Sorry, I wasn’t meaning you….I apologize for implying that. What I meant was these kinds of threads run every once in awhile and the tone seems overly critical to me. What are filmmakers supposed to use to represent MIGs? When some of these films were made it’s not like the Ruskies were leasing out their Air Force. The guys aren’t making the films for that 0.0001% in the audience who can tell the difference between a SBD and a TBD, or a B-17E from a B-17G. It’s entertainment, folks.

.

Thank you – much appreciated – my view really is that I’d like to see a bit more consistancy, in “Midway” a flight of ‘planes changes at every shot for example, just do some research and find a “stable” ground, battle of britain for example – OK, we have a bunch of look alikes, lets keep with them. Now with CGI the supply of thousands of planes will be easier, so send somebody to do some research, to stop (say…) Air Force F-18’s like in “the rock”, OK, rest of the film is 100% pappy entertainment and I really don’t think a 65 year old convict could take on special forces, so why did only the F-18’s with “US Air Force” painted on them get my attention!? – maybe the wife is right about me……. heaven forbid:eek:

Contrary to common belief the design was not a failure and was loved by the majority of its pilots. At times the Whirlwind was the only type capable of flying in weather conditions that kept other, and certainly single engined types, on the ground. Most of the problems with the engines were ironed out and certainly below 15,000ft there was very few aircraft who could touch it for speed. Admittedly it was not a great match against single seat types such as the FW190, but there again how many twin engined types were?

Its remarkable to think that it remained in service, basically unaltered, from late 1940 through to late 1943. When it was finally replaced by the Typhoon on 263 Sqn, the Sqd Ldr at that time, Geoff Warnes, considered that the unit had lost its elite status within the RAF.

I’ve heard and read much the same. The engine was never fully developed as the Whirlwind was the only aircraft using it, and it was two small to take a merlin. The high landing speed on grass airfields is often quoted as the reason why it was taken out of service. Consider the losses of Blenheims and 3 crew per time against a squadron of whirlwinds carrying a 1,000 ilbs of bombs on sweeps. as for the posts, any flyer of any historic ‘plane is a winner, reality bites however and I’d settle for a restoration/replica combination.

Its interesting, remember the “zig zag” paint job on F-14’s tested in the early 80’s – the whole concept is to make the angle of the aircraft look different and try to make the pilot alter his own flight – I think basically, however you look it seems like an aeroplane shaped hole in the sky, which is why RAF trainers are black instead of yellow red etc ! – I think Canadian F-18’s still have them?

I’m going with Battlestar…definately a Battlestar…prob the Pegasus but could be the Galctica…

thats a colonial fleet secret, BSG-75 is in stealth mode, avoiding the in laws what with the time of year and all…………:D 😉

Tony Buttler bok, British secret projects – jet fighters since 1950 has some interestig line drawings, it as a P.110 dated March 1981, looks a tad like a Grypen to me – it has a few others, no P.120 but the 110 may be close?

Why in “Tora Tora Tora”, which allowing for the aircraft available with no CGI etc, does a fine job, did they butcher a B-25 with a single fin, just to be blown up by a “zero” diving into the hanger? Its on screen for seconds, but stands out (OK, to me) a mile?

633 Squadron

In old movies you have to cut slack on effects etc, but ever noticed that the Mossies have no tails when they do the cockpit scenes? – They faffed about with the engine sound tracks as well, the merlins all sound like they have no oil in and are being thrashed to death.