The Shenanigans in Top Gun

[xmid]

If you want an 80s movie that more accurately portrays naval aviation (key word being "more"... as it is still hollywood), I say watch "Flight of the Intruder."

Or "The Great Santini"... Especially for you Marine types. It WAS required viewing at USNA for ethics class, don't know whether thats still true.

 

[Cobra Commander]

nice

I just KNOW I'm gonna end up being like callsign "rabbi" or "douchebag" lol

Or foreskin.

 

[eddie]

Or foreskin.

BC: botched circumcision, AND Before Christ...

 

[phrogdriver]

Or foreskin.

Taken, at least 1 permutation, anyways, and not for the reason above.

 

[scoober78]

There is always schmuck for all you Yiddish scholars out there...

 

[Lawman]

There is always schmuck for all you Yiddish scholars out there...

I had to talk to three differnt people to get the Marine Corps to change my religious status because somehow it thought I was jewish. Believe me it became a running joke in the squadbay.

What the hell is this crap, you join the Marine Corps... you get a new hair cutt... you START BEING JEWISH!?!?

 

[Catmando]

....There went my childhood fantasies.

Don't worry. Be happy.
Below is the more real class picture . . . to validate your childhood fantasies:

Early TOPGUN Class Depicted - Two east coast F-4 crews, two west coast F-4 crews, plus a NFWS instructor. Of the 8 students pictured, 4 soon saw combat and 2 downed enemy MiG's. All survived.

 

[invertedflyer]

SHHHHH!!!!

And Mig-28's do exist. They're manufactured from old F-5's, which are subsequently painted black and marked with garish red stars.

No kidding mate... I was referring to the fact that they were F-5s and the two seaters were T-38s....

SCOOBS!

You got me man, I thought Flight of The Intruder was 80s ... my fault... what did you think of it though?

 

[Catmando]

The sad part is, as it says in the book "Bogeys and Bandits":
"Every Navy pilot will tell you that one of the silliest aviation movies ever made was Top Gun. He would say the film was cartoonsish, adolescent, sexist, technically erroneous, simplistic, farcical. ...."
...

Actually, the fighter-types at Miramar of that time were relatively, if not extremely happy with the movie when it came out. (Of course many of them also had smiling cameo, or extra roles in it ) Sure, everyone realized there were some tremendous inaccuracies in the movie. (But never to the extent as has been later commented on. Nobody then ever saw that coming. )

But it still was the most "accurate" depiction of Naval Air to date since the Korean War film, Bridges at Toko RI http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bridges_at_Toko-Ri

Perhaps with not great success, the Navy was surprisingly allowed to have, and did have considerable and unprecedented input into the film.

Thankfully, this led to many positive changes from the original screenplay. And the flying scenes were far much more real than initially planned. In fact, one flight almost crashed in the desert trying to make it as realistic as possible. (Also, the camera crews in the back seats with their heavy cameras under high G's did an incredible job, too!)

While perhaps laughable today, it is still entertaining even after two decades. At the time of its release, most naval aviators overlooked its many glaring discrepancies, and took real pride in finally getting some real positive recognition that Naval Air had not seen in the previous, long anti-war/anti-military decades.

True, there have been far better and far more accurate movies since then.

But at the time, the movie was the best thing ever to happen to Naval Air, and especially recruiting! . . . as I can attest to with my static display F-14 at a Midwest airshow, shortly after the movie debuted. It was beyond rock-star status! :icon_smil

 

[joboy_2.0]

As I understand it, the production company went to the AF first, and after being told to fvck off, they went to the Navy. The Navy supported the movie, but after they saw the final product wanted nothing to do with it. After Top Gun came out, there were record numbers of people applying to the Navy. Is this right? Just seems rather funny.:icon_tong

 

[CaptainRon]

Catmando, you were an F-14 guy?

Anything one thing in particular in the movie that civilians might think looks realistic that you, as an insider, cringe at?

 

[Catmando]

Catmando, you were an F-14 guy?

Anything one thing in particular in the movie that civilians might think looks realistic that you, as an insider, cringe at?

Flew F-14's in VF-1 for two cruises onboard Enterprise, and then F-14's in the Reserves at the time the movie was filmed. (I actually carried one of their cameramen once for the movie's trailer scenes. Gave him a 'good' ride, too… )

There were a multitude of things that we cringed at. Here are just a few, off the top of my head:

Kelly McGuiness's part was beyond fiction. It was totally ludicrous.
There was never any "trophy". Yes, we were cutthroat in the air, but we were all best friends on the ground. We were supposed to, and did all work together.
The extraordinary real flying was sadly polluted with some Hollywood computerized HUD and tracer shots.
A lot of scenes were shot at MCRD instead of NAS Miramar.
Tom Cruise had to stand on a box in scenes with the taller McGuiness.
The studio begged and pleaded for a real, canopy-to-canopy inverted "flipping of the bird" but that was one sequence the Navy adamantly refused to fly for safety reasons. (Many other sequences, while maybe "safe", nevertheless "stretched" the ROE of the time.)
Don't remember any locker rooms or showers at TOPGUN. Reserved for instructors as I recall. We flew, debriefed, briefed, flew again, debriefed, went to the classroom, studied, and then went home late…. all in our stinking flight suits.

Haven't seen the movie in awhile, but I could name a much longer list of things we cringed at. But some other things people laugh at were not so far fetched, either. Nevertheless, at the time, we were generally happy with the overall finished product, considering the circumstances of that time. And again, it was the best thing since sliced bread for Naval Air.

 

[phrogpilot73]

The above post brings to mind something that has always confused/irritated me.

Why do Unrestricted Aviators (aka Helo Bubbas) feel the need to apologize/repent for wanting Jets/Props/E6/whatever (if they did) or having read books about it? I have seen DH/CO/XO's rail guys if it ever came to light that they did not want helos from day 1.

It took me until Fam 3 in Primary to see the light... I was generally the earliest convert in my squadron...

And, on the topic of Top Gun - I never saw one of those guys sweating a NATOPS check or studying their TACMAN, so I know its fake. However, I still think its a great movie, even if my wife doesn't!

 

[theblakeness]

I bought a book at MCAS Miramar called "fightertown, USA" which talks about the history of NAS Miramar and it had a whole chapter on Topgun the movie.

One of the things it talked about that I thought was funny were the fictional squadrons that were used. IE the "Fists of the Fleet" becoming an F-14 squadron (Iceman), or Maverick's squadron logo being taken from the E-2 RAG (VAW-120).

 

[Kickflip89]

If you want an 80s movie that more accurately portrays naval aviation (key word being "more"... as it is still hollywood), I say watch "Flight of the Intruder."

You mean Firefox isn't realistic!!??