Flight of the Phoenix question (spoilers)

[CalMeacham]

I watched this again last night (the 1965 Jimmy Stewart version, of course, not the remake). it's one of my favorite films.













Spoilers below. If you haven't seen the film -- which I highly recommend -- don't read.

















At the end of the film, when they take off, the passengers are arrayed along the wing behind fairings. This has always bothered me, for several reasons. It's certainly mess up your airflow in those parts of the wing. But, more to the point, in Elleston Trevor's original book the passengers are placed in "cots" arrayed along the fuselage of the Phoenix. I assume that he did research for the book to get his facts straight, and that implies that you need the extra weight towards the back. Did someone decide they needed the weight on the wings, for some reason?


It can't be for the actual airworthiness of the stunt plane used -- there were only the pilot and a co-pilot behind him in the real fuselage -- everything else was silhouettes or dummies. I know that the plane broke apart, killing the pilot and seriously injuring the co-pilot, but that's not the fault of what was on the wings.



so why did they change the passenger configuration from what it was in the book to the movie? Nothing I can find on the internet tells me.

[Johnny L.A.]

I haven't read the book, and it's been at least five years since I watched the film. (I can't even remember if I have it on DVD, or if it's VHS!) So I don't know what you mean by '"cots" arrayed along the fuselage'. Were they on the outside? Or were they on the inside, and provided so that the passengers would not interfere with control cables?

If the latter, then the movie would have the typical interior and exterior shots. Nothing wrong with that; it's the way it's done. If the former, you'd have characters separated by the fuselage (some on each side) and I think it would make for some clunky filmmaking. By putting the passengers on the wings the filmmakers got exciting visuals, and also could get all or most of the actors in-frame. Yes, it's aerodynamically 'dirty'; but there's a lot of unobstructed wing, and anything will fly given enough power.

Re: Weight and Balance I'll refer you to this Wiki article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_of_gravity_of_an_aircraft). The article has a section on incorrect weight and balance in a fixed-wing aircraft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_of_gravity_of_an_aircraft#Incorrect_weight_and_balance_in_fixed-wing_aircraft).

But audiences don't care about that. I suspect that the reason they put the passengers on the wing is that it's better filmmaking.

[CalMeacham]

The book had the "cots" on the outside of the fuselage, parallel to it, so that they lay along the fuselage with their heads toward the front. But all the cots were well behind the wings.

[Johnny L.A.]

IRL I wonder if that would be more draggy than having the passengers on the wings. ISTM they'd stick out farther into the airstream. But IRL it might be necessary for weight & balance. For the film, I still think it's visually less interesting and narratively problematic.

[BrotherCadfael]

This was a great movie. I know someone who could be the German engineer who designed the rebuild. I know someone very much like him - brilliant, but every time you talk to him you just want to punch him out.

For no particular reason, this movie always reminds me of another "plane crashed in the middle of the desert" movie, the 1970 TV-movie Sole Survivor (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065007/). About all I can remember is that Bill Shatner does a "whip off the sunglasses" move that would put Horatio Caine to shame!

[CalMeacham]

For no particular reason, this movie always reminds me of another "plane crashed in the middle of the desert" movie, the 1970 TV-movie Sole Survivor. About all I can remember is that Bill Shatner does a "whip off the sunglasses" move that would put Horatio Caine to shame!

I've read recently that Both Flight of the Phoenix and Sole Survivor (which I saw when it was first broadcast) were probably both inspired by the finding of the Lady Be Good in 1958. It had left its Algerian base in 1943 and crashed in the desert. Its crew survived the crash, but died in the desert -- so Sole Survivor (and a Twilight Zone episode, "King Nine will not Return" are truer to life, and involve the ghosts of the crew. Flight of the Phoenix tells a more upbeat story.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Be_Good_%28aircraft%29

[ElvisL1ves]

Just for a more dramatic shot. It makes no sense otherwise.