Iron Eagle VS. Top Gun
Iron Eagle is way better. I DARE anyone to start an argument about this statement, especially if your a guy. I DARE YOU!
share[deleted]
MovieChat Forums > Iron Eagle (1986) Discussion > Iron Eagle VS. Top Gun
Please, Top Gun is much better. Not only is the aerial photography, acting, and plot better, but Iron Eagle just seems to be the Air Forces attempt to boost thier numbers after the success the Navy saw in recruiting after Top Gun. Plus the F-14 is just a much better aircraft overall than the F-16.
FLY NAVY!!
the F-14 is a 50 million dollar embarrassment to aviation history
shareBoth movies are good actionwise, Iron Eagle has the slight edge because It involved ground attacks.
IE's fatal flaw was that it made the AIR FORCE in general look bad (17 year old kid sneaking into an AFB and stealing a plane?) OTOH, Top Gun glorified the hell out of the Navy (I know, I was in HS at the time and Navy recruitment spiked when that film came out.) Other than that, the movie rocked.
How can you even compare the two?
The F-16 is designed for dogfighting where as the F-14 is more of a bomber.
And "embarrassment" ?
The F-14 receieves a good beating on every landing, the F-16 isn't able to land on aircraft carriers because of it's weaker frame and landing gear.
It would break down after 1-3 landings.
john, the f-16 and f-14 were built both for air superiority.
shareActually, you're wrong here.
The F-14 was built for interception duty. In truth the "dogfighting" scenes were unnecessary and overdone. The F-14 was a small sight more effective at close-in dogfighting than the F-4 Phantom II. Much like the A-10 was built around the GAU-8 cannon, the F-14 was built around the AIM-54. It was a missile platform that had a CHANCE at holding its own against an incoming force of hostile attackers after expending its load of long-range ordinance.
Every carrier is surrounded by a battlegroup, and AEGIS defensive systems were operational in the mid-80s on Ticonderoga-class cruisers. These would have engaged the incoming fighters once they passed into a threat area.
Failing that, each carrier constantly has a BARCAP (Barrier Combat Air Patrol) aloft (which back then would have included Tomcats armed with at least two Phoenix apiece - typically four Sparrow and two Sidewinder as well) to keep weight down and ergo stay longer on station) to intercept, repel, or escort any interlopers venturing near the carrier. Aircraft expected to be carrying long-range anti-ship ordinance (like those in the film) would've gotten the SM-1 treatment the second they engaged the BARCAP, along with any launched missiles, long before they even got within 300 miles of the carrier, let around the ~100 described so dramatically in the film.
Also, the first F/A-18s entered operational service in '82...it always surprised me why they never showed up on a deck shot while A-7s did. Call it blasphemy, but if there was any dogfighting called for the Hornet drivers would've been responsible (especially considering they KNEW there would be potential engagement - BARCAPs only engage close-quarters if there's little to no warning) - the Tomcat drivers would have been on BARCAP, far away from any potential risk to plane and crew, seeing as it was damned expensive to replace a Tomcat (50 million vs. the 30 quoted in-film).
The only reason Tomcats were used in the two Gulf of Sidra Libyan incidents at close-range was because the warning was so short...and both times the incoming planes were detected by Tomcat BARCAPs. Look 'em up on Wikipedia. Nowadays Super Hornets run BARCAPs with AMRAAMs. Kinda odd, but hey.
As for the F-16, it was designed as a "Jack of All Trades, Master of None" plane. It was not designed for air superiority, it was designed for its simplicity to fly and its enhanced flexibility over the Air Force Phantom IIs, which were showing their age towards the end of the Vietnam War. Phantom drivers were getting pissed that MiG-15s and 17s were outmaneuvering them in close quarters, hence the need for a multirole fighter that would replace the Phantom and give it better odds against not only previous generation fighters, but an increased edge against whatever the Russian next generation held.
True air superiority platforms would include the F-15A/C (not including the F-15E) and F/A-22, mirrored by the Su-27/Su-37. The Su-27/37 might very well have ground attack capability (as do the F-15C and F/A-22 in a limited sense), but they're designed at their core to kill aerial threats and prosecute other fighters. The F-14 wouldn't stand a chance in close-quarters with an Su-27/37 unless the pilot of the Sukhoi was a worthy-of-study imbecile.
THANK GOD SOMEONE WHO HAS SEEN THESE MOVIES KNOWS THE TRUTH!
shareWhile pbdye has a much longer and likely more accurate reply below, here's what I remember from my Academy days:
F-16 - Primary mission: Ground Attack
F-14 - Primary mission: Air Interdiction
F-15 - Primary mission: Air Superiority
the F-14 is an interceptor, meant for flying CAP and firing phoenix missles at multiple targets from 90 miles away. Its engine's are unreliable and it has a turning radius the size of fuucking new jersey. if i had a choice i wouldnt be caught dead in that flying brick.
shareDo you know anything????? The F-16 was designed as a multi purpose all weather replacement for the F-4's owned by the Air Force. The Tomcat however was designed specifically as an interceptor, the bombing capabilities of the Tomcat came later in it's service life, around Operation Desert Storm or shortly there after when it became apparent that the A-6 was going to be removed from service with the knowledge that the improved Super Hornet was still ten years from being ready for service.
share...where as the F-14 is more of a bomber.
Only the B variant of the Tomcat.
Generally, the F-14 Tomcat was a naval air superiority fighter, primarily tasked with keeping Tupolev Tu-95 Bears at arms length from CBGs.
With the decommissioning of the Tomcat from USN service, the Bears are back.
The F-16 is designed for dogfighting...
Correct. The Viper was designed from the ground up to be a dogfighter, after Vietnam War experiences against the VPAF MiG-21 Fishbeds, with their smaller size and superior maneuverability to the Rhinos at medium to high altitudes.
Since the Viper is multi-role, it can serve as a fighter-bomber.
Almost totally backwards. Both the F-14 and F-16 are air superiority (dogfighting) fighters. The F-16 did have LIGHT ground-strike capability.
The F-14 not a good ACM plane? The WHOLE Tomcat mythos grew around the Phoenix air-to-air missile that could pop enemy fighters from 50+miles out.
And the Falcon is probably the one of best pure Air combat fighters ever produced. Hence why countries all over the world are still buying them.
I guess the meek can inherit the Earth now. It looks like the stupid aren't doing anything with it.
...and the F-16 is a cheep, thrown together, knockoff of the F-15 without any original avionics, power plant or weapons systems. The F-14 not only gave us the Phonix missle system, but also a high performance, air superiority, carrier based fighter that ruled the skies until the F-18 was ready. Added to which the F-14 is a damn sight sexier than the gape-mouth profile of the 16.
First off the Falcon does have original avionics (first with Fly by Wire), as for original weapons, that concept only worked with the Tomcat's original mission, to knock down Soviet bombers from beyond cruise missile range. As for anyone trying to say the Hornet is better than -16, remember what the -16 beat out for the Air Force contract, the YF-17, which was given new avionics and relabeled the F/A-18. Speaking of Phoenix and the Hornet, if the Phoenix was such a great missile then why wasn't the Super Hornet designed to carry it also?
share[deleted]
Wrong. The F14 is so good it does not even fly anymore.
ha ha losers
the f14 doesn't fly anymore coz of the great cost involved in maintainence, it was designed with performance for then and late into the future, not design cost efficiency, and the F/A 18 was, so the hornets are cheaper in maintainence. The f14 served for over 30 years, there had to come a time were it would retire, it retired because the cost of renewing or fixing up all the aged f14s was to great, not because its performance sucked.
If it wasn't for its great computer sysyem, the f16 wouldn't even fly, its centre of gravity is *beep* up, and its UGLY as.
Actually, Iron Eagle and Top Gun were both produced at the same time. Iron Eagle's release was delayed a few months so the two movies wouldn't compete with eachother.
And while Top Gun is arguably a much higher quality and more plausible movie, Iron Eagle is tons more fun, having removed a romance subplot and homoerotic volleyball scenes in favor of including more 80's hair band songs and explosions.
I dont agree with the last statement. An f-16 could fly circles around an f-14 Tomcat!
Top Gun is bigger budget and more realistic, but Iron Eagle has a better (although totally unbelievable) story IMO.
they both suck and are about as realistic as micheal jackson ever looking normal again
shareTop Gun by far. Top Gun has better acting(except Louis Gosset Jr. rocks), and better action and attention on screen. You've been dared, so what's your defense?
shareOkay, was the acting in Top Gun better? Yes. And the aerial shots? Yes. But Iron Eagles was a more quintessentially EIGHTIES film--which makes it, ultimately, the better movie.
How can we ever forget Reggie declaring: "(Iran) was different...Mr. Peanut was in charge back then...now we got this guy in the Oval office who don't take no s**t from no gimpy little countries! Why do you think they call him 'Ronnie RAY-GUN'?"
Or Doug exclaming "Looks like they'll be IMPORTING oil this year!"
And, perhaps best of all, this movie torques off every kind of liberal out there. I googled the above line to make sure I posted it verbatim, and found four links, three of which were complaining about the movie being too pro-war.
As a veteran, I'll say this: There's nothing wrong with a movie that shows flag-waving, unilateral Americanism for all its worth.
God, I love this movie!
[deleted]
Actually I watched this growing up. And yea when ever I pop this into my DVD player I cheack my brain at the door for a couple of hours. It's good, never could happen in a million years fun.A true popcorn movie.Besides, didn't the bad guy look just like Saddam Heussaine. No I don't care if I spelled his name right. Besides I love F-16's and Kifer-Lion cubs (They substtuted for real mig 23's in the movie)
*Former Official Story Harry Potter Fan*
*Current Cho Chang Fan*
Iron eagle is stupid and corny, like a 17 year old kid could just get into a us airbase steal to f-16s arrange a route to the middle east with tankers to refuel them!!!.
And when she spills the drink over the guy in ariel recon it is so fake.
But TOP GUN is brilliant film with actual actors not a bunch of drifters picked up off the street. Iron eagle is an embarresment to the U.S.A.F.
Diavlo.....I think you are a little too hard on IE. Since when is Luis Gossett Jr. a "drifter picked off the street"?
Top Gun was more realistic but had it's share of BS as well.
Give "Iron Eagle" some credit, at least they used foreign planes as MIGs, where "Top Gun" used very recognizable American fighters. Considering the superior budget, that is lame.
Wait I lied. This is the: Most. Retarded. Post. Ever.
shareWhat you on about geeza? Top Gun has:
1. A decent soundtrack, not the crappy stuff in Iron Eagle,
2. Actors that can act.
3. The plausability of Top Gun is far more believeable, yeah, like the USAF would let kids hang around a base?? When the kid says he "hung around outside an intelligence meeting", he would have been locked up. The aircraft they fight against arnt even MIGs. The jets take off so quickly it gives the impression that they can take off in hardly any runway space.
4. Yeah, like the government would be like "oh dont worry, you stole jets, caused an international incident and generally did some bad stuff, but thats ok, because we'll let you off and send you to an Air Force academy!!!!"
And besides, F-16s are boring jets, Tomcats look awesome and are real men's jets, not girlie like the F-16!!!
El
I liked both Iron Eagle and Top Gun.
Darth Vader rules. Everyone else is a dick.
Not only is Top Gun better (not by a whole lot, but still), but the F-14 is a much better airplane than the F-16. Whoever said that the F-14 is an embarassment to aviation history is a joke. Except for the A-6, no other airplane performed its duties better than the Tomcat. Hell, if it was so bad why would they make a missile that only the Tomcat can carry? And don't worry about the fact that there have been no air-to-air combat losses of an F-14 in its history. Case closed.
shareI liked them both for different reasons. When I first saw Iron Eagle I was about 15, so Doug was a big hottie for me then. Now I'm a little older, 23, and Tom is hot in Top Gun. They both are well watched movies in my house.
shareanyone who says that iron eagle has a good soundtrack should be shot, anyone who says it has a good plot should be beaten to death by a gang of criminals and anyone!!! who says it has good actors should be crucified!!!!!!!!!
It is crap!!!! corny!!!! unrealistic!!!!!!
When it was on I thought it was a hot shots sequel!!!
I like both Top Gun and Iron Eagle. However, Iron Eagle is the better film. It has heart, something which Top Gun lacks.
Top Gun is all about image and looking cool while Iron Eagle is about never giving up and doing the right thing.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Top Gun is way better! It shouldn´t even be compared to such a bad b-movie as Iron Eagle...
shareNo way top gun had some good bits but all in all was just a slushy serious piece of average film. where as IRON EAGLE was the best Kid steals jet fly's to the middle east rescue's his dad movie ever!
sharei would have to say top gun would be better even though when i was a kid i watched iron eagle about 30 times because absolutley love f16's i also love f14's but there is better acting in top gun and the aircraft photography is much better too, for alot of the explosion scenes with the foreign aircraft they used the same shot no end of times which was poor ...
shareI'd say that Tank with C. Thomas Howell was the best "kid steals jet fly's to the middle east rescue's his dad" movie, except that he didn't steal a jet, fly to the middle east, and it was the kid being saved by the dad. But it came out two years earlier, so we've got to give them credit for that.
Perhaps that should be a new thread: Tank vs. Iron Eagle.
>I personally would have preferred to see an F-15 in Iron Eagle than an F-16
Not to mention, considering the title of the movie, that it is the F-15 *EAGLE*.
I think you're wrong. Tomcat did suffer air to air combat losses during iraq-iran war.Iran received a batch of Tomcats during Shah's reign and were used in war against Iraq.
Okay, the fact that F-14 were shot down during the Iraq/Iran War really isn't an arguement seeing as 1.) I seriously doubt that Iran allowed the original pilots to actually fly the planes, more than likely it was some fundementalist jerk-off who forced the original pilot to teach him at gunpoint. 2. Iran's technological base took an absolute nose-dive after the Shah was overthrown, so the planes were probably barely able to fly in the first place. 3. We were supporting Iraq's military/technological base during the 1980's. Finally 4. Fundementalist Muslim's and technology are like oil and water.
*Radical Islam; leading the charge into the 12th Century*
IIRC, the two pilots who didn't flee the country after the overthrow were imprisoned and executed, so yeah, they probably weren't playing with their first string team against Iraq. There seems to be a tradition with popular revolutions of tracking down anyone with any kind of useful skill and killing them or locking them up.
shareThe biggest reason Iran had so much trouble with the Tomcats they got is the fact that they received the -A model which had the weaker Pratt& Whitney engines. The Shah was overthrown and the arms embargo placed against them before the more powerful General Electric engines were ready. Bottom line, you put an F-14A against much of anything and the Tomcat better catch the bad guy by surprise and not have to fight him. F-14B against the F-16B, the Tomcat had better not get in close with the Falcon! It doesn't have the close in manueverability that the -16 has. It's sheer size and weight get in the way of that. As far as better aerial photography, I would have to say Iron Eagle over Top Gun. At least with IE the missles were somewhat realistic looking, the things they passed off as missiles in TG were a joke. Hard to believe TG had the bigger budget.
shareWell, to be fair, if the F-14 was the only plane ever made that could carry the Phoenix missile, it makes you wonder how good the missile could be if they never tried to fit it to any later designs :*D
Also, the F-14 was only used by a grand spanking total of two air forces, while the F-16 has been produced and used by dozens of countries worldwide and used in numerous conflicts, which kinda exposes it to greater risk of loss (what IS the loss rate of the F-16 and it's many variants, anyhow?)
[deleted]
el uk
The enemy fighters in Top Gun aren't MIGs either, in fact they are very American F-5's. Iron Eagle used Israeli planes as their "MIG's". At least it was something foreign.
Iron Eagle's soundtrack wasn't bad. "One Vision" by Queen is better than anything in "Top Gun".
Top Gun is a superior movie over all, But IE did offer more of a story.
This question has plagued mankind for centuries. Both of these movies rock, both of them are extremely 80's.
If you're looking for a nice legitimate make-out flick with something for everyone, top gun is your movie. I mean, the "take your breath away" scene will have girls jumping on you faster than an axe commercial. And as for the music, danger zone is almost unbeatable. Top gun has a plausable plot and TC playing shirtless beach volleyball. Sweet.
However, in the immortal words of Jack Black, "if it rocks, it never did have to mean nothin'." Iron Eagle is a sweet testosterone blow stuff up movie. There's more action than top gun, and its undeniably more of a hokey 80's guilty pleasure. Sure the plot is almost painfully unrealistic, but it rocks anyway. On the soundtrack front, you've got King Cobra's "never say die" which is mindblowingly awesome. It's also got some Queen and some Dio.
I guess I haven't really answered the question, because frankly, this is like asking "how many licks to the center of a tootsy roll pop" and "why are women so stupid?" Nobody knows and nobody ever will... but one thing is certain- TOP GUN AND IRON EAGLE ROCK HARD.
They're both wildly corny and unrealistic, but somewhat fun. I'd have to say i like Iron Eagle more. When I watch iron eagle i can watch the whole film strait through, when i watch top gun i just skip ahead to the flying scenes.
As for the F-16 vs F-14 debate. I like the F-16 more. Mainly because the F-16 has a much better combat record than the tomcat. I mean the F-14 was designed as an interceptor and it's only shot down what? Maybe 4 enemy aircraft in it's entire career (all of them being flown by half assed Libyan pilots). The F-16 on the otherhand has shoot down dozens of syrian migs over lebanon, several iraqi aircraft in desert storm, 2 serbian soko galebs over Bosnia, and a serbian MiG-29 over Kosovo. And I haven't even begun to go into the F-16s Air-to-Ground role...
Regarding the movies, the movie Top Gun is a lot better, even though there are no Mig 28's, they were played by F5 Tigers..
For the comparison of the F16 Viper and F14 Tomcat, there is no comparison, they are two completely different aircraft.. The Tomcat was designed around the AIM54 Phoenix as a Long Range Interceptor for the fleet, and the F16 was designed as a "cheap" low maintenance Multi-Role All weather Fighter, and dare i say, the F16 is the best multi role fighter in the world yet.
Infact the F16 can hold more bombs than a F14 tomcat even though a tomcat is like 2 times as big as a Viper, but the Tomcat has superior range, so when the tomcats operated in afghanistan and kosovo, they operated as FAC's or Forward Air Controllers since they could loiter on station much longer than a F18 or F16. They also used the F14 to guide other aircrafts LGB's in kosovo because of its two man crew. Regarding air to air kills, the F16 is the winner, when it was first introduced to combat, over israeli skies one israeli pilot shot down 4 syrian/egypt airplanes in the same mission, thats a remarkable feat, i dont think even the F15 has ever done that, even though the F15 is the ONLY aircraft with combat record with NO losses to enemy aircraft (the Charlie version, F15C)
regarding the planes in the movie, the F16's was israeli F16s and the Migs were israeli Kfirs which are basically israeli copies of the french mirage fighter. so every shot is filmed over israeli territory..
hey! since when have f16's been called vipers ? i know they changed from general dynamics to lockheed martin but i never thought they would change the original name from the fighting falcon to the viper .that cant be right surely.
sharestop jacking off to your janes collection and go talk with some real pilots. vipers was one of the concept name but gd finalized with the fighting falcon, but with the f16 drivers that name struck.
Folks don't call me 'the Torturer' because I don't like to torture people.
I heard they were called Vipers because of the fighters in Battlestar Galactica (called Vipers) and the early F-16 pilots were fans of the show and called the jets vipers and it stuck.
shareYah, the F-16 first saw active duty in 1979. BSG came out in the same year. F-16's however, are sorely inferior to the Colonial Viper due to a lack of a TURBO button on the stick.
sharei liked Iron Eagle better. In Top Gun they used F-5's as MiGs. In Iron Eagle they used foreign aircraft as Migs, which is more realistic i think.
shareThis is what I've found, the F-15 and a couple of AAMRAM missles has never let down any Marine pilot. It is a reliable, tough, and deadly aircraft. The only plane that will ever replace the F-15 is the new 22, i heard that it is almost orgasmic to fly.
OORAH!!! Semper Fi.
marine don't fly f-15s, that's air force. f22a might be orgasmic to fly, it's pain in butt to maintain.
Folks don't call me 'the Torturer' because I don't like to torture people.
I dont know why this board has degenerated into technical comparisons between the F-14 and F-16. This is about IRON EAGLE vs TOP GUN.
TOP GUN is way more realistic and is a true A-list movie dealing with Cold War fears of Russian badguys.
IRON EAGLE is your typical "attack an evil third world made-up nation which has an air bases manned by drone soldiers, the most hapless of all being the guys who man the guard towers, since the guard towers are always the first to go" type movie. Oh yeah, it also deals with Cold War fears of Libyans (Billyad - the name of the evil country in the movie) and Iranians.
If you think about it, both movies have killer soundtracks. Of course, the TOP GUN soundtrack went on to be a blockbuster on its own, and it went multiplatinum. But the IRON EAGLE sndtk is very good too - it's got snazzy Queen tunes and Steve Winwood's "Gimme Some Lovin'". TOP GUN simply had the better sappy love ballad ("Take My Breath Away") so it had the marketing edge.
Both flicks have awesome lines, and we're all familiar with the ones from TOP GUN. But give IRON EAGLE its due, I mean, you can't beat the following soundbytes:
"CHAPPEEEEEEE!"
"Attack them through the flames!"
"Get down! And get out of your flight suit. NOW!"
"This is Doug Masters, United States Air Force."
They may not be as memorable as anything from TOP GUN, but...
My point is, don't go heralding TOP GUN in the same breath as SCHINDLER'S LIST or GHANDI. It's not THAT great of a movie. TOP GUN has plot holes, continuity errors, and was generally silly. IRON EAGLE and TOP GUN were both cheesy smiley-face action movies fueled by a rock n roll score. I'd rate both of them as equally watchable.
Hey, the bad guy was a gold mine of cool lines.
"Give the American his last meal. After tommorow, he will not have much of an appetite."
"Bring me two of your bravest men, if there are any left among you!"
"Time to Die, Iron Eagle!"
Top Gun was a 10. It could have been an 11 if it only had a snarling villain, which it sadly lacked.