I just watched the movie Flyboys and thought it was a great WWI movie. I have two questions. Can anyone tell me the name of the French planes the Americans flew? Also, was the movie that historically acurate?
NEW_b
Well, I believe they were supposed to be Nieuport 17’s. And no, although a very entertaining show, the historical value is laughable. I doubt if the German air force had that many Dr1 triplanes in it’s entire inventory. Not to mention our hero’s pistol shot kill of the “black ace” after having been pierced by a Maxim bullet at almost point blank range, and the “fat guy” who barely squeezed into the cockpit! You can google the true stories of the Lafeyette Escadrille, it is a fascinating history.
I must say though, strictly for entertainment, I really enjoyed the movie. Anything with aerial combat scenes that look that cool is alright with me. A Zeppelin raid on Paris in broad daylight was sheer suicide no matter how many escorts were available!.
Steve
I bought the movie on Tue and must say I enjoyed it tremendously. As far as being accurate I am afraid not even close. The french aircraft were Neuport 17s but all the red Dr 1s I dont think so???. Looks good on film but not accurate and as said before a Zepplin raid in daylight?. I would have liked it more if they stayed more along the lines of The Blue Max.
Steve
I had really wanted to see this one in the theater, but no such luck. (Probably the same with Letters From Iwo Jima.) The commercials make the CGI look a bit ‘obvious’ (not sure how else to describe it - you know, when it looks good but you can tell it is obviously not real). Despite that I’ll at least rent it and give it a spin - I can get past CGI issues if the action is good.
And I think it would be as historically accurate as Pearl Harbor - “one man single-handedly fighting the war” kind of garbage.
The CGI is pretty good, and needless to say vastly superior to the first Star Wars movie.
The clicheed, cardboard characters coupled with a hackneyed plot and an irrelevant American-flyboy-falls-in-love-with-French-farmgirl (doubtless thrown in to edge the movie toward the “chick flick” end of the spectrum) turned this in to a total yawner for me.
Furthermore, the Nieuports flown by the Lafayette Escadrille and the anachronistic Fokker triplanes were powered by Le Rhone rotary engines. The cylinders of rotary engines, of course, rotated, but not one of the engines in the movie had rotating cylinders!
A profound disappointment.
Another sacrifice to video game culture. The Blue Max may have not been 100% historically accurate, but at least it appealed to an adult audience. The sad thing is, if these people who produced the film would have just told the real story with a sub plot (vis a vis Saving Private Ryan), they might have had a hit on thier hands.
Steve
I should rent it and watch for myself. Looks great movie to me when i was looking around the movie section at walmart. but odd is that i have book called Flyboys which is based on WW2 aircraft the SBD dauntless on the cover of the book.
I’ve got that book too. One of the toughest reads I’ve done in a while.
Yes, that was one of the most disturbing books I’ve read. I also have to say that it was one of if not the most historically accurate and balanced books that I’ve read. I highly recommend it.
Not accurate by any means-- but entertaining. And welcome in the sense of a lack of any aviation films as of late-- especially focusing on WWI. I liked the fact that the old veteran in the film was a “representation” of Lufbery-- complete with the lion cub.
I just finished reading an excellant book about WWI. TO THE LAST MAN by Jeff Shaara. It is very detailed and accurate. Around half the book is about the air war and the other half the ground. It covers the Lafayette Escadrille as well as Manfred von Richthofen. Again very good book.
havent seen the movie, but I’ve read the book. Made me stop in a lot of places and go read something more pleasant like Calvin and Hobbes… pretty disturbing book
I’m afraid I’m going to have to go against the flow here guys, I did not enjoy Flyboys at all.
I won’t go and do a big review here, suffice to say that IMHO it was a huge opportunity wasted.
Darren
I have been reading that same book. It’s good but I liked John Mosier’s Myth of the Great War better along with David Fromkin’s Europe’s Last Summer: Who Started the Great War in 1914? Both are excellent reads. If you want to know more about what happened after the war, check out the book Paris 1919 as well. Pretty much the entire Middle East stems from the treaties of WWI. Sorry if I rambled. History is a big thing with me and WWI being of particular importance.
BTW Flyboys by James Bradley is mostly garbage. There are about 150 pages in that book that are absolutely useless that have nothing to do with Navy fliers.
My vote for best WWI flick is the 1930 classic by Howard Hughes Hell’s Angels. There is some excellent blimp stuff in this movie, especially when the German crew all bail to lighten the load. The dogfights seem to go on forever.
f
I just got my DVD copy of the movie, and I like it very much.
As for historical accuracy, one interesting thing is that the aircraft in the movie are in fact contradicted by the black-and-white historical footage shown at the beginning.
So just to add my [2c], here’s my rundown of “glitches” I saw:
- While the British have the Bristol BF2c and the SE5a the squadron leader tells them the French flyers are still flying the Nieport 11’s, when they would have had SPAD VII’s by then. The SPAD VII &XIII’s combined to be the most produced fighter aircraft of WW I.
- The German squadron of all-red triplanes flew in the face (no pun intended) of the more common Albatross and Pflaz series that were developed per the Nieuport sesquiplane design. There is not a single documented of the “Red Baron” (much less in his famous red triplane)ever encountering an American flyer, much less ever downing one, since he prefered to concentrate on the British flyers as they were easier to kill since their training generally was of poorer quality then the French, which generally explains American losses being relatively low and French scores very high, when compared to the RFC as a whole.
- The interception of the accurately depicted Gotha bomber was OK, except no one tried to shoot it from underneith. Also, this Gotha, like other German machines shown in movies did not have the correct ring support for the gunner’s Parabellum, which actually was a cumbersome geared clock-work affair that was supposed to offset mid-air deflection-shooting errors that the average German gunner hated.
- One glaring omission that was shown in “The Blue Max” was the more mundane activity of “baloon-busting”, for which they carried special rockets.
- The Zepplin combat was a farce, starting with a daylight raid, fighter escorts, and then suddenly blowing up after being rammed. There is no record of any Zepplin ever being downed by ramming in WW I, although one was literally bombed out of the sky by a Sopwith Tabloid. After they caught fire, the Zepplins eventually burned end-to-end before crashing (more like in the Howard Hughes’ movie “Hell’s Angels”), not exploding in air (hydrogen gas burns, not explodes).
- Another ommission, was that since they were attached to the army, the general and primary mission for WW I persuit squadrons involved escorting and protecting their own observation aircraft, while intercepting the enemy’s, as was also correctly emphasized in “The Blue Max”.
- In their ammo dump raid they are supporting Handley Page bombers which did not see action until August 1918, which by then the American Hat-in-the-Ring squadron was in full-swing, and generally absorbed the Layfayette Escadrille pilots, who would also have been flying SPAD’s as well by then.
- Most of the Fokkers simply “blowing up” when hit. Most WW I air-to-air kills involved things like a wing being shot off, wings collapsing after being weakened by enemy fire, the pilot being shot, or the plane catching fire, where the pilot often jumped, parachute or not (I have seen photos of this, the pilot simply waiting to hit the ground beneith him).
Basically, I saw kind of a re-make of “Hells Angels” in this movie, from "Baldy getting the hated “bad guy” Von Bruen, to the Zepplin downing by being rammed to a raid on an ammo depot.
As for “Hell’s Angles”, if you get a copy (it is available from Columbia House also), I feel it is a better movie then this one, the main glitch is the night persuit squadron taking off all at once at night to get the Zepplin (I liked them showing the “cloud car” they used to “sneak bomb” from above the cloulds). They did not do that, since they were concerned about planes running into each other in the dark, so they actually dispatched single planes from different fields to avoid this, never intercepting as a squadron at night. Also, to shoot down a Zepp, they had both tracers and incendiary rounds, where all they had to do was concentrate their fire on a single point at the airship,and eventually it would catch fire and crash.
Tom [C):-)]
Actually the total production run of Fokker Dr.I types was 320 airframes not counting the 10 experimentals. The most ever at the front at one time was about 107.
A good fellow runs; http://www.fokkerdr1.com/
Just a quick note of clarification concerning real Fokker Dr.I types. Only two of the prototypes flew with captured LeRhones. The other 318 used Oberursel Ur.II 120hp for frontline use and Gobel Goe. II 100hp for trainers. The Ur.II was a license built version of the LeRhone but with a separate face plate that included the Prop shaft. The Thulin rotary story was proven bogus by Alex Imrie. See The Fokker Triplane by the same author.
Yes they were supposed to be Nieuport 17 types but they are closer to the Nieuport 23 types. The Vickers guns were offset even on the flying replicas so you could see the faces of the actors. If you picked up the collectors set, in the features on Disc 2 please note that I did indeed castigate the Lafayette Foundation prez. Andy Parks for saying Iroqoius in stead of Seminole. Also the models in the display boxes are my builds. I think the Lucas people did a great job of showing off our main hangar. Yes, the full scale Fokker E.V is almost finished and can be seen without covering.
For comments by Tony Bill see;
Until you realized that that made for a tricky take-off where the engine’s torque and gyroscope effect could easily kill an unexperienced pilot.
A lot of Sopwith Camel pilots “lost it” like that which made the RFC/RAF abandone the type after WW I for the SE5’s.
When it comes to shooting movies, having flown a little myself, I am for safety and reliability of the aircraft first.
Tom [C):-)]
I just got my DVD copy of the movie, and I like it very much.
As for historical accuracy, one interesting thing is that the aircraft in the movie are in fact contradicted by the black-and-white historical footage shown at the beginning.
So just to add my [2c], here’s my rundown of “glitches” I saw:
- …
- "…There is not a single documented of the “Red Baron” (much less in his famous red triplane)ever encountering an American flyer, much less ever downing one, since he prefered to concentrate on the British flyers as they were easier to kill since their training generally was of poorer quality then the French, which generally explains American losses being relatively low and French scores very high, when compared to the RFC as a whole.
- …
- The interception of the accurately depicted Gotha bomber was OK, except no one tried to shoot it from underneith. Also, this Gotha, like other German machines shown in movies did not have the correct ring support for the gunner’s Parabellum, which actually was a cumbersome geared clock-work affair that was supposed to offset mid-air deflection-shooting errors that the average German gunner hated.
- …
- The Zepplin combat was a farce, starting with a daylight raid, fighter escorts, and then suddenly blowing up after being rammed. There is no record of any Zepplin ever being downed by ramming in WW I, although one was literally bombed out of the sky by a Sopwith Tabloid. After they caught fire, the Zepplins eventually burned end-to-end before crashing (more like in the Howard Hughes’ movie “Hell’s Angels”), not exploding in air (hydrogen gas burns, not explodes).
- …
- …
- …
…Tom"
#2 Actually MvR did shoot down at least one American flying for the Brits. The Americans didn’t enter the war on his sector of the front until May 1918 and he was KIA in April 1918. The comment about the British training being of a poor quality is an unreasonable statement.
#3 There was a gun tunnel underneath the Gotha. Most pilots would have avoided it.
#6 Hydrogen explodes and that was what the Germans used. The US would not sell them Helium. Remember the Hindenburg? Boom.
.