Tin Triangle,
Your hope that “I’d rather they concentrated on getting the props, casting, locations, Lancasters, main storyline and script etc believable and accurate.” is – as you full well know – not likely to be achieved within the limits of criticism on this Forum. However brilliant the re-creation may be (Black Labs names aside) there will – I guarantee it – be those who will cavill that “The oxygen mask used was not issued until 6 months after the time of OP CHASTISE”. Or some such equally fatuous niff-naff and trivia.
The whole point of the original film was very strongly made when, at the close, Gibson walks away saying “I have some letters to write”. The technicalities were brilliant, the (then) CGIs were a bit primitive, but the casualties were far, far, more important. Any remake is totally irrelevant, and only designed to part your hard-earned money from your wallet. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive.
Respectfully (to the 617 Sqn casualties)
Resmoroh

Don’t get me wrong, I quite agree. Re-makes as a whole are generally a waste of time, in this case no less than in any other. It will not be any better than the original, and you are probably right regarding how accurate it will be, but I don’t see that this changes the essential point: given that it does happen, the dog’s name is one thing that really shouldn’t matter. The essential message of the film (indeed summed up by Gibson’s last line in the original) is far more important.

It seems to me that it is such an inconsequential and minor detail in the storyline that it really doesn’t matter what they call the dog. If times have changed such to not permit the word being used, what of it? At the end of the day, they have to try and make a profit on the film, and if the name of the dog is key to making it sell in America, then so be it. I’d rather they concentrated on getting the props, casting, locations, Lancasters, main storyline and script etc believable and accurate. These, after all, are the things that are going to make the film “feel” right and evoke the spirit of the events, times and personalities involved.

Fine stuff: a Short Belfast display must have been a sight to behold!

It surely can’t just be need to work out all the stresses etc effecting an aircraft of plywood construction, as don’t we have things like Proctors flying (and under restoration to fly) with plywood construction, albeit much more simple airframes? Is it a case of trying to combine a massively powerful and complex warbird with wooden construction that presents such a hurdle with the CAA? Or is this not a fair comparison?

That Monospar’s really coming together nicely. What a complex structure!
Also, nice to see from Pic 2 that the Dominie acquisition went ahead, even if it was delivered a bit smaller than planned!

What a stunner! She looks amazing, a true testament to the hard work put in.

Many happy returns…

I saw what must have been this aircraft flying North over Oxford in formation with a Cessna of some description a couple of weeks ago. I assume it was on its way up to Coventry. Nearly made me fall off my bike when I saw it!