Veyron race fake?

[lagunengrune36]

Originally Posted by MattD1zzl3

I love seeing threads where a member finally finds out top gear is scripted. Its like seeing a child discover santa claus or the easter bunny aren't real

Whoa! You mean Santa and Eastern Bunny aren't real?

[quarkburger]

Hi, I'm one of those guys who just discovered Top Gear (actually a couple of months ago), and found something funny going on. And yes, it's no surprise to me that these shows are heavily edited. i.e. the caravan fire, the Reliant Robin Shuttle explosion on impact (I'd guess more parts of that were faked but which?). I see a lot of people here saying well at least the results of the races are real. I think they are planned to produce a certain result. Like the Veyron vs Cessna race mentioned before.

I'm a pilot and was interested in the route they took and was trying to find out where they took off from. The show says they started in Alba, IT and the graphic said they took off from Cuneo in Italy. I noticed the runway they took off from was runway 17. I looked for an airport with a runway 17 near Cuneo and there wasn't one. Using GoogleEarth, I couldn't even find an airport in Italy with a runway 17 that looked like the airport on the show. Then I found it... in France. Mandelieu airport in Cannes. So they went about 100 mi on scooters from Alba IT, in the wrong direction to Cannes FR, while passing all those other airports on the way? Oh, and if they were flying towards Nice, it was after they rode past it on their scooters lol. I can see now why Jerome was almost out of Italy by the time they took off.

Other things to note:
A direct route from Alba to London is 522 nautical miles. The highest mountain on the route is about 10,000ft.
The 182 can fly at 145 knots up to 18,100 ft. They could have easily flown over the mountains, and arrived in London after flying around 4 hours. No need to take the long route, refuel, or stop for the night. So they could have beat the Veyron by 9 hours (7-8 hours if you count the time to go to a closer airport & preflight).

I know this show is primarily for entertainment, and it's great, but they do seem to imply that at least these great challenges are somewhat real. But come on, this wasn't even close.

[stevanford1]

I think you have just proven that top gear stage their races.

[BlaRo]

Good sleuthing, Detective quarkburger. Now all we need is a Japanese train engineer and we'll have our bases covered!

Originally Posted by Meio

Stop picking on the poor Americans, they can't help it.

[quarkburger]

Thanks for the welcome Despite this discovery, I still love the show. It's filling up my DVR system!

[teeb]

Originally Posted by quarkburger

Other things to note:
A direct route from Alba to London is 522 nautical miles. The highest mountain on the route is about 10,000ft.
The 182 can fly at 145 knots up to 18,100 ft. They could have easily flown over the mountains, and arrived in London after flying around 4 hours. No need to take the long route, refuel, or stop for the night. So they could have beat the Veyron by 9 hours (7-8 hours if you count the time to go to a closer airport & preflight).

I don't doubt your knowledge here. Could it (potentially) be the case that James May doesn't have a "going over mountains" bit on his flying license, in the same way he can't fly at night?

In the back of my head I remember him saying something like that in the ep, but it's bee na long while since I've watched it.

[otispunkmeyer]

also, i am under the impression that most of the filming isnt done during the actual race. (thats if they actually do it at all) dont they capture a lot of shots on the drive back or at a later date?

[vikiradTG2007]

Originally Posted by teeb

I don't doubt your knowledge here. Could it (potentially) be the case that James May doesn't have a "going over mountains" bit on his flying license, in the same way he can't fly at night?

In the back of my head I remember him saying something like that in the ep, but it's bee na long while since I've watched it.

Well he did. At the time, he was not allowed to fly at night, nor over a specific height. And that specific height was most likely lower than the Alps.

Originally Posted by otispunkmeyer

also, i am under the impression that most of the filming isnt done during the actual race. (thats if they actually do it at all) dont they capture a lot of shots on the drive back or at a later date?

The production notes say that it took nearly a month to get the best shots after driving back down the same route after the race had finished. So, probably, a month of playing on the French highways... with Stiggie driving.

[quarkburger]

Originally Posted by teeb

I don't doubt your knowledge here. Could it (potentially) be the case that James May doesn't have a "going over mountains" bit on his flying license, in the same way he can't fly at night?

In the back of my head I remember him saying something like that in the ep, but it's bee na long while since I've watched it.

James just says "nope, can't do it". You could be right about different restrictions in Europe. I'm from the US, and with a standard pilot's license, you can fly at night. I know that's not the case in the UK, or maybe all of Europe. But there's no need to fly at night if the trip only takes four hours. To fly over 12,500ft in an unpressurized plane such as the 182, we're required to use bottled oxygen. You don't need a permit for that, you just go rent a bottle, which isn't expensive. Do you need a bottled oxygen permit in Europe? I don't know.

As for flying over mountains, there are all kinds of tricky wind currents around mountains that make it dangerous to fly through the mountains, and you should have special training to do that. But, if you fly at least 2000 ft above them, it should be no problem. There looked like there were passes along the route which don't take you too far out of the way where 2000' above the terrain would be safely below 12,500 ft, and you wouldn't need bottled oxygen.

[quarkburger]

Originally Posted by vikiradTG2007

The production notes say that it took nearly a month to get the best shots after driving back down the same route after the race had finished. So, probably, a month of playing on the French highways... with Stiggie driving.

I think it's worth it to do that. It does look very good.

[ed1911n]

I know lots of stuff on Top Gear is scripted but I've always believed, or wanted to believe, that the races are real, but, like others have pointed out, they have chosen a route where they know it will be a very close race. Obviously the longer the trip, the more advantage a plane will have over a car. Try racing a plane from the UK to, say japan. Or from New York to Hawaii.

Andy saying they worked too much on the script to make the race funny doesnt have to mean the race itself is staged though, it could be just the comedy bits.

Anyway, I used to believe pro wrestling was real when I was a kid, so...

[Aston Martin]

Veyron race was freakin awesome... close thread.

[otispunkmeyer]

lets be fair here.... who'd wanna see a race where one team finished hours ahead of the other? it doesnt make television, and also..... it doesnt look too good when the car doesnt win, this is afterall a show about cars run by a man that doesnt really like public transport or cyclists.

[Turkus2]

Sorry if I'm a ghost on this forum!

But I believe Jeremy made a glaring point about television in general (why I'm not "up in arms" about Bear Gryll's being "fake") when he mentioned that after a race they go back and shoot what Andy calls "ups and passes." That being the shots where the cameraman is ahead of the car and the car comes up on it or passes it. Such shots are completely ridiculous if Jezza's improvising his route or whatever.

I, for one, believe they do actually run the race and, if the outcome is close enough to be negligible, they just script the car to win be it via an excuse (such as James' pilot restrictions) or some unknown but completely believable variable. They then go back to film it and make it pretty.

I'm of the same feeling with "Man vs. Wild." The news story came out that Bear Grylls may drop the line that he doesn't know what he's doing but he did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I think its irrelevant when you watch the things he does. But more importantly, he DOES actually perform the challenge, but after they're done, they go back out there and get the "glamor shots" that make it a "television show."

No one even REMOTELY familiar with any sort of high production value should be surprised about such things.

-mC

[quarkburger]

Originally Posted by Turkus2

I, for one, believe they do actually run the race and, if the outcome is close enough to be negligible, they just script the car to win be it via an excuse (such as James' pilot restrictions) or some unknown but completely believable variable. They then go back to film it and make it pretty.

Did you read post #42 in this thread? Does that change your mind?

[Seasonone]

Originally Posted by quarkburger

As for flying over mountains, there are all kinds of tricky wind currents around mountains that make it dangerous to fly through the mountains, and you should have special training to do that. But, if you fly at least 2000 ft above them, it should be no problem. There looked like there were passes along the route which don't take you too far out of the way where 2000' above the terrain would be safely below 12,500 ft, and you wouldn't need bottled oxygen.

Well I can't say for sure but both Hammond and May are insured for quite a bit of money. I can't imagine the BBC or the insurance company would be too happy having them do something as dangerous as though the mountains, especially if there were high winds or low visibility that day.

They reshoot all the time, just because it showed them take off from one spot doesn't mean they actually took off from there during the race. Clarkson has said on a few occasions the races aren't fake. They may predetermine routes to make the ending close but from what I have read they both want to win.

[quarkburger]

Originally Posted by Seasonone

They reshoot all the time, just because it showed them take off from one spot doesn't mean they actually took off from there during the race. Clarkson has said on a few occasions the races aren't fake. They may predetermine routes to make the ending close but from what I have read they both want to win.

Ok, I'll accept that. Especially now that I see them saying they're landing in Lille but showing them landing back at Cannes lol. I still wonder where they took off from? Cannes FR, or Cuneo IT?

[Turkus2]

It doesn't, because I think it was just a production decision to go with the "prettier shot" as it were. If they think the details are irrelevant as long as most of the audience will be clueless as to locations, they'll just shoot wherever is the better location.

I still think they run the race and then make the call based on how it goes. Does the car win every time? I highly doubt it. But I do think they run it just to see what obstacles come up.

-mC

[Turkus2]

I'd like to bring this topic back from the dead for two reasons. One, how I explained it was exactly how Andy explained it (thanks, Andy. You're a trooper). Two, because someone asked me how I felt regarding the supposed "outcome."

Anywho:

Lots of people ask lots of questions about the races - how do you shoot them so nicely if you’re in a race? Are the results fixed? - that’s two popular ones.

Well, what we do is shoot the race in real time - car on the road, camera car alongside, no stopping for extra shots - get the result, and then the director and camera crew spend another two days after the race going back over the route to get the pretty shots.

You have to do this because a race shown on telly with just the shots you get on the move during the actual race will look shit, and you and us deserve better than that.

And in answer to the second question, no, the result is the result. If the car wins the car wins and vice versa.

I have the exact same belief when it comes to Man v. Wild. The public just does not grasp the concept of returning to the film site and doing "pick-ups."

-mC

[Rick914]

I'm also a some-time pilot. I don't have a clue about European airspace rules, but it's quite possible that the "shortest route" isn't available as a clearance from ATC.

(Like I said, I don't know what their VFR rules, etc are.)