Posted on 05/11/2009 6:37:28 PM PDT by Fred Nerks
This is a great video. It shows the three aircraft orbiting over the Statue of Liberty during the Air Farce One incident. (The money shot is near the end)
The "Red Tail F-16" is clearly a prop.
If the George Lucas' film "Red Tails" has, as is likely, a 3D IMAX version, and this sequence were to be used as an epilogue, the camera plane would likely have an external camera mount to attach an IMAX camera. Publicity stills would have been photographed by an air combat photographer during the flight.
According to this Wall Street Journal article, the camera plane was also an F-16, with a combat photographer on board. While the F-16s were flown by guard pilots, the photographs were taken by Master Sgt. Andrew N. Dunaway, a specially trained Air Force photographer based with a combat camera squadron at Charleston Air Force Base, S.C.
Could that "special training" have been in the operation of an IMAX camera?
Check out Dunaway's work. This guy is definitely a "pro from Dover."
And here is a photo of Lucas, lady-friend Mellody Hobson, Michelle Obama, "Red Tails" cast-member Sidney Poitier, Barack Obama, and Ford Theater's Paul Tetreault. George Lucas contributed $33,100 to the Obama Victory Fund, an additional $28,500 to the DNC Services Corp (D), and another $4,600 to Obama, Barack (D) -- that's a total of $66,200. Just friends helping friends, no doubt.
Lucas was quoted as saying, "We have a hero in the making back in the United States today because we have a new candidate for president of the United States, Barack Obama," when asked who his childhood heroes were.
Obama, "for all of us that have dreams and hope, is a hero," Lucas said.
Just another coincidence -- an old name and a famous paint scheme is returning to the skies above central Alabama. The commanding general of the Air Force is reactivating the 100th Fighter Squadron as part of Montgomery's 187th Air National Guard Wing.
Tip of the hat to FReeper Plutarch
Embedded links at website.
ping to another coincidence.
The AIR FORCE would never doa 45 degree bank with AF-1 at 1000ft ASL over Manhattan for a photo-op for a still PR photo! They had to be ordered and the maneuvers could only be required for a Video! That Zero chose to joke about his daughters being grounded for taking a joyride over Manhatta in AF-1 is Outrageous and probably very truthful only in that they were along for the ride with Michelle MaBelle and Lucas and Other Good Friends of HUSSEIN.:-( A SAD Day for AMERICA and AF-1!
Weren’t the F-16’s out of Alabama? Why?
Does the Alabama reserve/NG unit normally have red tails?
I think Lucas was filming in the city, maybe on rooftops, Air Force 1, with the Red Tail beside it, all a big blubber fest closing shot for his movie. ‘From fighting Nazis to be
n da President, lordy lordy’ fade to black....
Like the video linked above some great shots could be taken from the Jersey shore with AF-1, the SoL and the NYC skyline in the background. The video was from a handheld camcorder. With professional equipment and crew a much clearer and more dramatic shot could be taken.
ML/NJ
UPDATE! UPDATE!
http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaLatest.htm
Was Air Farce One Pic Photoshopped?
A sharp-eyed reader of the Texas Darling blog has submitted a series of photographs that she believes provides evidence that the Air Farce One photograph released by the White House has been Photoshopped.
Take a look at her evidence and decide for yourself.
http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2009/05/10/td-exclusive-air-force-one-flyover-pic-photoshopped/
Its interesting how poor the quality of the picture of The Statue of Liberty is for what one would expect to be of premier quality. AIR FORCE ONE is clearly flying at a greater height than 1000 ft, remember the Statue is over 300 ft high. That combined with the “numerous” imaginary flags” and “other foibles” make this picture appear to be photoshopped by a rank amateur, probably as rank as a “DEAD FISH!”
Who is the "commanding general of the Air Force"?
I looked at the linked presentation/discussion and I have to say: I don't know. But there are really only two or three reasons why a Photoshopped picture would be offered.
1) No picture was taken during the NYC flyover but the Administration wanted to support the notion that the mission here was to obtain AF-1 pictures over the Statue of Liberty.I am most intrigued by this third possibility.2) No professional pictures were taken and some aspects of the snapshot taken by the F-16 pilot severely needed cleaning up if the picture was to presented to the public, again to support the notion of a photo mission.
3) The Administration Photoshopped the picture, just because it could, and it did so to distract its critics.
ML/NJ
Probably no excuse, but I'm an Australian and wouldn't know where to look for an an answer to your question.
from my observation it wasn't an ideal day for taking pictures at ground level, I saw images that showed the area covered in a haze.
HA! Methinks all THREE apply.
See comment #8. Can you please look at this image and give us your opinion?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2247156/posts?page=72#72
Hint: there is no such office.
Cursory glance of the “released” photo shows the shadow cast by the sunlight on the airplane is not cast in the same direction as the shadow cast by the flag pole.
found this (final paragraph) from the link at the OBAMA FILE LATEST NEWS:
http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaLatest.htm
In the past, the 187th Fighter Wing has provided air support in both Gulf Wars and in the no-fly zones. Air Force commanding general Michael Mosely wouldn’t say if he expected to provide more no-fly zone aircraft when the United States leaves Iraq sometime in 2008 or 2009, but says if the president ordered such a plan, the Air Force - and the 187th would be ready to go.
http://www.f-16.net/news_article2511.html
Good enough, but there still is no “commanding general,” which makes me wonder how many other inaccuracies there are in the article.
It may well be a haze result, but it looks more like poor exposure, or even that there are two different pictures superimposed. The Statue is just so dark and distant for haing AF 1 at only 1000 ft above Sea Level while The Statue reachs 300 and some ft into the sky. Something Stinkith badly:-(
Further, one just doesn’t try to take promotional pictures in bad weather whether it is rain, snow, or Haze! You just Dont! So taking them on a day when You witnessed the bad haze just raises more questions and makes it more likely it was what Zero stated it was Saturday night; His two crumb crunchers got loose and took a Joy ride in AIR FORCE ONE! Its GROSS and OBSCENE ZERO would even attemrt to joke about that, but then We are speaking about Obama’s behavior, of which nothing should surprize Us anymore:-(
“...Further, one just doesn’t try to take promotional pictures in bad weather whether it is rain, snow, or Haze! You just Dont!...
an enlargement of this image shows just how bad the ‘haze’ was.
http://weblogs.amny.com/entertainment/urbanite/blog/planescare.jpg
There’s only one chase plane(F-16) in that video along with AF1/2
If this was for a film, where’s the camera crew on the ground or in the air? Somebody would have noticed them.
you will find the sources quoted are linked at:
http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaLatest.htm
see entry dated 5/10/09
from the Wall Street Journal article linked at THE OBAMA FILE LATEST NEWS ENTRY FROM 5/10/09:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124093288256863979.html
The 747-200B aircraft, one of two used as Air Force One, was accompanied by two F-16 fighters from the D.C. Air National Guard, which operates out of Andrews.
“We’ve never been asked to do this before,” said Capt. Byron Coward, a spokesman for the guard unit.
While the F-16s were flown by guard pilots, the photographs were taken by Master Sgt. Andrew N. Dunaway, a specially trained Air Force photographer based with a combat camera squadron at Charleston Air Force Base, S.C.
Only one of the F-16s was involved in the photo shoot; the other peeled off once the 747 reached New York, but both accompanied the plane back to Andrews
No offense to you, of course. I've just seen a slew of silly claims about this incident that were not true (ex: there are no 2-seat F-16s, you would never take pictures through a fighter canopy, the F-16 was tailing AF-1 the whole time).
This whole thing is a sham, but wild, ill-informed Internet theories don't help.
No. 735-08
September 02, 2008
General Officer Announcements
Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates announced today that the President has made the following nominations:
Army Brig. Gen. James L. Hodge for promotion to the grade of major general. Hodge is currently serving as commanding general, Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command, Scott Air Force Base, Ill.
http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=12176
You, and the "Obama File" don't know enough to recognize your error.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/187th_Fighter_Wing
The many accomplishments of the 187th Fighter Wing have received praise and recognition from the highest levels of the U.S. military leadership. The unit enjoyed nineteen years and over 55,000 flight hours without a Class A aircraft mishap and has received numerous Flight Safety awards from the Air Force Air Combat Command and the Air National Guard for its safety record. The Wing has also been recognized by Air Combat Command and the 9th Air Force Inspector General for excellence during Operational Readiness Inspections and Unit Compliance Inspections over the last two decades.
Accuracy matters.
http://states.ng.mil/sites/DC/leadership/Pages/aagair.aspx
The District of Columbia Army National Guard has a unique mission. It is led by a Commanding General, and is the only Army National Guard organization activated by the President of the United States for natural and civil emergencies.
The D.C. National Guard is also unique from other National Guard organizations because, unlike state organizations who have dual jurisdiction for federal and local matters, the D.C. National Guard has no local jurisdiction. This means the mayor cannot call upon the District of Columbia National Guard forces to protect local interests in Washington, D.C. (hence the City’s nickname, the Federal City).
LINDA K. MCTAGUE
Brigadier General, DCANG
Assistant Adjutant General, Air
Brigadier General Linda K. McTague is the Deputy Commanding General - Air, Joint Force Headquarters, District of Columbia National Guard, Washington, District of Columbia. She is responsible for the command and control and operational readiness of the headquarters element, 121st Weather Flight, Detachment 1, and 113th Wing which provides expeditionary combat forces, homeland air sovereignty, and world-wide transport in F-16 (Air Combat Command) fighter and C-38/C-40 airlift (Air Mobility Command) aircraft. General McTague also serves as the Commander of the Joint Task Force - District of Columbia.
(It’s all a bit above my paygrade LOL! ...but the connections are interesting. If she’s the Deputy Commanding General, who’s the boss?)
I’m not sure what this post has to do with anything???
Google returne 4,170 items for “187th Air National Guard Wing”
And, this is the statement from the source/writer:
“An old name and a famous paint scheme is returning to the skies above central Alabama. The commanding general of the Air Force is reactivating the 100th FS as part of Montgomery’s 187th ANG Wing.”
I believe “commanding general” in that context, is correct.
thank you Beckwith.
Believe what you want. You are wrong. The term is "Chief of Staff of the Air Force." This is 28 years of Air Force experience telling you.
No, it returns one. item.
I understand what you are saying.
However, the writer (probably a civilian) doesn’t have your precision and experience.
In the context of the writer’s words, he’s correct from his viewpoint. There is a “commanding general” of the Air Force. His title is “Chief of Staff of the Air Force.”
Your statement about the 187th Air National Guard Wing is incorrect.
I didn’t use quotes and there’s plenty of articles about the 187th.
Here is the Wikipedia entry for the “The United States Air Force’s 187th Fighter Wing (187 FW) is a unit located at Dannelly Field, Alabama.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/187th_Fighter_Wing
In your precision, I think your being unduly critical of the writer of the source article. The guy probably was writing his article from notes, and once again, does not have your background.
What is your experience? I work at the Pentagon. I work on unit activations, organization and naming. The unit is the 187th Fighter Wing. You are completely wrong. There is no such thing as an "Air National Guard Wing."
As I said before, accuracy is important.
Your search did not include quotes. Do it right,and you will find one hit on google...this very thread.
I've been to the 187th.
You keep criticizing your fellow FReepers for small errors in an article published on the website “F-16.net - The Ultimate F-16 Reference.”
I suggest you direct your anger to them.
From the “Read Me” page at “The Obama File”:
“I don’t write this stuff. I cherry-pick it and archive it here. The overwhelming number of items in this archive are from mainstream media sources and what I believe are reliable, if sometimes partisan, blogs. I make every attempt to provide attribution and/or links to the original source. Many of the items in this archive have multiple sources/links. If you don’t like the writer’s viewpoint, send them an email, not me.”
If we want the libs and MSM to be accurate, it is the least we could require of ourselves. This thread, and much of the Obama File that I have glanced at, is riddled with inaccuracies.
As far as small errors go, read up on how we busted Dan Rather with his fake memos from the 187th.
You might want to check my name in relation to that story.
There are two-seater F-16s. Do a google image search and you’ll see.
But still, I wouldn’t think a fighter canopy would have the best optics for photography.
I know that. I was offering that as an example of the errors people are posting.
But still, I wouldn’t think a fighter canopy would have the best optics for photography.
Have you ever been under one?
I know who you are.
But comments, like this: “You, and the “Obama File” don’t know enough to recognize your error.” are unnecessary.
It’s not our error. It’s the writer’s error, but you choose to attack Fred Nerks and The Obama File, rather than the source.
We’re just engaged in a discussion. You’re engaged in — I don’t know what?
I post an item from what I conside a reliable source. Fred Nerks re-publishes the larger article, containing the comment from F-16.net here and you go off on us.
What’s your problem?
It is true. Witness the fact that you are still trying to defend the errors.
We’re just engaged in a discussion. You’re engaged in — I don’t know what?
Correction. It is all a part of the discussion. I know you would love to be able to pass this all off as the Gospel, but it is not.
I post an item from what I conside a reliable source. Fred Nerks re-publishes the larger article, containing the comment from F-16.net here and you go off on us.
If correcting an inaccuracy is "going off" then you I can't help.
I’m not trying to defend the writer’s “errors” at all.
I contend that his article is factual, even if his choice of words doesn’t meet your standards of precision.
But this statement, that you made in Post #27:
“ex: there are no 2-seat F-16s...”
Is false.
Here’s the article:
http://www.f-16.net/news_article2511.html
Take it up with the writer.
The 187th Fighter Wing is very clearly a unit of the Alabama Air National Guard. So while you are technically correct that “There is no such thing as an ‘Air National Guard Wing’”, it is a distinction that matters little to most. The essence of the story does not change with your correction, and your offering it in a tone of “OMFG, THESE PEOPLE ARE IDIOTS FOR SAYING THAT!” does little to impress. In fact, quite the reverse.
Similarly with “commanding general” and “Chief of Staff”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
