MovieChat Forums > The Right Stuff (1984) Discussion > Chuck Yeager

Chuck Yeager

posted 9 years ago by joed1667
12 replies | jump to latest

I did not like the way they portrayed him. He came across in the movie as someone who did things at the spur of the moment, like we saw with the X-1 and F-104 flights when in real life, he was anything but. From all accounts I have read on him, he was meticulous and a careful planner. With the X-1, there were 9 previous flights to familiarize himself with the aircraft and each one, taking it closer and closer to the sound barrier. There were also multiple flights with F-104 prior to his crash, plus the F-104 he was flying was a specially modified version which had a rocket booster above the jet engine.

[–] Blueghost 9 years ago

My history teacher had your same take. Yaeger was not college educated at the time, but new flying and aircraft. I tried out to become a naval aviator and have lived next to a couple of fighter pilots, and what you learn is that they tend to be creative as well as analytical.

Having gone through many critical thinking courses in college and university, I think I can clearly say that the kind of analytical thinking taught at the university level doesn't always serve you a great deal during a crisis. That's when your own mechanical understanding of what your experiencing and what could be happening kicks in.

Yaeger had that ability, but according to the movie and my history teacher's citation of his biography, because he wasn't college educated, he therefore was disqualified for the astronaut program. A real shame.

[–] memayse1701 9 years ago

This movie made him kind of look bad and bitter...he was the commandant of the space pilot school and seems very smart and cool.

Look him up on YouTube on the old tv show WHATS MY LINE? And his honor flight.

[–] pjmcgill142 9 years ago

This movie made him kind of look bad and bitter...

From reading a number of other biographies, it seems he is bad and bitter. And, by many accounts, he screwed the pooch on that NF-104 flight.

[–] rogueforte 9 years ago

From reading a number of other biographies, it seems he is bad and bitter. And, by many accounts, he screwed the pooch on that NF-104 flight.

Ironically, Yeager was one of the primary sources for the movie (he's got a couple cameos as the bartender in Pancho Barnes' bar) so you'd think he'd do his utmost to make himself look good. None of the living Mercury 7 astronauts were consulted.

And, yeah, according to those accounts, Yeager 'screwed the pooch' on the NF-104 flight, much worse than anything Gus Grissom might have done. Although he didn't just waltz out to the plane and take-off without any flight-plan or authorization as shown in the movie, the story is that he 'did' arrogantly take the plane up without thoroughly reviewing or analyzing a previous test flight by a different pilot. If he had, he'd have known that the previous pilot (someone named Roger Smith, I think) narrowly escaped the same fate and it was only through sheer luck (and not skill, as Yeager must have thought) he had survived.

In fact, I always kind of looked at the movie as some sort of subconscious Freudian guilt thing with Yeager about how Gus got such a drubbing for supposedly blowing the hatch, while Yeager got a pass on the NF-104 crash.

[–] pjmcgill142 9 years ago

...Yeager was one of the primary sources for the movie...

I'm sure he added to the movie, and it might in some way explain why the final crash is glossed over. It certainly made a dramatic finish, that's for sure.

Although I love the movie, in no way is it a documentary. A number of astronauts spoke to Wolfe when he was righting the book, including Pete Conrad and Jim Lovell. Gus' flight gets a lot more balance than depicted in the movie, but does ask the question why his stellar astronaut career continued while Scott Carpenter's come to a screeching halt.

...the story is that he 'did' arrogantly take the plane up without thoroughly reviewing or analyzing a previous test flight by a different pilot.

Yes, I've read that too. One pilot (NF 104.com, perhaps) in the know stated he simply couldn't fly the required profile. But we couldn't show that in the movie, could we? That wouldn't display Chuck's righteous stuff.

[–] rogueforte 9 years ago

Yes, I've read that too. One pilot (NF 104.com, perhaps) in the know stated he simply couldn't fly the required profile. But we couldn't show that in the movie, could we? That wouldn't display Chuck's righteous stuff.

What I read specifically (I think right here) was that they plugged the data from the previous, successful NF-104 flight into a flight simulator, and using the previous pilot's actions, it crashed every time.

But it must have taken some time to run the simulations and Yeager, apparently, didn't feel like he needed to wait since the previous pilot had managed to get through the flight unscathed. So, he took the plane up, did exactly what the previous pilot had done, and crashed just as the flight simulations predicted. If he had waited and reviewed the data (as other subsequent pilots have evidently done), he'd have learned the characteristics of the plane and how to 'correctly' deal with them.

It is a very entertaining movie which does a superb job of capturing the mood and feeling of the time, but it's definitely not a documentary.

[–] pjmcgill142 9 years ago

If he had waited and reviewed the data (as other subsequent pilots have evidently done), he'd have learned the characteristics of the plane and how to 'correctly' deal with them.

Check Robert Smith's site. I'm sure his view is markedly different to Chuck's but it seems that this particular flight required a profile that Chuck wouldn't or couldn't fly. Smith says Yeager failed the stability & control section of the test pilot training which he feels left him short when it come to flying the 'space' part of the flight. Yeager didn't distinguish the aerodynamic characteristics of the aircraft from the non-aerodynamic. In fairness, Yeager, in his book says he never got to do it, having been taken off the school to fly the X-1. I tend to feel this is more likely correct. Yeager, to his credit, does say people like Hoover and especially Ridley got him over the line when it come to the engineering/mathematical side of flight test.

Smith says he briefed and de-briefed Yeager on a handful of his flights with a view of getting him his last record. Smith says Yeager kept making the same mistakes on each flight. Smith didn't see him learning from the mistakes and (correctly) doubted he could get the most out of the aircraft's performance. He clearly states the crash was 100% pilot error. Yeager couldn't get the aircraft at the initial, and critical 70 degree climb. Not getting the aircraft into the best attitude, it bled energy too quickly and therefore never got the height for the reaction control rockets to work effectively. Trying to reach the record height, he put the aircraft into a 'hammerhead stall' and never recovered.

To Smith's chagrin, the investigation laid blame on the aircraft, enforcing many changes to it and the flight program. An interesting read.

http://www.nf104.com/

[–] rogueforte 9 years ago

That tidbit about Ridley helping Yeager is intriguing in that one of the biggest liberties taken in the movie was Ridley's presence at Yeager's NF-104 flight since Ridley had actually been killed in a plane crash years before. That short scene between Yeager and Ridley immediately prior to Yeager's flight seemed contrived, particularly Yeager's line of, "I think I see a plane with my name on it". It was great entertainment but pure Hollywood fiction.

And one wonders if things might have gone differently if Ridley had still been around to continue providing help to Yeager on that level of flying. All accounts seem to agree that Jack Ridley was one of the sharpest engineers in the program and his death really doesn't get the recognition it should have. In fact, it could have been expounded upon a bit more in the movie, as well.

Honestly, I wish they'd stuck more to the facts of the actual NF-104 attempt, with Yeager having proper authorization, filing a normal flight plan and, maybe, as he's strapping himself in right before take-off, mutter something like, "I sure wish Jack was here". Of course, that also would have taken away the whole premise of the movie that Yeager was the ultimate 'Right Stuff' guy.

[–] pjmcgill142 9 years ago

That tidbit about Ridley helping Yeager...

Yes, Ridley was killed in a crash on Mount Fuji in 1957 so he didn't see any of that astronaut stuff. But that scene has that magical quality about it. The echoing voices in the hanger and then the camera dollies into the tailpipe and then cuts to the scene at the Astrodome. It couldn't have been any better for me.

To top it off with Jack driving out to pick up the downed Yeager... "you're damned right it is (a man)" is just classic Hollywood... with another great cut to Cooper's launch. And Jack, of course, is the narrator, so he has a special part to play in the whole film. Excellent stuff.

I'll disagree with your opinion of the NF-104 scenes. Sure the tower guys would have seen a heap of 104s in their time, and no pilot would ever take a plane on a whim, but it adds to the telling a great story. The risks those pilots took in those days would be unthinkable today. Mike Collins mentions a shocking streak of fatalities during his time as a test pilot. Something like 11 guys in 22 weeks (also alluded to by Deke's wife in the movie '...the machine just broke!')? It wouldn't be allowed today.

And by pure coincidence, I'm visiting the US of A and just had a conversation with a gentleman at the Leather Necks Flight Museum at Mirimar. Retired Colonel Jack Cooper. He gave my brother, my sister-in-law and me an entertaining guided tour with some great anecdotes. He also touched on Glenn Edwards' fatal flight in the 'wing'. Amazing days, that's for sure.

And the movie, although not historically accurate, brings that magic alive.

[–] rogueforte 9 years ago

And the movie, although not historically accurate, brings that magic alive.

Can't argue with that. Even with the deviations (which, for the most part, are relatively minor), the movie does a fantastic job of capturing the mood and spirit of the time.

If you have the opportunity (and haven't already been there), one of the best museums dedicated to American flight is at Wright-Patterson AFB in Dayton, Ohio. 'The Right Stuff' dwells on Edwards, but the story of the test flight program heavily involved WPAFB, too. In fact, I think that's where Yeager, Ridley, and Hoover were all stationed before being tapped for the X-1 project and transferred to Edwards (then known as Muroc) when civilian Slick Goodlin got too greedy.

[–] pjmcgill142 9 years ago

Thanks for the tip. Ohio is not on the list this time. Arizona/Nevada/California this time. I am going to try for the Pima Air and Space Museum in Phoenix. Although my brother might not be too impressed if too many of these places turn up on the itinerary. He was impressed looking at the actual chopper at Mirimar that was used in the evacuation of the diplomatic staff from Saigon. It's amazing how these pieces of history make their way to these little places throughout the country.

when civilian Slick Goodlin got too greedy.

Ah, I think there are a few supporters of Goodlin that aren't too impressed with Slick's depiction. But that, too, is another story!

[–] Blueghost 9 years ago

Also, I'm not sure if it's still around, but there used to be a museum just outside Castle Air Force Base (now closed, a former SAC B-52 base).