Top Gun Maverick

[Gianky]

Hey Skatezilla,

one is Devotion (crossing my fingers for this one...), which one is the other?

[SkateZilla]

it has no official title yet it's in preproduction

[Gianky]

Thanks SZ, I'll keep an eye out for it.

[Aquorys]

I finally watched it! Despite the somewhat ridiculous mission and circumstances surrounding it, it was an entertaining movie, I had fun watching it.

On 7/29/2022 at 10:20 PM, Dragon1-1 said:

IRL, it would've been bust. This mission simply wouldn't have happened. Too much risk, no real approach to the target. That said, it also wouldn't have happened for the simple reason the US reacts to situations like these with hand-wringing and strongly worded letters, maybe a few more sanctions if there's anything left to sanction by that point. 

Either that, or from what I have seen in the movie, it seems to me that the mission would not have been that hard to accomplish if it had been done differently.

Here are some of my random thoughts about that whole scenario:

• They successfully attacked the airfield with cruise missiles. Why not just fire a whole bunch of cruise missiles at the target using DSMAC navigation, or at least at the air defenses around it? Don't really need GPS for that.
• If the cruise missiles can't hit the target, hit the GPS jammers instead, then fly a B-2 over it and drop a JDAM.
• The bad guys' air defenses looked a lot like the SA-3 (S-125). I guess some jammers would have made that mission a lot easier.
• Okay, so for some reason, the bad guys don't have access to modern SAMs, but they do have access to top notch stealth aircraft. Probably bring some F-35s to the party or call the Air Force for some F-22 support, not for bombing, just air-to-air for a target CAP to level the playing field.
• If I were a bad guy, I'd probably use some low-altitude air defenses. Even limited to cold war era material, there are still ZSU-23s, SA-8s, SA-9s, SA-13s, MANPADS like the SA-7/14/24, they could probably ruin your day if you were going to fly through that canyon.

Aaaahhh... all those possibilities!! 

 

On 7/29/2022 at 10:20 PM, Dragon1-1 said:

That said, it also wouldn't have happened for the simple reason the US reacts to situations like these with hand-wringing and strongly worded letters, maybe a few more sanctions if there's anything left to sanction by that point. 

Yeah, like virtually all other countries, unfortunately. Except the UNO. The UNO doesn't even write strongly worded letters because chances are it's gonna get vetoed by the country's government that was supposed to receive the letter, because that makes a lot of sense. Oh boy, the reality of politics... 

 

On 7/30/2022 at 7:04 PM, Exorcet said:

I really think a realistic strike would have been more interesting than the canyon thing, not to mention a lot more reasonable.

Yeah, I think it could have been. But anyway, just as with games like DCS, the most important aspect of movies and games is that they are entertaining, and it was. Plus we have something to talk about in the forums. Imagine how boring all the discussions would have been if the only thing we all could say about it were, "yeah, that's what I would have done too"... 

[Dragon1-1]

3 minutes ago, Aquorys said:

• They successfully attacked the airfield with cruise missiles. Why not just fire a whole bunch of cruise missiles at the target using DSMAC navigation, or at least at the air defenses around it? Don't really need GPS for that.
• If the cruise missiles can't hit the target, hit the GPS jammers instead, then fly a B-2 over it and drop a JDAM.
• The bad guys' air defenses looked a lot like the SA-3 (S-125). I guess some jammers would have made that mission a lot easier.
• Okay, so for some reason, the bad guys don't have access to modern SAMs, but they do have access to top notch stealth aircraft. Probably bring some F-35s to the party or call the Air Force for some F-22 support, not for bombing, just air-to-air for a target CAP to level the playing field.
• If I were a bad guy, I'd probably use some low-altitude air defenses. Even limited to cold war era material, there are still ZSU-23s, SA-8s, SA-9s, SA-13s, MANPADS like the SA-7/14/24, they could probably ruin your day if you were going to fly through that canyon.

1. Not sure CMs exist with quite the accuracy (INS, in this case!) and bunker-busting power of a Paveway III. Of all things, the weapon choice was definitely right. SAMs could have been hit, particularly their radars, but remember that a fleet has a limited number of TLAMs. There were a lot of SAMs (though we don't get to see any radars), and with increased CEP. flying under INS, TLAMs lose their "pick a window" accuracy. Not a problem shooting at an airbase, but could be for a single SAM launcher.

2. JDAMs don't have quite the "womp rat" level of accuracy needed here even if they have access to GPS. LGBs are much better in that regard, this is part of the reason LJDAM was developed. For a target that small it had to be an LGB.

3. Some Growlers would've been useful either way, if only to give the heroes a better chance at getting back. Evidently, the filmmakers knew much more about planes than they did about SAMs. But that's common, air defense is almost never depicted correctly. Nobody appreciates the complexity of these things.

4. And let them wussies share the glory? No way! This is a Navy operation, with real men and women flying real planes off a real boat. No way they'd go to some AF sissies for help.  Actually a more realistic outcome than one might think, interservice politics do get in the way IRL. Frankly, given that most people planning this op seem to be Navy aviators, with egos to match, it's likely they just didn't think about involving the Air Force.

5. They would have to be posted in the valley. The whole point of the strike was that the enemy didn't know it was coming. In fact, they didn't think someone would be crazy enough to attempt it. There's a ton of things the enemy could have done to stop the raid dead in its tracks if they knew it was coming. Also remember, the facility was quite secret. Locating SAMs around the area makes sense because of the airbase, stationing ground troops in direct proximity of the installation could compromise secrecy (yes, it was already compromised, but they didn't know that).

You forgot the big one: shoot some damn HARMs! Even if the cruise missiles couldn't have been used to directly hit the SAM grid, other Hornets could be tasked with launching HARMs to keep the SAM radars silent. Egress should definitely have been covered by at least division strength SEAD cover. Would make getting out much easier, and HARMs' long range would keep them well clear of the Felons. Plus, as I said before, having another division in the air would've helped get the Felons to think about something other than the strikers.

[Aquorys]

21 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

1. Not sure CMs exist with quite the accuracy (INS, in this case!)

As I mentioned, DSMAC - it follows terrain by scanning the terrain and matching it to an onboard database that contains a map of the terrain (e.g., see here for some further information, and this is from as long ago as 1994, it was probably upgraded a couple times since then). It's been implemented on Tomahawks for decades.

21 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

4. And let them wussies [the Air Force, A/C] share the glory? No way! This is a Navy operation, with real men and women flying real planes off a real boat. No way they'd go to some AF sissies for help.  Actually a more realistic outcome than one might think, interservice politics do get in the way IRL. Frankly, given that most people planning this op seem to be Navy aviators, with egos to match, it's likely they just didn't think about involving the Air Force.

Hahahaha, yeah, I mean, I have to admit, I was being completely unreasonable concerning this suggestion, that would never happen! 

Chances are, if the Navy struggled to do the mission, some generals would still be sitting around a table trying to figure out how to get the Navy and the Air Force to work together, and meanwhile, the whole thing would get blown up by a handful CAG operators who'd pull up at the target location in a stolen Toyota Landcruiser 

Edited August 15, 2022 by Aquorys

[Dragon1-1]

4 hours ago, Aquorys said:

As I mentioned, DSMAC - it follows terrain by scanning the terrain and matching it to an onboard database that contains a map of the terrain (e.g., see here for some further information, and this is from as long ago as 1994, it was probably upgraded a couple times since then). It's been implemented on Tomahawks for decades.

DSMAC is great for navigating, but it's not going to give you nearly that kind of accuracy. It was awesome for a 1994 missile that had no MITL capability or laser guidance. The best info I found about TLAMs is that they have a CEP of ~10m, and I don't think it improved tenfold even using a modern iteration of DSMAC (and that's a CEP, meaning 50% chance of ending up in the circle). Only laser guidance can provide sub-meter accuracy from an aircraft, remember that a laser-guided Hellfire variant is the only system that can hit individual humans precisely enough to not need a warhead (the R9X "Ninja Missile"). Plus, you have to do it with a pretty big penetrating warhead, a TLAM is a 1000lbs unitary, while a PIII is a 2000lbs bunker buster. 

4 hours ago, Aquorys said:

Chances are, if the Navy struggled to do the mission, some generals would still be sitting around a table trying to figure out how to get the Navy and the Air Force to work together, and meanwhile, the whole thing would get blown up by a handful CAG operators who'd pull up at the target location in a stolen Toyota Landcruiser 

Remember the Navy has SEALs, too, that could be a last-ditch attempt to stave off the other services.  That said, it probably would've come online by then, making this potentially troublesome from the political side. Scattering possibly enriched uranium around the landscape is not a good PR move, particularly for an op that would already cause other countries to give US the stinkeye. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the Navy suddenly became very concerned about radioactive fallout the moment other services started getting near the mission...  

[Harry_Bumcrack]

Suggested pre-flight checklist:

1. Popcorn: big - check

2. Beverage of choice - check

3. Set expectations (this is a work of fiction made to appeal to the masses not 'rivet counters') - check

That worked for me. If you accept that you want to be entertained rather than informed then be prepared for the type of 'blockbuster' that I thought hollywood had forgotten how to make.

I'm personally not a big fan of Tom Cruise and didn't really like the first Topgun. But I really enjoyed this one and for a movie with a two hour + runtime it never drags, unlike other films of this length.

I can't see it winning any Oscar's (except maybe cinematography), but I thought it was it was a couple of hours of solid movie going. See it on the biggest screen possible.

[kiss4luna]

any of you guys fly the C model with similar payloads as in the movie and reach the 680 knots speed?

[Dragon1-1]

Of course not, the Superbug has much bigger engines. It's a good deal faster than the C model.

[SkateZilla]

5 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Of course not, the Superbug has much bigger engines. It's a good deal faster than the C model.

Depending on the situation that's debatable.

 

On 8/24/2022 at 12:03 AM, kiss4luna said:

any of you guys fly the C model with similar payloads as in the movie and reach the 680 knots speed?

 

doubt it, as you're just past mach 1.01 and transonic is the once place the super hornet struggled due to sheer size and transonic drag, add 2 GBUs and a Drop Tank and maintaining 680 without riding the burners and still being able to maneuver would be super difficult.

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

Not exactly the biggest top gun fan

I am more a fan of classics such as Sky Fighter (歼十出击, the Meng Long attack at the end was beautiful) Sky Hunter and Shir Dil.

The most important comparison between the old and new movies for me was in the beach volleyball/football scenes

To the new movies credit, the boys in this move were more built than in the 1980s' one, there were more hunks too but we hardly got to see as much of them

The older movie is arguably superior in this regard, the shots on the bare chested men are much more dramatic and masculine I liked that

The scene was some what ruined by misplaced characters in the sequel, I just couldn't ever take John Hamm as a serious military man after seeing him in so many rom coms in general!
 

[macedk]

I like the new Top gun movie but love the old one. 

Points for me: Original Top Gun. 
1.   I had never seen footage that good and up close from an aircraft carrier. It was amazing.
2.  Cool story (at that time real was an option and the "mig" number and undisclosed combat location was fine. 
3.  Sound was amazing and it is just a cool jet (First fighter love, later F-16)
4. Story, tempo and characters was great, the tie in with Goose's wife was short but on point. 
5. At the time I believed and would relate to the magic of movies, I was right there.  

New Top gun:
1. The things that are comparable with the original film are done ok not great. 
2. Story, just no, because the world is now an open source and I bet that many of us old Top Gun watchers have sucked the internet dry of any information on F-14 and Carriers.
3. The feels scenes are done well and many of us old dudes can relate to be the seasoned guy ;).
4. You ask me to forget Top Gun and look with "fresh" eyes, Sorry I'm not that good. 
5. It has good moments and is not a bad sequel but imagine they took out the reference to Top Gun, then it would be a very bad movie IMO. 

But I'm very biased as I see and follow a lot of military aviation. 

And to the young ones, you lucky B#¤%¤#%s, I whish I had this platform in my youth :).

To DCS, you are not there and will never be but you guys are the closets ones, keep it up.

 

[phant]

Funny thing:

Spoiler

the attack on the nuclear site is essentially identical to what happens in the 1988 film IRON EAGLE II (although in that case it is set in a desert landscape).

 

Bye
Phant

[SkateZilla]

2 hours ago, phant said:

the attack on the nuclear site is essentially identical to what happens in the 1988 film IRON EAGLE II (although in that case it is set in a desert landscape).

Anything after Iron Eagle I's credits don't count.
It was a Missile Silo in IE2, in TGM is was a Uranium refining facility, different things.

 

Also Seems the "Rooster" Movie is gaining traction, a lot of people are calling for a Prequel ("midquel"?) showing Roosters path before the events of TGM.

Edited September 14, 2022 by SkateZilla

[Nealius]

Man, people will dig so deep to criticize anything, not seeing the forest for the trees. Sure the story is unrealistic, just like every single fiction movie in existence. I'm just happy they put so much real flying and real details like panic release button, disarmed Tomcat ejection seat switches, paddle switch before over-G'ing the jet, etc. 

[Mars Exulte]

I finally saw it the other day. When it started I kept shushing my wife cause I was trying to watch the movie. Half way through, I gave up and started making fun of it and she kept shushing me cause SHE was trying to watch the movie. By the end, she gave up, too, and we were both making fun of it.

 

There's some cool aircraft, of course, but even setting aside real vs movie, just internally it never made any damn sense. And they tried way too hard to make this some emotional drama, and it just didn't make any damn sense either.

-edit

Best moment was when the Hind showed up, my wife and I nearly simultaneously blurted ''Oi blyat, it's Putin!''

Edited September 14, 2022 by Mars Exulte

[KenaiPhoenix]

Awesome movie... i cant believe I just watch the original Top Gun a couple of month ago (oh boy... my life would be different), and was afraid Maverick was just a cheap excuse to grab "nostalgia money" but man... it is really good.

 

It improves in every aspect of the original. The only aspect were the original is better, is on the music side, all the other aspects of the movie are better: better phasing, effects, etc. Really a must watch movie for almost everyone.

[Aquorys]

For those who might find it interesting, two former fighter pilots, Maj. CW Lemoine (aka "Mover", former USAF F-16, USN F/A-18, USAFR pilot) and Maj. T. Hartsock (aka "Gonky", former USN F/A-18, USAFR pilot), are currently doing a series of YouTube videos where they react to and comment on various scenes of the movie. I highly recommend watching it, besides being very entertaining, I guess some of you geeks will enjoy some of the more technical comments of two guys who know what they're talking about.

Here is a link to the playlist. It seems there will be one or a few more videos published soon to complete this series, so you should probably check again in a week or so.

 

[SkateZilla]

Dont you mean "Author of the Spectre Series"?

lol, j/k.

I second watching the series of videos of reactions to TGM.

[Nealius]

I love their reactions. "That isn't totally unrealistic! Having lead suddenly do something stupid in front of you"