Yup, I saw that too, watching it on TCM as we speak. Remember, most 29 pilots were veterans of 17s and 24s, so it is quite possible that Stewart's character started in a Liberator. It's interesting to note that Stewart himself was a veteran 24 commander during the war and was highly decorated. Maybe Jimmy just misspoke when saying his line.
Also, when first confronted by the 24, most pilots were in awe of the big machine. According to George McGovern's book about his experiences in Italy flying Liberators, the 24 was not a pilot's plane and was difficult to fly. The 29 was also a handful and the B-36 was very likely also a handful. Most reports I have read say the B-47 was a beautiful plane to fly.
Also, does anyone find it odd that the 47 year old Jimmy Stewart was still playing baseball at a high level when Gen. Hawkes came to get him? Stewart even looks too old for a baseball player. And I didn't think the USAF would be going so hard after middle aged former pilots. I would have thought there would have been enough experienced younger men able to come back and take SAC into the next phase. After all, most airplane commanders were no more than the early to mid 20's during WWII. I know Jimmy Stewart was very likely the most patriotic actor of his day, so maybe all this is just an allowance to Stewart's long career in service to his country. I wonder who he'd vote for in this year's election?
They don't make them like Jimmy Stewart anymore. And more's the pity.
reply
share
rac701
16 years ago
I don't think it would be too hard to figure out who Jimmy Stewart would vote for in this year's national election. I'm pretty sure it'd be another former fellow pilot.
reply
share
HypnocraticGoat
15 years ago
So we can assume that Stewart voted for McGovern in '72 then?
----- Made you look! -----
reply
share
scottmcclure
16 years ago
I agree that the baseball player storyline is a bit of stretch, however it really does not bother me. Something about this old movie that I just love--hard to explain but it just involves patriotism and the kind of America that I like to think still exists. I see as well that Paul Mantz was in charge of the aerial photography and this guy was simply brilliant with a camera. He was the guy who also crash landed the B-17 at the beginning of 12 O'Clock high. Apparently when he was killed in an air plane crash Jimmy Stewart was a pall bearer.
reply
share
crssbs
16 years ago
Mr. Mantz was killed during the filming of "The Flight of the Phoenix" in 1965. Jimmy Stewart was a pallbearer, as was General Jimmy Doolittle, Chuck Yeager and John Ford. Paul Mantz and Jimmy Stewart were great pilots as well as very close friends.
reply
share
dmt-12
16 years ago
This movie is really unique in that Jimmy Stewart really was checked out in that aircraft in the Air National Guard at the time. My grandfather sat in the jump seat on his checkride. He met the guy and has some documentation to prove it, either way he said that Mr. Stewart said that he wasn't a very good actor but just was himself on screen. A very nice guy I hear. Some actors have stand ins for scenes in which they are not on camera. Jimmy would fly in in his own p-51 just to read lines to other actors even though he wasn't being filmed.
My grandfather also flew the 36 and 47 and hated both passionately. He was a command pilot so (in that day) one worked up through fighters, then through bombers and finished his career in transport. He rolled a 47 over the field to get transfered on to MAC. The 36 was a transition plane and wasn't really suitable for either set of powerplants. The 47 had really flexible wings that made it almost unflyable. When you pull back the nose pitches up and the wings would flex down then snap back up and the plane would oscillate. Fortunately they were soon surpassed by something less dangerous to the crews.
Either way, Mr. Stewart was flying the things in the service of our country off camera. Great guy. I don't think you can make 'em like that anymore.
reply
share
RockGrey
15 years ago
Your grandfather seems like such a cool guy. He would have gotten along just fine with my granddad it seems to me.
Anybody want a peanut ?
- Fezzik, " The Princess Bride " ( 1987 )
reply
share
Jim A
15 years ago
B-47s weren't unflyable, just seriously unforgiving of error, just like a lot of the early jets. Accident rates in the early 1950s were seriously horrendous because of lots of inadequacies, both engineering and operational. A lot of the technology pioneered in the 47 is in the bloodlines of most of Boeing's jetliners up through the 747 generation. That's a lot of decendants.
B-36s were a handful- six 28 cylinder piston engines needed an immense amount of maintenance and were seriously prone to failures in flight. Just too many parts trying to stay in synchronization. There are four left in the world, none flyable. Just too incredibly expensive to restore.
reply
share
captbob2002
11 years ago
There was a group of ex-Convair engineers in Ft. Worth working on restoring a B-36 to flying condition. They eventually met with resistance from the State department. Seemed having a flyable intercontinental bomber (regardless of how old) would present a problem with treaties between the US and the former Soviet union. Pity. Love to see one in flight, but have no idea how they would have been able to pay the care and feeding on a flying example of that monster.
reply
share
wcallen1369
9 years ago
There was also problem with the 47's tendency to "Porpoise" on landing. It required a keen sense of timing to deploy the drag 'chute to stop it.
reply
share