Movie TBDs?

[Dave Lindauer]

The thread on the new Midway movie got me thinking about the creation of Devastator movie stand-ins ---

Ground scenes should not be an insurmountable problem given a reasonable budget. Gate Guards UK could surely produce very convincing static replicas, and others could generate lower quality mock-ups that might still be convincing on screen.

Flight scenes are of course the problem. What are the best full-size alternatives to CGI, radio-controlled models or manned small scale replicas? New build TBDs along the lines of the Russian A6Ms are a nice dream, but that's about it. Big compromises would need to be made, and whatever is created would be picked apart by all of us for their gross inaccuracies. Still, if you were tasked with producing several flying TBD stand-ins at a relatively reasonable cost, what would you do?

The best I can come up with are modified T-6s or Yak 50s, with TBD-esque canopies, radio masts, fins and rudders, simulated wing corrugations, and perhaps altered trailing edge profiles. Perhaps similarly modified Soko 552s might be more convincing, but coming up with a few airworthy examples (and owners willing to modify them) would be very difficult.

That's the best I can do. We'd all be laughing at them (and me) and making snide comments for many years to come. This is leading me to throw in the towel, abandon full-scale stand-ins, and use a mix of CGI, large scale radio-control models, and for tight in-flight cockpit shots only T-6s with TBD canopies and radio masts.

It's your turn to be the modern day Hamish Mahaddie. What would you do for TBDs?

[leo]

I watched a Steve McQueen, Frank Sinatra, Charles Bronson movie last night and it had a UC-78 as a hack (nice one too) and an airfield full of Japanese planes. I got interested as there was a scene showing a Zero taxiing and it looked like it could have been one. I backed it up several times to look again (until the wife made me stop). During an attack scene they were blowing up the "Zeros" and they sure looked like AT-12's to me... Maybe POF stuff for taxi and molds?
A McHale's Navy episode the other day had a mustang and what looked like an early P-38 in it. The mustang looked like the current "Man O War" when it was studio owned, battle damage and all.

[old iron]

Flight scenes are of course the problem. What are the best full-size alternatives to CGI, radio-controlled models or manned small scale replicas? New build TBDs along the lines of the Russian A6Ms are a nice dream, but that's about it. Big compromises would need to be made, and whatever is created would be picked apart by all of us for their gross inaccuracies. Still, if you were tasked with producing several flying TBD stand-ins at a relatively reasonable cost, what would you do?

I think all this is a pipe-dream: there would be no full-size alternatives. Air scenes would of course be CGI, much as done for the most recent King Kong movie (and to my knowledge no large-scale models were built for these). Ground scenes would be blue-screened with the aircraft in the background being CGI.

They would pretty much have to do it this way, because as already said above, any aircraft built up from trainers or Avengers would be "picked apart by all of us." Doing CGI from scratch would be quicker, cheaper and produce images that were more accurate. They could have the actors walk around, get into and onto these and still do it all with CGI images.

[OD/NG]

Flight scenes are of course the problem. What are the best full-size alternatives to CGI, radio-controlled models or manned small scale replicas? New build TBDs along the lines of the Russian A6Ms are a nice dream, but that's about it. Big compromises would need to be made, and whatever is created would be picked apart by all of us for their gross inaccuracies. Still, if you were tasked with producing several flying TBD stand-ins at a relatively reasonable cost, what would you do?

I think all this is a pipe-dream: there would be no full-size alternatives. Air scenes would of course be CGI, much as done for the most recent King Kong movie (and to my knowledge no large-scale models were built for these). Ground scenes would be blue-screened with the aircraft in the background being CGI.

They would pretty much have to do it this way, because as already said above, any aircraft built up from trainers or Avengers would be "picked apart by all of us." Doing CGI from scratch would be quicker, cheaper and produce images that were more accurate. They could have the actors walk around, get into and onto these and still do it all with CGI images.

Full size, accurate reproductions of the aircraft were made for the recent King Kong movie. Details here:

https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthr ... g-Aircraft

This is also documented in the "extras" of the DVD/Blu-ray.

Part of the problem with building a Devastator is that no blueprints or engineering drawings are known to exist for the TBD, in addition to the fact that no above ground TBD's exist from which moulds could be made. Could something be made from pictures/movies that looks like a TBD? Sure! Could something be made that was a highly accurate, exact replica that was capable of flight? Absolutely not!

Unless or until one of the below ocean examples are brought to the surface, none of us will ever see a TBD in real life. I think the best chance we have is of raising one of the Lexington's TBD's that were discovered by Paul Allen's team a few months ago.

[old iron]

I stand corrected (and not for the first time).

[Dan Jones]

When the tv miniseries "War and Remembrance" was shot years ago they used the Tora "Kates" for TBD's for the Battle of Midway sequence and the result I thought was quite good. Those, some real SBD's (with a bunch of blue T-6's in the background) and a few FM-2's made a pretty good job of it.

[JohnB]

King Kong was directed by Peter Jackson, a fan of WWI aviation...and we can guess, of "Golden Age" biplanes.

He went to the trouble and expense to make accurate reproductions because HE CARED.
Most film makers don't, to them "close enough" is good enough.
To most directors, and most audiences, a T-6 is close enough to a TBD.
In short, don't get your hopes up.

're previous posts...what move had Sinatra and McQueen?
IIRC, PT-109 had Cessna T-50/AT-17/UC-78 as Japanese aircraft, so we can assume there were so me around Hollywood in the early '60s.

McHales Navy was filmed at Universal studios, that should help ID the Mustang.

[John Dupre]

I have long thought that you could make fairly convincing replicas of almost anything using some of the moldless composite techniques used to make the old Rutan Eze series or WAR 1/2 scale homebuilt aircraft. A substructure of steel or aluminum tubing given the weight and power of the engine and then foam layers hot wired to the proper shapes and covered in composite fabric. It would be a lot of work but far less costly than traditional construction. Systems would be basic and simple; no need for weapons or folding wings. Complex parts like landing gear would be repurposed from current types. Maybe not full scale and lots of panel details would have to be scribed or painted on depending on the type. If full scale you pick one type of engine say R1820 or Allison V1710 regardless of original type. Purists would moan but if you had 6 Bf 109 look-alikes and 6 French Hawk 75 look-alikes in the air in one scene I can't imagine anyone would moan for long especially if the paint schemes and markings were accurate. Also since you are designing essentially flyable movie props you could engineer out some of the more problematical aspects of some designs i.e. adding trim systems or changing airfoils for better handling. Their purpose is to fly and look like a war time type not to be a replica or reproduction.

[dbrown]

My guess is that Paul Allen has already created a deep-sea sled and has sent four or five powerful ROV units to drag three TBD's on the sled and slowly winch them up.

One for Pensacola, one for his collection, and one to reverse engineer to create a small run of TBD's that most museums and private collectors would love to have - a la the 262 project.

So give it another 6 months or so until someone leaks a photo of a sled of TBD's.

[Dana M Bell]

're previous posts...what move had Sinatra and McQueen?

Never so Few...

[leo]

Thanks Dana! I just zoned on the name at the time.
Yep, old photos I have in magazines and my own show the mustang at Universal, before it became Man O War.

[L-188]

King Kong was directed by Peter Jackson, a fan of WWI aviation...and we can guess, of "Golden Age" biplanes.

He went to the trouble and expense to make accurate reproductions because HE CARED.
Most film makers don't, to them "close enough" is good enough.
To most directors, and most audiences, a T-6 is close enough to a TBD.
In short, don't get your hopes up.

're previous posts...what move had Sinatra and McQueen?
IIRC, PT-109 had Cessna T-50/AT-17/UC-78 as Japanese aircraft, so we can assume there were so me around Hollywood in the early '60s.

McHales Navy was filmed at Universal studios, that should help ID the Mustang.

Never so few 1959. sinatra plays an OSS ? officer in I think, Burma, Steve McQueen, Bronson and a host of others are along for the ride. Pretty good movie.

[leo]

It was an OK movie, except that all the jungle fighting scenes looked like they were done in a park, with groomed grounds, plants and trees spaced neatly, no detritus, etc.
Kinda unique to see a Navajo code talker (Bronson) in a movie made in that time period. Maybe I have just missed the nod to them in other films.

[Chris Brame]

In Never So Few, the planes blown up on the ground were two old mockups built by MGM in the 1930s; a Northrop A-17 and this civilian variant P-35:

[JohnB]

If I recall my film history (actually my books on aviation film history) I think the Seversky mock up was done for Test Pilot...as the fictional Drake Bullet.

Wow, I've never heard of Never So Few...with Sinatra and McQueen, 'd expect it to be better known.