79 Cringeworth Top Gun errors

[112th_Rossi]

A good read

 

http://www.wearethemighty.com/79-cringe-worthy-technical-errors-in-the-movie-top-gun-2015-03

[NineLine]

Or another name for that article: "People that take movies too seriously" :D

[smnwrx]

This guy is a former RIO. He writes some pretty good fiction stuff staring the tomcat.

[kontiuka]

In all honesty, I would have caught very few of those errors. Even after playing DCS for years. But, then again, I really wouldn't have been looking for them.

[kontiuka]

My one pet peeve about aviation movies is stock footage. In one scene, the bandit is flying an F-5 then in another he's flying an F-16 (stock footage inserted to save money). I'm not talking about Top Gun per se, just those type of movies in general.

[outlawal2]

A good read

 

http://www.wearethemighty.com/79-cringe-worthy-technical-errors-in-the-movie-top-gun-2015-03

 

A fun article but I love it when folks try to discredit everything and then screw up themselves. MANY errors in this article..

 

(One example was the hard deck and how "Watch the Mountains" would never be stated if they were above the hard deck...)

 

Ummmm, yes it would if the mountain was 10,000 feet or taller. Remember that those numbers are always from sea level, not from ground level...

 

Still a fun read though..

[NineLine]

Name a Tom Cruise movie that was more than just a shiny happy rendition of reality... I am glad that this person could point out so many technical errors, but I still watch the movie anytime its on TV, and I enjoy it for what it is... popcorn fodder...

[outlawal2]

Absolutely..

 

Besides, some of the "errors" aren't really errors at all, they are changes made so that average Joes (and Janes) can follow what the Hell is going on.. One example was the use of the call signs rather than the plane tail numbers... Well yeah because we all have a list of tail numbers for naval aircraft printed out on a sheet of paper right?

 

Sometimes they make changes and the DO make sense.. Otherwise half of these movies would be a total waste of time because no one would have any idea what is going on..

[cichlidfan]

I would imagine that the technical advisor(s) for the movie, as well as the producers, were well aware of all of most, if not all, errors before the movie even finished production.

Edited March 12, 2015 by cichlidfan

[PFunk1606688187]

Ummmm, yes it would if the mountain was 10,000 feet or taller. Remember that those numbers are always from sea level, not from ground level...

 

Why would you pick a hard deck below the mountains? :huh:

[joey45]

 

It's a film..

[Yurgon]

My one pet peeve about aviation movies is stock footage. In one scene, the bandit is flying an F-5 then in another he's flying an F-16 (stock footage inserted to save money). I'm not talking about Top Gun per se, just those type of movies in general.

 

Yeah, or the Air Force's F-16 are actually F/A-18 because the effects company had done Independence Day and they didn't have any F-16 models ready for action. (As I recall it, this was the explanation for a f***up on an episode of "24", but would probably explain a few more errors of the kind).

 

Or the aviation equivalent of the gun that is clearly empty in one scene and loaded in the next shot: external loads and paint-jobs changing from shot to shot, or F-14 wings being swept back and then forward. And of course, whatever the pilots do, if they get really angry, they push the throttle to full AB - regardless of the fact that they'd been doing that like 5 times in a row already. :D

 

I know some of this crap is because of budget constraints or for dramatic reasons, but most of it seems so avoidable.

 

Of course in the CGI age, most of the above mistakes can be avoided, but now the flight model looks so badly off that one would simply wish they used DCS for the external shots and vamped up the colors a bit. This forum holds more than enough proof that it's doable with still pictures, and with a bit of cash, why not apply those techniques to moving pictures as well?

 

Holy crud, CGI, now that's gonna get me started... why would an F-35 engage a terrorist truck from a freaking hover? Because... it's possible.

 

Seriously. The Harrier-scene in True Lies was hilarious (in a good way), but what the hell were they thinking in Die Hard 4? Then again, the movie wasn't nearly as boring as the fifth, so in all honesty I kinda forgive them for the F-35 abuse. And taking down a chopper with a car. And the fact that an alcoholic, broke, looser cop was actually able to fly a chopper himself without breaking it. And... nope, let's not go down that road any further, or we'll end up with at least 79 totally annoying things in Die Hard 4... :)

[Scarecrow]

Yeah Iron Eagle was way more realistic and far less homo-erotic.;)

[104th_Maverick]

Who ever wrote that article needs shot!

 

Semi-interesting though

[BIGNEWY]

Top gun was a great film, it was fun to watch a young pilot struggle with his own sexuality and have hollywood portray it so well :)

[NineLine]

Top gun was a great film, it was fun to watch a young pilot struggle with his own sexuality and have hollywood portray it so well :)

 

So you are saying it spoke to you personally on many levels huh ;)

[BIGNEWY]

So you are saying it spoke to you personally on many levels huh ;)

 

Only my feminine side ;)

[Daisai]

Ah... Top gun...

 

That movie sucked so much, those errors were so obvious it would make you think it was directed by a blind person.

[tomcatter]

Ah... Top gun...

 

That movie sucked so much, those errors were so obvious it would make you think it was directed by a blind person.

 

The facts that we are making posts about that film almost 30 years after it was released and that the film collected 356 $ millions maybe indicate that your comment is not accurate.

 

It was a mainstream film made for pure entertainment, not a documentary about naval aviation.

[Roadrunner]

as much errors as this movie may have, as much fun it was when i was young. my best friend then and myself would watch that movie and then fly F/A-18 Interceptor on the Amiga500 one at a time.

 

we also had a "simulator" with wiremesh models and splitscreen where we would dogfight each other debating about who was the better pilot, hehe.

 

so as said, as bad as it may be from an aviator point of view, it was entertaining and pushed our fantasy and we had a good time ;)

 

regards,

RR

[VIKBELL]

That movie was the U.S Navy best recruiting tool.. IMHO.:smilewink:

[Tone71]

as much errors as this movie may have, as much fun it was when i was young. my best friend then and myself would watch that movie and then fly F/A-18 Interceptor on the Amiga500 one at a time.

 

we also had a "simulator" with wiremesh models and splitscreen where we would dogfight each other debating about who was the better pilot, hehe.

 

My mate and I used to play F/A-18 on his Amiga, taking turns, and that wireframe splitscreen "simulator" wasn't Skychase by any chance? We'd play that on my Atari ST!

[Roadrunner]

yes!

 

with that name i found screenshots, it was indeed skychase!

 

 

there was also a paper plane in there, aye?

[Tone71]

there was also a paper plane in there, aye?

 

There sure was:

 

 

I loved this game but look at what we have now :)

 

Edit: sorry for the off topic nostalgia trip guys!

[outlawal2]

Why would you pick a hard deck below the mountains? :huh:

 

It isn't real difficult to figure out if you pick a hard deck of 10,000 feet and you take off from ground level and say you are 30 MILES away from the mountains at takeoff, it is conceivable that once you reach the mountains, your hard deck is no longer valid... The real mistake here was allowing them to fly that close to the mountains in the first place...