Will You Help Me Write A Movie?

GST · Sat Aug 27, 2011 7:17 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 49):
A 747 must have half a dozen tanks at least. So you'd have several gauges, right. Also AFAIK it isn't that simple.

Even more reason for poor Hattie to have terror in her eyes!

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 49):
than address the pax at this stage!

Just in case, pax = passengers in airline jargon.

Apologies if our replies all came too late for your draft deadline.

Starlionblue · Sat Aug 27, 2011 8:18 am

Quoting GST (Reply 50):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 49):
A 747 must have half a dozen tanks at least. So you'd have several gauges, right. Also AFAIK it isn't that simple.

Even more reason for poor Hattie to have terror in her eyes!

Yes well what I meant is that in reality she couldn't just look at "the fuel gauge".

tdscanuck · Sat Aug 27, 2011 4:56 pm

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 49):
I'm having a very hard time with this dumping fuel scenario for several reasons.
- Sparks from an engine are no reason to dump fuel.
- Three hours to an airport, you really don't want to dump fuel.

If you can conjure up some scenario where you have fuel leaking onto a hot engine (basically, you've voided all the flammable fluid leakage zone design rules) I can imagine the decision to stop the leak by dumping rather than risk an in-flight fire *might* be made...but it's a really really long shot.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 49):
Is there really just one fuel gauge? A 747 must have half a dozen tanks at least. So you'd have several gauges, right.

On an EICAS airplane like a 747-400 there really is just one "gauge". It's down at the bottom right corner of the EICAS display and shows total fuel. If you want to see fuel by tank you pull up the fuel synoptic.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 49):
Even on a modern airliner, calculating remaining fuel and how far it will get you manually is not trivial. Different altitudes, winds and weight give very different consumption.

True. However, the FMC constantly does the "fuel over destination" calculation for your flight plan route and (for some FMC's) for your alternates too. It's relatively simple (~20 seconds, maybe a dozen key pushes) to see how much fuel you'll have at any particular airport for a given flight path. This includes engine-out performance figures too.

Tom.

waterdog · Sat Aug 27, 2011 7:18 pm

You guys have no idea how much I appreciate your help here ....
in the newest draft, I have made some pretty significant changes based entirely on the feedback in this forum.

- there will be no fuel dump - instead a rupture/slow leak
- the flight is now across the pacific not the atlantic, elimination all the gander/ st. john's airport alternatives
- there is going to be a fire on board - that will impact the hydraulics and other systems.
- the captain will radio "blindly" - not knowing if ATC can hear him

and that's only so far. I have a ton of notes that I've taken from here, and I'm still going through them looking for ideas and fixes to what's already there

Re the fire in the cargo hold idea - in an earlier draft we had crew going down (at sub 10K altitude) and actually tossing cargo into the sea to help them gain those extra couple of precious miles. This was removed largely because we were told it was simply not possible. That's fine, and I don't need it but my question is - can you in fact get into the cargo area during flight. I know Jodie Foster did it in Flightplan, but that didn't feel like a real airplane to me (with an almost empty hold, with a car in it and a coffin sitting all by itself like it was on display). Also, there is NO REASON for this to be a 747. It could be any jet that flies trans-pacific.

Paul

waterdog · Sat Aug 27, 2011 7:22 pm

oh, I almost forgot...
If you had say 250 passengers and 100 of them vanished from a big jet - would you feel anything? A little bump as you ditch around six tons of weight?

bluejuice · Sat Aug 27, 2011 7:25 pm

747 could be a Combi. You can access the cargo area from the passenger compartment.

GST · Sat Aug 27, 2011 7:52 pm

Quoting waterdog (Reply 54):

If you had say 250 passengers and 100 of them vanished from a big jet - would you feel anything? A little bump as you ditch around six tons of weight?

If they disappear relatively evenly across the cabin, you may not notice, the autopilot (if engaged) will immediately cater for any tendency for the aircraft to climb due to the sudden weight loss, so the pilot probably wouldn't notice unless they were hand flying, not likely in cruise. If on the other hand they disappear unevenly with more being taken from one end than the other the aircraft may become out of balance and become difficult to keep level. Passengers are generally allocated seats evenly through the aircraft in not full flights to spread the load. Given the number of seats on airliners the weight variation between passengers tends to average out evenly over the aircraft so we're not particularly worried about the morbidly obese guys sitting right at the front/back either, unless they are a full coach trip going somewhere. You can also run into center of gravity issues if loads of passengers decide to go forwards/backwards at once (generally difficult due to isle width but has led to crashes in small airliners), so a stampede forward for whatever reason could be another catalyst for an unplanned descent as the aircraft pitches down against the captain's efforts.

NoUFO · Sat Aug 27, 2011 10:25 pm

Quoting waterdog (Reply 54):
If you had say 250 passengers and 100 of them vanished from a big jet - would you feel anything? A little bump as you ditch around six tons of weight?

That reminds me of a funny and long-lasting thread about a plane full of birds that all start flying.
It think is safe to say that a sudden loss of 6 tons would cause some sort of a little bump.
I think "Little Boy", the nuclear bomb, weighted somewhere around 4 metric tons and the crew felt the bump when the bomb was dropped.

[Edited 2011-08-27 15:28:24]

Starlionblue · Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:27 am

Quoting waterdog (Reply 53):
- the captain will radio "blindly" - not knowing if ATC can hear him

This is plausible and there are interesting scenarios here. If you search on some threads on North Atlantic Tracks (NAT) you will see that you really can't reach ATC as easily in the middle of the ocean as over land. It's not like ATC radios are sitting in ships mid-ocean. Different radio, satellite phones, communication glitches.

I don't know all the details but AFAIK it is quite conceivable that pilots can't reach ATC immediately even in normal circumstances.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 52):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 49):
Is there really just one fuel gauge? A 747 must have half a dozen tanks at least. So you'd have several gauges, right.

On an EICAS airplane like a 747-400 there really is just one "gauge". It's down at the bottom right corner of the EICAS display and shows total fuel. If you want to see fuel by tank you pull up the fuel synoptic.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 49):
Even on a modern airliner, calculating remaining fuel and how far it will get you manually is not trivial. Different altitudes, winds and weight give very different consumption.

True. However, the FMC constantly does the "fuel over destination" calculation for your flight plan route and (for some FMC's) for your alternates too. It's relatively simple (~20 seconds, maybe a dozen key pushes) to see how much fuel you'll have at any particular airport for a given flight path. This includes engine-out performance figures too.

Thx for info Tom. I guess someone has to ram a screwdriver through the FMCs and the PFDs.

lowrider · Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:52 am

Quoting waterdog (Reply 53):
there is going to be a fire on board - that will impact the hydraulics and other systems.

That would simplify some of your problems, particularly if you go with a slow hydraulic leak that ignites, and self extinguishes when the system runs out of fluid.

Quoting waterdog (Reply 53):
Re the fire in the cargo hold idea - in an earlier draft we had crew going down (at sub 10K altitude) and actually tossing cargo into the sea to help them gain those extra couple of precious miles. This was removed largely because we were told it was simply not possible.

Its not.

Quoting waterdog (Reply 53):
can you in fact get into the cargo area during flight

Not on any widebody currently in passenger service that I know of, at least in the US.

Quoting waterdog (Reply 53):
Also, there is NO REASON for this to be a 747. It could be any jet that flies trans-pacific.

I would pick a 777 or a 767 doing LA (or SFO)- HNL. It can be done single crew, so there is no relief pilot to reduce the tension, and there are no diversions.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 58):
I don't know all the details but AFAIK it is quite conceivable that pilots can't reach ATC immediately even in normal circumstances.

When you are beyond VHF range, communications with ATC are commonly handled via HF or CPDLC (basically text messaging with ATC). There are many threads on these subjects, so I won't rehash them all here. Contact can also be established via SatPhone or SatComm. It is not as quick as VHF, mostly because you are talking to a relay and not directly to the controlling agency

Okie · Sun Aug 28, 2011 2:10 am

Why do I see the 2nd plane that rams the subject plane have both pilots disappear and the clipboard that one of the pilots was holding falls and clicks off the autopilot. Meanwhile the terror of the Flight Attendant while he/she bangs on the cabin door in utter terror as half the passengers have disappeared and the plane flies wildly across the sky until it crashes into subject airplane.

Okie

waterdog · Sun Aug 28, 2011 6:09 pm

So the pilot is in the flight deck - he just discovered his co-pilot has vanished into thin air. In the back the pax (i love not having to type 'passengers' in all of my notes) are freaking out trying to find their missing family members. But very quickly they're thrown into a literal panic - a mini riot.
The captain sees it all on the video screen and has to get control. An announcement and seat belt light don't work. So he does SOMETHING? and then drops the oxygen masks and everyone scrambles for a seat, straps in and shuts up.
What is the SOMETHING? would you bank the plane, drop the altitude quickly, do something else that would simulate heavy turbulence?

Paul

lowrider · Sun Aug 28, 2011 6:22 pm

Quoting waterdog (Reply 61):
What is the SOMETHING? would you bank the plane, drop the altitude quickly, do something else that would simulate heavy turbulence?

No. You want them to sit down, not injury them, possibly seriously, and compound your problems. Unanticipated violent motion does not calm people down. Look around you next time you fly through turbulence, particularly if it was unannounced. It generally does not add to the feeling of well being in the cabin. This is where you cue the flight attendants, and the megaphones (if they are still required as emergency equipment). Also, with the cabin of the aircraft being a fairly finite space, I think people (especially the more level headed ones, cue co-star here) will move from panic to acceptance fairly quickly and on their own. It would quickly be obvious that all the missing people are not in the lavs, nor did they step out to walk the dog.

tdscanuck · Sun Aug 28, 2011 6:48 pm

Quoting waterdog (Reply 54):
If you had say 250 passengers and 100 of them vanished from a big jet - would you feel anything? A little bump as you ditch around six tons of weight?

You'd get a noticeable bump.

Quoting GST (Reply 56):
If they disappear relatively evenly across the cabin, you may not notice, the autopilot (if engaged) will immediately cater for any tendency for the aircraft to climb due to the sudden weight loss, so the pilot probably wouldn't notice unless they were hand flying, not likely in cruise.

The autopilot would correct the trajectory, but the initial motion would be an abrupt upward acceleration (not a climb but more like an elevator going up) because the wing lift would be more than the aircraft weight. The autopilot can't compensate until the airplane starts moving and since this is an impulse change, it the bump would be pretty obvious.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 58):
I don't know all the details but AFAIK it is quite conceivable that pilots can't reach ATC immediately even in normal circumstances.

It's pretty normal if HF is having a bad day (solar flares, etc.).

Quoting lowrider (Reply 59):
Quoting waterdog (Reply 53):
can you in fact get into the cargo area during flight

Not on any widebody currently in passenger service that I know of, at least in the US.

Almost all jets have EE bay access in flight (if you know where to look), and they've all got a crash axe on the flight deck. If you can reach the EE bay with a crash axe, getting into the cargo bay isn't hard.

Quoting waterdog (Reply 61):
So he does SOMETHING? and then drops the oxygen masks and everyone scrambles for a seat, straps in and shuts up.
What is the SOMETHING? would you bank the plane, drop the altitude quickly, do something else that would simulate heavy turbulence?

The problem could be solved automatically for you...if there is a rapid decompression of the cabin (due to shrapnel from the collision or a failed engine) the proper procedure is to drop the oxygen masks and initiate a rapid descent (throttles to idle, speedbrakes up, dive to Mmo). This causes a fair amount of vibration and noise, an agressive pitch-over, deployment of oxygen masks and (on some aircraft) an automatic PA announcement to get in your seats, strap in, put on a mask, etc.

Tom.

GST · Sun Aug 28, 2011 7:05 pm

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 63):
but the initial motion would be an abrupt upward acceleration

Thanks for the correction Tom, I'm back from cloud cuckoo now (well partially).

Quoting waterdog (Reply 61):
So he does SOMETHING?

He would let the cabin crew deal with it, the pax are their job. There are a lot of cabin crew members on this forum so we'll hopefully get their input here. with any luck the technical trend of the thread thus far hasn't limited the followers to just the folks who work on the technical side of things. If not, possibly a second thread may be in order to handle crew interactions advice?

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 63):
The problem could be solved automatically for you...if there is a rapid decompression of the cabin (due to shrapnel from the collision or a failed engine)

Correct me if I am wrong, but does the collision not happen a while after the initial disappearances when everyone has had chance to settle down a little.

waterdog · Sun Aug 28, 2011 7:28 pm

Quoting GST (Reply 64):
Correct me if I am wrong, but does the collision not happen a while after the initial disappearances when everyone has had chance to settle down a little.

Yes. The pandemonium I am talking about comes right after the vanishings - before the ghost plane ever appears. So people are freaking out, fighting, searching, screaming, pounding on the flight deck door demanding answers etc. I know that if I were in that situation - I can't imagine thinking "i have to find my kids but that F.A. is insisting that I return to my seat with my tray in the upright position" is going to have much of an impact. He needs to get everyone sitting down and breathing deep, and that's why he decides to fake an airplane emergency so everyone fears imminent danger and returns to their seats. Then once they all of have to sit and shut up (masks) he can come on the intercom and tell everyone to chill out and that panic is real enemy right now, that he's trying to find answers etc. This is a forced "take a deep breath" moment.

Paul

waterdog · Sun Aug 28, 2011 7:32 pm

Quoting GST (Reply 64):
There are a lot of cabin crew members on this forum so we'll hopefully get their input here. with any luck the technical trend of the thread thus far hasn't limited the followers to just the folks who work on the technical side of things. If not, possibly a second thread may be in order to handle crew interactions advice?

So maybe I should try the Civil Aviation forum? ... I don't want to be a pain cross posting all over the place.

Paul

NoUFO · Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:13 pm

A cross post would be against the forum rules anyway, I think.

lowrider · Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:24 pm

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 63):
Almost all jets have EE bay access in flight (if you know where to look), and they've all got a crash axe on the flight deck. If you can reach the EE bay with a crash axe, getting into the cargo bay isn't hard.

With a crash axe and enough determination, there are few things that can't be reached. Since regular access from the cabin is not a priority, these may be obstructed. Even in an all cargo config, e and e doors are frequently obstructed by pallets. Now that you mention it though, I do recall an old TWA training film that showed the FE removing the carpet to access the e and e on a 747.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 63):
an agressive pitch-over,

I am not sure I would do this if I knew I had a large number of unrestrained people in the cabin, not to mention service carts. I know this can cause significant injuries, including compound fractures. Plus you run the risk of shifting a lot of weight forward, which may or may not help your situation.

Now if you drop the cabin pressure, even if you only raise it to 10,000 feet, people will run out of stamina quickly, as most people live at significantly lower elevations. You could even run it up to 15,000 and that would settle anyone but a dedicated marathoner down pretty quickly, with little risk to themselves. Plus, once folks are settled, you could restore normal cabin pressure with

waterdog · Sun Aug 28, 2011 9:14 pm

Quoting lowrider (Reply 68):
if you drop the cabin pressure

You can do that without changing altitude? That would be great if suddenly everyone is running short on breath and has to grab the masks.

lowrider · Sun Aug 28, 2011 9:18 pm

Quoting waterdog (Reply 69):
You can do that without changing altitude?

Yes. It is pretty simple to do, actually.

GST · Sun Aug 28, 2011 9:20 pm

Quoting waterdog (Reply 66):
A cross post would be against the forum rules anyway, I think.

Okay, it was a silly idea then, keep things here and hope we can get some cabin crew professional opinions.

Quoting lowrider (Reply 68):

Now if you drop the cabin pressure, even if you only raise it to 10,000 feet, people will run out of stamina quickly, as most people live at significantly lower elevations. You could even run it up to 15,000 and that would settle anyone but a dedicated marathoner down pretty quickly, with little risk to themselves. Plus, once folks are settled, you could restore normal cabin pressure with

I rather like this idea. Perhaps you can have the cabin crew losing their bid to control the pax, and contacting the flight deck on the intercom to report the beginnings of a stampede forwards to the cockpit. Fearing the center of gravity moving forwards too much due to all the folks going to one end the pilot takes drastic action. Maybe combine lowering the atmospheric pressure with a 2g turn so everyone feels twice as heavy and you have a lot of people tired and thus subdued very quickly with very little risk to life or limb. With dropped masks people will sit down, breathe deeply and listen.

Have you thought that at the moment of people disappearing the captain could be just getting out of his seat going to the loo or something? Not only would he be out of position and thus more challenged with recovering the emergency but you could then have the comedy final straw twist of fate, like John McClane's lack off shoes in Die Hard.

waterdog · Sun Aug 28, 2011 10:35 pm

Quoting GST (Reply 71):
Have you thought that at the moment of people disappearing the captain could be just getting out of his seat going to the loo or something? Not only would he be out of position and thus more challenged with recovering the emergency but you could then have the comedy final straw twist of fate, like John McClane's lack off shoes in Die Hard.

Actually that's a cool idea - do you have to give you a screen credit?

Starlionblue · Sun Aug 28, 2011 11:00 pm

Quoting waterdog (Reply 61):
So the pilot is in the flight deck - he just discovered his co-pilot has vanished into thin air. In the back the pax (i love not having to type 'passengers' in all of my notes) are freaking out trying to find their missing family members. But very quickly they're thrown into a literal panic - a mini riot.
The captain sees it all on the video screen and has to get control.

AFAIK the majority of airliners have no CCTV monitoring the cabin from the cockpit. IIRC there may be a camera showing the area just outside the cockpit door though?

Quoting waterdog (Reply 69):
Quoting lowrider (Reply 68):
if you drop the cabin pressure

You can do that without changing altitude? That would be great if suddenly everyone is running short on breath and has to grab the masks.

As Lowrider mentions, it is an easy thing to do. Airliners generally cruise at 25000 feet and up. However the cabin pressure is the equivalent of around 6000-8000 feet. Controlling pressurization accurately is an important part of what makes high altitude air travel possible.

tdscanuck · Mon Aug 29, 2011 4:06 am

Quoting waterdog (Reply 65):
He needs to get everyone sitting down and breathing deep, and that's why he decides to fake an airplane emergency so everyone fears imminent danger and returns to their seats. Then once they all of have to sit and shut up (masks) he can come on the intercom and tell everyone to chill out and that panic is real enemy right now, that he's trying to find answers etc.

I doubt any pilot would drop the masks because the mask are a one-time shot. Once you drop them you can't use them again for the rest of the flight, so if you later get a real depressurization you're screwed.

Quoting lowrider (Reply 68):
Now that you mention it though, I do recall an old TWA training film that showed the FE removing the carpet to access the e and e on a 747.

Almost all Boeings have an EE bay hatch under the carpet just aft of the flight deck.

Quoting lowrider (Reply 68):
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 63):
an agressive pitch-over,

I am not sure I would do this if I knew I had a large number of unrestrained people in the cabin, not to mention service carts. I know this can cause significant injuries, including compound fractures.

Not *that* aggressive. Normal "agressive" emergency descent pushover is about 0.5-0.6 g. Not nearly enough to hurt people, but it gets their attention in a hurry.

Quoting GST (Reply 71):
Fearing the center of gravity moving forwards too much due to all the folks going to one end the pilot takes drastic action.

Forward CG isn't that big a deal...it's aft that will kill you.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 73):
AFAIK the majority of airliners have no CCTV monitoring the cabin from the cockpit. IIRC there may be a camera showing the area just outside the cockpit door though?

Post 9/11, video monitoring systems for the area immediately outside the cockpit are a pretty common option (and standard on some new types). I'm not aware of anyone with a full-cabin monitoring system though.

Tom.

lowrider · Mon Aug 29, 2011 4:50 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 74):
Normal "agressive" emergency descent pushover is about 0.5-0.6 g. Not nearly enough to hurt people, but it gets their attention in a hurry.

But it does hurt people, that is why on most emergency descent procedures you have everyone sit down and strap in first. Flight attendants have been injured in TCAS RA maneuvers, not because the maneuver was so violent, but, because the sudden motion caused them to become unbalanced and fall in a direction they were not prepared for. In any case, I still don't see how that will have a calming effect on people. All you have done is given them more things to be afraid of. I still think the mildly hypoxic option will accomplish the same thing with less risk.

Starlionblue · Mon Aug 29, 2011 6:10 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 74):

I doubt any pilot would drop the masks because the mask are a one-time shot. Once you drop them you can't use them again for the rest of the flight, so if you later get a real depressurization you're screwed.

Just to clarify, the oxygen canisters start running and run out after a while right? You can't stop the process and re-start it at will.

wn700driver · Mon Aug 29, 2011 7:01 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 76):

Just to clarify, the oxygen canisters start running and run out after a while right? You can't stop the process and re-start it at will.

Correct. The O2 involved is actually supplied by a candle. So much like a solid fuel rocket, there simply is no way to shut it off.

GST · Mon Aug 29, 2011 7:55 am

Quoting waterdog (Reply 72):

Actually that's a cool idea - do you have to give you a screen credit?

If you want, sure but I'd put greater value on what you're already doing, i.e. trying to get the aviation aspects of the story as realistic as possible, which not many in your position have done previously even where it plays a massive part in their stories.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 74):

Forward CG isn't that big a deal...it's aft that will kill you.

True it won't kill you as immediately, but if everyone goes all the way forwards you may get into an unrecoverable dive, potentially descending almost as quickly as with an aft cg wing stall if you have to extend spoilers & throttle back to prevent over-speeding. But I agree the pax all rampaging aft would certainly lead to a more violent wing stall and rapid plunge into the sea.

Starlionblue · Mon Aug 29, 2011 9:51 am

Quoting GST (Reply 78):
I'd put greater value on what you're already doing, i.e. trying to get the aviation aspects of the story as realistic as possible, which not many in your position have done previously even where it plays a massive part in their stories.

Word. If even half of these suggestions actually make it into the movie it will be one of the most accurately portrayed flight sequences in movies ever.

Important lesson here: Making it accurate does not mean making it boring and/or inaccessible. Then again knowing a Hollywood writer I have a sadly accurate understanding of the workings of the industry.

I'll even watch the darned movie.

tdscanuck · Mon Aug 29, 2011 1:44 pm

Quoting GST (Reply 78):
True it won't kill you as immediately, but if everyone goes all the way forwards you may get into an unrecoverable dive, potentially descending almost as quickly as with an aft cg wing stall if you have to extend spoilers & throttle back to prevent over-speeding. But I agree the pax all rampaging aft would certainly lead to a more violent wing stall and rapid plunge into the sea.

Going forward won't really put you in a dive but will, eventually, start increasing your trim speed. You'd have to accelerate or descend to maintain attitude at the extreme fwd CG positions. However, since we're talking about a mid-oceanic flight in cruise that's dumping and physically can't be at MTOW anymore, I'm not sure it would be possible to move the CG far forward enough that you'd force a descent. The limits of control authority are at low speeds (single-engine takeoff, approach), not cruise.

The problem with aft isn't stall (the change in wing lift with CG change is measurable but not large enough to force a stall), it's the change in stability. If the CG gets too close to the CL (CL has to be behind CG on a commercial airliner) you lose pitch stability...you don't stall, you flip around so the airplane is trying to fly tail first.

Tom.

FlyboyOz · Tue Aug 30, 2011 11:11 am

Ahh I didn't know that about that post! Left Behind is my fav book!!! Wow! I'm so glad to hear from him.

Left Behind was written in before 9/11 and I guess there are some minor changes after 9/11 because we know what happened to the aviation industry during 9/11. I think you need to re-write a little bit more about FAA/civil aviation authority.

- After rupture, FAA/civil aviation authorities (from all over the world) order all the airlines to make diversion immediately (somewhere near the airport or fly back to the original destination or return to the terminals).

- All the airspaces around the world are closed because of chaos! - Planes must stay on the ground for 24 hours until the problem has been resolved.

FlyboyOz · Tue Aug 30, 2011 11:37 am

I have seen other movies about being emergency landing and I'm not a flight attendant. I'm not sure if the story isn't in order.

After announcement, the captain has to call all the crew members (though the phones which are near the emergency doors) to let them know about emergency landing. Then crew members have to tell all the pax to take your glasses off, ear rings, scarves and other sharp stuff and put them inside the plastic bags or backseat pockets. Then check pax whether their seat belts are fastened probably. When it's finshed, then crew member have returned to their jumpseats and let the purser know that they are seated. Then report to the captain. Then Captain can make emergency landing.

Before the plane touch down, crew members yelled "heads down, stay down". Then pax were in brace position immediately and stay in it until the aircraft stops completely.

GST · Wed Sep 10, 2014 4:58 pm

I hope nobody minds the thread bump, this movie has actually been made and is to be released in the US and a few other places next month.

I don't know about any of the other participants in this thread when we were discussing this but I wasn't expecting the project to get completed, what with the death rate for film scripts being so high, let alone attract such actors as Nicolas Cage. It was a very fun discussion at the time and I hope it has fed into an entertaining film with hopefully more real world aviation accuracy than the norm (with the usual sacrifices they have to make here and there for storyline).

Trailer here for anybody interested.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrXe8YDbzYs

It looks like a number of the suggestions from this thread might well have made it into the final script. Can anybody work out what airport is used at for the external shot of the plane at the beginning of the trailer?

I was hoping that this film wouldn't turn out to be so overt in its religious agenda, which isn't to my taste exactly but I still really want to see this. Hope it gets a UK release.

boacvc10 · Thu Sep 11, 2014 2:34 pm

Quoting GST (Reply 83):
I don't know about any of the other participants in this thread when we were discussing this but I wasn't expecting the project to get completed, what with the death rate for film scripts being so high, let alone attract such actors as Nicolas Cage. It was a very fun discussion at the time and I hope it has fed into an entertaining film with hopefully more real world aviation accuracy than the norm (with the usual sacrifices they have to make here and there for storyline).

The movie trailer looked interesting, and I will go see this. BTW, The U.S. release date is 3 Oct is a notable date for me so I will indeed go. But will the original poster of this thread provide any comment, to the a.net crowd, now that the project is finished ? Of course, acknowledgements in a film of this magnitude (who doesn't like Nicholas Cage), was not expected, but some publicity about the value that a.net (airliners.net) forum has in developing realism in aviation potrayals might be appreciated.

GST, did you happen to know the OP waterdog through the process, then?

GST · Thu Sep 11, 2014 4:20 pm

Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 84):

GST, did you happen to know the OP waterdog through the process, then?

Nope, on Tuesday I just stumbled upon someone on youtube talking about this film and its plot very tangentially and I immediately thought, "that sounds strangely familiar!" Once I'd dug back through here and finally found this thread, since the title is listed in the OP and various plot points were revealed, I could confirm that it is indeed one and the same film.

oly720man · Thu Sep 11, 2014 4:58 pm

Quoting GST (Reply 83):
Can anybody work out what airport is used at for the external shot of the plane at the beginning of the trailer?

It's JFK T4 looking towards the Jetblue terminal in the background with an EI A330 and JB A320.

Gate A6 - the grey one on the left of the view, above the FedEx truck is here

https://www.flickr.com/photos/radunzel/3051873566/

strfyr51 · Fri Sep 12, 2014 6:12 am

Quoting waterdog (Thread starter):
Here's my first "technical" question:
Our plane is involved in a near-miss collision where there is some damage but they remain airborne. The result of the damage is that they have to dump a significant quantity of fuel to avoid a fire in an engine that is sparking. I have been having a hard time finding out if you can in fact dump fuel from one wing without draining both sides equally. There is something called a cross-feed valve, that controls the flow, but does it have to be open during flight to keep the plane "balanced".

**********************************************************************************************************************************************
you're going to Have to just expand l the problem. if you've seen Die Hard with Bruse Willis, He opened a fuel vallve on he #2pylon that wasn't there and set a trail of fuel alight to blow up the 747 they were on. it LOOKED exciting, but there isn't a fuel valve there . But sinc most people don't know that? It sure seemed real. ...

AF1624 · Fri Sep 12, 2014 9:15 am

You have got to be kidding me.

I was 100% convinced this was all hot air. I'm amazed that it's not. I'm surprised to say the least.

Feels like A.net members should get free tickets to go see the movie now, lol.

zeke · Fri Sep 12, 2014 12:58 pm

A330 with a yoke, that's new to me.

Francoflier · Fri Sep 12, 2014 1:26 pm

It would be cool if waterdog came back to us for a little 'debrief'.

Once he's done with the red carpet stuff of course...

In any case, congrats.

Acheron · Fri Sep 12, 2014 5:06 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 89):
A330 with a yoke, that's new to me.

From what I could tell, the actual plane is a 767, you can spot it later in the trailer when the wing catches fire or the miss with what seems to be a 727. Though at some point they did add 747 cockpit windows...

Glad they tried to add some realism regarding the technical aspect, but shame they made the old mistakes of mash up planes together.

mandala499 · Fri Sep 12, 2014 5:46 pm

Those who want to ask "waterdog" could probably see the screenplay writer on the credits, and match the name to the name of the OP, and google/email/whatever...

Nice to see the remake is hitting the screens...

AirlineCritic · Fri Sep 12, 2014 8:29 pm

Very happy to learn the movie has been made. Looking forward to seeing it!

KELPkid · Sat Sep 13, 2014 12:03 am

Looking forward to a (mostly) a.net tech/ops approved movie in the theater

VirginFlyer · Sat Sep 13, 2014 2:36 am

Here's the details of the movie on IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2467046/

And this appears to be waterdog: Paul Lalonde: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0482510/

Anyone willing to speculate how long it will take someone in the Civil Aviation forum to say something along the lines of "there were so many inaccuracies, they should have come to a.net to do their research"?

V/F

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net