Flightplan - the movie

A forum to discuss all aviation items (not for latest aviation news and military aviation news)

Moderator: Latest news team

chornedsnorkack
Posts: 428
Joined: 21 Oct 2005, 00:00

Post by chornedsnorkack »

lastrow wrote: I guess with some of you guys from luchtzak they would have designed a better plane! how about the idea to collect some issues in a list with recommendations and then send it to the guys in charge for the E-474??

-lr.

PS. besides all: I like the idea that such a plane would depart from Berlin non-stop to directions all over world :-)
Indeed. I wonder why not. Some other parts of their routemap look iffier.

Why, really, should Frankfurt have so much nonstop flights - but not Berlin? Berlin is the capital, the largest city... And Lufthansa is said to have trouble and need to split their operations between Frankfurt and Munich. So, a hub in Berlin should make sense!

As for their destinations... JFK and LAX are sensible.

Manila... hm, what are the best Southeast Asian airports for longhaul nonstop? Singapore, Bangkok, Jakarta, Hong Kong... what is the best destination? Who serve Manila now?

West Africa... looks like somewhere around Bamako. Is it a popular destination?

South America... looks around Brasilia. Which is a capital, but less populous than Rio de Janeiro or Sao Paulo... what are the route structures like?

Australia is perhaps the worst. Looks like Queensland outback.

The logical destinations for a kangaroo route would be Sydney and Melbourne. If there is a need for a landfall airport, because there is not enough range to reach Sydney, then Darwin and Perth might be logical stopovers. Brisbane also might be sensible, because it is the home of Qantas. But Outback... cannot see why.

Zaki-boy
Posts: 31
Joined: 18 Jul 2005, 00:00
Location: Belgrade(Beograd),CS Serbia and Montenegro

Post by Zaki-boy »

I just adored the movie and I think that the fake parts are a bit over the top but yet ok it fits in the complex of the movie!
Good job Jodie Foster and the rest!
I also thing that it's wierd to have a British pilot on a German airline though...
Greetings

User avatar
sab319
Posts: 2142
Joined: 29 Nov 2003, 00:00
Location: Mortsel, antwerp, Flanders, Belgium, Europe, Earth, Milky way
Contact:

Post by sab319 »

I believe it was a US airline....

Zaki-boy
Posts: 31
Joined: 18 Jul 2005, 00:00
Location: Belgrade(Beograd),CS Serbia and Montenegro

Post by Zaki-boy »

sab319 wrote:I believe it was a US airline....
Than why would the annocments be on both German and English?

User avatar
sab319
Posts: 2142
Joined: 29 Nov 2003, 00:00
Location: Mortsel, antwerp, Flanders, Belgium, Europe, Earth, Milky way
Contact:

Post by sab319 »

Zaki-boy wrote:
sab319 wrote:I believe it was a US airline....
Than why would the annocments be on both German and English?
because they want to be nice to their PAX, I mean Iberia does Dutch and French announcments on the BRU flights too

Duke
Posts: 351
Joined: 08 Feb 2005, 00:00

Post by Duke »

The flightdeck looks somewhat like the MS FS2004 777-cockpit. Although it's a 4-engined plane, you only see two rows of instruments for the engines on the LCD-screens.

I like the nose more than the nose of the A380. The cockpit windows are placed higher, wich gives the nose and the front of the plane a "lighter", less massive impression. The cockpit-windows look more like what we see on the models of the 787.

chornedsnorkack
Posts: 428
Joined: 21 Oct 2005, 00:00

Views

Post by chornedsnorkack »

Duke wrote: I like the nose more than the nose of the A380. The cockpit windows are placed higher, wich gives the nose and the front of the plane a "lighter", less massive impression. The cockpit-windows look more like what we see on the models of the 787.
And the nose is very sharp. This is a problem. The Concorde has a sharper nose, which is why it droops out of sight. Airbus chose to have blunt nose and cockpit low in the nose so the pilots would be low and have a good view of ground ahead... the E-474 pilots have much poorer visibility on or near ground.

JoeCanuck
Posts: 87
Joined: 29 Mar 2005, 00:00
Location: Today - Ahvaz, Iran

Post by JoeCanuck »

The movie was "wait for the dvd", at best. Really nothing in there that you needed the big screen for. The plot was full of holes big enough you could have flown an E474 through them.

Here's the premise; in midair, Jody foster loses her child. Nobody....(passengers, crew, gate people, checkin folks, cabbies.....I mean nobody), can remember the kid at all, much less getting on the plane.

I won't ruin the rest of the "when I grow up, I want to be a thriller", plot but it ain't worth the big screen cash. If you really want to go to the cinema, see Harry Potter.

ps...also stay away from SawII and The Libertine.

Post Reply