Real Or Fake?

[Pisis]

What do you think this video is a real or a fake?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtSA6No3EVM

 

[FLYBOYJ]

It looks lika a real video made with Spits and Hispano HA-1112s.

 

[Gnomey]

Looks like a real video but it is not of the Battle of Britain. I would agree with Joe in that it is post war footage HA-1112s.

 

[Pisis]

Yeah, I did mean it's real for sure but if from the BoB or not. so not you say. I thought so...

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Fake, not from WW2.

 

[Pisis]

But still cool.

 

[Gnomey]

Yep but it isn't WW2 footage. Few things make it obvious.
1) Colour video wasn't really around especially not of that quality
2) No tracer
3) Ha-1112's

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

no way that's WWII, it's all far too convenient........

 

[Matt308]

Sorry gents. You all have it wrong. While exceptionally cool, it is computer generated. Here is my arguments, some strong, some weak.

1) While very well done indeed, the first person perspective from the wingman is too staged. The tactics are piss poor by both sides. The 109s break late for a non-firing head on pass and the Spits attempt no counter-break maneuver. C'mon. And did the Brits like the US use two man formations in 1939? I didn't think they did.

2) 109 bursts of fire produce no hits on the surf during low altitude and diving profile.

3) The graphics are great, but just slightly amiss. Lots of detail, but still looking like polygon generation to me.

4) The sound is obviously fake. In addition to having a color camera mounted externally outside of the prop circle with no perceptible airframe/mount shake during high G/(firing?) maneuvers, the audio would have required synchronization and two channel area mic and taps from the audio control panel to capture air-to-air comm.

5) PTT initiation does not result in spikes of background noise. Cannon/MG noises are definitely fake and did not originate from "recording" aircraft. Even in a modern day transport aircraft, the cockpit noise levels are significant. In a 109, at WEP, at 300+ mph, even a cannon/MG burst recorded from behind and say 100+ft away would not come thru so clear. Those who have been to a range will know what I'm talking about.

6) Pilot banter is certainly calm for such an adrenaline rush.

7) While perhaps a nit, I have read more than one recollection of FOD damage caused by expended cannon and MG casing ejections while in mid-air. Some of these resulting in loss of the damaged aircraft. Note the Spit makes a "suprise?" jump with a long burst directly from above and then in front of the 109 wingman. Not any indication (pilot maneuver or otherwise) of a expended case hit. Oversight? Or perhaps just lucky. Not really conclusively supportive. You have to admit though that it is awfully staged looking when the wingman then ignores the second Spit which has broken yet again and follows his wingman like any good director would instruct his camera man.

But it is really cool.

 

[cheddar cheese]

I agree, looks CGI to me too.

 

[Hunter368]

Joe you should be able to answer this one better than most people here. Trailing plane is very close and right behind the first fighter. Right?

What about prop wash on that trailing plane would that not have screwed up the back plane? He is flying soo close I would of thought the prop wash would of screwed him up bad. If it was actually real planes flying.

What do you think Joe?


Joe did you notice my new sig? I was thinking about your sig when I did it. I was trying to find a Sabre in crosshairs but I could not. lol

 

[Pisis]

No way CGI... The question remains if is it WW2 or later.

PS: Hunter, nice Mig, there. Can you pls send me the original picture?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Joe you should be able to answer this one better than most people here. Trailing plane is very close and right behind the first fighter. Right?

What about prop wash on that trailing plane would that not have screwed up the back plane? He is flying soo close I would of thought the prop wash would of screwed him up bad. If it was actually real planes flying.

What do you think Joe?


Joe did you notice my new sig? I was thinking about your sig when I did it. I was trying to find a Sabre in crosshairs but I could not. lol

Great Sig - I was going to comment on it!!8)

To answer your question though, propwash will be below and to one side of the front aircraft, so if the chasing aircraft stayed right behind the front aircraft, at or above his tail he should be alright. Additionally I don't think the propwash off the lead plane would be that bad since both planes are about the same size and producing about the same horse power although it would be a little bumpy if one got behind the lead aircraft....

 

[Hunter368]

I like your's also Pisis, for whatever reason I love the Mig-21 and older Migs. Here you go:

Yahoo! Image Detail for www.fredsboringpictures.com/images/Chino%2005/images/1141968%20MiG-15.jpg

 

[Hunter368]

Ok thanks Joe, I knew you would know.

 

[Pisis]

TY

 

[Clave]

That was cool footage - the Dover cliffs just shouted 'GGI' at me, but a damn nice job anyhow...8)

 

[Matt308]

Pisis, your getting outnumbered on this one, buddy. It was a super great video. I would love to see more.8)

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Ok thanks Joe, I knew you would know.

no sweat!

 

[timshatz]

Didn't the 109E have struts in the tailplane?