Model plane designer?


Its so many years since I aw the original that I hardly remember anything about it. But the "twist" at the end that the aero-engineer only designed model planes didn't ring the faintest bell.

Such a premise, and the character's claim that the principles are identical were (a) ludicrous and (b) irrelevant.

Ludicrous because the building of life-size planes involves engineering principles and practice that goes way beyond anything required for building miniatures. No-one has to use calculus to determine the tensile strength and the amount of flex of a piece of balsa wood. If the proto-type breaks, no-one got hurt. You just use a thicker bit.

Irrelevant because the equipmeny necessary for making sensitive measurements and calculations wasn't available under the conditions they found themselves in. For example, an over-simplistic rule of thumb in miniature-design is that the balance point is around the main spar. So how would they have calculated the positioning of the wings to give the right balance point? Put them too far forward and the plane becomes unflyable. Too far backard and it'll nose-dive.

Oh, and a tendency to lift as the wind hits the plane head on is not an indication that it will be flyable. Try flying a piece of flat cardboard that lifts in the wind!

reply

Okay, so explain magic carpets then.

"You're fakin' nicked me ol' beauty!"
John Cleese, The Life of Brian

reply

Dang.

reply

Today I own you. Tomorrow the world! MMWWWHAHAHAHA....etc

Lol mate.

"You're fakin' nicked me ol' beauty!"
John Cleese, The Life of Brian

reply

Its so many years since I aw the original that I hardly remember anything about it. But the "twist" at the end that the aero-engineer only designed model planes didn't ring the faintest bell.

This is the same in the original movie.


http://www.bumscorner.com
http://www.myspace.com/porfle

reply

Hm...

---
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing .

reply

see, i told them building a flying wind mill is much better idea.

reply

I think it’s not as absurd as it sounds.

Many model planes are scaled copies of real planes, so it’s not such a stretch than a person working for a model company would be familiar with big airplanes. Also, model plane hobbyists are usually also aviation buffs who read and study about full scale planes.

Just because this guy worked for a company that made toy planes, he didn’t have to be completely ignorant about how real planes’ mechanics. We can assume that being a smart guy he was able to the necessary calculations to translate his existing experience to bigger sizes and stronger materials.

Of course in real life, he would probably need to go thought lots of trial and error, including short test runs before risking a long flight. But usually in movies such technical details are skipped for dramatic purposes.

reply

If I was stuck in the desert I'd rather have someone from a model plane company than someone from Boeing. The person working on model planes will have much broader and fresher experience. Most people working for big companies are incredibly specialized in a single aspect of the process, so would have a hard time remembering if the mass center was supposed to be in front of or behind the quarter-chord point. The OP has one point: structural subtleties would probably be unfamiliar territory for the scale designer, but it would be no more familiar to 98% of the technical staff at a "real" airplane company.

Speaking as someone with two aeronautical engineering degrees. I'm so specialized I'd be hard pressed to pull off such a project, even though I studied it all in college. Even a competent model airplane hobbyist would be better than me.

I'd rather have Heinrich Dorfmann with his slide rule. I also preferred the way that Heinrich never actually made a secret of what he worked on, he just didn't mention it because he genuinely didn't think it was relevant. Everyone else assumed, but he didn't hide the catalog from Frank or anyone else.

reply

^^He never hid the catalog, people just assumed when he said that he designs planes...he later clarifies that he does not see a distinction between real plane and model plane as they both fly using the same aerodynamics and propulsion....or something to that effect anyway.

It is fun and games until someone gets caught. Then it's rape.

reply

I agree with these last 3 guys that it doesn't sound ludicrous, or even really all that odd. And I love the point about a company like Boeing being so compartmentalized that a smaller toy company designer might actually be better suited for the complete rebuilding. And you're right to say he never lied about it, though he did allow them to make the obvious conclusions. But not out of character with his arrogance.

Really enjoyed this thing more than the critics suggested I would. But the photos at the end were entirely pointless to me, or at least could have been executed with a lot more wit and imagination. That's smelled of studio input over "fixing" the ending.

reply

*this*

reply

Ludicrous because the building of life-size planes involves engineering principles and practice that goes way beyond anything required for building miniatures.


Dorfman didn't seem like a high school kite flyer who happened to get a job making model airplanes. I only saw the 2004 version once a couple of years ago, but the original movie's Dorfman seemed like a guy who went to school to become an engineer, so would have had the training and skills to design a plane on a sheet of paper, not by trial and error with balsa.

Besides, as with most movies, we do have to suspend logic and belief just a bit.




It is bad to drink Jobus rum. Very bad.

reply

I guess someone should have told the Wright Brothers that it isn't possible to design a plane without using calculus to determine the tensile strength. I have not watched the original in a long time but I remember that the designer's explanation was plausible

Thomas Gibson has been fired from Criminal minds now I won't watch CM, No Hotch no watch

reply