I like the way this movie looks, despite the premise of the movie it's not quite Oscar bait and for some reason I'm somewhat amazed that Hollywood can make a movie simply based on a pilot landing a plane in an emergency.

Then again they are making a movie about bike couriers in NYC if I recall correctly.

I could never see this movie. I've been flying for 20 years and I would be rolling my eyes through the whole damn film.

LegacyDL: Then again they are making a movie about bike couriers in NYC if I recall correctly.

Too late... Quicksiver (1986).

Hey look, it's Nadine Velasquez.

johnz16: I could never see this movie. I've been flying for 20 years and I would be rolling my eyes through the whole damn film.

i felt the same way about Unstoppable. i still cringe when people ask me about that one since they know i know a great deal about railroading...

They're all dead! The plane really crashed! It takes place in the Lost Season 6 universe!

Ever seen Denzel Washington fly a passenger jet upside down..,...on weed?

johnz16: I could never see this movie. I've been flying for 20 years and I would be rolling my eyes through the whole damn film.

You might want to read up on Alaska Airlines Flight 261 and TWA Flight 841.

LegacyDL: I like the way this movie looks, despite the premise of the movie it's not quite Oscar bait and for some reason I'm somewhat amazed that Hollywood can make a movie simply based on a pilot landing a plane in an emergency.

Then again they are making a movie about bike couriers in NYC if I recall correctly.



Oh dear, nobody tell him about My Dinner With Andre.

Ever see a guy say goodbye to a shoe?

gunga galunga: Ever seen Denzel Washington fly a passenger jet upside down..,...on weed?

Surprised it took 9 posts to get here.

You ever seen a grown man naked?

Do you like gladiator movies?

I hope Martin Scorsese got paid for using his song.

9beers: johnz16: I could never see this movie. I've been flying for 20 years and I would be rolling my eyes through the whole damn film.

You might want to read up on Alaska Airlines Flight 261 and TWA Flight 841.

Not sure what those have to do with flying an airliner upside down. 261 was a failed jackscrew which caused a loss of pitch control. Plane crashed everyone died.

841 wasn't flown upside down, It did do a couple of rolls but it wasn't sustained inverted flight like they are showing in the clip. An impressive save none the less.

johnz16: Not sure what those have to do with flying an airliner upside down. 261 was a failed jackscrew which caused a loss of pitch control. Plane crashed everyone died.

The pilot of 261 attempted to fly the aircraft upside down when he was unable to pull the nose up. Investigators determined that upside down flight would have been possible had the aircraft not been past recovery. Obviously they would have had to have been able to roll it onto its belly again before landing but the point was to show that it's possible for a passenger jet to remain in the air upside down.

johnz16: 841 wasn't flown upside down, It did do a couple of rolls but it wasn't sustained inverted flight like they are showing in the clip.

Again, my point is to show that a passenger jet can recover after being upside down.

According to Joe Bill Dryden, senior experimental test pilot for General Dynamics.....A jumbo passenger jet, for example, could perhaps fly upside down only 15 or 20 seconds before its internal systems would be disrupted.

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/08/04/sci ence/q-a-061592.html

Wow, actually looks interesting. Denzel has been on my 'Meh' meter ever since Training Day, but this looks good. John Goodman's character looks like a blast. I might have to see this.

Now for the two questions:

1.) Is this supposed to reflect any kind of real event? I know from upthread that there are a couple of similar situations, but I mean an actual 'Based on' event?

2.) What would the reason for inverted flight be, exactly? How might it benefit a plane that is undergoing catastrophic failure?

Boeing 707 barrel roll by test pilot Tex Johnson

Mikey1969: 1.) Is this supposed to reflect any kind of real event? I know from upthread that there are a couple of similar situations, but I mean an actual 'Based on' event?

Flight: What if Sully was an alcoholic?!?!?

johnz16: I could never see this movie. I've been flying for 20 years and I would be rolling my eyes through the whole damn film.

Yeah, I know how you feel. I'm a time traveler, and I laugh every time there is some sort of concern over "changing the timeline." I've personally killed Hitler dozens of times, and beyond being an exercise in alternative historical study, it never changes the timeline I came from. Worse, it's never the "spectacular" events in history that are pivotal... I've changed more by bumping into a random person in a crowd than preventing entire wars from ever happening.

Hollywood sucks.

Oh, and spoilers on the future.... Hollywood never stops "Rebooting" movies that were perfectly good the first, second or third time (you get the idea) around.

johnz16: I could never see this movie. I've been flying for 20 years and I would be rolling my eyes through the whole damn film.

I'm not a pilot and I was rolling my eyes through the whole damn preview.

johnz16: I could never see this movie. I've been flying for 20 years and I would be rolling my eyes through the whole damn film.

Imagine how cops, doctors, lawyers, firemen, scientists, etc.... feel.

LesserEvil: johnz16: I could never see this movie. I've been flying for 20 years and I would be rolling my eyes through the whole damn film.

Yeah, I know how you feel. I'm a time traveler, and I laugh every time there is some sort of concern over "changing the timeline." I've personally killed Hitler dozens of times, and beyond being an exercise in alternative historical study, it never changes the timeline I came from...

You're wasting your time. The cavemen of this decamillenia still believe time is one-dimensional. One!

/Wouldn't be surprised if they even believe the Yucatán Event was an asteroid impact. They have no sense of high dimensional mechanics.

Mega_Doof: Boeing 707 barrel roll by test pilot Tex Johnson

Sure, that roll is a 1g maneuver. That is not inverted flight. They may look similar, but they are far from the same.

asciibaron: johnz16: I could never see this movie. I've been flying for 20 years and I would be rolling my eyes through the whole damn film.

i felt the same way about Unstoppable. i still cringe when people ask me about that one since they know i know a great deal about railroading...

Cool stories, bros. Are you getting a kick out of these replies, etc.?

Phoenix65420: Mega_Doof: Boeing 707 barrel roll by test pilot Tex Johnson

Sure, that roll is a 1g maneuver. That is not inverted flight. They may look similar, but they are far from the same.

What you said is such a false dichotomy I don't know where to begin.

thisisyourbrainonFark: Ever see a guy say goodbye to a shoe?

(laughing) Yes, once.

Terrific people behind it, but that last shot looked terrible.

And I'm a bit worried it's a big jesus freak, deus ex machina movie.

I'm hoping the explanation is Aliens.

Repeat: passenger planes cannot fly as rockets... passenger planes cannot fly as rockets...

/WHAR LIFT
/WHAR

All you airline pilot farkers, would you say

"We're gonna roll it"

Or would you say

"We're gonna roll her"

Because that's when I could no longer suspend disbelief.

asciibaron: i felt the same way about Unstoppable.

I know nothing about trains and I still hated that movie. The fact that both Denzel Washington and Tony Scott, the guys who gave us Man on Fire, were involved with that piece of crap project makes it all the more depressing.

Apparently A DC-10 flew inverted for successfully and landed safely. Again, this was at cruising altitude, not "oh god, that's going to clip my house" altitude, so the altitude required to correct the aircraft may not be there. A couple thousand feet makes the difference between a successful maneuver and Czar 52.

But then again, when has Hollywood ever taken liberty with reality?

Fark is awesome, even after numerous sources showing that it is indeed possible for a passenger plane to fly upside down, we still have people screaming about how unrealistic this movie is based on a 2 second clip of a plane upside down.

I love all of the flight experts arguing over how crazy inverted flight with an airliner is after watching a trailer that focused entirely on HOW CRAZY INVERTED FLIGHT WITH AN AIRLINER IS. The whole damn trailer is people reacting to what an incredible save it was, how 100 pilots in simulators couldn't pull it off, Denzel has no memory of how it happened, etc.

It's like a geologist getting pissed at Lost because "islands don't move like that, DUHHH!"

I think the point of the movie may have flown inverted right over a few heads.

9beers: Fark is awesome, even after numerous sources showing that it is indeed possible for a passenger plane to fly upside down, we still have people screaming about how unrealistic this movie is based on a 2 second clip of a plane upside down.

I don't know much about aircraft. What's the advantage to flying upside down in a crash scenario? I don't think it was explained in the trailer.

I read the headline and started thinking, "Have I ever seen Denzel Washington fly a passenger plane upside down?" "No", came the reply, "I certainly have not." I chuckled to myself as I realized the blood would rush to my head and then I would have a bad headache if I did.

Hetfield: 9beers: Fark is awesome, even after numerous sources showing that it is indeed possible for a passenger plane to fly upside down, we still have people screaming about how unrealistic this movie is based on a 2 second clip of a plane upside down.

I don't know much about aircraft. What's the advantage to flying upside down in a crash scenario? I don't think it was explained in the trailer.

I don't think flying upside down was the point.
Sounded to me like the plane was in a dive and something failed on it that removed the pilots ability to get it pointed upwards again (flaps or something malfunctioned). He turned it upside down to get it leveled out.



As for everyone else. Yea, we get it. Things in movies are not 100% realistic. 100% realistic is boring and makes for extremely short movies. Chiming off on it doesn't make you cool.

Bunnyhat: Sounded to me like the plane was in a dive and something failed on it that removed the pilots ability to get it pointed upwards again (flaps or something malfunctioned). He turned it upside down to get it leveled out.

Thanks.

Hetfield: 9beers: Fark is awesome, even after numerous sources showing that it is indeed possible for a passenger plane to fly upside down, we still have people screaming about how unrealistic this movie is based on a 2 second clip of a plane upside down.

I don't know much about aircraft. What's the advantage to flying upside down in a crash scenario? I don't think it was explained in the trailer.

From what I could tell, some of his flight surfaces were locked, forcing him down. By turning upside down, he hoped to get enough of an angle to prevent a nosedive into the ground.

I don't know how he rolls it in the first place, or how he rolls it back into position to belly land after the fact, but apparently, he does.

....and the movie clearly states all you pretend pilot Farkers couldn't have done what he did, no matter how many times you try it in MS Flight Simulator, with your pimped out Soul Plane airliner.

LesserEvil: From what I could tell, some of his flight surfaces were locked, forcing him down. By turning upside down, he hoped to get enough of an angle to prevent a nosedive into the ground.

Thanks, again.

As God as my witness, I thought passenger jets could fly upside-down.

Precision Boobery: [memeblender.com image 500x765]

That picture makes me laugh everytime I see it.

We first see





Now see how low it is to the ground in this extended sequence showing stable inverted flight, nose level or slightly high, no roll, no visible damage, looks like one engine (maybe two)






Now she's almost righted, though rolling, with seemingly almost no loss in altitude as she hits the church (seen from front of plane)



Now seen from rear of plane as she passes overhead



I'd say the film makers, even in the trailer, need to give us some plausible explanation of what may have occurred that makes inverted flight a reasonable solution, and then provide a realistic simulation of what an inverted flight in the aircraft would be like, or else suggest more heavily that this is a god miracle movie or science fiction movie.

As Discover Magazine pleads:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/dis coblog/2010/02/23/scientists-to- h ollywood-please-break-only-1-law-of-ph ysics-per-movie/

Scientists to Hollywood: Please Break Only 1 Law of Physics Per Movie

Every time I hear the pilot say "we will be on the ground shortly" I mentally add "one way or another."

RoyBatty: I'd say the film makers, even in the trailer, need to give us some plausible explanation of what may have occurred that makes inverted flight a reasonable solution, and then provide a realistic simulation of what an inverted flight in the aircraft would be like, or else suggest more heavily that this is a god miracle movie or science fiction movie.

So basically you want them to explain the entire plot in the trailer?