The flight I’ll be taking will be from Miramar (KNKX), the former location of the Top Gun academy outside San Diego, to Joint Base Andrews (KADW) outside of Washington, D.C. If I do everything right, the 2,000-mile trip should take just 25 minutes.

The airplane in the movie was roughly based on the Lockheed SR-72, which is supposedly in development, though all the details about it—including whether it truly exists or not—are top secret. According to reports, at least, the SR-72 is meant to be the replacement for the SR-71 Blackbird, which was retired in 1998 and was the fastest operational airplane in the world.

• READ MORE: Crossing the English Channel in a Blériot XI

Lockheed’s famous “Skunk Works” actually worked with the filmmakers of Top Gun: Maverick to ensure the full-scale mock-up they constructed looked like a realistic hypersonic airplane, similar but not identical to the SR-72. There is a story—perhaps true, perhaps not— that when the filmmakers produced their version of the Darkstar, China repositioned a satellite to fly over and take a closer look, believing it was real.

Because of the wind, I’m taking off to the west and will need to turn around to head east. That will add some time to my flight. Rotating from Miramar’s runway at 180 knots, with afterburners on, I pitch up 10 degrees and raise my landing gear, accelerating toward Mach 0.9.

Once I reach Mach 0.9, I stay below the speed of sound by raising pitch to 20 degrees, while turning to the east. That’s San Diego Harbor below me.

To break the sound barrier and accelerate quickly, I invert the airplane to go into a dive. The reason I invert is to avoid excessive negative G-forces by pulling back instead of pushing forward on the stick to nose down. I’ve just broken Mach 1.0.

Now that I’m supersonic, I quickly roll back upright and resume my 10-degree climb, gradually accelerating to Mach 3.0. I’m already over the California desert, nearing the Salton Sea ahead. Until I reach Mach 3.0, I’m still using my conventional jets with afterburners.

A normal jet engine works by compressing air through a series of spinning blades then adding fuel to burn it and make it expand rapidly out the back. Before it exits, the hot air turns a turbine that powers the compressor in front. At extremely high speeds, a compressor isn’t needed because the ramming force of the oncoming air itself is sufficient to compress it. A ramjet dispenses with both the compressor and the turbine to drive it.

• READ MORE: Canada’s Rugged, All-Metal National Airplane

In a ramjet, however, the air is slowed inside the engine to below the speed of sound. In a scramjet—or supersonic ramjet—the air flowing through it remains at supersonic speed and can produce much higher speeds as a result. A scramjet, however, needs to be already moving at a very high speed to work. So once I reach Mach 3.0 (I’m at 2.81 and rising), I can flip the switch and ignite the scramjets.

The exhaust ports for my red-colored afterburners close, replaced by the white-hot heat of my scramjets. The airplane accelerates very rapidly now.

I’ve also climbed very rapidly. I level off at 135,000 feet, a little higher than I planned, but no matter. I’m nearing Mach 6.5 now, over 4,800 mph.  I think I’m over Arizona, but to tell you the truth, I’m not 100 percent sure. I’m just following the magenta navigation line on my screen. You can see the nose and edges of the airplane heating up from the friction of moving so fast.

I’ve leveled off again at 127,000 feet and reached Mach 9.1, my cruising altitude. It’s possible to reach Mach 10 by going higher, but I’ve got enough on my hands already.

The flight is going very quickly. I’m already over the Great Plains. You can easily see the curvature of the Earth.

The mission of the SR-72, like the SR-71 and the U-2 before it, would be to conduct reconnaissance at an altitude too high and speed too fast for anyone to catch or shoot down. While these missions are now mostly performed by satellites orbiting the Earth—or, more experimentally, by high-altitude balloons—some argue that a high-altitude, high-speed “spy plane” is still needed to fill gaps in coverage at a moment’s notice.

• READ MORE: A Fanciful Flight in the ‘Spruce Goose’

I haven’t been able to recognize very much along the way, but I’m pretty sure St. Louis is about 24 miles below me.

How hot does the airplane get? That’s classified. But the skin of the SR-71, traveling at a mere Mach 3.0, reached an average of 600 degrees Fahrenheit. The cockpit window of the SR-71 was made of quartz and 1.25 inches thick to survive these temperatures.

About 200 miles from my destination, I turn off the scramjet, pull the throttle back to idle, and begin my slowdown and descent. I’m dropping through 75,000 feet here and slowing to Mach 4.4, basically just gliding down with minimal power.

The first time I flew the Darkstar, I waited too long to begin decelerating. As I descended into the thicker atmosphere, I was going too fast and the airplane broke up from the stress (oops, sorry taxpayers). This time I overcompensated in the other direction and began my deceleration a bit too early. So I ended up skimming over the Appalachians at a slower speed, adding about 15 minutes to my flight time. Better than disintegrating, I suppose.

My approach speed should be between 150 and 200 knots. To fly level at these low speeds, the Darkstar has to keep its nose pitched up about 10 degrees. As I cross the Potomac River with Washington, D.C,. in the background, just to my north, I’ve lowered my wheels for landing at Andrews Air Force Base.

This is a little tricky. I have no forward view and can barely see out my side windows. I have to rely entirely on the digital image on my screen to land on the runway. The little airplane marker on the screen shows my current trajectory. I need to keep it pointed near the start of the runway, while keeping my speed around a steady 150 knots.

It wasn’t the softest landing, but I ended up safe and sound. My total time across the country by scramjet was about 50 minutes. Taking off to the west added about 10 minutes, and beginning my slowdown and descent too early cost me another 15. Still not bad from coast to coast.

Some hope that scramjets can someday be used for passenger transport, putting any destination in the world within a 90-minute flight. But for now the applications remain purely military. Hope you enjoyed the flight.

If you’d like to see a version of this story with more historical photos and screenshots, you can check out my original post here.

This story was told utilizing the official Top Gun Maverick Expansion Pack for MSFS2020, along with airports and sceneries produced by fellow users and shared on flightsim.to for free.

The post Taking a Transcontinental Flight in the Hypersonic Darkstar, Virtually appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Cruise, one of Hollywood’s most famous pilots—on screen and off—could possibly be on his way to becoming the first civilian to conduct a space walk on the International Space Station, if executives at Universal Pictures have their way.

“I think Tom Cruise is taking us to space. He’s taking the world to space,” Universal Filmed Entertainment Group Chairman Donna Langley told BBC in a recent interview. “That’s the plan. We have a great project in development with Tom that does contemplate him doing just that, taking a rocket up to the space station and shooting, and hopefully being the first civilian to do a space walk outside of the space station.”

Cruise proposed the idea to the studio during the pandemic, Langley said.

“The majority of the story actually takes place on Earth, and then the character needs to go up to space to save the day,” she said.

• READ MORE: Actor Tom Cruise Headed for Outer Space

Rumblings of the actor blasting off into space aren’t exactly new. In the spring of  2020, Deadline reported that the Top Gun: Maverick actor was collaborating with NASA and Elon Musk’s SpaceX to film an action-adventure movie.

It’s a collaboration that NASA officials support, according to then-NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine.

“We need popular media to inspire a new generation of engineers and scientists to make NASA’s ambitious plans a reality. NASA is excited to work with Tom Cruise on a film aboard the Space Station.” Bridentine said, according to the Deadline report, “There has never been a leading man… who puts himself at risk as often as does Cruise, in the name of the most realistic action sequences possible. If he is successful shooting a project in Musk’s space ship, he will be alone in the Hollywood record books.”

The ISS, which is about the length of an American football field, orbits 227 nm above Earth, according to Kennedy Space Center.

Last year, the actor interviewed NASA astronaut Victor Glover about his ISS mission.

• READ MORE: Pilots Will Love Top Gun: Maverick—It’s a Lot More Real

Cruise, who has been a pilot since 1994, flew in many of the scenes in the Top Gun: Maverick. 

“The Navy wouldn’t let him fly an F-18,” the film’s producer, Jerry Bruckheimer said, according to USA Today. “But he flies a P-51 in the movie and he flies helicopters.”

• READ MORE: Tom Cruise Takes James Corden on ‘Top Gun’ Flight

The post Tom Cruise On Course For First Civilian ISS Space Walk appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Top Gun: Maverick opened nationwide May 27, delivering up epic flight scenes. The butt-puckering flight sequences included in the sequel to Top Gun, more than three decades in the making, were made possible because of the creation of the Cinejet, a specially designed aerial camera platform based upon an Aero Vodochody L-39 Albatros, as well as the Embraer Phenom 300 and Airbus AStar used as aerial photo platforms.

• READ MORE: Pilots Will Love Top Gun: Maverick—It’s a Lot More Real

Less than a month after it was released, the movie has raked in $402 million and counting, earning it the distinction as the highest grossing movie of the year, according to Deadline, a Hollywood breaking news site.

The financial success, it seems, is that for most viewers, the movie script has a bit of everything: love, loss, regret, reflection, conflict, plus airplanes, aileron rolls, and afterburners.

For one movie goer, however, Top Gun: Maverick was a “two-hour monstrosity.”

• READ MORE: Review: How Does Top Gun: Maverick Stack Up?

In a nearly 750-word review on the social network Letterboxd,  reviewer “Brett” gave the movie half a star out of five stars. According to the site profile, Brett has watched 1,565 films, at least 26 of which he has reviewed so far this year. The film chapped his derrière so much that he said it rated lower than the 1.5 stars he bestowed upon the 2019 Hollywood production of Cats (which, OK, fair enough) and with the same rating contempt as the all-around horribly racist 1915 film, The Birth of a Nation.

• READ MORE: ICYMI: Tom Cruise Takes James Corden on ‘Top Gun’ Flight

“Even if one can ignore the rabidly bloodthirsty nature of this movie, it is still absolute garbage,” Brett said of Maverick. “The morals of this story are, and I am not exaggerating in the slightest: soldiers should ignore orders to stand down, and you should take actions without thinking about them. Our heroes follow these lessons throughout the story and are constantly rewarded for it. It is a child’s understanding of bravery and honor, coated in thick layers of some of the most painfully sentimental slime that Hollywood has ever produced.”

Brett took issue with his interpretation of the plot: “a bombing run over an Iranian nuclear facility near completion.” It was a story that stood in contrast with reality, Brett said, and would have set Tom Cruise and company up for what he deemed an “illegal and unconstitutional act of war.”

The politics of the film should not be ignored, Brett added.

“It is not a fun blockbuster nor an escapist fantasy, but a clear and unequivocal celebration of U.S. militarism,” he said. 

• READ MORE: U.S. Navy, Air Force Banking On Top Gun: Maverick Recruitment Boost

“Top Gun: Maverick is a 131-minute long advertisement for death,” Brett concluded. “Aggressively unoriginal, wildly irresponsible with its messaging, historically revisionist…This is a masterwork of propaganda in defense of some of our nation’s worst traits, and it’s an enormous success,” Brett said. “I left the theater depressed and forlorn.”

In the barrage of criticism, however, one aspect of the movie was spared Brett’s barbs: the soundtrack. 

The 1986 Top Gun soundtrack, which featured generational hits by Berlin and Kenny Loggins, continues to evoke emotion among the pilot set. (FLYING curated a list of special songs from the soundtracks of Top Gun and Top Gun: Maverick, as well as music that celebrates the unique aircraft and characters in both films.)

• READ MORE: FLYING’s Top Gun: Maverick Music Playlist

Are Brett’s criticisms warranted? We want to hear from you.

The post Meet Someone Who Really Didn’t Like <i>Top Gun: Maverick</i> appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

On Monday, I took my family to see Maverick because I figured they would enjoy it and I wanted to hear their impressions of the film and their opinions on whether the decades-spanning story holds together. I also simply wanted to see it again.

Our outing plus my repeat views contributed to the movie’s reported box office tally of $156 million, a record for a Memorial Day weekend release.

It is no surprise that the film is popular. It has the elements of success: love, loss, regret, reflection, conflict, denouement. Add airplanes, aileron rolls, and afterburners to the mix, with a lot of exhaust nozzles flaring and tensing, and you have a good case for the perfect cinematic product. Indeed, both my flight instructor and my favorite middle-school English teacher should love this film.

• READ MORE: U.S. Navy, Air Force Banking On Top Gun: Maverick Recruitment Boost

Circumstances also helped propel Maverick. Pent-up, pandemic-era demand for big-screen entertainment in general, and the public’s enthusiasm sometimes bordering on obsession over Top Gun in particular promised a big audience. The film was supposed to debut in 2020 but COVID-19 thwarted that plan. It was a temporary obstacle, though, and after more than 30 years of waiting, another two seemed only to enhance the excitement. Let’s just say it was easily worth the wait.

• ICYMI: Tom Cruise Takes James Corden on ‘Top Gun’ Flight

This is especially so for pilots, who have been among Top Gun’s biggest fans and harshest critics. Anyone who knows anything about modern air combat will tell you that for decades fighter weapons technology has allowed aircraft to engage enemies from ever-greater ranges, often beyond the horizon. So why, back in 1986, were F-14s mixing it up with “bogeys” at distances less than a city block? Was this a World War I dawn patrol?

• READ MORE: Pilots Will Love Top Gun: Maverick—It’s a Lot More Real

Realistically, we have to admit that downing enemies more than 100 miles away with Phoenix missiles would make for one seriously boring movie. I recall listening to an interview with retired Rear Admiral Pete Pettigrew, a well-known adviser on the original film, who talked about how combat aircraft actually fight versus the way they battled on screen. Eventually, he came to terms with the directorial license needed to make the flight sequences appeal to a general audience. Airplane movies cry out for close-ups.

Pettigrew also joked that he felt the film would be fine as long as it didn’t somehow morph into a musical. I suspect the admiral knows that Top Gun arguably is a bit of a musical. Its aerial combat scenes always made me think of the Sharks and Jets of West Side Story dancing with switchblades, perfectly choreographed. Realistic? Not exactly, but exceedingly entertaining.

• Listen: FLYING’s Top Gun: Maverick Music Playlist

While Maverick excels as a sequel, gracefully bringing the story, characters, situations, and dialog out of the 1980s and into the modern age while adding realism to flight sequences and personal interactions, it is still enough of a music video, dance show, and tearjerker to appeal to an audience well beyond aviation enthusiasts.

The post Review: How Does <i>Top Gun: Maverick</i> Stack Up? appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Cruise’s latest blockbuster, Top Gun: Maverick, opens nationwide Friday, May 27. For pilots, the scenes promise to be epic, thanks to a purpose-built L-39 Cinejet outfitted for filming the adrenaline-inducing sequences.

• READ MORE: Pilots Will Love Top Gun: Maverick—It’s a Lot More Real

Standing under a light in the predawn hours alongside the darkened runway at Bob Hope Hollywood-Burbank Airport (KBUR), the British comedian summed up what was to come next: “I’m here because Tom Cruise has asked me to meet him here at 5 a.m. When Tom Cruise calls, you sort of have to say yes.”

The pair boarded a Honda HA-420 business jet, which Cruise flew to a remote desert landing strip to rendezvous with his own vintage warbird, a P-51 Mustang. Up in the air in the World War II-era fighter, Cruise showed off his aviator chops by performing a series of maneuvers that included threading a gap in a ridgeline.

• READ MORE: Before Top Gun, Other Aviation Movies Inspired Us

“Tom, you’re a madman. You’re insane,” Corden said, coming up for air.

But there would be more. Flying an Aero L-39 Albatros fighter jet trainer, Cruise demonstrated tactical maneuvers, including loops and inverted flight.

Cruise, who has been a pilot since 1994, flew in many of the scenes in the Top Gun: Maverick. 

“The Navy wouldn’t let him fly an F-18,” the film’s producer, Jerry Bruckheimer said, according to USA Today. “But he flies a P-51 in the movie and he flies helicopters. He can do just about anything in an airplane.”

It wasn’t Corden’s first aviation rodeo with Cruise. In 2018, and while promoting Mission Impossible: Fallout, Cruise talked Corden into going skydiving.

• READ MORE: U.S. Navy, Air Force Banking On Top Gun: Maverick Recruitment Boost

The post ICYMI: Tom Cruise Takes James Corden on ‘Top Gun’ Flight appeared first on FLYING Magazine.