Tom Hanks plays Sully in new movie (engine out Hudson landing)

[vcarlo 529]

The 737 at the 30 second mark has scimitar winglets that weren't out at the time of the event.

 

Literally unwatchable!

I'm surprised you aren't upset the AAL livery was NOT around in 2009 and the 2 UNITED planes were Continental then.  At least they kept the US Airways 320 in tact.  C'mon give Hollywood a break {tongue firmly in cheek}   :Whistle:

[Mike777 163]

 

 

I'm surprised you aren't upset the AAL livery was NOT around in 2009 and the 2 UNITED planes were Continental then.

 

They needed to hire consultants from World of AI and possibly used some of the models and liveries they can supply.

 

Mike

[mwilk 1,106]

I'm surprised you aren't upset the AAL livery was NOT around in 2009 and the 2 UNITED planes were Continental then.  At least they kept the US Airways 320 in tact.  C'mon give Hollywood a break {tongue firmly in cheek}   :Whistle:

They got the interior of the cabin right. We had those "leather" seats in our Airbuses.

[NZ255 309]

I'm surprised you aren't upset the AAL livery was NOT around in 2009 and the 2 UNITED planes were Continental then.  At least they kept the US Airways 320 in tact.  C'mon give Hollywood a break {tongue firmly in cheek}   :Whistle:

haha. Good spotting

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

Am I correct to assume that this movie will not explain why the decision to start the APU was pivotal, as it ensured that the Airbus remained in normal law, which improved the result of the ditching?

And no mentioning how important the actions of each member of the crew were for the fortunate outcome of the accident? F/O and cabin crew alike?

No mentioning of vital favourable circumstances like the installed slides/life rafts and nearby emergency response?

And no mentioning that today's crews - flightdeck and cabin alike - aren't trained and experienced anymore to handle an emergency like this one in an equally professional way?

So, just the usual fictitious Hollywood one man show?

 

I think this crew has deserved better ...

[mwilk 1,106]

Am I correct to assume that this movie will not explain why the decision to start the APU was pivotal, as it ensured that the Airbus remained in normal law, which improved the result of the ditching?

And no mentioning how important the actions of each member of the crew were for the fortunate outcome of the accident? F/O and cabin crew alike?

No mentioning of vital favourable circumstances like the installed slides/life rafts and nearby emergency response?

And no mentioning that today's crews - flightdeck and cabin alike - aren't trained and experienced anymore to handle an emergency like this one in an equally professional way?

So, just the usual fictitious Hollywood one man show?

 

I think this crew has deserved better ...

How would we know? No one has seen it yet.

[Jimm 437]

It would appear that they are concentrating on the aftermath of the event including the mandatory NTSB investigation rather than the event itself. That could fill volumes.

 

 

Vic

Of course, any government investigation these days has to waste the maximum amount of taxpayer dollars over something that could have been handled in a day.

 

Here are MY questions (and possibly ones that will be addressed in the film):

 

Did the NTSB, at any time, ever consider "pilot instinct" as the driving force for the Captain to perform a water landing?

Regardless of what the engines were doing, or were still capable of at the time, didn't NTSB think for one second that it would be a greater risk to fly the aircraft back over a heavily populated area?

Was it expected by the airline and the NTSB that this flight was supposed to crash with total loss of passengers and crew?

Was the Captain NOT a trusted and experienced pilot to the airline?  40 years is a long career and he didn't deserve to be grilled like he was with such insulting statements ("when was your last drink?).

 

He saved the passengers, averted total disaster, but yet they wanted to hang him out to dry.  I'd agree with Sully that he wasn't a hero...he was doing his job.

[HiFlyer 9,352]

[pete_auau 1,154]

How would we know? No one has seen it yet.

 

he's probably going by the shorts on it to make his comments

[ErichB 3,638]

I'm not a huge fan of any aviation related movie - regardless of the fact that this is a well documented event.

 

Hollywood productions are always over-sensationalized, significantly lacking technical accuracy, and feed garbage to those without any aviation knowledge - who then tend to spout garbage as truth.

[ViperPilot 81]

From watching the Trailer, it just seems to me that they're trying to drum up suspicion about Sully's actions, like the bit about the Simulator...

 

I'll wait for it to hit On Demand.

 

Alan  :smile:

[mwilk 1,106]

It's not likely that this is a rip job because the movie is being adapted from Captain Sullenberger's book and Clint Eastwood is directing. That's not Eastwood's style. My guess is, the NTSB did take a very hard look at the actions of the crew. That's their job. I'll wait for it to appear on HBO or Netflix. After 36 years in the airline industry, I find very few of the projects to be on the money. Hopefully, this one will be different.

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

I find very few of the projects to be on the money. Hopefully, this one will be different.

Probably because a truthful account of what really happened wouldn't be exciting enough to sell tickets. Grande what really happened was very exciting, just not in a good way, if it was portrayed exactly as happened it would probably come across as too mundane.

 

Same happened in one of my favorite all time aviation related movies, The Right Stuff. Chuck Yeager and other astronauts had spoken about how they had to make some of the scenes more dramatic than how they actually occurred to make it more interesting. As if breaking the sound barrier for the first time or going into space wouldn't be exciting enough, if they portrayed it exactly how it happened, it would come across so matter of fact by the pilot or astronaut that the audience would get bored.

 

If you've ever seen the footage of Neil Armstrong during the Gemini missions where he was docking with the Aegina booster and ended up tumbling out of control due to a thruster being stuck open, the actual footage was of a calm person, no screaming or yelling for help. If you put that in a movie no one would watch. They'd have to make it much more dramatic to keep the attention and interest of the audience.

[ViperPilot 81]

Jim,

 

Your Comments remind me of a time where I was watching a Featurette on the making of HBO's From The Earth to the Moon. One of the Directors made the comment that, due to the nature of the Astronauts and their cool demeanor, it was hard to come up with suspenseful scenes because the Technical Advisor would tell them "No, it wasn't really that dramatic!"

 

BTW... the Technical Advisor was Dave Scott, Neil Armstrong's co-pilot on Gemini 8 and the CDR of Apollo 15.

 

Alan   :smile:

[SpiritFlyer 987]

I am looking forward with relish to being able to enjoy the retelling of one of the most exciting and inspiring stories in the history of great human deeds.

 

There is no way I am going to let fault finding over trivial insignificances smudge the shiny warm glow I feel in being able to share a little in the glory of it all.

 

Kindest regards,