A-10 Warthog-AKA-Thunderbolt II-Tank Buster

[edyvw]

Sure. I have heard of cases where there was a ton of cooperation with military in the making of a movie, or at least with some sort of expert who would ostensibly say "No that is not how it works." There was the infamous "Glock 7" from Die Hard 2, where their armorer saw the script and said it was wrong in so many ways. When the Secret Service cooperated making In the Line of Fire, they were trying to persuade the producers not to portray an attempt on the President. I'm sure when the US Navy cooperated with Top Gun, they weren't too happy about showing Maverick recklessly buzzing the tower.

The last one seemed to have a lot of coverage, including stories about how residents in the surrounding neighborhoods in San Diego were complaining about the noise. I've been there and heard some noise from routine operations, but I'm pretty sure flying that low to the ground is not normal at a military base unless there's an airshow. Heck - we had a situation a few years ago where a pilot was flying back to NAS Lemoore before being transferred to a different unit. He flew over Berkeley and told his brother (a UC Berkeley graduate student) to expect it. Not sure what the final disposition was, but there was a ton of PR trying to explain it.

Still - some of that stuff in "Sky Hunter" is not just unlikely (like buzzing the tower) but impossible such as surviving an intentional collision with another aircraft that shears off the cockpit. And a damaged canopy cracking like it's made out of glass. I would have thought the technical advisors would have told them that canopies aren't made of glass.

Military cooperation does not mean script. Top Gun had heavy involvement of Navy, to the point where Paramount was yelling at Scott about money they were spending on flying F14's. But military is not incharge of script. Script sells movies. Reality is not important here. Same goes for propaganda. Top Gun was business, but turned into propaganda too. When movie was about to be released Pentagon was thinking to run Navy ad before movie in theaters, until someone stood up and said: people, we have 2hrs of free propaganda, what ad? Astro can probably attest to number of people who joined bcs. Top Gun.
"Behind Enemy Lines" was based loosely on Scott O'Grady shot down. Except, O'Grady was shoot down bcs. he was/is dumb. There are numerous articles about that, and his decisions before flight (what he was wearing), how he was shot down, etc. My friend was pilot that O'Grady replaced that day on "no fly zone" patrol over Bosnia and there is actually even more to it. But movie had to be about all American hero, and had to make money, regardless of military involvement. What will USAF say? "Let's make a movie how he had only t-shirt under flight suit?" It is business, military is there for Hollywood not to kill anyone. And Pentagon sometimes decides not to participate in movies bcs. controversial issue etc.
In China, movie has to be sanctioned by a party, and if movie is about how great China is? Heck, they will make SU-27 go to the Moon in the movie.

 

[edyvw]

Hopefully we can all agree this article's lead pic is plain awesome. And several with an A-1 Skyraider painted in Vietnam-era camo, too.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...cially-painted-a-10-warthogs-is-mind-boggling

USAF made probably the ugliest (A10) and the most beautiful plane (F16) around same time. Once I was in Pensacola NAS with some frinds watching Blue Angels, and Czech pilot said: man, this F16 is like Enzo Ferrari designed it.

 

[y_p_w]

USAF made probably the ugliest (A10) and the most beautiful plane (F16) around same time. Once I was in Pensacola NAS with some frinds watching Blue Angels, and Czech pilot said: man, this F16 is like Enzo Ferrari designed it.

Wouldn't that be Pininfarina? I say that considering the focus of this website.

 

[y_p_w]

Military cooperation does not mean script. Top Gun had heavy involvement of Navy, to the point where Paramount was yelling at Scott about money they were spending on flying F14's. But military is not incharge of script. Script sells movies. Reality is not important here. Same goes for propaganda. Top Gun was business, but turned into propaganda too. When movie was about to be released Pentagon was thinking to run Navy ad before movie in theaters, until someone stood up and said: people, we have 2hrs of free propaganda, what ad? Astro can probably attest to number of people who joined bcs. Top Gun.
"Behind Enemy Lines" was based loosely on Scott O'Grady shot down. Except, O'Grady was shoot down bcs. he was/is dumb. There are numerous articles about that, and his decisions before flight (what he was wearing), how he was shot down, etc. My friend was pilot that O'Grady replaced that day on "no fly zone" patrol over Bosnia and there is actually even more to it. But movie had to be about all American hero, and had to make money, regardless of military involvement. What will USAF say? "Let's make a movie how he had only t-shirt under flight suit?" It is business, military is there for Hollywood not to kill anyone. And Pentagon sometimes decides not to participate in movies bcs. controversial issue etc.
In China, movie has to be sanctioned by a party, and if movie is about how great China is? Heck, they will make SU-27 go to the Moon in the movie.

Didn't the production company that made Top Gun basically only pay for the cost of fuel, as the Navy knew it would be a pretty big recruiting tool.

Of course they don't want to show the boring stuff that all officers have to do. My comment on Behind Enemy Lines was more about the missile. I haven't seen the whole thing but I think I saw bits and pieces including the SAM that takes forever. What I was getting at was that that showed a SAM chasing down a plane for about 90 seconds.

However, the PLAAF had their logo on one of the title pages. Still - this wasn't their first rodeo. That was Sky Fighters from 2011. For some reason they're in love with the cobra maneuver.

 

[edyvw]

I really do not know whether Paramount paid only fuel. Possibly, I guess.
As for Behind ENemy Lines, that missile launcher they showed in the movie is BOV, that is armed with Strela 2M/A or Igla missiles. So 90 seconds, range of some 5km, max 6km for Igla, speed of some 450m/s for Strela or some 550m/s for Igla. So, 90x some 500m/s you get 45km of chasing action with a missile that has range of 5-6km

 

[y_p_w]

I really do not know whether Paramount paid only fuel. Possibly, I guess.
As for Behind ENemy Lines, that missile launcher they showed in the movie is BOV, that is armed with Strela 2M/A or Igla missiles. So 90 seconds, range of some 5km, max 6km for Igla, speed of some 450m/s for Strela or some 550m/s for Igla. So, 90x some 500m/s you get 45km of chasing action with a missile that has range of 5-6km

Well - I thought that most missiles are out of propellant within seconds and will coast. Top Gun got it right when a missile didn't hit and just passed its target.

 

[edyvw]

Well - I thought that most missiles are out of propellant within seconds and will coast. Top Gun got it right when a missile didn't hit and just passed its target.

I am nit sure what is harder to watch there, that “chase” or Owen Wilson.

 

[y_p_w]

Just wondering why there hasn't been a movie about the A-10? I know there are bit parts, but heck - the A-6 got its own movie.

 

[edyvw]

Wouldn't that be Pininfarina? I say that considering the focus of this website.

Well, pilot was just making statement to emphasize how beautiful plane was.

 

[Astro14]

Just wondering why there hasn't been a movie about the A-10? I know there are bit parts, but heck - the A-6 got its own movie.

After Top Gun was released, bumper stickers at the Oceana (Home of both F-14s and A-6s at the time) O’Club said:

“Fighter guys make movies, Attack guys make history”

Then, Flight of the Intruder (awesome book, terrible movie) was released. New bumper stickers appeared.

“Fighter guys make movies, Attack guys make sh**** movies”

 

[Jetronic]

That’s so awful it’s unwatchable. Unless, perhaps, you’re a teenager with zero understanding of tactical aviation.

It's like that in every movie. Trains that don't act like real trains, cars that aren't cars, elevators that have no safeties etc...

 

[ArrestMeRedZ]

After Top Gun was released, bumper stickers at the Oceana (Home of both F-14s and A-6s at the time) O’Club said:

“Fighter guys make movies, Attack guys make history”

Then, Flight of the Intruder (awesome book, terrible movie) was released. New bumper stickers appeared.

“Fighter guys make movies, Attack guys make sh**** movies”

You guys got Top Gun. Us Air Force guys got "Red Flag: The Movie" with William Devane. I like the actor, but the movie was terrible. If we didn't have recruiting problems after that, we should have.

 

[edyvw]

You guys got Top Gun. Us Air Force guys got "Red Flag: The Movie" with William Devane. I like the actor, but the movie was terrible. If we didn't have recruiting problems after that, we should have.

Well, there is shortage of recruits. Maybe movie is still resonating

 

[Astro14]

You guys got Top Gun. Us Air Force guys got "Red Flag: The Movie" with William Devane. I like the actor, but the movie was terrible. If we didn't have recruiting problems after that, we should have.

Hey, there are just so many great USAF movies, I mean, who can forget “Iron Eagle”? Flown exclusively with F-16 models on a wire...

Then there’s, um, “Firefox”, right, I mean, it was kind of USAF...or, how about “Dr. Strangelove”? I mean, James Earl Jones and Slim Pickens? Who didn’t want to be a B-52 guy after that one, right?

 

[y_p_w]

You guys got Top Gun. Us Air Force guys got "Red Flag: The Movie" with William Devane. I like the actor, but the movie was terrible. If we didn't have recruiting problems after that, we should have.

I remember his take on From Here to Eternity. Also made for TV. I was pretty young then. Had to look it up and the full TV movie is available.

 

[y_p_w]

Hey, there are just so many great USAF movies, I mean, who can forget “Iron Eagle”? Flown exclusively with F-16 models on a wire...

Then there’s, um, “Firefox”, right, I mean, it was kind of USAF...or, how about “Dr. Strangelove”? I mean, James Earl Jones and Slim Pickens? Who didn’t want to be a B-52 guy after that one, right?

Air Force One? There was that great shot of the F-15s scrambling where they dropped their external tanks. The had the cooperation of the USAF for a tour of an actual VC-25A and they got use of F-15s, although some of the scenes just looked really bad. They did show BVR missiles being used. However, they also had a scene of possibly the slowest air to air missile in the world taking 15 seconds to go less than a mile before an F-15 miraculously gets in the way.



You get some sci-fi stuff like Transformers. And then there was this mess.



The one thing I don't get is why most fighter jet movies almost always show pilots flying without their visors down. Isn't it blinding to do that? I know that it's to show the eyes of the actors, where the bad guys are faceless, but it's just a little bit weird. I've seen the trailers from Top Gun: Maverick, and they show Tom Cruise using a clear visor. At least in this scene from Aloha, the pilot brings down the visor.

 

[ZeeOSix]

^^^ She has the right Hawaii NG 199th squadron patch on the right shoulder at time 0:27, but flying scene near the end isn't Hawaii.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/199th_Fighter_Squadron

http://usafunithistory.com/PDF/0100/175-199/199 FIGHTER SQ.pdf

 

[y_p_w]

^^^ She has the right Hawaii NG 199th squadron patch on the right shoulder at time 0:27, but flying scene near the end isn't Hawaii.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/199th_Fighter_Squadron

http://usafunithistory.com/PDF/0100/175-199/199 FIGHTER SQ.pdf

It's definitely not Hickam after maybe the ground scenes. There's definitely no farmland around Hickam/HNL But they did show it on the base.

https://www.15wing.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/625294/aloha-premiers-at-jbphh/

 

[ZeeOSix]

^^^ Yeah, take off scene looked like Hickam (I've been there), but not farmland fly over.

 

[y_p_w]

^^^ Yeah, take off scene looked like Hickam (I've been there), but not farmland fly over.

Trying to figure out where it is, but it doesn't look like any place where the F-22 is based.