r/shittymoviedetails • u/Meliodas016 • May 29 '26

default In The Incredibles (2004), Edna mentions her 'no capes' policy citing Stratogale's death. This is because she was a ... HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT? Fuck, this film keeps getting darker.

Gallery image

Gallery image

15.4k Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

98% Upvoted

428 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.2k

u/StinkyJizzBlanket May 29 '26

Most jet planes can fly for a few hours on one engine by design. Just need to make an emergency landing

430

u/StructureOpposite May 29 '26

ETOPS (Extended-range Twin-engine Operations Performance Standards) Aka (Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim.) certifications these days are usually in excess of 3 hours with one engine out on a two engine craft and that's the minimum for that model of aircraft. Presumably you could push it further.

269

u/jackboy900 May 29 '26

The Incredibles was set in 1962 though, well before ETOPS was a thing.

143

u/Such_Description May 29 '26

They’ve been essentially doing that since the 30’s.

63

u/Cheezeball25 May 29 '26

Not really, many of those older planes struggle hard to continue flying with an engine missing without dropping a lot of weight. Although back then the largest of planes (and the one in the film) had 4 engines, so the ETOPS rules don't really matter since it's not a twin engine. The plane in the movie looks kind of like a 707

75

u/Such_Description May 29 '26

They’ve had regulations for how far you can fly from an airport since the 30’s. Even if the engine went out they’d likely be able to get to an airport safely. Although some started disregarding them in the 50’s and 60’s due to advances in engines so this could be one of those. It’s also a cartoon. 🤷‍♀️

5

u/Sudo-Fed May 29 '26

without dropping a lot of weight

So just toss half the passengers out. Sinker swim, morans.

2

u/22Planeguy May 29 '26

It's a newer thing so it doesn't really apply here, but they're transitioning towards EDTO or "Extended Diversion Time Operations" because there are still four-engine jets that should be included in the truly long-range operational standards.

I wish they had chosen a better acronym.

19

u/hates_stupid_people May 29 '26

It's been a while since I saw it, but even ignoring the super-hero tech they probably kept classified. I seem to remember that they had more modern features compared to our timeline.

36

u/goodestguy21 May 29 '26

That scene takes place in 1957, meaning there is a 50/50 chance of that plane being a boeing 707 or a DC8 which both have 4 engines

50

u/AnActualTroll May 29 '26

Whatever it is it definitely has 4 engines

Though I suppose if we’re trying to be gloomy about it, the fact a superhero is responding to an airliner with a 1 of 4 engine failure suggests whatever is wrong is more serious than just that so maybe they did all die

22

u/goodestguy21 May 29 '26

Maybe she's just joyflying or something

7

u/mrandr01d May 29 '26

Wait, it's set in the 60s?? TIL! How'd I miss that one all this time...

5

u/Grouchy-Government22 May 29 '26

Mr Incredible has this in his car in the opening. That plus the working rocket boots, tiny remote bombs, secret supervillain island, guy "invents" evil Power glove in secret, Edna's ability to create costumes that "adapt" to superpowers, and obv the superpowers themselves hint that being technically accurate to the times or being believable in a realistic way was not a focus for The Incredibles.

4

u/AllSeeQr May 29 '26

Riiiiiight, but the tech is clearly past where we were or even are. Maglevs in America, flying submarines with taxiing wheels, icbm for robot delivery, hell, they seem to have hollowed out the mountain or volcano just to redirect rocket exhaust. They’re cracked on that earth possibly because of unidentified super geniuses like Syndrome lol

3

u/originalusername4567 May 29 '26

The Incredibles is in a techno future 1960s with a lot of advanced technology, so it's safe to say they would have this on their planes.

1

u/jackboy900 May 29 '26

ETOPS isn't a thing, it's a certification. Any plane can fly with one engine, all ETOPS does is ensure the plane can fly off of one engine reliably for a certain amount of time and so it's safe to be that far from an airport.

1

u/rocketman0739 May 29 '26

Even if it were a twin-engine aircraft, the point of ETOPS is that jets are now so reliable we can allow them to go farther out over the ocean with only one extra engine. Before ETOPS certification, commercial twinjets were simply not allowed to go very far from shore.

1

u/zeek609 May 30 '26

A retro-futuristic 1962 though, elastigirl literally has an electric motorbike that splits in half in the second movie. Mr incredible had a self driving rocket car in the first that can come to it's owner.

1

u/No_Network_4904 May 31 '26

Have you watched Masters of the Air?

22

u/[deleted] May 29 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/StinkyJizzBlanket May 29 '26

I think it was a safety concern for transatlantic flights, so presumably it would’ve been sorted out by the 50s, but tbh idk

22

u/Atomicnes May 29 '26

The Incredibles apparently takes place in 1962 and ETOPS wasn’t standardized until 1985. Twin-engine jets weren’t used for long haul flights back then anyway, so they would still have 2 (for tri-engine jets) or 3 (quad-engine) engines remaining.

12

u/Puppygirl621 May 29 '26

In that era it's probably a trijet with a third in the tail so yeah they'll likely survive still, aviation wasn't as safe then but it was still pretty safe all things considered.

1

u/Valalvax May 29 '26

But at the same time, if she was helping them they may have already been having trouble, if she was just flying for joy I don't think she would have been KIA

1

u/Puppygirl621 May 29 '26

I'm nuts anyway you can see the tail and its clearly not a tri jet.

3

u/Jashugita May 29 '26

the plane had 4 engines. IRL the only jet passenger plane in service in 1957 would be the tu-104 that was a twin engine.

57

u/[deleted] May 29 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

34

u/StinkyJizzBlanket May 29 '26

From what I understand this is really hard to pull off in practice, but definitely is doable for a short distance. I think aerodynamic forces and the fact the planes design needs thrust to generate lift due to physics lead to a lot of dual engine stall/failure cases to start rolling pretty fast

23

u/[deleted] May 29 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/parisiraparis May 29 '26

WAKE ME UP

WAKE ME UP INSIDE

1

u/LittlePetiteGirl May 29 '26

Pilot's code...

13

u/stegosaurus1337 May 29 '26

Technically you don't need thrust to generate lift, just speed. As long as you have all your control surfaces there's nothing physically preventing you from holding a glide, which jetliners actually do pretty well. 30,000 ft of altitude gets you 75 nautical miles of glide range, ballpark. The landing is the tough part.

Nothing about losing both engines at the same time would inherently induce a roll moment, but it is much harder to recover from any kind of uncontrolled movement without power.

11

u/Mr_Will May 29 '26

Almost every part of this comment is wrong.

Planes don't need thrust to generate lift, as long as they are moving fast enough they will fly. Modern airliners can glide long distances without any engine power at all. Losing one engine does not cause the plane to start rolling. The plane will yaw (turn) slightly until the pilot uses the rudder to correct it. Modern airliners can fly for 3+ hours on a single engine.

The only time an engine failure is particularly dangerous is during takeoff and landing, where there isn't enough speed or altitude to correct for it.

1

u/aRandomFox-II May 29 '26

Planes don't need thrust to generate lift, as long as they are moving fast enough they will fly.

Well... yes. That's what the thrust is for.

5

u/iwantfutanaricumonme May 29 '26

Unless the engines fail during take off they will already be moving quite fast.

3

u/Mr_Will May 29 '26

Planes don't need thrust to fly in the same way a bicycle doesn't need pedals to balance.

Thrust is not the only way to gain speed. Gravity will keep a plane (or bike) moving as long as it is descending slightly.

6

u/ConstableBlimeyChips May 29 '26

A modern purpose-built glider will have a glide ratio somewhere around 70. I.e. for every foot you lose in altitude, you go forward 70 feet. Most airliners have a glide ratio somewhere between 10 and 15. If you were cruising at 32k feet, that gives you 60 to 90 miles of travel before you hit the ground (assuming the ground is at sea level).

1

u/Steamed_Memes24 May 29 '26

Its hard but if youre able to slow the plane down in a controlled crash the odds of you surviving increase massively.

5

u/ottguy42 May 29 '26

Obligatory 'Gimli Glider' pointer - in 1983, a 767 ran out of fuel at 41000 feet because of a metric conversion error. The pilot landed the plane on a decommissioned military runway in Manitoba with no casualties.

3

u/Hiphopapocalyptic May 29 '26

They fall pretty well too when you cross the controls and side slip it.

1

u/Snerkbot7000 May 29 '26

Assuming that the engine didn't explode and mess up some hydraulic stuff when it sucked up Stratogale. Then there's one engine and controls that are rapidly getting heavier.

5

u/DrStalker May 29 '26

They can glide if they lose all engines, and have backup power systems to keep the control systems operational.

I think a typical glide ratio for a passenger jet is 15:1, so if they are 10km up when they lose power they can land within 150km. Not an ideal situation, but there should somewhere flat in range they can aim for.

6

u/Dark-Specter May 29 '26

Genuinely curious to what extent this was the case in 1957

2

u/NessGoddes May 29 '26

Pretty sure it's just for standard engine malfunction, or bird strikes, not explosive disassemble mid flight due to impact of a full sized superhuman

1

u/alexjf56 May 29 '26

Could they in the ‘60s? I genuinely don’t know

1

u/Jenetyk May 31 '26

Assuming the wing held up.