much for your interest and feedback.

Yes, I am doing two different versions of the boat tail and vertical tail fin to allow people to get either the NASA variant or the normal F-104. I am hoping to get the kit listed tomorrow so that I can ship them out right after Christmas.

I will post a note here once it is listed!

 

[les]

You know, all of these great new kits are making a serious dent in my budget...

 

[Bill S]

I am interested in one of the BT-80 versions when they become available.

 

[burkefj]

Looks great, I'm also in for a BT-80 version, I much prefer the single cockpit nose than the bubble double type, and that NASA white blue scheme is my favorite, there is on in the Seattle Museum of flight like that, but the classic silver/orange/yellow is also great.

 

[gsitexas]

I'm also interested in a BT-80 version.

 

[BABAR]

Overkill/options. Depends on your attitude.

“Overkill” is not a term applicable to a fighter jet. Good rocket name though!

If you load a 13mm in the NASA version, I suspect will need some counter-nose weight?

Does the motor need to be plugged or will it be ejected or vented?

 

[BigMacDaddy]

“Overkill” is not a term applicable to a fighter jet. Good rocket name though!

If you load a 13mm in the NASA version, I suspect will need some counter-nose weight?

Does the motor need to be plugged or will it be ejected or vented?

Haha... I was just looking at the 24mm E12-6 + A10PT and thinking about how much power that was compared to the C5-3 I launched on.

I will try to finish building the NASA version and see how much nose weight is needed to get CG in the same place as the other version.

Yes, needs to be a plugged engine. I think it might eject itself if there was an ejection but it might also light the vertical fin on fire since it butts up against that.

 

[BigMacDaddy]