Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.
- Thread starter ghostryder
- Start date
Bobatrek, thank you for posting the good close-up image. (TYP) it is, then.
Now I wonder what the heck does TYP mean, as well as some of the other notations in parentheses here and there on the diagram.
Now I wonder what the heck does TYP mean, as well as some of the other notations in parentheses here and there on the diagram.
Sir Angus
Well-Known Member
"TYP" is an engineering notation meaning "typical" and that this one detail is the same for all. If they truly End up making the Bus VTOL that's even worse because of the location of the engines and how they're mounted it'll rip the airframe to shreds long before the wheels liftoff. With the exception of the Osprey (a collossal failure), no other VTOL craft mounts the engines on outriggers (e.g. wings).
Riceball
Master Member
I'd hardly call the Osprey a colossal failure, sure it had a rough start but it's going strong now.
As far as the Bus goes, it's just a show, and a super hero show at that. It's not like Iron Man can really exist yet you seem to have no problem with him or that you could put engines actually big enough to make something like the heli-carrier even remotely a reality.
Sir Angus, thanks for the explanation of TYP. How about (P/S) and (P/A) which we see on some of the other notes?
Hey bobatrek, could you post a close-up of the Stark Industries Preliminary Design Schematic in the lower-right? Or just list the names. Just curious. I thought at first one was Coulson, but now I sort of see it's Coulter or something like that.
By the way, I just really noticed "Escape Pod Storage." ...!!
You know, these posters were originally limited to a public run of 300 for sale only at NYCC from Marvel booth, right? I see at least 12 have sold on eBay recently, and a few more currently listed. None listed on Amazon or marvel.com store, and I doubt the original purchasers hate them already, so I guess most of those on eBay are "unofficial" copies? Shame, shame.
Hey bobatrek, could you post a close-up of the Stark Industries Preliminary Design Schematic in the lower-right? Or just list the names. Just curious. I thought at first one was Coulson, but now I sort of see it's Coulter or something like that.
By the way, I just really noticed "Escape Pod Storage." ...!!
You know, these posters were originally limited to a public run of 300 for sale only at NYCC from Marvel booth, right? I see at least 12 have sold on eBay recently, and a few more currently listed. None listed on Amazon or marvel.com store, and I doubt the original purchasers hate them already, so I guess most of those on eBay are "unofficial" copies? Shame, shame.
Sir Angus
Well-Known Member
Ok, I get it. We're all different ages, different educational backgrounds and such but if you're going to try to be condescending at least be knowledgable on the subject.
The "couple of extra engines" makes a huge difference in whether that C-17 flies or flames out and crashes. So yeah to me, as an engineer, seeing this set up is very problematic. Without those rear engines creating thrust they're essentially huge boat anchors pulling the plane off balance and reducing the lift characteristics.
The helicarrier was better because they placed the rotor blades correctly and sized them relative to the mass being lifted. IMO, they went "the extra mile" by taking some basic engineering into account and presented us with a believable solution. Now do helicarriers exist? No. Do we have the technology or ability to build them? No. It's all theoretical at this point, but they smoothed the leap from real to imaginative by grounding everything in believable tech.
Now, expecting the entire Marvel universe, or any other, to completely hold to our reality is a pointless argument. I go into watching these sorts of things understanding that huge bursts of Gamma radiation turns you into the Hulk and not a cancer patient, or that a billionaire, genius playboy could create perpetual energy in an Afgani cave. However, when they use existing tech but mod it to ridiculous proportions for a simple "cool factor" without taking function into account that's when I throw my BS flag because they've shattered the imaginary world created by my own willingness to believe the story they're presenting.
Like it or not, that's how I see it.
Sir Angus
Well-Known Member
Scroll up ... This started as part of my overall comment about the show, but you and a few others jumped at the chance to tell me how wrong I am. So, how about if you disagree with someones opinion you just let it go or just stop posting about it? You made way too much out of my original post.
I would've much rather been discussing Skye this entire time.
I wouldn't. 
Sir Angus
Well-Known Member
The "(P/S)" and "(P/A)" aren't normal blueprint annotations that I'm familiar with, but I work with many different types of engineers so I'll ask around to see if anyone has come across them before. There's a chance they're aeronautical specific or made up to make the blueprint look more "engineered".
I wouldn't.
I still think her character can work. It just needs to be toned down. Don't force us to accept her here and now, let it come. It took the general audience two whole seasons to warm up to TNG and for good reason.
Just a thought, but given the similarity in general shape of the letters, "(P/A)" might actually be "(F/A)", making the annotations mean this:
P/S = Port/Starboard
F/A = Fore/Aft
Fore and Aft refer to front and back, respectively, of a ship or aircraft. When facing Fore, Port is the left hand side and Starboard is the right.
Riceball
Master Member
It makes a lot of sense except for P/S which would mean Left/Right.
I think that had more to do with the change in uniform styles (from a one piece jumpsuit to a two piece pants and jacket) after the first season, making the actors more at ease on set, therefore making the scenes seem less forced. The original jumpsuits were redesigned after the cast was complaining about back problems. As for why Season 2 was bad... Dr. Pulaski.
Exactly. It means that whatever is being annotated with the P/S or F/A has an instance at each location.
For instance, if you see an annotation of "Emergency Exit (P/S)" on a blueprint, it means that there is an emergency exit located on both the port (left) side and the starboard (right) side of the aircraft.
Nice work on the port / starboard, guys. Here's what shows on the diagram, and it all makes sense with that explanation:
(P/S)
cargo door
emergency exit
exit
horizontal stablizer
hydraulic machinery
(F/A)
spiral staircase
An easy way to remember port/starboard and left/right is port wine is red, and your heart is on your left = pump red blood. I know that's not the most stellar memory trick lol, but it's the one I was taught. Maybe easier is port and left both have 4 letters.
Well, guess I'm done with the diagram, unless there are some easter eggs on the legend in the bottom right. That was fun.
I still get a chuckle over Episode 2 / Fury's dressing-down of Coulson - NF's longing comment about the bar on the plane. "And a bar!!... ....a really nice one..."
(P/S)
cargo door
emergency exit
exit
horizontal stablizer
hydraulic machinery
(F/A)
spiral staircase
An easy way to remember port/starboard and left/right is port wine is red, and your heart is on your left = pump red blood. I know that's not the most stellar memory trick lol, but it's the one I was taught. Maybe easier is port and left both have 4 letters.
Well, guess I'm done with the diagram, unless there are some easter eggs on the legend in the bottom right. That was fun.
I still get a chuckle over Episode 2 / Fury's dressing-down of Coulson - NF's longing comment about the bar on the plane. "And a bar!!... ....a really nice one..."
Similar threads
