Warbird Information Exchange

No hyphens. Also, if you prefer calling it the "Me 109", well boy, do I have some good news for you... From the Flugzeugsbeschaffungsprogramm document of 27 November 1935:



I've found so many instances in official RLM docs referring to the "Me 109" - even from The Fat Man himself, Hermann Göring - that there is absolutely no reason for anyone to get their teats in a wringer over it. For my part, I'm sticking with "Bf 109" in my book, but that is entirely a personal preference, and I state so right in the front of the book.

Cheers,

Lynn

In the end movie making is art, and not everyone can appreciate all works of art. As with all art, storytelling and cinema evolves over time. Much of today’s story telling and cinema doesn’t resonate as much with me as earlier works. A Guy Named Joe to Always, Thomas a Crown Affair 1968 to 1999, 3:10 to Yuma 1957 to 2007, Fist Full of a Dollars to Last Man Standing. Even the same story being presented my a new storyteller to a fresh audience can make huge cinematic and dramatic changes to appeal to the audiences of the day.

I personally would rather see storytellers evolve for better and for worse and continue to appeal to new audiences and maybe enlighten new generations along the way than get stuck with the the same old thing over and over. If amping up the drama of combat a bit using video game-like visuals gets someone to put down Fortnight and watch a movie with some semblance of historical value, aim happy to accept it. If you just remake 12 o’clock high using the same template over and over, they will simply stop making aviation movies because nobody will pay to see them. Cinema is already in jeopardy of extinction due to the minuscule attention span of today’s society. I’m really excited that a historical series can still remain commercially viable in today’s world. People are welcome to have the opinion that they are too good to be entertained by this series, but compared to much of what I’ve seen come out of Hollywood in the past decade, consider me of the opinion that this is the top tier cinema of this decade.

This scene was a storytelling choice to display the perceived temporal distortion of events by the aircrew experiencing them while under extreme stress.

Having experienced this myself, I thought it was a very effective scene at showing what that feels like.

_________________

The truly sad part is that they *did* go to such lengths for accuracy in so many places, only to have it pissed on by the far-more-visible-to-the-casual-observer uncanny-valley CGI.

_________________

My take on the parts falling slowly is the filmmaker was trying to make the audience feel like time slowed down. Because in some situations like that, your brain becomes hyper focused and time gets distorted and you see some details that might’ve been missed. They seem to have done this in a few other spots in the movie like when they zoom in close to a character face and then show what he is seeing. I know in my flying career there are certain moments where it feels like there’s a snapshot of an experience, but I most likely won’t ever forget. For veterans. I’m sure it’s the type of thing that gave them PTSD and nightmares. Sometimes it’s really hard to get a horrific memory out of your mind.

In terms of the aircraft, starting the engines 1, 2, 3, and 4 in sequence, and watching YouTube videos from that time. That was the accepted practice, so that all ground personnel around the airplane, knew, the start sequence, and would be away from the appropriate propellers As to the current operators starting methods, most start either 2 or 3 first due to the proximity of the battery and not every engine has a generator installed any more as the electrical load is a lot less been on the older aircraft because of the avionics and turrets. We would usually start #3 first start to get a generator online so if need be, we could recharge the battery to start the other three .


Edited for grammar and added a couple sentences at the end of the first paragraph

This thread is meant to be a review of the series from, and for, WIX members. Who most are either experienced with their knowledge or above average knowledgeable of this subject. There’s no surprise the fact that some of us would be critical of certain aspects of this series. Certainly no one contributing their opinions to this thread has come across as being too good to watch the series.

At times the CGI is overkill, but other than that so far the series is right up there with “The Pacific” but not quite up there with Band of Brothers. Again, just my opinion so far which means zip!

The ratings so far are very positive so that’s good. Which means it’s being seen by a good amount of people NOT as experienced in this particular area of history, which is great for the exposure of the 8th AF and it’s WWII sacrifices.


And that’s a great thing!

Up until partway through the F-series, the B-17's bombardier position used a bucket seat.


The radio operator's compartment on a B-17 Flying Fortress.

Looks like the series is getting a companion documentary on March 15th.

I wish I could have been involved with the post production and VFX work as there would have been so many things that could have been fixed easily without taking away from the content. A lot of it would have saved production money by not having to create things that didn't exist or were just not needed.

You do what you can...

_________________
To donate to the PV-2D project via PayPal click here http://www.twinbeech.com/84062restoration.htm

We brought her from: to this in 3 months: Help us get her all the way back

All donations are tax deductible as the Stockton Field Aviation Museum is a 501c3 nonprofit organization. Tell a friend as the Harpoon needs all the help she can get.

Thank you!

Taigh Ramey
Vintage Aircraft, Stockton, California
http://www.twinbeech.com
'KEEP ‘EM FLYING…FOR HISTORY!'

I’ve been thinking the same thing Taigh. So many things well done just to be skewed by amateurish post production predominantly by the use of CGI.

To be fair, there’s several areas in the series where the CGI really hit the mark IMO, but other areas where it’s really cringe worthy. The latest episode was painful to watch during the introduction of the P-51 escorts.

From what I’ve been reading, the masses seem to be enjoying the series, so the producers should be happy. Haven’t seen much feedback from veterans, but that’s of little surprise as any veteran who flew combat missions during WWII would be well into their 90’s by now.

Your efforts Taigh were predictably spectacular. Thanks for being involved.

^^^ This ^^^

Great work, Taigh.

_________________

Speaking of reviews, the run of episodes from 4 to 7 has been superb in my opinion. The character development and storytelling has been really firing on all cylinders.

For me, the depictions of the post-mission debriefs of the Bremen and Munster raids really hit home...the bewilderment and disbelief of the carnage they saw and their difficulty in putting that into words to tell Intel what occurred was entirely believable.

The contrasts, too, of guys being in combat during the day and then back in "regular society" in London and out in East Anglia at night was particularly well conveyed.

Hopefully the series finishes as strong as this middle portion has been IMHO. Hopefully there are also less 600-knot P-51s whipping past bomber formations, hehe.

_________________

And less than 600 P-51's all in the same frame with zero formation order. Also I must say that if the CGI jockeys were to actually take the idea seriously of that many fighters (from by sides) in the air so closely bundled up flying in all directions as was portrayed, they forgot to add the hundreds of midair collisions and random bomber shoot downs of fighters both friend and foe. Just sayin....

No comments since the last episode has aired? OK, I'll go... Overall I really enjoyed the series. The early CGI and aviation cliché grumbles about the first couple of episodes were quickly forgotten as the story was further developed. They touched on a lot of subjects in a short period of time and it didn't seem forced.

I thought the companion documentary narrated by Tom Hanks, and featuring interviews with the real Airmen (and B-17 Fuddy Duddy) was fantastic and should just be considered the 10th episode.

The biggest testament to the show's value to bring the subject to a wider audience is that my wife sat beside me and watched the entire series and documentary with interest. Normally her eyes glaze over whenever the subject of WW2 comes up (ok, maybe that's my fault) .

_________________
Share your story: Rutgers Oral History Archive http://oralhistory.rutgers.edu/

“Too much and not enough.” The subject matter is too extensive and intricate. There’s no middle ground that feels satisfying to those of us who have spent vast amounts of our lives even as amateur historians. You either need to create something that is a documentary or of complete fiction. And either are fine, but to attempt to mix reality and fantasy with history and mass market it as a way of bringing remembrance and inspiration? I’m still on the fence on that approach because the truth and reality in facts has to mean more than “good enough for the masses.”

There’s no question that the thoughts were in the right places, never any qualms there, but in all three of the series to date that have reached out with massive budgets, star power backing and great hoopla? only BOB was able to hold on to any great amount of fact vs fiction.

So yes, for the vast majority of people who spent the time watching this series? I’m sure it was entertaining and informative. I’m sure it satisfied many folks aspersions for remembering those who served and sacrificed as well. And this is all good in the big scheme of things I suppose. But I'm certainly not convinced the big budget, “Pearl Harbor” CGI video game strategy is the best way to try to convey historical context accurately if that indeed was the intention.

I’d rather these large productions portray fictional characters, events and scenarios with a hint of reality than the other way around if the final product ends up with video game qualities. History is real and nothing to be played with regarding essential truths and facts.

Entertainment only IMO