PROSA From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5577 posts, RR: 5 Posted (12 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1656 times:
Here is an interesting movie blooper as reported at Nitpickers.com It looks like this Registered Nitpicker is quite an aviation enthusiast.
Movie Nitpick Number: 39752
Submitted by Registered Nitpicker Number: 27349
Movie Title: Cast Away - 2000
Nitpick Category: Other
Approximate time of nitpick: first 10 minutes
Summary: Engine #2 Fan rotation
Details: First, the aircraft is an MD-11. It can't be an MD-10 because Fedex didn't acquire the first one until July 2000. It can't be a DC-10 because it has all CRT displays in the cockpit. Thus it's an MD-11. When the airframe breaks apart you see the wing spar sink along with the forward fuselage. That means that engines 1 and 3, which are attached to the wings are also sinking. It is very unlikely that the motors would have been intact anyway because they sit lower than the fuselage. Any ditching would have ripped the motors off the wings because that is probably what would contact the ocean first. Thus the only motor that could have been spinning would be #2. and it's rotating in the wrong direction. Even if it was a modified airframe with a Rolls-Royce engine (they rotate opposite Pratt and Whitney and G.E. engines) it's clearly shown that the Fan section is rotating in the opposite direction of the blade angle.
"Let me think about it" = the coward's way of saying "no"
Woodsboy From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 1028 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (12 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 948 times:
I noticed the engine misplacement in the nacelle right off the bat, and yes, it was an MD-11, at least in the crash. He did however get on an A300.......with all the FedEx everything in the movie, its a wonder someone didnt notice that. The crash was all wrong, engines didnt come off the wings....etc.......etc.
Spark From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (12 years 1 month 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 881 times:
You have to be real careful who you bring stuff like that up with, because 99.9% of the people would think you've jumped off the deep end (I don't, but I'm nuts as well).
Of course, if reality were a part of the movie, Tom Hanks would've died in the crash to begin with. I doubt that person could've survived the crash (just try to hold your breath while he is under). I also have my doubts that a plane could've gotten that far off the radar screen (especially FedEX, where you can see if your driver has stopped for a pit stop with your package). They would find the wreckage in a matter of hours, and most likely know the exact spot the plane went down.
For the movies sake, which I enjoyed, it would've been a pretty short movie. Guy yells at a bunch of Russians, jumps on a plane, eats dinner, Jumps on another plane, and dies.