Top Gun 2

Sluis Van Shipyards

Master Member
Hey as long as we get actual Soviet planes, CGI or real, instead of Mig-28s (F-5s), then it's partially successful IMO. :lol I'm pretty sure we're friendly enough with some of the former Soviet countries they could help out. Heck I'm pretty sure some of them have come over here for exercises like red Flag.
 

batguy

Sr Member
They could face off against Imperial TIE fighters if they wanted. I have a feeling it's all gonna be CGI regardless of what they might claim. Tom Cruise will arrange for the ET publicity clips to show him flying a real F-18 and the SFX houses will do the rest. If we're lucky they will blow up some real miniatures for the destruction scenes.
 

Maverick8500

Active Member
Not a fan of this paint scheme, though it has some basis in history. In the early days of TOPGUN ( yes it should be one word) the instructors wore dark flight suits with 2 parallel light blue stripes down one side of the chest. The scheme added to this plane is reminiscent of that. Don't get me wrong its still ugly. TOPGUN has used a variety of high-vis schemes on their aggressor aircraft in the past, so this is not really a reach. The numbers on the nose "00" are called the "Modex" numbers Navy land based squadrons such as those at TOPGUN all have 2 digits in their Modex. Fleet squadrons have 3 digit numbers. So the 00 is signifying that this is a land based unit.

Now the 3 silhouettes along the canopy rail are a complete screw-up on the part of the art department. Historically pilots paint either flags of an enemy nation or silhouettes on their planes to signify confirmed kills. Maverick shot down 3 Migs in the original film so it would make sense that he carry 3 silhouettes on the plane which carries his name. What makes zero sense is that the silhouettes are those of US F/A-18 Hornets. Did he shoot down Americans?

Also i know the art dept is trying to give movie-goers a way of more easily identifying who's who in the air. But air crews don't always fly the jets that have their name on them. They use whatever aircraft is ready to go. Given the hours of maintenance they require you'd never limit a pilot to only flying one plane.
 
Last edited:

airair

Sr Member
The latest video I saw from about a month ago, it was a little rough but he said that it wasnt part of the initial illness and is getting better.
he is in this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JH0WldpM8Hw

one comment says this

"Actually I met him at comic con, and he could talk, but his voice had a high pitch to it. So i wonder if they just ran his vocal audio through a mixer and made it deeper?"

i hope his voice gets better, never realised it before but he has a very distinctive voice and one is hell of an actor.
 

Riceball

Sr Member
Not a fan of this paint scheme, though it has some basis in history. In the early days of TOPGUN ( yes it should be one word) the instructors wore dark flight suits with 2 parallel light blue stripes down one side of the chest. The scheme added to this plane is reminiscent of that. Don't get me wrong its still ugly. TOPGUN has used a variety of high-vis schemes on their aggressor aircraft in the past, so this is not really a reach. The numbers on the nose "00" are called the "Modex" numbers Navy land based squadrons such as those at TOPGUN all have 2 digits in their Modex. Fleet squadrons have 3 digit numbers. So the 00 is signifying that this is a land based unit.

Now the 3 silhouettes along the canopy rail are a complete screw-up on the part of the art department. Historically pilots paint either flags of an enemy nation or silhouettes on their planes to signify confirmed kills. Maverick shot down 3 Migs in the original film so it would make sense that he carry 3 silhouettes on the plane which carries his name. What makes zero sense is that the silhouettes are those of US F/A-18 Hornets. Did he shoot down Americans?

Also i know the art dept is trying to give movie-goers a way of more easily identifying who's who in the air. But air crews don't always fly the jets that have their name on them. They use whatever aircraft is ready to go. Given the hours of maintenance they require you'd never limit a pilot to only flying one plane.
You're right, they definitely painted F-18s for Mavericks kill markers.

0917-tom-cruise-on-set-tmz-7.jpg0917-tom-cruise-on-set-tmz-11.jpg

Here's a first look at Tom in uniform, it looks like he's keeping the same basic paint scheme for his flight helmet. Which is funny since the current issue flight helmets are pretty much universally gry.
0917-tom-cruise-on-set-tmz-4.jpg
 

Maverick8500

Active Member
You're right, they definitely painted F-18s for Mavericks kill markers.

View attachment 843827View attachment 843828

Here's a first look at Tom in uniform, it looks like he's keeping the same basic paint scheme for his flight helmet. Which is funny since the current issue flight helmets are pretty much universally gry.
View attachment 843829
The helmet he's wearing is i believe ( its a somewhat low res photo) an HGU-68. The USN requires its pilots to have their helmets covered in reflective 3M tape to make them easier to spot should they have to ditch in the ocean at night. Something like 80% is required to be white... obvious the production doesn't care about this, it was already a requirement when the first film was made in 85. but they ignored it then too. He also has a clear visor which is odd, but i assume they can't block his face... The USAF is the ones with the gray helmets. they wear HGU-55's which are almost identical, just a few minor parts differences here and there. They do not require reflective tape in the USAF. they just keep the standard gray paint.
 

robn1

Master Member
The MiG 29 has a very similar silhouette, could they be using F-18s as stand ins for the MiG?
 

Nismo

Well-Known Member
I am confused as why he still only has 3 - kills

I mean in 32 years we have still seen combat as a nation? should he not have seen more action? Que (Take my breath AWAY!!!)

not that kinda action :cool
 

Maverick8500

Active Member
The MiG 29 has a very similar silhouette, could they be using F-18s as stand ins for the MiG?
No those are absolutely F/A-18 Hornet Silhouette. It is most likely just a huge screw-up from the art department. The US only exports Hornets to friendly nations so unless Canada or Switzerland have suddenly become enemies in this movie, that can't really occur. I haven't seen any mention of what they will be using as enemy Mig substitutes yet. Early talk was of drones but that was reportedly dropped. In todays market there are a number of privately owned Mig-29's and 35's. There are also at least 1 privately owned Su-27 in the United States. These could be used.
 

Riceball

Sr Member
I am confused as why he still only has 3 - kills

I mean in 32 years we have still seen combat as a nation? should he not have seen more action? Que (Take my breath AWAY!!!)

not that kinda action :cool
Since the movie came out we've not gone up against anyone that has had a credible air to air threat. The last time we engaged in air to air combat was Desert Storm and there were only 1 or 2 engagements back then. Fast forward to DS2 the Iraqis did not try engage us in the air and the Taliban had no Air Force to speak of.
 

Riceball

Sr Member
He became an instructor after scoring those three kills.
That would only account for part of his time. Assuming that he returned to TOPGUN to teach at the end of the movie, that would only account for 2, maybe as much as 4 years, of his life. After that he probably would have been rotated back to a fleet squadron for another couple of years or so, possibly sent to some sort of advanced school, done a shore based tour, probably another tour at sea, maybe a turn at the Pentagon or maybe on the staff of the head of Naval aviation, more school (possibly command and staff school, if he didn't do that earlier), if lucky a tour as CAG, and probably at the time of this movie he's just returned to command TOPGUN which will likely be his last duty station (depending on when he got his silver chicken) before either retiring or getting his star.
 

Maverick8500

Active Member
I am confused as why he still only has 3 - kills

I mean in 32 years we have still seen combat as a nation? should he not have seen more action? Que (Take my breath AWAY!!!)

not that kinda action :cool
Nismo, In todays military aviation the vast majority of pilots will spend entire careers without ever encountering a hostile fighter aircraft. This has been the case since the end of the Vietnam War. In it's entire career with the USN from 1975-2006 the F-14 only had 5 kills, 4 migs and 1 helicopter. (The Iranians, who also have a number of tomcats claim to have shot down 159 enemy planes with it but this is far from confirmed) This low number is in part due to the USAF vectoring its own F-15's to most air-to-air engagements during the gulf war. There hasn't been a US Ace pilot in any flying branch (5 kills) since Vietnam. The closest anyone has gotten since 1975 is 3 kills. In short, Maverick going 30 years with only 3 kills is entirely realistic.
 

Sluis Van Shipyards

Master Member
No those are absolutely F/A-18 Hornet Silhouette. It is most likely just a huge screw-up from the art department. The US only exports Hornets to friendly nations so unless Canada or Switzerland have suddenly become enemies in this movie, that can't really occur. I haven't seen any mention of what they will be using as enemy Mig substitutes yet. Early talk was of drones but that was reportedly dropped. In todays market there are a number of privately owned Mig-29's and 35's. There are also at least 1 privately owned Su-27 in the United States. These could be used.
Those freaking Swiss with their chocolate and their mountains are just asking for it. They think they're so great... :lol

Like I said earlier, several former Soviet countries come to the U.S. for exercises like Red Flag and I would bet they would love to have their planes and pilots in a movie. I think Poland has Mig-29s now.
 
Top