F-15E WSO Explains the Bomb Run in Top Gun: Maverick

Former F-15E Strike Eagle Weapons Systems Officer "Pako" Benitez, now editor of "The Merge" newsletter, joins Ward to break down the attack mission in "Top Gun: Maverick."
Support this channel by using the SUPER THANKS (heart icon above) or by becoming a Patron at / wardcarroll
Buy one or all three of the books in the PUNK'S TRILOGY, Ward's popular first three novels about life a Tomcat squadron, at www.usni.org/p.... Use the PUNKYT discount code at checkout for 25% off to KZbin channel subscribers.
Also available in KINDLE format here: www.amazon.com...
And as an audiobook here:
PUNK'S WAR: www.audible.co...
PUNK'S WING: www.amazon.com...
PUNK'S FIGHT: www.amazon.com...
Get official channel gear at my-store-b7f9c...
Follow Ward on Twitch at / moochontwitch
Subscribe to The Merge newsletter at www.themerge.co/

[@AndyFromBeaverton]

This is not impossible to do. I used to bull's-eye womp rats in my T-sixteen back home. They're not much bigger than two meters.

[@keirfarnum6811]

After flying through Beggar’s Canyon, too!

[@AndyFromBeaverton]

@@keirfarnum6811 May the Force be with you.

[@kenw5901]

Dust off and nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

[@AndyFromBeaverton]

@@kenw5901 First time I watched Aliens in the theater, I almost cut off all circulation to my girlfriend's hand. The second time I watched it, it became a comedy. One of my all-time favorites.

[@asherbelles1305]

Stay on target...

[@dksl9899]

Fun fact: the bomb run is actually foreshadowed right at the start of the movie. As Maverick walks into Penny's bar for the first time, an aviator can be seen playing darts. He manages to get two consecutive bullseyes, then his friend covers his eyes and makes him try again.

[@Roddy556]

It's also foreshadowed in the movie Star Wars where fighters fly into a valley and the hero has to hit a small target without using his targeting system.

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

@@Roddy556 Which was foreshadowed by WW2 aviation movies Dambusters and Sq 633. Kurosawa's The Hidden Fortress also foreshadowed other A New Hope plot points.

[@johngilbert6036]

@@ChucksSEADnDEAD Ditto

[@jackshittle]

Someone is a keen observer of detail.

[@maximilliancunningham6091]

@@Roddy556 And that is a glaring plagiarism, unfortunately. They shoulda, coulda, written a scenario, like the Israeli raid on the bagdad reactor,

[@timsparks7049]

Dropped lots of MK84 with and without Laser Kit from the A-6 Intruder. The dive delivery was the standard and surprisingly in a 40 degree 500 knot dive with the early LGB kits the steering fins didn't go to neutral it was full deflection one way or the other so it would wiggle back and forth bleeding energy all the way to the target. It would hit the ground going slower than it was released at! Typical miss was short of the target as the weapon just ran out of energy. You had to get over 45 degree in the dive just to give it enough Q to maintain the speed all the way to the target. We would joke the last thing the guy on the ground heard was the audible clacking of the fins as they deflected back and forth flying to the target. Buddy lazing was something we did as well lots of different scenarios on how we did that. First Live MK-84 (non-lgb) I dropped was -4 on a division roll into a target on the big island of Hawaii. We all had 4 MK-84 on the planes so 32,000 pounds were delivered in about 30 seconds on the target. The Army Rangers who were working the range were impressed to say the least!

[@usmcbn]

Tim, Vulture 4 Bravo here. Did you salvo all 4 Mk 84s at once? I did once during my first tour in Vietnam on a TPQ drop (Ground Radar directed) from 28,000 feet. I felt like the ejection seat went off! When we got back and told maintenance what we did they said we over-geed the airplane and had to do a special inspection. Turns out the A6A Tactics Manual said "Don't do that!"

[@jackshittle]

I wish there was a new more accurate version of Flight Of The Intruder using real A-6's in the same fashion as Top Gun: Maverick. I remember in A school guys that were non-aircrew were hoping they didn't get assigned to an A-6 squadron after they told us that a single A-6 can hold 30 500lb bombs (with the gear doors removed). Plus the angle at which you'd have to hump those bombs looked like a real back breaker. Kudos to them.

[@usmcbn]

@@jackshittle Aboard ship, pretty much every bomb was loaded individually using hernia bars (basically a short length of pipe screwed into the front fuse pocket) and lifted by the tail fins. For a change, the Marines (shore based) had it easier: a multiple ejector rack (MER) would be loaded with six Mk 82 (500 lb) bombs and the entire MER would be loaded on the wing station using Short Airfield Tactical Support (SATS) loader (basically a fork lift that was only about 3-4 ft high with a long reach). I was a Bombardier/Navigator (B/N) in Danang and Chu Lai, later in VMA (aw) - 224 aboard USS CORAL SEA so I saw both methods used extensively. My sincerest appreciation for the "Red Shirt" ordies that humped all those bombs! Semper Fi, Vulture 4 Bravo

[@johngilbert6036]

When in Vietnam we had F-4 Phantoms do an airstrike near fire base Digger. We were really impressed when a bomb threw trees into the air and then dropped napalm next, they made 5 passes all with ordinance. The strike you did/saw would have been awesome to the max! Those F-4s meant business we lost most of our recon platoon, we were pissed and and wanted payback.

[@pwr2al4]

The A-6, another kickass product from the boys and girls over at Grumman Ironworks!

[@johngregory4801]

Knowing that the bomb run was actually possible instead of being Hollyweird hyperbole makes seeing Mav's old 900 Ninja and that gorgeous P-51 flying even cooler!!! Not to mention Jennifer Connelly being hotter than the Sun.

[@bobkvideo]

Civilian here. I saw the movie and thought it was entertaining as hell. No way did I ever think that run was realistic. So much respect to those of you who do this for real.

[@reboundrides8132]

He’s kind of splitting hairs it wasn’t a very realistic mission it would have never gone down like this in a real scenario.

[@skepticalbadger]

@@reboundrides8132 It's an unrealistic mission carried out realistically. Which is exactly what you want from a military movie.

[@reboundrides8132]

@@skepticalbadger fair analysis 🧐

[@4g63attack]

Realistic… try realism look up operation opera. In my opinion this movie was loosely based on that event

[@rcslyman8929]

Yeah, there's elements of the mission prep that make you go, "Why?" I get it, they can't use F-35s for the strike itself, fine. We can go with it. But why the heck don't you have some of the backups on the boat running intercept in 35s? Or call up the Air Force, see if we can't spare a couple Raptors out of Incirlik? I'm sure there'd be no lack of volunteers to go up for a live op, with the possibility of facing off against hostile 5th Gens. Of course, we know that's to give the aged Tomcat its day in the sun once more.

[@jrads]

This guy is one of your best guest. Would love to hear about his experiences in the F 15 EX. I'm very intrigued with that plane.

[@peccatumDei]

Years ago, I worked for the contractor that developed the laser seekers for the Paveway III. As with any development program of this type, a test article is manufactured that gets frozen, baked, and placed on a shaker table, subjected to stresses beyond what the contract calls for. The test article never failed, and became an additional asset to the program. SO, that seeker was attached to a live bomb, and dropped at a test range targeting a truck being driven by remote control, using a laser designator carried by a soldier on the ground. There were some great photos taken with a high speed camera that showed the tip of the seeker just touching the drivers side window and the glass starting to craze. This all happened about 40 years ago, and I can only imagine the improvements that have been made since then.

[@efdjr1963]

Loved the movie. However, the mission was the attack on the death star. After the targeting pod malfunctions, you can almost hear Obi Wan say use the force Rooster! Lol

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

The death star trench run was "inspired" by the Dambusters and Sq 633, aviator movies.

[@TurboHappyCar]

2:20 I laughed out loud at the Centurion patch with the zero's crossed off and "significant emotional event". Great stuff guys! 😂👍

[@timsparks7049]

I have a Kitty Hawk 399 trap patch. Due to clerical error I thought I had 400. But missed by one….

[@TurboHappyCar]

@@timsparks7049 That's hilarious. Thanks for sharing! 👍

[@brianstone8843]

Love the explanations and the technical background provided. Thank you Mooch and Pako .

[@nplus1watches35]

Thank you to Pako for filling in the blanks when Rooster deadeye'd his bombs. It wasn't clear how it was on target without being pure luck. Great vid, Ward, love your channel and content. Thank you, sir.

[@sweetlisa22]

I would love to hear an explanation of the "Hondo" character. He was running the test flights, then he was at "Top Gun" counting pushups, then he was on the Carrier deck How is that? He is a super soldier!!

[@Roset595]

He's the movie's stand-in for all enlisted sailors, because God forbid they feature us actually doing our jobs

[@liammorris6354]

Only because of THIS video did I learn that Maverick was RE-released in IMAX. Already bought 2 tickets for the 12/11 show @ Neshaminy Mall (PA) AMC

[@juan080876]

Thank you, Mr. Carroll. We truly enjoy seeing Pako on your channel. As we learn more about the B-21 and the EX Eagle, we would love to hear his insights and opinions.

[@pastorrich7436]

Feeling better about seeing TM again. Thanks for the 411 and professional input on the authenticity of the action and storyline! Merry Christmas Mooch and Pako!!

[@JeffHancock93]

Great video as always. It was nice to have something to watch while I was cooking my eggs and bacon. Always glad to know there's more realism in the film than I thought even after four viewings

[@On-Our-Radar-24News]

Pako is a wealth of knowledge! 1,000 combat sorties!!! The Goat!

[@redtailpilot]

Wow, 100' AGL Supersonic must be a blast! Lowest I've flown as a civilian private pilot is 500 over the shoreline. Really nice to hear his take on one of my favorite scenes in this awesome movie!

[@harrylime3.143]

Very good show with new info turns out they got it mostly right, good hop Tom. Thank you Mooch for hooking us up the someone new to give the straight story.😎✌

[@danielmarshall4587]

"ONE HUNDRED FEET SUPERSONIC....I like the sound of that" I suspect no one on the ground would like the sound of that, GOOD GRIEF. Very interesting video thank you both for this.

[@robchapman5366]

Merry Christmas Mooch. Love your vids. Please keep doing them. Have a fantastic 2023.

[@WardCarroll]

Thanks for watching, Rob!

[@terrylee5638]

I actually was flown onto the USS Enterprise in the Navy COD and caught the wire and then we were catapulted off. I’m an Air Force guy and I’m telling you it was amazing to get that opportunity! Go Navy! 😊

[@hueginvieny7959]

I could listen to the two of you talk about Disney Ice capades and I would be engaged every second. I'm hoping for a f15 eagle episode with Paco the two of you work very well together and as always everything you put out ward I listen to every second and can't wait to see what you have every week

[@steyefong590]

A F15 episode with Paco will be nice. Please, Mooch.

[@WardCarroll]

Okay!

[@wills2140]

7:30 ~ some of that low altitude and very low altitude supersonic training takes place in Wales, U K. The F 15 E "Reapers" squadron took their last flight their recently, videos are available on here. :)

[@bburnsga]

Very interesting!! I LOVE that movie, wish I'd known it was in IMAX, would've definitely seen it on the huge screen! As is, I have the DVD & will be watching it from time to time on my TV. Thanks for the great interview!!

[@rickquick8977]

He explained the tandem drop concept really well. I guess my issue with the movie is that the planes were so close together that you would not get the extra 5 to 10 seconds of laser time on the target before the second plane would have had to pull up as well.

[@williamgarry2635]

There were AT LEAST 3 things that bothered me about the final mission: 1) why didn’t they strike the anti-air missile sites while the a/c’s were inbound? 2) Where were the Growlers? 3) Where were the standby CAP vehicles that should have been airborne off the coast to provide protection to the outbound fighters from the mission?

[@timsparks7049]

I agree but remember it’s “Not a documentary.”

[@2bugles]

Answers, 1. They didn't think about it. 2. They didn't think about it. 3. They didn't think about it. Those items blew the movie for me.

[@piman2k]

Doesn't Hangman count as the off shore CAP?

[@VincoVenator]

@@piman2k he probably does, and since he turns up when needed he seems to fulfil that role but I don't think he launches until after the others are already back and goes out only after they see Mavericks jet on radar

[@muzzaball]

Great work Mooch - when in doubt, bring out the experts! Glad to see that the advisors for the movie got it mostly right. The accuracy for TGM far surpasses TG1 in this area. Cheers.

[@gregorymaupin6388]

Thanks Pako another great interview

[@MrRawnerves]

Kudos to Tom Cruise. It sounds like always he surrounds himself with the experts and makes it realistic. 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽

[@steveshoemaker6347]

l have watched this movie twice ans learned something both times.....Thanks Mooch..... Old Shoe in my 80's 🇺🇸

[@moosemate610]

Hey Mooch, this is Moose - love your vids man. Im a retired RAF Tornado GR1/4 back seater - 100 combat missions. I thought Hollywood did pretty well with the attack - even mentioned the laser code. We used 1688 for training; 1732 was the operational code (well for us anyways). Maybe you Navy mates did different. As for Pako tooling along supersonic at 100' - I'd like to see that! We would fly high subsonic at 100' but with all the crap hanging off the jet, there was no way we could go faster unless we dumped it all. Also no way to stay that low unless over flat terrain. No doubt the SE had the grunt to do it - proper amount of thrust - but were all the stores and weapons able to? I'd be surprised.

[@nissimhadar]

I was an F-4 back-seater. 1688 is the same as the older, non-encoded pulse rate. So it was useful for guiding older weapons. And yes - I don't think supersonic at 100` is possible. We did 600 kts at 300` and 540` at 100`. The F-4 has a very high wing-load, especially compared to newer fighters like the F-15. The F-4 also had a bottom-wing, whereas the F-15 (and Tornado) have a top-wing. This would make the F-15 even less stable. I did some ACM in an F-15 and that thing shook like hell at low speed ;)

[@timsparks7049]

Moose Mate, I know we used 1776 for our LGB code does that number sound familiar? Wow I hadn’t thought of that in awhile. All good! Sparky

[@hoghogwild]

@@nissimhadar 1974 operational F-14A Tomcat could do 805 knots at Sea Level(SL) or 1,314kts@38,000ft. Same vintage jet with the 6 AIM-54 loadout with External Fuel Tank(EFT) jettisoned could do 708kts(Mach1.08).@ SL or 1,090kts(Mach-1.9)@38,000ft. Empty weight for an operational July 1974 F-14A was 38,188 pounds and the 6 Phoenix/2 EFT had a Max TakeOff Weight(MTOW) of 68,649lbs. A pre-service 1985 F-14D had an empty weight of 41,343lbs and a 6 AIM-54/2 EFT MTOW of 73,329 lbs with the cat being able to support a max shot of 74,349 pounds, and max. arrested bringback of 54,000lbs. 4 Phoenix/2 Sparrow and 2 Sidewinder with a MTOW of 72,646lbs allowed a bringback of 54,875lbs with EFT jettisoned with JUST 2,703 pounds of fuel left on board. The bringback issue is why full 6 Phoenix loadouts were reserved for warloads only. Though I've heard rumours of 6 Phoenix/2 sidewinder loadouts being launched in the early/mid 80's. A Strike Eagle with its Conformal Fuel Tank(CFT)(mounted beside each) and both its targeting AND navigation pods (mounted under each) engine intake really had to hurt performance esp. down on the deck. 1992 F-15C with an empty weight of 28,476lbs and max speed at SL approaching Mach 1.2 when clean weighing 34,396lbs. Same jet equipped with CFT's has an empty weight of 30,963lbs and can acheive right around Mach 1 at SL while weighing 44,190lbs. This shows us that the CFTs really dont help the F-15 speedwise esp down on the deck. For comparison, a 1976 F-15A has an empty weight of 25,870lbs. F-111B (SeaVark) with an empty weight of 46,000 pounds could do 793knots at SL with 2 Phoenix mounted internal weighing 63,220lbs launching at a MTOW of 72,421lbs or 628 knots weighing 68,365lbs with 6 Phoenix(2 internal/4 external) and a MTOW of 77,566lbs. Those are some heavy max launch weights, very very hard on equipment, plus not much of a fighter.

[@nissimhadar]

@@hoghogwild Sea level does NOT mean close to the terrain…

[@hoghogwild]

@@nissimhadar Then I have to ask, what does Sea Level mean?

[@lesliegrayson1722]

Thanks Ward and Pako for your more up to date views. Whilst its wildly romantic to think an F14 could be anything in a fight with a modern plane, seeing as though the F14 was always just a fast missile truck with over super long range hypersonic missiles that would have obliterated anything long before it had a chance to see the F14. Obviously things have changed but not changed. :D

[@AUTiger1964]

I am glad Paco is on our side!🇺🇸

[@iamsam8446]

When I saw this in Top Gun, and I haven't heard anyone comment on this yet, it seems eerily similar the attack on the Death Star 1 in Star Wars.

[@nycshelbygt500]

Yes, they stole the plots from Star Wars A New Hope and Firefox (Clint Eastwood Steals a MIG).

[@pogo1140]

@@nycshelbygt500 Or the incident where a downed allied pilot stole an FW-190 from a German airfield and flew it to England

[@brad238899]

Our military is a completely volunteer force and that's a beautiful thing... having said that id like to volunteer to bend the brim of this guys hat!

[@jesseleblanc989]

Excellent! Thank you!

[@amcds2867]

Always learning on this channel.

[@Trojan0304]

Great job explaining movie accuracy

[@markray814]

Saw the movie for the first time recently. What an amazing movie! Thanks for this video

[@schumy1975]

Thank you so much for Pako's sharing and insight. another great episode Mooch. Merry Christmas to you all

[@WardCarroll]

Merry Christmas!

[@nissimhadar]

One point that bothers me in the movie, from personal experience, is the time between the two weapon drops. The second crew will be lasing into the dust cloud of #1's explosions. The correct way to do it is to (never mind....)

[@SoloRenegade]

inertial guidance: exists F-35: could still be an escort, or deliver a laser guided bomb Growlers or F-35: support providing jamming and SEAD

[@nycshelbygt500]

No two-seat F-35Cs for the Actors in the back for filming, so they didn't use them.

[@SoloRenegade]

@@nycshelbygt500 I get that, just pointing out the holes in the premise.

[@mickroam9991]

I've watched probably every you tube video on maverick I was so hooked on that movie and made several calls to imax on it ever coming out again in the last few months. How did I not hear about the re-release 😢

[@GazpachoTabletop]

I like how you switch between one and two talking heads. Tres slick

[@wileybird69]

Thanks for insight👍

[@bandit6272]

This kind of attention to detail is one of the big reasons why Tom Cruise is one of the last true movie stars.

[@JackWaldbewohner]

Ward the SAMS in the movie were old-fashioned Vietnam War-era SAMS.

[@wilson2455]

after watching the movie, my 1st thought was " it's impossible to fly the F/A18 when you've ripped the wings off.. ". Also, a 5th Gen SU-27 v Tomcat would last about 5 seconds..

[@timhowell6929]

100 feet @ supersonic??? Oh my gosh! What a rush! I had no idea that was even possible… We have an amazing military!!!

[@lykinsmotorsports]

I've always wondered about how accurate it was in the movie to grab the stick with both hands and pull/push with the magnitude that they were pulling/pushing.

[@nissimhadar]

@@ascot4000 On certain aircraft - a very fast pull on the stick can stall the stabilator. In fact - I have seen a stabilator snap on an F-4E doing this exact maneuver.

[@deSloleye]

Probably makes sure that you got the paddle that turns out the 7.5g limiter, since they needed more than that to miss the inside of the mountain

[@GMdrivingMOPARguy]

A P51 required something like 50 pounds of stick force in a 4g turn. I'm sure an F18 has a lot of assist (or are the FBW? I don't know a lot about the 18) but I bet it still takes quite a lot of strength to pull a 9G climb.

[@deSloleye]

@@GMdrivingMOPARguy yes, the FA18 is all FBW. The only limit for g is energy state and flight control limiting. Nothing to do with the strength of the pilot

[@deSloleye]

@@nissimhadar a Hornet might snap a stabilator, but probably not a Super Hornet. They have the energy to break themselves, but the computer protected the plane

[@johndrummond88]

Great interview! Love the Banter between AF and Navy.

[@TheMathius78]

Thanks, Mooch! This conversation is totally jawsome.

[@robertmonaghan5420]

The Punks War Trilogy was Excellent! Definitely Recommend

[@Cyge240sx]

WHAT! Re-release! Hell yeah my saturday is planned

[@sanfordschoolfield710]

Thanks

[@drmarkintexas-400]

Thank you for sharing 🙏🇺🇲🤗🎖️

[@heathercarignan2414]

Loved your books!

[@robertbandusky9565]

Great view and insight guys! I only flew AH-64 ‘ s with similar symbology at much lower velocities 🇺🇸

[@karlfair]

Nice work on this episode. Thanks to you both.

[@fidem15893]

Very interesting. Thank You!!!

[@Knightfang1]

My only complaint with the mission was when they said GPS jamming means they cant use an F-35, but the F-35 can drop laser guided bombs as well. It basically has a Sniper Pod built into the underside of the nose. Of coarse the real reason was the NAVY was not going to let Hollywood actors see inside an F-35 cockpit, and there are not any 2 seater F-35s

[@swordmonkey6635]

Isn't the Hornet more nimble than the F-35 for things like the canyon run? The jet's nickname "Fat Amy" doesn't bode well for twitchy maneuver missions. The Hornet is a dogfighter that also is a great ground attack platform made during an era (competing for the USAF contract against the F-16) when dogfighting (high maneuverability) was a prerequisite. Not so much for the design mission for the F-35.

[@Knightfang1]

@@swordmonkey6635 the lightning is more nimble than people give it credit for but the point is with its stealth it wouldn’t need to be down in the canyon

[@swordmonkey6635]

@@Knightfang1 F-35 pilots call it Fat Amy. The F-35 can maneuver, but not as well as the Hornet, Falcon and especially the Raptor. It's not designed to. As for stealth. The closer a jet gets to a radar receiver, the less stealthy it gets. There's a point in time (and space) where modern radars will just burn through the low visibility features and track it. In the movie, those SAM radars are VERY close and would light the F-35 up. The F-35, not being as nimble, would have to fly higher and either get painted by SAM radar or the CAP Felon's radar. I'm not trying to bash the F-35. I'm just saying the Super Hornet was the better jet for the job of threading the ravine in a timely fashion... and then having to evade SAMs afterward.

[@Zivandra]

I would have just dropped a SEAL team in to laze the target from the ground, or used Triton UAVs to relay the GPS data, and used F-35s at altitude, but that would not have made a great a film.

[@BrokeSolid]

I’ve prob supported Pako. Was stationed at Seymour and currently support the fielding of the EX.

[@jeffw5263]

One of Murphy’s Laws of Combat states, “The easy way is always mined.”

[@JoeBehan3]

Thanks!

[@WardCarroll]

Thanks for the support, Joe!

[@ritaloy8338]

I have seen Top Gun Maverick while on my return flight from Montreal to Los Angeles. I really enjoyed the movie. Granted the screen on the back of the seat was not the greatest but while flying is hard to beat. Mooch, you made the recommendation to see Top Gun Maverick on IMAX after watching this episode and I did. The sound was great the big screen did add to the experience. But I remembered the whole plot and I almost could resite the dialog. Yes I am really glad that I spent my money to see Top Gun Maverick again. Thanks for the recommendation @Ward Carroll.

[@groomlake51]

You both are a great team🙏🏻 excellent content!!!

[@W1ckedRcL]

Excellent content.

[@isaacjamestea9652]

This was an amazing segment. Also amazing movie. I forget why they can't use the F-35. That would work amazing with a laser guided GBU regardless of GPS jamming, unless they were worried about loss of the airframe to the hostile nation.

[@EvoraGT430]

Because of GPS jamming, apparently. Extremely skoshy.

[@SBArrow310]

Thanks for the detailed walk through of that part of the movie. I'm really surprised that the movie depicted things that accurately.

[@nathanfisher1826]

Thanks guys

[@mimaspa1234]

much respect!

[@coisasnatv]

This all sound nice but, from a tactical point of view, why not use the Tomahawk to take down the SAM's near the top of that mountain to assist the daggers to run away after the attack? To make the daggers face a 5gen jet would make much more sense instead of SAM's.

[@jimgutshall4855]

Great explanation!!

[@petertarantelli]

Excellent breakdown of possibly the best movie ever made!

[@rdlsar15]

I think Highlander got the academy award for “best movie ever made”.

[@TheEvertw]

Normally such movies would do a lot of explaining, glossing over various errors. It is very rare for a movie to get it absolutely right yet do no explaining of how and why. Makes you appreciate the movie even more.

[@mrkc10]

Another great video. Pretty sure I’ve refueled PAKO out in the AOR in years past. Painful loss today for Navy 😬

[@poncho6784]

Damn. Another excellent vid with two awesome professionals. Keep it coming!

[@hunt_club_1]

very interesting, thanks

[@b3delta1]

The movie did its job, quite entertaining. I personally wondered why not just send 2x Growlers to do the job instead of 2x 2 seaters and 2x 1 seaters. No need for the ceiling with a Growler going "buzzer on"

[@roderickcampbell2105]

Did I hear that right? 100 feet and supersonic? Margin for error. None.

[@scottcooper4391]

In basic NFO (VT-10) - lowlevels were considered 500' AGL and 300 Kts - time (your perception of it, anyway) really slows down. I can only imagine 100 Ft and supersonic (650+ kts)....

[@cbspock1701]

Very interesting

[@riggodrill]

Really good background information. Love it.

[@davidsanchez9674]

Awesome video...Thank You

[@TC-rw1kf]

Here in Atlanta no theater would move the movie back into the imax screen they left black panther in there the entire time which was a waste of time especially that last week so sad like 4 or 5 people maybe watch in black panther when there was probably I don't 50 people that would love to see Top Gun on imax again. I actually watched it in the movie theaters 33 times. I have unlimited so watching it on Dolby Digital atmos at the AMC theaters a couple times a week just from being bored and enjoy watching it. Also a movie tavern is $5 on Tuesday I thought there about 9 times. I already had the DVD but the experience on the big screen is so worth it.

[@conceringGod]

SO MUCH RESPECT. I have learned so much. Thank you for serving and protecting our country. How blessed to return home safe. Jesus flying with you. Thank you MOOCH & PAKO.

[@Rick_Dunaway]

Great pictures, you can really see that all the weapons are CGI "and many of the aircraft" as one of the artist stated on Movers channel. I'm glad I caught that interview before he had to pull it down! This in no way detracts from the movie myself ands if you still believe in Santa, I understand and will not fight back if you call me a liar...

[@ruiliu4157]

Those guys conflated CGI and VFX. CGI is computer generated imagery. If a scene is not originally acquired from an actual camera but constructed in computer by software, that’s CGI. If the scene is captured through camera, then the footage is imported into computer for some post processing and manipulation (as made possible in the digital age), that’s just VFX. I think that filmmakers of Top Gun Maverick should genuinely be proud of what they have achieved. Especially the real flying footage, which are just incredible, because any computer generated flying scenes in other movies look like rubbish in comparison with what’s shown in TGM. If you can’t tell the difference, then you really have no reason to dislike or like what’s in TGM.

[@timsparks7049]

Supersonic at 100' I would be interested in that explanation. I assume it was hand flying or TFR? Given that the Radar altimeter (in my day) could be out run before you get to supersonic speeds. The pitot static disturbances around the airplane render it unreliable that makes me say huh...... Mudhen with a combat load, could it do the number down low? What about stores carriage limits..... Good discussion. I'm signing up for your newsletter.

[@magnashield8604]

I'm not a pilot, I don't even play one on tv. This does bring back a memory. When I was a teenager my dad and I were driving in the Nevada desert towards Utah, out in the middle of nowhere. An f-15 (probably out of Nellis) was off in the distance doing who knows what, as we headed down the road, all alone. He shot parallel to the road, maybe a mile or two away, circled a peak off in the distance and then dove straight down the freeway buzzing over the top of us. I don't have any idea how high he was, but it shook the truck we were in with one thunderous boom. We were both impressed. Great time. One man airshow.

[@kanetao]

They should have taken care of the radars guiding the SAMs with a few HARMs. The batteries themselves were fixed position, cruise missiles could have handled them making it easier to do a run on the installation, drones or have Weasels to handle the SAMs. But it was a good scene with great filming visuals.

[@machalot]

I'm coming back for the discussion about GPS jamming and the F-35. My attempt at rationalizing it is that the lack of a back seater, which means it's too much to ask of the pilot to use the laser designator accurately while flying the extreme profile. High altitude long range toss delivery is out for three reasons, because of the required impact angle, because GPS jamming makes JDAM's inertial guidance inaccurate, and there's no line of sight for a laser spot from outside the valley. Interested to hear your thoughts.

[@iansullivan7777]

Yeah I would really like to hear an explanation on the subject as well. What you’re saying seems to have merit, but then again I’m no subject matter expert.

[@machalot]

@@unknownuser069 I agree with you about the real reason, I was just trying to come up with an in-world reason. I still think it would be a challenge for an F-35 pilot to designate the target for his flight lead while flying the mission profile, vs a WSO.

[@glennburt8360]

G TMs is after my time, however, if it is inertially guided, GPS jamming would have no effect has inertial is internal to the weapon.

[@machalot]

@glennburt8360 Pure inertial guidance is not accurate enough for many missions, they often require GPS aiding to correct the inertial drift.

[@Kevin-bg3wu]

Thanks for info

[@WarGasm0824]

What I don’t understand is both of the F model birds were equipped with the Laserguided bombs as well, Phoenix could have picked her bombs as well on Bob’s same same paint leaving Rooster and Fan Boy nothing but to expfill and cover the first 2 plans out of the canyon.

[@chefjamesmacinnis]

On C. W. Lemoine's channel, they mock the mission and mention a bunch of different ways it could have been done. Such as having a seal team do the laser to eliminate the need for a second plan with a pod. I think they also said it's standard practice for the drop plan to also have a pod as a back up? They point out that a second volley of cruse missiles could of take out the Sam's as could stealt bombers. F-15 growler could of jammed the Sam's. F-35's could of deployed and held out of Sam range in case the enemy 5th generation plans were up. Great movie still but not very realistic in the actual attack

[@db2157]

So, am I wrong here but, backseat = not actually flying the plane... But I love all the tech info....sooo damn good..

[@mdk03]

oh shit Pako flew the EX thats fucking incredible

[@Condor1970]

My first question concerning the strike mission, was an immediate wonder as to why they didn't launch some drones to light up the enemy radar and missile sites, then launch a massive barrage of HARM missiles to wipe out all the SAM sites. That way, the F-18's didn't have to fly like maniacs to approach the bomb run and escape. The other option is to also launch a drone with EW pods to jam everything from the SAM sites, allowing free passage of the F-18's.

[@scottcooper4391]

All the Tomahawks fired at the airfield made enough noise as it was. If you could target the SAM sites, just put additional Tomahawks or similar weapons instead. However, they may have shot all all available Tomahawks taking out the airfield. Sending additional planes to take out the SAMS would just be putting them in a very bad place with a debateable result. I also don't think you fire HARMs in barages like that - sort of an engage 1 target at a time.

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

The whole pitch for the strike was that the cruise missile strike would make it look like the air base was the target. If they attacked the SAMs the Felons would show up sooner.

[@Condor1970]

@@scottcooper4391 That's what the Growler is for, if I understand correctly. They can jam and launch HARMs to take out sites like that. Growlers EW is so potent, a SAM trying to hit it, is like you throwing a dart into the sky, trying to hit a hummingbird a hundred feet away. Growlers can also jam the whole bloody area and come in dropping dozens of laser guide bombs to blow the tops off those mountains. In a real world scenario, I think they really would have just done a bigger operation with overwhelming force to prevent that kind of response. Especially, if it was that important. Sending in only 4 planes to wipe out a rogue threat to the entire civilized world, just doesn't seem all that feasible to me. But hey, it was a spectacularly awesome movie!

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

​@@scottcooper4391if the enemy is switching off radars to evade HARMs, you keep firing them continuously to keep a missile in the air at all times. That ensures the radar doesn't get turned on.

[@AA-xo9uw]

@@Condor1970 It's a movie not a documentary.

[@rustyATV]

Curious to know why the F-18 that was lasing the target would have GBU's but not drop them as well, especially when they knew they were going to be dodging SAMs exiting the target area.

[@tgmccoy1556]

The "Maverick" attack on the reactor had a bit of "663 Squadron" and the "Dam Buster's" about it and I felt was intended.😁

[@joeyjojojr.shabadoo915]

Obviously we have the problem with Security and 'Weapons & Tactics' being guarded from public knowledge, but the fact that a pair of Aviators can get together and talk about the nuances and reality of an Aviation movie is testament to proper production. I feel that there are many 'Operator' movies and TV shows out there that show butchered and unrealistic (as well as mistaken) scenes with things such as a rifle being pointed at someone with bolt-lock, to the same with a slide-locked pistol still being a threat in a scene that precludes many actual 'Operators' from enjoying that movie, in the way that you all seem to enjoy and celebrate Maverick. I guess it's just unfortunate that Tom Cruise can't portray a Navy SEAL, Green Beret or Ranger etc, in order to produce a product that can be consumed and enjoyed by that Military element.

[@billgarrymore2861]

Outstanding!

[@CShivery]

Top Gun 2 was an action-packed remake of Star Wars.