Read the forum code of contact
By: - 14th January 2010 at 08:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I should think it's a figment of the modelmakers mind...................like when they tagged an IL76 type nose onto the front of our AN124!!
By: - 14th January 2010 at 08:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Got it!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Asat_missile_20040710_150339_1.4.jpg
It's an ASM-135 ASAT. The fins are the same as is everything else. Makes no sense, of course.
What about the ship though? It appears fake enough, I must say. Only appears for a second or two. I don't get it. They could easily get for free a video from US Navy showing any Aegis vessel firing an SM-2 in a drill. Would appear far more realistic...
By: - 19th January 2010 at 12:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
She looks like a T23 to me
By: - 19th January 2010 at 13:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It's definitely a T23.
By: - 19th January 2010 at 13:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Got it!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Asat_missile_20040710_150339_1.4.jpg
It's an ASM-135 ASAT. The fins are the same as is everything else. Makes no sense, of course.
What about the ship though? It appears fake enough, I must say. Only appears for a second or two. I don't get it. They could easily get for free a video from US Navy showing any Aegis vessel firing an SM-2 in a drill. Would appear far more realistic...
The point was it was supposed to be a British Ship....and maybe we have missiles the rest of the world doesn't know about (rolls around on floor laughing like lunatic while looking at a picture of Type 45 with empty silos) I mean Bond is very realistic representation of the work of British Intelligence as it happens, as is the series spooks....:D
By: - 19th January 2010 at 13:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I mean Bond is very realistic representation of the work of British Intelligence D
Homosexuals cannot whistle
Sumai can draw their testicals back up their inguinal tract
Autogyros can carry more weapons than a B52
High quality cutlery is magnetised
Its like a fly-on-the-wall documentary
By: - 19th January 2010 at 13:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The point was it was supposed to be a British Ship....
But according to script it was American. When at the HQ in South Korea borders, the American Damian Falco, head of NSA, is asked "What about Icarus?" and replies "Oh, we are taking care of that with a launch in an hour". Unless I missed smth...
So it could only be either a Tico or an Arleigh. But from the few frames, it doesn't look like with neither of these. So my guess is that it's just an imaginative model made up to look fancy. But I think it's a pity, they could easily secure a video from a US Navy SM-2/3 test launch and make it far more realistic.
In fact, 6 years later the US Navy actually shot down a satellite, so today we could be even discussing about prophetic movie and so on. Now we are just discussing how lame, inaccurate and unconvincing those scenes are...
and maybe we have missiles the rest of the world doesn't know about (rolls around on floor laughing like lunatic while looking at a picture of Type 45 with empty silos) I mean Bond is very realistic representation of the work of British Intelligence as it happens, as is the series spooks....:D
A poisonous remark for the Type 45s :p
Point taken. :cool:
By: - 19th January 2010 at 13:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
But according to script it was American. When at the HQ in South Korea borders, the American Damian Falco, head of NSA, is asked "What about Icarus?" and replies "Oh, we are taking care of that with a launch in an hour". Unless I missed smth...A poisonous remark for the Type 45s :p
Point taken. :cool:
Fair enough, not seen the film since I walked out of the cinema in disgust how ever many years ago. I seem to remember they recycled the clip from an earlier bond film where a type 23 fires a cruise missile (!!!) at a chinese arms fair. Damn useful ship the Type 23 is in Bond world, make you wonder why we are even buying T45s. :D
By: - 19th January 2010 at 15:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
At least it isn't as bad as the last episode of the new Spooks series, they portray the Pakistani navy using shots of Tico's/Burkes, and the Indian navy sub they are chasing surfaces and reveals itself to be a Vanguard.
...shocking.
By: - 19th January 2010 at 15:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
At least it isn't as bad as the last episode of the new Spooks series, they portray the Pakistani navy using shots of Tico's/Burkes, and the Indian navy sub they are chasing surfaces and reveals itself to be a Vanguard....shocking.
Didn't Pearl Harbour have shots of Kidds being blown up?
Maybe they assumed that the line "World War 2 just started" would trump any other historical inaccuracies.
By: - 19th January 2010 at 15:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Didn't Pearl Harbour have shots of Kidds being blown up?Maybe they assumed that the line "World War 2 just started" would trump any other historical inaccuracies.
Haha. Who needs fact when you're in Hollywood.
By: - 19th January 2010 at 22:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Fair enough, not seen the film since I walked out of the cinema in disgust how ever many years ago. I seem to remember they recycled the clip from an earlier bond film where a type 23 fires a cruise missile (!!!) at a chinese arms fair. Damn useful ship the Type 23 is in Bond world, make you wonder why we are even buying T45s. :D
I confirm, the movie was "Tomorrow never dies" and indeed the footage is directly copy-pasted on "Die another day", except that the missile's fins are somewhat larger. Also in the same movie we can see an L-39 carrying a duo of... nuclear torpedoes :D
I don't really mind with certain attrocities by the moviemakers, after all it's a movie. So what if the protagonist runs and hundreds of bullets are fired upon him but all miss. It's called poetic licence, I can live with that, after all if the protagonist dies, the movie ends, what's the point of watching it then? But certain errors in details make no sense, like this one.
I mean, it's not like they saved so much money by making a model ship and a CGI missile. They could easily get a video with a missile launch from either US Navy or RN. They would both be happy to provided it for free welcoming publicity, thus making the scenes far more credible and real.
Anyway, it's just a movie.
By: - 20th January 2010 at 08:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
At least it isn't as bad as the last episode of the new Spooks series, they portray the Pakistani navy using shots of Tico's/Burkes, and the Indian navy sub they are chasing surfaces and reveals itself to be a Vanguard....shocking.
Yeah my wife told me to shut up half way through that episode...can't think why?
By: - 20th January 2010 at 08:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Anyway, it's just a movie.
And a bloody awfull one. Big fan of Bond but Die Another Day was tripe for all sorts of reasons! Now Casino Royale thats a bond film. Personal fave is OHMSS though, I knows its Lazenby, but great film.
By: - 20th January 2010 at 09:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And a bloody awfull one. Big fan of Bond but Die Another Day was tripe for all sorts of reasons! Now Casino Royale thats a bond film. Personal fave is OHMSS though, I knows its Lazenby, but great film.
Agreed. JB films are a legend, but sometimes the makers clearly overeact. In fact, here's a quote from Roger Moor on this film:
"I thought it just went too far — and that’s from me, the first Bond in space! Invisible cars and dodgy CGI footage? Please!"
Source: Bye bye to Ian Fleming's James Bond?
However, alongside Clancy's film adaptations, JB films are perhaps the neatest approach to militaristic fiction. But allthesame, they are always movies, not documentaries.
By: - 20th January 2010 at 19:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Agreed. JB films are a legend, but sometimes the makers clearly overeact. In fact, here's a quote from Roger Moor on this film:Source: Bye bye to Ian Fleming's James Bond?
However, alongside Clancy's film adaptations, JB films are perhaps the neatest approach to militaristic fiction. But allthesame, they are always movies, not documentaries.
Bourne trilogy?
By: - 20th January 2010 at 20:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Bourne trilogy?
It's very good too, in its own way, but it's a pure spy series of films. We don't see any major military hardware or anything, only small arms at best. Bond is different in this sense and unique alongside Clancy's Ryan.
Numerous examples so far, on "The Living Daylights" the defector general Koskov is retrieved by being placed on the back seat of dual seat trainer Harrier aircraft (VERY impressive at that time), on numerous occasions he is seen in submarines (the spy who loved me, the world is not enough etc), on Thunderball we see beautiful Avro Vulcans, on Goldeneye he drives a T-72 tank, on Octopussy he destroys a prototype radar on a fighter aircraft inside a latin american airforce hangar, and of course, on Goldeneye again, it was the first time we saw descent-looking MiG-29 Fulcrums... :)
Bourne is lost and tries to find out who he is. No comparison whatsoever. Nice films, but nothing like JB.
Posts: 694
By: HAWX ace - 14th January 2010 at 02:09
It's from JB's film Die Another Day, I just watched it :D . It is supposed to be a ship-based anti-satelite missile, launched to destroy "Icarus". At first I thought it was Harpoon. The launcher is definately harpoon's, but the fins don't match. A training round perhaps?
I can't get a clue on the ship either. According to script, it's supposed to be american. Any ideas? Of course all these could also be models under scale, but I don't know...
A few stills for those who have not seen the movie ....