Thu Jun 14, 2007 9:13 pm
No Mudge, I ment the movie history. 
Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:09 pm
I am friends with all the Tora Pilots and have known Charles Hutchins for like 10 years so I love seeing the Tora act.
Fri Jun 15, 2007 11:24 am
Mudge wrote:I beg to differ with it being "still alive". If it were ACTUAL Japanese a/c doing the display, I'd agree with you. To the best of my memory, it's some modified T-6's and some oil fires and we have to be TOLD what it is they're doing. It's "advertised" as "Tora, Tora, Tora" the attack on Pearl Harbor. If there were no lead in explanations as to what it's supposed to be, people would only think it was a bunch of modified T-6's and some oil fires and explosions.
Mudge the illusionist
Dear Mudge the clouded,
I think you forgot or omitted the word "re-inactment". That word has always been in the act advertisement.
I have flown in the Tora routine, and you won't find a group of more dedicated airmen anywhere. They are professionals that Mudge could only dream of being. The coreography that goes behind the motions is only duplicated on Braodway.
By the way, there are no oil fires involved. The ground explosions are 5 gallons of gasoline and a quarter stick of dynomite.
Even if actual Japanese aircraft could be used, Mudge the pessimist would probably complain that there weren't actual corpses left on the field.
Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:19 pm
Well hello skymistress. There's no reason for the attempts at insult. I'm too stupid to know when I'm being insulted. How about you?
I'm happy for you that you're affiliated with the Tora group. I'm happy that they're professionals that I could only hope to be. I'm happy for you that there is no oil used. It's good that you/they are dedicated. BUT...Was I not correct that the display/"re-enactment" consists of a group of modified T-6s and "fires" (of whatever content)?
I meant no insult to the people who do this routine. For you/them, if that's what you want to do, have at it.
I was merely voicing my opinion/observations of the display itself.
Mudge the optimist
ps. Wishing for corpses and being a pessimist is an "apples and oranges" thing. Wishing for corpses would be "sadistic" not pessimistic. A pessimist would be one who didn't want the corpses left on the field.
You have a pleasant day now, you hear.
I'm happy for you that you're affiliated with the Tora group. I'm happy that they're professionals that I could only hope to be. I'm happy for you that there is no oil used. It's good that you/they are dedicated. BUT...Was I not correct that the display/"re-enactment" consists of a group of modified T-6s and "fires" (of whatever content)?
I meant no insult to the people who do this routine. For you/them, if that's what you want to do, have at it.
I was merely voicing my opinion/observations of the display itself.
Mudge the optimist
ps. Wishing for corpses and being a pessimist is an "apples and oranges" thing. Wishing for corpses would be "sadistic" not pessimistic. A pessimist would be one who didn't want the corpses left on the field.
You have a pleasant day now, you hear.
Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:57 pm
BUT...Was I not correct that the display/"re-enactment" consists of a group of modified T-6s and "fires" (of whatever content)?
Hi Mudge,
Actually they are modified T-6's and BT-13's. Still not sure I understand why you dislike the Tora act so much(I think BS was a little too strong
). It is a pretty intense re-enactment and very surreal. I've seen them perform 3 or 4 times and each time was a thrill. You got to look at it this way. People see the show, they think its neat, and they go wanting to learn more about it. So in the end the Tora group has a positive outcome and becasue of them more people have gotten interested in the history of Dec, 7 1941. 
Thats all I am trying to say Mudge. No hard feelings.
-Nate
P.S. Hows flying coming?
Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:28 am
Sorry Mudge, I have to disagree on this one.
Not having enjoyed any of these displays I am writing from a point of "envy" but I personally believe such Airshow "reinactments" bring the history of these aircraft alive.
While none of us enjoy a full compliment of "original" combantants for accurate re-creation, I certainly consider the Tora conversions are very good "look-alikes" to represent the display of Japanese aircraft, we have one of the Tora "T6" Zeros in Australia and certainly on the ground you can identify the NA design lurking beneath the modifications and paint work, but in the air it does an excellent job.
Airshows are all about "Entertaining" the General Public who pay most of the bills funding the exotic aircraft we enthusiasts come to see.
Obviously "some" General Public members may need a commentary to explain the role of those green aircraft with red dots on them and what their "display routine" is trying to portray, but the same people will not recognise a Spitfire, Mustang or Hurricane, or be able to tell the difference between those either.
Combat sequences with appropriate types, and coreographed well can be very entertaining, I look forward one day of a trip to Midlands to see the CAF Airshow with Tora-Tora display Sequence or WW1 Sequences at Omaka.
Indeed the sight of 7 replica Triplanes, or other ground theatre put on by Peter Jackson and his film props team are setting new standards in Airshow displays.
I personally feel these are far more interesting, than simple "fly pasts" of the "subject" display aircraft, or even worse, the "aerobatic/high performance" displays of an aircraft might be "thrown into" to lift the "entertainment" factor, and often also the "risk" factor.
I have no problem with oil fires etc mock combat displays etc if they are showing the aircraft in context, and a B-17, P40, etc under attack from modified and mocked up T6's and B13's will suit me fine until someone rolls up with a squadron of genuine A6M-2's.
I understand recently a "flock" of Nangchangs played the role of the Japanese at Omaka to allow the P40, Corsair and Mustang to have a worthy opposition.
At Australian airshows we often have the traditional closing display of the RAAF PC-9 "Roulettes" aerobatic display, which I usually use as a cue to bolt for the carkpark, however that doesnt be-little their display and the General Public interest in it, just simply my own tiredness of an often seen display.
Perhaps some of us have been too spoilt by exotic originals being restored and exhibited in recent times and have similarly become dis-missive of mock-ups etc, perhaps you wont "waste your film" on it, but I think these displays have a major role to play in the ongoing success of airshows, and even the growth of historic aviation.
In some ways in my mind there is little difference between the Tora T6 mockups and the accurate and new built replica Oscars, FW190's or ME262's, none of them are original airframes with true provenance, all of them are trying to "recreate" an image in the sky for future generations to enjoy.
Without the success of the Battle of Britain Movie and Tora-Tora-Tora I do wonder how many warbirders may have grown up with other hobbies, and the same can be said of future generations watching the Tora Sequence - how many kids will be enthused to look into aviation history and learn more about it, perhaps even grow up to be an enthusiast and warbird owner/operator (rather than driving a gameboy or Microsoft Flight Sim?)
I am heavily involved in a volunteer museum, with some very historic aircraft, and I certainly know its easier to drag the General Public along to an airshow than a static museum, despite the quality and accuracy of what is on offer in the museum. "Flying "historic" aircraft have that extra "wow" factor, the roar of the engine, the speed of a dive, the rumble down the runway - it all brings in more interest and keeps our hobbie alive.
regards
Mark Pilkington
Not having enjoyed any of these displays I am writing from a point of "envy" but I personally believe such Airshow "reinactments" bring the history of these aircraft alive.
While none of us enjoy a full compliment of "original" combantants for accurate re-creation, I certainly consider the Tora conversions are very good "look-alikes" to represent the display of Japanese aircraft, we have one of the Tora "T6" Zeros in Australia and certainly on the ground you can identify the NA design lurking beneath the modifications and paint work, but in the air it does an excellent job.
Airshows are all about "Entertaining" the General Public who pay most of the bills funding the exotic aircraft we enthusiasts come to see.
Obviously "some" General Public members may need a commentary to explain the role of those green aircraft with red dots on them and what their "display routine" is trying to portray, but the same people will not recognise a Spitfire, Mustang or Hurricane, or be able to tell the difference between those either.
Combat sequences with appropriate types, and coreographed well can be very entertaining, I look forward one day of a trip to Midlands to see the CAF Airshow with Tora-Tora display Sequence or WW1 Sequences at Omaka.
Indeed the sight of 7 replica Triplanes, or other ground theatre put on by Peter Jackson and his film props team are setting new standards in Airshow displays.
I personally feel these are far more interesting, than simple "fly pasts" of the "subject" display aircraft, or even worse, the "aerobatic/high performance" displays of an aircraft might be "thrown into" to lift the "entertainment" factor, and often also the "risk" factor.
I have no problem with oil fires etc mock combat displays etc if they are showing the aircraft in context, and a B-17, P40, etc under attack from modified and mocked up T6's and B13's will suit me fine until someone rolls up with a squadron of genuine A6M-2's.
I understand recently a "flock" of Nangchangs played the role of the Japanese at Omaka to allow the P40, Corsair and Mustang to have a worthy opposition.
At Australian airshows we often have the traditional closing display of the RAAF PC-9 "Roulettes" aerobatic display, which I usually use as a cue to bolt for the carkpark, however that doesnt be-little their display and the General Public interest in it, just simply my own tiredness of an often seen display.
Perhaps some of us have been too spoilt by exotic originals being restored and exhibited in recent times and have similarly become dis-missive of mock-ups etc, perhaps you wont "waste your film" on it, but I think these displays have a major role to play in the ongoing success of airshows, and even the growth of historic aviation.
In some ways in my mind there is little difference between the Tora T6 mockups and the accurate and new built replica Oscars, FW190's or ME262's, none of them are original airframes with true provenance, all of them are trying to "recreate" an image in the sky for future generations to enjoy.
Without the success of the Battle of Britain Movie and Tora-Tora-Tora I do wonder how many warbirders may have grown up with other hobbies, and the same can be said of future generations watching the Tora Sequence - how many kids will be enthused to look into aviation history and learn more about it, perhaps even grow up to be an enthusiast and warbird owner/operator (rather than driving a gameboy or Microsoft Flight Sim?)
I am heavily involved in a volunteer museum, with some very historic aircraft, and I certainly know its easier to drag the General Public along to an airshow than a static museum, despite the quality and accuracy of what is on offer in the museum. "Flying "historic" aircraft have that extra "wow" factor, the roar of the engine, the speed of a dive, the rumble down the runway - it all brings in more interest and keeps our hobbie alive.
regards
Mark Pilkington
Sat Jun 16, 2007 9:26 am
Aloha All,
The late honorary CAF Colonel Jay Frank Dial provided paint schemes to the CAF, once the CAF left the white with red-white-blue trim behind...starting with P-51 "LOU IV".
Jay said of the TORA fleet, "They look like Zeros, perhaps they fly like a Zero, but in their hearts they are T-6s."
As a paraplegic, Jay would carve, mold, etc, advance design planes for LTV and Bell Helicopter, but his love was a bent-wing affair that Vought made. He wrote both PROFILE PUBS monographs on the F4U and the one on the P-39. He also wrote US WWII CAMOUFLAGE, the first book with FS595 paint chips, in 1963.
Cheers,
David Aiken
The late honorary CAF Colonel Jay Frank Dial provided paint schemes to the CAF, once the CAF left the white with red-white-blue trim behind...starting with P-51 "LOU IV".
Jay said of the TORA fleet, "They look like Zeros, perhaps they fly like a Zero, but in their hearts they are T-6s."
As a paraplegic, Jay would carve, mold, etc, advance design planes for LTV and Bell Helicopter, but his love was a bent-wing affair that Vought made. He wrote both PROFILE PUBS monographs on the F4U and the one on the P-39. He also wrote US WWII CAMOUFLAGE, the first book with FS595 paint chips, in 1963.
Cheers,
David Aiken
Sat Jun 16, 2007 11:27 am
I agree with DZ (SkymstrO2) about Tora....their "reenactment" and their pilots. DZ and I both used to live (not together...LOL) in the area thick with Tora planes and pilots. The amount of talent there is amazing and the care with which they maintain the planes is to be admired.
SkymstrO2 and I both have O-2As which saw combat in Nam and Thailand. I do an airshow routine which replicates the mission......even though my plane is "real" according to Mudge's definition that routine is still nothing more than a reenactment and is advertised as such.
The show going public does not believe that the Tora act is a real attack and if the name Tora is mentioned in connection with a local show a true airshow afficianado will know what it is prior to going and will recognize the act without hearing the announcer's spiel.
Just my 2 cents worth from The Sky Mistress......last time I looked SkymstrO2 was a boy...LOL
SkymstrO2 and I both have O-2As which saw combat in Nam and Thailand. I do an airshow routine which replicates the mission......even though my plane is "real" according to Mudge's definition that routine is still nothing more than a reenactment and is advertised as such.
The show going public does not believe that the Tora act is a real attack and if the name Tora is mentioned in connection with a local show a true airshow afficianado will know what it is prior to going and will recognize the act without hearing the announcer's spiel.
Just my 2 cents worth from The Sky Mistress......last time I looked SkymstrO2 was a boy...LOL
Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:10 pm
OK, the pilots and people involved are professional and dedicated. Never said they weren't. And I'm glad that many of you know the pilots and support personnel.
I STILL don't care for the show.
Mudge the obstinate
ps. Lady O2...Then why doesn't HE sign skyMASTER. "MSTR" could be an abbreviation for a lot of things. Do you use the term "boy" because of his youth or because he's not a "man"?
That oughta' stir somethin' up.
I STILL don't care for the show.
Mudge the obstinate
ps. Lady O2...Then why doesn't HE sign skyMASTER. "MSTR" could be an abbreviation for a lot of things. Do you use the term "boy" because of his youth or because he's not a "man"?
That oughta' stir somethin' up.
Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:28 pm
I'm for anything that demonstrates what went on in any aspect of WW2.
I'm afraid that young folks today have no clue of the enormous scope of the war, and the fact that the outcome shaped the face of this country to this day. One of these days the Al Gores of the world are going to have their way and we're going to have to watch a 'hybrid' powered T-6. That just won't be right.
Steve G
I'm afraid that young folks today have no clue of the enormous scope of the war, and the fact that the outcome shaped the face of this country to this day. One of these days the Al Gores of the world are going to have their way and we're going to have to watch a 'hybrid' powered T-6. That just won't be right.
Steve G
Sat Jun 16, 2007 3:11 pm
That oughta' stir somethin' up.
Someone landed on the wrong end of the runway.
Sat Jun 16, 2007 3:11 pm
That oughta' stir somethin' up.
Someone landed on the wrong end of the runway.
Sat Jun 16, 2007 4:15 pm
Mudge wrote:ps. Lady O2...Then why doesn't HE sign skyMASTER. "MSTR" could be an abbreviation for a lot of things. Do you use the term "boy" because of his youth or because he's not a "man"?
He is a man.......I used the term "boy" as a joke.....obviously not a good one. How his screenname was chosen is not of concern......I believe it goes back to very old days with AOL where we were limited in the number of characters used. But who the heck cares. As for age ......we're both fairly old but that is not part of this discussion either.
I really don't care whether you like Tora or not.....that is your decision, preference and opinion which I respect. I guess a lot of us do like the reenactment and the public does too.
Sat Jun 16, 2007 4:49 pm
Mudge wrote:I STILL don't care for the show.
Some people are never happy, no matter how much work is put in.
I just wish "FIFI" could still drop the atomic bomb.
Sat Jun 16, 2007 4:52 pm
Whatever...time to put this "disagreement" away.
Mudge the bored
Mudge the bored