Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
RedCrown

Top Gun 2 Production begins

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Would they let him be a CAG? Is a CAG usually a Commander or Captain?

How old until the Navy grounds an aviator?---John

Edited by john53

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, achterkirch said:

Wasn’t that pilot from VF-74 who shot down an RF-4C back in the 80’s, didn’t he make rear admiral? 

Yep

59 minutes ago, john53 said:

Would they let him be a CAG? Is a CAG usually a Commander or Captain?

How old until the Navy grounds an aviator?---John

Captain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Fishwelding said:

Does the Navy have "up-or-out" rules?  If so, what's the absolute latest year main character Pete "Maverick" Mitchell could still be a Captain in the Navy, if he was a Lieutenant in 1986?  😎

Depends how many time he lost his section qual's and how many times CAG put him in hack.

 

The way he was going I'd be surprised if he ever made El Cadard (LCDR).

 

😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/1/2018 at 12:24 PM, Djack said:

Not knowing anything about the movie myself, I would assume there will be good Super Hornet footage.  I was reading a while back that Tom Cruise was not going to do the film if it was CGI aircraft...only real footage. I am hoping for some goof F-5 or F-16 footage from Fallon myself!

 

David

In order for real footage to be used in this new film, the Super Hornet is the logical step given that it replaced the F-14 and also "Maverick" would be an instructor on the type.  The photo that was released on Tom Cruise's page was taken at NAS North Island which is approximately 19 miles (30kms) south of the now MCAS Miramar where the original was shot.  All the flying sequences however were filmed over the ranges near Fallon.  The choice of North Island is odd in one sense because the Topgun school moved to Fallon in 1996 but on the other hand, San Diego was where it all started.  I would like to think that at some point in the new movie that Fallon should feature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, achterkirch said:

Wasn’t that pilot from VF-74 who shot down an RF-4C back in the 80’s, didn’t he make rear admiral? 

Negative, he was not promoted to RADM.   The senate did nothing with his selection because the aircrew of the RF-4C spoke up about it when they found out  about it and made some valid points against his promotion.

 

https://pilotonline.com/news/military/article_ca226700-e5e9-57f7-944b-a084b04c00e5.html

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/friendly-fire-victim-outraged-over-navy-officers-admiral-promotion/

Edited by Ishthe47guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Fishwelding said:

Does the Navy have "up-or-out" rules?  If so, what's the absolute latest year main character Pete "Maverick" Mitchell could still be a Captain in the Navy, if he was a Lieutenant in 1986?  😎

 

10 hours ago, Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy said:

 

Dear God, don't make him an admiral.... :doh:

 

 I would not be at all surprised  if that old tried-and-true plot device of "bringing back someone out of retirement because he was the best we ever had" is used in the movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit that I am interested in seeing how this movie develops and unfolds. It's been about  32 years since the events of the original Top Gun movie so I am curious how a 55ish year old former F-14 driver and Top Gun instructor will become a key figure in whatever international incident requires his use/attention. I am also curious if any of the other original cast members will have a role. Regardless, it will be a fun year or so talking, speculating, and discussing the movie up until its eventual release.

:smiley-transport006:

Regards,

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 questions

1) what the heck is hack???

2) I wonder how "Charlie" (Kelly Mcgillis) will be written out, because she's DEFINITELY not the Kelly she was in TG1!

 

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ishthe47guy said:

Negative, he was not promoted to RADM.   The senate did nothing with his selection because the aircrew of the RF-4C spoke up about it when they found out  about it and made some valid points against his promotion.

 

https://pilotonline.com/news/military/article_ca226700-e5e9-57f7-944b-a084b04c00e5.html

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/friendly-fire-victim-outraged-over-navy-officers-admiral-promotion/

My bad, I heard that he was put up for ADM but didn't hear that he wasn't selected, I assumed he was selected.

1 minute ago, hawkwrench said:

2 questions

1) what the heck is hack???

2) I wonder how "Charlie" (Kelly Mcgillis) will be written out, because she's DEFINITELY not the Kelly she was in TG1!

 

Tim

Hack is when you are restricted to the ship during a port visit but it is not reflected in your official personnel record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy said:

 

Dear God, don't make him an admiral.... :doh:

 

Oh yes, please make him an Admiral.

 

With a daughter.

 

🍿

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, habu2 said:

 

With a daughter...

Named Penny...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will this one include a shirtless shuffleboard tournament at Maverick's assisted-living facility?

 

SN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Steve N said:

Will this one include a shirtless shuffleboard tournament at Maverick's assisted-living facility?

 

SN

 

:rofl::cheers:

 

...or shirtless bingo....

Edited by Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it’s anything like the last one, there are a disturbing number of all-male shower scenes to block, light and shoot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they should actually make this a serious action movie, like a Mission Impossible type. The first was campy and fun. Half of it was the music that made it. You can't really repeat that. So instead, go for a serious war movie. Maybe something like Rogue One. I think that has more chance for success than trying to replicate what they did 30 some odd years ago. Times have changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Darren Roberts said:

I think they should actually make this a serious action movie, like a Mission Impossible type. The first was campy and fun. Half of it was the music that made it. You can't really repeat that. So instead, go for a serious war movie. Maybe something like Rogue One. I think that has more chance for success than trying to replicate what they did 30 some odd years ago. Times have changed.

I was reading something about this on the 'net last week.  The article mentioned how, back when the original movie came out, the U.S. Navy hadn't been at war for the past 20 years.  Today, the U.S. Navy has been in action for the past 20 years and now Maverick will exist in a world where Naval aviators have seen war/combat.  So basically the theme, the feel, of the movie will be made to reflect that.  

 

I think Darren raised a good point that I hadn't thought of before.  Will it be more of a serious movie or will it be more "campy and fun"?  On a side note, I still love the "campy and fun" Top Gun movie.  My God!  It was filled with F-14s!  What's not to love about it???

 

Eric

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better question yet is what are they gonna use for "MiGs" this time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/31/2018 at 10:08 PM, habu2 said:

Statuesque Tom Cruise had to sit on phone books so he could be seen over the canopy rail when sitting in the seat of the Tomcat in TG1

 

Thirty years later phone books are extinct.  Guess they will have to use CGI to elevate Big Tom in TG2.

 

I hear he is going to sit on a Mark VIII Ultra E-meter.

 

Edited by KursadA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, KursadA said:

 

I hear he is going to sit on a Mark VIII Ultra E-meter.

 

 

Why would he sit on a phone book? What they need is to shove a sofa into a cockpit, somehow, and have him jump up and down on it like a frickin' moron again! :whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Wolfgun33 said:

Better question yet is what are they gonna use for "MiGs" this time?

 

Unlike the ‘80’s, today they could use real MiGs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is how I picture it,

 

Movie opens with "Maverick" still wearing aviators and his flight jacket.  There is Chinese speak going on in the background as boxes are loaded onto a cargo plane (let's say C-130).  He watches one of the boxes go by, and we get a glimpse of the contents,  " Dog Toys Rubber Dog Sh**" . He gets in to the cockpit, where Merlin (Tim Robbins), is pre-flighting. They find out they are headed to California and near Miramar.  They reminisce the day they waxed those bandits and nearly started WW3.  Once they return to Miramar they find a bar named "Hard Deck" and find Jester working there.  In there sits a  navy pilot, playing with a toy F-14.  Mavericks approaches the pilot, and asks where did you get that.  "my dad gave it to me a prior to him dying in a  crash".  Maverick looks at his name badge, and the last name is Bradshaw (played by Ryan Gosling :taunt:).  Suddenly it hits him...the rest of the movie writes itself....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, Wolfgun33 said:

Better question yet is what are they gonna use for "MiGs" this time?

I think the US actually has REAL Migs that they bought from some broke

third world nation back years ago, they used them as agessors if memory

serves me right. Also does Canada have any of their Mig-21s left or are they all

"statues" of perogis? LOL---John

iALKbxm.jpg

Edited by john53

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, john53 said:

I think the US actually has REAL Migs that they bought from some broke

third world nation back years ago, they used them as agessors if memory

serves me right. Also does Canada have any of their Mig-21s left or are they all

"statues" of bacon? LOL---John

Moldova was the county, number of them was 17 and type was MiG-29-13. They were bought in 97. 

https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/truth-about-mig-29-180952403/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, john53 said:

Also does Canada have any of their Mig-21s left---John

Sadly no. Those Mig-21's were only briefly used and all of them were quickly returned to the former USSR as they were causing far too much political turmoil for Canada with it's western allies...

MiGStory8.jpg

 

MiGStory9.jpg

Not without mishaps though...

MiGStory7.jpg

Evidence of a former RCAF Mig-21 actually having found its way into the North Vietnamese Air Force...

MiGStory11.jpg

 

More here...:rolleyes:

 

http://www.vintagewings.ca/VintageNews/Stories/tabid/116/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/285/The-Breaking-Point--Canadian-MiGs-test-American-friendship--2011-APRIL-FOOLS-HOAX.aspx

 

 

Edited by Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

That would be a GREAT idea for a group build, western countries

that have or used Migs!---John

image.jpeg.77a14165db739f514266a5e4aa29656c.jpeg

Edited by john53

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×