*** Top Gun 2 “Maverick” *** thread

[RJ2kWJ]

*** Edit *** Finally saw it 100% in IMAX last night Tuesday with Jason, and it’s asinine. Was great to see the stuff that wasn’t done yet with all the score and soundtrack. Man. I’ll be back to the theaters again within a week.

Before I left in hard core porn glory on tMB,

I had quite a view of private videos. I’ll let the gentlemen that was on one of the Aircraft Carrier during filming, bring himself out.

He was/ is a tMBer. He was on the ship during filming while I was the prick that simply enjoyed the aftermath.

For me. I was very, very lucky enough to see the rough full version of the film.

It’s a sequel that I’ve never been more proud of than T2 vs Terminator or Aliens vs Alien.

It will give every gent on this board an American boner. And if the said poster gives me allowance, I’ll provide personal pics.

 

[RJ2kWJ]

This thread might suck for now. But I promise you some insane pics and vids when the movie is released. Trust me boys.

 

[Juro]

This was my most hyped movie for 2020 (fuck you, 2020) and now 2021. 1b was James Bond.

If it's in theaters, I'm dressing up and going in. Don't even care.

 

[TJHall1]

 

[RJ2kWJ]

This was my most hyped movie for 2020 (fuck you, 2020) and now 2021. 1b was James Bond.

If it's in theaters, I'm dressing up and going in. Don't even care.

Also saw only the first half of “No Time to Die”. I’ve said it numerous times on this board that he plays the villain to perfection. Everyone is meant for that one roll.

Rami Malek is better than Javier Bardem in SKYFALL. And that is really, really tough for me to say.

 

[RJ2kWJ]

This was my most hyped movie for 2020 (fuck you, 2020) and now 2021. 1b was James Bond.

If it's in theaters, I'm dressing up and going in. Don't even care.

Where do you live?

 

[RJ2kWJ]

And like I did on tMB. I will always post my friend destroying the oceanfront with a proper F/18 - A Superhornet. With his buddies.

They love to do this after an air show. They have to burn the fuel no matter what so fuck off liberal fucks that don’t understand this shit.

 

[Teddy Jack]

I’m ridiculously excited about this movie. I’m hoping it doesn’t disappoint. Doesn’t matter cause I’m there the second it opens up.

 

[RJ2kWJ]

I’m ridiculously excited about this movie. I’m hoping it doesn’t disappoint. Doesn’t matter cause I’m there the second it opens up.

It won’t disappoint. I swear on my own life.

 

[Dtcliffo]

I remember your thread on TMB. I might have to see this in IMAX.

 

[AgEngDawg]

Before I left in hard core porn glory on tMB,

I had quite a view of private videos. I’ll let the gentlemen that was on one of the Aircraft Carrier during filming, bring himself out.

He was/ is a tMBer. He was on the ship during filming while I was the prick that simply enjoyed the aftermath.

For me. I was very, very lucky enough to see the rough full version of the film.

It’s a sequel that I’ve never been more proud of than T2 vs Terminator or Aliens vs Alien.

It will give every gent on this board an American boner. And if the said poster gives me allowance, I’ll provide personal pics.

Has the plot leaked?? From the snowy mountain scenes I want to say that Russia is the bad guy. Does anyone know?

 

[Teddy Jack]

It won’t disappoint. I swear on my own life.

Not sure if you’re being serious or not. I have no idea why you would make this up but I hope you’re honest.

can you explain the brief shot of the F-14 in the trailer?

 

[AgEngDawg]

By the way, the original movie made a hero of the a really shitty plane. The F-14 was a disaster and it is a good thing we never went to war against a near peer enemy with that shitty plane.

The Navy should have been flying F-16s:

 

[Teddy Jack]

By the way, the original movie made a hero of the a really shitty plane. The F-14 was a disaster and it is a good thing we never went to war against a near peer enemy with that shitty plane.

The Navy should have been flying F-16s:

View attachment 9927

Not sure where you get that information. I’ve heard pretty good things about the tomcat and it being a pretty damn good fighter. A very large jet but I’ve not heard it being bad.

 

[Juro]

Where do you live?

Omaha, NE.

 

[AgEngDawg]

Not sure where you get that information. I’ve heard pretty good things about the tomcat and it being a pretty damn good fighter. A very large jet but I’ve not heard it being bad.

Some one told you wrong. It was a shitty plane. It was not maneuverable at all and that gets pilots killed in dog fights.

The F-14 was everything that is wrong about the defense acquisition system.

the swing wing design is a disaster. It is not worth the extra weight. You see the new fighters don't use it.

 

[AgEngDawg]

Not sure where you get that information. I’ve heard pretty good things about the tomcat and it being a pretty damn good fighter. A very large jet but I’ve not heard it being bad.

Also, where I am getting this information:

Energy–maneuverability theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Teddy Jack]

Some one told you wrong. It was a shitty plane. It was not maneuverable at all and that gets pilots killed in dog fights.

The F-14 was everything that is wrong about the defense acquisition system.

the swing wing design is a disaster. It is not worth the extra weight. You see the new fighters don't use it.

Also, where I am getting this information:

Energy–maneuverability theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Your link didn’t say the tomcat was a shitty airplane. I’ll trust my source over your Wikipedia page any day of the week.

pilots now a days do train for dog fighting situations, but neither the tomcat, the eagle, falcon, raptor, or lightening were built just to dogfight. They kill the enemy way before they’re seen. The tomcat isn’t an exception even for its age. They could fire from a long distance with their missiles and capabilities.

I believe the tomcat was pretty agile with its wings at certain angles. And it was a very fast jet. Don’t think it’s a shitty plane at all. But that certainly doesn’t mean it’s on par with the hornet, eagle, raptor, etc.

 

[AgEngDawg]

Your link didn’t say the tomcat was a shitty airplane. I’ll trust my source over your Wikipedia page any day of the week.

pilots now a days do train for dog fighting situations, but neither the tomcat, the eagle, falcon, raptor, or lightening were built just to dogfight. They kill the enemy way before they’re seen. The tomcat isn’t an exception even for its age. They could fire from a long distance with their missiles and capabilities.

I believe the tomcat was pretty agile with its wings at certain angles. And it was a very fast jet. Don’t think it’s a shitty plane at all. But that certainly doesn’t mean it’s on par with the hornet, eagle, raptor, etc.

The line I highlighted is complete bullshit. That thinking got pilots killed in Vietnam. Missiles are avoidable and always have been and are today.

The Americans thought they could depend on missiles and fire for far off. Guess what?? The manueverable Soviet planes avoided the missiles and then got within visual range and downed our heavy planes!!!! That thinking got people freaking killed and still would today.

John Boyd saved the Eagle, Falcon, and Raptor from this fate. He led to changes into those planes (his disciples the Raptor). The Eagle, Falcon, and Raptor are much more manueverable than the F-14!!! They were specifically designed to be maneuverable. Do you see a swing wing design on any of those fighters???

LOL, you are wrong and completely wrong. There are no fighters designed like the Tomcat anymore because it was a disaster.

My source if Freaking Colonel John Boyd!!! He knows much more about fighter design than your "source."

The F-14 was too heavy, not manueverable, and would have got pilots killed if we went up against the Soviets.

Look at the F-22 and F-35, they look nothing like the F-14. The F-14 looks like the planes that got pilots killed in Vietnam.

Read this book, you will learn a lot about fighter design because everything you freaking posted is bullshit.

Amazon.com: Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War: 8601421754750: Coram, Robert: Books

Amazon.com: Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War: 8601421754750: Coram, Robert: Books

www.amazon.com

 

[RJ2kWJ]

Not sure if you’re being serious or not. I have no idea why you would make this up but I hope you’re honest.

can you explain the brief shot of the F-14 in the trailer?

I’m not kidding at all. He’s flying it to prove a point.

I will gladly show some pics when I’m allowed to. My connection is awesome and don’t want to ruin it.

 

[RJ2kWJ]

So do you gents enjoy the first trailer or 2nd trailer more?

 

[PeytonMooning]

There's never been a more homoerotic film than Top Gun. The sexual tension between Maverick and Iceman was palpable. Hope this film delivers the same way.

 

[sanction]

I dyed my dick Red White and Blue. I will watch it in IMAX.

 

[Teddy Jack]

The line I highlighted is complete bullshit. That thinking got pilots killed in Vietnam. Missiles are avoidable and always have been and are today.

The Americans thought they could depend on missiles and fire for far off. Guess what?? The manueverable Soviet planes avoided the missiles and then got within visual range and downed our heavy planes!!!! That thinking got people freaking killed and still would today.

John Boyd saved the Eagle, Falcon, and Raptor from this fate. He led to changes into those planes (his disciples the Raptor). The Eagle, Falcon, and Raptor are much more manueverable than the F-14!!! They were specifically designed to be maneuverable. Do you see a swing wing design on any of those fighters???

LOL, you are wrong and completely wrong. There are no fighters designed like the Tomcat anymore because it was a disaster.

My source if Freaking Colonel John Boyd!!! He knows much more about fighter design than your "source."

The F-14 was too heavy, not manueverable, and would have got pilots killed if we went up against the Soviets.

Look at the F-22 and F-35, they look nothing like the F-14. The F-14 looks like the planes that got pilots killed in Vietnam.

Read this book, you will learn a lot about fighter design because everything you freaking posted is bullshit.

Amazon.com: Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War: 8601421754750: Coram, Robert: Books

Amazon.com: Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War: 8601421754750: Coram, Robert: Books

www.amazon.com

You are exactly the type of person i don’t want to discuss things with online. Maneuverability isn’t a constant. The tomcats wingspan could change. I’m not arguing it was better than any other fighter. It wasn’t. I’m arguing that you said it was shitty. It wasn’t a shitty jet. And it didn’t serve in Vietnam.

 

[Teddy Jack]

Just some more fodder for the discussion.

Why the Navy Misses the F-14 Tomcat (Despite Some Big Problems)

The Navy retired the venerable Grumman F-14 Tomcat in 2006 after more than three decades in service. However, the Tomcat’s demise has left gaps in the carrier air wing that are only now being felt.

www.google.com

 

[AgEngDawg]

You are exactly the type of person i don’t want to discuss things with online. Maneuverability isn’t a constant. The tomcats wingspan could change. I’m not arguing it was better than any other fighter. It wasn’t. I’m arguing that you said it was shitty. It wasn’t a shitty jet. And it didn’t serve in Vietnam.

You have no idea what you are talking about. I did not say it served in Vietnam. What I said is that it was designed in the same way that the jets that cost American pilots their lives in Vietnam.

It was based on on the principle that high speed and use of missiles would dominate. That turned out to be bullshit and cost lives!!!!

When we are talking about manueverability in jets, we are talking about the ability to gain or lose energy quickly. The tomcat sucks at that.

The tomcat sucked at that!!! Do you see anyone designing fighter jets now with swing wings??? No, because that was a dumb ass idea that cost to much weight and destroys manueverability.

This is not hard. Look at more recent jets. There are literally books written on this topic and the energy manueverability theory.

 

[America 1st]

Turning on the original with the wife now.

 

[Teddy Jack]

F14 was designed to be fast and fly long distances to protect the carrier. It became and interceptor and also was a bomber. It wasn’t a shit jet. It basically replaced the F4. It was an expensive jet. There are definitely better designs as technology and ideas/platforms matured.

But the above demonstrates that other platforms (B1 bomber) do utilize that particular wing design and ability to change angle.

 

[AgEngDawg]

View attachment 9973
F14 was designed to be fast and fly long distances to protect the carrier. It became and interceptor and also was a bomber. It wasn’t a shit jet. It basically replaced the F4. It was an expensive jet. There are definitely better designs as technology and ideas/platforms matured.

But the above demonstrates that other platforms (B1 bomber) do utilize that particular wing design and ability to change angle.

LOL, you going to dog fight with the B1?

Also, the B1 was designed in the 1970s.

You definitely do not want to do air superiority missions with it.

You going to tell me next you want to conduct air superiority missions with the B-52?

 

[AMSO]

I enjoy flying jets

 

[Nas]

Get wrecked commie bastards. Will watch this shit and not give a fuck.

Unrelated, but boner inducing. Helmand Province 2010, some dip shit Taliban walked up to a Marine LAV25 and fired off a mag from an AK at it. Dude tried to cross the Helmand River. LAV started orienting his barrel and over the radio we heard all stations mark your vehicles with panels we have wart hogs on station. Everyone backed up. We saw this huge mountain of sparks and then we heard the garbage disposal noise. Nothing left of that dude.

 

[Nas]

Another one, that still gets me rock hard and vascular. When ordinance was about to "expire" we would either do a controlled detination or use them on the next op. We did one on the Pakistani border that was tremendous. Used a miclic to flatten a town. The guys that ran or shot at is got hit with either a himar or a jdam. One dude rode a bike away got hit with a himar. Complete overkill. Shit was great.

 

[Teddy Jack]

LOL, you going to dog fight with the B1?

Also, the B1 was designed in the 1970s.

You definitely do not want to do air superiority missions with it.

You going to tell me next you want to conduct air superiority missions with the B-52?

I’m not sure what you’re arguing at this point.

I provided the B1 as an example of another platform utizing the wing design (or something similar) to the F14. Yes I realize the deign is old. So is the tomcat. So is the F15.

the tomcat was not made for dogfighting. It was made to fire from long distances away and utilized better radar, and weapons than the planes that were shot down in Vietnam.

here is a snippet of just one article to demonstrate that the tomcat was just fine in close quarters if necessary.

Despite these massive deficiencies, the Tomcat, in the hands of a skilled pilot flying with a good RIO, could be quite lethal in the visual arena. Especially if it had the General Electric motors.

In a two-circle fight, where degrees of turn per second are a premium, the Tomcat was quite adept. But if you got the A-model slow, into the ‘black hole’ around 250 knots, you were stuck in a region the plane did not excel in. The TF-30 engines just didn’t have enough grunt to allow the plane to fly extremely slowly, nor to power back up to proper maneuvering speed.

Confessions Of A Navy F-14 Fleet Pilot Turned F-5 Aggressor

Francesco "Paco" Chierici talks fighting in Tomcats and Tigers, losing comrades, and flying 737s during the week and fighters on the weekend.

www.thedrive.com

 

[Teddy Jack]

And here is another great article on the relative strengths of the F14 versus the F15. Really interesting article. Bottom line is the tomcat wasn’t a shit jet at all. It has some really badass equipment and could kill the bad guy from a hellava long way away.

didn’t have quite the agility of let’s say an F15, but could kill from much further away and had a different mission.

Death Match: U.S. Navy F-14 Tomcat vs. Air Force F-15 Eagle (Who Wins)?

Interesting question.

www.google.com

 

[AgEngDawg]

the tomcat was not made for dogfighting. It was made to fire from long distances away and utilized better radar, and weapons than the planes that were shot down in Vietnam.

here is a snippet of just one article to demonstrate that the tomcat was just fine in close quarters if necessary.

I’m not sure what you’re arguing at this point.

I provided the B1 as an example of another platform utizing the wing design (or something similar) to the F14. Yes I realize the deign is old. So is the tomcat. So is the F15.

the tomcat was not made for dogfighting. It was made to fire from long distances away and utilized better radar, and weapons than the planes that were shot down in Vietnam.

here is a snippet of just one article to demonstrate that the tomcat was just fine in close quarters if necessary.

Confessions Of A Navy F-14 Fleet Pilot Turned F-5 Aggressor

Francesco "Paco" Chierici talks fighting in Tomcats and Tigers, losing comrades, and flying 737s during the week and fighters on the weekend.

www.thedrive.com

You have no idea what you are talking about. Firing missiles from far off still does not work. Everyone knows that and that is why the new fighters do not look like the F-14.

You can't protect an aircraft carrier except through fighter engagement.

The F-15 is old, but it was designed to manueverable, not as much as the F-16. However, both fighters are vastly, vastly superior to the F-14.

When I questioned you, you brought up a long range bomber.

 

[AgEngDawg]

And here is another great article on the relative strengths of the F14 versus the F15. Really interesting article. Bottom line is the tomcat wasn’t a shit jet at all. It has some really badass equipment and could kill the bad guy from a hellava long way away.

didn’t have quite the agility of let’s say an F15, but could kill from much further away and had a different mission.

Death Match: U.S. Navy F-14 Tomcat vs. Air Force F-15 Eagle (Who Wins)?

Interesting question.

www.google.com

Beyond visible range is bullshit. Missiles are never as good as anticipated and this has been proven time and time again. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Depending on beyond visible range kills has gotten pilots killed.

 

[Teddy Jack]

You have no idea what you are talking about. Firing missiles from far off still does not work. Everyone knows that and that is why the new fighters do not look like the F-14.

You can't protect an aircraft carrier except through fighter engagement.

The F-15 is old, but it was designed to manueverable, not as much as the F-16. However, both fighters are vastly, vastly superior to the F-14.

When I questioned you, you brought up a long range bomber.

That’s why there’s an “F” in front of it because it’s a fighter jet. It was a fighter, designed to kill the bad guys from very long distances. That’s exactly what the F22 and F35 do. They kill you from a long way away so nobody ever has to dogfight again.

you said it’s a shit plane and you’re absolutely wrong. It isn’t and wasn’t. It could do things that the F15 could not do as quoted in one of the articles. It all depends on the mission requirement.

 

[Teddy Jack]

Beyond visible range is bullshit. Missiles are never as good as anticipated and this has been proven time and time again. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Depending on beyond visible range kills has gotten pilots killed.

Maybe in the 60s dude.

 

[AgEngDawg]

That’s why there’s an “F” in front of it because it’s a fighter jet. It was a fighter, designed to kill the bad guys from very long distances. That’s exactly what the F22 and F35 do. They kill you from a long way away so nobody ever has to dogfight again.

you said it’s a shit plane and you’re absolutely wrong. It isn’t and wasn’t. It could do things that the F15 could not do as quoted in one of the articles. It all depends on the mission requirement.

LOL, now that thinking will get people killed.

I am going to let you go. You were wrong.

Just keep in mind, time and time again it has been proven that the military overestimates the effectiveness of missiles.

Missiles can be defeated, then you are within range of the enemy. Then you are fucked.

The F-14 was never ever really tested. The F-15 has been through our sales to Israel.

I hope no one in the Pentagon is thinking "so nobody ever has to dogfight again."

Geez, that is freaking terrible

 

[AgEngDawg]

Maybe in the 60s dude.

Are you like 15? You know the Afghans and other insurgents are pretty adept at defeating our technology.

Wait til we go up against a near peer.