Sully The Movie
Thought the whole thing was great, thought I cringed in true pilot nerd fashion at the sim sessions.
'fpv on!', so she changes the range on the ND. Lol what?
Then we she crashes it into a building, selects full reverse. Yep, that'll help! Haha.
'fpv on!', so she changes the range on the ND. Lol what?
Then we she crashes it into a building, selects full reverse. Yep, that'll help! Haha.
Loved the selection of reverse.
First aviation movie that I can recall that made any attempt to get aviation right. And if you've ever been involved in an incident, it was all too close to home.
Recommended.
First aviation movie that I can recall that made any attempt to get aviation right. And if you've ever been involved in an incident, it was all too close to home.
Recommended.
Certainly worth viewing. Tom Hanks did a fine job as Sully, IMHO. The open court scene towards the end of the film with the NTSB Board trying to nail Sully and his co-pilot to the floor, was the best part.
I really enjoyed it, the aviation related subjects were surprisingly accurate for a Hollywood production who normally even struggle to keep aircraft types consistent. Well worth a look.
The notion of objective, dedicated pros/experts existing within an government Agency is one they view with cynicism, despite the fact that so much knowledge and foundation of what we do to enhance safety and mitigate threats in aviation comes directly from decades of accident investigations conducted by them. Historically, the NTSB has found fault or identified causes for accidents that have as much to do with Company deficiencies and FAA oversight as they have with individual pilots crewing an accident aircraft. In many ways, their techniques are the basis for the broad-based approach to identifying ALL causal factors that we expect today, not just the forensic expertise.
Sad the producers felt the need to try and cast the NTSB as the "opposing force" just because there wasn't an obvious choice of person, Corporation, or the FAA to fill the role. Completely unnecessary, and unfounded.
Since when is CAsA (the regulator) doing accident investigation which is the preserve of the ATSB.
CAsA can't get the regulatory environment right so how on earth would they be any better at accident investigation.
CC
CAsA can't get the regulatory environment right so how on earth would they be any better at accident investigation.
CC
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: world
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said. Hollywood always needs a "bad guy", believing conflict advances any story, and they've been using various government agencies in this role forever.
The notion of objective, dedicated pros/experts existing within an government Agency is one they view with cynicism, despite the fact that so much knowledge and foundation of what we do to enhance safety and mitigate threats in aviation comes directly from decades of accident investigations conducted by them. Historically, the NTSB has found fault or identified causes for accidents that have as much to do with Company deficiencies and FAA oversight as they have with individual pilots crewing an accident aircraft. In many ways, their techniques are the basis for the broad-based approach to identifying ALL causal factors that we expect today, not just the forensic expertise.
Sad the producers felt the need to try and cast the NTSB as the "opposing force" just because there wasn't an obvious choice of person, Corporation, or the FAA to fill the role. Completely unnecessary, and unfounded.
The notion of objective, dedicated pros/experts existing within an government Agency is one they view with cynicism, despite the fact that so much knowledge and foundation of what we do to enhance safety and mitigate threats in aviation comes directly from decades of accident investigations conducted by them. Historically, the NTSB has found fault or identified causes for accidents that have as much to do with Company deficiencies and FAA oversight as they have with individual pilots crewing an accident aircraft. In many ways, their techniques are the basis for the broad-based approach to identifying ALL causal factors that we expect today, not just the forensic expertise.
Sad the producers felt the need to try and cast the NTSB as the "opposing force" just because there wasn't an obvious choice of person, Corporation, or the FAA to fill the role. Completely unnecessary, and unfounded.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/10/bu...een-drama.html
otoh, i enjoyed the heck out of the flight scenes. i flew the 320 and out of laguardia many times. better sully than me.
It is an indictment on the writer/producer etc that they cannot write a script around an exciting event and keep it factual AND interesting. I agree that's modern media. (Not just Hollywood) having said that it is not a documentary it's a movie.
I suspect that although an exciting event in and of itself it probably didn't have the elements that make for an engaging story, e.g., character growth and some kind of adversity to overcome.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Paris
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: `
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really? Have you seen "Whisky Romeo Zulu"?
Brilliant movie but not surprising considering the writer, director and actor (all the same person) was a pilot for the airline in the movie. Well worth watching IMO.
Whisky Romeo Zulu is available on YouTube but in Spanish. If you click on the link at the start of this line it may assist in getting English subtitles for the excellent movie. I believe it's also available on Netflix with English subtitles.
