Masters of the Air - Where are the B-17G Bombers with Chin Turrets? A deep dive review.
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 03. 2024
- B-17 models were modified as the war progressed to take into account combat lessons learned. The B-17F models lacked sufficient forward facing firepower. The Germans exploited this vulnerability by usually attacking head on. A temporary solution was to incorporated and field modified nose flexible mounted .50 caliber machine gun. This was replaced with the Bendix chin turret at the end of 1943. Most 100th bomb group bomber should have chin turrets by episode 7. None of the bombers shown in episode 7, 8, or incorporated chin turrets.
- Věda a technologie
One missed opportunity this series had was to bring in the Me 262; there was one incident with the 100th where the B-17s thought a Mustang was hanging back and was trying to rejoin its group, but when it got closer it was a Schwalbe; the gunners couldn’t track it and it took down one of the lead bombers then flew off. That scene would have been worth including. The last three episodes were less “Masters of the Air” and more “Masters of the Luft Stalags.” They also didn’t do much for the Red Tails, but they did better than the inaccurate movie did.
The series was based on the book. The book details the P51 situation. And it discusses the Me262
I second that. Was totally expecting to see jet fighters in this. Also no famous "piggy back ride" scene.....
Er, yeah, what makes you think he doesn't know that? @@Mugdorna
The worst thing is we all waited 10 years to get this aerial s...t
No a single word about RAF Spitfires that escorted bombers in the first leg....
Ridiculous comment made by Major John Egan watching the ruines of a German city destryed by Royal Air Force:
" At leas they hit something"..
So American people knows that only american bombers made something against nazi Germany. ( ........ )
( Actually, only the bomber Command ( RAF ), was able to make precision bombing using the Stabilizing Automatic Bomb Sight.. Especially for 5th group 617 sq.. )
My father was a 20-24 year old pilot during the war. I asked him what it was like when a fighter attacked. He had 20/15 vision and said he could see them coming head on from a good distance and as they closed in he could see blinking lights as they opened fire. He said because of the noise in the cockpit and his headset that he didn't hear them pass like in the movies. He twice had to crash land his shot up B-26.
The technical effects guy did an over hour long interview with WW2tv channel among other people involved with master’s of the air. He actually brought it up and said since they couldn’t use any real b-17’s for filming in England because of covid and they were only static museum models, they had to build a full size prop b-17F and other cockpits for filming. So they just made it silver for the later episodes and had it scanned for the flight scenes. They were already way behind schedule and over budget for the show due to covid so cuts had to be made. The show was supposed to have some real b-17’s with shots done in the US for taxiing and take offs, and 2 more episodes making it an 11 part series. But those had to be cut. I applaud them for the show they were able to deliver for filming at the height of covid.
There’s no crazy crazy mistakes that are egregious. The one writer said, for every inaccurate thing you find, you will find 5 accurate things. They also had to change some events times around for continuity. And some cinematic changes like the location of the sun for the DDay flying scene so the planes weren’t silhouetted.
Also they only had p51d’s to film with so that’s why the Tuskegee airmen p51’s were wrong for the date portrayed. And they had them use rockets instead of a strafing run for cinematic effect.
They coulda just reshot a few quick scenes. Or better yet, just slap some chin turrets on with CGI. That would have cost barely anything given the low bar they set for CGI quality throughout the series
Covid really isnt a good excuse for them....its 2024. The CGI would have taken 6 months tops
@@fishjohn014that's a lot of money. I know it doesn't seem like a lot, but we're talking tens of thousands of dollars per second of screentime. That's a lot for an already underfunded and over budget production.
COVID is a lame excuse - it actually had very little impact.
It is basically a production screw-up.
A sad end to Hanks' and Spielberg's reputations.
@@wiseguy3696 haha no, CGI isn't that expensive anymore. One of the benefits of AI
Beyond the absence of B-17G chin turrets during the circa 1944-45 episodes, there was little to no mention of the B-24 Liberator throughout the course of the series, an equally important airframe that served in the 8th Air Force (and carried a heavier payload). Moreover, if "Masters of the Air" is to be believed, the sole fighter Americans flew was the P-51 (with a very peripheral mention of the P-40). Nothing in the series discussing the P-47, the fighter that carried the load up to the arrival of the Mustang. Additionally, Luftwaffe pilots had a very healthy respect for the Thunderbolt (both its firepower and survivability as well as its high altitude performance), so the lack of any mention of that aircraft is inexcusable.
There were more B-24 produced than B-17's it was prevalent in the ETO.
The 100th bomb group (the focus of the series) was only equipped with B17s. P47s are seen in episode 5 escorting the Münster mission.
@jeffpowers8526 Granted, B-17's would get the spotlight in the series given the emphasis on the 100th, but an acknowledgment that the B-24 at least existed would've been nice. And yup, there's a very brief CGI shot of Thunderbolts in one episode, but little else is offered other than that token glance. Other than that it's all P-51's, all the time (even in the couple of ground attack/close air support scenes, which by 1944-45 was really the Thunderbolt's domain).
@@jimbo6413 The 332nd was equipped with P-51's so for the ground attack scenes in Ep. 8 where they're shot down, that's accurate. They didn't just take part in escort missions for the 15th as opposed to 8th fighter command which that's pretty much all they did. And for the P-51 that strafes the camp in Ep. 9 it could very well be a fighter returning from escort looking for targets of opportunity. In the 9th AF the P-47 did the lion's share of ground attack but that mission isn't exclusive to that plane in the ETO or the MTO.
They likely left out any mention of B-24's because their focus was the 100th. But even aside that a B-17 is pretty, and it's accurate to call the B-24 "The Box the B-17 came in" ;)
I was so annoyed by the glaring lack of the G model in Masters of the Air. I loved the series overall, but the first time I saw a formation of silver F models in 1944 I let out a huge WTF?! My wife, non-WW2 aficionado didn't care. But as a B17-G fan, it really bugged me.
Basically, Covid, time, and money are the cause. This interview tells you all you need to know. Fantastic
czcams.com/users/livehl2EYqcFXsE?si=MwAnux3d87A06n3N
I feel like the chin turret looks badass and almost makes it look like a totally different plane
I felt the same, but it wasn't done due to time and budget as they'd need to change the mock-up. If they added these something else would have been cut completely, maybe the Tuskegee airmen or other other historical aspects.
@@mattjohnson7369 I hear you, but the old adage "If it's worth doing, it's worth doing well" really applies. I think if the B17-F weren't so distinctly different in appearance, nobody would care. like the early model P51's versus the later D model with the bubble canopies. But the B17-G's silhouette is SO different due to the Bendix chin turret, the glaring inaccuracy of it NOT being there in the later part of the war really stood out.
I've been loving your channel ever since Masters of the Air came out. Don't let any haters get you down. I can both appreciate artistic liberties that the show takes AND your "deep dives" into the historical accuracy.
It's disappointing that so many comments on this channel can't accept the show for what it is. Most of us wouldn't be here without it.
Exactly. I can accept that for a range of reasons, absolute accuracy is not gonna happen. But for most human beings, it’s the personal experience that matters and although I can be as OCD as the next amateur, do-your-own-research internet armchair historian, I can also suspend my disbelief sufficiently to appreciate the tv or film in question. Having a video like this one to discuss discrepancies is like a value-add, extras on a DVD. It enables me to engage much further than just watching the series. It’s kinda the best of both worlds for me. And I can feel smug in an ‘ackchoolee’ way as a bonus if the topic ever raises in conversation 😂.
Thank you. The issue of the F and G models was my biggest question/concern about the series.
Not the biggest one. Inserted story of Tuskegee that totally not related to The 100th and therefore make up lot of hypothetical clips, is.
Probably decided to use just B-17F design to save on production costs.... oops he explains that was the reason at the end of the video ;)
@@picardtseng It is fact, however, that Red Tail pilot Alexander Jefferson was shot down over Toulon, and was sent to Stalag Luft III. So, while the story was inserted, it had the benefit of being true.
A good show but it's very evident that they were either rushed or ran low on their budget by the last three episodes
No, because of the time period it was shot, during covid restrictions in England, the series was cut to 9 episodes because of the production cost due to covid. They left a lot of material on the cutting room floor. They had to change the story on the fly and cut an entire episode. It was originally pitched as an 11 episode series.
Covid is no excuse for this farce.
If there were Covid restrictions, how come they had so many scenes with lots of actors in them?
It is pure and simply bad production.@@ericharmon7163
Filming paused briefly in July due to positive COVID-19 tests I think you are exaggerating this slightly 😅😅 The Hollywood Reporter said it would consist of nine episodes at a total cost of $250 million. This was in 2019😮😮😮
@@ericharmon7163
The money for CGI is separate, it's a line item on the productions budget so it still could have run out earlier even if episodes were cut, that stuff isn't done in house they contract it out which is why it's a line item in the movie's budget, like a trucking company only having so much money budgeted for tires or fuel, there's been plenty of case's of movie's since CGI became as big as it is that in post production were notified by the outfit they contracted to do the CGI before thing's were done that told them the money ran out because they kept having thing's changed and if they want them to move forward it'll require more money, so the producers would have to go to the banks or any one of other sources for money and raise it so the CGI effects in the movie could be completed.
If you cannot do it right, do an inaccurate version anyway?
If you under budget, spend the extra to keep the product from becoming irrelevant and unable to achieve its purpose
Great research. I was wondering why they’d omit the chin turrets in Masters. My grandfather was a bombardier for the 390th and would often talk about that chin turret and how great it was. I hadn’t found much on CZcams describing this until now and you did a great job. Thanks!
I've been a proud member of your channel before this series. Thanks for covering this. It was a glaring omission, in my opinion. Because there were many field retrofits done. I knew this. I just felt that the series could have done a better job. But I understand why, budget and time constraints? It was shot during COVID-19, which wrecked havoc on all the arts and movies.
There were literal years to fix this in post-production with CGI, at least partly (the physical model could have been left as was).
@@skepticalbadger Its going to be weird if the bombadier is firing he's single MG in internal shots and in the external shots the chin turrets is firing
The lack of a chin turret is lost on most people, and just us nerds notice. I'd argue your comparing the inaccuracy to be like the F4F vs. F6F would require the series to show the B-24 or B-29 instead of the B-17. They got the model wrong, not the whole type. ;)
A B-24 wouldn’t be out of the question - only one B-29 ever operated in Europe during WW2…
@@allangibson8494 ehhh I don't know man
This show was produced for WW2 fans.....not marvel fans
It's pretty simple to add the chin turrets. The producers obviously had access to dozens of WW2 aviation experts and failed to follow the most simple of instructions
@@fishjohn014 There were more B-24’s operating in Europe than B-17’s.
It's an interesting point - who is the show for?
Ultimately, they should be capable of doing an historically accurate show AND make it entertaining for the average viewer, satisfying nerd and non-nerd!
@@allangibson8494 It would be out of the question, as the 100th only flew B-17s. ;)
One more glaring thing. Why were all the P51's D Models - there way more of B and C models in late 1944 than D's
It's weird because I asked about this to a VFX artist and they said they added chin turrets to the models in post production which clearly they didn't.
Maybe a pre-viz or something of the sort.
I'm on the MotA official page on FB, a person with production said the same thing - the CGI team was all ready to do the transition, but the coordinator stated "it's not a big deal" and didn't crossover on the mock up planes or CGI. Utter laziness, nothing to do with budget costs. Just like in episode 5 where they take off without red outlined insignia and land WITH red outlined O.o
Not to mention all its other flaws.
@@perrylockhartiv8003 well to the laymen, it isn't a big deal but to those that know better, it looks bad. That sucks.
@@perrylockhartiv8003
_'Laughable!'_ Regarding the [newer-style/-adopted] insignia blooper, perhaps the technical 'coordinator' there (or likely, whatever 'apt' title they rightfully deemed-themselves 'fitting' to) only saw it as being 'fitting', akin to being 'bloodied' on the return trip back to base!
@@perrylockhartiv8003 I’d say we found the production team’s diversity hire.
Hello once more I love this video as a always wanted a deeper dive in the chin models. You should also do a video on the evolution of the b-17 bomber varients
Agree!!! All B17 variants were used in the Pacific theatre quite extensively for the entire duration of the war. Some of the early models became famous for their exploits and field modifications. Much now forgotten and overshadowed by the later European actions.
@@sueneilson896 man I’ve been begging him to do a video like that for a little bit now
Stephen Rosenbaum (the Visual Effects Supervisor) was fully aware of this, but they didn't have the time nor the money to redesign both the physical models and subsequent CGI air scenes to get them to G model aesthetics. He talks about it in detail on his interview with WW2TV.
That's nonsense on his part - they had plenty of time. He should be sacked.
@@CzechImp Lol. You work as a vfx artist? You know how long these things take?
It doesn't take four years!@@jordan6049
It was filmed during COVID. There was PLENTY of time to address this in post. @@jordan6049
Another stellar job. Thank you for your attention to detail AND correct history.
My Dad did his missions in an unpainted B-17G in 8th AF, 306th BG, 423rd SQ as a waist gunner. He said the view over the Normandy beaches on 6-June during low-level support missions was incredible. It's too bad the series creators could not add the authenticity for the B-17G modeling to the series.
I also noticed this. There were several tail numbers in the series that started with '4' for 1944 and I was expecting at least those models to have the chin turret. Thanks for another great video/
Sad really considering even the last blocks of B-17F’s were produced with the long plexiglass nose AND the chin turret.
There were more than twice as many G models than F models built. What is so odd about this error is that historical accuracy *is* the point of such a series for the target audience. What’s the point of a “you were there” series if the creators make it so obvious that they weren’t ?
By end of war
@@tomhenry897 Did you watch the video? By D-Day the F model was replaced. What the show depicted was historically inaccurate. The fact that the G model far outnumbered the F demonstrates exactly this piece’s point: to build an entire show around what was ultimately a minority version of the aircraft and continue to show that minority version during time periods when it wouldn’t have been in the air is the point.
@@tomhenry897 🤦♂
Because 80% show was set in 1943 and focused on the careers (and many, MANY deaths) of the initial tranche of 100th Bombardment group pilots that deployed to England. Thus all the practical replicas and as well as the CGI budget went to creating the almost perfect renditions of the B-17F.
It made no budgetary sense to spend a huge amount of cash to convert or build entirely new physical replicas and CGI models of the B-17G for less than 5 minutes of footage for the last episodes as they focused on the pilots during their time as POWs. They mitigated this by CGI painting the replicas into their unpainted 1944 form instead.
Ultimately like most things the flaws came down to money, just be glad we finally got a full 9 episode show that was mostly accurate and unlike Memphis Belle, didnt involve the destruction of an actual B-17.
The 100th were using G models in 1943. They were using them for most of the scenes in the series.@@fludblud
Now they should make a 10 part series on the WWII Naval Warfare. The nighttime naval battles between the US Navy and the Japanese Navy during the Guadalcanal, campaign were epic battles.
Give me a break! ... Though perhaps 'there' however, every goddamn war-machine - flying, or not; Allied or otherwise - would be conspicuously up-armed with a 'chin'-turret, huh?
Leyte Gulf would be a great focus for a USN centered series.
"they" shouldn't make anything ever again!
Let someone else make it who knows what they are doing!
hopefully not the same production company unless they pay a bit more attention to historical accuracy.
@@billbrockman779 Navy vet here, they'd better include the Marianas Turkey shoot at some point :)
these videos are just fantastic. fantastic source material, and more importantly an informative but succinct presentation. great work
Fascinating. I appreciate the work people like you do in scouring archived materials to bring forth accurate information. I find it neat to learn about history through exploring inaccurate details in media.
Shame we didn’t see the B-17G, such an obvious omission. The other issue for me was the continuity with the P-51s, some were clearly civilianised and lacked head armour, however in the aerial sequences the head armour was miraculously there. I would have expected better.
They said they had no P-51 Cs but they did have real P-51 Ds. So they used the real one they had as a reference. Makes no sense because I feel like they could've added/changed with CGi. Same for the chin turret on the B-17s 🤷♂️
@arhickernell That's very strange as there are airworthy P-51B & Cs in existence. I think, sadly, it is a case of budgetary constraints and omission, which is a real shame given the effort put into Band of Brothers and The Pacific.
@harjindersokhi9852 From what I read, they had like a $250 million dollar budget. But they had to use like $60 million just for covid/testing/ppe/etc. They ran over schedule due to all this. Episode 8 was clearly supposed to be 2 episodes cramed together. This is a great interview about the CGI, Covid, time.
czcams.com/users/livehl2EYqcFXsE?si=MwAnux3d87A06n3N
@harjindersokhi9852 this interview basically sums it up. But blame covid honestly.
czcams.com/users/livehl2EYqcFXsE?si=MwAnux3d87A06n3N
I was watching interviews with a one of the technical advisors to the show. He restores WW II aircraft. When about the criticisms of the show for accuracy at times, he stated ask them to name the things we got right. I thought this was a bad answer, because the chin turrets not being on the B 17s were a big mistake, so who cares how much care you put into having the piolet make the right motion to turn of an engine, or the type of crane used in the hanger, which he went on about in some detail because he said that even though it was minor people would notice, yea but no one notices the big things right. My take is that he restores aircraft and knows how they were used and the conditions they faced, but he was not a historian who know the where and when of different models. They did have a historian also and even he did not point it out, he was very knowledgeable, I watched his interview as well, but my guess is either he had no input into the computer models used or he knew the experience of the men and the campaign but not the vehicles used. Its a shame for so much money and effort to be spent on making this series and for them to miss such a big thing that anyone with any knowledge of WW II would most likely notice.
Well said. In general, looking at this from the 30,000 ft view, I think society as a whole/intelligence is getting worse and worse. With cell phones, AI, etc. Just look at our fathers and grandfather's generation compared to us. In relation to movies and pretty much everything, I suspect quality is going to plummet as time progresses. AI written scripts with no heart & soul, etc etc. Sad.
I find it hard to believe they went as far as building a 1:1 scale B-17 mock up, but never built an interchangeable nose section or magnetic chin turret that they could fix onto the mock up.
I find it hard to believe that they made a series based around B17s without actually using any of the many surviving planes!
@@CzechImp Last time there was a Hollywood production which used surviving B-17s they accidentally destroyed one. I'm glad they didn't risk that.
I didn't know that! Which film/show?@@historyeverday
@@CzechImpwhen the movie Memphis Belle was made, one of the B-17s was lost
I didn't realise that. I was in the RAF when it was made and I remember a lot of excitement around our Lincolnshire bases when it was being filmed there.@@weirddeere
You've got a new subscriber - your attention to detail in the info presented is fantastic.
I’m glad you presented the tv production companies point of view this time that there was no budget or time left to make changes
Thank you so much for your continued quality content.
I love how you bring out historical document reports. Not only does it support your claims, but also makes this video significantly more educational! Though, I do wonder how you get access to those documents.
I noticed this too. They did get the "no more paint" detail correct on the later models, but no chin turrets!
Changing skins is a piece of cake. They could've made them all pink polka dots on the fly.
They wanted to add them but they were way behind schedule and money constraints, etc
@@fitycalibre7555it likely would've taken less than a few hours to add a low detail chin turret for the CGI models. A scratch built one for the full size model likely less than a day. I seriously doubt it would've been a major expense in time or money.
@@MercurialMorpheus you’ve clearly never worked on film projects before. I wish it was that simple. Plus if it was a bad CGI chin turret, everyone would’ve complained even more. So 🤷🏻♂️
@@fitycalibre7555 Heh 'rivet counters' would have had a field day! it's bad enough they pick apart the war movies we DO have now.. :)
Bendix chin turret AND the cheyenne tail turret. At least 3500 were modified before leaving the US.
Great video! Would you do a deep-dive video regarding the control stick and gun sight used to operate the chin turret. Thanks...!
Very disappointed in the production for this reason. It’s so visible.
No paint less weight
@@Paulftate This is about chin turrets. Not painted or unpainted bombers
@@Paulftate Yes, there was supposed to be no paint on latter models. What is being discussed is that they should have been G models with chin turrets from mid 44 on. Really bummed that with all that they went through for accuracy, they didn’t take the time to get this right.
@@davidkavanagh189 I was answering a question .. not looking for a smart ass question ... let me guess? a progressive liberal looking for something to cry about
@@Atpost334 I was answering a question the way I understood it ... and yes my answer is appropriate for the question I was answering .. let me guess? A woke Progressive liberal looking for something to cry about
Great historical detail! But considering the average audience member and the entertainment industry, I’m delighted the B-17 doesn’t takeoff as a B-17 and land as a B-24. Or have a bathroom onboard that looks like that of a modern jet airliner.
Another excellent video, I've learned something today.
they just didn't want to spend money on a slightly different CG model and/or couldn't get a G model for the filming so they just stuck with what they had.
Not that. They didnt want to spend the considerable money on changing the physical models that they built. In order to not have the big difference between CGI and physical they stuck to the earlier versions.
80% of the show was set in 1943 flying the F models, it wasnt worth the money to convert everything to the G model for less than 5 minutes of footage for the last two episodes.
What money? The cost of adding chin turrets to the CGI model is very small compared to the benefit. They could have left the 'hero' aircraft as an F since that would have cost, and we'd have lived with the compromise. A show about B-17 crews getting the B-17 wrong is really poor.@@fludblud
@@skepticalbadger Do you do CGI for movies? How much would it have cost to add?
It's not a show about B-17 crews; it's a show about the 100th BG, which flew B-17s. It seems to have been made so that people could learn about these men. I'll forgive the error.
I figured as the bombers were shot down we would begin to see the G models begin to show up, with a majority being the G model by the end of the war
Perhaps in a future video you could discuss the duration of fire for various guns. Twenty-six SECONDS for the chin turret! From what I understand, duration for fighters was similarly brief. (Watching old war movies you'd think guns could fire indefinitely, without a thought to ever running out of ammo! 🤣)
He always does, here 5:04 you can check ammo capacity, max was about 1 minute with 600 ammo for waist gunners.
26 seconds is a lot. Most fighters would have about half that or less. You would fire in very short bursts.
Hahaha. I was waiting for a video on this topic that we all knew was coming from you. :)
Your research is amazing bringing out original documents from the time to support your video and back up the facts . This happens in all your videos. You must have direct access to the WW2 archives 😊😊😊😊
I was asking myself that exact question yesterday after watching episode 7 which take place in 1944. Thanks for andwering .
Haven’t seen Masters of the Air yet, but depending on the timeframe, B-17F’s were used early in the War. My father-in-law Frank Casto piloted a B-17F with the 99th bombardment group out of Algeria North Africa in 1943 and 44. One of his gunners, actually achieved the status of ace by shooting down five Me109’s . His aircraft actually survived the war, as did the “Memphis Bell”, which was also a B-17F
Something interesting I didn’t know before was they named the engines after wives or girlfriends. Saw a picture of him, standing below an inboard engine with the name Janey, his wife, on the cowling.
Nicely done! Thank you!
They simply counted on audience ignorance to save a few bucks. Disappointing…but thanks for the great video!
Amazing information, thank you.
Excellent! Thank you.
Super review!
Шикарный разбор, так же заметил их отсутсвие
Was wondering this when I saw the last episode!
Thank you for that valuable information! I didn’t know about that! 👍🏽🇦🇺
I can't wait to see the video on the surface to air rockets they're using in the show now
And the production team's response is that those who notice are rivet counters. "Look at what we DID include."
I'm just disappointed that quite a few improvements in tactics, techniques, equipment, and aircraft that developed constantly through the war could have been addressed with portraying the February 1945 mission differently.
It's like all the time, money, and energy of the moon program to only orbit. For $300 million we expected a landing.
Exactly my thoughts
What they failed to recognize is that people who are into shows and movies like Masters of the Air are typically rivet counters. We are the ones that will determine whether or not the series is a success or not both in viewership and sales after the initial release. Seeing what they get right or wrong is half the entertainment value in historical pieces. It’s a shame they can’t see that.
These chin turrets came from early B-25's. B thru G model's lower turret. On the B-25 the lower turret gunner knelled backwards and leaned over and tried to sight through the periscope. As the turret spun, It was very hard to find an opposing fighter and the gunners became sick. Being ineffective they were removed in the field to save weight. The B-17 had a big glass nose to see the enemy and the travel of the turret was far less.
Agree - I was building a B-17G from airfix while watching - expecting to see them, that and the fact that P51 escorts were 'within' the bomber formation not above outside bomber gun range were among the two most annoying issues - most of it was all good to me...
For everyone moaning, read the book. Its gives far more nuance and depth than 9 episodes are capable of doing.
(Yes, the lack of chin turrets in the last few episodes erked me, but I still enjoyed the series.)
I also noticed the B-17G in final episode didn’t have the Cheyanne modification to the tail gun. Would assume by 45 all G models or close to all had that tail gun.
Their excuse is a cop out, I could model a chin turret in a few hours, they could have added it to the complete cgi model and be done in a day. They didn't need to alter the replicas, that also could have been done digitally just as they did with showing all the flak damage. I love the series and think they did a great job with the CGI work but not showing the G model was an epic fail.
Shit happens
300,000 Mustangs flying through the bomber formations was way worse than this oversight!!! The series deteriorated rapidly. 😂🤣
`Big Week` mission 226 had nearly 1000 fights escorting the bombers in 1944
All those b-17s flying right over invasion beaches is pretty bad too.
@@robmarsh6668 Phase2 of Operation Argument - or Big Day` saw thousands of B17`s, B24`s and A20`s used to supress the enemy from the air. So the show was very accurate
I've never seen a series nosedive so quickly. Eps five and six were fantastic and then they just gave up from seven onwards
@@thetombuckI mean the show for shelves many times and then had to be produced during a worldwide pandemic we havnt seen in generations. Don’t really think it was entirely their fault
Great research
I do like these, I also really wonder where you get all these sources from
Probably national or museum archives.
Well done!
Enjoyed that. Very good.
Thank you very much for your contribution. I have already spoken about the lack of the B-17 G version in the series and why it was not possible to include it with today's computer animation. The reason given was the great time pressure, the limited time and budget. In addition, only an F version was available in Great Britain and the pandemic also got in the way. I find it very tragic and sad that it was not done. I hope that maybe one day we will get a director's cut version that is digitally reworked again with the animation of B-17 G chin towering.
There is at least one G model in the UK.
then I really don't understand why they didn't get it for that. Was it the money or did the owner not have time for it?!
My exact question put forth to Apple TV FB post last week. My father in law was shot down in a 91st BG 17G over France 12/31/43
Thanks for this
you make excellent videos
great info
This was an excellent video, even by your high standards - absolutely fascinating.
The change to the Bendix turret is a tribute to US operational researchers, and the rapid responsivity and production flexibility of US engineering manufacturers - in these respects surely the best in the world of that era.
they mailed it in. love to see you address rocket armed 332 p-51 d-5's, 15's in the Italian theatre..... I can't even bring myself to watch more than a minute of a clip without being bummed.
Speaking of the Mustang - What about a P-51 strafing the POW column AT NIGHT? Really? When did the P-51 Mustang become a night fighter?
Excellent segment, very good information on the B-17G. I also wondered watching Masters of the Air why there no B-17G models in the episodes. I built models and read books on the B-17. It seems the B-17G came out in 1943. Did they not include the B-17G because the cost of digital production?
When did they stop painting the B-17 the Olive Drab color? I noticed in episode 9 all the B-17’s were aluminum.
The plane at :15 is an F with chin turret. I've seen the pic captioned as a prototype, but someone claimed it was in a production block that may have had chin turrets from the factory? It's hard to tell from the heavily cropped photo, but the plane is flying over Pierce County, Washington, about 35 miles south of the Boeing plant, west of Gig Harbor with Purdy in the background.
It's not just the Bendix chin turret; the B-17s in that scene also carry the original B-17F tail turret. Which I suppose they should; they are clearly B-17Fs. But the Cheyenne tail turret was definitely a feature of the B-17G, as were the staggered waist gunners' positions.
Your presentations are excellent, very listenable. One thing you don't comment on here is why some B17s had both the flexible nose guns and chin turrets (plenty of images in google). One person couldn't operate both - did they have two people in there?
This adds and supports my feeling that the show felt a little rushed and not fully fleshed out. I definitely noticed the lack of chin turrets since the planes didn't match historic images of the time.I'm curious, if indeed production knew they were going to cover the time period that transitioned into the chin turret era, why didn't they just start work on those digital models at the start? Oh well, in the end it was a minor oversight that did little to really hurt the narrative.
This happened because MoA built two replica B-17s for filming ground scenes, walk around and taxi shots. If they built one B-17F and one B-17G they would not be able to use both aircraft in the same shots for the first 6 episodes, which is the brunt of the story and and majority of ground/flying scenes. They chose to simply build two of the same aircraft to facilitate the filming they needed, and kept B-17Fs as the CGI flight model and the very last ground shots for continuity sake. The replicas took a year to build. A restrictive budget and tight filming schedule necessitated this omission. As mentioned in the video at the end, there wasn’t really a way around it.
I was wondering this since episode 5.
Actually Wildcats were the fighter aircraft for the escort carriers because of it's take off and landing characteristics. So was the Avenger. Hellcats, SBDs, and SB2Cs were only carriers by escort carriers when they were ferrying aircraft or providing replacements for the carrier groups. Wildcat performance was greatly improved over it's very long run.
By the time the 100th fully transitioned to the G Model, any E or F Models that were still airworthy would have been painted in a very bright and gaudy paint scheme and used as an "Assembly Ship"; the Squadrons would form up on the Assembly Ship and create the Combat Box, then the Assembly Ship would break formation and RTB.
That nose turret controller looks a lot like what Luke and Han used in the turrets of the Millennium Falcon. Probably no coincidence!
I saw an interview with the vfx supervisor fom Master of the Air and he was quick to call out most of the cgi/vfx short comings . It basically came down to lack of time and money. This was largely down to the extra expence and time constaints of operating under Covid restrictions.
A couple of days ago I happened across a video about the famous B17 ''All American''. I then read about it becoming a ''hack'', as well as reading about B17s and B24s being used as Assembly (or Formation) Ships.
Have you done anything on this? Sounds like a fascinating aspect of the air war which I had never heard about before.
I think you’re talking about the colorfully painted ones that had bright striped and polkadots? Yea very fascinating
How did adding the chin turret affect the bombardier's ability to use the bombsight? I am aware that the groups transitioned to having toggliers, but there would have been a period of chin turrets and bombardiers.
Amblin and Apple not having the budget to change the model? Can only guess that on a budget of $300k it never drove in the numbers it needed on a single streaming site. Great content as always :)
There are two budgets, both of which have to be met. One is money - obviously not a problem. The other is time. Money can't always buy that.
I think people tend to focus on the wrong things in these series: it's not about the equipment, it's about the men that operated the equipment. There are bound to be some errors in equipment accuracy, as there were in BoB with some of the armour used.
Apart from one error with a Jagdpanther (just for a few minutes), there is nothing wrong with equipment in BoB.
Masters got it wrong for a number of episodes.
@@CzechImp Did everyone bang on about that error ad infinitum?
@@CzechImp No they didn't. The 100th were flying the B-17F until April/May 1944. Other historians have said the only episodes where the 100th were flying the wrong model was Episode 7 and 9. At least get YOUR facts right.
Gramps was B 17 ETO after about eraly mid 43 and I think an EWO as "I recall". Is the Angeled front almost centered nose glass Armored? with or without chin guns?
Othe Gramps was Battle for the Atlantic EWO, another a Seabee, in law RCAC, RAF, and USAAC, flew with every allied force, and the French.
I never knew about the YB-40. Wow
Can you review how accurate unguided air-to-air rockets were? They felt like guided missiles in the show...
Very good
The b17 ball chinian sure is a beauty 😍
How effective were the cheek mounted guns?
It was a missed opportunity for MOTA as I believe this channel pointed out that bomber losses from head on attacks diminished and more bombers survived than previously with this addition.
Even with chin and top turrets the frontal attack was always the best strategy. A well placed burst in the cockpit downs the aircraft. Frontal attack also means no deflection shooting and shortest time being exposed to gunners. Without escorts the Luftwaffe could set up frontal attacks leisurely. Once long range escorts showed up that became impossible.
" shortest time being exposed to gunners" true on both sides there.
True. My money is on the FW190 with four 20mm cannon and two 13mm machine guns though. Bigger, slower moving target to shoot at and more concentrated firepower.@@vladimirpecherskiy1910
Peculiar simply because there are a number of surviving G types flying today!
Mr Tom Hanks, Mr Spielberg, and all the well paid producers, please explain this major oversight to the audience. Thanks
I read that the crews hated the chin turret because it’s open gaps created a wind tunnel effect that blew through the entire aircraft. It was already freezing cold, and adding all that wind chill effect made it much worse.
The old Steve McQueen film "The War Lover" shows the bombardier warming up the chin turret guns by firing off a few rounds. They were tracers though. I'm not sure that would have been kosher with a G model in combat.
The guns in the chin turret are not being fired to warm them up, they are being test fired to make sure they work before getting into combat. This way they,hopefully, malfunctions can be corrected.
True. This was pretty much standard practice for aircrews (both fighter and bomber) , provided that they had the time/opportunity to do so of course.@@williampage622
This is a great channel and always earns a thumbs up. I greatly appreciate Apple hiring a production company and spending $250 million over four years to bring us this incredible series. The intent is to educate current generations about the horrors that those young men experienced on our behalf. I will happily give the production company a pass on aircraft and continuity errors that don't alter the narrative.
All the more strange considering how much time and effort was spent using the IWM's B-17G as study and reference.
It is interesting question though why top and bottom turret can not provide fire more or less straight ahead. From visual standpoint it looks like that should be possible to pretty shallow angles.
the ball turret was designed in such a way it could not traverse all the way around, that way gunners would not be able to shoot out their own wheels or into the engines. Remember, the landing gear didn't fully retract into the nacelles.
@@eclipsehorse8693Well, every source I seen stated turret did spin 360. If you would limit horizontal spin not to allow to get wheels in - you would cut off like 40 degrees angle in front - that clearly too much.