New Fighter from INDEPENDENCE DAY: RESURGENCE

Just seen these on the GPTNW Facebook page......Enjoy! And feel free to rip this apart!

Hmmmm. . . I think I have seen some of their prior work. . .

I was going to wonder how they plan to feed the engines through those puny inlets. Then I realized the stuff under the wings must be antigravity generators or some such, so really, what's left to critique.

At least they actually BUILT something. Most studios just generate it all with CGI and call it a day. Hooray for physical effects!!!

Looks like the Tomcat and a Suhoki had a baby, then slapped a high delta wing on it?

Makes no sense and doesn't even look that cool. Stealth's fighter was far cooler than that.

Why does an aircraft with anti-gravity need a wing? Because it looks cool?

Well if the anti-grav generator or flux capacitor goes maybe you can still land it somewhat intact. Or maybe you want as

Chances are it is still going to end up in fighting aliens in dogfights reminiscent of World War One regardless of how advanced it is. BVR is boring.

It's like Hollywood looked at fighters (F-22 maybe the T-50) and said if we make it 'opposite' of today's planes that will mean MORE ADVANCED.

There's these big openings for engines so smaller mean more advanced. The cockpit is a clear bubble well OUR cockpit with be multi-faceted and have several windows. The wings are straight ours will bend DOWNWARD with the back tails going inward not outward WOW LOOK HOW COOL.

Abraham Gubler said:

Why does an aircraft with anti-gravity need a wing? Because it looks cool?

Click to expand...

Gives you some options after an anti-gravity generator failure. I can just imagine the checklist:

First anti-gravity generator failure immediate response items:
1. Turn off the other anti-gravity generator REALLY QUICK

Abraham Gubler said:

Why does an aircraft with anti-gravity need a wing? Because it looks cool?

Click to expand...

Some way to make the plane work if the anti-grav generator fails?
Some where to hang weapons from?
Its Hollywood, it doesn't need a reason!

Abraham Gubler said:

Why does an aircraft with anti-gravity need a wing? Because it looks cool?

Click to expand...

Is that not reason enough? ;D

Maybe the canon/background story is, that alien technology was added in pods to original fighter aircraft.
I hope, that model makers over at "Fantastic Plastic" will have those pods detachable.

DrRansom said:

Looks like the Tomcat and a Suhoki had a baby, then slapped a high delta wing on it?

Makes no sense and doesn't even look that cool. Stealth's fighter was far cooler than that.

Click to expand...

It's the Bird of Prey wing with T-50 tails added. I see where they were getting their inspirations. Some of that design is straight out of Macross Plus, too.

fightingirish said:

Maybe the canon/background story is, that alien technology was added in pods to original fighter aircraft.
I hope, that model makers over at "Fantastic Plastic" will have those pods detachable.

Click to expand...

I'm unconvinced that those pods are *necessarily* anti-grav lifters integral to the design. They look tacked-on; they might not be needed for the plane to fly. They might instead be some sort of superweapons, or additional thrusters needed to fly into space or something.

Without them, the fighter looks pretty "cool;" with them the fighter looks out of balance and they don't seem to be oriented for VTOL anti-gravs.

That's probably what's going on. Very similar gizmos show up on the other vehicle they've released, described as a "moon tug". My guess is it's a space propulsion system that can be bolted onto a fighter to make it spaceworthy.

2 more pictures:






Source (French): http://www.buzzarena.com/independence-day-resurgence-dix-images-du-tournage-revelees-3842

Would be nice if there was some ground combat as well. As humans moved underground the aliens are forced to root us out. I'd love to see some real Heinleinian MI suits.

Those inlets...

if ı have 5 tons of lift from anti gravity pods on a 4.5 ton plane what do ı do when ı need to pull 9Gs turning into the belly of some Alien plane ? Or how to make all those life saving barrel rolls in the best of Hollywood tradition ?

A clue to the planform of the fighter. I cropped the screens on that hangar bay console

More screens,

Looks like they were trying to make it look stealthy, but those big glowing goobers under the wings would completely screw that up (unless they are some kind of fancy alien plasma stealth generators).

To borrow from Douglas Adams, perhaps those are SEP (Someone Else's Problem) Field Generators.

RadicalDisconnect said:

Those inlets...

Click to expand...

Awful...would look much better without those inlets./

Is it just the size? Because the shape and location may be inspired from something they saw.

Stick the anti-grav thingies on a Victor B)
Why didn't they think of that?

Arjen said:

Stick the anti-grav thingies on a Victor B)
Why didn't they think of that?

Click to expand...

Looks like the Victor already has those anti-grav thingies. ;D

Maybe a shield generator instead of power plant?

XP67_Moonbat said:

A clue to the planform of the fighter. I cropped the screens on that hangar bay console

Click to expand...

Enhanced:

Trailer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7a2u8lxWm8

sferrin said:

Abraham Gubler said:

Why does an aircraft with anti-gravity need a wing? Because it looks cool?

Click to expand...

Is that not reason enough? ;D

Click to expand...

The Pentagon buying fighters for the Air Force that don't have wings? Pffft! Like that's going to happen. Where would they mount the twin gatling guns?

Some trailer stills and a diagnostic screen.

JeffB said:

sferrin said:

Abraham Gubler said:

Why does an aircraft with anti-gravity need a wing? Because it looks cool?

Click to expand...

Is that not reason enough? ;D

Click to expand...

The Pentagon buying fighters for the Air Force that don't have wings? Pffft! Like that's going to happen. Where would they mount the twin gatling guns?

Click to expand...

Well, for the sake of thoroughness...

As an atmospheric fighter it would still have a shape that would be atmospherically-optimized to some degree. Ideally you'd want something that starts with a Sears-Haack body or a flat-nosed hypersonic shape, as I hear waverider shapes are a little dated (and maybe that's why it also has that sort of XF-108 Rapier shape to its overcomplicated two-piece canopy). Doesn't answer why it might still need wings, but it still might need an aerodynamic shape and why they picked this overly generous wing.

A better reason might be a power source limitation. Say it has an antigravity system that allows it omnidirectional thrust-it can point forward, backward, fly sideways, straight up, wherever the pilot wants to go, it goes. If you diverted all its power into pushing you, say, forward, why would you want to put any more power in using the antigravity system, and just the antigravity system, to also keep you off the ground? It'd be more efficient to just design an airframe that can, say, hover and carry especially outsize loads to some respectable subsonic speed or use an aerodynamic lifting shape that can survive the drive putting all its power into forward thrust to achieve insane high Mach flight.

Of course, at that stage the question becomes why the drives are hanging off the wings and not integrated into them-not only would it cut down the frontal profile but you can't deny it'd also make a much more beautiful, more predatory, purposeful fighter design or at least offer these really cool model shots of a hero plane or setpiece craft with those green digital lines going all up and down the wings like the plane's alive, real predatory...

Judging by those stills, though, it looks like all that this would do is negate the fighter's mass, allowing a separate engine to actually push the craft forward. Which is weird if there's that transport-looking thing that flies by nothing BUT the antigravity thingies. So it's an omnidirectional thruster offering thrust in any direction...but also has this kind of unnecessary extra step when a much more robust power source pumping power into the green glowy antigravity drives would be a much more efficient solution. Like, they're not boosters, they're not hidden lift systems designed not to spoil the aerodynamics of an otherwise potent jet aircraft, they're like the radiators of a Corsair except they have their own wings.

I'll admit this is coming from sci-fi stuff I'm doing in my free time too and those are the rationalizations I use for why I want certain designs for similarly-antigrav-equipped aircraft that still look logically high-performance as I use wing shapes and wing placement to differentiate designs, so feel free to take it with a grain of salt or the whole shaker, go right ahead.

Maybe the antigrav things have to be vertically oriented? The alien attacker fighters had theirs on the top but still oriented more or less the same way. With 20 years to recover, assess, and adapt, it could be that the humans know that the devices work if you put them THIS way but not if you put them THAT way, without understanding enough about the function to change it.

New Trailers are out. I think i saw a tandem seater (Su-24/F-111) version of these antigrav fighters. Trailers are to quick to make a screenshot.