I got the number wrong. However, I do recall comments about what Shrub
flew not being particularly safe.

Jase Vanover wrote:
I've always heard that the F-104 was a superb aircraft for what it was
designed for (high speed, high altitude intercept), but by the time it was
operational the needs had changed, and the attempts to adapt it to the needs
of the time played to it's weaknesses.

It was freakin' fast (first plane capable of sustained Mach 2+), and held
records of the day for altitude and time to climb. I've seen a parked one
at the museum in Ottawa, Canada. Smallish in nature, but hot lines... a
looker and real "sports car."

The "missle with the man in it" is indeed an interesting, if not
particularly successful aircraft.

wrote in message
oups.com...
You can get statistics on each individual plane in terms of accidents
per hour.

http://afsafety.af.mil/ is the main page
You probably want this page
http://afsafety.af.mil/AFSC/RDBMS/Fl...aft_stats.html

This is the website where you file FOIAs to get crash information. Lots
of sleaze-bags on the net charge for this information.

Shrub flew the F-104. It is really an intercept aircraft, so it
wouldn't be likely to see a dog fight, especially in Alabama. In
Shrub's favor, while it would be the plane of choice to fly in the
theater if you didn't want to see action, the F-104 was a deathtrap
compared to other aircraft, strictly from an operational standpoint.

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 18:18:36 GMT, "gatt"
wrote in
::

Anybody have any leads to reputable information about fighter pilot
fatality
statistics?

For example, in terms of miles, is commuting more dangerous than flying
a
fighter plane? (I say no, many say yes.)

Context: Can a Coward Become a Fighter Pilot? (Yeah, I know. That's
so
2000.)

I'll bet lots of folks who frequent rec.aviation.military can respond
to your inquiry. I'll crosspost this followup there for you.