Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Every German Tank is a Tiger

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Stitch View Post
    The "Tiger" in the first three adverts is all wrong; wrong fenders, wrong tracks (they look like T-34 tracks), split commanders hatch (the Tiger NEVER had a split commander's hatch); at least they got the sights right. The last ones look okay: correct tracks, fenders, muzzle brake, etc.
    I love the way we all think along these lines. Not knowing armor for crap, I would watch a movie like this and never object. But put in some aircraft, and it's "Hey! That's a P-51D model... Too early in the war, it should be a B!!" The worst was Top Gun's "MiG-28" or whatever it was, a painted F-5.

    Attached Files

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Chogy View Post
      I love the way we all think along these lines. Not knowing armor for crap, I would watch a movie like this and never object. But put in some aircraft, and it's "Hey! That's a P-51D model... Too early in the war, it should be a B!!" The worst was Top Gun's "MiG-28" or whatever it was, a painted F-5.

      [ATTACH=CONFIG]29449[/ATTACH]
      Not to mention that all MiGs had odd numbers and there was never such thing as MiG 28.
      No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

      To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Chogy View Post
        The worst was Top Gun's "MiG-28" or whatever it was, a painted F-5.

        [ATTACH=CONFIG]29449[/ATTACH]
        You've shattered my perceptions.

        Add countless journo op ed's getting the wrong name for the aircraft pictured (really basic) in the MASS media by 'credible publications', to soapies like Pensacola Wings of whatever (they seem to swap magically between F-14's and F-15's)
        Ego Numquam

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Chunder View Post
          You've shattered my perceptions.

          Add countless journo op ed's getting the wrong name for the aircraft pictured (really basic) in the MASS media by 'credible publications', to soapies like Pensacola Wings of whatever (they seem to swap magically between F-14's and F-15's)
          I was in the Eagle when Top Gun was a cultural phenomenon. It irritated us to no end when people would say "Is that an F-14?" "No, it's an F-15..." "Oh." and their faces drop and they lose interest. Worse would be the comments like "I bet you WISH it was an F-14" "Uh, no, not really. When we fight them, they usually apologize in the debrief for not putting up a better fight." That doesn't go over well.

          I think I mentioned this before... at airshow static displays, the Tomcat would draw all the pimply pubescent teen boys, leaving the hot young things around our jets. The Navy boys were herding cats and dealing with inane questions while we were asked to autograph various tender skin areas with a sharpie marker. Fine memories!

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Chogy View Post
            The worst was Top Gun's "MiG-28" or whatever it was, a painted F-5.[ATTACH=CONFIG]29449[/ATTACH]
            I dunno, I thought they did a pretty good job with what they had on hand.

            The real Fighter Weapons School guys were asked by the producers for advice on an adversary aircraft for the movie, having a choice of the A-4 or the F-5.

            They quickly recommended the F-5 for it's shark-like menacing looks. That all-black scheme with silver accents was quite effective on-screen. They even kept that paint scheme for several years after the filming was completed.

            Chogy, I think I might have asked you about this already but...
            Did you ever mix it up with an F-14D? If so, was it more of a challenge than the A model?
            “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Chogy View Post
              I was in the Eagle when Top Gun was a cultural phenomenon. It irritated us to no end when people would say "Is that an F-14?" "No, it's an F-15..." "Oh." and their faces drop and they lose interest. Worse would be the comments like "I bet you WISH it was an F-14" "Uh, no, not really. When we fight them, they usually apologize in the debrief for not putting up a better fight." That doesn't go over well.
              Heh, well, Tom Cruise is now just a discredited nutjob scientologist who sat on the ground while you got a magnificent canopy to look out over the world. These days you actually do something useful, Tom doesn't. Back then I envied guys like you that had the brains and the physique to do that job. These days I wish I had done that job, really wish.
              Ego Numquam

              Comment


              • #52
                Chunder,

                You can repeat how TC is a nutjob, crackhead or whatever (and it might be true in 99% of the cases), but Top Gun did a great job on propaganda level, be it "USA has the best AF in the world" or recruitment for new pilots.
                No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                  Not to mention that all MiGs had odd numbers and there was never such thing as MiG 28.
                  But...can it pull negative 4 G?
                  "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                    Chunder,

                    You can repeat how TC is a nutjob, crackhead or whatever (and it might be true in 99% of the cases), but Top Gun did a great job on propaganda level, be it "USA has the best AF in the world" or recruitment for new pilots.
                    For the U.S. Military, I think the 1980's were our finest decade in a number of ways. It all flowed from Reagan, and the attitude that became more common among USA folk. It was finally cool to be patriotic once again. While the ghost of Vietnam will never fully go away, at least by then, it was behind us far enough so that we could be proud of our work.

                    We had the budget, all the services had fantastic new hardware, an "enemy" we understood in the USSR, and it culminated in the superb success of Desert Storm.

                    Top Gun was so successful, the Navy had recruiting booths set up outside theaters. I wonder how many high school boys signed on the line thinking they'd be piloting a Tomcat tout suite.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by gunnut View Post
                      But...can it pull negative 4 G?
                      That's classified.
                      No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                      To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Meanwhile Dok, the only thing your piloting is a wheelie bin full of rabid dog $hit out of Skopje.

                        :p Sorry, couldn't resist.
                        Ego Numquam

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          My piloting? Arghhh...















                          Edit: You are aware we are talking Top Gun here? Just checking :P
                          Last edited by Doktor; 30 Aug 12,, 13:24.
                          No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                          To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Chogy, I think I might have asked you about this already but...
                            Did you ever mix it up with an F-14D? If so, was it more of a challenge than the A model?
                            I don't think I ever did. Even the A model was nicely agile, but it simply lacked energy. When maneuvering vs an agile, but low energy opponent, use of the vertical almost guarantees victory, but that was in an artificial environment of either AIM-9P equivalent, and/or even AIM-9L/M using seeker slave to radar line of sight.

                            The kinematics and seeker limits of the AIM-9X are a generation beyond the L/M. To put it in a simple way, there is a cone pointing forward where a missile can be successfully fired, and the AIM-9X cone is extremely wide. This means even an energy-limited opponent can put a missile in the air, and is one of many factors contributing to the death of the traditional maneuvering fight.

                            The T-38 looks menacing, but the reality is sadly different. It is about the same as an F-4D, a hard-wing F-4. The F-5E with slats improves things a bit, but the wing loading is too high, and the thrust too low, for any of that family to be an outstanding turning machine.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Doktor View Post



                              Edit: You are aware we are talking Top Gun here? Just checking :P
                              I want some butt, I want it now! Argh! God Damnit!

                              You mean to say you don't remember "keep this up and the only thing you'll be piloting is a harbour tug full of rabid dog $hit out of Hong Kong"?
                              Ego Numquam

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                ^^ I think it was a "cargo plane out of Hong Kong" but otherwise spot on!

                                I chucked at that scene... tossing Mav and Goose to Top Gun while chewing them out for flight discipline. I don't know how the Navy does it, but the AF equivalent, fighter weapons school guys, the "target arms", were chosen only after years of scrutiny for stability, skills, but more than anything else, only those who have an innate ability to teach others ever goes there, because their mission is to take what they've learned and instruct others.

                                That said, I think 2 of the 4 guys in the first four-ship to sweep over Baghdad were target arms.

                                Attached Files
                                Last edited by Chogy; 30 Aug 12,, 14:38.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X