P-51's in movie "Empire of the Sun"

I was watching "Empire of the Sun" the other night and near the end some
P-51's attack the Japanese base. What struck me was that the P-51's were
flying in just a few feet above the ground and dropping their bombs. Would
this really have been done? How did the planes keep from blowing themselves
up?

This seems pretty routine in contemporary movies. It was ture I think
in Saving Private Ryan, in Windtalkers, and of course in Pearl Harbor,
where a P-40 chases a Zero down a street, about the level of the
second-story windows.

Of course at one time or another, planes flew at every altitude right
down to impact. The artistic failure is to take the exceptional and
make it routine.

Great movie, by the way--Empire of the Sun, I mean. But did you notice
that the entire tail section of the "Zero" turned? Probably it was an
AT-6 with a pointy tail cone pasted on.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

yes i did, and what about young jim, managing to get in so close to the
planes?? he's a prisoner right, whats going on there??
I liked frank and basie!! well played parts; jim gets into the mens dorm,
and says to frank ina yankee accent, "Hey, how ya doin' frank", i found that
quite funny!!
yep a good film.
In pearl harbor, how come suddenly the whole USA war effert revolves around
the two good friends??
I got the feeling that if we'd lost either of them too soon in the film, the
war was lost and the japs would have won!! ridiculous i know but you what i
mean!
"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...

I was watching "Empire of the Sun" the other night and near the end some
P-51's attack the Japanese base. What struck me was that the P-51's were
flying in just a few feet above the ground and dropping their bombs.
Would
this really have been done? How did the planes keep from blowing
themselves
up?

This seems pretty routine in contemporary movies. It was ture I think
in Saving Private Ryan, in Windtalkers, and of course in Pearl Harbor,
where a P-40 chases a Zero down a street, about the level of the
second-story windows.

Of course at one time or another, planes flew at every altitude right
down to impact. The artistic failure is to take the exceptional and
make it routine.

Great movie, by the way--Empire of the Sun, I mean. But did you notice
that the entire tail section of the "Zero" turned? Probably it was an
AT-6 with a pointy tail cone pasted on.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Cub Driver wrote:

Great movie, by the way--Empire of the Sun, I mean. But did you notice
that the entire tail section of the "Zero" turned? Probably it was an
AT-6 with a pointy tail cone pasted on.

This makes me wonder just what sort of "modifications" are
typically done by Hollywood to create actual flying aircraft
no longer in existence, or just not available to fly.

Obviously, the main "trick" is simply paint the aircraft in
the correct national markings. Thus a P-51 becomes an Me 109,
an AT-6 a Zero (seems the most common role for a Texan in a
movie). Some F-86s can become "Migs", and I vaguely recall
a C-47 becoming a G4M Betty at one time.

JN-4 "Jennies" served as German and British/US fighters in the
WWI movies of the 20's and 30's. Just a splash of paint and
a roundel made it a Sopwith Camel, or a black cross and it was
a "Fokker".

I believe in "Memphis Belle" a B-17G was converted to an F by
actual removal of the nose turret. Addition of a tail cone
to make an AT-6 into a Zero seems more than necessary, but
some directors are detail focused.

Then of course there are "faux warbird" props. Even during
WWII when the real thing might have been available, you often
see some dummied up aircraft. I think John Wayne in "Flying
Tigers" had some plywood P-40s with propellers that would
lazily spin trying to imitate a squadron cranking up for an
intercept. I think the BoB TV movie "Piece of Cake" used
some dummied up Spits for ground scenes as well. Didn't some
of them spin props too?

Of course with the increasing power of F/X in movies, you can
now film formations worth of Me 262s attacking B-24s or
whatever. The need for the actual warbird is pretty much gone.


SMH

On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:10:07 -0500, Stephen Harding wrote:
Cub Driver wrote:

Great movie, by the way--Empire of the Sun, I mean. But did you notice
that the entire tail section of the "Zero" turned? Probably it was an
AT-6 with a pointy tail cone pasted on.

This makes me wonder just what sort of "modifications" are
typically done by Hollywood to create actual flying aircraft
no longer in existence, or just not available to fly.

Obviously, the main "trick" is simply paint the aircraft in
the correct national markings. Thus a P-51 becomes an Me 109,
an AT-6 a Zero (seems the most common role for a Texan in a
movie). Some F-86s can become "Migs", and I vaguely recall
a C-47 becoming a G4M Betty at one time.

The most famous modified aircraft of this type are probably the
faux Japanese aircraft used to film the 1970 movie "Tora, Tora,
Tora!" I recently saw the movie again on cable, and it looked
to me like pretty much all of the flying sequences used real
aircraft (as opposed to models -- CGI animation obviously
wasn't a possibility in the late Sixties.)

According to the web page of the Commemorative (nee Confederate)
Air Force's Gulf Coast Wing [1], which owns and operates 14 of the
aircraft that were used to film the movie, the Zeros were modified
AT-6 Texans, the Val dive bombers were modified BT-13 Valiants,
and the Kate torpedo bombers were combinations of AT-6 and BT-13
components "with lots of stretching and modifying both types."

The web page also mentions that the CAF is currently modifying
another AT-6 to look like a Zero to add to their airshow act.

... Addition of a tail cone to make an AT-6 into a Zero
seems more than necessary, but some directors are detail
focused.

The "Tora, Tora, Tora!" AT-6s were modified to change the
general shape of the wingtips and tail surfaces to match
the Zero's silhouette, and were fitted with replacement
canopies (the T-6 canopy looks nothing like a Zero's.)

On the other hand, some movie directors don't really care --
see, for example, "Iron Eagle II", which gets points for
using real aircraft and air-to-air photography, but loses
them big time for painting red stars on Israeli Air Force
F-4 Phantoms and calling them "MiG"s.

I think the BoB TV movie "Piece of Cake" used some dummied up
Spits for ground scenes as well. Didn't some
of them spin props too?

"Tora, Tora, Tora!" features a number of P-40s and PBYs
getting blowed up good on the ground during the attack.
I assume the P-40s were mockups. Dunno about the PBYs -
it might have been cheaper and easier to use real junked
PBYs from some boneyard somewhere than to build full-sized
mockups.

Of course with the increasing power of F/X in movies, you can
now film formations worth of Me 262s attacking B-24s or
whatever. The need for the actual warbird is pretty much gone.

Maybe, maybe not. The CGI animated flying sequences in
"Pearl Harbor" look pretty lame compared to the flying
sequences in "Tora, Tora, Tora!" While it's true that
you'd have no other choice than CGI if you had to have
a scene that showed large formations of B-17s and German
fighters all at once, real aircraft and air-to-air photography
still give you better looking footage (in my opinion, anyway.)

CGI sequences aren't cost-free, either. Look at "Pearl Harbor" --
they could have used CGI to produce realistic WWII destroyers being
bombed at anchor, but instead opted to set off a bunch of pyro effects
on the decks of several real decommissioned Spruance-class destroyers.


ljd

[1] http://www.gulfcoastwing.org/torapage.htm

Maybe, maybe not. The CGI animated flying sequences in
"Pearl Harbor" look pretty lame compared to the flying
sequences in "Tora, Tora, Tora!"

That's certainly my feeling. When I see a contemporary movie (Saving
Private Ryan, Windtalkers, Hamburger Hill?, even Pearl Harbor) and
watch the fighters come buzzing in, I feel as though I had been
transported into Flight Simulator. They just don't look real. Pearl
Harbor did a pretty good job with this, because in each case I think
there was an actual plane, which was multiplied by computer tricks.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

On the other hand, some movie directors don't really care --

The director of "Midway" for example. Too many bloopers to mention.

For example: Ensign Gay shown flying an SB2U *Dive* bomber, not a
TBD *torpedo* bomber; but when he was shot down, it miraculously
turned into an F6F.

Charleton Heston's kid flies an F4F but lands (badly) an F6F.

Etcetera Etcetera Etcetera.

vince norris

"Tora, Tora, Tora!" features a number of P-40s and PBYs
getting blowed up good on the ground during the attack.
I assume the P-40s were mockups. Dunno about the PBYs -
it might have been cheaper and easier to use real junked
PBYs from some boneyard somewhere than to build full-sized
mockups.

The P-40s were mock ups. If you look real closely at several that explode you
will see the fiberglass skin come off revealing a steel tube fuselage. Sadly,
the PBYs were genuine and original flying boat variants as well. There are now
probably only three or four flying boat versions left as opposed to the A for
amphibian variant.

John Dupre'

..... as opposed to the A for amphibian variant.

I had never heard that. I thought the "A" merely meant the first mod
of the "5" model. Do you mean, literally, the A stood for
"amphibian"?

vince norris

In article ,
vincent p. norris writes:
..... as opposed to the A for amphibian variant.

I had never heard that. I thought the "A" merely meant the first mod
of the "5" model. Do you mean, literally, the A stood for
"amphibian"?

Well, since it's the Navy, and they couldn'b be like abyone else, it's
one of those "That Depends" things again.

For example, the Amphibian models of the PBY and PBM flying boats were
the PBY-5A and the PBM-5A.

But the F4U-1 Corsair with the bulged canopy was an F4U-1A.
(And the version with 4 cannons was an F4U-1D).

An uprated engine was usually signified by an 'F' tacked on, but not
always.

Fighter Bombers got a 'B' for a suffix.
Radar carrying airplanes gor an 'E'.
Night Fighters/Bombers got an 'N'.
ASW airplanes got an 'S'.
Elint airplanes got a 'Q'.

But it wasn't always consistant. An F6F-5E was a Night Fighter, and
an PBM-3E was an ASW Patrol Bomber.


--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

Fighter Bombers got a 'B' for a suffix.
Radar carrying airplanes gor an 'E'.
Night Fighters/Bombers got an 'N'.
ASW airplanes got an 'S'.
Elint airplanes got a 'Q'.

But it wasn't always consistant. An F6F-5E was a Night Fighter, and
an PBM-3E was an ASW Patrol Bomber.

No wonder McNamara decided to take this problem in hand!

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com