Memphis Belle - a realistic movie?
Tex Houston
movie. Incidentally last summer they dedicated a sculpture of a B17 at the
Air Force Academy. Bob Morgan was the guest speaker. He was the pilot and
his then girlfriend the Memphis belle.
Tex Houston (Colorado Springs)
Tom Cosgrave wrote in message <6tn08v$6ft$1...@news.indigo.ie>...
>Perhaps the WWII combat vets, (good to see your postings, wish there were
>more to speak with!) would care to give their opinions - myself I really
>liked it, but could a
>B-17F *really* come back on one engine????
>Tom Cosgrave t...@indigo.ie
>
>
>
>
>
Tom Cosgrave
more to speak with!) would care to give their opinions - myself I really
liked it, but could a
B-17F *really* come back on one engine????
Again, I'm a newbie, so excuse me if this has been asked before!
Tom
--
Tom Cosgrave t...@indigo.ie
"There's an angel on my shoulder, In my hand a sword of gold"
Houses of the Holy - Led Zeppelin
Sarah-K :- http://www.sarah.org/
The Corrs Links Page :- http://www.thecorrs.org/links/corrs.htm
ArtKramr
>Perhaps the WWII combat vets, (good to see your postings, wish there were
>more to speak with!) would care to give their opinions - myself I really
>liked it, but could a
>B-17F *really* come back on one engine????
>
>Again, I'm a newbie, so excuse me if this has been asked before!
>
>Tom
>--
>Tom Cosgrave t...@indigo.ie
The movie was total crap. It was 90% Hollywood with all the things they showed
on the mission never having taken place. Hollywood made most of it up. If you
want an idea of the real mission, see the documentray, "The Memphis Belle"
photographed on actual missions by an Air Corps camera crew.
Arthur
"...we few, we happy few, we band of brothers..."
Henry V before the battle of Agincourt
Hugh Waterman
<xxt...@indigo.ie> wrote:
|Perhaps the WWII combat vets, (good to see your postings, wish there were
|more to speak with!) would care to give their opinions - myself I really
|liked it, but could a
|B-17F *really* come back on one engine????
|
|Again, I'm a newbie, so excuse me if this has been asked before!
|
|Tom
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sure I saw "Memphis Belle" at some time in the past, but
I don't remember much about it. I guess that indicates that
I didn't think too highly of it.
About flying on one engine - scares me and I'm fearless!
With two engines, you can fly fairly normally, but those two
engines will be straining. I can substantiate 27 hours on
two engines in B-17Gs, over 30 missions. (They had pretty
good flak gunners.) If you have only one engine working,
look for a large field! The one engine will help lengthen
your flight path, but you won't maintain level flight.
I believe you were correct to doubt the movie.
Hugh W.
Mike Kopack
one mission was that bad no one would have ever come back - the movie seemed
to take all the 'incidents' of an entire tour and compress them into a single
mission.
Mike Kopack
Phantom Productions Aviation Photography
http://www.topedge.com/panels/aircraft/sites/kopack/
Tom Cosgrave wrote:
> Perhaps the WWII combat vets, (good to see your postings, wish there were
> more to speak with!) would care to give their opinions - myself I really
> liked it, but could a
> B-17F *really* come back on one engine????
>
> Again, I'm a newbie, so excuse me if this has been asked before!
>
> Tom
Dave
>
> Perhaps the WWII combat vets, (good to see your postings, wish there were
> more to speak with!) would care to give their opinions - myself I really
> liked it, but could a
> B-17F *really* come back on one engine????
>
> Again, I'm a newbie, so excuse me if this has been asked before!
>
> Tom
> --
> Tom Cosgrave t...@indigo.ie
> "There's an angel on my shoulder, In my hand a sword of gold"
> Houses of the Holy - Led Zeppelin
>
> Sarah-K :- http://www.sarah.org/
>
> The Corrs Links Page :- http://www.thecorrs.org/links/corrs.htm
What did happen in the last mission of Memphis belle
Michael Ash
He said of the movie 'Memphis Bell'
"If evrything that happened in that movie happened in one flight I would have
died of a heart attck"
Mike Kopack wrote:
> I spoke with Col. Morgan (the Belle's Pilot) about the movie. He said if
> one mission was that bad no one would have ever come back - the movie seemed
> to take all the 'incidents' of an entire tour and compress them into a single
> mission.
>
> Mike Kopack
> Phantom Productions Aviation Photography
> http://www.topedge.com/panels/aircraft/sites/kopack/
>
--
Michael Ash
Newtek Tech Support Manager
ma...@newtek.com
www.newtek.com
Gerard
<mko...@greenville.infi.net> wrote:
> I spoke with Col. Morgan (the Belle's Pilot) about the movie. He said if
> one mission was that bad no one would have ever come back . . .
Speaking of no one going back. I read somewhere that he in fact (or was it
another crew member?) volunteered to fly B-29s and actually flew bombing
missions over Japan. Yeah or nay?
Maury Markowitz
> The movie was total crap. It was 90% Hollywood with all the things they
showed
> on the mission never having taken place. Hollywood made most of it up. If
you
> want an idea of the real mission, see the documentray, "The Memphis Belle"
> photographed on actual missions by an Air Corps camera crew.
It's like they just collected all the stories they heard, even blatently
false rumors, and stuck them all into one movie. The portion with the
co-pilot going back so he could use the tail guns was particularily silly.
It wasn't even well written either. There's the scene where the pilot
"orders" the ball gunner to put on the seat belt, and you KNOW it's going to
save his life later in the movie. Uggg.
Maury
Mike Kopack
believe that he lead some of the first B-29 missions against Japan.
Mike
Gatt
> Perhaps the WWII combat vets, (good to see your postings, wish there
> were more to speak with!) would care to give their opinions - myself I
> really liked it, but could a B-17F *really* come back on one engine????
I saw this movie with my father, who was a 96th BG waist gunner until 14,
Oct 1943 and who trained and rode in F models (the 91st got his crew's
brand new plane which they had named "Outhouse Mouse" and my father and
the gang got stuck in patched up old war horses.)
He liked the movie immensely, even more than the matter-of-fact
propaganda-ish original. He pointed out a lot of technical flaws (you
can't hear flak and if you do, your ride is probably over) and the obvious
fact that that much stuff didn't go wrong on the 'Belle's final mission
and rarely happened on ANY plane. MB had more stuff technically CORRECT
than nearly all other bomber sequences made; the absence of side and radio
room windows is an example. There were no P-51s that early in the war.
What he seemed to like the most, though, was that it didn't cast the
airmen as model citizens. Like in Piece of Cake, the guys were just
guys, and assigning them with some moral and patriotic stereotype for them
to uphold on top of the sacrifice they were making already is hideously
unfair. The dry radio-esque discussions over the interphone in the
documentary were less accurate than the panic, fear and hostility that
was better demonstrated in the Hollywood version. What 20-year-old gunner
amped on adrenalin WOULDN'T scream into the interphone when he was trying
to kill the sonofabitch that was firing machine guns and a 20mm cannon at
him?
Evergreen Air Venture's B-17 landed at a south Pacific airfield in the
'50s on one engine. Ray Bye, my father's pilot, earned the DFC for
belly-landing a B-17 that lost its final engine as he pulled up to avoid
some power lines. Boeing and the Army said it couldn't be done.
If a B-17 loses three engines in combat, other things are sure to be
wrong. So, if you jettisoned everything expendable and streamlined your
aircraft, you could go a long ways from 30,000 ft and possibly make it
across the channel or to neutral territory. Usually, though, there are
enough other things wrong with the aircraft (control surfaces, parasite
drag caused by skin damage, etc) that it's just not very likely.
So, yeah, it could land on one extremely-well-running engine, but that
part was Hollywood.
Tell me you didn't have to resist the urge to stand up in the theater when
you saw the bombers roaring past the tower or taking off the first time
you saw the movie. Did something else happen in the film? That's all I
remember. ;>
On a side note, I've noticed that most 1943/44-era B-17 vets have a bit of
hostility toward the hype around the Memphis Belle. "Hooray for them,"
they seem to say. "The war was easier then." Of the two B-17 crews that
my father saw that completed 25 missions, the pilot of the first
buzzed the field, tried an aileron roll and crashed, killing the entire
crew.
The second was the crew of Wabbit Twacks. A gunner gave father his good
luck charm...an RAF flak helmet that later saved my father's life.
Chris Gattman | "..And the sky is humming,
ga...@thetics.europa.com | and now my motor thunders." -Floater
Gatt
> Get the documentary film 'Memphis Belle" which is FAR superior to the recent
> movie. Incidentally last summer they dedicated a sculpture of a B17 at the
> Air Force Academy. Bob Morgan was the guest speaker. He was the pilot and
> his then girlfriend the Memphis belle.
I believe he remarried in front of the 'Belle just a couple of years ago.
It's odd that so many people like the old documentary more than the
remake. The second was Hollywood storytelling, which you could take at
face value. The first was propaganda. My father disliked it.
As a gunner in 1943, who's been there and done that (to use Art's
argument) that's the only testimony I need. :>
-Chris
Gatt
> What did happen in the last mission of Memphis belle
Nothing. It was an ideal 25th combat mission...basically, a milk run if
such a thing existed in 1943.
For non-B17 buffs, the average life expectancy of a crew that summer was 7
missions.
Gatt
> It's like they just collected all the stories they heard, even blatently
> false rumors, and stuck them all into one movie. The portion with the
> co-pilot going back so he could use the tail guns was particularily silly.
Other silly things that happened, and their sources..
1) Gunners leaning out the windows and waiving at ground crews while their
bomber belly landed. -C Gattman, jr 96th BG
2) Crewmen using oxygen from their mask to keep cigarettes lit. -same
3) Veteran pilots attempting low-level aileron rolls, resulting in crash.
-C Gattman, jr and 96th BG Historical society
4) Crewmen smuggling cats, dogs and even a goat on board as a mascot.
-96th BG Hist Soc
5) Airplane returning from a training flight with a mysteriously-absent
top turret -Eugene Fletcher, "Lucky Bastard Club"
6) Pilots breaking orders and strafing herds of antelope.
-Chuck Yeager
Yeah, a co-pilot shooting down a figher on his first try is ridiculous.
The fact that he went back would be silly, but it doesn't mean it didn't
happen. It's important to keep one thing in perspective; these guys were
in their late teens and early '20s, were crazy enough to volunteer as
airmen in the first place, and they knew they were most likely going to
die.
Besides, showing a movie about two pilots sitting in a seat, a bomber
looking through an eyepiece and gunners in the back, unrecognizable in
thick clothing as they stared motionless into the skies...it wouldn't be
much of a movie.
-Chris
>
> It wasn't even well written either. There's the scene where the pilot
> "orders" the ball gunner to put on the seat belt, and you KNOW it's going to
> save his life later in the movie. Uggg.
>
> Maury
>
>
>
Chris Gattman | "..And the sky is humming,
Ralph Jones
> Perhaps the WWII combat vets, (good to see your postings, wish there were
> more to speak with!) would care to give their opinions - myself I really
> liked it, but could a
> B-17F *really* come back on one engine????
There are lots of good comments here on the technical aspects, the cramming
of dozens of cliche events into one mission and so forth, but that isn't what
irritated me the most. It was the portrayal of the crew as a bunch of
adolescents and incompetents.
The worst examples were the pilot and copilot. Now the pilot is the
commanding officer of a crew, and the copilot is his deputy commander. About
ten percent of their job consists of sitting in the pilot seats wiggling
levers. The other ninety percent is the exercise of COMMAND. They are in
charge of eight other people trained in overlapping specialties, each with
his own problems, and they must bring those assets to bear and accomplish a
mission.
As Rock Hudson said in "Ice Station Zebra", "We're on a first name basis
here. My first name is Captain." A command officer must NEVER forget this. If
there is ever any question that his orders will be followed, he's impotent.
So what does the copilot do? He whines incessantly to the enlisted crew about
his dismal fate in being second banana to that prick in the left seat.
Everything he says is designed to undercut the pilot's authority. He takes
the crew's side against the boss. And in the crisis, when Modine starts to
take the formation around for a second bomb run (I'll look the other way on
the technical aspects here), he attempts to TAKE CONTROL AWAY FROM HIS
COMMANDING OFFICER.
At this point you might want to find a copy of the Uniform Code of Military
Justice and look up "Mutiny" and "Cowardice Under Fire". You'll find they are
both hanging offenses.
And what does the pilot do? He makes a whiny, defensive speech: "Now look
guys, I'm <sniff> supposed to be in CHARGE here, and I'm gonna do my BEST to
see that we WHIP that Hitler guy..."
In real life, the copilot would be sitting very quietly in his seat by that
time, with the muzzle of a .45 screwed into his ear. And MP's would be
waiting for him at the home base.
rj
Ragnar (no, not THE Ragnar)
missed your primary target, you MIGHT have a secondary target. More likely,
you'd drop your bombs on the target of the week to avoid bringing back live
ordnance.
Ragnar
ArtKramr
> Yeah, no question. He had a lot of good things to say about the B-29. I
>believe that he lead some of the first B-29 missions against Japan.
>
>Mike
I guess that is what we might call , "The Right Stuff".
ArtKramr
>From: Gatt <ga...@europa.com>
>What did happen in the last mission of Memphis belle
>
>
>Nothing. It was an ideal 25th combat mission...basically, a milk run if
>such a thing existed in 1943.
>
>For non-B17 buffs, the average life expectancy of a crew that summer was 7
>missions.
>
It was a milk run. And that expression was quite common in 1943.
ArtKramr
>From: Gatt <ga...@europa.com>
>What 20-year-old gunner
>amped on adrenalin WOULDN'T scream into the interphone when he was trying
>to kill the sonofabitch that was firing machine guns and a 20mm cannon at
>him?
>
Any gunner that was well trained, disciplined and experienced would never
scream into the intercom. That is because the sound breaks up and is
unintellgible.
Tom Cosgrave
Gatt wrote in message ...
>
>Tell me you didn't have to resist the urge to stand up in the theater when
>you saw the bombers roaring past the tower or taking off the first time
>you saw the movie. Did something else happen in the film? That's all I
>remember. ;>
Yes I did :-)
Thanks to everyone who replied!
It made for good reading, I must look for the old propaganda movie.
ArtKramr
>From: Ralph Jones
>So what does the copilot do? He whines incessantly to the enlisted crew about
>his dismal fate in being second banana to that prick in the left seat.
>Everything he says is designed to undercut the pilot's authority. He takes
>the crew's side against the boss. And in the crisis, when Modine starts to
>take the formation around for a second bomb run (I'll look the other way on
>the technical aspects here), he attempts to TAKE CONTROL AWAY FROM HIS
>COMMANDING OFFICER.
>
>At this point you might want to find a copy of the Uniform Code of Military
>Justice and look up "Mutiny" and "Cowardice Under Fire". You'll find they are
>both hanging offenses.
>
>And what does the pilot do? He makes a whiny, defensive speech: "Now look
>guys, I'm <sniff> supposed to be in CHARGE here, and I'm gonna do my BEST to
>see that we WHIP that Hitler guy..."
>
>In real life, the copilot would be sitting very quietly in his seat by that
>time, with the muzzle of a .45 screwed into his ear. And MP's would be
>waiting for him at the home base.
>
>rj
>
Absolutelt right !!! And back then we had the Articles of War, a much tougher
set of regulations and punishments than the present UCMJ. These Hollywoof
filmmakers just have no shame.
ArtKramr
>From: "Ragnar (no, not THE Ragnar)" <rwo...@earthlink.net>
>Date: 9/16/98 3:53 PM EST
>Yes, I really hated that whole "let's go around for a second try" thing. If
>you
>missed your primary target, you MIGHT have a secondary target. More likely,
>you'd drop your bombs on the target of the week to avoid bringi
NO! If the primary was clear, you would do a go-around. You would only go to
the seocndary if you couldn't hit the primary. You could not avoid the primary
because it would cause losses.
Gatt
> ten percent of their job consists of sitting in the pilot seats wiggling
> levers. The other ninety percent is the exercise of COMMAND. They are in
True...but the lever-wiggling is as often as not what saved the lives of
command and crew, and many great airmen were killed by unskilled, careless
or just unlucky pilots. The "B-17 driver" mentality fails to respect the
responsibility of flying an over-loaded bomber and forming with dozens of
others in low-visibility conditions in which a wrong move by any pilot in
the formation might kill 20 people and two aircraft.
> As Rock Hudson said in "Ice Station Zebra", "We're on a first name basis
> here. My first name is Captain." A command officer must NEVER forget this. If
In Memphis Belle, the co-pilot utters "Whatever you say, Dennis. You're
the boss." That is not inaccurate. My father's crew called their
commander "Ray." He was a replacement to their first commander who they
received when they were first assigned together for stateside training.
That original pilot lined up the crew and gave 'em the "My first name is
Captain" speech. I should remind you that Rock Hudson is also synonymous
with Hollywood Bullshit.
Turns out, the original crew mutinied, walked into the CO's office as a
crew and said they "absolutely would not fly with that sonofabitch." UCMJ
or not, he was their commander right up until the time they were to take
their first flight, when Ray Bye arrived as his replacement.
BTW Bye let the co-pilot fly much of the time and, whenever he made a
mistake, he'd yell "Aw, SHITHOUSE MOUSE!" into the interphone. The
co-pilot learned well and was given his own command before they got their
factory-new B-17, so he never knew they named the airplane OUTHOUSE MOUSE
after him. On its flight from the states to war, the able commander
buzzed his farm and blew over the grain silo then, in Scotland, landed on
an icy runway and slid into a tree. My father, who sitting in the nose
rather than at his station (dispelling the
crewmembers-didn't-leave-their-station argument) said a tree they hit
exploded into splinters as the glass hit it.
If you don't think he was indicative of the average B-17 commander,
consider that he won the DFC for gliding a burning bomber into the ground
and saving his crew, evaded, participated in the Berlin Airlift, Korea and
Vietnam and retired as a Wing Commander at the same base he'd wrecked the
Mouse.
> And what does the pilot do? He makes a whiny, defensive speech: "Now look
> guys, I'm <sniff> supposed to be in CHARGE here, and I'm gonna do my BEST to
> see that we WHIP that Hitler guy..."
Actually, that's not a direct quote. He doesn't make a Rock Hudson
speech...rather, he just reacts weakly betraying the fact that he's just
another guy in a tough spot.
> In real life, the copilot would be sitting very quietly in his seat by that
> time, with the muzzle of a .45 screwed into his ear. And MP's would be
> waiting for him at the home base.
Actually, no. For a raid over Germany, the pilot would just as likely
have an item on his pre-flight checklist to make sure the crew had
appropriate equipment "conundoms for urination" and did NOT have
firearms.*
* From an original pre-flight checklist for a raid over Germany now in
private possession of the B-17 crew that I work with.
Gatt
> Yes, I really hated that whole "let's go around for a second try" thing. If you
> missed your primary target, you MIGHT have a secondary target. More likely,
> you'd drop your bombs on the target of the week to avoid bringing back live
> ordnance.
Okay, that was hokey. Not quite as hokey as the "Okay, guys, we gotta put
it in the pickle barrel because there's a school on one side, a hospital
on the other, a baby milk plant next to the orphanage across the street
which is attached to the convent where the Virgin Mary herself is
attending to all our POWs" speech.
By the third pass, of COURSE the co-pilot would question the captain. The
likelihood of that speech isn't nil, but I suspect it would have more
closely approached "Fog, flak, Nazis. Bombs away."
Maury Markowitz
> Other silly things that happened, and their sources..
Silly things that happened in "real life" or in the movie?
> 3) Veteran pilots attempting low-level aileron rolls, resulting in crash.
> -C Gattman, jr and 96th BG Historical society
This is an interesting one because it's a staple of just about every movie
about _fighters_ I can think of. Another part of the same thing is "the
speach" in which the pilot in question is publically dressed down by the CO
with words to the effect of "what if your controls had frozen up, you'd lose
an expensive machine". Lines like this appear in BoB, another movie I can't
remember, and in another form in Top Gun. Yet from what fighter pilots here
have told me, this was basically standard proceedure.
> 5) Airplane returning from a training flight with a mysteriously-absent
> top turret -Eugene Fletcher, "Lucky Bastard Club"
I don't remember this one, what's it?
> Yeah, a co-pilot shooting down a figher on his first try is ridiculous.
Worse was just the whole setup of it. It was just so cheesy and overdone.
> The fact that he went back would be silly, but it doesn't mean it didn't
> happen.
I think the real question though is whether or not it _did_ happen.
> Besides, showing a movie about two pilots sitting in a seat, a bomber
> looking through an eyepiece and gunners in the back, unrecognizable in
> thick clothing as they stared motionless into the skies...it wouldn't be
> much of a movie.
Sure, agreed.
Maury
Mike Tighe
>Perhaps the WWII combat vets, (good to see your postings, wish there were
>more to speak with!) would care to give their opinions - myself I really
>liked it, but could a
>B-17F *really* come back on one engine????
>
>Again, I'm a newbie, so excuse me if this has been asked before!
By now, you will have seen a range of opinions on this subject, many,
if not all of them negative. In this respect, it is panning out like
the recent 'Right Stuff' thread.
Now, the movie has faults, but it is a movie - although it shares it's
title with Wyler's Wartime work, it is just a piece of dramatic and
visual commercial art. I don't know for sure, but I would bet that no
one around here complains that the natural history documentaries on
the coyote are more realistic and accurate (despite the animals being
anthropomorphised to appeal more), and carry more validity than the
Chuck Jones vision of a Coyote who exists solely to be the leading
customer of the Acme Corporation and the victim of his own misguided
ambitions...
In a movie, the technical details can (and indeed *have* to) be waived
to a certain extent. For this example, no-one needs to keep oxygen
masks on at all times (or else how would you see them act?). You need
a character with an insubordinate attitude or a guilty secret - after
all, the key to drama from the earliest days has been the conflict,
and how it is resolved. It doesn't matter that the captain and
co-pilot aren't good leaders (in fact, it's essential!). Early in the
film, some good guys have meet their doom to establish how bad the bad
guys are, but in general, the good are rewarded, and the bad either
punished or redeemed by the time the credits roll. The values of
teamwork win out in the end despite initial doubts and friction -
that's just about the universal formula for drama of any kind, and
griping because the *movie* holds true to that convention is just
extreme tunnel vision.
You need the fighters (anachronistic as the P-51Ds might be), to
heighten the sense of threat and isolation as the bombers are left to
continue alone - it's just dramatic licence. If you feel charitable,
you can trade that off against the film makers conversion of the B-17s
to 'F configuration, allowing them to portray the fear and deadly
effects of a frontal attack on the raids of that period - the
characters do comment on their helplessness ('What do you want me to
do... spit at him?') and some events have to happen to give the
'regular guy' central characters to have their shot at heroism.
There's a need to progress the story, and to connect with some primal
emotions in the audience. The second bomb run defines the crew as
brave, heroic and humane - they have to miss that school (or puppy
farm, or whatever) that was mentioned at the briefing. You just
couldn't get a good feeling with a bunch of terrorfliegers (sp?), and
it's nice to think that the lead bombardier, at least, isn't going to
cause any collateral damage. The (combat fatigued or cowardly? You
decide!) nav, who cracks up and tries to jettison the bombs during the
first run, is even given a chance to redeem himself by giving the
crank the last turn to lock the gear down and save the plane (which we
have already been shown will just blow up for no reason at all if it
lands on one wheel - but it wouldn't be drama without the peril) in
the nick of time.
Yup, its corny, but I would guess that many of the incidents did take
place at some time or other. The sentiment is laid on a bit thick for
most tastes, but against that, you have that beautiful B-17 take off
shot from the one of the cross runways at Binbrook (nit picking Mike
says that it's even better if you ignore the RAHG which you can see
across the main runway in the background...)
Mike Tighe
Speaking from the bottom left
hand corner of the big picture.
Gatt
> >What 20-year-old gunner
> >amped on adrenalin WOULDN'T scream into the interphone when he was trying
> >to kill the sonofabitch that was firing machine guns and a 20mm cannon at
> >him?
> >
> Any gunner that was well trained, disciplined and experienced would never
> scream into the intercom. That is because the sound breaks up and is
> unintellgible.
Depends on whom you ask. ;> I asked a well trained, disciplined and
experienced waist gunner. (Actually, more than one.) Very few gunners
in 1943 had a chance to gain much experience and many never did find
themselves locked in a shooting match with an FW190 on a pursuit curve.
Consider they only had a couple of minutes of ammunition and were lucky if
they made it to 10 missions. A gunner's job was to spot the enemy, call
him out and turn him away if he got too close. Otherwise, gunners just
stood around in the cold waiting to die.
Also, he pointed out that the calm voice you hear in the original Memphis
Belle documentary was simply not indicative of a 1943 waist gunner, who
would be standing in front of a huge, open window in the slipstream of
150-200mph wind over the roar of four engines.
I'm familiar with and own WWII flying gear including a helmet headseat and
throat mic and I've used an original interphone in various stations on
multiple occasions in flight in a B-17. Even with modern David Clarke
headsets and noise-cancelling mics, (and waist windows) it doesn't sound
like that. You're right, though. Throat mics don't get any clearer by
shouting and you won't make money singing rock and roll through 'em.
Anybody who can describe watching his tracers bounce off an ME109 or the
pieces of cowl flying off a FW190 that is still "flashing his headlights"
or who can describe the scarf the German pilot was wearing--flapping
behind him because the canopy glass had just been shot away, or who can
talk about the bullets coming through the length of the B-17 between the
gunners is--burning their parachutes--is in my book, experienced.
Gatt
>
> Thanks to everyone who replied!
> It made for good reading, I must look for the old propaganda movie.
Yes...despite its (few) flaws, the propaganda documentary is dramatic and
essential warbird-buff material. Seeing it during the war is hard to
imagine.
There's another movie you might look for, but I can't remember what
it's called. It's another wartime movie, b/w, about a B-17C in the
Pacific. C's had no tail position, and in the movie they have the novel
idea of sawing off the tail cone and stuffing a gunner back there.
Evidently, the movie was made before E models were in service so it has
historical value. Also historical is that the plane was on loan for
production from the military, returned to service and was shot down in
combat some time after the movie was completed. I hope somebody knows the
name, because I caught the tail end (heh) of it on PBS and never found out
what it's called.
Twelve O'Clock High is, of course, great.
-Chris
Gatt
> > 3) Veteran pilots attempting low-level aileron rolls, resulting in crash.
> > -C Gattman, jr and 96th BG Historical society
>
> remember, and in another form in Top Gun. Yet from what fighter pilots here
> have told me, this was basically standard proceedure.
Was the movie Piece of Cake? I liked that one (DUCK!) because it seemed
to capture the grace of flying and the tragedy of loss of a pilot, wheras
BoB seems to show a bunch of amazingly taken-for-granted aircraft flying
around and exploding.
> > 5) Airplane returning from a training flight with a mysteriously-absent
> > top turret -Eugene Fletcher, "Lucky Bastard Club"
>
> I don't remember this one, what's it?
Eugene Fletcher lives in eastern Washington and wrote a couple of books
about being a pilot. He's a friend of a girl I know. If you read a pilot's
view and then read Cold Skies (a waist gunner's view) you have two
decidedly different pictures of the war. Fletch said in the book that an
airplane came back from training without a top turret...as if it had done
a roll or a loop and the turret had dismounted and fallen out. He said he
never found out what really happened, though.
> > Yeah, a co-pilot shooting down a figher on his first try is ridiculous.
Okay...I'll concede! :> Crunching the model B-17 that the gunner had been
carving (or carving during a combat mission at all) is unrealistic.
The admitted flaw of the movie is that it took all the
could-have-but-probably-didn't-happen things and put it in a 90-minute
movie about a six-hour combat mission making it seem like every mission
would have been that weird.
On the 96th BG's first raid, a waist gunner had a runaway machine gun that
sawed off a tail wing on takeoff. A slug went through the tailgunner's
nut (he returned to service as a waist gunner...couldn't hack the bicycle
seat) and the pilot was killed trying to ditch the plane over the channel
after the crew bailed out.
Later in the war, a fresh gunner on his first mission lost his nerve when
he saw that the ground crews had failed to wash the piss, blood and gore
out of the airplane he'd been assigned to, in which the previous gunner
had been decapitated by flak.
Details like that would have made the movie more realistic (the new crew
of Mother and Country), than stuff like "guts on the nose" or the other
random chaos that nearly made Memphis Belle seem like Gilligan's Island.
But I still liked the movie! :>
Tex Houston
book and one was an aviation film. "Island in the Sky" by the late Ernie
Gann and "Day of the Jackal" by Frederick Forsythe. Most books are
butchered by script writers, directors, producers and time or money
constraints. While filming a television show and telling the director "It
didn't happen like that." he replied "There's real life and there's
television.". And that's the way it is...
That said my favorite movie is another entirely.
Tex Houston
Colorado Springs
Mike Tighe wrote in message <360645cc...@news.dircon.co.uk>...
>Now, the movie has faults, but it is a movie - although it shares it's
>title with Wyler's Wartime work, it is just a piece of dramatic and
>visual commercial art
Very cut...
Ragnar (no, not THE Ragnar)
Ragnar
ArtKramr wrote:
> >From: "Ragnar (no, not THE Ragnar)" <rwo...@earthlink.net>
> >Date: 9/16/98 3:53 PM EST
>
> >Yes, I really hated that whole "let's go around for a second try" thing. If
> >you
> >missed your primary target, you MIGHT have a secondary target. More likely,
Gord Beaman
--cut--
>
>About flying on one engine - scares me and I'm fearless!
>With two engines, you can fly fairly normally, but those two
>engines will be straining. I can substantiate 27 hours on
>two engines in B-17Gs, over 30 missions. (They had pretty
>good flak gunners.) If you have only one engine working,
>look for a large field! The one engine will help lengthen
>your flight path, but you won't maintain level flight.
>
>I believe you were correct to doubt the movie.
>
>Hugh W.
This reminds me of a paragraph in the 'Dash one' (Aircraft Operating
Instructions) for the Canadian Argus (CP-107).
"With very skillful piloting and perfect atmospheric conditions the
aircraft can be expected to maintain altitude on one inboard engine
operating at dry power at or below an all up weight of 96,000 pounds."
The basic dry weight (no fuel, no oil, no crew) was 98,000 pounds.
A pretty scary paragraph I'd say.
--
Gord Beaman
PEI, Canada
JFHar43
Wasn't part of the dialogue for the MB written by noted 8th AF historian Roger
Freeman?...seems to me it could have been alot better. But then again this
movie had to appeal to the younger masses. lt did in fact, to a certain
degree, bring WWII, particularly the air war, back to the forefront of modern
reality. I graduated from High School in 89' and in my entire four years of HS
schooling I think we spent less that one week on WWII.
Another point...a B-17 was lost during filming...with all the time, money, and
effort to convert these priceless -17's to F model configuration why was so
much great footage left on the cutting room floor...for cheesy special effects.
I think it was Mark Hanna (who was flying a fighter) related a story in
Warbirds magazine about the day a B-17 engine coughed and blew off the cowling.
blowing debri through the formation of of camera planes, the other forts, and
the Mustangs...where is this footage??
Oh well guess we can't expect too much...my favorite is still 12
o'clock High .
Over and out.
Jim Harley
www.jfharley.com
Gerard
<rnj...@teal.csn.net> wrote:
>And in the crisis, when Modine starts to
> take the formation around for a second bomb run (I'll look the other way on
> the technical aspects here), he attempts to TAKE CONTROL AWAY FROM HIS
> COMMANDING OFFICER.
I think you got the plot wrong here. This scene takes place when the
bombardier, Val if I remember, announces that he has no "sighting" (for
lack of a better term) to start his bomb run. The result was having to go
around again, his navigator evidently didn't like that idea and it was he
would tried to hit the lever to release the bombs. Then there was a
struggle and the navigator seeing that he could not do it said, "Just do it
Val."
dana...@nasm.si.edu
jfh...@aol.com (JFHar43) wrote:
>
> Wasn't part of the dialogue for the MB written by noted 8th AF historian Roger
Freeman?...seems to me it could have been alot better. But then again this
movie had to appeal to the younger masses. lt did in fact, to a certain
degree, bring WWII, particularly the air war, back to the forefront of
modern reality. I graduated from High School in 89' and in my entire four
years of HS schooling I think we spent less that one week on WWII.
>
> Another point...a B-17 was lost during filming...with all the time, money, and
effort to convert these priceless -17's to F model configuration why was so
much great footage left on the cutting room floor...for cheesy special
effects. I think it was Mark Hanna (who was flying a fighter) related a
story in Warbirds magazine about the day a B-17 engine coughed and blew off
the cowling blowing debri through the formation of of camera planes, the
other forts, and the Mustangs...where is this footage??
>
> Oh well guess we can't expect too much...my favorite is still 12
> o'clock High .
>
> Over and out.
>
> Jim Harley
> www.jfharley.com
Jim,
While I never asked Roger about his participation, I understand he was so
unhappy with the movie that he asked to have his name removed from the
credits.
-Dana
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
-mikep-
>Yes...despite its (few) flaws, the propaganda documentary is dramatic and
>essential warbird-buff material. Seeing it during the war is hard to
>imagine.
Never seen the original movie myself, though many authentic shots in
documentaries (and in second 'Memphis Belle'?) might have been from Wyler's
cameracrew.
About the latter movie itself, forgetting the very-Hollywood-style script, I
wish to thank people who managed to gather the real birds before the
cameras.
These movies with original machines will become rare.
BTW did'nt know about the loss of one B-17 during the make. I wonder how it
happened.
>There's another movie you might look for, but I can't remember what
>it's called. It's another wartime movie, b/w, about a B-17C in the
>Pacific. C's had no tail position, and in the movie they have the novel
>idea of sawing off the tail cone and stuffing a gunner back there.
Might have been 'Air Force'; appeared on silver screen 1943, director Howard
Hawks(?).
Seen only photos from the movie but I reckon the tail section of this
particular B-17 was 'old fashioned' and without guns.
Plot was something like this: A lone B-17 escapes from Philippines(?),
leaving behind the ruins of decimated airfield (Clark Field?), making it's
way through Zero-infested airspace to Australia.
Don´t know whether there's anything like mixed Colin Kelly -story, but a lot
of Zeroes in flames.
>Evidently, the movie was made before E models were in service so it has
>historical value. Also historical is that the plane was on loan for
>production from the military, returned to service and was shot down in
>combat some time after the movie was completed.
A really serious propaganda movie, 'Desperate Journey' (1942?; Erroll Flynn,
Ronald Reagan)
had heroes flying a model B-17, which was, according the time, more original
version and shot
down en route to Berlin by a quite ridiculous Messerschmitt.
>Twelve O'Clock High is, of course, great.
Definitely agreed. Could the footage have been from 'Memphis Belle'?
-mikap-
' Is there such thing as a Happy End in a war movie?'
Critics
Tom Cosgrave
Gatt wrote in message ...
>
>it's called. It's another wartime movie, b/w, about a B-17C in the
>Pacific. C's had no tail position, and in the movie they have the novel
>idea of sawing off the tail cone and stuffing a gunner back there.
C's never were my favourite version, Nor the E, or even the F.
The G variant was the one for me - maybe it was the chin turret that made it
look extra nasty ;-) Weren't a lot of C's absolutely smashed in the Pacific
by the Japanese? Or was that the B?
JFHar43
>Jim,
>
> While I never asked Roger about his participation, I understand he was so
>unhappy with the movie that he asked to have his name removed from the
>credits.
>
> -Dana
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>
Dana,
Thanks for the info...that shores up my faith in Mr. Freeman. I think
I've read everything he has written.
Jim
Tom Cosgrave
nominate "Empire of The Sun". ?
Now - I don't really like the movie, but there is an amzing sequence IMHO
when the
P-51-D's attack the Japanese airstrip.
The boy is standing on the roof of a building in the POW watching the
Mustangs attack the adjacent airstrip , and then there is a slow motion
scene.
The boy watches a P-51 fly towards him and and the camera zooms in. We then
see an angle of the boy as he gets closer and then farther away - this is
clearly meant to be the pilot of the Mustang looking at him. Then it flashes
back to the Mustang who has his canopy back, and it clearly shows the pilot
with his goggles up and his mask off, and he waves at the boy. Then he flies
off again back to the airfield. The boy starts screaming "P-51, Cadillac of
the sky!!!".
It's not realistic IMHO (there was AA fire etc, and the Mustang was bumbling
along), but I think it is a beautiful piece of film, and I felt the same way
whern I saw my first
P-51-D execute a low pass in Derry, Northern Ireland at an airshow back in
1993. I wanted to scream and laugh - it was *beautiful* :-)
Any opinions or am I talking rubbish? :-)
Scott Chan
e.g., dog accompanying crew on mission:
I just browsed a book titled, "Skip Bombing", IIRC author was J. Murphy,
about a B-17 based in New Guinea in 1942. In it is a photo of the
crew's mascot "Pluto", sitting on the flight deck.
According to the author (the pilot), Pluto "flew on some missions".
So there.
Gatt
> C's never were my favourite version, Nor the E, or even the F.
> The G variant was the one for me - maybe it was the chin turret that made it
> look extra nasty ;-) Weren't a lot of C's absolutely smashed in the Pacific
I'm quite sure 100% of the B-17 crews would agree, even though the
addition of the turret was only marginally more effective (they already
had guns in the nose...the turret just made 'em look formidable.)
The F and G versions had hundreds of other modifications that were
probably more significant that the chin turret (self sealing tanks, etc.)
Maiesm72
It never ceases to amaze me how bad Hollywood can do a job.
I worked on a film called "Radio Flyer" several years ago. Provided airplanes,
scale models, built a vintage hobby shop with every detail perfect, etc. Very
high paying job with promissed credits.
The rushes looked good and the initial release was great. It is a real rush
seeing your name on the screen, even if it is way, way down the list. The
studio didn't like it, though, and pulled it after two days of sneak previews.
They re-shot some of it and made it into a child abuse movie, deleting about
half of the scenes that I worked on. Along with twenty or so others I yanked my
name from the resulting mess. It bore little resembelance to what we made in
the first place.
It is kind of fun to see some of the cut scenes appear in ads and a couple of
movies since then, no credit though.
Tom
Maiesm72
Carrying mascots on low level missions wasn't all that uncommon.
But carrying a pooch on a high level mission would be a good way to off the
pet.
Was it the newer Memphis Belle that had the crewman leaning on the fuselage
with an ungloved hand at altitude? The results of that casual action would be
the surgical removal of the fast frozen fingers or entire hand.
There were also scenes of conversation at altitude without oxygen masks.
Absurd!
However, I sure liked the movie overall. The original WWII film of the same
name is one my all time favorites.
Tom
Gatt
> It's not realistic IMHO (there was AA fire etc, and the Mustang was bumbling
> along), but I think it is a beautiful piece of film, and I felt the same way
> whern I saw my first
> P-51-D execute a low pass in Derry, Northern Ireland at an airshow back in
> 1993. I wanted to scream and laugh - it was *beautiful* :-)
>
> Any opinions or am I talking rubbish? :-)
Absolutely not. I've watched that scene about three times as often as
I've seen the whole movie.
The '51s in Saving Private Ryan had the same effect. I embarrassed myself
by cheering in the middle of the theater when they showed up. If you
watch that scene again, you can see the effects of the wingtip vortices on
the smoke.
The first time my father saw the rumored P-51 was at Mauthausen when he
was being marched from Stalag XVII to Braunau, Austria. An Nazi staff
plane (maybe an Me108) just above the trees was desperately dodging a
maurauding Mustang, which ultimately shot it down. A Jewish inmate at the
camp looked up and said "Cheer up, boys. It won't be long!" to the
passing POWs. The inmate was promptly shot through the face.
To me that makes the suprise arrival of air power--particularly
P-51s--in film more stimulating.
There's also the Ride of The Valkyries scene in Apocalypse Now. Less
important, but just as hair-raising.
LesB
>I just browsed a book titled, "Skip Bombing", IIRC author was J. Murphy,
>about a B-17 based in New Guinea in 1942. In it is a photo of the
>crew's mascot "Pluto", sitting on the flight deck.
>According to the author (the pilot), Pluto "flew on some missions".
And the RAF's 88 Sqd's tail emblem was a snake. This Canberra B(I)8
Sqd in RAFG had a live snake as a mascot - called *Fred Aldrovandi*.
This snake flew with 88 Sqd on detachments at heights of up to
40,000ft and was, reportedly, quite happy as long as it could snooze
in the sun on the bomb-aimers mat in the nose.
LesB
{take out one to mail}
EE Canberra Tribute Site
http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~lesb/canberra.html
MLenoch
>Yup, its corny, but I would guess that many of the incidents did take
>place at some time or other. The sentiment is laid on a bit thick for
>most tastes, but against that, you have that beautiful B-17 take off
>shot from the one of the cross runways at Binbrook (nit picking Mike
>says that it's even better if you
> ignore the RAHG which you can see
>across the main runway in the background...)
Curiously enough, I "saw" this movie at a party where I could not hear the
'script'. I was amazed how really remarkable an image the movie presented.
Only after hearing the script on a subsequent viewing, did I realize how indeed
'corny' some of the scenes were portrayed. The film was quite an
accomplishment in this day and age, to visually depict events that happened
over 50 years ago. I do agree that dramatic ( hollywood ) license was employed
to produce a movie that would hold the interest of today's commercial movie
going public.
I do have a favorite movie: "Captains of the Clouds". I highly recommend it.
V.Lenoch
Krztalizer
Hey, now, don't get half the picture. Find a copy of The Fighting Lady, and
watch the two movies back to back. You might as well include the incredible
carrier battles of the Pacific in your cinematic education. :)
Gordon
<====(A+C====>
USN SAR Aircrew
"Senso? Got anything on radar?"
"Just my forehead, sir."
Krztalizer
>
> Silly things that happened in "real life" or in the movie?
>
>> -C Gattman, jr and 96th BG Historical society
>
cameras during a low / too low Sierra Hotel pass that ended in a prang.
DOH.
>> 5) Airplane returning from a training flight with a mysteriously-absent
>> top turret -Eugene Fletcher, "Lucky Bastard Club"
>
> I don't remember this one, what's it?
>
Something about certain turrets being held in place primarily by gravity, and
the crew supposedly had rolled the big bomber over and held it so long that the
turret had fallen free. Heard it, dont recall where. Perhaps
Alt.Flakey.Stuff.Conspiracy. Hard to say.
>> Yeah, a co-pilot shooting down a figher on his first try is ridiculous.
>
As a one time aerial gunner, I considered that worthy of an unexpected guffaw
in the theater. The mathematics of such a shot on your first squeeze of the
triggers is a bit like Fermat's Second Hardest theorum being figured out by,
say, me. Not likely that he would have departed his station during a mission
to essentially "have a go at la Boche".
> Worse was just the whole setup of it. It was just so cheesy and overdone.
>
Plus, I built better Me-109 models when I was 14.
>> The fact that he went back would be silly, but it doesn't mean it didn't
>> happen.
>
> I think the real question though is whether or not it _did_ happen.
>
>> Besides, showing a movie about two pilots sitting in a seat, a bomber
>> looking through an eyepiece and gunners in the back, unrecognizable in
>> thick clothing as they stared motionless into the skies...it wouldn't be
>> much of a movie.
>
> Sure, agreed.
>
>Maury
>
>
But, it would be accurate. Watching your squadron mates periodically vaporize
might not be cinematic gold, but at least it would be representative of the
truth. Riding long range warplanes is tough, and I am damn lucky I was spared
the experience of having to do it when folks were shooting back (on purpose).
I felt that the original "Memphis Belle" movie was more accurate to the subject
matter, but they left out a lot of the mundane parts that just wore a person
out. The movie was a good reflection of the times, of course set as a
We-Can-Do-It! propaganda film. It still works.
Cept when the narrator says, "See this man? He'll get a purple heart." At that
point, the camera points at a Luftwaffe pilot, that has just parachuted over an
Allied Field!. Other than that, I thought the movie was very well done.
Gordon
Navy 78-90
Mary Shafer
> There's also the Ride of The Valkyries scene in Apocalypse Now. Less
> important, but just as hair-raising.
That, the Hueys flying around in the smoke and haze at the beginning,
and the carrier launches and traps at the beginning of Top Gun are my
three favorite military aviation scenes in the movies.
I keep checking to see if Apocalypse Now is on the list for release in
DVD; Top Gun will be released in October and I've already got it
ordered, but I also really want Apocalypse Now (and The Thomas Crown
Affair). I swore to my husband that I wouldn't start collecting DVD
movies, but there are a few that are just essential (I've already
started with Dune and Bullitt). I may get the Star Wars trilogy, too,
largely for the military technology, because that's where so many of
the special effects are concentrated. It's pretty bad when so many
years of movie production boil down to only four titles that I really,
really want.
--
Mary Shafer NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA
SR-71 Flying Qualities Lead Engineer Of course I don't speak for NASA
sha...@reseng.dfrc.nasa.gov DoD #362 KotFR
URL http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/People/Shafer/mary.html
For personal messages, please use sha...@ursa-major.spdcc.com
Cynthia Keeney
From: [1]"-mikep-"
>Gatt wrote in message
>>There's another movie you might look for, but I can't remember what
>>it's called. It's another wartime movie, b/w, about a B-17C in the
>>Pacific. C's had no tail position, and in the movie they have the novel
>>idea of sawing off the tail cone and stuffing a gunner back there.
>
>Might have been 'Air Force'; appeared on silver screen 1943, director
>Howard Hawks(?).
I agree, sure sounds like "Air Force".
The movie also has some interesting footage of P-39s & even some of an
odd/rare observation type: O-52 if I'm remembering right.
>Seen only photos from the movie but I reckon the tail section of this
>particular B-17 was 'old fashioned' and without guns.
Yep.
>Plot was something like this: A lone B-17 escapes from Philippines(?),
>leaving behind the ruins of decimated airfield (Clark Field?), making
>it's way through Zero-infested airspace to Australia.
Well, the flying (and I think the movie) starts in California on Dec 6th,
1941 and the plane/crew is part of the B-17 flight coming into Pearl
during the raid. The plane is then sent on in to the war zone. It's not
till the closing scenes that they bomb a JIN ship as they depart the
Philippines on the way to Australia.
>' Is there such thing as a Happy End in a war movie?'
Sure, one final "boom", the bad guys surrender and the heros go home.
Still leaves lots of room for unhappy middles.
John
--
ArtKramr
>From: krzta...@aol.com
>>> Yeah, a co-pilot shooting down a figher on his first try is ridiculous.
>>
The copilot leaving his position while on a bomb run is even more rediculous.
Arthur
344th Bomb Group 494th Bomb Squadron
9th Tactical Air Force
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Thomas Myers
Don Blakeslee, the squadron CO had warned thet anyone crashing a plane
hot dogging would be court marshalled. Within the next couple of days,
Gentile completed his tour, buzzed the field on his return, & hit the
ground
distroying the plane. According to his biiography, they bulldozed it into a
nearby pond where it appparently still rests. Blakeslee, incidently, was
pissed.
He wasn't about to court marshall one of the war's first legitimate heros.
Krztalizer <krzta...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19980916225818...@ng83.aol.com>...
Krztalizer
>
>It was Gentile that crashed his P-51 B On returning from his last mission.
>Don Blakeslee, the squadron CO had warned thet anyone crashing a plane
>hot dogging would be court marshalled. Within the next couple of days,
>Gentile completed his tour, buzzed the field on his return, & hit the
>ground
>distroying the plane. According to his biiography, they bulldozed it into a
>
>nearby pond where it appparently still rests. Blakeslee, incidently, was
>pissed.
>He wasn't about to court marshall one of the war's first legitimate heros.
>
that making Colonel four times was somehow a bad thing - and in some way
related to punching out fellow officers!
>Krztalizer <krzta...@aol.com> wrote
William H. Shuey
>
> It was Gentile that crashed his P-51 B On returning from his last
> mission.
> Don Blakeslee, the squadron CO had warned thet anyone crashing a plane
> hot dogging would be court marshalled. Within the next couple of days,
> Gentile completed his tour, buzzed the field on his return, & hit the
> ground distroying the plane. According to his biiography, they
> bulldozed it into a nearby pond where it appparently still rests.
> Blakeslee, incidently, was pissed.
> He wasn't about to court marshall one of the war's first legitimate heros.
>
No, Blakeslee couldn't court marshal Gentile, but he wrote such a
scathing fitness report on him that he was still a Captain when he was
killed in a crash in 1951.
Bill Shuey
Krztalizer
Bullitt? Mary, you display obvious good taste in DVD movies.
Gordon
ps, getting a package of photos ready to send off to Mr Dana -- Lifting body
and X-15 stuff. I still can't find evidence of a plane he DIDNT fly.
Damien Burke
wrote:
>Seeing as we are now goign on to movie footage of WW2 aircraft, may I
>nominate "Empire of The Sun". ?
...
>It's not realistic IMHO (there was AA fire etc, and the Mustang was bumbling
>along), but I think it is a beautiful piece of film, and I felt the same way
>whern I saw my first
>P-51-D execute a low pass in Derry, Northern Ireland at an airshow back in
>1993. I wanted to scream and laugh - it was *beautiful* :-)
Hear hear. A few weeks back I was at Bruntingthorpe waiting for
everyone's favourite Vulcan to do the first engine run of the year, and
a P-51 went past in the distance. Very nice I thought. Then he curved
round and came and beat up the runway - only about eight people saw it
but it was superb and very similar to the scene you mention.
If the pilot is reading, thank you - topped off a nice day that did.
--
Damien Burke (add 'k' to end of address if replying)
British military aircraft site: http://www.totavia.com/jetman/
Melvyn Hiscock
> Mary Shafer wrote:
>
> > That, the Hueys flying around in the smoke and haze at the beginning,
> > and the carrier launches and traps at the beginning of Top Gun are my
> > three favorite military aviation scenes in the movies.
>
>
> that it is kinda silly, but so is "Top Gun".
There's a shot near the beginning of Catch 22 when the B25s take off and fly out
over the sea. No models, no special effects just a whole bunch of B25s bumbling
off into the distance. I love it.
Melvyn Hiscock
PS anyone want to offer me some right hand seat in a B25?
No? Didn't think so but there is no harm in asking!
Gatt
> >> 3) Veteran pilots attempting low-level aileron rolls, resulting in crash.
> >> -C Gattman, jr and 96th BG Historical society
> >
> cameras during a low / too low Sierra Hotel pass that ended in a prang.
Seems odd. You'd think a veteran could nail it. Well, what was he, 24
years old? I was referring to a B-17F at Snetterton Heath that had a full
crew. The pilot actually tried to aileron roll the plane after he buzzed
the field. At least they -think- he did intentionally, because the plane
went into one before exploding in a farm. All aboard were, of course,
killed.
I think my father said he'd
been on base for a week when it happened.
> > I don't remember this one, what's it?
> >
> Something about certain turrets being held in place primarily by gravity, and
> the crew supposedly had rolled the big bomber over and held it so long that the
> turret had fallen free. Heard it, dont recall where. Perhaps
> Alt.Flakey.Stuff.Conspiracy. Hard to say.
It would be harder to say to Eugene Fletcher, Captain USAAF (ret) and
veteran of 35+ combat missions over Germany that he's full of shit or that
he's flakey.
> I felt that the original "Memphis Belle" movie was more accurate to the
> subject matter, but they left out a lot of the mundane parts that just
> wore a person out. The movie was a good reflection of the times, of
> course set as a We-Can-Do-It! propaganda film. It still works.
I guess. The original had some distinct advantages over the remake.
First, getting a shot of B-17s in formation--and flak, and bombs--was as
simple as pointing the camera out the window. Second, it didn't -have-
to tell a story or be overly dramatic. The drama was being played out in
real life by the fathers, sons, brothers and husbands of the people
watching the movie. A propaganda film does not have to show
interpersonal relationships, stress, cowardice, confusion and fear.
Rather, it CAN'T show those things. If they send a camera up, show some
bombs falling, some flak and the airplane getting home just fine
with hands standing...that's a wrap.
Unless you were an "actor" in the original, making it would have been a
hell of a lot easier than the Hollywood version. (I wonder if military
censors got at it and, if so, what they cut.)
-Chris
ArtKramr
>From: Gatt <ga...@europa.com>
>Seems odd. You'd think a veteran could nail it. Well, what was he, 24
>years old?
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots....
RMiG15
Catch 22 one of the best novels ever.
RMiG15
JFHar43
I was at an airshow in Louisville Kentucky a couple of years ago and there were
around 25 Mustangs present. The Horsemen (Ed Shipely and Jim Beasley Jr) were
finishing thier show. I was tracking (video) Ed in Big Beautiful Doll as he
departed airshow left for his extended turn-around manuever. He went high and
outside...reapproaching the runway from a 90 deg heading in a 45 deg dive from
around 3000' (guess) he pulled into a screaming turn right on the deck and
came by airshow center knife edge...very very low. To this day I have never
heard a merlin wound up so tight...I still get goose bumps!!! That pass would
have made John Landers proud!
Jim Harley
www.jharley.com
Billy Beck
Mary Shafer <sha...@reseng2.dfrc.nasa.gov> wrote:
>I swore to my husband that I wouldn't start collecting DVD
>movies, but there are a few that are just essential (I've already
>started with Dune and Bullitt)...
<sigh>
1969 Dodge Charger.
Those were the days.
Billy
VRWC fronteer
http://www.mindspring.com/~wjb3/promise.html
Judge
bust your bubble... It was however the greatest
chase scene in history!
Sidenote: Max Bechowski, who did the setup for
that, died last week.
Judge
Billy Beck
"Judge" <agen...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Uh, Billy, that was a 1968 Charger...
(Really? Round tail lights? How I hate a dimming recall.)
>...sorry to bust your bubble...
No burst. The '68 & '69 Chargers are, to me, the epitome of
muscle car design. It's kinda like my regard for the B-47: a moment
of culture crystallized in design. The Chargers celebrated The Great
American Feast Of Ostentatious Consumption - right at the time when it
was coming to an end: big, loud, and proud.
Loved 'em dearly, even though I now drive a '72 Chevelle.
>It was however the greatest chase scene in history!
Yup. Prototypical. Although Roy Scheider wrecking that Pontiac
in "The Seven-Ups" was pretty good, too.
>Sidenote: Max Bechowski, who did the setup for
>that, died last week.
Mary Shafer
> "Judge" <agen...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Uh, Billy, that was a 1968 Charger...
>
> (Really? Round tail lights? How I hate a dimming recall.)
Yes. The movie was made in '67 and early '68, and released in '68, I
think. It's a '68 Mustang fastback, although a friend of mine who
probably knows says that he thinks that they dropped a NASCAR engine
in it. That's certainly possible, as there was a lot of room under
that long Mustang hood. There's a great scene where McQueen is
backing the Mustang up and you can see the rear tire squirming and the
wheel flexing--no torsion bars possible on San Francisco streets,
unlike the tracks.
The Bullitt DVD had a great segment on the making of the movie, which
I think must have been a 30-minute TV show or something. McQueen was
really hipped on authenticity, so they used a real hospital with
actual doctors and nurses instead of actors, as well as a lot of real
San Francisco police. There was a story about how one of the actors
(not McQueen) was doing a ride-along with the SFPD and a suspect
claimed that he knew him, that he'd arrested the guy two months ago.
McQueen did all his own driving in the movie, too. They practiced the
race sequences, particularly when they were side-by-side at the end,
for a couple of months up at the track in Cotati.
Robert "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" Duvall (see, a real
reference to military aviation) was in the movie, too. He's the taxi
driver. And Mr. Roper from "Three's Company" was a police lieutenant.
> No burst. The '68 & '69 Chargers are, to me, the epitome of
> muscle car design. It's kinda like my regard for the B-47: a moment
> of culture crystallized in design. The Chargers celebrated The Great
> American Feast Of Ostentatious Consumption - right at the time when it
> was coming to an end: big, loud, and proud.
>
> Loved 'em dearly, even though I now drive a '72 Chevelle.
We had a '70 GTO until we gave it to our nephew for his 16th birthday.
He was 3 when we bought it. I had a 64-1/2 Mustang convertible until
'92, when I got a Cutlass Supreme convertible and sold the pony to a
co-worker. I loved my Goat; I could shut down anyone in town
(although some of that may have been the unexpectedness of a woman in
her 30s who liked to show teenagers that fancy paintjobs couldn't take
400 cubic inches displacement on and win).
Those were the days--the only way to burn rubber in my '95 Cutlass
Supreme is to be on a hill. Front-wheel drive, with its great
traction, has ruined one of the joys of driving.
> >It was however the greatest chase scene in history!
>
> Yup. Prototypical. Although Roy Scheider wrecking that Pontiac
> in "The Seven-Ups" was pretty good, too.
Nothing will ever match that chase. I don't care what anyone says
about The French Connection or anything else.
Judge
of cubic inches... heres my thoughts :
Hey Mary... if werent married, I would be on your
doorstep like white on rice :)
Ok, this is SO ironic, since I just wrote a long
discertation on the passing of Max Belchowski, the
man who setup the car chase in Bullitt, as well as
the cars. Max was a world class Sportscar racer in
the 50's, and later went onto to do not only
Bullitt, but "Vanishing Point" and other great car
movies. He is sorely missed.
In an interview with Max several years ago, he
said, " the mustang was a piece of shit. It kept
tearing itself apart. We had to stop filming
several times and weld it back together. The
Charger on the other hand, only required us to put
the hubcaps back on a few times.. " < 13 to be
exact! > The Mustang had a 390 big block, standard
issue that they did beef up a bit with a better
intake manifold, holley carbueretor, and headers.
The chassis had stiffer springs, stiffer shocks
and several braces welded in. < side note here,
Mustangs were coil spring in front, and leaf
spring in the back. Only Chrysler products used
torsion bars at the time. I am thinking you meant
traction bars, which indeed would have helped his
wheelhop. > The Charger only need a set of
stiffer shocks. Steve McQueen always the gearhead,
fancied himself a driver. He insisted he actually
drive the mustang in the scene, but after crashing
it on the first days shoot, they deceided a pro
was needed. The driver in the charger is indeed
the stuntman, the shotgun wielding hood is an
actor. They did shoot alot of side by side closeup
footage for the chase scene, but 95% of it is
indeed a stuntman driving.
<<< > >It was however the greatest chase scene in
history!
>
> Yup. Prototypical. Although Roy Scheider
wrecking that Pontiac
> in "The Seven-Ups" was pretty good, too.
Nothing will ever match that chase. I don't care
what anyone says
about The French Connection or anything else.
>>>>>
Also of note here, Roy Scheider drove a 1969 < I
think, could have been a 68, its been a while! >
Plymouth GTX in the movie " 52 pickup". The ONLY
chase scene that can compare with Bullitt is not
really a "chase" but a VERY high speed ride thru
town. It was a short film shot in the early to mid
70's in Italy.. I cant remember if the guy is in a
Ferrari, Lambo, or Maserati.. I believe its a
maserati. Anyway, its Totally unstaged and hes
running like 120-160mph THRU the city! traffic,
people, everything is scrambling... you can get
this tape from Classic Motorbooks International.
Makes the French Connection look like a Dominos
Pizza delivery driver....
<< PS - for those wondering, I use to make a
living in musclecar sales and resto. specializing
in Chrysler products.. now I am webmaster for
nitronic.com - theres top fuel racers, airplane
engined stories, dry lakes, and things not to be
believed! >>
C/S : Judge
Jon Krocker
<re...@newsgroup.please> wrote:
The ONLY
>chase scene that can compare with Bullitt is not
>really a "chase" but a VERY high speed ride thru
>town. It was a short film shot in the early to mid
>70's in Italy.. I cant remember if the guy is in a
>Ferrari, Lambo, or Maserati.. I believe its a
>maserati. Anyway, its Totally unstaged and hes
>running like 120-160mph THRU the city! traffic,
>people, everything is scrambling... you can get
>this tape from Classic Motorbooks International.
>Makes the French Connection look like a Dominos
>Pizza delivery driver....
>C/S : Judge
I think it is called Le Rendevous and it was through Paris at 4 or 5 in
the morning and it was a Ferrari Dino. I think the director was Claude
Lelouch or someone like that. It is about a guy driving to meet his
girlfriend.
--
Jon Krocker jkro...@magic.mb.ca
Aus des Weltalls Ferne, Funken Radiosterne, Quasare und Pulsare
-Kraftwerk
MakinKid
>man who setup the car chase in Bullitt, as well as
>the cars. Max was a world class Sportscar racer in
>the 50's, and later went onto to do not only
>Bullitt, but "Vanishing Point" and other great car
>movies.
Tony Murphy drove both the Mustang and the Charger in Bullit's chase scenes
(not in the same scenes of course). He also drove the car in the chase scene
in The French Connection. McQueen was a Mustang fan, that's why the protag
drives one in Bullit. Murphy held that not only was the Mustang fragile, it
was ugly.
Tony was a good friend and motorcycle riding buddy of Steve McQueen. You can
see him and Steve horsing around on dirt bikes in the motorcycle movie On Any
Sunday.
Steve was a great collector of antique motorcycles. He stored them in a
warehouse Murphy owned on Varna St., off Sherman Way, in the San
FernandoValley. Representatives of Japanese motorcycle companies used to visit
and browse around among the pre-war (World War One) bikes looking for good
ideas that had been long forgotten. One of the motorcycles McQueen owned was
the Henderson 4-cylinder 61-inch, bike that was clocked roaring up the Cajon
Pass in 1932 at a measured 127 mph! (He went through a speed trap set up by
the highway patrol.) My favorite among the pre-WWI bikes was a Flying Merkel.
The advertising brochure for it said, "If it passes you, it's a Flying Merkel!"
As I recall, it was a 500cc DOHC four-valve single. I tried to buy the bike
from Steve, but he wouldn't sell. At the time, I had a '39 Rudge, a '52
Norton Manx, a '55 BSA Gold Star, a '69 BSA Spitfire and a brand new '71
Triumph Trident. Tony, Steve, Bob Green (the legendary automotive editor),
myself and whoever else was lucky enough to be around used to race the whole
length of Mulholland from Highland Ave. in Hollywood out to the Pacific Coast
Highway, undercarriages dragging, sparks flying. Murphy's favorite mount on
these runs was his Norton Commando, McQueen preferred a Triumph Bonneville and
I rode my BSA Spitfire. Both Tony and Steve were footdraggers in the turns,
like TT or Mile riders. I used the techniques Mike Hailwood and Phil Read
taught me in Europe and could easily keep ahead of McQueen. But Murphy was
astonishingly good and simply could not be passed except for one time a kid
named Dale Boller riding a desmo Ducati simply motored away from the whole
pack. Funny thing was, he wasn't part of our riding group. He overtook us
while we were flailing wildly through the canyons and serenely slipped through
us and vanished into the curving scenary. He used an odd (in those days)
riding technique of keeping the bike upright in corners while hanging his body
off, something we had never seen. It was a "Who is that guy?" moment. We
caught up with him sipping a lemonade at the Rock Store (before Cook Neilson
wrote a famous article about it and ruined it by attracting the vast horde).
Bob Green was smart enough to snag the kid to work for him.
Murphy tried to get me to take up the life of a movie stuntman, but, having
busted enough bones inadvertently throwing away motorcycles, I couldn't
generate any enthusiasm for doing it on purpose. I chose another career path.
After Steve died his collection, over 200 mahcines, was broken up. I was out
of the country when the auction was held. I hoped that "my" Merkel wouldn't
have been sold. But when I got back and ask Murphy about it, he only shrugged
and said everything was gone. The warehouse was empty, except for some
scattered litter. I picked up a 1912 copy of Motor Cyclist magazine lying on
the floor and some other scraps and left.
Makin
Judge
WHO is out there, WHAT they know, WHAT they have
done, and how damn small this world is. Thanks
Makin, great post, and good readin... would you
consider writing for a webpage? Email me directly
at robb...@aol.com and I will explain.
Robb
AW3 C/S - Judge
David Lesher
>The Bullitt DVD had a great segment on the making of the movie, which
>I think must have been a 30-minute TV show or something. McQueen was
>really hipped on authenticity, so they used a real hospital with
>actual doctors and nurses instead of actors, as well as a lot of real
>San Francisco police.
But they faked one crucial scene.
Since by now, everyone has seen it......
At the end of the chase, the Charger leaves the road, and runs
into the gas station. Kabbooom. Right?
It missed. Look carefully, you can see it passing BEHIND the station
as the special effects are set off..
When I was in SF in the mid 70's; the cab drivers still talked about
filming that chase.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
funkraum
>>wj...@mindspring.com (Billy Beck) writes:
>Yes. The movie was made in '67 and early '68, and released in '68, I
>think. It's a '68 Mustang fastback, although a friend of mine who
>probably knows says that he thinks that they dropped a NASCAR engine
>in it. That's certainly possible, as there was a lot of room under
>that long Mustang hood.
I know you can fit a Cleveland or a Windsor small block under the hood
(not available in 67/68 ?) of the 67/68 frame but I'm reasonable sure
that you need the 69/70 frame if you want to house a big block.
I had always thought that the model was that year's K-GT, still with
the 289 block although I don`t know the displacement.
The internet movie database didn`t reveal any facts.
I'm fairly sure that the 289 in the K-GT could smoke the hides direct
from the factory.
[...]
>The Bullitt DVD had a great segment on the making of the movie, which
>I think must have been a 30-minute TV show or something. McQueen was
>really hipped on authenticity,
>
Some odd bits that I could never really add up:
Before the chase the Mustang is following the Charger under an
underpass where they take a left at the end. The Charger's brake
lights seem to pulse like it was an auto and someone is left-footing
the brake. But in the action the Charger is manual.
Also, I could never tell whether some bits of the soundtrack during
the chase had been 'folleyed' (sp ?), as when the Mustang upchanges
you get a sound like he is double-declutching on a downchange. Weird.
Anyway. Every piece of the footage is a delight - even down to the bit
where McQueen parallel parks the Mustang.
[...]
>> No burst. The '68 & '69 Chargers are, to me, the epitome of
>> muscle car design. It's kinda like my regard for the B-47: a moment
>> of culture crystallized in design. [...]
Succinctly put - I shall remember this phrase and pass it off as my
own.
>(although some of that may have been the unexpectedness of a woman in
>her 30s who liked to show teenagers that fancy paintjobs couldn't take
>400 cubic inches displacement on and win).
>
Mary: You really are quite summin' else !
[...]
>Nothing will ever match that chase. I don't care what anyone says
>about The French Connection or anything else.
Oh yes indeedey (but I think the chase in the French Connection is in
a different category, and first in this category.)
What is a great, great pity however <sinister kettle drums> is the
recent sacrilegious use of this hallowed footage from 'Bullit' in a
-mere- -base- advertisement. <raises voice> Militating this crime
further is the fact that the same, nameless company, actually
contributed to the original footage.
HOW COULD THEY !!!!!?
Even worse - they included a reference to =even= more sacred footage:
That of McQueen getting his motorbike airborne and jumping the barbed
fire fence (<- note aviation content of post) in 'The Great Escape'.
<foam flecks off lips> WHAT MONSTROUS CALUMNY !!!!...
Funk - 'AA fuel-altered' - raum
funkraum
[...]
>I know you can fit a Cleveland or a Windsor small block under the hood
>(not available in 67/68 ?) of the 67/68 frame but I'm reasonable sure
>that you need the 69/70 frame if you want to house a big block.
>
I stand corrected - the big block fits
See thread:
'Re: Memphis Belle - a realistic movie? < car stuff now! >'
Albert H. Dobyns
> >
> > >Uh, Billy, that was a 1968 Charger...
> >
> > (Really? Round tail lights? How I hate a dimming recall.)
>
> think. It's a '68 Mustang fastback, although a friend of mine who
> probably knows says that he thinks that they dropped a NASCAR engine
> in it. That's certainly possible, as there was a lot of room under
> backing the Mustang up and you can see the rear tire squirming and the
> wheel flexing--no torsion bars possible on San Francisco streets,
> unlike the tracks.
>
> Robert "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" Duvall (see, a real
> reference to military aviation) was in the movie, too. He's the taxi
> driver. And Mr. Roper from "Three's Company" was a police lieutenant.
>
....
>
> Those were the days--the only way to burn rubber in my '95 Cutlass
> Supreme is to be on a hill. Front-wheel drive, with its great
>
> > >It was however the greatest chase scene in history!
> >
> > Yup. Prototypical. Although Roy Scheider wrecking that Pontiac
> > in "The Seven-Ups" was pretty good, too.
>
> about The French Connection or anything else.
>
> Mary Shafer NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA
> SR-71 Flying Qualities Lead Engineer Of course I don't speak for NASA
> sha...@reseng.dfrc.nasa.gov DoD #362 KotFR
> URL http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/People/Shafer/mary.html
> For personal messages, please use sha...@ursa-major.spdcc.com
There is one car chase of a sort that is funny. In "What's Up, Doc"
Ryan O'Neal and Barbra S. are riding some kind of tricycle thing with
a box on the front...or maybe they are in a VW. Anyway all these
crazy guys are chasing them in cars like 1950's Cadillac, and other
big iron. I love how they keep running into each other, hubcaps
flying, one car loses its hood, and I think they all wind up in
the bay. It's a different form of car chases but to me it's funny.
I like the ones you described, too.
--
Al