Top 10 Aerial Combat Films 

You need to watch the 1983 aviation historical drama film, “The Right Stuff”.

Top gun is fantasy. So while great filming, doesn't have the brutal reality experience by real pilots in real combat! This really should push it down the list well behind the likes of Battle of Britain

@HollywoodMarine0351 I love the movie and the book is a ripper mate, but there's not an iota of "aerial combat" involved in the movie. If you read Tom Wolfe's book, upon which the film is very loosely based, there is some reference to the back story of Gen. Chuck Yeager's combat experience. There is also brief mention of it in a single scene in the film version, but old son, The Right Stuff is not a film depicting "aerial combat" With all due respect sir, warm regards from Sydney 🤙

@@christiankirkwood3402 I said watch the movie and didn’t mention anything about it being a aerial combat movie. 🫡

flight of the intruder is one of the best imo same with iron eagle no mention of red baron which was odd or flying tigers or the black sheep

I think Flight of the Intruder deserves more than a mere mention, in my opinion it should be in the top five. Top Gun on the other hand just doesn't deserve 2nd. Battle of Britain certainly should be at least 3rd, if not 2nd. Dunkirk is a great movie, but it's not a great aviation one. I would give it an honorable mention at best.

One of the mosquitoes from the movie is on display at Cosford Air Museum

And that movie was the inspiration for the attack on the Death Star in Star Wars, not the Dambusters, as stated here. I remember Lucas saying that himself.

Absolutely, I saw it with my big brother and went back to see it again alone and they wouldn't let me in! Got on DVD now along with Mosquito Squadron which shares some of the same scenes.

Thats right. Mosquito for ever

Fun Fact: A Recon Mosquito was the very first Allied Aircraft to encounter a Me-262 intercepting them over their mission area, they were punched through a bit and got spooked by their exit door being ripped away by the intense evasive maneuvers thinking they received a killing blow, but recovered and got away safely, quite uneasy about what they just encountered.

I think 633 was the actual inspiration for the attack on the Death Star. Compare the shots from the German Ack-ack with the Empire's guns.

Only the director can explain what inspired any scene. He has mentioned that Star Wars characters and plot was inspired by Kurosawa Akira samurai era movie The Hidden Fortress. No aviation or Death Star in this film. He also mentioned watching all the old aviation combat movies and these inspired much of the space combat scenes. It is fun to speculate on the origin of scenes.

The opening scene when he asked "Pearl Tower" for permission for take off, afterburner lit, release the brakes, shoved the throttle forward, pulled back on the stick for a vertical climb, sent chills up my spine! When I listen to it, I CRANK THE VOLUME WAY UP!

Devotion was chronically under-promoted in my opinion, should have received so much more attention

Hear, hear. Great film.

midway is an unreal movie, top for sure

I was wondering where Hurricane was tbh when watching this list, that and Devotion are excellent movies. Even if Devotion is less combat based, it still has some really amazing scenes and really helps portray the F8F and F4Us

The physics in Midway were kinda shit

Personally I found Hurricane disappointing on a couple of levels, the amount of modern and non-english dialogue for one, ('Roger that!', 'Thanks for the invite', etc) and the CGI air-combat was very unimpressive, planes under attack flying straight and level while pilots marvelled at bullets flying past them for a while before reacting, etc. The aircraft movements were slow and uninspiring, in short the air combat was dull. The Hurricane and the Poles deserved better.

@@IgnoredAdviceProductions not kinda, totally! Terrible remake of original Midway

Sherdil belongs to Pakistan

A great one that people forget.

Damn yes! That was awesome for flight sequences. And don't forget Red tails either.

Yeah, there was so much done in the making of Battle of Britain, the acquiring of so many WW2 fighter aircraft (Luftwaffe and British), real aircraft of that battle. I have 2 versions of the movie, in one it is a 2-DVD version that has the back story information of the preparation of it (some Spitfires taken from museums to prep for the movie etc.), coordination of filming, filming & dangers encountered filming in other countries - that 2nd DVD itself is worth mention. I mean, I do like Top Gun (and have in my collection), but Battle of Britain is better all around.

yeah, I dunno..it was May 1986 I just graduated Navy Boot & Top Gun was first movie I saw once we transitioned "mainside"..obviously we didn't wanna provoke the Russians but there was no love lost at the time..Cold War was still in full swing and brass never lost chance to remind us that our #1 ENEMY WAS THE USSR!!! Notices about Mig-29 Fulcrum was posted in hallways of C-A Schools I attended..pretty sure Charlie mentioned all Mav was interested in was learning about "the (new) MiG (-28)"..and yes I think you are correct that it never mentioned Russians specifically any new MiG design would certainly be solely flown by "Tha ROO-skies". I do KNOW that 4 yrs later "Hunt for Red October" came out in March 1990..and in post it was noted that these events depicted happened in 1984..just so we could all be nice friends in the wake of the Berlin Wall being taken down in 1989 (something that happend DURING filming of Red October)

Just to quantify my observation which is also aligned with a few ex U.S. Naval Aviators, well known here on RU-vid also one ex Airforce, ex Naval Aviator, also well known here on RU-vid, all of whom have extensively reviewed both movies, and like myself are big fans of both Top Gun films. There are extremely widespread, commonly known and very widely stated references from Tony Scott to Tom Cruise, the production team, screenplay writers and editorial, plus ALL the actual military Aviators involved in these films, that no continent, country or national origin or identity be given or used in reference to the opposition aircraft. Add to that, sir, the fact that U.S.N. F5s aircraft were used to depict the MIG 28 opposition. That's a proverbial ocean of tactful & absolute respect for political and military sensitivities as you "generally" try to express, not to mention political influences on the films on the proviso that current service, combat aircraft, aircrew, maintenance & logistical and operations personal as well as actual aircraft carriers, are provided for these production's, for "rent" and running cost's, within a time window and subject to very minimal periods of operational time constraints. Fact is, the F5s doesn't resemble a MIG 28. At all. Great credit must be allowed and acknowledged regards the production of both movies. FYI, it's abundantly clear that in Top Gun Maverick, that the insignia on the opposition F14 is brilliantly imaginative... likewise and retrospectively the insignia used on the black painted F5s "MIG 28" opposition does RESEMBLE a country from the era, however it is definitely fictional. Hey... we all know which nation was "portrayed" in Top Gun as in hemisphere and continental location relevant to 1986. We all know the same sort of thing geopolitically and geographically as with Top Gun Maverick - a new opposition antagonist for a new era. Maaate... think about it...these film makers can't go calling out actual nations as aggressors, especially when they want a decent return on the investment by not treading on politically sensitive toes and to keep the masses, worldwide, contented and happy with the movie.. and make money worldwide 🌐 Consider this... how many aircraft, from actual MIG 21 to F15 types could've been used to portray... the MIG 28. Noteworthy here sir, is that the opposition aircraft/bandits in Top Gun Maverick are based on Sukhoi Su 57 aircraft, yet NEVER referenced verbally or otherwise in the film or by the production team other than "5th generation" combat/fighter aircraft. The people who made this film from Tony Scott down, the Navy, the government had to play it based on an "enemy" threat - something the U.S. military are well and truly, constantly maintained in preparedness for - yet naming a political affiliation by nationally is not possible in the name of diplomacy, peace, goodwill and common sense movie making, money earning popularity. Take the requisite time to realise I'm actually acknowledging your point as realistic . Very warm regards to you from us here in Tuckombil via Alstonville and East Ballina 800km north of Sydney via Maroubra. MATE 😉 👍🤙

@@christiankirkwood3402 no worries we're all friends amigo..and I'm certainly not arguing your point..I think I have to realize that you're more referring to the modern-day Maverick movie where certainly we don't want to go pissing off someone that might buy a ticket.. but back in 1986 especially with all the Red Dawn Rambo anti-Russian movies where no one much cared at all that the Soviets might be seen as the bad guys.. I think it might be more of Hollywood wanting to play nice..I can just about guarantee at the time the US Navy wouldn't care one bit if the Soviets came across looking like aggressive antagonists..G'Day from Red River, Texas

@joe3591 Hey amigo, I've thoroughly referred to BOTH films, particularly with references to the actual aircraft and insignia. I provided a very decent overview of BOTH films mate. I think you oughta actually read and not just see words and miss the mark. No ill intent intended old son. I'm 61, I too am well aware and all too familiar with what was depicted in the og film. I think you miss the point. Go well, nice to meet you mate 👍