A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

P-51's in movie "Empire of the Sun"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old March 19th 04, 07:10 PM
Stephen Harding
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Cub Driver wrote:

Great movie, by the way--Empire of the Sun, I mean. But did you notice
that the entire tail section of the "Zero" turned? Probably it was an
AT-6 with a pointy tail cone pasted on.


This makes me wonder just what sort of "modifications" are
typically done by Hollywood to create actual flying aircraft
no longer in existence, or just not available to fly.

Obviously, the main "trick" is simply paint the aircraft in
the correct national markings. Thus a P-51 becomes an Me 109,
an AT-6 a Zero (seems the most common role for a Texan in a
movie). Some F-86s can become "Migs", and I vaguely recall
a C-47 becoming a G4M Betty at one time.

JN-4 "Jennies" served as German and British/US fighters in the
WWI movies of the 20's and 30's. Just a splash of paint and
a roundel made it a Sopwith Camel, or a black cross and it was
a "Fokker".

I believe in "Memphis Belle" a B-17G was converted to an F by
actual removal of the nose turret. Addition of a tail cone
to make an AT-6 into a Zero seems more than necessary, but
some directors are detail focused.

Then of course there are "faux warbird" props. Even during
WWII when the real thing might have been available, you often
see some dummied up aircraft. I think John Wayne in "Flying
Tigers" had some plywood P-40s with propellers that would
lazily spin trying to imitate a squadron cranking up for an
intercept. I think the BoB TV movie "Piece of Cake" used
some dummied up Spits for ground scenes as well. Didn't some
of them spin props too?

Of course with the increasing power of F/X in movies, you can
now film formations worth of Me 262s attacking B-24s or
whatever. The need for the actual warbird is pretty much gone.


SMH

  #12  
Old March 19th 04, 09:27 PM
Laurence Doering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:10:07 -0500, Stephen Harding wrote:
Cub Driver wrote:

Great movie, by the way--Empire of the Sun, I mean. But did you notice
that the entire tail section of the "Zero" turned? Probably it was an
AT-6 with a pointy tail cone pasted on.


This makes me wonder just what sort of "modifications" are
typically done by Hollywood to create actual flying aircraft
no longer in existence, or just not available to fly.

Obviously, the main "trick" is simply paint the aircraft in
the correct national markings. Thus a P-51 becomes an Me 109,
an AT-6 a Zero (seems the most common role for a Texan in a
movie). Some F-86s can become "Migs", and I vaguely recall
a C-47 becoming a G4M Betty at one time.


The most famous modified aircraft of this type are probably the
faux Japanese aircraft used to film the 1970 movie "Tora, Tora,
Tora!" I recently saw the movie again on cable, and it looked
to me like pretty much all of the flying sequences used real
aircraft (as opposed to models -- CGI animation obviously
wasn't a possibility in the late Sixties.)

According to the web page of the Commemorative (nee Confederate)
Air Force's Gulf Coast Wing [1], which owns and operates 14 of the
aircraft that were used to film the movie, the Zeros were modified
AT-6 Texans, the Val dive bombers were modified BT-13 Valiants,
and the Kate torpedo bombers were combinations of AT-6 and BT-13
components "with lots of stretching and modifying both types."

The web page also mentions that the CAF is currently modifying
another AT-6 to look like a Zero to add to their airshow act.

... Addition of a tail cone to make an AT-6 into a Zero
seems more than necessary, but some directors are detail
focused.


The "Tora, Tora, Tora!" AT-6s were modified to change the
general shape of the wingtips and tail surfaces to match
the Zero's silhouette, and were fitted with replacement
canopies (the T-6 canopy looks nothing like a Zero's.)

On the other hand, some movie directors don't really care --
see, for example, "Iron Eagle II", which gets points for
using real aircraft and air-to-air photography, but loses
them big time for painting red stars on Israeli Air Force
F-4 Phantoms and calling them "MiG"s.

I think the BoB TV movie "Piece of Cake" used some dummied up
Spits for ground scenes as well. Didn't some
of them spin props too?


"Tora, Tora, Tora!" features a number of P-40s and PBYs
getting blowed up good on the ground during the attack.
I assume the P-40s were mockups. Dunno about the PBYs -
it might have been cheaper and easier to use real junked
PBYs from some boneyard somewhere than to build full-sized
mockups.

Of course with the increasing power of F/X in movies, you can
now film formations worth of Me 262s attacking B-24s or
whatever. The need for the actual warbird is pretty much gone.


Maybe, maybe not. The CGI animated flying sequences in
"Pearl Harbor" look pretty lame compared to the flying
sequences in "Tora, Tora, Tora!" While it's true that
you'd have no other choice than CGI if you had to have
a scene that showed large formations of B-17s and German
fighters all at once, real aircraft and air-to-air photography
still give you better looking footage (in my opinion, anyway.)

CGI sequences aren't cost-free, either. Look at "Pearl Harbor" --
they could have used CGI to produce realistic WWII destroyers being
bombed at anchor, but instead opted to set off a bunch of pyro effects
on the decks of several real decommissioned Spruance-class destroyers.


ljd

[1] http://www.gulfcoastwing.org/torapage.htm
  #13  
Old March 19th 04, 10:05 PM
M. H. Greaves
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

i saw a film that they tried to make the F4 Phantom a russian fighter! that
said, the chances of getting a REAL russian plane for the film would be
pretty slim!
In 633 sqdn they used me108's because they couldnt get a 109!
In the film Memphis Belle, they had a Bf109 with a Merlin engine (same
engine as in the spitfire and the P51), so they could have a mostly genuine
enemy plane (well apart from the engine).
Of course there werent any originally engined 109's available.
In the original Pearl Harbour they took the two rudders off a B25 and put a
cardboard fin in the middle, to make it look like something else (what, i
dont know!!).
I think we could go on and on, with this!
he he!
regards, Mark.
"Stephen Harding" wrote in message
...
Cub Driver wrote:

Great movie, by the way--Empire of the Sun, I mean. But did you notice
that the entire tail section of the "Zero" turned? Probably it was an
AT-6 with a pointy tail cone pasted on.


This makes me wonder just what sort of "modifications" are
typically done by Hollywood to create actual flying aircraft
no longer in existence, or just not available to fly.

Obviously, the main "trick" is simply paint the aircraft in
the correct national markings. Thus a P-51 becomes an Me 109,
an AT-6 a Zero (seems the most common role for a Texan in a
movie). Some F-86s can become "Migs", and I vaguely recall
a C-47 becoming a G4M Betty at one time.

JN-4 "Jennies" served as German and British/US fighters in the
WWI movies of the 20's and 30's. Just a splash of paint and
a roundel made it a Sopwith Camel, or a black cross and it was
a "Fokker".

I believe in "Memphis Belle" a B-17G was converted to an F by
actual removal of the nose turret. Addition of a tail cone
to make an AT-6 into a Zero seems more than necessary, but
some directors are detail focused.

Then of course there are "faux warbird" props. Even during
WWII when the real thing might have been available, you often
see some dummied up aircraft. I think John Wayne in "Flying
Tigers" had some plywood P-40s with propellers that would
lazily spin trying to imitate a squadron cranking up for an
intercept. I think the BoB TV movie "Piece of Cake" used
some dummied up Spits for ground scenes as well. Didn't some
of them spin props too?

Of course with the increasing power of F/X in movies, you can
now film formations worth of Me 262s attacking B-24s or
whatever. The need for the actual warbird is pretty much gone.


SMH



  #14  
Old March 19th 04, 10:26 PM
Cub Driver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Maybe, maybe not. The CGI animated flying sequences in
"Pearl Harbor" look pretty lame compared to the flying
sequences in "Tora, Tora, Tora!"


That's certainly my feeling. When I see a contemporary movie (Saving
Private Ryan, Windtalkers, Hamburger Hill?, even Pearl Harbor) and
watch the fighters come buzzing in, I feel as though I had been
transported into Flight Simulator. They just don't look real. Pearl
Harbor did a pretty good job with this, because in each case I think
there was an actual plane, which was multiplied by computer tricks.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at
www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com
  #15  
Old March 20th 04, 02:40 AM
Jim Doyle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"M. H. Greaves" wrote in message
...
i saw a film that they tried to make the F4 Phantom a russian fighter!

that
said, the chances of getting a REAL russian plane for the film would be
pretty slim!
In 633 sqdn they used me108's because they couldnt get a 109!


Same with 'Von Ryan's Express' - rocket firing 108's! Also didn't Donald
Pleasence get shot after James Gardner crashed theirs in 'The Great Escape'?

In the film Memphis Belle, they had a Bf109 with a Merlin engine (same
engine as in the spitfire and the P51), so they could have a mostly

genuine
enemy plane (well apart from the engine).
Of course there werent any originally engined 109's available.


Just the one actually, 'Black 6' at Duxford - (has since crashed into a
field at the hands of the then CinC Strike!)

In the original Pearl Harbour they took the two rudders off a B25 and put

a
cardboard fin in the middle, to make it look like something else (what, i
dont know!!).
I think we could go on and on, with this!
he he!
regards, Mark.
"Stephen Harding" wrote in message
...
Cub Driver wrote:

Great movie, by the way--Empire of the Sun, I mean. But did you notice
that the entire tail section of the "Zero" turned? Probably it was an
AT-6 with a pointy tail cone pasted on.


This makes me wonder just what sort of "modifications" are
typically done by Hollywood to create actual flying aircraft
no longer in existence, or just not available to fly.

Obviously, the main "trick" is simply paint the aircraft in
the correct national markings. Thus a P-51 becomes an Me 109,
an AT-6 a Zero (seems the most common role for a Texan in a
movie). Some F-86s can become "Migs", and I vaguely recall
a C-47 becoming a G4M Betty at one time.

JN-4 "Jennies" served as German and British/US fighters in the
WWI movies of the 20's and 30's. Just a splash of paint and
a roundel made it a Sopwith Camel, or a black cross and it was
a "Fokker".

I believe in "Memphis Belle" a B-17G was converted to an F by
actual removal of the nose turret. Addition of a tail cone
to make an AT-6 into a Zero seems more than necessary, but
some directors are detail focused.

Then of course there are "faux warbird" props. Even during
WWII when the real thing might have been available, you often
see some dummied up aircraft. I think John Wayne in "Flying
Tigers" had some plywood P-40s with propellers that would
lazily spin trying to imitate a squadron cranking up for an
intercept. I think the BoB TV movie "Piece of Cake" used
some dummied up Spits for ground scenes as well. Didn't some
of them spin props too?

Of course with the increasing power of F/X in movies, you can
now film formations worth of Me 262s attacking B-24s or
whatever. The need for the actual warbird is pretty much gone.


SMH





  #16  
Old March 20th 04, 05:09 AM
Dan Shackelford
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:56:18 -0500, zxcv wrote:

I was watching "Empire of the Sun" the other night and near the end some
P-51's attack the Japanese base. What struck me was that the P-51's were
flying in just a few feet above the ground and dropping their bombs.
Would this really have been done? How did the planes keep from blowing
themselves up?


Delayed action fuses in the bombs were used in low level attacks.

  #18  
Old March 20th 04, 07:34 AM
QDurham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Damnably impossible I'd say...the rules say 100 feet for 'pilot bombing' and
while this figure was likely (certainly) broken a _few_ times nobody actually
flew _knowingly_ with the prop tips
"3 to 5" feet above the water in a P2V. Trust me.

Sorry Gordo. Been there. Done that. Seaman's Eye bombing as well as mining
operations. Propwash in water. The Navy likes water. "Stay low and you can't
possibly fall very far."

We were "mining" Buckner Bay, Okinawa, once upon a time, leaving a propwash
wake in the water while the AF was up looking for us visually in F86s. Heard
one jet pilot say "I'm all the way down to 5 thousand feet. Wonder where they
are." Then another say something like "I'm down here in Australia. I'll go up
to Alaska and see if they are hiding behind a polar bear," or some such. Whish
whish zippy-zippy zoom-zoom!

We were at 5 feet. They never saw us. Hope we have better anti-mining
techniques now than we had then. Scary. If we could do that in barely 200+ kt
prop planes on a clear day with defense given time of arrival and looking for
us visually, what could the bad guys do on a dark and stormy night? Scary.

Quent (VP 29)



  #19  
Old March 20th 04, 11:13 AM
M. H. Greaves
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yep, and on dropping the eggs they flew off to one side!
"Dan Shackelford" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:56:18 -0500, zxcv wrote:

I was watching "Empire of the Sun" the other night and near the end some
P-51's attack the Japanese base. What struck me was that the P-51's

were
flying in just a few feet above the ground and dropping their bombs.
Would this really have been done? How did the planes keep from blowing
themselves up?


Delayed action fuses in the bombs were used in low level attacks.



  #20  
Old March 20th 04, 11:18 AM
Cub Driver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Damnably impossible I'd say...the rules say 100 feet for 'pilot
bombing' and while this figure was likely (certainly) broken a
_few_ times nobody actually flew _knowingly_ with the prop tips
"3 to 5" feet above the water in a P2V. Trust me.


How much of a cushion do you have, from ground effect, in a
high-powered aircraft? I suppose it would be least in a fighter or a
B-26. But what about a B-25 or -17? If you were making 200 mph, say,
would the ground really want to reject you, or would you plow right
in?

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at
www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cold War: The War For American Empire Krztalizer Military Aviation 2 March 15th 04 01:45 AM
Cargo plane in movie "Flying Tigers" John Fitzpatrick Military Aviation 5 October 26th 03 10:46 PM
French block airlift of British troops to Basra Michael Petukhov Military Aviation 202 October 24th 03 06:48 PM
Flying Fortress Movie L'acrobat Military Aviation 0 July 1st 03 12:42 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.