Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/1/2002 10:19:21 PM EDT
im not a history professor, but some parts some a bit far fetched. but truth is stranger than fiction, so is it accurate? did they really use army planes off aircraft carriers? broom sticks to fake machine guns? cans of gas on board? seeing ben afLACK, and alec baldnuts sure didnt help the film with shoddy acting
Link Posted: 1/2/2002 7:46:50 AM EDT
As for the Army planes, B-25 Mitchels, yes. It was the only way they would reach main land Japan with out putting the fleet carriers at serious risk. One of the problems was the B-25's were not made to take off on that short of a run way. I do know that it took a good amount of practice by the pilots to learn to get the planes off such a short run way. I don't know about the broomsticks or cans of gas. The part I hate in the movie, besides all the love crap, was the flight sceens. Stupid Disney had those P-40's and Zeros doing way to much junking around. Way too many G's. It looked like a fricken B sci-fi movie. Even Star wars looked more realistic. Even that stupid move Iron eagle had better flight sceens. All that work and no one had any idea what real P-40s and Zero's looked like flying??? In one sceen, the P-40 afleck is flying does about 3 turns in the length of one battle ship. You think some one in holly(puke) wood would have said, "Hey you think maybe the P-40s and Zeros look like they are pulling more G's than the dogfights in Top Gun?" Just that part ruined it for me.
Link Posted: 1/2/2002 7:54:31 AM EDT
It was fairly accurate, up until the part where Ben Affleck portrays a heterosexual. [;)]
Link Posted: 1/3/2002 2:12:11 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SJSAMPLE: It was fairly accurate, up until the part where Ben Affleck portrays a heterosexual. [;)]
View Quote
haha I am glad I still have not seen that movie.
Link Posted: 1/4/2002 6:31:07 AM EDT
Disney used way to much creative license (its the kinder gentler Pearl), not to mention they broke every law of physics and the p-40 Warhawk. The P-40 Warhawk was underpowered to begin with. It could be deadly in the hands of a fighter pilot with thousands of hours but not in the hands of a non blooded Us American Airmen with no combat experience. The got the number of planes right , only two p-40's got up after that disney says goodbye to reality and walks into the twilight zone. For a good movie on Pearl rent Tora,Tora,Tora. In my view it outshines the Disney attempt by a good bit. Benjamin
Link Posted: 1/4/2002 8:58:27 PM EDT
I also love the way the heroes managed to shoot half of the 40 downed Jap planes that day.
Link Posted: 1/5/2002 3:29:38 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/5/2002 3:32:35 AM EDT by LAgunman2K]
i liked how they used the term "cocked and locked" when they were getting the M2 50bmg's ready for action. C&L is obviously a single action auto pistol term that came from/for the 1911 .45 . some how i think the M2 doesnt qualify as a single action. and when the enemy is flying overhead having the safety locked "On" with a M2 is not something i would do or worry about. it also looked like they were firing those M2's without a tripod, resting on top of sandbags.
Link Posted: 1/7/2002 11:23:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2002 11:25:51 PM EDT by DonS]
Originally Posted By LAgunman2K: i liked how they used the term "cocked and locked" when they were getting the M2 50bmg's ready for action. C&L is obviously a single action auto pistol term that came from/for the 1911 .45 . some how i think the M2 doesnt qualify as a single action.
View Quote
So you think the M-2 is a double action? Actually, the M-2, M-16, M-60, M-240, M-249, BAR, M-1 Garand, M-1 carbine, M-14, M-3 "greese gun", Tommy gun, M-1917 and the M-1919 are all single actions. Prior to the M-9 pistol, the only DAs used by the US military were revolvers. There are not very many double action long arms. The Italians made a DA sub machine gun a few years ago, and a DA shotgun (Mossberg?) is currently being offered for the police market. Edit: I should add that "cocked & locked" applies to any single action that must be cocked before the safety can be applied. If the safety can be applied before cocking the piece, like on the M-1 Garand, the command is "locked & cocked".
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 6:55:17 PM EDT
Originally Posted By LAgunman2K: im not a history professor, but some parts some a bit far fetched. but truth is stranger than fiction, so is it accurate? did they really use army planes off aircraft carriers? broom sticks to fake machine guns? cans of gas on board?
View Quote
The Doolittle raid using B-25 army twin engined bombers off the carrier USS Hornet is true. Some info from "Warplanes and Air Battles of WWII", Beekman publishing 1973, from a chapter by John Landers Vader: The 24 crews were recruited from the 17th Bombardment Group. I never heard of any fighter pilots recruited for the mission like they did in the movie. Extra fuel: "Three auxiliary fuel tanks, ten 5-gallon tins, and a 360-gallon-capacity collapsible rubber bag were added to the normal fuel load to give the B-25 an 'attack-and-escape' range." The movie makes it look like they throw the extra gas cans on the bombers at the last minute, but this reference seems to say it was all planned in advance. They don't specifically mention broomsticks, but do say: "For 'protection' from astern, two fake wooden .50 machine guns were installed at the tip of the stingless tail." The bombers in the film are late models with the tail gunner position, but the early model B-25s had no tail gunner, just a glass dome. Don't ask me why. Anyway, someone had the bright idea to add the fake guns out the tail's glass dome. Couldn't hurt. A Jap patrol boat DID spot the task force farther out than their planned max launch range. It was sunk but not before it radioed a warning. They launched at 823 miles when the max was 650 miles and an intended 450 miles. The movie I think said they were at 650 when they launched. Baldwin's character said they have 467 feet to take off. This is correct. Doolittle, in the first bomber, had 467 feet for its takeoff run. The others had slightly longer runs from starting further back on the carrier deck. The bombers hit Tokyo, Yokosuka navy yard, Kobe, Yokohama, and Nagoya. The movie makes it look like all 16 bombers stayed together and bomb Tokyo. The Japanese were expecting a conventional carrier attack the next day and were caught off guard by the bombers' raid. The damage "far exceeded the most optimistic expectations" according to Doolittle. Of the aircrew, 50 parachuted into China (one killed, no details in my reference), 10 crash landed and were rescued by the Chinese, 8 were captured by the Japs of which 3 were executed and one died as a POW. Since each bomber carried 3 explosive and one incendiary bomb, their damage inflicted was small. However, the psychological shock was great and the Japs kept some fighter groups within Japan that were sorely needed elsewhere. Also, the raid indirectly led to the Battle of Midway (whose biggest purpose was to sink the US carriers) which was a huge US victory. Some other movies: "30 Seconds Over Tokyo" is an old black and white film dramatizing the raid (based on a book of the same name). "Midway" starts with the B-25s launching off of the USS Hornet. I'm sure I bored y'all to death with the details. Edmund
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 4:20:54 AM EDT
Actually I found that interesting, thx
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 5:03:27 AM EDT
"30 Seconds Over Tokyo" is a good read. I read it when I was in high school. It is based on one crews experience. I didn't see the movie. I tell everyone that comments on the Pearl Harbor movie to read it since Baldwin and his band of idiots screwed up the true historical aspects.
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 7:37:17 AM EDT
As I understand it - I did not see the film - by request of the Japanese government, the scenes of the Doolittle flyers being beheaded by their captors in Japan were deleted. The Japanese do not want to view the truth. Why we continue to cover for them is beyond me. For the Germans, and the Nazis, we let it all hang out, but not the Japanese. Germany has paid reparations, but how about Japan? As for Pearl, Lt. George Welch, in a P40, claimed 4 planes shot down. There were P36s in the air, too. The P40 was produced until November of 1944. The P40N-CU-1 was the fastest. John
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 7:45:38 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/10/2002 7:46:52 AM EDT by Benjamin0001]
That is why I love the movie, "The Final Countdown." Very fun movie. Edited to Add: I like the shots of the VF-84 Jolly Rogers. That is the best paint scheme of any VF group. Benjamin
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 7:52:21 AM EDT
[url]www.jolly-rogers.com/103-flare.htm[/url] [url]www.jolly-rogers.com/17-4hogs.htm[/url] The history. Benjamin
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 12:16:54 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Edmund_Rowe: The bombers in the film are late models with the tail gunner position, but the early model B-25s had no tail gunner, just a glass dome. Don't ask me why.
View Quote
I couldn't say, either, but I do know that there was a period when fighters were designed for extreme manuverability (20s through early 30s). Consequently, they were designed as biplanes, and they gave up some speed. Bomber designers took advantage of this, designing fast bombers to outrun the fighters of the day. It could be that early B-25s were designed to outrun fighters, and such things as tail guns were not important.
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 11:19:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/10/2002 11:21:53 PM EDT by LAgunman2K]
i didnt say an M2 was a single action or double action gun. what i should have said was -- the M2 doesnt qualify as a single action Pistol. i dont apply the terms "single action" and "double action" to any other guns except handguns, and never heard of anyone else do so. never heard of "locked and cocked" in reference to the garand or any other gun. my Guess is that the term "C&L" is a more recent modern term that came out of that self defense arena. but thats only a guess.
Link Posted: 1/11/2002 12:19:39 AM EDT
Originally Posted By LAgunman2K: i didnt say an M2 was a single action or double action gun. what i should have said was -- the M2 doesnt qualify as a single action Pistol. i dont apply the terms "single action" and "double action" to any other guns except handguns, and never heard of anyone else do so. never heard of "locked and cocked" in reference to the garand or any other gun. my Guess is that the term "C&L" is a more recent modern term that came out of that self defense arena. but thats only a guess.
View Quote
Most long arms are in fact single action, and it is just assumed that a long arm is single action unless otherwise specified. Rare exceptions include the Italian double action SMG. I may be wrong on the term "cocked & locked" and "locked & cocked". The military terms were "lock and load" and "load and lock" (sorry, got confused). The former command was used when possible, the latter otherwise. These are terms dating from at least WW2, and they probably predate WW1. Obviously, these applied to single action firearms, since the only double actions in service in the US military at that time were revolvers, which can't be locked. My guess is that "cocked & locked" came from the term "load & lock".
Link Posted: 1/11/2002 9:43:52 PM EDT
"Lock and Load" is the term they SHOULD have used in the movie, it would be more period correct and more military correct since IMO the usage can cover almost all firearms. i dont think you will hear the terms "cocked and locked" used very often on a military firing line. im Guessing here, but i think the military carried there 1911s in condition 3, so C&L wouldnt apply there.
Link Posted: 1/11/2002 10:19:23 PM EDT
Originally Posted By LAgunman2K: "Lock and Load" is the term they SHOULD have used in the movie, it would be more period correct and more military correct since IMO the usage can cover almost all firearms.
View Quote
"Load & lock" actually covers more firearms than "lock & load". Anything that you can "lock and load" can be "loaded and locked", but the reverse isn't true. But they should have used the correct term for the specific weapon.
Originally Posted By LAgunman2K: i dont think you will hear the terms "cocked and locked" used very often on a military firing line. im Guessing here, but i think the military carried there 1911s in condition 3, so C&L wouldnt apply there.
View Quote
I know that on one military base during the 1950s, everything (including 1911s) was "cocked and locked", although I don't know that they used that term.
Link Posted: 1/12/2002 6:01:02 AM EDT
Tom Sizemore using a trench shotgun to hit Jap planes wasn't very accurate.
Link Posted: 1/12/2002 7:52:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SS109: Tom Sizemore using a trench shotgun to hit Jap planes wasn't very accurate.
View Quote
No, but there were two officers that were headed out to the skeet range when the planes came in. According to the history channel, they used up a couple boxes of shells trying to down the Japs with thier shotguns.
Top Top