City In the Sky - Airliner Logistics ABC Tuesday 8:30pm

[BAM1748]

Well if you insist ...

(1) The titular analogy which becomes the basic premise for the show is silly. 1 million PAX airborne at any one time does represent the population of a small to medium size city such as Adelaide.
However that is as far as it goes. In no other respect are those 1 million PAX on thousands of aircraft comparable to a city.
(2) This feeble premise is used to justify the participation of the person who "does the mathematics of cities" who doesn't ever seem to have seen an aircraft before.
Great junket if you can get it.
(3) The story about the measures they take to heat an aircraft during a layover in Siberia was interesting. Although the many continuity errors were annoying.
(4) Apart from that the show seemed to consist of merely "wow isn't that big!" "how can something so heavy take off?" and "gee aren't there a lot of bags!".
Maybe as a frequent flyer I am just not in the target demographic for this sort of incredulity.
(5) Opportunities to add insights weren't taken. The effusive segment on the A380 seemed either ignorant or out of date. While I hope that the rumours of its demise are exagerrated, it was wrong to
present it as the unambiguous future of aviation, without any mention of the way fuel costs and economic circumstances had placed its future under a cloud.
(6) As someone else has commented, showing the two freeloaders, I mean presenters, sending text messages to each other was juvenile.

Like the show Top Gear (which I guess you don't like either) it's an entertainment show rather than doco, even though sold as a doco by the ABC. I do agree with most of your points and re the 380 shows the program was out of date.

 

[eric2011]

Well if you insist ...

(1) The titular analogy which becomes the basic premise for the show is silly. 1 million PAX airborne at any one time does represent the population of a small to medium size city such as Adelaide.
However that is as far as it goes. In no other respect are those 1 million PAX on thousands of aircraft comparable to a city.
(2) This feeble premise is used to justify the participation of the person who "does the mathematics of cities" who doesn't ever seem to have seen an aircraft before.
Great junket if you can get it.
(3) The story about the measures they take to heat an aircraft during a layover in Siberia was interesting. Although the many continuity errors were annoying.
(4) Apart from that the show seemed to consist of merely "wow isn't that big!" "how can something so heavy take off?" and "gee aren't there a lot of bags!".
Maybe as a frequent flyer I am just not in the target demographic for this sort of incredulity.
(5) Opportunities to add insights weren't taken. The effusive segment on the A380 seemed either ignorant or out of date. While I hope that the rumours of its demise are exagerrated, it was wrong to
present it as the unambiguous future of aviation, without any mention of the way fuel costs and economic circumstances had placed its future under a cloud.
(6) As someone else has commented, showing the two freeloaders, I mean presenters, sending text messages to each other was juvenile.

Okay, well, we all have our opinions and I respect yours. Thankfully we are all different other wise the world would be a worse place that it sometimes is.

 

[amaroo]

The NATO pipeline system was interesting...

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_56600.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Europe_Pipeline_System

 

[jb747]

I thought it was quite decent, and covered a number of things that I've never seen before.

 

[esseeeayeenn]

Clearly someone doesn't watch much tv . I enjoyed it.

Guilty as charged, but only due to a lack of appealing content.

 

[JessicaTam]

I have just watched it. I found it interesting. Others have mentioned at least they got the aircraft types correct, however I did spot discussion about a take off which showed footage of an airplane landing. (I know, I known nit-picking).

 

[Happy Trails]

The NATO pipeline system was interesting...

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_56600.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Europe_Pipeline_System

The UK system was my bread and butter before moving to Aus.

 

[kamchatsky]

Just watched it on iView. I found it very interesting. I will definitely watch Episode 2 and 3.

 

[OATEK]

Just watched it on iView. I found it very interesting. I will definitely watch Episode 2 and 3.

Yes, I caught up with it overnight and being the travel junkie that I am will certainly follow the rest of the series. Yes, it was a bit hammy, but the sequences were long enough to see what really happens, whereas as so often with these mockumentaries the cuts between scenes seems based on watchers with an attention span of <30secs.

 

[seanpodge]

I thought it was pretty good. The SMS thing is a bit odd, but they didn't go overboard with it, thankfully.

Looking forward to the next episode.

 

[drewbles]

Good, general entertainment that may have educated some people on general points of aviation as well as related things (such as the EU fuel pipelines).

Shame it's only 3 episodes, but they're all quite good. Quite enjoyed them!

 

[DElliott]

Looking forward to the next episode , thought it an excellent show.

 

[Bundy Bear]

Another episode coming up tonight on ABC at 8:30, check your local listings.

 

[serfty]

Another episode coming up tonight on ABC at 8:30, check your local listings.

Part 2: "Airborne"

 

[samh004]

Thanks for pointing this out!

 

[PLANT]

Been given the tick off approval..... From the family

 

[suze2000]

Just watched this ep. There wasn't much that was interesting after the bit about ATC, though it was fun to watch him get almost struck by lightning.

 

[blackcat20]

Just watched this ep. There wasn't much that was interesting after the bit about ATC, though it was fun to watch him get almost struck by lightning.

Yeah I didnt find this one as interesting as the first one.

 

[coriander]

Yeah I didn't find this one as interesting as the first one.

I was surprised than such a thin Cu mesh could absorb and dissipate a lightning strike.

 

[Quickstatus]

Well if you insist ...

(1) The titular analogy which becomes the basic premise for the show is silly. 1 million PAX airborne at any one time does represent the population of a small to medium size city such as Adelaide.
However that is as far as it goes. In no other respect are those 1 million PAX on thousands of aircraft comparable to a city.
(2) This feeble premise is used to justify the participation of the person who "does the mathematics of cities" who doesn't ever seem to have seen an aircraft before.
Great junket if you can get it.
(3) The story about the measures they take to heat an aircraft during a layover in Siberia was interesting. Although the many continuity errors were annoying.
(4) Apart from that the show seemed to consist of merely "wow isn't that big!" "how can something so heavy take off?" and "gee aren't there a lot of bags!".
Maybe as a frequent flyer I am just not in the target demographic for this sort of incredulity.
(5) Opportunities to add insights weren't taken. The effusive segment on the A380 seemed either ignorant or out of date. While I hope that the rumours of its demise are exagerrated, it was wrong to
present it as the unambiguous future of aviation, without any mention of the way fuel costs and economic circumstances had placed its future under a cloud.
(6) As someone else has commented, showing the two freeloaders, I mean presenters, sending text messages to each other was juvenile.

Even documentaries are sprinkled with a liberal dose of artistic license (maybe even overdosed) because the primary purpose is to entertain, not necessarily to inform. Secondly the target audience is the superficial and uninformed (S&U).

There is nothing much of substance these days via the usual outlets and critical /logical thinking is not a educational subject.

The % who are S&U seem to be growing. That's why "spin doctors" are in such high demand and constantly used by any group from airlines to political parties. They know that very few endeavour to be informed.