General > General Technical Chat

SciFi movies and pathetic misconceptions of tech failing for the story line.

<< < (16/42) > >>

CatalinaWOW:

--- Quote from: tszaboo on April 04, 2023, 05:02:52 pm ---
--- Quote from: David Hess on April 01, 2023, 01:57:31 am ---
--- Quote from: snarkysparky on March 27, 2023, 01:46:43 pm ---Firefly was a good show but they made no attempt to get spaceflight correct.
--- End quote ---

Firefly is the *only* show or movie that I have ever seen showing how a ship properly descends into a lower orbit for entry into the atmosphere.  I almost jumped up to cheer.

https://youtu.be/J3rX0T2XNxs

Forward takes you out, out takes you back, back takes you in, in takes you forward.

--- End quote ---
Ha. Flip and burn maneuver. Despite the early sci-fi CGI it really looks like something a ship would do.
It's a strange disconnect for people. Everyone seems to know that you can go to mars every 26 months, and the route is 9 months long, but then you rarely see anything else orbital implemented. Like I was watching Red Planet the other day. They start the landing like 20 minutes early, end up kms from the original landing site. So the ship must be going 20km/h in orbit I guess.

--- End quote ---

Well that is one answer.  Another would be that the start was 20 minutes early and the various dynamic correction mechanisms couldn't take out the initial error.  That would exceed the capability of any system appropriate for the time frame, but is only off by one or two orders of magnitude, not the three orders that chaps you about your solution.

BrianHG:

--- Quote from: tggzzz on April 04, 2023, 11:09:33 pm ---
--- Quote from: David Hess on April 01, 2023, 01:57:31 am ---
--- Quote from: snarkysparky on March 27, 2023, 01:46:43 pm ---Firefly was a good show but they made no attempt to get spaceflight correct.
--- End quote ---

Firefly is the *only* show or movie that I have ever seen showing how a ship properly descends into a lower orbit for entry into the atmosphere.  I almost jumped up to cheer.

https://youtu.be/J3rX0T2XNxs

Forward takes you out, out takes you back, back takes you in, in takes you forward.

--- End quote ---

Babylon 5 was good w.r.t. spaceflight dynamics. It completely avoided the "spitfires/mustang in space" syndrome. It also replaced "cowboys and indians in space" with "Roman empire / Japanese empire / Tolkien in space".

But then B5 was pioneering in many ways, including CGI, 5 year story arc, plot points being introduced many many episodes  before they came to fruition, none of the "global reset" between episodes (think Star Dreck!), general literacy, being based around classic philosophical questions, and the way the creator (JMS)  interacted with the fan base on usenet after each episode was transmitted.

Still worth rewatching after 30 years. Newbies should start with series 3, get hooked, then watch the earlier series to see how they got to that point.

--- End quote ---
Yes, B5 had a slow season 1 which you just had to sit through, but the entire series is worth watching.
It is the same with Farscape.

tszaboo:

--- Quote from: CatalinaWOW on April 05, 2023, 12:38:29 am ---
--- Quote from: tszaboo on April 04, 2023, 05:02:52 pm ---
--- Quote from: David Hess on April 01, 2023, 01:57:31 am ---
--- Quote from: snarkysparky on March 27, 2023, 01:46:43 pm ---Firefly was a good show but they made no attempt to get spaceflight correct.
--- End quote ---

Firefly is the *only* show or movie that I have ever seen showing how a ship properly descends into a lower orbit for entry into the atmosphere.  I almost jumped up to cheer.

https://youtu.be/J3rX0T2XNxs

Forward takes you out, out takes you back, back takes you in, in takes you forward.

--- End quote ---
Ha. Flip and burn maneuver. Despite the early sci-fi CGI it really looks like something a ship would do.
It's a strange disconnect for people. Everyone seems to know that you can go to mars every 26 months, and the route is 9 months long, but then you rarely see anything else orbital implemented. Like I was watching Red Planet the other day. They start the landing like 20 minutes early, end up kms from the original landing site. So the ship must be going 20km/h in orbit I guess.

--- End quote ---

Well that is one answer.  Another would be that the start was 20 minutes early and the various dynamic correction mechanisms couldn't take out the initial error.  That would exceed the capability of any system appropriate for the time frame, but is only off by one or two orders of magnitude, not the three orders that chaps you about your solution.

--- End quote ---
Nah, Red planet was just an overall bad science accuracy movie. They had some sort of proton storm or something, and had to do emergency landing early.

B5 is great, and does sci-fi well. As in focusing on the human element instead of the tech gizmos. The human ships are pretty grounded design with centrifugal artificial gravity, or the Star Fury wit it's 4 engines and high maneuverability. I watched the series again, after like 25 years? Too bad the CGI is quite dated, and some of the sets are... Let's just say I had no idea that plastic pallets and IBCs, and garden floor tiles are so versatile.

tggzzz:

--- Quote from: tszaboo on April 05, 2023, 11:34:03 am ---B5 is great, and does sci-fi well. As in focusing on the human element instead of the tech gizmos. The human ships are pretty grounded design with centrifugal artificial gravity, or the Star Fury wit it's 4 engines and high maneuverability. I watched the series again, after like 25 years? Too bad the CGI is quite dated, and some of the sets are... Let's just say I had no idea that plastic pallets and IBCs, and garden floor tiles are so versatile.

--- End quote ---

Clearly you have never watched classic British TV SF from the 60s, 70s, 80s. For starters, have a look at Doctor Who and Blakes 7...

There's a subset of fandom that amuses itself by working out what various bits are and where they came from. The most famous example is probably "a sink plunger".

(They are a bit like my old Land Rover, which had many parts from many cars (frequently Minis!), and a fuel gauge calibrated in Roentgens/hour)

tszaboo:

--- Quote from: tggzzz on April 05, 2023, 12:15:24 pm ---
--- Quote from: tszaboo on April 05, 2023, 11:34:03 am ---B5 is great, and does sci-fi well. As in focusing on the human element instead of the tech gizmos. The human ships are pretty grounded design with centrifugal artificial gravity, or the Star Fury wit it's 4 engines and high maneuverability. I watched the series again, after like 25 years? Too bad the CGI is quite dated, and some of the sets are... Let's just say I had no idea that plastic pallets and IBCs, and garden floor tiles are so versatile.

--- End quote ---

Clearly you have never watched classic British TV SF from the 60s, 70s, 80s. For starters, have a look at Doctor Who and Blakes 7...

There's a subset of fandom that amuses itself by working out what various bits are and where they came from. The most famous example is probably "a sink plunger".

(They are a bit like my old Land Rover, which had many parts from many cars (frequently Minis!), and a fuel gauge calibrated in Roentgens/hour)

--- End quote ---
No, but why would I? I also don't watch Turkish Sci-Fi, or the Sharknado series or 90s Brazilian soap operas. Or a number of genres.
Watched Doctor who from Eccleston to Peter Capaldi, didn't really like Capaldi since most of the time I didn't understand what he was saying, plus Steven Moffat is a baboon who doesn't understand storytelling, and it went all downhill from there. I think I wanted to watch some Red Dwarf, but it's nowhere to be found.
I don't think you realize, but If you don't have access to BBC 14 or whatever channel these films are goin on, you will never see them. They are so niche, even the BBC doesn't have all the Doctor Who episodes archived.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod