The reviews are in for 'Hobbs & Shaw' — The Rock is pulling it off! - We Are The Mighty
MIGHTY MOVIES

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

Warning: There are minor spoilers ahead for Hobbs and Shaw.

The last major movie of the summer is upon us, and you’re in for a good time and a few surprises with “Hobbs and Shaw.”

The “Fast & Furious” spin-off puts Vin Diesel in the backseat as the Los Angeles lawman Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) and the former British military elite operative Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham) are forced to reluctantly work together to save the world.

What went so wrong that Dominic Toretto couldn’t be called? The two enemies need to save the world from Brixton Lorr (Idris Elba), a cybergenetically enhanced superhuman who, along with an evil global organization, is trying to get his hands on a virus to make more of the human race just like him.


Does the premise seem a bit silly? You bet! But if you’ve been following this franchise since 2001, then you know what you’re in for — fast cars, big action sequences, and a bad guy who needs to be stopped. It’s just another day at the office for the Fast fam.

This is a fun one that feels right at home in the “Fast and Furious” universe.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

How much did you want to see a movie with these two after this scene?

(Universal Studios image)

Why you should care: It’s the first ‘Fast & Furious’ spin-off movie, and it features two fan-favorites from the franchise.

This is simple. It’s the Rock/Dwyane Johnson and Jason Statham in a movie. If you saw 2017’s “The Fate of the Furious,” you’ve been waiting for this team-up since their memorable prison-escape sequence.

According to the film’s production notes, the idea for a spin-off Hobbs film had been floated around since he joined the “Fast” franchise in 2011’s “Fast Five.” The “Deadpool 2” and “John Wick” director David Leitch is in the directing chair for this one, so buckle up for some great fight sequences.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

The fate of the world is in these guys’ hands… if they can stop fighting long enough.

(Universal Studios image)

What’s hot: The chemistry of The Rock and Jason Statham, the addition of Vanessa Kirby, some unexpected surprises, and two of the big action sequences.

If you told me years ago that I’d be rooting for Deckard Shaw, the man who killed off one of the most beloved characters in the “Fast” franchise (RIP Han), I’d think you were joking. But here we are. Whoever thought it was a good idea to put Johnson and Statham in a movie together made the right call.

You can easily watch Johnson and Statham banter for a full two hours. One of the jokes may get old after its third run-through, but their inability to cooperate for a majority of the film to save the world makes for a fun watch.

One of the biggest delights of “The Fate of the Furious” was seeing the Academy Award winner Helen Mirren join the cast as Shaw’s mother. She had said she really wanted to be a part of the franchise, so it was great to see her in “Hobbs and Shaw,” if only for a bit. You can tell she has so much fun doing these films. Mirren told Entertainment Weekly she wanted to drive in the next “Fast and Furious” film. She’ll be in next year’s ninth film, so here’s to hoping.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

Helen Mirren is in “Hobbs and Shaw” and in jail for some unknown reason.

(Universal Studios image)

The addition of Vanessa Kirby as Shaw’s little sister Hattie is simply great casting. Not only does she look and sound like a young, feisty Helen Mirren, but Hattie is exactly what Johnson and Statham needed to ground their characters so they simply weren’t bickering for over two hours.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

Vanessa Kirby is convincing as Helen Mirren’s badass daughter.

(Universal Studios image)

If you felt as if you saw the majority of “Hobbs and Shaw” in the trailers released, that’s relatively true. However, Universal did a great job of leaving two major surprises out of the film I won’t name here. You’ll never guess them, but one of the major additions received the most laughs of the entire movie.

While watching, I couldn’t stop thinking that one or two of the large action sequences would make for a great ride at Universal’s theme parks. Yes, they already have “Fast and Furious” rides at the Hollywood and Orlando, Florida, parks, but two, even three, chase scenes felt immersive enough to make for good additions. You’ll feel as if you’re on a ride yourself.

And pay attention to the music while watching. Elba, who’s also a DJ in real life, also wrote and performed a song that appears in the movie called “Even if I Die (Hobbs Shaw).”

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

I love Idris Elba, but when did the “Fast and the Furious” become “The Terminator”?

(Universal Studios image)

What’s not: There are some really silly moments, and the entire premise of the movie’s villain starts to take the franchise into the sci-fi genre.

Over the years, the “Fast” franchise has gotten more ridiculous in pushing the limits of where the films can go. If you’re along for the ride, you kind of just go with it. (The seventh film had Dom’s team go after a device called God’s Eye.)

But the villains thought up for “Hobbs and Shaw” make the “Fast” franchise feel as if it’s moving from action genre to sci-fi. And it should probably stick to action.

The bad guys want to genetically enhance and evolve the human race for unspecified reasons I’m guessing we’d learn more about in a sequel. That’s textbook villainy from a superhero movie.

That’s not all. There are a few moments when Idris Elba’s character, Brixton, starts to feel like a “Terminator” villain who just keeps coming back for more.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

I guess at some point heist movies and chasing after drug cartels aren’t large-enough stakes when you’re 10 movies into a franchise.

(Universal Studios image)

Brixton is even referred to as such at one point on-screen because his character has been fused with some sort of machine so he can accurately predict others’ hits and movements. As a result, he’s a super soldier who’s more machine than man and appears unstoppable. At another point in the film, he’s called Black Superman.

Then there’s a faceless omniscient machine that’s pulling the strings behind-the-scenes. I’m sure the wizard behind the machine will be revealed to be someone with a grudge against Hobbs or Shaw in an inevitable sequel. But in this film, at least, the machine is a bit over-the-top. Every time its booming voice comes on-screen, it feels as if you’re watching a cheesy superhero film from the early 2000s.

It would all be a lot tougher to swallow if the chemistry between Johnson and Statham weren’t so good. Their wisecracks and fight scenes against Brixton’s goons are good enough to keep you distracted from thinking about how silly the villains are.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

Jason Statham fight scenes? Sign me up.

(Universal Studios image)

Other than the villain, the entire third act of the film gets a bit silly when the group abruptly heads to Hobbs’ birth place of Samoa (eagle-eyed viewers will notice that they actually filmed in Hawaii) to enlist his estranged family to take down some high-tech baddies. What about the rest of the Fast fam? Where are they? Shaw only saved Dom’s baby in the previous movie. Surely, they owe him one.

I’ll let the location slide because the Rock himself is from Samoa. Throughout the “Hobbs and Shaw” press tour, he has repeatedly said he wanted to honor his culture on-screen. He even speaks in Samoan in the film. That’s sweet.

But once the Rock meets up with his older brother, Jonah, it’s a little bit tough to take Cliff Curtis seriously as someone who’s related to Hobbs. Curtis is fine in the movie, but he’s given two giant braids of hair to wear for the part. If you’re familiar with the actor from “Fear the Walking Dead,” it’s a jarring look that you never get used to while watching the movie.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

It’s not a perfect film, but it has family at its heart. That’s the mainstay of a “Fast and Furious” film.

(Universal Studios image)

The bottom line: The Rock and Jason Statham keep the energy high in this crowd-pleasing spin-off. Expect more from these two.

I say this every time a “Fast and Furious” movie comes out. These aren’t movies that you take too seriously. They’re a good, fun time with explosions, high action, fast cars, faster car chases, and a few good brawls. If that’s what you go in expecting, that’s what Universal delivers with “Hobbs and Shaw.”

Is it a bit silly? Sure. Did I laugh and enjoy watching the Rock and Jason Statham bicker back and forth? Definitely. But most important, the film doesn’t forget its franchise roots. For as ludicrous as some of the film’s plot becomes, family is always at the heart of the spin-off.

If “Hobbs and Shaw” performs well at the box office, and I expect it will, get ready for a whole lot more of Luke, Deckard, and maybe Hattie as well. Make sure to stay until the film’s very end for a few unexpected end-credits scenes.

Grade: B

“Hobbs and Shaw” is in theaters Friday. Watch a trailer for the movie below.

Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw – Official Trailer #2 [HD]

youtu.be

Hobbs & Shaw In Theaters August 2, 2019 https://www.HobbsAndShawMovie.com After eight films that have amassed almost billion worldwide, the Fast & Furious…

This article originally appeared on Business Insider. Follow @BusinessInsider on Twitter.

MIGHTY TRENDING

U.S. and Russian astronauts forced to conduct emergency landing

A space capsule carrying a two-man Russian-American crew that malfunctioned after liftoff has landed safely in the steppes of central Kazakhstan, the Russian and U.S. space agencies say.

Russian cosmonaut Aleksei Ovchinin and U.S. astronaut Nick Hague returned to Earth on Oct. 11, 2018, in their Soyuz capsule for an emergency landing following a problem with the booster rocket shortly after a launch bound for the International Space Station (ISS).

Both NASA, the U.S. space agency, and Roskosmos, the Russian equivalent, said the astronauts were in good condition after their capsule landed about 20 kilometers east of the Kazakh city of Zhezqazghan.


“The search and rescue teams have reached the Soyuz spacecraft landing site and report that the two crew members are in good condition and are out of the capsule,” NASA said.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

(RFE/RL Graphic)

“The cosmonauts are alive. They have landed. They have been found,” according to a source at the Russia-leased Baikonur launch facility in Kazakhstan.

The crew had to return in “ballistic descent mode,” NASA earlier had said, which it explained was “a sharper angle of landing compared to normal.”

Following their emergency landing, NASA published pictures of Hague and Ovchinin undergoing a medical checkup and relaxing on sofas in Zhezqazghan. The two were expected to be flown to Baikonur and then on to the Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center outside Moscow.

Roskosmos chief Dmitry Rogozin said he had ordered a state commission to be set up to investigate the causes of the malfunction, while Russian Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov announced that manned space flights would be suspended until the probe is completed.

The Soyuz capsule automatically jettisoned from the booster when it failed 123 seconds after the launch from Baikonur, Borisov said, according to the Interfax news agency.

The minister added that the problem occurred when the first and second stages of the booster rocket were in the process of separating.

Footage from inside the spacecraft showed the crew being shaken around at the moment the failure occurred.

In a statement, NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine said that a “thorough investigation into the cause of the incident will be conducted.”

Hague and Ovchinin were due to spend six months on the ISS, which is orbiting 400 kilometers above the Earth.

Relations between Moscow and Washington have plunged to the lowest level since the end of the Cold War over the wars in Ukraine and Syria, allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential, and other issues, but Russia and the United States have maintained cooperation in space.

The Russian-built Soyuz spacecraft is currently the only vehicle for ferrying crews to the ISS following the retirement of the U.S. space shuttle fleet in 2011.

The Oct. 11, 2018, booster failure led to what is said to be the first emergency landing for the Soyuz since 1975, when it failed to separate between stages during an ascent and triggered the abort system. The crew survived.

In 1983, a Soyuz exploded on the launchpad soon after the two cosmonauts it was carrying jettisoned. The crew also survived without injuries.

This article originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Follow @RFERL on Twitter.

MIGHTY HISTORY

Here is how the Allies planned to evacuate wounded before D-Day

Preparing for the invasion of Normandy wasn’t just a matter of training troops to take the objectives, nor was it simply about moving all the necessary troops and supplies to England or fielding enough planes for support. All of those elements were important, but the Allies needed to plan for something else, too: evacuating the wounded.


Looking back on history, it’s easy to assume this was a given. If I were storming the beaches, I’d want to know that if I got hit, the brass had a plan to get me out of there safely as opposed to leaving me to explore Nazi Germany’s idea of hospitality. As it turns out, the Allies had a plan for retrieving the injured, but it was far from trivial.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

The widespread use of helicopters to evacuate wounded troops wasn’t made practical until the Korean War.

(USAF)

On the battlefield, a medic (or corpsman) would move to aid a casualty as quickly as possible. He’d assess the condition and the troop would then be moved back, either on foot or by jeep, to the battalion aid station. From there, if needed, a troop would be moved further back from the front for more intensive care.

Now, in World War II, using helicopters for medical evacuations wasn’t possible. The first practical helicopters were flying, but they still didn’t have the lift capacity needed — even still, there were ways to get troops back reasonably quickly.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

The Landing Ship Tank proved to be a key component of plans to evacuate wounded troops on and after D-Day.

(US Navy)

One of the best assets for doing this was the Landing Ship Tank, or LST. These vessels were designed to get tanks and vehicles ashore, usually by making a run onto the beach and dropping a bow ramp, allowing vehicles to roll onto land. That ramp, of course, worked two ways. You could easily roll vehicles, like jeeps and trucks, back on.

The LSTs were designed to be a combination of both a floating ambulance and an emergency room. On board, Army doctors could perform emergency surgery on wounds that required immediate attention. Troops could then be evacuated (usually via C-47 Dakota) as necessary from Normandy to England. In England, a network of holding hospitals, transit hospitals, and general hospitals awaited the wounded.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

Like the C-17 today, the C-47 Dakota was used for medical evacuation.

(U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Shane A. Cuomo)

The result was that many wounded troops — who would have likely died from those same wounds in past wars — were able to survive and, in some cases, even return to the battlefield.

Learn more about the way combat casualties were evacuated from Normandy in the video below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9aQ_p2FPQs

www.youtube.com

MIGHTY TRENDING

Army to focus on long-range hypersonic weapons to fight Russia

The Army’s new “Vision” for future war calls for a fast-moving emphasis on long-range precision fire to include missiles, hypersonic weapons, and extended-range artillery — to counter Russian threats on the European continent, service officials explain.

While discussing the Army Vision, an integral component of the service’s recently competed Modernization Strategy, Secretary of the Army Mark Esper cited long-range precision fire as a “number one modernization priority” for the Army.

Senior Army officials cite concerns that Russian weapons and troop build-ups present a particular threat to the US and NATO in Europe, given Russia’s aggressive force posture and arsenal of accurate short, medium and long-range ballistic missiles.


“The US-NATO military hospital in Landstuhl, Germany, for example, is in the range fan of Russian assets. That is how far things can shoot. You do not have sanctuary status in that area,” a senior Army official told Warrior Maven in an interview.

The senior Army weapons developer said the service intends to engineer an integrated series of assets to address the priorities outlined by Esper; these include the now-in-development Long Range Precision Fires missile, Army hypersonic weapons programs and newly configured long-range artillery able to double the 30-km range of existing 155m rounds. The Army is now exploring a longer-range artillery weapon called “Extended Range Cannon,” using a longer cannon, ramjet propulsion technology and newer metals to pinpoint targets much farther away.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!
Marines fire an M777A2 155 mm howitzer
(U.S. Marine Corps photo)

Army leaders have of course been tracking Russian threats in Europe for quite some time. The Russian use of combined arms, drones, precision fires, and electronic warfare in Ukraine has naturally received much attention at the Pentagon.

Also, the Russian violations of the INF Treaty, using medium-range ballistic missiles, continues to inform the US European force posture. Russia’s INF Treaty violation, in fact, was specifically cited in recent months by Defense Secretary James Mattis as part of the rationale informing the current Pentagon push for new low-yield nuclear weapons.

The Arms Control Association’s (ACA) “Worldwide Inventory of Ballistic Missiles” cites several currently operational short, medium and long-range Russian missiles which could factor into the threat equation outlined by US leaders. The Russian arsenal includes shorter range weapons such as the mobile OTR-21 missile launch system, designated by NATO as the SS-21 Scarab C, which is able to hit ranges out to 185km, according to ACA.

Russian medium-range theater ballistic missiles, such as the RS-26 Rubezh, have demonstrated an ability to hit targets at ranges up to 5,800km. Finally, many Russian long-range ICBMs, are cited to be able to destroy targets as far away as 11,000km — these weapons, the ACA specifies, include the RT-2PM2 Topol-M missile, called SS-27 by NATO.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!
Russian SS-21 Scarab

It is not merely the range of these missiles which could, potentially, pose a threat to forward-positioned or stationary US and NATO assets in Europe — it is the advent of newer long-range sensors, guidance and targeting technology enabling a much higher level of precision and an ability to track moving targets. GPS technology, inertial navigation systems, long-range high-resolution sensors and networked digital radar systems able to operate on a wide range of frequencies continue to quickly change the ability of forces to maneuver, operate, and attack.

While discussing the Army Vision, Esper specified the importance of “out-ranging” an enemy during a recent event at the Brookings Institution.

“We think that for a number of reasons we need to make sure we have overmatch and indirect fires, not just for a ground campaign, but also, we need to have the ability to support our sister services,” Esper told Brooking’s Michael O’Hanlon, according to a transcript of the event.

The Army’s emerging Long-Range Precision Fires (LRPF), slated to be operational by 2027, draws upon next generation guidance technology and weapons construction to build a weapon able to destroy targets as far as 500km away.

LRPF is part of an effort to engineer a sleek, high-speed, first-of-its-kind long-range ground launched attack missile able to pinpoint and destroy enemy bunkers, helicopter staging areas, troop concentrations, air defenses, and other fixed-location targets from as much as three times the range of existing weapons, service officials said.

Long-range surface-to-surface fires, many contend, could likely be of great significance against an adversary such as Russia — a country known to possess among most advanced air defenses in the world. Such a scenario might make it difficult for the US to quickly establish the kind of air supremacy needed to launch sufficient air attacks. As a result, it is conceivable that LRPF could provide strategically vital stand-off attack options for commanders moving to advance on enemy terrain.

Esper specifically referred to this kind of scenario when discussing “cross-domain” fires at the Brookings event; the Army Vision places a heavy premium on integrated high-end threats, potential attacks which will require a joint or inter-service combat ability, he said. In this respect, long range precision fires could potentially use reach and precision to destroy enemy air defenses, allowing Air Force assets a better attack window.

“This is why long-range precision fires is number one for the Army. So, if I need to, for example, suppress enemy air defenses using long-range artillery, I have the means to do that, reaching deep into the enemy’s rear. What that does, if I can suppress enemy air defenses, either the guns, missiles, radars…etc… it helps clear the way for the Air Force to do what they do — and do well,” Esper said.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!
Army Photo of Army Secretary Mark Esper
(Photo by David Vergun)

In addition, there may also be some instances where a long-range cruise missile — such as a submarine or ship-fired Tomahawk — may not be available; in this instance, LRPF could fill a potential tactical gap in attack plans.

Raytheon and Lockheed recently won a potential $116 million deal to develop the LRPF weapon through a technological maturation and risk reduction phase, Army and industry officials said.

Service weapons developers tell Warrior a “shoot-off” of several LRPF prototypes is currently planned for 2020 as a key step toward achieving operational status.

Esper also highlighted the potential “cross-domain” significance of how Army-Navy combat integration could be better enabled by long-range fires.

“If we’re at a coast line and we can help using long-range weapons …. I’m talking about multi-hundred-mile range rockets, artillery, et cetera, to help suppress enemies and open up the door, if you will, so that the Navy can gain access to a certain theater,” Esper explained.

While Long-Range Precision Fires is specified as the number one priority, the Army Vision spells out a total of six key focus areas: Long-Range Precision Fires; Next-Generation Combat Vehicle; Future Vertical Life; Army Network; Air and Missile Defense; Soldier Lethality.

This article originally appeared on Warrior Maven. Follow @warriormaven1 on Twitter.

MIGHTY GAMING

These vets made a one-shot video simulating ‘Call of Duty’

U.S. Army vet Gregory Wong is no stranger to making fan films. His Jurassic World fan films and their behind-the-scenes extras have 2 million+ views on YouTube alone thanks to the military perspective he and his teams brought to the franchise.

An avid airsofter and gamer, Wong enjoys bringing those tactics to life after his military service.

Most recently, he teamed up with some fellow veterans and civilians to create a one-shot style video that emulates the experience from the new Call of Duty game.

Check it out right here:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81gi7ikIwsg
CALL OF DUTY IN REAL LIFE | CLEAN HOUSE MODERN WARFARE – SIONYX

www.youtube.com

“Since everyone, both civilian and military, has been sinking their time into the game, it felt like a fun opportunity to explore and experiment by emulating the most talked about portion,” shared Wong.

The video also uses a color night vision camera built for outdoor use — and a little help from post-production.

“We used editing software to give it that iconic green look,” Wong divulged. “It’s a good exercise for making fan projects with limited budget but high attention to detail. We were fortunate to have gear from one of the companies that actually supplies the CTSFO (British national police force like FBI SWAT or FBI HRT).”

Also read: Some veterans went balls out and made a ‘Jurassic Park’ fan film

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

Wong’s team used the Aurora, a day/night camera with true night vision that uses Ultra Low-Light IR sensor technology that delivers true night vision capability in monochrome or in color. They also shot with gear from c2rfast, Airsoft Extreme, and PTS Syndicate.

The Clean House mission in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare takes place in a large house that the player must infiltrate, eliminating enemies and protecting hostages. Forbes magazine called it the “finest single-player FPS experience in years.”

Check out the video above and see what you think.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

These 8 fighters served decades beyond “retirement” as drones

You may think that when a plane is retired by the Air Force, the Department of Defense is simply done with it. The only options from here are being sold second-hand, getting scrapped, becoming a museum installation, or getting lucky and becoming a civilian warbird. Well, there is another option – planes can continue to serve, but that service usually comes to a fiery end.

That’s because old fighters make for useful target drones. These eight successful fighters all found use well after retirement.


The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

A F6F Hellcat meets its end at the hands of an AIM-9B Sidewinder missile in 1957, more than a decade after the end of World War II.

(U.S. Navy)

1. F6F Hellcat

Over 11,000 F6F Hellcats were produced, so it’s no surprise that this classic ended up doing target drone duty. In the late 1950s, Hellcats served as targets for the early versions of the AIM-9 Sidewinder. Today, the FAA shows only 11 registered Hellcats.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

The QF-86 Sabre was still in service with the United States military in 1991 – four decades after F-86 Sabres blasted Commies out of the sky.

(U.S. Navy photo by PH2 Bruce Trombecky)

2. F-86 Sabre

The most famous plane of the Korean War didn’t leave service when the Air National Guard retired its last F-86 in the 1970s. Instead, F-86s served as target drones in the 1990s — long after they dominated MiG Alley.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

A F-16 Fighting Falcon takes down a QF-100 Super Sabre in a test of the AIM-120 AMRAAM.

(USAF)

3. F-100 Super Sabre

The F-100 Super Sabre also saw years of post-retirement service as a target for missiles. The AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile’s deadliness was honed on QF-100 Super Sabres.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

The F-102 served as a target drone into the 1980s.

(USAF)

4. F-102 Delta Dagger

Former President George W. Bush’s old steed saw some service as a target drone for a decade after its retirement. The last of the QF-102/PQM-102s were shot down in 1986.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

The Air Force bought less than 300 F-104s, but some became target drones.

(USAF)

5. F-104 Starfighter

This plane didn’t see much service with the United States, but was purchased in large numbers by American allies. The QF-104 extended the F-104’s otherwise brief service with the United States military.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

The F-106 Delta Dart was replaced by the F-15 in the 1980s, but those that were turned into target drones came within a couple of years of serving into the 21st century.

(NASA photo)

6. F-106 Delta Dart

The F-106 Delta Dart succeeded the F-102 as an interceptor in the 1960s, so it seems natural the QF-106 would succeed the QF-102/PQM-102 force as targets. The Delta Dart’s last mission as a target drone was in 1997.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

The QF-4 Phantom served for over two decades as an oversized clay pigeon for various missile tests.

(Wikimedia Commons photo by Jon Hurd)

7. F-4 Phantom

The F-4 was a workhorse for the United States Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps for decades. However, it also put in roughly two decades as a drone. It finally flew its last mission in 2016.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

The QF-16 Fighting Falcon will be serving as a target drone for the foreseeable future.

(USAF photo by MSgt. J. Scott Wilcox)

8. F-16 Fighting Falcon

The F-16 replaced some F-4s in active United States Air Force service – as well as in the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve. Now, the first QF-16 target drones are taking flight as targets for missile tests.

The fighters that end up as target drones meet a noble end. Though they no longer fly missions in-theater, they ensure that the missiles used by American military personnel are reliable.

MIGHTY TRENDING

Watch a North Korean defector dodging bullets to cross the DMZ

The United Nations Command released a video showing a North Korean defector brazenly crossing the border into South Korea as North Korean soldiers fire their weapons at him.


Around 3 p.m. local time on Nov. 13, the defector sped toward a bridge in a Jeep as soldiers pursued him on foot.

He tried to drive past the Military Demarcation Line, the line dividing North and South Korea — but he ran into an obstruction and could go no farther.

As North Korean soldiers from the adjacent guard tower ran toward the vehicle, the defector quickly got out and ran south across the MDL. In the video, several North Korean soldiers can be seen firing their weapons at the defector, who appears to be only a few feet away.

One North Korean soldier appeared to cross the MDL for a few seconds, then run back toward it. The UNC said it found that North Korea had breached the 1953 armistice agreement that ended the Korean War.

The Korean People’s Army “violated the armistice agreement by one, firing weapons across the MDL, and two, by actually crossing the MDL,” a spokesman said during a news conference Tuesday.

In the video, as US-South Korean forces are alerted about the incident, North Korean troops can be seen mobilizing from Panmungak, one of the main North Korean buildings near the Demilitarized Zone.

The defector is seen resting on a wall in a pile of leaves. South Korea has said North Korean forces fired 40 rounds, and doctors said the defector was shot at least five times.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

USFK

Heat signatures from cameras show two Joint Security Area soldiers crawling toward the defector. They then drag him out — US forces then airlifted him to the Ajou University Medical Center.

No South Korean or US forces were harmed during the incident, according to United States Forces Korea.

During multiple surgical procedures, doctors found dozens of parasites in the defector’s digestive tract, which they say sheds light on a humanitarian crisis in North Korea. He is reportedly in stable condition.

Sources told the South Korean newspaper The Dong-a Ilbo that as he received medical care, the defector asked, “Is this South Korea?”

After he received confirmation that he was, in fact, in South Korea, he said he would “like to listen to South Korean songs,” The Ilbo reported.

Although the defector’s name and rank have not been disclosed, the South has said it believes he is in his mid-20s and a staff sergeant in the KPA.

 

MIGHTY HISTORY

Long-lost military slang: The dog robber

There are all sorts of great bits of military lingo and slang that eventually fall by the wayside. While FUBAR has survived through to modern day, SNAFU and TARFU have been mostly forgotten — even though all three were popular slang and had characters in WWII-era GI cartoons named after them. Snafu was even voiced by Mel Blanc, the voice of Bugs Bunny.


www.youtube.com

One old terms that seems to have fallen out of popularity is “dog robber,” which, today, is occasionally used by a handful of general’s aides and adjutants to describe their own job, though that wasn’t the original meaning of the term.

“Dog robbers” is the U.S. Army equivalent of the British slang term, “batman,” which refers to an officer’s personal valet or orderly, one step removed from the butler. So, while the aides-de-camp were assisting the general with the actual task of conducting battles and campaigns, the batmen and, later, dog robbers, were cleaning uniforms, running errands, and scrounging for any personal items their officer might need.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

Think Woodhouse right before the massacre in the German trenches.

French Foreign Legion Capt. John Hasey was hit by a burst of machine gun fire in his face and had to be nursed back to health. In his biography, Yankee Fighter, he gave credit to his “dog robber” for keeping him fed before the ambush and helping him reach aid after.

My own platoon was there, with Blashiek, my faithful batman — or dog-robber, as he is known in the United States Army; and when I say “faithful,” I mean exactly that. For six months that tough Polish soldier had cared for me as carefully as any Southern mammy, fed me fresh mule meat when I was starved, and tactfully neglected to let me know what it was. He helped carry me back to a First Aid station outside Damascus when my jaw was shot away and my chest and arms were sprayed with machine-gun fire. It was upon him that I leaned when my legs began to wobble.

These were usually enlisted troops, and their assignments weren’t limited to general officers. Lieutenants could have a batman, especially if they were from a rich family and hired a civilian to work for them, but the practice was most common with captains and above.

This makes it obvious why the term began to fall out of use in the U.S. With the country’s generally dim view of aristrocracy, assigning enlisted soldiers to provide hygiene and personal support to officers feels a little against the country’s values. As this position largely disappeared from the military, the term lost popularity.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

This is a photo from when King George V visited the New York National Guard. Guess if the king was visiting, I might want a valet, too.

(New York National Guard)

But it did survive. How? It evolved to encompass more of the staff members around the general, especially the aide. And, it reverted back to its original meaning.

See, the U.S. Army didn’t come up with the term. It started to become popular in the military in the Civil War for an officer’s servant, but its first documented use was actually in 1832 to describe a scrounger.

As the servants disappeared, scroungers got the title again instead. James Garner, a famous actor and veteran, actually played a dog robber in the 1964 movie The Americanization of Emily and later told Playboy Magazine that he had been a dog robber (the scrounger type) in the Korean War.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

And James Garner’s character got to have sex with Mary Poppins. And that was after he admitted to being a dog robber and a coward — not bad.

(Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer)

According to Garner, he had served in an Army post office and bartered for the materials to make a bar, a theater, a baseball diamond, and a swimming pool.

That would make him a dog robber on the level of Milo Minderbinder (for all you Catch-22 fans out there).

MIGHTY HISTORY

What it was like to suffer a German U-boat attack

The Merchant Marine in World War II was supposed to just tool around the world’s oceans, delivering supplies to ports and troops in Europe, Africa, and the Pacific while the real fighting was done by sailors, soldiers, and Marines. But due to German U-boats and other attackers, the mariners actually operated in an extremely dangerous niche.


The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

A U-boat reloads new torpedoes during World War II.

One of the biggest dangers was of U-boat attack, when even a single boat could wipe out an entire convoy, provided that the boat was able to surface and attack using its deck gun.

The mariners were in danger from the moment they lost view of the land. U-boats would typically attack deep into the Atlantic, but they liked to remind Americans that they weren’t safe at any time, so some U-boats were sent to hunt right off the coast.

Regardless of when the attack came, most merchant vessels didn’t have any kind of sonar or radar, not even all Navy vessels had those detection systems in World War II. So, unless your ship was in a large convoy with a naval escort, you won’t know a U-boat was there until it attacked.

German sailors manning deck gun in preparation for attack in North Atlantic Sea. HD Stock Footage

youtu.be

When the U-boat attack got under way, it played out in one of two ways. If there were no threats of a U-boat in the area, you would find out you were under attack when a black hulk slowly surfaced in the nearby waves, a few sailors poured out of it, and the deck gun began firing on your ship.

These were often capable of sending 3.5-inch rounds into the hull of your thin-skinned cargo vessel, allowing water to pour into the lower decks and slowly send you deep into the sea. And since the attacking vessel is a tiny U-boat and not an enemy destroyer or cruiser, there’s no way to get rescued. You have to paddle your lifeboats through a sea filling with oil from the sinking ship, potentially as it’s on fire.

And, believe it or not, that’s, by far, the preferred option.

That’s because the other likely method of attack from a U-boat comes via its torpedo tubes, which means there’s no surfacing ship, no scramble of sailors to warn you. You might, might notice a darkness in the water before a stream bubbles starts racing towards your ship.

If you look a few feet ahead of this stream of bubbles, you’ll see the 21-inch diameter, almost-24-foot-long metal tube barreling towards your ship at nearly 35 mph. It will reach you. It will hit you. And its 600-pound (or heavier) warhead will rip apart the hull.

What happens next depends almost entirely on what cargo is being carried. Got a bunch of foodstuffs like grain and fruit? The boat will sink fairly slowly, and you’ll have a chance to escape. But if you were carrying lots of heavy war materiel, like tanks and planes or, worse, industrial goods like iron and coal, you’re pretty much screwed. The weight and density will take the ship down in minutes.

But the worst came when the ship was carrying fuel or oil. The massive explosion from the torpedo warhead would often rupture any tanks on the targeted vessel, providing a massive burst of heat as the pressure wave mixed the targeted fuel with the outside air, virtually guaranteeing massive fireballs and explosions as the torpedo exploded.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

The Allied tanker Dixie Arrow sinks after being torpedoed in the Atlantic Ocean by a German submarine.

(U.S. Navy)

When you’re on a tanker and the tanks suddenly explode, there’s not a lot to be done. The steel around you has likely been twisted, the decks are burning hot and searing your flesh, and the blast wave has likely scrambled your brain. If you’re lucky enough to survive, you now have to overcome your scrambled brains, make it through the burning corridors, and then try to get in a boat and get away from the deck before the suction takes you under.

If you did make it out of a shipping ship, your ordeal isn’t over. Traditionally, combat ships would rescue survivors from enemy vessels once hostilities were over. If a cruiser sinks a destroyer, then once the destroyer crew surrenders the cruiser crew would begin taking on the survivors and would later take them to POW camps.

But U-boats barely have enough room for the crews. They can’t take on survivors. So, after sinking anything from a fishing trawler to a destroyer to a passenger ship, the U-boat crew typically can’t do much more than offer some loaves of bread or water before sailing away. They wouldn’t even tell other Allied ships where to pick up the survivors, at least not at first, since that would give away the location of the subs.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

Surrender of German U-boat, U-858, 700 miles off the New England Coast to two destroyer escorts, May 10, 1945.

(U.S. Navy)

Even if your ship was in a convoy, there was no guarantee that you could be picked up by friendly ships since a U-boat wolf pack could sink the entire convoy, leaving dozens of life boats in its wake, filled with slowly dying soldiers desperate for water or food.

To add insult to injury, Merchant Marine members were rarely paid for any period where they weren’t actively crewing a ship, and no, lifeboats don’t count. So their harrowing trial to survive at sea is performed for free, solely for the hope that they’ll survive.

And throughout all of this, the U.S. would often keep the sinkings of ships secret, reporting just a couple of ship losses every week while dozens might have gone down.

Luckily for mariners, British innovation and American industry eventually gave the sub hunters the edge over the submarines, culminating in “Black May” 1943 when German losses got so steep that subs essentially withdrew from the Atlantic, allowing the Merchant Marine to finally sail largely in peace.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

Russia just named the first places it will drop its new weapons

As President Trump meets with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Vietnam to defuse one potential nuclear showdown, America’s perennial rival Russia is upping the ante on the new Cold War’s latest arms race: hypersonic nuclear weapons.


It doesn’t help that a Cold War-era nuclear arms limitation treaty is also in the midst of being dismantled by both the United States and Russia. In recent days, the U.S. has accused the Russians of repeatedly violating the Intermediate-range nuclear forces treaty, going so far as threatening to pull out of it entirely. Russia vowed a “tit-for-tat” response to the American declaration.

And now the Russian media are entering the discussion.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

No, not the Trololo Guy.

According to the Wall Street Journal, one of Russia’s most influential state-run media channels boasted about the Kremlin’s first strike capabilities against the United States during its Sunday night prime-time recap of the news of the week. The Kremlin mouthpiece specifically mentioned that precision strikes against the Pentagon and Camp David could hit the United States in less than five minutes.

They also mentioned that a U.S. response to the attack would take another 10 to 12 minutes. The Russians cite this advantage due to their positioning of Russian missile subs carrying Tsirkon hypersonic cruise missiles.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

A Tsirkon cruise missile during a test fire.

(Sputnik News)

The Tsirkon missile was first successfully tested in 2015 and has since been developed to reach speeds of eight times the speed of sound. Its operational range is upwards of 300 miles or more. Being so close to the U.S. and capable of such speed would make it difficult to intercept with current U.S. ballistic missile technology. The missile travels covered by a plasma cloud which both absorbs radio waves and makes it invisible to radar, according to Russian military sources.

Tsirkon missiles are at the center of the newly heightened tensions between the two powers. Washington contends the Tsirkon violates the 1987 INF Treaty, along with several other missiles developed by the Russians in the years since. When Washington threatened to redeploy short- and medium-range nuclear forces in Europe, it was too much for Russian state media. That’s when they began lashing out and naming targets.

Other potential targets listed included Jim Creek, a naval communications base in Washington, as well as the Pentagon. Camp David is the traditional vacation home of the sitting American President, and was a clear shot at President Trump. There was no mention of Trump’s Florida Mar-a-Lago resort, where he spends much of his free time.

MIGHTY MILSPOUSE

Top 5 holiday movies, according to a veteran

‘Tis the season for yuletide carols, family, gifts, entirely too much food, and, of course, some much-needed downtime. Somewhere between “I swear to defend….” and getting that sacred DD-214, many of us developed quite the affinity for film and television.

So, it’s only natural that we spend our downtime getting together on the nostalgia train to binge watch a few of our favorites. Christmas might be over, but there’s still time to enjoy these must-see holiday films. So, grab your spiked eggnog, a warm blanket, and snuggle up for a day’s worth of cinema magic as you pretend the break isn’t rapidly coming to an end.


The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

Tim Allen is comedic greatness in this role.

(Walt Disney Pictures)

‘The Santa Clause’

The greatness of this film lies in two words: Tim Allen. His comedic timing is great here, and it really serves the premise of the movie: a dad kills Santa Claus and is forced to become Santa himself.

I mean, it’s a completely impossible narrative (Santa Claus is immortal, duh), but it’s fun all the way through.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

This one is for all the dads

(20th Century Fox)

‘Jingle All The Way’

This one’s another movie about a dad and holiday hijinks. Arnold Schwarzenegger is on the search for a near-impossible-to-find toy in a quest to buy the affections of his son. In a lot of ways, this movie from the ’90’s has proven to be prophetic for its time. Much of the shenanigans that Schwarzenegger’s character experiences have become the standard holiday shopping experience.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

No holiday season is complete without Kevin.

(20th Century Fox)

‘Home Alone’

By now, you’ve probably noticed that parental neglect and aloofness is a bit of theme among the items on this list — but Home Alone cranks it up to full blast.

Kevin McCallister, as played by the immortal Macaulay Culkin, became the iconic ’90s smartass that indirectly shaped a generation. In the film, Kevin proves to be more than capable when he defends his family home against would-be invaders using nothing but wit and a closet full of toys.

It’s sheer conjecture, but we’re sure Kevin McCallister grew up and served — that resourcefulness says “veteran.”

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

Yippee ki yay, MF.

(Silver Pictures)

‘Die Hard’

John. Mc. Clane.

Die Hard is definitely the most non-holiday movie on this list but, make no mistake, it is absolutely a holiday flick! It’s got a Christmas tree and a happy, warm and fuzzy ending.

Close enough for me!

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

It is, literally, a Christmas story.

(Metro-Godwyn-Mayer)

‘A Christmas Story’

“You’ll shoot your eye out!”

It’s one of the most iconic lines in cinema history, but it’s not even the best in the film. A Christmas Story is brilliantly written, fantastically acted, and features some of the best narration in film.

This one is to be viewed, preferably, on Christmas Day, but as long as there’s snow on the ground, it’s still good.

MIGHTY CULTURE

Monkeying around? Iranians ridicule official for posting Halloween costume as astronaut’s suit

Iranians are making fun of an Iranian official for posting a picture of an astronaut suit adorned with an Iranian flag that seems to be a photoshopped version of a children’s Halloween space costume.


Iranian Information and Communications Technology Minister Mohammad Javad Azari Jahromi issued the image on February 4 with the hashtag #bright_future. Without any explanation at the time, it was unclear if he was trying to fool people into believing it was an actual Iranian-issue space suit or just a joke.

Azari Jahromi’s vague tweet was quickly met with derision, criticism, and humorous memes by Iranians on social media amid allegations the minister was, in fact, trying to trick his countrymen into believing the image was an actual suit for the government’s ambitious but not-ready-for-prime-time space program.

He later clarified that the image was “the picture of a dream, the dream of walking on the moon.” He added that he found the many jokes posted online to be “interesting.”

Speaking at a Tehran event titled Space Technologists’ Gathering, Azari Jahromi said his tweet “was the introduction to good news.”

“The suit wasn’t really important because we haven’t made an Iranian space suit, yet work is being done to create a special outfit for Iranian space scientists,” he backpedaled.

That didn’t stop the torrent of jokes.

“He bought a Halloween space costume [for] , removed [the] NASA logo while sewing an Iranian flag on it. He’s promoting it as a national achievement,” a user said in reaction to the image.

Some posted memes to mock the minister, including a video of an astronaut dancing to Iranian music with the hashtag #The_Dance_of_Iranians_In_space #Bright_future.

Another user posted a photoshopped photo of Apollo 11 astronauts Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins, and Buzz Aldrin wearing the suit Azari Jahromi had posted on Twitter.

Azari Jahromi — an avid Twitter user who’s been blacklisted by Washington for his role in censoring the Internet in Iran, where citizens are blocked from using Twitter and other social-media sites — has been promoting Iran’s space program in recent days while announcing that Tehran will launch a satellite, Zafar (“Victory” in Persian), into orbit by the end of the week.

Azari Jahromi said on February 4 that his country had taken the first step in the quest to send astronauts into space. “The Ministry of Information and Communications Technology has ordered manufacturing five space capsules for carrying humans to space to the Aerospace Research Center of the Ministry of Science, Research, and Technology,” he was quoted as saying on February 4 by the semiofficial Mehr news agency.

Iran had two failed satellite launches in January and February of last year and a third attempt later in the year resulted in the explosion of a rocket on the launch pad.

But Azari Jahromi said on Twitter on February 3 that Tehran was not afraid of failure and that “we will not lose hope” of having a successful space program.

Do Monkeys Get Space Suits?

Iran does have a recent history of sending creatures into orbit, much to the consternation of animal-rights activists around the world.

In 2010, a Kavoshgar-3 rocket was launched by Iran with a rodent, two turtles, and several worms into suborbital space and they reportedly returned to Earth alive.

A Kavoshgar-5 carrying a monkey was launched into suborbital space in 2011 but it was said to have failed, though there was no information about the unidentified monkey on board.

Iran sent another monkey up on a Pishgam capsule two years later that it said was successful. However, no timing or location of the launch was ever announced, leaving many to doubt it had taken place. A second monkey, named Fargam, was said to have made a similar trip into suborbital space nearly a year later.

Iran’s planned satellite launch this week comes amid heightened tensions with the United States, which has accused the Islamic republic of using its space program as a cover for missile development.

Iranian officials maintain their space activities do not violate United Nations resolutions and that there is no international law prohibiting such a program.

Tensions between Tehran and Washington have increased since the withdrawal of the United States from the 2015 nuclear deal in May 2018 and the reimposition of sanctions that have devastated Iran’s economy.

In early January, the United States assassinated Iran’s top military commander, Qasem Soleimani, in a drone attack. Tehran retaliated a few days later by launching a missile strike on Iraqi bases housing U.S. troops.

This article originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Follow @RFERL on Twitter.

MIGHTY TRENDING

First parts of Russian S-400 missile system delivered to Turkey

Turkey’s Defense Ministry says the first parts of the S-400 Russian missile defense systems have delivered to Ankara and deliveries will continue in the coming days.

Ankara’s deal with Moscow has been a major source of tension between Turkey and Washington.

The S-400 consignment was delivered on July 12, 2019, to the Murted air base outside the capital Ankara, the ministry said, in a statement.

The announcement immediately triggered a weakening in the Turkish lira to 5.7 against the dollar from 5.6775 on July 12, 2019.

“The delivery of parts belonging to the system will continue in the coming days,” Turkey’s Defense Industry Directorate said separately.

“Once the system is completely ready, it will begin to be used in a way determined by the relevant authorities.”


Russia’s Federal Service for Military and Technical Cooperation confirmed the start of the deliveries, while Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on July 12, 2019, that “everything is being done in strict accordance with the two countries’ agreements,” and that “the parties are fulfilling their obligations.”

The Pentagon is scheduled to hold a press briefing on July 12, 2019, to outline its response to “Turkey accepting delivery” of the S-400 system, it said in a statement.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

22T6 loader-launcher from S-400 and S-300 systems.

The United States has said that if fellow NATO member Turkey does not cancel the S-400 deal by July 31, 2019, Ankara will be blocked from purchasing the next-generation F-35 fighter jets.

Washington has urged Turkey to purchase the U.S.-made Patriot missile system instead.

NATO has yet to react officially to the Turkish announcement, but an alliance official speaking on condition of anonymity told the AFP news agency that the 29-member bloc is “concerned about the potential consequences” of the purchase.

U.S. President Donald Trump met with Erdogan on the sidelines of last month’s G20 summit in Osaka, urging him not to proceed with the purchase of Russia’s advanced S-400 air-defense system.

The reviews are in for ‘Hobbs & Shaw’ — The Rock is pulling it off!

S-400 surface-to-air missile launcher.

Erdogan told Trump during their meeting on the margins of the G20 meeting in Japan that former U.S. President Barack Obama did not allow Ankara to buy Patriot missiles, an equivalent of the S-400s.

Washington has already started the process of removing Turkey from the F-35 program, halting training of Turkish pilots in the United States on the aircraft.

Ankara plans to buy 100 of the jets for its own military’s use.

This article originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Follow @RFERL on Twitter.

Do Not Sell My Personal Information