Warbird Information Exchange

Just saw another trailer. Red tail P-51s flying escort.

We know the main story of the series...it is in the book, there's no mystery here.

Eagan and Cleven meet at least one Tuskegee pilot in Stalag Luft 3, so most certainly the story of how he ended up in that prison camp will be told.

_________________

Nice interview/discussion from the WWII museum between author Donald Miller and one of the main producers from Playtone.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/live/edDoldxOXcs?si=wLX3jIoC0JHFbLc2[/youtube]

https://www.youtube.com/live/edDoldxOXcs?si=wLX3jIoC0JHFbLc2

_________________

There is a review in today's London Daily Telegraph.

They liked it a lot. The reviewer(who did not seem to know much about the subject), gave it Five stars.

They said the CGI well illustrated the formations but otherwise weren't too impressed by it.
They noted a largely U.K. - Irish cast and was impressed with the acting.

Another interesting bit which I had not heard, Harry Crosby, a navigator with the 100th, is a character and they use dialogue from his well known 1993 memoir, memoir, A Wing and a Prayer.
He is portrayed by Irish actor Anthony Boyle.

Finally, they said the sub plot featuring the Red Tail pilots seemed to be tacked on.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

That's my plan, but having seen the trailers I'm not sure I can muster up the effort required to do so. I was done with the Indianapolis movie within maybe 5 minutes.

_________________
Those who possess real knowledge are rare.

Those who can set that knowledge into motion in the physical world are rarer still.

The few who possess real knowledge and can set it into motion of their own hands are the rarest of all.

What I don't get is why many warbird fans who would love to see warbird-themed productions (dare say it, beg for them), then quickly act hoity toity about them and say stuff like this... Same folks who are giddy to see a 8th AF themed 51 fly over, then run home to post about how the bugs smashed on the wings are incorrect because they are only native to North America and not Europe... Just enjoy this series and take it for what it is, an (at least attempt at) accurate portrayal of a subject matter we all hold dear.

_________________
Taylor Stevenson

It happens across any community with historical interests, but you're right. I find it funny that they were doing the Apples to Oranges thing comparing Indianapolis with this, because Indianapolis was an awful, low-budget action flick. That's like saying you don't want to watch Saving Private Ryan because Windtalkers sucked.

There's a lot of undue pessimism that pervades the community, but everything that's been coming out of this series from the people who worked on it is showing an insane amount of effort into research and portraying their story properly. There will be issues of course (looking at you, bare-aluminum F-Models), but I trust the team working on this, and this will be the best modern depiction of the 8th Air Force we could have ever hoped for.

Exactly.
A big budget production from an outfit that has produced acclaimed, sensitive and accurate series on the topic.

Yes, I'm sure there are errors and things we'd like to improve, but it issomething to honor our history and the men who made it.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

Agreed. Warbird people are a tough crowd. I love them, but if I were a film maker, I would never make a warbird related film. People are so impossible to please. I always hear the line, "if they would've done the slightest amount of research" regarding any mistake no matter how minor. Movies and TV series are largely for entertained purposes. They're going to get things wrong. They had to use CGI, there aren't very many Forts airworthy currently.It is what it is. I'm planning to just enjoy and be glad someone chose to film something I'm interested in.

I was pleasantly surprised.

The CGI was pretty cringe...the low note of which was the B-17 go-around at Blue West 1/Narsarsuaq. The high point was that they actually used the real terrain there at BW1, even if the B-17s looked and flew like cartoons. The take-off scenes at Thorpe-Abbots were also pretty cartoonish with B-17s flying a lot faster than they do in real life.

Having slogged through reading the book, I was already familiar with the characters, so I didn't mind that the narrative jumped right into the action.

For those who haven't read the book, the narrative on Egan, Cleven, Crosby, et al was a minor sub-thread in the book's much larger history lesson about the creation and operations of the whole 8th AF. For the most part the scenes, dialogue, etc we saw on the screen were not taken from the book directly, although the stuff spoken by Crosby in the voice-over narrative portions were from points made in the rest of the book. The discussion about the special breakfast on mission days, and the whole bike-race-in-the-mess-hall, how crews were awakend prior to the mission and their getting kitted out, etc were in other portions of the book as general narrative.

So, that being the case, what I was pleasantly surprised at is the screenwriting team seems to have done a good job of recreating a set of personal stories out of what is primarily like a history textbook.

I was also generally happy with many of the detail points of how the airplanes were being operated and flown...checklists and procedures and flipping switches that actually exist in the real airplane. The replica B-17s did a decent job of looking like real engine starts, although they fired up much faster than in reality.

Interesting that they performed the engine starts in numerical order, whereas now on the 17/24/29 we start 3 and 4 first, then 2 and 1 (inboards then outboards). On the B-24 the start is in that sequence as a method of checking the function of the hydraulic pumps, and on the B-29 the 3-4-2-1 sequence allows function testing the various generators on each engine. If you watch the current warbird B-17s start, they fire up 3-4-2-1 also, but the wartime Boeing "how to start the B-17 engines" show the 1-2-3-4 sequence.

It was nice to see that the sets of the inside of the B-17s were much more proportionally realistic, especially when the bombardier was pulling the arming wire safeties standing on the catwalk. I remember being 18 and skinny and that catwalk being narrow to walk through just wearing t-shirt and shorts.

We shall see how it develops, but I give it a cautious thumbs up at this point.

_________________

You’d be minimizing the amount of interest and passion that most Warbird enthusiasts give to their research of military aviation history by questioning their reviews and opinions. Of course we would love to see more productions of WWII aviation themed films, but since most of us are well aware of the realities of what actually took place, how it took place and above average knowledge of WWII military aviation, it’s only natural that we would be harder to convince, let alone please.


So there’s very little surprise that reviews and opinions from this community would lean more towards skepticism of what has been shown so far. I personally would be disappointed if it were any other way quite frankly because I know many of the folks who frequent this forum are extremely knowledgeable.

We enthusiasts, while watching this series may find ample opportunities to nitpick, but in reality we aren’t the main audience this series is targeting. I’m glad there are people like us around who genuinely care that this type of history is not lost, forgotten or ignored, and that it’s told in all its authenticity.

You’ll find no difference between this forum and similar forums as far as realistic expectations and opinions. Gotta try to keep em honest!

One episode in and I liked it, and I'm an enthusiast. I didn't really cringe at anything, although as pointed out the B-17 go-around at BW1 was less realistic. Most of the CGI was quite acceptable. The interior shots and sets, props, etc were fantastic.

Just sit back and enjoy it folks.

The airplane scenes are cartoons. Totally unreal.
Just watched E1.
The only time the airplanes move realistically is when they're taxying. I cringed.
Top Gun II was a better path for a Producer.

After watching E1 my fears were realized. CGI is advanced enough to generate realistic aerodynamics. Problem seems to be that the CGI programmers (in this series) aren’t advanced enough create realistic aerodynamics. So while I may be a bit disappointed (in the CGI) I’m sure the video game generations will be delighted. Hopefully M of the A won’t get tanked like Pearl Harbor did.

Just watched episodes 1 and 2. Overall I am glad it is finally out and a larger portion of the general population will get to learn about the difficult conditions experienced by WWII aircrews. The history lesson seems fairly accurate, some of the aircraft performance a little less so. I suppose the producers/directors decided they can’t take 30 seconds of a show to start one motor as it coughs, sputters and lopes (as much as I love that sound). It would be thirty seconds less to get other story lines across.

As much as I enjoyed my time working/volunteering in the warbird community and having the opportunity to work on and fly some WWII aircraft. By far the best experience I had was meeting the WWII vets and/or their family members and hearing firsthand about their individual experiences. As long as this series honors that, I will consider it must watch show.

I was impressed with the level of detail regarding the interior shots of the B17 especially the cockpit and panel. Also, while flying the pilot used the underhand technique on the throttles.

As an aviation enthusiast I too wish some of the flying portions were a little more realistic, but I think most of the general public wouldn’t quite pick up the drama of a slow climb rate after takeoff when the airplane was heavily loaded or a go around in a strong crosswind. The steeper climb rate I suppose is to try and make the general public that doesn’t know much about aerodynamics to feel anxious by adding a dramatic visual with a steep climb and excess exhaust.

Prior to the crosswind go around the one aerodynamic thing I couldn’t unsee and don’t understand how it made it to the screen, was the rudder was deflected the wrong way for the crosswind approach. How did the aviation advisors miss that, or did the director just decide not to correct it if pointed out?

Despite that, I look forward to watching the rest of the series.