Watching 'Devotion'

[Bozothenutter]

Watching atm...

Guys go from Bearcat to Corsair, nobody thinks it's a step down?

Corsair is said to have "torque to flip you right over", but it's basically the same engine as the Bearcat?

Hollywood doing its thing again....

[kiseca]

Maybe the Bearcat was too late to build its reputation since it didn't much get to show its prowess in combat and be the best in the skies. It held its own in Korea but the stars that cemented their reputations there were the MiG 15 and Sabre.

 

I always thought of the Corsair as the king of piston engined carrier fighters until only last year when I was watching a Corsair at an airshow at Duxford, and enjoying seeing what is to me an iconic warbird strut her stuff. Then the two rather more knowledgeable mates I was with asked me if I'd ever seen a Bearcat do a display.

 

No, and I wouldn't recognise a Bearcat if I walked into one.

 

It did its display after the Corsair, climbing like an early fighter jet and basically looking like it was 100mph faster everywhere than any other prop aircraft that had displayed that day. It gave me the impression that it could outclass everything else that had displayed that day in a dogfight. The only thing that looked in the same league speed wise was the Vampire. By the end of the day I knew the Bearcat an awful lot better.

 

So for me at least, until last year I'd have put the Corsair above the Bearcat out of plain ignorance. I don't know how common that perception is in enthusiast circles.

 

[Alan P]

The Bearcat was designed as a point defence interceptor, speed and rate of climb were its outstanding features as it was intended to intercept threats as far from the fleet as possible. It was smaller, lighter and faster than both the Hellcat and Corsair whilst using the same engine, although it was more lightly armed. The torque was fearsome, worse than the Corsair, so I guess it was a hotrod that was tricky to fly, with not great visibility around the carrier, and maybe the rugged, heavy Corsair might be regarded as a step sideways, or possibly even up, for pilots.

[Dermo245]

The Fighter Pilot Podcast had an episode recently about the film, featuring an interview with a Corsair pilot who flew in the film - worth a listen.

While I don't think there's mention of 'torque to flip you over', it doesn't sound like an easy plane to fly.

 

Looking forward to seeing the film. The book of the same name by Adam Makos is highly recommended.

 

Cheers,

Der

[dromia]

It seemed like the Bridges at Toko Ri story line with a splash of Redtails thrown in.

 

The US film industry at its mundane best.

 

I do like watching aeroplanes flying and releasing ordnance though.

[kiseca]

Was it better than Maverick, or worse?

[BlueNosers352nd]

Have not seen it yet, I'll wait till I can watch it at home.   BUT.......the book was a great read and a quick read to boot.

[Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies]

I suspect the "enough torque to flip you over" is a twisting (no pun intended) of the Corsair's fairly vicious stall reputation for the general audience who are more likely to know what torque is than they are to grasp the implications of an aircraft which excels at stalling asymmetrically.

 

The Corsair's stall was characteristically so asymmetric that they were fitted with this breaker wedge on the leading edge of the starboard wing only to try to make the aircraft behaviour more manageable for average pilots.

 

That said, most of these late war fighters had enough torque to roll the aircraft it the throttle was gunned at very low speed. There's a grim video clip of an F6F trying to go-around from a missed approach onto a carrier but rolling onto its back and crashing into the sea alongside the ship.

[dromia]

1 hour ago, kiseca said:

Was it better than Maverick, or worse?

The James Garner TV series?

[kiseca]

I've watched it now. I enjoyed Maverick more (the Tom Garner one, not the James Cruise one, to avoid any confusion) but the story behind Devotion certainly gives it a lot of weight and the aerial footage is mostly pretty good.

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

On 1/20/2023 at 3:08 AM, Bozothenutter said:

Watching atm...

Guys go from Bearcat to Corsair, nobody thinks it's a step down?

Corsair is said to have "torque to flip you right over", but it's basically the same engine as the Bearcat?

Hollywood doing its thing again....

Yes a speed-wise step down, but a serious increase in ordnance. The Navy/Marine Corsairs weren't meant to fight mig’s but they were meant to fight tanks. 

[noelh]

In fact all single engine aircraft have some torque effect, not just torque but the effects of the slipstream, propellor effect (p factor) and gyroscopic precession. All conspiring to roll the aeroplane to the left. It's  particularly marked in tailwheel aeroplanes. 

 

Even the most innocuous light aircraft needs a touch of right rudder during take off and you'll  get get a stiff right leg holding right rudder when climbing to altitude in, for example, a skydive aeroplane.

 

In a big engined beast like the Corsair the effect was very pronounced at low airspeeds at a high angle of attack. A high profile example was Guy De Bordelon's F4U-5N in Korea which was destroyed by an inexperienced Air Force pilot who lost  control of the Corsair.

 

The results seen below:

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by noelh

[junglierating]

On 1/20/2023 at 3:06 PM, dromia said:

It seemed like the Bridges at Toko Ri story line with a splash of Redtails thrown in.

 

The US film industry at its mundane best.

 

I do like watching aeroplanes flying and releasing ordnance though.

Preferably not on you though...bit close id wager

[Whitewolf]

Having watched it, I thought it wasn't a bad film, fair amount of accurate CGI - namely the USS Leyte etc. Not in the same league as Top Gun Maverick, but it is a true story....

[Zoran Srb]

On 20/01/2023 at 10:08, Bozothenutter said:

Watching atm...

Guys go from Bearcat to Corsair, nobody thinks it's a step down?

Corsair is said to have "torque to flip you right over", but it's basically the same engine as the Bearcat?

Hollywood doing its thing again....

For my money, reason navy gave up on Bearcat is two fold. The Bear cat was superior only as point defense interceptor, and at the start of jet age, there wasn't much sense to continue with it... Corsair was, at my opinion first  naval "multi role" fighter in service. They almost replaced Helldivers on AC, after Philippines, since later marks F4U-4 could carry as much, but still could be used as fighter when needed. They had much longer range, and carrying ability then Bearcat. And lets not forget, Corsairs use in Korea, was primarily as fighter-bomber (as Skyraiders were just being introduced in service...), and not as a fighter (except in night fighting role).

Feel free to disagree...

[Andrés S.]

Hi.

 

I have seen the film, this past Thursday.

Let's be honest, for an air freak anything that appears on the screen and has wings is good... But no. As a movie it is rather bad and what is worse, boring.

 

I don't know which of the directors of the golden age of Hollywood said that "Don't be an artist. If you want to tell a story, tell it but in no way bore the audience", and he was absolutely right.

I won't spoil it, but for the first hour or hour and a quarter you barely see planes, only the story of friendship between two pilots is told. Only from then on is there more action and airplanes, but it's neither exciting nor fast-paced. There are times when you think you're seeing real planes in flight, even in situations you know couldn't possibly be, which says a lot in favor of special effects. On the contrary, there are times that are unfortunate and are more than evident. And the bridge and the runway part of the aircraft carriers look obviously made of papier-mâché...

 

The film has neither the emotion nor the emotion that it possibly would have had, and that it surely deserves, had it had a bigger budget. It seems that it is based on a true story which means, taking into account Hollywood parameters, that ........

 

In my opinion I spent money uselessly in the cinema. It is a movie to watch on TV.

 

Andrés.

 

 

[Whitewolf]

2 hours ago, Andrés S. said:

Hi.

 

I have seen the film, this past Thursday.

Let's be honest, for an air freak anything that appears on the screen and has wings is good... But no. As a movie it is rather bad and what is worse, boring.

 

I don't know which of the directors of the golden age of Hollywood said that "Don't be an artist. If you want to tell a story, tell it but in no way bore the audience", and he was absolutely right.

I won't spoil it, but for the first hour or hour and a quarter you barely see planes, only the story of friendship between two pilots is told. Only from then on is there more action and airplanes, but it's neither exciting nor fast-paced. There are times when you think you're seeing real planes in flight, even in situations you know couldn't possibly be, which says a lot in favor of special effects. On the contrary, there are times that are unfortunate and are more than evident. And the bridge and the runway part of the aircraft carriers look obviously made of papier-mâché...

 

The film has neither the emotion nor the emotion that it possibly would have had, and that it surely deserves, had it had a bigger budget. It seems that it is based on a true story which means, taking into account Hollywood parameters, that ........

 

In my opinion I spent money uselessly in the cinema. It is a movie to watch on TV.

 

Andrés.

 

 

Without spoiling the film for others, the friendship between the two pilots is a key part of the real story being told and led to the unusual actions at the end. But, it does as you say, get boring, possibly because there is too much emphasis on that alone.

[kiseca]

I think that can be summarised as, it's an unexceptional movie about an exceptional true story. That would summarise my view of the movie anyway.

[Whitewolf]

21 minutes ago, kiseca said:

I think that can be summarised as, it's an unexceptional movie about an exceptional true story. That would summarise my view of the movie anyway.

Pretty good way of putting It!

[Bozothenutter]

Exceptional story, with quite a few question marks.

Mig kill: didn't happen

Hudner home visit: didn't happen 

First time Jesse's wife met Hudner was when he got the MoH.

Apparently the actual friend was the guy that crashed his Corsair (Mohring?)

Just started reading the book, to get more background, but I get the feeling the 'friendship' was never much more than professional and has been inflated for the book/movie.

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

On 2/5/2023 at 8:38 AM, Zoran Srb said:

For my money, reason navy gave up on Bearcat is two fold. The Bear cat was superior only as point defense interceptor, and at the start of jet age, there wasn't much sense to continue with it... Corsair was, at my opinion first  naval "multi role" fighter in service. They almost replaced Helldivers on AC, after Philippines, since later marks F4U-4 could carry as much, but still could be used as fighter when needed. They had much longer range, and carrying ability then Bearcat. And lets not forget, Corsairs use in Korea, was primarily as fighter-bomber (as Skyraiders were just being introduced in service...), and not as a fighter (except in night fighting role).

Feel free to disagree...

Nope thats about the best answer Ive seen yet. Im not just blowing smoke either as my screen name hints at my favorite aircraft. 

[3DStewart]

I watched it on Amazon Prime and was rather disappointed.  It has it's good points, but I thought it was too slow, with too many intense pauses in the dialogue, odd lighting and what seemed to me a bad colour cast for much of the film.  Even the aerial action scenes didn't seem convincing with ridiculously tight combat formations and flak that was both fantastically intense and ineffective.

And being Hollywood the Mig pilot expends about two planes worth of shells and hits nothing, while the Corsair hits first burst. Yes, I know some pilots were rubbish with their aiming and you could get lucky bursts, but I suspect the Migs weren't given to rookies.

 

Edited February 8, 2023 by 3DStewart