Marco Leon wrote:
I think that was more for the audience than himself. All things considered,
they did a pretty good job of getting the aviation details down. There was a
minimal amount of "Hollywood-izing" of the details and some could even be
attributed to the editing room (e.g. saying his altitude was 4000 ft and
climbing while the instruments indicated 1,250 ft and level.)

My guess is that they had a pilot available for consultation.


It was probably a brother in law of some member of the production staff. I
don't imagine anybody with a technical background would have let some of that
stuff slip if he'd been there to correct it. After all, it wouldn't have taken
any time or money to correct the dialogue; nor would it have detracted from the
story. Why not do it right?

1. Squawk IDENT, not 'transponder".
2. Not only did the instruments not agree with his claim of an altitude of
"four", the window didn't either. When he said "four", I didn't know whether he
meant four hundred or four thousand. Looking out the window, I'd have said
about 2000 feet.
3. I'm going to ignore that super duper J-3. Amazing how quickly it flew out
of visual range on takeoff yet was ultimately overtaken by the Archer with
apparent ease on down the road.
4. When the Archer pilot made the near vertical dive on the J-3, did he really
expect to hit it? Trying to make a balls to the wall vertical approach as
opposed to say, just slipping over a few feet from the side and chewing up the
tail with your prop? Banzai!

But this is hardly unusual. When I see hospital scenes on TV, I usually note
all the siderails are down, the oxygen nasal cannula is being worn backwards,
and people's hair is never greasy or uncombed. But that's just me....



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com