Hoe realistisch zijn de ruimteschepen/raketten uit films?

Ik heb deze week Sunshine en Deep Impact gezien en ik vroeg me dit ineens af.

Zijn de knoppen/bedieningspanelen zo ook in een echte raket?
Is de inrichting enigszins waarheidsgetrouw?
Voelt het vliegen in een raket/ruimteschip echt zo soepeltjes?

Weet jij het antwoord?


Het beste antwoord

Het is vrij realistisch daar de NASA jaarlijks alle sf films beoordeeld en alleen 2012 is afgedaan als totale onzin. Toegevoegd na 10 minuten: NASA's silly sci-fi film list -- 2012 the most flawed (w/ Video) January 7, 2011 by Lin Edwards (PhysOrg.com) -- At a conference held at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California, NASA experts have voted 2012 the most scientifically flawed and absurd science fiction film ever made. Ads by Google Nasa Matras vanaf €199 - Gratis 14 dagen Test: Eerst Rustig Thuis Uitproberen, dan Beslissen! - www.energy-plus.info/Matras The 2009 disaster film named 2012 was directed by Roland Emmerich and written by Emmerich and Harald Kloser and grossed almost $800 million. The story is set on the date the Mayan calendar supposedly ends (21 December 2012), which is believed by some to be the day the world will end. The story revolves around a marital reconciliation, which takes place as the world begins to collapse as strange neutrino particles cause global devastation. NASA’s Donald Yeomans, who headed the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous mission, called the film an "exceptional and extraordinary" example of bad science in Hollywood movies. He pointed out that neutrino particles cannot interact with physical substances, and there is no possible way neutrinos carried to Earth by solar flares as depicted could cook the planet’s core and cause hurricanes or earthquakes or produce tsunamis big enough to overwhelm Mount Everest as shown in the film. NASA has received a massive amount of mail as a result of people’s concerns about the world ending in 2012, and has set up a website to debunk the myths, which is something they have never needed to do with previous disaster films. This is a major reason for their list of bad science films — because they do worry many people. Other films on NASA’s silly list include The Day After Tomorrow, about accelerated global warming, Volcano, in which a volcano appears in Los Angeles, the supposed documentary What the Bleep Do We Know, The Sixth Day, Chain Reaction, and The Core. Another film on the hit list is Armageddon, a film about a massive asteroid being blown up by a nuclear bomb to save the Earth. The film was originally supported by NASA. The NASA scientists also voted on scientifically accurate sci-fi films and this list included Gattaca, Metropolis, Jurassic Park, Contact, and Blade Runner.

Dat weten we nog niet,Cindy,want wat de mens tot hedentoe gebouwd heeft lijkt in de verste verte niet op een ruimteschip. Ook is de mens nog niet verder gekomen dan de maan en dat kun je nog echt geen ruimte noemen.

Stel zelf een vraag

Ben je op zoek naar het antwoord die ene vraag die je misschien al tijden achtervolgt?