Crash Pulse Modeling For Vehicle Safety Research: Fill & Download for Free

“It is said…”?Is that your concept of how automobile safety is ensured?Seat belts were the first step in occupant protection.Seat belts have effected a substantial overall reduction in injury, the pattern has changed. Mackay et al. (1995) identified four categories of seat belt inadequacy and, in turn, have identified typical injuries:• Head and face contact with the steering wheel is almost certain to occur in collisions of about 50 km/h in which the head will arc forward and downwards with a horizontal translation of some 60 cm to 70 cm; injuries are usually AIS I to 3. The suggested solution is an airbag, but this has been found to cause problems for out of position drivers.• Rear loading from unrestrained occupants can cause injuries to correctly restrained front seat occupants although this problem has greatly diminished as a result of legislation that requires rear occupants to wear seat belts.• Misuse of the seat belt is frequent with those who are overweight who tend to place the seat belt over the abdomen instead of low across the pelvis; the consequence is often severe abdominal injuries at relatively low impact speeds.• The most frequent injuries caused by the seat belt are fractures to the ribs and sternum, particularly for the elderly.In the 1950s, a division of Fairchild-Hiller was working on final plans for a prototype car supposed to protect driver and passengers in a 50-mph frontal crash. The car wasn't any more attractive than were those originally proposed by Republic the previous year as part of its safety-car study for New York State. Head-on, the car—like its predecessors—resembled the top half of an airplane fuselage. Project manager George Hildebrand seemed more interested in the car's safety features than in what it would look like. Unique feature of the car was the steering column, located in the center rather than the left side. Driver, however, sat in his customary spot with the wheel in front of him. This was accomplished by a cross member connecting the column and the wheel. First two-ana-a-half feet of the four-wheel drive car were taken up with what Hildebrand called an "impact absorbing structure." The car had a "relatively small" engine, but that it would accelerate normally and hit 100 mph top speed. Plans called for construction of a prototype fleet of 15 units, starting the next year.SIDE COLLISIONS have been the main target of safety researchers since the 1950s. According to a traffic accident research team at UCLA, the problem was to make the sides of a car rigid enough to prevent collapse of the driver/passenger compartment. The auto industry was well aware of the problem, but was still two or three years away from a solution. Behind increasing attention to side collisions were giant improvements in windshields, steering columns and instrument panels, all of which combined to markedly reduce injuries in the event of frontal impact.That most of the energy is absorbed by the longitudinal members is the basis of conflict between legislation, which requires impact tests into a rigid barrier, and safety.In practice the most common accident is a collision where two cars collide head-on with a partial overlap, typically 40%.The resulting deceleration will depend upon the relative position of the longitudinal members, if they meet then the pulse will depend upon the collapse characteristics and the outcome for the occupant will be determined by the efficiency of the restraint system.If the longitudinal members do not meet then there is likely to be a substantial collapse of the relatively weak body panels and although the performance of the restraint system will still be vital to the protection of the head and chest, lower limb injuries from intrusion may occur that cannot be readily controlled by restraint systems.However, for the frontal impact test, in Europe, although not in the US, the rigid barrier has been replaced by a deformable offset barrier that is more representative of an opposing vehicle.Thus it will be even more important for the car designer to understand the way in which the vehicle collapses and particularly so for the strong energy absorbing structural members.Such understanding is likely to be sought mainly from a combination of the use of lumped mass models constructed in computer packages such as MADYMO and finite element models using packages such as DYNA 3D.Lumped mass models are useful for large parametric studies and then the detailed behaviour of critical structural components can be analysed using finite element techniques.Passenger safety is a complex issue which has benefited tremendously over the years from research and technology.Structural, exterior and interior design, occupant biomechanics, seat and restraint systems are dealt with, taking account of statistical data, current regulations and state-of-the-art design tool capabilities. Occupant kinematics and biomechanics are reviewed, leading to a basic understanding of human tolerance to impact and of the use of anthropometric test dummies and mathematical modelling techniques. Different types of restraining systems are designed in terms of impact biomechanics. The material and structural behaviour of vehicle components is studied in relation to crash testing. A variety of commonly used techniques for simulating occupants and structures are used, in particular the use of multibody dynamics, finite element methods and simplified macro-elements, in the context of design tools of increasing complexity, which can be used to model both vehicles and occupants.Rider safety is ensured by a series of designs and crash tests.Passive safety devices protect you when an accident is inevitable. Passive safety begins with a new computer-designed structure that surrounds the passenger compartment with steel beams. From progressively deformable front frame rails that absorb accident impact to extra steel bows across the roof, from steel door beams to reinforced floors, the modern car is designed to protect you from every conceivable calamity.Injury patterns and airbag useAirbag implementationIn the early 1960s, faced with disappointing low seat belt use, work in the US turned to passive restraint systems.The intention was to protect car occupants without them having the need to take any action themselves, such as fastening a seat belt.The US regulation FMVSS 208 provides for protection in frontal impacts and requires passive protection of the front seat occupants and the industry has used airbags as the way to meet this requirement.Airbags are controlled by performance requirements specified as dummy criteria, which must be met in the standard 30 mph (48 km/h) full-frontal impact test without the use of seat belts.The requirement is that the criteria must be met without the use of seat belts, and this effectively controls the size of the air bag that is needed.American air bags are typically 70 litres in volume, are deployed at an impact speed of 16 km/h and inflate very rapidly.In Europe, where seat belt use is frequent, smaller bags specifically intended to complement the use of a seat belt are fitted.This smaller bag is known as a `European' or face bag and is 30-45 litres for the driver's side and 60 litres for the passenger's side.They are designed to deploy at an impact speed of between 24 km/h and 32 km/h and inflate more slowly than American bags, typically within 50 ms.As you might expect, the modern car has class-leading supplemental restraint systems as standard equipment.The front airbags are a new third-generation design, with variable deployment based on front impact sensors.There are seat-mounted side airbags for the front passengers, plus the three-row side curtain airbags to help protect heads and faces in side impacts.Air bags: benefits and injuriesDalmotas et al. (1996a) found that supplementary air bag systems significantly reduce (26.7%) the risk of severe head and facial injuries among belted drivers (collision severities at 40 km/ h).However, these benefits are being negated by air bag-induced injuries, most notably to the face in moderate and low speed collisions, and to the upper extremities at all collision severities.The safety benefits achieved at higher collision severities are being negated by the higher incidence of a bag induced injury in low and moderate collision severities.When seat belt use is very frequent, the vast majority of air bag deployments in low speed collisions serve no useful purpose.And I haven’t even started on other safety provisions like ABS.As for your “G-suits” theory, it is laughable. Fighter-pilot G-suits are designed to protect her from G-Loc, G-induced loss of consciousness, in maneouvres. They will be utterly, absolutely, totally useless in an impact situation.

Extraterrestrial Technology Adopted from Crashed UFOs by Reverse-Engineering in Area-51 base(USA).Overview Of antigravity craft developed by various US military contractors as a result of reverse engineering captured UFOs.This should come as no surprise based on what Col Philip Corso revealed in terms of his involvement in U.S. Army efforts to pass on extraterrestrial technologies to civilian industries from the Roswell wreckage available in his filing cabinet. Of course, the scraps of ET material in Corso’s filing cabinet pales in comparison with the actual craft retrieved by elite UFO retrieval units on many occasions as whistle blowers such as Sgt Clifford Stone claim.While the details of each covert program cited by Boylan may be called into question due to the inherent problem in whistle blower testimonies that may be seeded with disinformation, his basic premise and overview appears well thought through. Boylan’s research reveals that Space based weapon systems already exist and have been used for several decades..This suggests that the Strategic Defense Initiative is just a cover for a covert weapons program that has been underway for some time and has already been deployed. SDI therefore may be little more than an effort to take space based weapons systems out of the ‘black’ world of illicit black budget funding, into the ‘white world’ of Congressionally approved Special Access Programs that can be funded by federal appropriations. This allows the black budget funds raised through illicit sources that previously funded these covert programs to be earmarked for other ‘urgent’ purposes.This suggests that efforts to prevent the weaponization of space need to consider the covert programs already deployed and the need of military policy makers to get some of these into the ‘white world’ in order to gain Congressional funding for other ‘black projects’. The proper focus should therefore be on making transparent the space weapons systems currently deployed, and to have some accountability process for the deployment and use of such weapons systems by Congressional committees. Turning back the covert deployment of space based weapons is a much more difficult challenge than preventing their initial deployment which has already occurred..Furthermore, the targeting of extraterrestrial vehicles by exotic weapons systems is certainly a major cause for concern as Boylan points out. However, as influential insiders such as Col Philip Corso have indicated, there is genuine military concern over extraterrestrial violations of national sovereignty and human rights..This has led to Corso and others supporting the deployment of such space based weapons systems. Consequently, there is great work to be done in bridging genuine military concerns over intrusive extraterrestrial activities, and egregious military practices of targeting extraterrestrial vehicles with exotic weapons systems.Michael Salla, PhDAs a behavioral scientist and clinician, I have been working for over 15 years with persons who report having had an encounter with an extraterrestrial intelligent life form, a Star Visitor.During the course of this work I have felt it necessary to learn as much as possible about the veridical reality of UFOs, and what the government already knows about these visitors from afar.As information on Star Visitors and their encounters with humans piled up, I began to publish my findings, presenting them at national and international conferences, in specialty journals, and in media interviews. This in turn brought me to the attention of certain figures, currently or formerly in highly-classified sectors of government and the military ad intelligence agencies. These individuals decided to leak certain additional information to me, knowing that I would thus serve as a conduit to bring such leaked information to the attention of the portion of the public interested and ready for such information.My doctoral training in psychology and anthropology taught the value of first-hand field research. And because the existence and operations of various undeclared or secret government installations related to Star Visitor matters are not going to be plumbed without field research, I made it my task, starting in 1992, to reconnoiter, observe, and in some instances penetrate many of the most important of these installations.I reasoned that the knowledge I gained could be very helpful to the experiencers who consult with me, to help them feel secure that they had not hallucinated, but that such advanced technology exists, and in fact, the American government is in possession of some of this technology.Additionally, the hundreds of experiencers of encounters shared with me information they possessed, including about advanced U.S. craft, either by reason of being told such things by the Star Visitors, or by being kidnapped by rogue military-intelligence units and taken aboard one of these craft to one or other of these installations, or viewed such craft once they arrived. This added to my store of information and data on advanced U.S. anti-gravity craft.While I have gathered, or been entrusted by others with, considerable information on special American aerospace craft, I do not purport to know everything that is in the U.S. arsenal, nor everything about the operations and capabilities of the craft that I am about to identify. What I know is presented here. I have held nothing back.At this time, I am aware of the existence of ten kinds of special-technology advanced aerospace platforms [mil-speak for craft], all incorporating anti-gravity technology in some form.These ten are:the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit Stealth Bomberthe AuroraLockheed-Martin’s X-33ABoeing and Airbus Industries’ Nautilusthe TR3-A Pumpkinseedthe TR3-B TriangleNorthrop’s Great Pumpkin discTeledyne Ryan Aeronautical’s XH-75DShark antigravity helicopterLockheed-Martin and Northrop’s jointly-developed TAW-50 hypersonic antigravity fighter-bomberBefore we examine these ten exotic aerospace craft, a brief overview of the different forms of generating antigravity fields is in order.The most primitive antigravity technology is electrogravitic. This involves using voltages in the millions of volts to disrupt the ambient gravitational field. This results in an 89% reduction in gravity’s hold on airframes in such vehicles as the B-2 Stealth Bomber and the TR3-B Astra triangular craft. And given the considerable ambient ionization field I observed around the X-22A, it is reasonable to assume that extreme-voltage electrogravitics is also employed with these craft.The next level up of sophistication is magnetogravitic. This involves generating high-energy toroidal fields spun at incredible rpm’s, which also disrupts the ambient gravitational field, indeed to the extent that a counterforce to Earth’s gravitational pull is generated. The early British aeronautical engineers called this dynamic counterbary. This may have been used in some earlier American saucers and prototypes, but I have only been told that the secret Nautilus spacefaring craft uses magnetic pulsing , which appears to utilize this technology.The third level of sophistication, that used in the more modern American antigravity craft, is direct generation and harnessing of the gravitational strong force. Such a strong-force field extends slightly beyond the atomic nucleus of Element 115, an exotic element donated by Star Visitor scientist-consultants to human scientists at S-4, a secret base south of Area 51. By amplifying that exposed gravitational strong force, and using antimatter reactor high energy, and then directing it, it is possible to lift a craft from the Earth and then change directions by vectoring the shaped antigravity force field thus generated. Important information about this third technology is available on Bob Lazar’s website. (1) This information is also described on the Bob Lazar video. Lazar worked on extraterrestrial technology at Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Area 51’s Site S-4. (2)Let us now examine these 10 advanced craft in more detail. The amount of information available for each varies; in some cases more is known, in other cases very little.1) The B-2 Stealth bomber is manufactured Northrop-GrummanThe Air Force describes it as a low-observable, strategic, long-range heavy bomber capable of penetrating sophisticated and dense air-defense shields.Retired Air Force Colonel Donald Ware passed on to me information from a three-star general he knows, who revealed to him in July that the B-2 [Stealth bombers] have electro-gravitic systems on board; and that this explains why our 21 Northrop B-2s costabout a billion dollars each.(3)2) The Aurora SR-33A is a moderate-sized spacefaring vehicleThe late National Security Council scientist Dr. Michael Wolf(4)of NSC’s unacknowledged Special Studies Group subcommittee, (formerly called MJ-12), has stated that the Aurora can operate on both conventional fuel and antigravity field propulsion systems.He further stated that the Aurora can travel to the Moon.Wolf had also disclosed to me that the U.S. has a small station on the Moon, and a tiny observation post on Mars(5).Thus I doubt that Dr. Wolf would characterize the Aurora thus, unless it was a vessel already used in making such trips. He disclosed additionally that the Aurora operates out of Area 51, (Groom Dry Lake Air Force Station), at the northeast corner of the Nellis AFB Range, north of Las Vegas, Nevada.3) The Lockheed-Martin X-33A military spaceplaneIs a prototype of Lockheed’s other spaceplane, the single-stage-to-orbit reuseable aerospace vehicle, the National SpacePlane .Lockheed-Martin does not say too much about its winged, delta-shape X-33 VentureStar, except to say that we are building it. To be at that stage of development for its public-program SpacePlane, clearly Lockheed-Martin has already long since built prototypes, as well as an unacknowledged military version, which I have dubbed the X-33A. The ’A’ suffix stands for antigravity.Colonel Donald Ware, USAF (ret.) told me that he had recently learned from a three-star General that the VentureStar X-33 has an electrogravitics (antigravity) system on board(6). This virtually assures that the unacknowledged military antigravity version, the X-33 A, must surely also have electrogravitics on board. It is possible that what I have called the X-33A is the Aurora craft which Dr. Wolf described.4) The Lockheed X-22A is a two-man antigravity disc fighterThe late Colonel Steve Wilson, USAF (ret.), stated that military astronauts trained at a secret aerospace academy separate from the regular Air Force Academy at Colorado Springs, CO.These military astronauts then operate out of Beale and Vandenberg Air Force Bases, Northern California From those bases, these military astronauts regularly fly trans-atmospherically and out into space(7) One of the aerospace craft they use, Colonel Wilson reported, is the X-22A.Another informant, ’Z’, aka ’Jesse’, who formerly worked at the NSA, told me that the Lockheed X-22A antigravity fighter disc fleet is equipped with Neutral Particle Beam directed-energy weapons, that it is capable of effecting optical as well as radar invisibility, and that it is deployable for worldwide military operations from the new U.S. Space Warfare Headquarters, located in hardened underground facilities beneath 13,528’ King’s Peak in the Wasatch Mountains’ High Uintas Primitive (Wilderness) Area, 80 miles east of Salt Lake City(8)Recently I also heard from an Army engineer, formerly TDY’ed to NASA, who shall remain unnamed at his request. He also confirmed that Lockheed had made the X-22A, the two-man antigravity fighter disc which I had seen test-flown in a canyon adjacent to the main Area 51 operations zone.He explained why I had seen the X-22A so nervously flown during that test flight. He said that the original X-22A had had a standard altimeter hard-wired into it, but that such an instrument would give faulty readings in the craft’s antigravity field, which bends space-time. He had recommended that they instead use a gradiometer, which would function better.Apparently his suggestion was finally taken up, since in more recent years I have seen the X-22As flying more smoothly and confidently at high altitudes over and near Area 51.Another informant who wishes his identity kept private related operational details about military deployment of antigravity disc craft which sound like the X-22A. He reports:’During operation Desert Storm a close relative of mine was in charge of a Marine Division right on the front. In the first days film footage and especially video-cams which a large number of G.I.s had were impounded, so they wouldn’t capture any sensitive material.Iraq was pumped up and Gung-Ho, since they had well over 50,000 troops ready to charge us, [and] since we only had about 3500 they knew of, and they knew [that], because of the close proximity of troops we couldn’t nuke them, so, they were assuming piece of cake. Wrong.’Two pictures my relative confiscated from one of his officers showed:1. a large disc-shaped craft slightly in front of our men with a high intensity beam of light emitting out of it; then,2. where men, equipment, etc. was [had stood], there only remained dark charcoal-like spots on the desert floor. We have had this technology for quite a while.’The described disc was clearly an antigravity, levitating, aerial-weapons platform in the U.S. arsenal.Quite possibly it was the Lockheed X-22A two-man discoid craft, the real DarkStar, of which the unmanned drone X-22 DarkStar is but an aircraft ’cover’ program to disguise the existence of this manned antigravity fighter disc, the X-22A.Further, as ’Z’ noted, the real manned discs come equipped with the latest Neutral Particle Beam weapons, which take apart the target at the molecular level. Star Visitor craft do not incinerate humans. Only human military fighters are so deployed.So the above report does not deal with any extraterrestrial event.5) The Nautilus is another space-faring craftA secret military spacecraft which operates by magnetic pulsing(9).It operates out of the unacknowledged new headquarters of the U.S. Space Command, deep under a mountain in Utah. It makes twice-a-week trips up to the secret military-intelligence space station, which has been in deep space for the past thirty years, and manned by U.S. and USSR (now CIS) military astronauts.The Nautilus also is used for superfast surveillance operations, utilizing its ability to penetrate target country airspace from above from deep space, a direction not usually expected.It is manufactured jointly by Boeing’s Phantom Works near Seattle and EU’s Airbus Industries Anglo-French consortium.During travel to Washington State several years ago, I had a conversation with a former Boeing executive who worked in their Phantom Works, Boeing’s black projects division, (roughly the equivalent of Lockheed’s Skunk Works).The executive confirmed what I had earlier learned from an intelligence insider: that Boeing had teamed up with Europe’sAirbus Industrie to manufacture the Nautilus.6) The TR3-A ’Pumpkinseed’ is a super-fast air vehicleThe ’Pumpkinseed’ nickname is a reference to its thin oval airframe, whose contours resemble that seed.It may be the craft identified as using pulse detonation technology for propulsion in a sub-hypersonic regime, and also uses antigravity technology for either mass-reduction or complementary field propulsion at higher speed levels.As air breathers, these Pulse Detonation Wave Engines (PDWEs) could theoretically propel a hypersonic aircraft towards Mach 10 at an altitude in excess of 180,000 feet. Used to power an trans-atmospheric vehicle, the same PDWEs might be capable of lifting the craft to the edge of space when switched to rocket mode.7) the TR3-B ’Astra"Is a large triangular anti-gravity craft within the U.S. fleet. Black projects defense industry insider Edgar Rothschild Fouche wrote about the existence of the TR3-B in his book, Alien Rapture(10) My ex-NSA informant, ’Z’, also confirmed that the TR3-B is operational. ’Z’ had this to say about the TR3-B triangular antigravity craft.TR3-B. This is the code name for what everyone on Earth has seen. It is a very large triangular-shaped re-entry vehicle with anti-gravity. It is what the November [2000] issue of Popular Mechanics identified as the Lenticular Reentry Vehicle, a nuclear-powered flying saucer, the first version of which went operational in 1962, [the version which Popular Mechanics illustrated.]It was used in Gulf War’s early hours with electromagnetic-pulse/laser cannons. It literally sat mid-air, firing long-, medium-, short-range to take out antennas, towers, communications, air traffic control towers, TV dishes and centers, etc. For three hours, these three triangles [TR3-Bs] just sat there blowing up everything in sight.Then the Stealth fighters had fun for the rest of the day into the early evening next night. Then [followed] carpet bombings from high altitude B-52 Strato-Fortresses. They dumped all the old, aged Vietnam-era crap [munitions]; a third blew up and the rest [were] duds. Anyways, the TR3B has been in testing since the ’60s. But it has only been perfected for the last 8 years [since 1992].It is a good remake of what Truman first saw, [the Roswell semi-circular craft]. It is compartmentalized, built by the Skunk Works (Lockheed-Martin’s classified plant at Palmdale, CA) and Boeing [Phantom Works, Seattle]. It is housed in Utah.’Z’ was reminding of his earlier revelation that the U.S. Space Command has located its prime headquarters and antigravity space-launch fleet facility beneath King Mountain, the tallest mountain in the Wasatch Range east of Salt Lake City, Utah.8) Northrop Aircraft Corporation has manufactured its Northrop antigravity disc (designation unknown)...which I have dubbed the ’Great Pumpkin’ , from its brilliant ruddy golden-orangish glow. I first saw these craft operationally test-flown in 1992 above the Groom Range ridge line at Area 51, Nevada.Later I saw the same intensely burning-bright orange-gold craft that I had seen above Area 51 being test-flown sixty miles north of Los Angeles, in the Tehachapi Mountains east of Edwards Air Force Base.There the Northrop has its secret saucer manufacturing works buried deep within the mountains. I saw the same intensely burning-bright orange-gold craft test-flown above Northrop’s mountaintop test bed there as I had seen above Areas 51/S-4(11).When energized these discs emit their characteristic intense glow. It is reasonable to assume that this is due to strong ionization, and that electrogravitics is the methodology of their field propulsion.9) The XH-75D or XH Shark antigravity helicopterIs manufactured by Teledyne Ryan Aeronautical Corporation of San Diego.USAF Colonel Steve Wilson reported that many of these XH-75Ds were assigned to the Delta/National Reconnaissance Organization Division which retrieves downed UFOs.That Division is also implicated in mutilating cattle as a psychological warfare program on the American public, to try to get citizens to fear and hate extraterrestrials through assuming that aliens are the ones cutting up the cattle.Colonel Wilson also leaked a drawing of the XH-75D Shark.10) The TAW-50 is a hypersonic, antigravity space fighter-bomberA defense contractor with whom I have been in communication leaked to me details of this U.S. Advanced TAW-50 warcraft.Developed during the early 1990s, the capabilities of this war-bird are jaw-dropping. And the technology shows that the Defense Department did not fail to utilize what it learned combing through the wreckage of various UFO crashes.The TAW-50 was jointly developed by the Lockheed-Martin Skunk Works (Palmdale-Helendale, CA) and Northrop(undoubtedly at their undeclared Anthill facility within the Tehachapi Mountains, northwest of Lancaster, CA.) Both companies have a history of development of secret anti-gravity craft at these Mojave Desert facilities.The TAW-50 has speed capabilities well in excess of Mach 50, a number the contractor calls ’a very conservative estimate’. Its actual speed is classified.Since Mach-1 is 1,225 kilometers per hour, (approximately 748 mph), this means that the TAW-50 is capable of moving considerably faster than 38,000 mph. In comparison, the velocity required to escape Earth’s gravity is 25,000 mph. Therefore the TAW-50 is capable of going into space, and does.The TAW-50 has a SCRAM (supersonic ramjet) propulsion system for passing through the outer atmosphere. The TAW-50 utilizes electrogravitics to maintain its own artificial gravity while in weightless space, as well as to nullify the vehicle’s mass during operations. The TAW-50’s power supply is provided by a small nuclear power generator that the contractor said is Normal-Inert.The contractor said that the space plane uses electromagnetoferrometric power generation by the immersion of pellets in heavy water (deuterium) and specially-designed coil superconductive magnets, which yield enormous amounts of free electrons when placed in an immersion which has been triggered into an oscillating field-state flux.The TAW-50 has a crew of four. Nevertheless, the TAW-50 flies so fast that it requires computers to fly it. These were developed by American Computer Company, who derived them from its Valkyrie XB/9000 AI [artificial intelligence] Guidance series. They utilize a RISC Milspec Superchip. There are 180 of them in the flight control system, and 64 more in the weapons guidance system, the contractor reported.It can carry a combined payload of glide bombs and a package of MIRV (Multiple Independently-targeted Reentry Vehicles, mil-speak for a group of intercontinental ballistic missiles), each of which can seek out and strike a different target. The MIRV pack also contains reentry-capable balloon countermeasures to make it very difficult for laser and other defensive weapons to track down where the real MIRVs are and intercept them.The TAW-50 is armed with its own Kill Laser system, which can track and immolate SAM (Surface-to-Air missiles), STTA (Surface-To-Trans-Atmosphere missiles), ATA (Air-To- Air missiles), and ATTA (Air-To-Trans-Atmospheric missiles). The TAW-50’s killer lasers can also knock down high-performance fighter interceptors.The TAW’s Kill Laser is much smaller than the earlier 1980s-era SDI (Star Wars program) models, and has a miniaturized cooling core and 500 times the wattage. The contractor said it uses a spontaneous nucleonic burst to trigger the lasing [laser] effect.In addition, the TAW-50 is armed with microsuperexplosive HyperDart missiles. These are just a little larger than ordinary aircraft cannon ammunition, but travel at hypersonic speed for up to three minutes, and have enormous explosive capability. One HyperDart can blow apart a MiG fighter anywhere within 20 feet of the HyperDart. The TAW-50 carries several hundred HyperDarts.Because the TAW-50 is designed to operate in space, it has on board a two-day air supply. This air supply can be extended by using its scoop system and traveling into the upper atmosphere to harvest more oxygen.The contractor did not reveal the size of the space fighter-bomber except to say, ’It’s a pretty big thing.’The performance of the TAW-50 makes it virtually impossible to defend against.It can hide in orbit many hundreds of miles into space, orbiting at times at 22,000 mph.Then, without warning, it can dive straight down through the atmosphere at over 38,000 miles per hour on an 80-degree attack vector, reverse direction within 150 feet of the ground with very little loss of motion and without a glide turn, and almost instantly go vertically straight up at over 38,000 mph until long after it leaves the atmosphere and resumes orbiting in space.The contractor noted, ’Those [electro-] gravitics allow it to change its mass to almost nothing in a moment, and reverse direction in a second, increase its acceleration to so many times G [Earth’s gravity] it’s not funny, yet they are able to nearly nullify the G-force on the pilots.They [the electrogravitics] are fourth-generation, with the ability to bring it to a complete standstill in under 2 milliseconds, if need be, without crushing the pilots, and keep it there for quite some time.’ The contractor notes, ’It’s far too fast for tracking radars.’ ’And,’ he adds, ’what military aims its radars straight up?’The TAW-50 can be refueled and rearmed in orbit by docking with the secret undeclared Military Space Station that is in orbit(12)The entire refueling and rearming procedure takes under 10 minutes. Who mans the gas pumps? Military astronauts trained at the Secret Air Force Academy, located in the hills immediately west of the official Air Force Academy at Colorado Springs, CO.These military astronauts rotate duty by traveling to and from Vandenberg Air Force Base on other military antigravity vehicles(13).The Cape Canaveral Space Shuttles have carried the arming platforms (’classified Defense Department payloads’) up to the secret Military Space Station. The contractor reported that with a few extra tanks of LOX (liquid oxygen), the TAW-50 could fly to the Moon and back.As of 2002, the U.S. has 20 TAW-50s in its arsenal. But, as the contractor commented, ’You could take out an entire nation in under 10 days with only 10 of these, doing three attacks a day.One can wipe out an entire city the size of suburban Cleveland in a single attack without having to use any nukes at all.’The electrogravitics for the TAW-50 was produced by GE Radionics.Pratt & Whitney designed the SCRAM atmospheric penetrator technology.American Computer Company created the artificial-intelligence supercomputers.The contractor said he could not tell me anything else. And it was clear he did not want his name used. So, this is what is known.11) The Northrop Quantum Teleportation Disc?Are the above the current state-of-the-art in advanced aerospace craft? No.There have been advances beyond “mere” antigravity field propulsion. Quantum particulate physics is now being used to update a variety of aerospace craft and their weapons systems.On a recent (09/16/05) field trip to the boundary of Area 51, during a middle-of-the-night observation, I saw first one, then another, and finally six brightly-lit objects suddenly appear at approximately 1000’ (305 meters) height above the desert floor. The intensely-glowing, ruddy, golden-orangish ionization field surrounding these craft appeared identical to the field around the Northrop antigravity disc.But in the 13 years since I had last observed the Northrop discs above Area 51, and at their Tehachapi Mountains manufacturing site, considerable progress has been made.In 1992, the Northrop disc slowly rose vertically from its flight pad and gradually reached flight altitude. But in 2005 these craft are able to depart from their flight pad and suddenly appear at flight altitude without any visible ascent. And it is not a matter of their ionization field having been turned off during ascent for stealth purposes.The ionization field comes with electrogravitic field propulsion. If the ionization were turned off, the craft would have fallen from the sky. Rather what appears to be going on is that the Northrop engineers have incorporated quantum physics principles into the propulsion.Simply stated, Northrop appears to have harnessed quantum entanglement to achieve quantum teleportation. To the observer the craft simply ceases to exist on the flight pad and instantly begins to exist at, (in this case), 1000 feet altitude.If the interpretation of this observation is correct, then there exists an 11thentry in the U.S. antigravity arsenal, the Northrop Quantum Teleportation Disc.If the black-budget scientists keep advancing along these lines, we could foresee the day when a fleet of Air Force craft suddenly “cease to exist” on the air base runway and instantly appear at 35,000 feet altitude over a target city halfway around the globe.America has used its enormous wealth to become the global super-power.The TAW-50 is but one example of its exotic, unnecessarily proliferative, and highly-destructive arsenal. The world awaits the day when America finds its soul, and pays more attention to matters of spirit, mind, and metaphysical development, and withdraws from its addiction to war toys.It has been said that if the American people knew what the military had in their arsenal today, they wouldn’t believe it, and would think that someone was fantasizing about a George Lucas Star Wars movie episode.But it’s not science-fiction. The future is already here.The implications of the advanced antigravity craft back-engineered by humans are several. All of the antigravity technology is in the control of the organization conducting the UFO Cover-Up.This organization is so heavily infiltrated by Cabal types that Dr. Michael Wolf regretfully concluded that the Cabal had effective control of it. He should know; he was a high member of that Special Studies Group, [formerly "MJ-12"], buried within the National Security Council.Since the Cabal effectively control the development and special uses of these craft, there remains a very high danger that the Cabal will use its growing antigravity fleet to try to repel the Star Visitors and even conduct Space War. Elements within the U.S. Air Force and the Naval Space Command are making preparations for such a Space War.What can we do about this as light workers, Star Kids, Star Seed adults or other humans of good will?First is to keep ourselves informed about dangerous and evil uses of antigravity (and quantum) technology.Second is to contact our political representatives to oppose policies and weapons systems development that is oriented towards space warfare.Third is to encourage the release of this technology into the civilian sector, where it can revolutionize transportation, energy generation, large construction projects, and other peaceful uses.Fourth, the existence of this human technology is a two-edged sword for the Cabal. Not only is the existence of antigravity technology starting to get out to the public, but also the very existence of a massive worldwide organization conducting the UFO Cover-Up and confiscation of Star Visitor technology.As the public becomes aware that the Cabal have unfairly monopolized this technology for 40+ years, the public will become incensed at the Cabal for their greed and selfishness.This then becomes the opportunity to expose and discredit the Cabal, the Number One obstacle to human safety and progress.Footnotes1. UFOs and Area 51, Vol. 2 - The Bob Lazar Video (1999)2. Personal communication, September 20, 1997.3. See: MJ-12: Inside Revelations - Dr Michael Wolf4. See: Quotations From Chairman Wolf5. Personal communication, September 20, 1997.6. See: http://www.drboylan.com/swilson2.html7. Personal communication, February 10, 2002.8. See: Extraterrestrial Base On Earth, Sanctioned By Officials Since 19549. See: http://www.wealth4freedom.com/truth/bt3r.htm10. See: http://www.drboylan.com/grantour2.html11. See: Extraterrestrial Base On Earth, Sanctioned By Officials Since 195412. See: http://www.drboylan.com/colww3a.html13. See: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-entangleHave a look this documentary based on ETs( extraterrestrial) & the universal energy sources-THRIVE,Link-Since decades,we have been visited by ETs from other solar system.There are thousand of pattern has been recorded around the world in the crop field that are created by extraterrestrial living beings.The ancient picture from all over world especially Great Pyramid Of Giza,Egypt,Machhu-Pichhu.Working with ETs in Antarctica especially Nazis,Mexico UFO crash,Area 51 Deep secret like EBE-1 & EBE-2 alien interviews,technology in US Air Force’s secret advanced bomber TR-3B run in anti-gravity technology,HAARP’s secret experiments over ETs and thousands of stories of UFO abduction in US and lots more….Have a Look this secret Russian book by CIA.You can download this book directly by searching in google.You can see more evidence from the world’s largest ET research center SETI(USA).Link-SETI Institute

Q. What are the biggest historical inaccuracies in Saving Private Ryan?D-Day historian: 'Ryan' not best war film (cnn.com)Explore The Historical Accuracy Of Steven Spielberg's 'Saving Private Ryan’ (Best)The real, surprising message of "Saving Private Ryan"15 Fascinating Facts About Saving Private Ryan (mentalfloss.com)Saving Private Ryan (1998) 21 factual errors (moviemistakes.com)11 Crazy Behind-The-Scenes Facts About 'Saving Private Ryan'10 movie mistakes: Saving Private RyanD-Day historian: 'Ryan' not best war film (cnn.com)STORY HIGHLIGHTSAntony Beevor, author of new book on D-Day, not a fan of "Saving Private Ryan"Beevor admires the opening, but calls the rest "ghastly"Beevor's pick for best Hollywood D-Day work: "Band of Brothers"(CNN) -- Some reviewers have called "Saving Private Ryan," Steven Spielberg's World War II film about D-Day and the search for a soldier, one of the greatest war movies.Military historian Antony Beevor begs to differ.Not only is it not the greatest war movie, it's not even the best cinematic depiction of D-Day, says Beevor, author of the newly published "D-Day: The Battle for Normandy" (Viking).He admires the famed Omaha Beach opening -- "Probably the most realistic battle sequence ever filmed," he said -- but described the rest of "Saving Private Ryan" as "ghastly.""It's sort of a 'Dirty Dozen' cliche of the worst form," he said.He has expanded on the criticism in a lecture. "Spielberg's basic storyline had great potential. It shows the tension between patriotic and therefore collective loyalty, and the struggle of the individual for survival: those mutually contradictory pressures, which in many ways lie at the heart of war," Beevor observed in the talk.If any filmmakers wish to take on D-Day again, Beevor's book provides enough material for a dozen screenplays. Making use of first-person accounts stored in the National Archives, as well as a wealth of other material, Beevor depicts in painstaking detail not only the D-Day landings by American, British, Canadian and Free French forces, but also the subsequent battle for the whole of Normandy that proved pivotal in defeating Nazi Germany.Beevor says a director would do well to remember that the Allied effort to retake the continent extended well beyond that single day of June 6, 1944."D-Day, although an iconic moment, was not actually the end of it. Films like 'The Longest Day' and 'Saving Private Ryan' almost give the impression that D-Day was 'it' and then the next thing people know about was the liberation of Paris," he said. "But in fact, it was the fighting in Normandy which was far worse. Casualties on D-Day were far lighter than expected -- [military leaders] had expected 10,000 dead and only 3,000 died."The real fighting and the real casualties," he added, "came in the Battle of Normandy."So what does Beevor prefer in the way of a Hollywood treatment of D-Day? Another project Spielberg had a hand in, "Band of Brothers.""On the whole, I think [it] was pretty close to the truth," Beevor said of the 2001 HBO miniseries, which Spielberg and Tom Hanks executive produced. He called it "incomparably more realistic" than "Saving Private Ryan.""The improvement was presumably due to the fact that it was a pretty faithful adaptation of the book by Stephen Ambrose," he said.A major problem with "Ryan," Beevor said, is the climax of the film. "The U.S. Air Force arrives in the nick of time just like the U.S. cavalry in 1950s cowboy films. And to cap it all, the final frames are of Pvt. Ryan, standing in old age amid the rows of white crosses in a military cemetery, saluting his fallen comrades as tears run down his cheeks."That's Spielberg "milking our tear ducts with both hands," Beevor said.But then again, the historian believes Hollywood is not well cast in the role of purveyor of history."The central problem is that historical truth and the needs of the movie and television industry remain fundamentally incompatible. Hollywood has to simplify World War II according to set formulae," Beevor said in his lecture. "Its films have to have heroes and of course baddies. There are seldom shades of gray."Among WWII films, Beevor praises two from 2006 directed by Clint Eastwood (and produced by Spielberg), "Flags of Our Fathers" and "Letters from Iwo Jima"."But they are the exception which proves the rule that you do not need to resort to the tricks, the false claims of truth and even the clichés of the platoon movie," he said.And the best war movie? Beevor looks away from Hollywood for his answer: 1965's "The 317th Platoon," a French film set during that country's war in Indochina.Review: The Vietnam War, as Fought by the French, in ‘The 317th Platoon’Pierre Schoendoerffer was a war photographer in what was known as Indochina in the early ’50s, and was a prisoner of war at Dien Bien Phu. The experience was, it can be inferred, a defining one for Mr. Schoendoerffer, who died at 83 in 2012. He first wrote “The 317th Platoon” as a novel, and made it into a film in 1964, traveling to Cambodia to shoot at authentic locations.Trailer: ‘The 317th Platoon’The cinematographer he brought with him was Raoul Coutard, one of the seminal forces of the Nouvelle Vague, and an ace at capturing striking imagery under tough conditions. The movie’s story is a plain one of war and survival. A French platoon, made up of both French and Laotian soldiers, is ordered to abandon a highland outpost and rejoin larger French forces. The soldiers soon discover that they’re walking right into a growing Viet Minh offensive.The commanding officer, Torrens (Jacques Perrin), is a young lieutenant who’s been in country a little over two weeks. The platoon’s adjutant, Willsdorf (the great Bruno Cremer), is a battle veteran who, as an Alsatian, was forced into the German Army in World War II. The two have conflicting tactical ideas, but enough respect for each other that their differences never come to a head.And they don’t have to. This is a staggeringly engrossing and effective movie, its settings both beautiful and oppressive, its incidents tense and eye-opening. There are no philosophical musings, no what-are-we-fighting-for debates. It’s all about getting out in one piece as the odds of doing so get worse every hour. A terse text at the film’s end is a gruesome, ironic twist on the adage about living to fight another day. Screening officially in New York for the first time, this is a genuinely revelatory war movie.Review: The Vietnam War, as Fought by the French, in ‘The 317th Platoon’Explore The Historical Accuracy Of Steven Spielberg's 'Saving Private Ryan'The folks over at History Buffs have put together a video essay that lays out the historical context for Steven Spielberg’s war epic and reviews the film’s accuracy. The 23-minute “History Buffs: ‘Saving Private Ryan’” dives into the chaotic complexity involved in the invasion of Normandy, highlighting just what the allied soldiers were up against and how Spielberg and co. evoked the reality of war to an unprecedented degree. As the video points out, “Saving Private Ryan” does not avoid historic discrepancies common to gigantic, serious-minded Hollywood productions, but which do little to overshadow the research and accuracy injected throughout the film. If anything, “Saving Private Ryan” does what’s necessary to make a movie a movie —flubbing facts here and there to craft a narrative and build tension— in order to provide a vehicle for the emotional authenticity Spielberg was clearly interested in.The real, surprising message of "Saving Private Ryan"When it was released 16 years ago, I didn't get it.I knew Steven Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan was supposed to be a masterpiece. The best-known film critics in the country said so. Janet Maslin, for example, hailed it as "the finest war movie of our time." The film and its director both won Golden Globes, Spielberg received an Academy Award for directing, and more than 60 critics named Saving Private Ryan the best picture of the year.The most serious students of the Second World War shared the enthusiasm for the film. Historian Stephen Ambrose, author of D-Day and Citizen Soldiers, thought it "the finest World War II movie ever made." The Secretary of the Army presented the filmmaker with the military's highest civilian decoration, the Distinguished Civilian Service Award. The New York Times even devoted a respectful editorial to "Spielberg's War."And I knew that almost everybody else agreed with them. Along with 6.5 million other Americans, I saw Saving Private Ryan its opening weekend back in 1998, joining a mostly elderly crowd of the "Greatest" generation at a suburban multiplex. Moved to tears by the powerful film, the audience gave it an ovation as the final credits rolled. But as my wife and I filed out of the theater, I wondered what they were applauding, exactly, this darkened room full of veterans and their spouses.Like everyone else in the theater, I spent most of three hours wincing involuntarily in my seat, shocked by the unrelenting mayhem of a daylight amphibious assault across a barren killing field, sickened by the sudden hash that light artillery can make of human bodies, groaning at the grotesque wounds and the grisly mutilations of whimpering casualties, and—in the end—twitching at even the slightest clatter of mechanized warfare.Like everyone else, I wondered at the courage or desperation or whatever it was that drove American soldiers across a French beach, codenamed Omaha, under the withering spray of German machine-gun rounds from hilltop fortifications and the flesh-shredding explosions of 105mm howitzer shells lobbed by inland artillery.And like everyone else, I had to agree that it was brilliant filmmaking—except for the beginning and the end. Spielberg actually opens and closes the film twice, employing two pairs of images to bracket the war movie everyone praised. The first and last thing we see pulsing across the entire screen is a faded, translucent American flag. Can we understand the flag as anything but an announcement of the subject of his epic: patriotism? The fluttering flag, denatured of its color and perhaps of its vitality, is the image with which the film begins and ends. But Spielberg wraps not only the war in the flag but also the cloyingly sentimental frame story of an elderly veteran, followed by his wife, son, and grandchildren, on his pilgrimage to the vast cemetery overlooking the Normandy beachhead, now marked by row after row of simple Christian and Jewish headstones.Nearly every commentator criticized this prologue and epilogue. Janet Maslin conceded that these scenes are among the film's "few false notes." Others derided this opening and closing as "maudlin," "completely unnecessary," and "a burst of schmaltzy ritual." In fact, most writers simply ignored the prologue. Anthony Lane, for example, writing in The New Yorker, described the first half-hour of the film as "the most telling battle scenes ever made" without bothering to note that one must first wade through five minutes of schmaltz to get to Omaha Beach. (Later in his essay, Mr. Lane did make quite clear that he had no patience for Spielberg's "sappy epilogue.")So this is what I didn't get. The opening and the closing of any work should be the two moments of greatest emphasis (as Spielberg's English-teacher hero, Captain John Miller, would no doubt have taught his high-school students back home in Addley, Pennsylvania). How could such a formidable filmmaker have botched the beginning and the end of his film?But now, looking back as the 70th anniversary of D-Day approaches, I've begun to doubt that the opening and the closing of Saving Private Ryan are missteps. In fact, I've come to think that, even if maudlin, they are the whole point of the war story they introduce and conclude.What is that story? Surviving the bloodbath of Omaha Beach, a handpicked squad of Rangers are sent to extricate a paratrooper, James Ryan, from the intense fighting behind enemy lines because his three brothers have been killed in combat. Despite the efforts of his subordinates to dissuade him from authorizing the mission, General George C. Marshall determines to save Ryan's mother from a fourth telegram of condolence, quoting as his rationale, at times from memory, a worn letter to a Mrs. Lydia Bixby:Executive MansionWashington, Nov. 21, 1864To Mrs. Bixby, Boston, Mass.Dear Madam,I have been shown in the files of the War Department a statement of the Adjutant General of Massachusetts that you are the mother of five sons who have died gloriously on the field of battle. I feel how weak and fruitless must be any word of mine which should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming. But I cannot refrain from tendering you the consolation that may be found in the thanks of the republic they died to save. I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom.Yours very sincerely and respectfully,A. LincolnLincoln, unlike Marshall, does not hint that her grief deserves greater respect than that of any other mother deprived by the war of a son, nor that he would risk, even after Gettysburg, a single other soldier to preserve her from such loss. His eloquent letter expresses the sentiment, not sentimentality. Spielberg's Marshall, on the other hand, seems unable to distinguish between sentimentality and morality.In fact, Lincoln had been misinformed. Mrs. Bixby had protested the enlistment of her sons, and while two were killed in combat, another returned safely home after an exchange of prisoners of war. The final two sons deserted, one even fleeing the country. And, as M. Lincoln Schuster points out in A Treasury of the World's Great Letters, the widely circulated letter was denounced by Lincoln's opponents as "cheap and ostentatious." One paper even questioned Lincoln's right to pen such words while his own two sons, one still a child but the other 21, were "kept at home in luxury, far from the dangers of the field."These details—absent, of course, from the film—are not merely curious footnotes. The great bulk of dialogue in Saving Private Ryan not directly connected to the prosecution of battles is dedicated to an ongoing debate about the morality of the squad's mission. No one makes a case that their mission is heroic. It is idiocy and, as far as the soldiers are concerned, immoral idiocy. What of the grief of their mothers, they wonder. The true story behind the eloquent words and heroic sentiments with which General Marshall sends these soldiers to their deaths makes clear that Lincoln's letter is empty, as it turns out, of everything except rhetoric. But soldiers don't need a history lesson to recognize the emptiness of rhetoric when they are about to become its victims. The morality of risking eight men to save one is an equation that makes no sense to a soldier.Over and over again, the fundamental theorem of war—that one is sacrificed to save many—is examined. When the squad encounters a downed pilot whose troop transport crashed, killing 22 men, because his plane had been made unflyable by the steel plates added to its belly to protect from ground fire a brigadier general on board, everyone understands that to risk the safety of many to protect one (even if he is a general) is wrong and, in war, always dangerous.Approaching the climactic battle, Spielberg billets his soldiers in an abandoned church. While his men talk about their own mothers, Captain Miller defends the loss of 94 soldiers, one by one, under his command. Reminiscent of Shakespeare's disguised Henry V debating with English yeomen anxiously awaiting dawn at Agincourt a commander's responsibility for the death of his men in battle, Miller justifies his actions to his sergeant (and, obviously, to himself) by insisting upon the 10 or even 20 times more men he has saved by sacrificing one man. That's what allows him to choose the mission over the man, he explains. But this time, the sergeant responds, the mission is the man. Spielberg could not be more explicit in condemning the effort to save Private Ryan as immoral, at least in terms of the morality of the battlefield.Henry V is a useful comparison in another regard, as well. The most stirring of battle eve addresses, Henry's St. Crispin's Day speech rallies "we happy few" on to victory against overwhelming odds with images of glory, honor, and patriotic fervor. Despite the flapping flag and swelling music as the credits roll, Spielberg puts in the mouth of his commander, Captain Miller, no praise of homeland, no defense of democracy, no attack on fascism in rallying his troops. Instead, their commander simply says he just wants to go home to his wife. As his men have made clear repeatedly, as far as they are concerned, Private Ryan can go to hell. But if going to hell to save Ryan earns Miller the right to go back to his wife, then he'll go to hell. And hell, a French village named Ramelle is exactly where he finds the boy, guarding the last remaining bridge across the River Styx, a little stream the French call the Merderet.The absence of patriotic principles in his defense of the mission becomes quite striking when one compares Miller's speech about the war and his wife to another Civil War letter. A week before his death at the first battle of Bull Run, Major Sullivan Ballou of the Second Rhode Island addressed these words to his wife: "I have no misgivings about or lack of confidence in the cause in which I am engaged, and my courage does not halt or falter. I know how strongly American Civilization now leans on the triumph of the Government, and how great a debt we owe to those who went before us through the blood and sufferings of the Revolution. And I am willing—perfectly willing—to lay down all my joys in this life, to help maintain this Government, and to pay that debt." Major Ballou goes on to affirm, "Sarah my love for you is deathless, it seems to bind me with mighty cables that nothing but Omnipotence could break, and yet my love of Country comes over me like a strong wind and bears me unresistibly on with all these chains to the battlefield."No less in love with his wife than Miller seems to be, the Union officer finds the words to assert his devotion to the flag under which he fights. However, in nearly three hours, apart from the letter by Lincoln that General Marshall reads and the one that he himself writes to Ryan's mother, Saving Private Ryan offers not a single word about love of country. Generals may still talk like their Civil War counterparts, but soldiers in the field have ceased to cloak their duty in such sentiments.The Germans depicted are just as bewildered, terrified, and anxious to return to their families as the Americans. Of course, there is no shortage of cruelty and brutality. Nazis move through battle-scarred streets indifferently finishing off wounded Americans, but, early in the film, we have witnessed callous GIs mowing down surrendering Germans with a laugh. And the transformation of a cowardly American interpreter who coldly butchers a captured German he earlier has argued to spare is one of the most troubling moments in the film. Spielberg never suggests that we are any better than our enemy or, to put it more generously, that they are any worse than we are. On the contrary, he seems to be at pains to show the equality of men under any flag when the shooting begins. So this is not a patriotic film; if anything, it argues that patriotism is beside the point in modern warfare. Even the mission itself has no heroic or patriotic aim; there is no hill to be taken, no redoubt to be stormed. Its goal, according to Captain Miller, is public relations.Why then does the film begin and end with Spielberg's flag-waving and a tearful old grandfather mourning at the graves of fallen comrades? Are they merely hedges against the insidious argument of the film that even our last "good" war was as meaningless in its brutality and empty in its heroism as the conflict in Vietnam? Though Saving Private Ryan amply documents the extraordinary courage of men under fire and suggests the tide of grief their families endured, it never addresses the point of their heroism. How can it honor the horrendous sacrifices our parents and grandparents made when the film seems to demonstrate that neither glory, morality, patriotism, nor any clear meaning attended the slaughter of millions?Spielberg, aware of this contradiction, told a 1998 gathering of entertainment writers in Los Angeles that the movie is really about how two opposing things can both be true. The mission can't be justified on moral or patriotic grounds, and yet the toughest soldier in the squad, Sergeant Horvath, says saving Private Ryan might be the one decent thing they "were able to pull out of this whole godawful, shitty mess."This is not the only contradiction in the director's historical works. If one considers Spielberg's efforts in the 1990s to turn from the hugely successful entertainments that made his reputation to cinematic examinations of the most profound moral issues of the modern age, apparently inexplicable decisions on the part of the filmmaker seem to contradict the very arguments of those films, too.How can one explain Spielberg's choice, in his film on the Holocaust, to make its hero a German profiteer and, in his film on slavery, to make its hero a white leader of a slave economy? Of course, a Jewish clerk in Schindler's List prods his German employer to outwit the Final Solution and an enslaved African in Amistad goads a white former president of the United States to outmaneuver the very legal system (dedicated, as it was, to the preservation of slavery) that his oath of office had sworn him to uphold and defend. But the director leaves no doubt as to which character is the central focus of the narrative conflict: Since monstrous systems of exploitation constrain both Jew and African from independent action, only the beneficiaries of those inhumane systems are capable of change and, thus, able to serve as the protagonists of these dramas. Though we may assume these two films are about suffering—and presented with the vivid depiction of cruelty a camera can offer, an audience may find it difficult to look beyond such graphic images of misery to another, subtler subject—Schindler's List and Amistad are, in fact, about guilt and responsibility. They are not, as many imagine, noble memorials to the millions of victims of the Holocaust and slavery; rather, they are agonized meditations on all of those somehow implicated in those vast human tragedies.Saving Private Ryan, reviewA similar, though much more complex, contradiction beats at the very heart of Saving Private Ryan and accounts for the dissonance noted by virtually every critic between the body of the film and its opening and closing. How can the sentimental tableau of a weeping old man, his wife, his son, his daughter-in-law, and his grandchildren possibly serve as a fit conclusion to so savage and unsentimental a film?Spielberg himself offered a clue when, continuing his conversation with those entertainment writers in Los Angeles, he described his father's own war stories: "I was supposed to wave the flag and be patriotic and say that without his efforts I wouldn't have the freedoms I had or even the freedom to have the bicycle I was riding." Only later did the director realize that it wasn't "a bunch of bunk he was telling me." John Miller, the high-school teacher from Pennsylvania, teaches Jimmy Ryan the same lesson.Private Ryan, a dazed kid surrounded by the bodies of men who were absurdly ordered to their deaths to save him, is given the equally absurd command by the dying hero, Captain Miller, to "earn this" and must now bear the terrible, impossible order until his own death.But don't we all struggle under Ryan's moral burden? And how can Ryan, or for that matter any of us, ever pay such a debt—and to whom? Spielberg had already once suggested the answer to that profound question. In the epilogue to Schindler's List, contemporary descendants of the Jews saved by Oskar Schindler process past his grave. Again at the end of Saving Private Ryan, as a grandfather and his son and grandchildren pay homage to those whose deaths we have just witnessed, the living are called not merely to bear witness to the achievement of fallen heroes; the living are, in fact, the achievement itself. Like Private Ryan, we cannot help but ask what we've done to deserve such sacrifice by others and beg their forgiveness for what we have cost them. And like James Ryan, all we can do to justify that sacrifice is to live our lives as well as we are able.This is not to suggest Spielberg has made a perfect film. There is a difference between virtuosity and genius, between a tour de force and a masterpiece. Saving Private Ryan is flawed, in part because it loses its nerve. Those surviving veterans who actually leapt into the reddened surf of Omaha Beach have attested to the accuracy of the film's depiction of modern war and, particularly, of the Normandy Invasion; for that artistic accomplishment, the director deserves all the accolades heaped upon him. On the other hand, the flag-waving patriotism it pretends at in its first and last shots is as transparent as the faded flag Spielberg waves across the screen.But the prologue and epilogue, even if they are embarrassingly sentimental in their presentation and do pander, perhaps, to their audience, pose what remains a fundamental question after the blood-drenched 20th century: What is our responsibility to those who have gone before us? Like Schindler's List and Amistad, Saving Private Ryan is not about those who suffered; it is about those who have been spared suffering. Spielberg's subject, in the end, is not the courage of the soldiers who fought at Normandy; his subject is the debt owed them by their children and their children's children. As we approach the 70th anniversary of the largest amphibious assault in history, we should remember that Mrs. Ryan's son was not the only child those brave men saved.We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to [email protected] BIGUENET is the Robert Hunter Distinguished University Professor at Loyola University in New Orleans. He is the author of six plays and seven books, including The Torturer’s Apprentice and Oyster, and a recipient of the O. Henry Award.15 Fascinating Facts About Saving Private Ryan (mentalfloss.com)It was up to eight men to save the life of one. Here are 15 things you may not have known about Steven Spielberg’s Oscar-winning World War II drama Saving Private Ryan, which arrived in theaters 20 years ago today.1. THE MOVIE CAME TOGETHER IN A SINGLE DAY.Saving Private Ryan was the only movie that Steven Spielberg directed up to that point in his career that he hadn’t developed on his own. Screenwriter Robert Rodat’s script was actually sent to Spielberg by his agent. In a stroke of luck, the script had also been sent to actor Tom Hanks, who also wanted to make the movie. Both Spielberg and Hanks, who had never worked with each other at that point (and would go on to work together again in Catch Me If You Can, The Terminal, and Bridge of Spies, as well as the miniseries Band of Brothers and The Pacific), called each other up when they found out they were reading the same script and decided to collaborate on the movie all in the same day.2. STEVEN SPIELBERG WAS INSPIRED TO DIRECT THE MOVIE BECAUSE OF HIS FATHER.Spielberg directed Saving Private Ryan as a tribute to his father, Arnold Spielberg, who served in the U.S. Army and Signal Corps, and fought in Burma during World War II as a radio operator in a B-25 squad. Arnold also helped a young Steven to direct his first movies as a teenager, both of which involved plots that took place during World War II. Escape to Nowhere was a 40-minute behind enemy lines movie that a young Spielberg shot with his friends, while Fighter Squad was shot at the Sky Harbor Airport hangar in Phoenix, Arizona, which conveniently housed grounded former WWII fighter planes that the young Spielberg and his friends used, but didn’t fly.3. IT’S PARTLY BASED ON A TRUE STORY.PARAMOUNT HOME ENTERTAINMENTContrary to popular belief, Saving Private Ryan is not based on the Sullivan brothers, a group of five brothers who were all killed in action while serving in the U.S. Navy during World War II on the USS Juneau. The movie is actually based on the Niland brothers, four siblings who all served in the U.S. Army during World War II. Three brothers—Robert, Preston, and Edward—were supposedly killed in action, which caused their remaining brother, Fritz (whom the titular Private Ryan was based on), to be shipped back to America so that the Niland family wouldn’t lose all of their sons. Edward, who was originally thought dead, was actually found alive after escaping a Japanese prison camp in Burma, making two surviving brothers out of the four who fought in the war.Saving Private Ryan4. THE ACTORS ACTUALLY WENT THROUGH BOOT CAMP.To get an idea of what WWII soldiers actually went through, the main squad of actors portraying the lead soldiers participated in a 10-day boot camp led by the film’s military advisor, retired former USMC Captain Dale Dye. Dye led the actors on an intensive field combat situation, leading the group on marches, living in tents, and eating MREs. They also received tactical training that included learning how to clean, assemble, and fire period-appropriate weapons. Dye can be seen as a War Department Colonel who gives General George Marshall the Ryan brother death notifications toward the beginning of the movie.5. ROBIN WILLIAMS HELPED MATT DAMON GET THE PART OF PRIVATE RYAN.Williams introduced Damon to Steven Spielberg in Boston during rehearsals for the movie Good Will Hunting. The director was also in town around the same time shooting Amistad, and Williams brought Damon along to say hi to Spielberg, whom Williams had previously worked with on Hook. Two weeks later, Spielberg contacted Damon about the part of Private Ryan.6. TOM SIZEMORE WAS NEARLY FIRED.PARAMOUNT HOME ENTERTAINMENTThe actor, who plays Sergeant Horvath, was heavily addicted to heroin prior to filming Saving Private Ryan in 1997. In order to keep the movie in line, and to force Sizemore to kick the habit, Spielberg swore to Sizemore that if the actor tested positive for drugs on-set—even on the last day of shooting—“he would fire me on the spot and shoot all 58 days that I'd worked over again with someone else.”7. GARTH BROOKS NEARLY PLAYED PRIVATE JACKSON.Frank Darabont was hired to do uncredited rewrites on Saving Private Ryan, and created the role of the Bible-quoting sniper, Private Jackson, to be played by country singer Garth Brooks. Brooks dropped out of the movie after Spielberg came onboard and cast Tom Hanks in the lead role. Apparently Brooks didn’t want to play second fiddle to Hanks, but Spielberg offered him a chance to play another role of his choosing. Instead of a specific role, Brooks allegedly said he wanted to play the “bad guy,” but in Saving Private Ryan there is no real bad guy other than the entire Wehrmacht, so Spielberg ultimately decided to drop Brooks from the movie.8. THE LOOK OF THE MOVIE CAME FROM REAL LIFE PHOTOGRAPHY.Spielberg and cinematographer Janusz Kaminski modeled the look of the film on actual newsreel footage from the era, and converted the modern lenses of the film’s shooting cameras to make them capture images more like cameras from the 1940s. They also modeled the look of the D-Day sequence on the bleached-out, grainy look of the D-Day photography shot by famed photojournalist Robert Capa.9. OMAHA BEACH WAS ACTUALLY IN IRELAND.Because the actual beaches in Normandy where Allied forces invaded France had strict filming restrictions, the opening D-Day scene needed to be shot elsewhere. Spielberg wanted an almost exact replica of the Omaha Beach landscape for the movie, including similar sand and a bluff similar to the one where German forces were stationed. A near match was found in Ireland at Ballinesker Beach, Curracloe Strand in Wexford. Over 2500 Irish Reserve Army troops were recruited to portray the Allied forces storming the beach.10. THE D-DAY SEQUENCE COST A WHOLE LOT OF MONEY.The D-Day scene alone cost $12 million because of the logistical difficulties and the realistic scope needed to complete the sequence. The entire budget of the movie was only $70 million. Spielberg didn’t storyboard any of the D-Day sequence.11. SPIELBERG HAD A BUSY YEAR BEFORE AND DURING FILMING.The director conducted the pre-production on Saving Private Ryan and the sequel The Lost World: Jurassic Park at the same time in 1996, and was originally supposed to direct the films back to back. But a rewrite by screenwriter David Franzoni on Amistad, another project he was developing around the same time, turned out to be so successful that Spielberg decided to direct that movie in between the two other movies. Amistad was directed after a four-week break that ended The Lost World and a six-week prep time before Saving Private Ryan.12. THE BOMBED OUT FRENCH CITY WAS ACTUALLY A SET BUILT OUTSIDE OF LONDON.Because the logistics of shooting a completely destroyed French city would be impossible, the fictional bombed out city of Ramelle was created entirely at the Hatfield Aerodrome, a now-closed WWII air base located about 30 miles outside of London. The entire half-demolished city set took four months to build. To add more believability to the area, tons of rubble was purchased from nearby construction sites and added to the set.13. NEARLY ALL OF THE UNIFORMS WERE CUSTOM MADE.Costume designer Joanna Johnston wanted to originally use period uniforms for the primary soldiers, but found that authentic WWII-era uniforms were too costly to buy and maintain. So 3500 custom-made military uniforms were created to outfit all of the actors portraying soldiers throughout the entire film. For the D-Day sequence alone, 2000 weapons were created, 500 of which could shoot blanks while the remaining 1500 were rubber replicas.14. THE MEANING OF “FUBAR” IS NSFW.The meaning of the phrase the soldiers utter to each other throughout the movie as a form of camaraderie is never explained. FUBAR is actually military slang for “F***ed Up Beyond All Recognition.”15. FOR MANY VETERANS, THE MOVIE WAS TOO PAINFUL TO WATCH.The film’s battle scenes were so realistic to veterans in the audience that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs set up a nationwide toll-free hotline for veterans and their family members to call if they felt unsettled by the war depicted onscreen.Saving Private Ryan (1998) 21 factual errors (moviemistakes.com)Factual error: The Tiger tanks portrayed in the movie are actually Soviet T-34s. You could tell by looking at their wheels. Real Tigers had interleaved wheels. These Tigers had the T-34 suspension. Obviously, Tigers are so rare (only one operational Tiger left) that another tank had to be substituted. But an excellent job was done to make the T-34s look like Tigers.Factual error: In the end scene, after the final battle, Reiben is seen calling for a medic to assist Miller. When he gets up to go and find a medic, he picks up his BAR by the barrel. Having just fought in a fairly long action with a high rate of fire, his BAR barrel would be far too hot to touch, let alone pick the rifle up by. It would take 15 or 20 mins for it to cool down enough to handle. He should have picked it up by the foregrip (The wooden bit under the barrel).Factual error: In the scene where the Americans are fighting the Germans in Remelle, there are two Tiger 1 tanks. In reality, there were no Tiger tanks on the American front in Normandy. All Tigers in Normandy were placed on the British and Canadian front south of Caen.Factual error: The American troops at Ramelle bridge are supposed to be fighting the 2nd SS Panzer Division. Two things wrong: the 2nd SS never had Tiger tanks in Normandy, having turned over their Tiger battalion to another unit in Russia prior to being transferred to France. Second, in the scenes with the Tigers, a 1st SS Panzerkorps insignia (Crossed Keys) is seen on the front right hull of the Tigers; 2nd SS Panzer Division was never a part of 1st SS Panzerkorps.Factual error: In the scene where the American troops are storming the German radar station, you can see a few dead cows with oversized bellies provoked by putrefaction, which means that they were killed at least 12 hours ago. When one of the cows receives a bullet, you can see highly-oxigenated fully arterial red blood spurting from the wound, something impossible to happens in a dead body. Blood at this time of death should be nearly black or brown.Factual error: When Jackson takes out the German sniper, we see the German snipers point of view through his scope and he eventually spots Jackson who fires at him. First you see the flash, then the bang, and then the German sniper gets hit through his scope. This is wrong because bullets from a powerful sniper rifle travel much faster than sound, he couldn't have heard the shot before he got hit.Factual error: When the Americans arrive in the first village (the one where the family is marooned upstairs in what's left of their house) there is a car. The car's registration plate follows the post-war system, not introduced until 1950.Factual error: The "tank traps" (actually designed to flip landing craft, when submerged) on Omaha are back-to-front. The bottom of the pole that that rests on the other two should be nearest the sea and not as shown in the movie. Documentary footage of the actual landings will confirm this.Factual error: After the soldiers' initial disembarkment they are shown crouching in groups near the shore and later running towards the bunkers. Unlike the movie shows, anything even as simple as crouching behind the tank traps, let alone actually standing up and running, was impossible at Dog Green Sector and indeed for anyone when pinned down by a machine gun from a high far-away position. In the real-life landing at Dog Green within 7-10 minutes all the officers of the landing company were dead and the survivors inert. They could do nothing except throw away all their equipment and slowly crawl up the beach, shielded from bullets by the incoming tide and dead bodies. 1 hour 40 minutes after landing twelve (known) survivors made it to the base of the cliffs. Only 2 had enough strength left to go on and fight with another group. (The second wave, apart from one boat which was almost entirely killed, opted to land elsewhere when they saw the fate of the first wave.) In this way the movie rather poorly represents what it meant to make a properly opposed landing on D-Day - although whether this is justified or not is another matter.Factual error: During certain scenes in the movie, we see Jackson switching his Weaver M73B1 sniper scope on his M1903A4 sniper rifle with a Unertl sniper scope. The problem is that the Unertl scope was used exclusively by the U.S. Marines in the Pacific Theatre on their M1903A1 sniper rifle. Even if we accept the premise that the Unertl scope was a 'battlefield pickup', the mounts for the Weaver 73B1 and Unertl are entirely different. The Unertl mounts require modification of the upper handguard, and drilling and tapping of the barrel for a forward mounting block. In the bell tower (and other) scenes, it is clear the rifle has a stock upper handguard. Therefore, it could not accept the Unertl scope.Factual error: When Capt. Miller talks to the pilot of the crashed glider telling his story the guy says he lost 22 men in the crash. Only one problem: his glider is a Waco CG-4A (the similar-looking but larger Waco CG-13A wasn't used in the Normandy invasion). The maximum load for one of those was only 13 fully equipped troops and the two pilots, and that's without a jeep. As a jeep is visible in the rear of the fuselage, there couldn't possibly have been more than 6 men on that glider including the pilots, or it never would have gotten airborne.Factual error: When the group is trying to take the German radio tower and the medic gets killed, the American hiding behind the cow is watching through a small rifle scope. The adjustment knobs should be on the top and side of the scope when held level and upright. The American is holding them crooked which means the crosshairs should be crooked, but when it shows the view through the scope, the crosshairs are perfectly vertical and horizontal.Factual error: Some of the ammunition cans were made after World War II; they have smooth sides instead of a recessed border and "low area."Factual error: In the scene where the soldiers are going through the dog tags to try and find Ryan, they all have the smaller chains attached to the tags. When taking the dog tags off a dead body, the smaller link that you see attached is broken away from the necklace around the dead body. It would be rare, if ever, that a soldier would take the time to reconnect the smaller chain. More likely, he would simply take the tag.Factual error: During the final fight scene the German armour enters the town (a built up area) with open-topped AF V's and unbuttoned tanks. The Germans learned not to do this, greatly to their cost, at Stalingrad and other urban battles. It is very unlikely they would have risked their scarce armour in such a way without first securing the area with infantry.Factual error: The typing pool scene, in which we first learn about Private Ryan, features vintage typewriters of various makes and models being used to notify families of soldiers killed in action. One of the first typewriters we see is a Swiss-made Hermes Ambassador from the mid-1950's.Factual error: After Miller has been shot, whilst trying to reach the detonator to blow up the bridge, we see him sat against what is supposed to be a wartime German motorcycle and sidecar. The vehicle in question is actually a Russian Ural M66 which was only produced during the 1970s.Factual error: When Mellish and Henderson are fighting in the room in Romell, twice German Steilgrenates are thrown into the room. Both times they are picked up and thrown back and then the grenades explode. This is highly unlikely since the Steilgrenate had a short (4.5 sec) fuse and would likely have blown up in the hand of the person throwing it back. It was more common that Germans threw back American grenades which had a much longer fuse delay.Factual error: Miller and his men finally find Ryan in the scene where Ryan destroys a German half track with a bazooka. The camera does not show Ryan firing the bazooka, but you hear the blast and see the effect of the shot hitting the half track, firing twice in about a three second interval. The problem is that a bazooka is a single shot weapon, and must be reloaded by hand. This takes time, perhaps 20 seconds if not more.Factual error: Near the end, Melish fires through the wall and kills a German. The blood then streams round the corner way to quickly to be real. It moves at the consistency of water. It then stops abruptly. Not the characteristics of blood.Factual error: When Upham and Mellish are conversing before the fight at Ramelle, Mellish is seen placing Mk. 2 Pineapple grenades into Upham's helmet. The "spoon" on the grenades does not look to be the correct type. The ones in the film appear to be modern, folded, sheet metal painted dark green; World War II era ones are a simple piece of stamped, sheet steel. The modern ones are angular while World War II ones have a slight curve.Tom Hanks signs on to produce, act in veteran-supported D-Day film11 Crazy Behind-The-Scenes Facts About 'Saving Private Ryan'1. Matt Damon Had It EasyBut the other actors? Not so much. The main group of actors went through a grueling 10-day boot camp prior to filming, but Matt Damon was spared the hell week so that the other actors’ resent for him would show in their performances.Media Source2. Spielberg Would Have Re-Shot The Movie Because Of HeroinActor Tom Sizemore, who plays Sergeant Horvath, was a heroin addict prior to filming the movie. Spielberg forced Sizemore to take drug tests on set and vowed that if the actor tested positive for drugs, he would fire him. According to Sizemore, Spielberg said “he would fire me on the spot and shoot all 58 days that I’d worked over again with someone else.”Media Source3. D-Day Was Shot In IrelandThe Normandy beach where D-Day had actually occurred had strict filming restrictions, so the Omaha Beach sequence was actually filmed in Ireland. More than 2,000 Irish Reserve Army troops were recruited to storm the beach during the battle scenes.Media Source4. It Took Four Weeks To Film The Omaha Beach BattleTo this day, the D-Day sequence in Saving Private Ryan is considered one of the best, most realistic battle scenes in cinema. To accomplish this feat, Spielberg spent four weeks filming the sequence, which cost an extraordinary 12 million dollars and was never storyboarded in order to enhance the realism of the battle.Media Source5. Damon Wasn’t The Only Actor Considered For Private RyanSpielberg wanted a relatively unknown actor for the part of Private Ryan, which ultimately backfired when Matt Damon skyrocketed to stardom right before Saving Private Ryan due to his role in Good Will Hunting. Another actor that was considered for the role of Private Ryan was Neil Patrick Harris.6. Other A-List Stars Were Also Considered For Tom Hanks’ RoleTom Hanks, who played Captain John Miller, received an Academy Award nomination for the lead role in Saving Private Ryan. He wasn’t the only high-profile actor considered for the part, though. Spielberg also considered Harrison Ford and Mel Gibson before choosing Hanks (definitely the right choice, in my book).Media Source7. It’s Loosely Based On A True StorySaving Private Ryan is partly based on the real-life story of the Niland brothers, who fought for the U.S. during World War II. Three of the brothers were thought to have been killed in action, so the last remaining Niland brother was shipped back home so the family wouldn’t lose all of the sons. One of the other Niland brothers, Edward, was ultimately found alive after surviving a Japanese prison camp.Media Source8. Matt Damon’s Ad-Lib Story Made It Into The MovieRemember that scene where Private Ryan rambles on about spying on his brother and an “ugly” in the barn? Well, none of it was in the script. Matt Damon ad-libbed the entire story, and Steven Spielberg felt that it was very true to Ryan’s character so he kept it in the movie.Media Source9. The Ammunition Was Made Of WoodThe spare ammunition hanging around the actors' necks during the battle scenes was made of wood instead of metal simply because the metal would have been too heavy.Media Source10. Actual Amputees Were Hired For The Landing SceneDuring the D-Day scene, somewhere between 20 and 30 actual amputees portrayed injured soldiers in order to make the scene more realistic. The maimed American soldiers that you see during the landing scene? They’re actually Irish amputees.Media Source11. Many Veterans Couldn’t Make It Through The FilmThe battle scenes in Saving Private Ryan were so realistic that many veterans walked out of theaters mid-movie. In preparation for the film’s release, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs also established a special hotline for veterans to call if the movie brought on PTSD.Media Source10 movie mistakes: Saving Private RyanSaving Private Ryan is a 1998 film set during the Invasion of Normandy in June 1944. It was directed by Steven Spielberg and stars Tom Hanks and Matt Damon.It won 5 Academy awards and a Golden Globe Award for best motion picture. It has been praised for the realistic way in which it filmed the battle scenes.The film magazine Empire described the sequence showing the landing of U.S. forces at Omaha Beach as the ‘best battle scene of all time.’The scene was named Number One on TV Guide’s ’50 Greatest Movie Moments.’Omaha Beach was the name given to one of two positions where U.S forces landed in Normandy on D-Day, 6 June 1944. The other was Utah Beach.The action in the scene is indeed very close to actual historical events. As shown in the film, many soldiers suffered from sea sickness. Many were shot even before they could reach the shore.Once ashore it was difficult to join up with other units on account of the heavy enemy fire. German machine guns in fortified positions shot at them, and they were continually shelled by artillery.Spielberg meant to honor those who fought, and so he did not want the battle to look romantic as many World War II war films before had done. He wanted to show the real suffering and intense emotion of the soldiers.The Landing scene was enormously difficult to do. The cast had to be militarily trained to do as the actual soldiers would have done. Attention was paid to every little detail of costume and scenery and military equipment.Just for a bit of fun – our chums over at moviemistakes.com have listed 103 mistakes from Saving Private Ryan – we think that’s a bit obsessive, so we are only going to share 10 of them! Enjoy!!Helmet moving aroundAfter the Battle at the Beach is won and Captain Miller has his new orders, he goes to the group of translators and map readers to collect Upham.He tells him to leave everything but his helmet, and in his stress and confusion, Upham knocks his typewriter, helmet, and other stuff from the table on the floor.When Upham then picks up the German helmet by mistake and goes back to get his own helmet, all the stuff he knocked off the table has jumped back onto the table!Take 2In the climactic battle in the French Village of Ramelles, the Americans face an overwhelming amount of German Armor. Two tiger tanks, two Panther tanks and more.Without any adequate anti-tank weapons they are forced to use sticky bombs to immobilize the first Tiger and turn it into a roadblock.When the soldiers attach the sticky bombs to the roadwheels of the Tiger, watch closely, and you can see a chunk of rubber missing.Fast forward a bit when Captain Miller tries to take down the second Tiger which is then crossing the bridge. That tank too has a chunk of rubber missing, from the exact same roadwheel.Bullet effect packAt the beginning of the movie, Captain Miller wades through the sea with another man who has a rather weird looking object in his uniform pocket.This is unmistakably a charge because a second later the man is shot dead smack bang in the middle of that pocket.Helmet FlipNow at the end of the movie, Captain Miller has just died, Private Ryan is standing there staring down in disbelief at the corps and the upside down helmet next to his leg.The next shot, looking over Ryan’s shoulder, the helmet has flipped!Clean FaceAfter Captain Miller lands on Omaha Beach, a mortar round lands behind him. He kneels in the sand with a face that is covered in bloody water.This is immediately followed by a young soldier shouting at him, and Captain Miller is suddenly in chest deep water with a clean face!Color changeWhen the bridge at Ramelle needs to be defended, there is a soldier that tries to attach a sticky-bomb to a Tiger Tank.He walks out to the tank in his beige uniform but in the next shot his uniform has changed color and is now dark green.When he gets hit, you can see the puppet in the dark green uniform exploding.Disappearing woundBack to the beach, Captain Miller kneels behind a Czech Hedgehog and talks into his radio. A soldier in front of the obstacle gets hit three or four times.In the first scene he gets it in the upper leg area, but when Miller leaves the cover of the hedgehog, that bullet wound has disappeared!Changing positionBefore Miller and his patrol are going to take on the radar tower and bunker they discuss their attack strategy. Hiding behind some bushes, you can see Jackson being two feet on the left of Reiben.When the scene cuts to Jackson, he has moved and is now behind Reiben.Rifle hand changesWhen Captain Miller and his soldiers have reached the relative safety of the bunker on Omaha Beach, he orders Jackson to move to a crater.Jackson kisses his cross, which he brings to his mouth with his right hand. However, in the next shot, his rifle is in that hand.Chest prostheticWhen the medic gets shot, look for the part where Upham brings the bags to the injured medic. There is some fog which then reveals the wounded medic.Watch carefully at the neck in the shot when the soldier rips the medic’s shirt away. For a split second, the fake stomach vest he wears is visible, until the actor realises his mistake and quickly covers it back up.Soldier who was flown home after his five older brothers were killed