Effective-Disorder posted:

No helmet apparently, front wheel on the bike is disintegrated. Chances are she was dead when they got there.

quote:

Because her character did not wear a helmet in the movie, the stuntwoman, an experienced road racer who reportedly was doing her first movie, was not wearing a helmet, a source told Deadline Hollywood.

Proteus Jones posted:

The fire does a fine job generating its own wind to help it spread. They've clocked the winds at ground level around 60 mph. And while I wouldn't necessarily call them "tornados" wildfires do spawn some impressively scary cyclones that move across the ground very swiftly.

Dillbag posted:

Last year one of the Maze Runner sequels dropped Dylan O'Brien off the back of a car during a stunt that was changed up at the last minute and ran him over.

WebDog posted:

Yeah changing at the last minute is one way to cause carnage.

Stunt people know how dangerous this stuff is and they will practice to the best of what they know. Directors adding in extra set bits or last minute changes unintentionally cause accidents.
Any worth their weight usually say no when something stinks.

Not sure what the whole situation is for this one. Either someone didn't think things through or assumed things would be fine.

Back to the future 2 has one major stunt fail where in the bit where Griff's gang crashes into the courthouse you see one woman plow into the pillar.
That was a combo of night before set changes loving up their wire work planning.

Or people simply not knowing how things work, such as that poor guy in Queensland who was shot by a blank from a gun because people think blanks just go bang.

Or that horrible story from a bunch of amateurs who shot on an active rail line with no medic on site killing one woman.

WebDog posted:

Twilight Zone for the infamous helicopter stunt gone horribly wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twilight_Zone_accident?wprov=sfla1

The Article posted:

Stephen Lydecker, also a camera operator on board, testified that Landis had earlier "shrugged off" warnings about the stunt with the comment "We may lose the helicopter." While Lydecker acknowledged that Landis may have been joking when he made the remark, he said: "I learned not to take anything the man said as a joke. It was his attitude. He didn't have time for suggestions from anybody."
...
Landis's career was not significantly affected by the incident, although he said in 1996: "There was absolutely no good aspect about this whole story. The tragedy, which I think about every day, had an enormous impact on my career, from which it may possibly never recover."

BgRdMchne posted:

https://twitter.com/BrettKHOU/statu...genumber%3D5716

Stolen from the C-Spam Trump thread.

Ignimbrite posted:

2 died, apparently.

Don't Ask posted:

Aww, came here to post this.

Check out the impact:

http://i.imgur.com/gJqRgj9.gifv

Effective-Disorder posted:

No helmet apparently, front wheel on the bike is disintegrated. Chances are she was dead when they got there.

RatHat posted:

Probably just because money. In The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo they were presumably going to digitally replace the head anyway.

EDIT: Also wouldn't you need a specific camera setup for that?

DiHK posted:

Not necessarily a special camera but definitely something on the rider/bike to assist with digital tracking.

Volcott posted:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Express_Flight_705

A time a plane went too fast. (Because the pilot was trying to keep a man who'd just tried to kill the flight crew with a hammer off his feet.)

It's also an episode of good podcast the dollop.

Cobweb Heart posted:

GnarlyCharlie4u posted:

Found the Australian truck driver.

Sirotan posted:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5c8mnf

tl; dr: Former fighter pilots roll a DC-10 140 degrees and nosedives at nearly mach 1, to throw off a hijacker that had already smashed a baseball-sized hole in his skull. Everyone survives.

Werong Bustope posted:

Holy poo poo talk about escalation.

KoRMaK posted:

Yea that was top notch air investigation

I loled when he got it to near mach 1 and remembered that normal airfoils don't work during them times

WebDog posted:

Twilight Zone for the infamous helicopter stunt gone horribly wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twilight_Zone_accident?wprov=sfla1

Wikipedia posted:

The finished film contains footage of a real helicopter crash. In a scene showing law enforcement officers firing their weapons to ward off tomatoes in a field, a $600,000 Hiller Aircraft UH-12E that had been rented for the production was supposed to have landed in the tomato patch behind the officers, but during the landing, its tail rotor struck the ground, causing the craft to spin out of control near the ground, roll over, and burst into flames. The helicopter pilot escaped without serious injury.[2] The crash was caught on film as the cameras were rolling at the time. The crash was later worked into the film. It was done saying of character Von Schauer who survived the crash saying the helicopter was attacked by a "kamikaze" tomato.

quote:

“What if one of us doesn’t make it inside the clock tower?” It was actually the first time the possibility had come to her. It might have been the first time the possibility had come to anyone. “There’s going to be all this smoke from that rocket they’re using for Griff’s hoverboard. How will you know if someone doesn’t make it in?”

“Cheryl,” he said, “it’s the best place for me to be. You have to trust me.”

“But that’s not how we rehearsed it.” She looked at him, he looked back, and their mutual silence and stares terminated the conversation. The debate over the stunt was officially over. It was time to shoot. She was suspended from the far left side of the frame, then Gary Morgan and Richie Gaona. David Rowden was going to land much lower, just above the courthouse steps. The performers were lifted up and clicked in their quick-release hooks. The giant crane started backing up slowly, maybe fifty or sixty feet, while the stunt team was suspended from a long cable. Kleven asked if everybody was ready, and on “Action,” the hooks were released. The four started swinging. Wheeler felt the rush of air against her face. They were picking up speed and, to her horror, veering to the left. I’m going to hit this pillar. They raced forward. She was headed on a trajectory straight for the set piece. I’m going to hit this pillar. Everyone was off course, and she wasn’t sure if Gary Morgan was going to make it through the glass either, but she was certain about her fate. I’m going to hit this—

She was spinning like a figure skater, parallel to the ground like Superman in midflight. She hit the pillar dead‑on, but because she was covered in shin guards, knee guards, elbow pads, and other well-concealed braces hidden within her costume, she felt fine. A little disoriented, perhaps, but fine. As she was rotating, she noticed she was alone. The rest of her colleagues must have made it. This was supposed to be a one-take shot, but whatever went wrong meant they would have to do it again. Maybe they’d be pissed, but she was okay and, most important, Greg Tippie hadn’t cut the cable. He must have seen she hadn’t made it inside.
Which might have happened if he had stayed outside the pillar. Or if the special effects team hadn’t gone with opaque trick glass. Or if there wasn’t so much smoke from the rocket. Or if she had gone with her gut and gotten answers to her questions. But that wasn’t what happened. He pressed the button and the stunt performers were released. As two other stuntmen headed toward the blue pads, Wheeler fell flat, like she was lying in bed, from thirty feet in the air. She knew she was going to die. She was certain of it, as certain as she had been that she would hit that pillar. She was falling from too high an altitude. She was going to die on the Universal Studios backlot.

Werong Bustope posted:

Holy poo poo talk about escalation.

POOL IS CLOSED posted:

None of the crew will ever get to fly commercially again.

Collateral Damage posted:

Worth noting that they were stopped from flying for medical reasons due to the injuries they suffered, not because of the actions they took. All three of them received the ALPA Gold Medal Award for heroism in the air.

Moist von Lipwig posted:

Actually Intel had started to hit a wall and Moore's law basically ended a few years ago. There's a reason clock speeds haven't moved at all and it's because going from a 45nm process to a 22nm is a much bigger jump in efficiency then going from 22nm to 10nm. We're running out of room at the bottom here. I sincerely hope we have some kind of breakthrough because otherwise we're gonna run out of progress to make.

Sagebrush posted:

From pages ago, but just wanted to point out that most other technologies have followed this same pattern -- initial rapid explosion in performance and then a plateau -- and the plateau has been maybe disappointing, but not the end of the world. Take commercial air travel, for instance. We went from single-passenger fabric biplanes that couldn't outrun a horse to 300-person jet aircraft going 600mph over the course of about 50 years, and except for the Concorde, jetliners haven't gotten any faster in the 50 years since. The lack of hypersonic airliners didn't throw the world into a depression, though. It just meant that we didn't get some of the things that futurists had been predicting (e.g. executives commuting from London to New York every day), and the underlying needs were addressed in other ways (e.g. fast international business travel has been predominantly replaced by the internet).

I imagine that processing power will work the same way. Some of the slack will be picked up by alternative strategies (MAKE MORE CORES), and there may be a few more breakthroughs coming, but for the most part physics does what physics do -- the growth will slow down and we'll have to find another way around it. What's the futurist dream of ultra-powerful computing? Hard AI probably, right? I think we won't achieve it with silicon electronics, but eventually it will happen by some other method -- I'm putting my money on engineered biological computers (likely working in sync with conventional electronics), and on the same sort of timescale as the airliner/internet shift:

1910: beginning of commercial air travel
1960: 600mph jetliners (plateau)
1980: internet is developed and begins to spread
1995: beginning of the dot-com boom
2015: internet is a ubiquitous basic need

1960: integrated circuits developed
2010: beginning of moore's law plateau
2030: engineered neural nets have been demonstrated
2045: major breakthrough leads to commercialization
2065: cyborgs are everywhere

IPCRESS posted:

Unrelated to OSHA but today someone was ear-bashing me about some wonderful new technology that uses aluminum and water to create hydrogen gas, "for the price of the water".

Unless I've mucked up the chemistry, this is burning up the aluminum as fuel. Cheap, renewable, totally carbon neutral aluminum.

Phanatic posted:

An empty airliner can loving move.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5_8D8HCnS4

Sagebrush posted:

From pages ago, but just wanted to point out that most other technologies have followed this same pattern -- initial rapid explosion in performance and then a plateau -- and the plateau has been maybe disappointing, but not the end of the world. Take commercial air travel, for instance. We went from single-passenger fabric biplanes that couldn't outrun a horse to 300-person jet aircraft going 600mph over the course of about 50 years, and except for the Concorde, jetliners haven't gotten any faster in the 50 years since. The lack of hypersonic airliners didn't throw the world into a depression, though. It just meant that we didn't get some of the things that futurists had been predicting (e.g. executives commuting from London to New York every day), and the underlying needs were addressed in other ways (e.g. fast international business travel has been predominantly replaced by the internet).

I imagine that processing power will work the same way. Some of the slack will be picked up by alternative strategies (MAKE MORE CORES), and there may be a few more breakthroughs coming, but for the most part physics does what physics do -- the growth will slow down and we'll have to find another way around it. What's the futurist dream of ultra-powerful computing? Hard AI probably, right? I think we won't achieve it with silicon electronics, but eventually it will happen by some other method -- I'm putting my money on engineered biological computers (likely working in sync with conventional electronics), and on the same sort of timescale as the airliner/internet shift:

1910: beginning of commercial air travel
1960: 600mph jetliners (plateau)
1980: internet is developed and begins to spread
1995: beginning of the dot-com boom
2015: internet is a ubiquitous basic need

1960: integrated circuits developed
2010: beginning of moore's law plateau
2030: engineered neural nets have been demonstrated
2045: major breakthrough leads to commercialization
2065: cyborgs are everywhere

FuturePastNow posted:

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-entertainment-news-updates-august-stunt-woman-killed-deadpool-2-1502732623-htmlstory.html

Face-first through a plate glass window without a helmet, she's getting a closed casket

mobby_6kl posted:

Interesting that she rode without a helmet. There's a clip on special effects in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, and there the stunt rider wore a helmet that was later digitally replaced with the actress' head: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDGqKyNV-HU&t=259s

Sagebrush posted:

I have corrected your spelling.

Also, while you're correct that it is technically "burning up the aluminum," it's not quite as bad as it sounds. The techniques I've heard of rely on raw aluminum's reactivity. A chunk of aluminum out in the world appears nonreactive, because it's always coated with a very thin layer of nonreactive aluminum oxide. If you disrupt this layer in air by scratching or cutting the block, the newly-exposed bare aluminum will immediately oxidize, sealing it back up and preventing any further oxidization. So in these techniques, you take a big block of aluminum and hold it underwater, then somehow disrupt the oxide layer (for instance by milling or grinding it away), and the exposed aluminum rips oxygen out of the water. You get hydrogen gas bubbling out and the block is slowly turned into a pile of aluminum oxide dust.

It's actually a fairly renewable method of generating hydrogen, because aluminum oxide is the natural form that we find it in on the planet's surface -- so we have facilities (aluminum smelting works) that can turn the oxide back into metallic aluminum relatively easily. If this were used in your car, for instance, it'd require a water tank and a hot-swappable pack of aluminum cubes or whatever, and consumed boxes of aluminum dust would get shipped back to the smelter to be melted down and recast. The energy input for your car is electricity at the smelter, which can be from a renewable source; in fact one of the pushes for the Niagara Falls hydroelectric project around the turn of the century was to supply the massive aluminum works along the Great Lakes.

There are lots of issues turning the concept into a functional system, but the idea is sound. I'm still all for direct-hydrocarbon fuel cells and biogenic hydrocarbons though.

Irradiation posted:

It's not sound at all. Aluminum smelting is not trivial and is extremely energy intensive. Even if you perfectly used every single atom of aluminum to generate hydrogen, the amount of energy required to convert the oxide back into base aluminum metal is so much that even a perfect process would produce 6.2 kg of CO2/kWhr.

Coal is one of the highest CO2/kWhr ratios and it still produces 18 times less CO2/kWhr.

Irradiation posted:

It's not sound at all. Aluminum smelting is not trivial and is extremely energy intensive. Even if you perfectly used every single atom of aluminum to generate hydrogen, the amount of energy required to convert the oxide back into base aluminum metal is so much that even a perfect process would produce 6.2 kg of CO2/kWhr.

Sagebrush posted:

IMO there should be like a Hays code thing that you can't show good guys in a movie riding a motorcycle without a helmet. Like I dunno if there's still an actual code that movies follow, but surely our current society would consider it extremely poor taste to show a movie hero drinking and driving, for instance? Definitely there would be pushback if they portrayed it as cool or normal to do so. Do the same for motorcycle helmets -- teach kids that it's dangerous and idiotic to ride without one, and save some lives (notably the stuntwoman's!) down the line.