A pilot’s review of the movie “Flight”

Flight movie cockpit
Last weekend I saw Flight, the movie starring Denzel Washington. I was asked how realistic the film was in terms of actually doing something like that in a real airplane.

Although my piloting is limited to small planes, the forces of nature and aerodynamics apply to all aircraft equally so let’s dive in.

The mechanical problem that brought down the plane parallels the true story of Alaska Airlines flight 261. In that incident, an elevator system problem caused the MD-83 to depart from controlled flight and eventually crash into the ocean after a series of unsuccessful attempts by the crew to regain control of the airplane. As with the movie, the cause of the malfunction was related to the jack screw, a piece of equipment that moves the elevator (or more exactly, the elevator trim). In this photo, the elevator of a Delta 727 is deflected up, which pushes the tail down and nose up. An MD-83 uses the same layout as a 727.

Delta 727 takeoff TPA

The fictional airplane (left) resembles a a real MD-83 (right) but has winglets, unlike real models.

MD-83 vs Flight aircraft

The flight departs Orlando in nasty weather bound for Atlanta. On departure, ATC dialog between the copilot and the controller is mostly accurate although the typical big airline copilot wouldn’t sound like he has been flying for only a couple of weeks. As they climb into the bad weather it becomes very turbulent. The Captain eyes the cockpit weather radar and makes a run for some clear air he spies; he does this by accelerating the airplane.

In reality, the last thing we want to do in turbulent conditions is increase speed in rough air. Instead, we slow down to reduce the force that turbulent air inflicts on the airplane and on the passengers. In fact, although it doesn’t make for a gripping five minutes of film, it’s common for airline crews to taxi into takeoff position on the runway and examine the weather radar view of what lies ahead so as to make an informed go/no-go decision.

But okay, this scene is the Hollywood equivalent of racing the train to the railroad crossing…and just barely beating it. It’s there to establish the Captain as larger than life and the copilot as a nervous newbie, before the big problem arises in a few minutes.

The Captain (Denzel) is feeling some lag from a late night of booze, sex, and coke. He hands the plane over to the copilot before nodding off for a while.

And then we hear and feel The Big Bang as the copilot’s flight controls suddenly stop working and the plane pitches over into a dive. Oddly, turning the yoke from side to side as he moves the control column to and fro doesn’t rock the wings. Apparently MD-83s only roll for captains.

The Captain rouses from his slumber and takes uncontrol of the crippled bird. It is quickly determined that there is no elevator control and that the elevator is stuck in the down position.

The pilots try a few emergency procedures to no avail. As the plane descends, the Captain orders the the copilot to deploy flaps (I forget how much but not full flaps) and lower the landing gear (the wheels). He wants some aerodynamic drag to slow the dive speed and buy time to find a few more rabbits in his cap.

During this scene the filmmakers got it right in principle. The pilots only deployed minimal flaps, presumably to avoid them from being torn off in the dive. Don’t get me wrong, a jet in a dive from 30,000 feet is probably moving right along and flap deployment seems it could cause more problems than not. That said, I will give them a thumbs up on the flaps and gear as a theoretical means of slowing the dive.

But now we run into trouble. As they get down near the ground Denzel decides to roll the plane inverted to counter the downward pitch forces from the stuck elevator. It is true that most any airplane can fly upside down without falling apart. Boeing pilot Tex Johnston famously rolled the prototype 707 and that worked out just fine.

When an airplane is rolled the nose has a tendency to drop. You can see this with the 707 above; it comes out of the roll in a shallow dive. The difference between the 707 and Denzel’s airplane is that the 707 starts the roll in a climb, whereas Denzel’s plane is already pointed down hill. If the plane had had enough altitude to make it all the way over to inverted flight it would have still ended up nose down.

Meanwhile, the co-pilot is having a nervous breakdown, which is not how a professional airline pilot would typically respond in such an emergency. That part is ridiculous.

In this movie trailer screen capture we see that he started the roll at less than 1000 feet above the ground (800 on the right scale).

attitude indicator

Applying down elevator while inverted will indeed force the nose up. Unfortunately, to get to level inverted flight from a 15-20 degree nose down inverted attitude, while closing in on the ground at 230 Kts (on the left) would result in pretty strong negative G that would most certainly cause structural failure.

Fortunately, Denzel Washington is up to the challenge and we made it to straight and level inverted flight. Not for long though, now the darn engines quit so we won’t be gliding upside down to Atlanta after all. Instead, we need to roll the crippled jet back upright to execute a forced landing.

Remember that stuck elevator? It seems to have mysteriously lost its ability to cause trouble as the plane rolled back upright. Wouldn’t that elevator drop the nose again and end the flight right then and there?

So a thumbs down on successfully rolling a broken airliner from 820 feet while heading downhill at 230 Kts. and then rolling it back over into a decent crash landing.

It’s all in good fun though and for the most part the film did a good job with attention to detail. As good a pilot as Denzel is, he needs some ground school on the proper application of aviator sunglasses.

Denzel Washington pilot sunglasses

Share this!Share on Facebook6Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Reddit0Share on Google+2

11 thoughts on “A pilot’s review of the movie “Flight”

  1. Didn’t the Alaska Airlines flight, about 1999 or so, whose tail jack-screw broke in flight from Cabo to San Francisco, and the plane flew upside down into the ocean off Malibu, prove that planes don’t fly upside down?

    • The plane was already too low, and far too pitched down, by the time they turned the aircraft it was too late to recover.

    • No that does not prove
      that planes cannot fly
      upside down. What it proves is that if your elevator is broken you have no up down control. Even though they went inverted (upside down ) they could not move the nose, with a broken jack screw the elevator
      was useless whether the plane was inverted or not. In theory going inverted could make you climb but only if the elevator stopped moving. Any fixed wing plane can do a barrel roll, it’s a 1 g maneuver.

    • Actually, yes. Military fighter jets are designed to fly upside down (like the Blue Angels F-18) because it happens sometimes in aerial combat. MD-80s are not designed to do that for obvious reasons. If you look closely at the engine pods of an MD-80, you see that they have an upward cant. This schedules incoming air at the right angle while cruising. If you invert the aircraft, the ‘angle of attack’ is all wrong, resulting in a compressor stall (engine shutdown). That’s exactly what happened. See NTSB report


      One last thing. MD-80s are incapable of jettisoning fuel.

  2. But what about when the plane is inverted and the engines catch fire? Denzel pulls the engine fire Suppressor and yet the engines keep running, doesn’t pulling the fire suppressor automatically cuts fuel to the engines?

  3. Yes, pulling the fire handle not only cuts Fuel, but Hydraulics, Pneumatics and Electrics as well (after a time delay). The delay is to allow electric valves to motor closed. At which time the crew will evaluate if the fire is out (No fuel or hydraulic to feed the fire) or supress the fire in the cowling area, but not down the inlet or core of the engine, with the activation of the fire bottles. I have not yet seen this movie, which sound terrific by collegue reviews of it, that it is very true when it comes to EGPWS (Ground Proximity) warnings of “Pull Up” and “Terrain – Terrain” and DC-9/MD-80 flight deck.

  4. in the movie after the inversion and engines flaming and extinguishing when he rolls back and the engines are out and he “glides” would that really work or as it is noted that once again upright the plane would go nose down again? I do have two brothers who fly commercially and haven’t yet had a conversation with them as to if they have seen this film and how they feel about it… but Good movie and message about change and the Human heart.

    • The elevator would have left the less effect at slower speeds. Therefore there would be a need to pitch up at slower air speeds to have more tail down force.

    • most aircraft have a 10 to 1 glide ratio which means you’ll go 10 feet forward for every one foot they drop in altitude large aircraft have run out of fuel before and glided a hundred miles before finding a place to land so yes these aircraft can glide

  5. I don’t think pilots are trained to fly upside down?, enough to fly in a regular passenger flight emergency or not.

    • they are not trained…. but there are instances where pilots have improvised for instance ,United Airlines Flight 232 lost all hydraulics ie complete loss of airleons, vertical and horizontal stabilizer… they used the different power in left and right engine to achieve turning and pitch control…this was not taught , they just improvised….they almost landed the aircraft ….i.e they crash landed at the airport ..more than half of the passsengers survived

Comments are closed.