Air Strike

[Sokol1]

If you enjoy Fly Boys, Red Tails, Hurricane... certainly will like.

 

 

 

Japanese use 5000 pounds Napalm bombs in China? 

[InProgress]

Damn, another hollywood movie filled with ridiculus action. Shame even story seems weird, flying with a cigar and yelling  "Lets kick some ass" probably japs will be getting shot down one by one by chinese flying ww1 planes :P ehh miss old movies where it was realistic and with good, mature story.

[Feathered_IV]

No doubt George Lucas is eyeing this, hoping it will replace Red Tails as: worst aviation movie ever made.

[Diggun]

Whats that beard doing? Destroyed my immersion.

[CanadaOne]

Was that a joke trailer?

[Nibbio]

4 hours ago, InProgress said:

Damn, another hollywood movie filled with ridiculus action. Shame even story seems weird, flying with a cigar and yelling  "Lets kick some ass" probably japs will be getting shot down one by one by chinese flying ww1 planes :P ehh miss old movies where it was realistic and with good, mature story.

 

I distinctly recall reading in "Pappy" Boyington Baa Baa Black Sheep that he constantly smoked a cigar in his F4 cockpit, so that detail at least is historical ?

and the Chinese are flying I-16s! my favourite BOX fighter ?

[Legioneod]

Does a movie have to be realistic? I enjoyed red tails for what it was, I thought it was very entertaining despite all it's inaccuracies.

[Dutchvdm]

14 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

Does a movie have to be realistic? I enjoyed red tails for what it was, I thought it was very entertaining despite all it's inaccuracies.

 

No i don't think so. Fury is far from super realistic but i did enjoy it. But i did not like Red Tails. Unrealistic is one thing, but idiotic movie tropes do bother me. The super evil nazi pilot came straight from an Indiana Jones movie, and the CGI effects were way over the top. 

 

Grt M

Edited September 13, 2018 by I./ZG1_Martijnvdm

[InProgress]

3 hours ago, I./ZG1_Martijnvdm said:

 

No i don't think so. Fury is far from super realistic but i did enjoy it. But i did not like Red Tails. Unrealistic is one thing, but idiotic movie tropes do bother me. The super evil nazi pilot came straight from an Indiana Jones movie, and the CGI effects were way over the top. 

 

Grt M

So how could you like fury? Hundreds of germans charging tank frontaly, all they had to do was send few people lefr and right + sniper to cover so mg on top wont shoot them, maybe one flank would die but other would survive and blow up that tank. But no, charge front and die in hundreds because panzerfaust range was 5m. 

Or tiger that can't deal with 3 shermans, he even drive towards them... 

 

It's not even about realism, it was just idiotic. 

[Legioneod]

26 minutes ago, InProgress said:

So how could you like fury? Hundreds of germans charging tank frontaly, all they had to do was send few people lefr and right + sniper to cover so mg on top wont shoot them, maybe one flank would die but other would survive and blow up that tank. But no, charge front and die in hundreds because panzerfaust range was 5m. 

Or tiger that can't deal with 3 shermans, he even drive towards them... 

 

It's not even about realism, it was just idiotic. 

One of the inaccuracies of Fury is that they depicted a Sherman vs Tiger needing a 5v1 advantage. Irl the suggested ratio when fighting a Tiger or Panther was 2v1, anything more is just an advantage.

 

At the end of the day it's just a movie, I don't expect it to be accurate or realistic, I just see it to have fun. If I want accuracy or realism I'll watch a documentary or something like Band of Brothers.

[Dutchvdm]

30 minutes ago, InProgress said:

So how could you like fury? Hundreds of germans charging tank frontaly, all they had to do was send few people lefr and right + sniper to cover so mg on top wont shoot them, maybe one flank would die but other would survive and blow up that tank. But no, charge front and die in hundreds because panzerfaust range was 5m. 

Or tiger that can't deal with 3 shermans, he even drive towards them... 

 

It's not even about realism, it was just idiotic. 

 

I liked Fury for what it was. An over the top Holywood ww2 blockbuster. Yes the last scene was ridiculous and the big tank scene was unrealistic.. but the movie does have some nice touches. Like the gritty filtering and overal feel of it all. 

 

It’s no das boot, but i’ve seen worse..

 

grt M

[InProgress]

1 hour ago, Legioneod said:

Irl the suggested ratio when fighting a Tiger or Panther was 2v1, anything more is just an advantage

It's repeated argument I see all the time, and it's really dumb. Probably taken out of context and repeated over and over again to show how bad tiger is and Sherman is master tank. Only 2 to destroy tiger. 

 

It does not say where, fight will look completely different in city, open fields, forest area, hills etc. You can't just say 2 shermans is suggested ratio vs tiger. Good luck with your 2 shermans in huge open flat field when they are 10km away. Make it 10, before they reach range of being even able to score an accurate hit, tiger will burn most of them. 

 

This is why that whole argument is trash, no range information, no information about location, I think people also forget that there will be bunch of infantry around protecting tank. Famous Wittmann action where alone destroyed over 20 vehicles, including more than 2 tanks I bet. So yeah... please stop using that useless argument.

[Rolling_Thunder]

I can see that plane @ 1.02 coming back out of the water the put a fatal burst into the Jap before barrel rolling away into the sunset.

[Poochnboo]

5 hours ago, InProgress said:

The super evil nazi pilot came straight from an Indiana Jones movie, and the CGI effects were way over the top. 

Oh, God. That was so bad. How did you like it when he said, with an evil smile,  "And now you die, you stupid black man!" How does a screenwriter look at himself in the mirror after writing a line like that?

Yeah, I know. He laughed all the way to the bank. But wow...this movie looks bad. Are we to assume that Bruce Willis is Chennault?

Edited September 14, 2018 by Poochnboo

[Legioneod]

3 hours ago, InProgress said:

It's repeated argument I see all the time, and it's really dumb. Probably taken out of context and repeated over and over again to show how bad tiger is and Sherman is master tank. Only 2 to destroy tiger. 

 

It does not say where, fight will look completely different in city, open fields, forest area, hills etc. You can't just say 2 shermans is suggested ratio vs tiger. Good luck with your 2 shermans in huge open flat field when they are 10km away. Make it 10, before they reach range of being even able to score an accurate hit, tiger will burn most of them. 

 

This is why that whole argument is trash, no range information, no information about location, I think people also forget that there will be bunch of infantry around protecting tank. Famous Wittmann action where alone destroyed over 20 vehicles, including more than 2 tanks I bet. So yeah... please stop using that useless argument.

Allied command said that they only needed a 2v1 ration to be in a favorable position, the more the merrier though.

 

You act as if the Tiger has some crazy meme gun (it doesn't) with proper angling of the armor the Sherman was found to be able to withstand hits from an 88, this was actually found out by the Germans themselves in one of their reports.

 

No point in arguing my friend, we can agree to disagree.

Edited September 14, 2018 by Legioneod

[InProgress]

5 hours ago, Legioneod said:

Allied command said that they only needed a 2v1 ration to be in a favorable position, the more the merrier though.

Again, you fail to acknowledge range, location and fact that there will most likely be infantry and other units. Can't you imagine flat field and 2 shermans 10km away? How is it favorable position? On what universe these 2 shermans would win in that scenario? 

 

Allied propaganda training video also showed every weapon of germans as something worst than every single american weapon. Did you watch some funny training video that said tigers are crap all you need to do is attack it with 2 shermans? 

 

Again, this argument is idiotic, it would be even if it was just 88mm gun position. You simply can't say something like this, there is too much options, who is attacking and who is defending, gun can be camouflaged and get free kill before they even know, range, location, it can be hidden in a bunkier... tank can be covered by sandbags or sitting in big foxhole where it will be really hard to hit it, it can have panzershreck team on flanks to prevent tank being flanked. 

 

And I am pretty sure tiger tank kills have bigger ratio than 2:1.

 

It's like saying, ferrari is faster than a monster truck and will always win. Surprise, race take place on swamp area. Have fun with this.

Edited September 14, 2018 by InProgress

[Legioneod]

39 minutes ago, InProgress said:

Again, you fail to acknowledge range, location and fact that there will most likely be infantry and other units. Can't you imagine flat field and 2 shermans 10km away? How is it favorable position? On what universe these 2 shermans would win in that scenario? 

 

Allied propaganda training video also showed every weapon of germans as something worst than every single american weapon. Did you watch some funny training video that said tigers are crap all you need to do is attack it with 2 shermans? 

 

Again, this argument is idiotic, it would be even if it was just 88mm gun position. You simply can't say something like this, there is too much options, who is attacking and who is defending, gun can be camouflaged and get free kill before they even know, range, location, it can be hidden in a bunkier... tank can be covered by sandbags or sitting in big foxhole where it will be really hard to hit it, it can have panzershreck team on flanks to prevent tank being flanked. 

 

And I am pretty sure tiger tank kills have bigger ratio than 2:1.

 

It's like saying, ferrari is faster than a monster truck and will always win. Surprise, race take place on swamp area. Have fun with this.

Not gonna argue with ya bud, I stand by what I said.

[Feathered_IV]

Oh, it got cancelled? 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2018/10/17/bruce-willis-film-canceled-after-co-star-fan-bingbing-disappears/1668153002/

[Finkeren]

A silly action movie putting the Polikarpov I-16 front-and-center? 

 

I would’ve taken it.

[Gambit21]

On September 13, 2018 at 6:24 AM, Nibbio said:

 

I distinctly recall reading in "Pappy" Boyington Baa Baa Black Sheep that he constantly smoked a cigar in his F4 cockpit, so that detail at least is historical ?

and the Chinese are flying I-16s! my favourite BOX fighter ?

 

"Historical Accuracy" and "Pappy Boyington" are two terms that don't mix well FYI.

If you want a historical accounting of VMF 214 then read Bruce Gamble's books.

The Black Sheep, and Black Sheep One.

[Danziger]

On 9/13/2018 at 12:18 PM, Diggun said:

Whats that beard doing? Destroyed my immersion.

Shaving profile.

[Poochnboo]

On 10/18/2018 at 11:26 AM, Gambit21 said:

"Historical Accuracy" and "Pappy Boyington" are two terms that don't mix well FYI.

Yeah. If he was able to put his name behind that stupid TV show, then I wouldn't believe much of what Boyington wrote. I agree, that third person accounts are going to give you a story that's a bit closer to reality. 

[Nibbio]

I was referring to his 1958 book, not to the 70s tv show. According to Pappy himself, that was "hogwash and Hollywood hokum"

 

[Bremspropeller]

On 10/18/2018 at 11:36 AM, Feathered_IV said:

Oh, it got cancelled? 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2018/10/17/bruce-willis-film-canceled-after-co-star-fan-bingbing-disappears/1668153002/

 

Is it me or does "Fan Bingbing" sound more like the name of an "adult etertainment" star?

[ATAG_SKUD]

Only cancelled in China

 

https://deadline.com/2018/10/air-strike-us-release-maintained-bruce-willis-fan-bingbing-lionsgate-grindstone-china-cancellation-1202485151/

[Lusekofte]

On 9/13/2018 at 12:18 PM, Diggun said:

Whats that beard doing? Destroyed my immersion.

 

Fleet Air Arm allowed pilots to grow beard, if they could do so within a limited time period , Cannot remember exactly , But it was something like 6 weeks for full-grown 

[Mmaruda]

Bruce Willis kicking ass in Ishak? This sounds like the best movie ever, it might even be better than Con Air.

[Thad]

At ease historical junkies. It's just for entertainment and not a historic documentary. 

 

A mediocre B movie bordering on propaganda.

Edited October 28, 2018 by Thad