If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"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' |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
..... 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 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Cub Driver writes: 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! Legend has it that the Great Designation MacNafit took place after he'd gone in fromt of Congress to tout the various merits of the C-130 over teh Marine Corps GV-1. He rattled on for an hour or so, until somebody pointed out to him that they were the same airplane. (ANd I wonder the the USCG's R8V-1 came in as well). Since he hated to be humiliated, especially by himself, (and he does have a lot to be humble about) he decreed that the designation systems be merged, so that he couldn't do it again. (Or you can substitute the F4H/F-110 if you'd rather.) It's a great story, but I'm sure rality is somewhat different, (and a lot more dull) -- Pete Stickney A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures. -- Daniel Webster |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
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). But weren't the letters A, B, C. D, assigned in alphabetical order, to successive mods? An uprated engine was usually signified by an 'F' tacked on, but not always. Even if the preceding mod was an A or a B? Are you saying the Navy jumped over the C, D, and E? What if the preceding mod was up to G, or H; did they go back to F? But it wasn't always consistant. An F6F-5E was a Night Fighter, Was that not because the preceding mod was the F6F-5D? and an PBM-3E was an ASW Patrol Bomber. And did that follow the PBM-3D? Thanks. vince norris |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cold War: The War For American Empire | Krztalizer | Military Aviation | 2 | March 15th 04 12:45 AM |
Cargo plane in movie "Flying Tigers" | John Fitzpatrick | Military Aviation | 5 | October 26th 03 09:46 PM |
French block airlift of British troops to Basra | Michael Petukhov | Military Aviation | 202 | October 24th 03 06:48 PM |
Flying Fortress Movie | L'acrobat | Military Aviation | 0 | July 1st 03 12:42 AM |