Startknob From Germany, joined May 2004, 156 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 20484 times:
Outside / shape:
Take An A380, semingly the A389, flat it to a round hull shape, take the A330/A340 tail, combine the A330/340 winglets with these massive wings (makes the ewinglets inconvenient smaller). The wings are far too large - hey, this is an airliner, not a F 15!
Crew rest room:
BS, 2x in the aft and the med-aft of the hull - "great" idea (who's desining that?) to have Captain and FO's walk acroos half of the bird to their rest room - BS.
show me that you place 800 pax in this bird with 7 Galleys - no asian domestic seating, please
3x HAL 2000 stolen from "2001" - lame. And in NO airliner there would be room wasted by nice looking and a stylish assembly of computers - BS. Obvioulsy the film needs a scene in this area and therefore this - hmm - assignment.
Not a nice loking plane IMHO.
When playing cat and mice it's imperative to know, who's the cat.
BDKLEZ From Ireland, joined Jun 2005, 1735 posts, RR: 15 Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 20440 times:
Seems to me that if Hollywood can spend XXX millions of dollars on producing a big-budget movie, surely it won't cost them that much more to have a "qualified person" advise them on the actual physics of a/c design and from that, come up with something a little less like a picture that my 6 year-old daughter has drawn!
[Edited 2005-11-21 02:17:56]
Trespassers will be shot; survivors will be shot again!
Boeing4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 20237 times:
Looks like a good movie. I guess I'll have to wait for the DVD since it appears I've missed it. Lousy college, lol.
As for the E-474, interesting take, though I coubt the avionics bay would be so friggin' big. Plus the "attic" would be jammed up with ducting and wires...maybe an overhead crew rest or two.
Looks like the A380 will have a run for its money.
I couldn't really tell from the graphics, but it looks as if those are 744 style winglets, only bent back as if to actually hook the air. Now I'm a second year AE, I don't take my Aerodynamics class until next year, but wouldn't that induce drag? One seemingly good idea, if you pay attention to the detail in the graphic it looks as if an A300 style wingtip fence has been added to the top of the vertical stabilizer. Amazing noone's thought of that before...but I'm sure someone who has taken the requried Aerodynamics course will probably explain why that is.
MD80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2651 posts, RR: 10 Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 19482 times:
There is no need for a "vertical stab'let" since the vertical stabilizer generates no lift (air pressure on both sides are considered equal). Basically it would be only for aesthetics...that is if it was not so fugly.
Jodie should not quit her day job .... that plane is awful, horrendous.
HiFi From Brazil, joined Apr 2005, 192 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 19432 times:
The movie is very far from reality, of course... being an engineer sometimes ruins it in these kinds of movies... I can't really blame them, but the part where jodie foster, not the aircraft designer, not the avionics engineer, but the propulsion engineer, sabotages the aircraft, by just inverting some conections (and knowing exactly what she is doing) is a little bit too much. But hey, it's the turning point