Why do they keep making the 208 have piston sounds?

That was pissing me off last night. I think its because most folks sitting on the couch watching dont associate the sound of a turbine with an airplane like they do a piston sound.. I think it is a pretty stupid maneuver on their part anyways..

The part where they were talking about the Caravan's engine, while the camera was panning across a 6-cylinder Lycoming drove me nuts.

Can't say I'm without fault. When editing a film shot from inside a Citabria, the engine noise sounded pathetic. I dubbed in audio from inside a Beaver -
best sounding Lyc 0-320 ever. To this day nobody ever commented on it. Now if I had used a turbine sound !!!

AvidFlyer wrote:Why do they keep making the 208 have piston sounds?

It happened the whole show on almost every airplane shot. seemed worse this episode. Not sniveling here jus asking' for a little credibility.

AvidFlyer wrote:Why do they keep making the 208 have piston sounds?

No kidding. They obviously have to add sound. Why is it so hard to use the right kind?

TV is a funny business. We did a couple flyfishing shows back when there was ESPN Outdoors. Years later I saw some of the exact same footage of our guide landing a steelhead, but that time it was in Michigan instead of Alaska. Anything for the shot is the motto.

SixTwoLeemer wrote:

AvidFlyer wrote:Why do they keep making the 208 have piston sounds?

It happened the whole show on almost every airplane shot. seemed worse this episode. Not sniveling here jus asking' for a little credibility.

All they need to do is dub in some V-8 noise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOF6eT6FRmY

Ps.. I agree... if the sound doesn't fit the scene my brain says WTF ????..

Ben.

geekxx wrote:The part where they were talking about the Caravan's engine, while the camera was panning across a 6-cylinder Lycoming drove me nuts.

That and the prop RPM bouncing a lil... power settings were steady, Tq was steady, fuel flow was steady.. duhhh the gauge is faulty, but nooooo. They have to make it a huge issue and make the world think he is about to lawn dart it into the tundra.. WTF. All they succeeded in doing was making themselves look like flaming idiots on national TV.

akavidflyer wrote:

geekxx wrote:The part where they were talking about the Caravan's engine, while the camera was panning across a 6-cylinder Lycoming drove me nuts.

That and the prop RPM bouncing a lil... power settings were steady, Tq was steady, fuel flow was steady.. duhhh the gauge is faulty, but nooooo. They have to make it a huge issue and make the world think he is about to lawn dart it into the tundra.. WTF. All they succeeded in doing was making themselves look like flaming idiots on national TV.

That and scaring the masses into thinking a single engine plane is downright deadly....

Ben.

Anybody else notice in the propane carrying caravan starting up and they show a twin engine RPM guage...R and L needles on the 208 guage. The piston sound effects on the 208 over and over was painful...a piston powered caravan with a twin engine RPM guage.....SERIOUSLY?

Did you notice the Caravan departing "Marshall" was really leaving some other strip, maybe Newtok? The Marshall strip is wide and flat, while the strip shown was much narrower. How about the mountains in the background of the "Bethel" shots? The producers are taking a lot of liberties with the footage they are using.

They could make an interesting and engaging program without the fabricated drama and without the misuse of sounds and locations, but apparently are too lazy to do so.

and yet you guys still watch it. It seems the producers have achieved their objective.

stewartb wrote:and yet you guys still watch it. It seems the producers have achieved their objective.

Bingo!

Besides, turbines sound wimpy.....

MTV

The sound made me chuckle, remembering the movie "Airplane!" where they, for obvious comic effect, dubbed in what seemed to be a B-17 drone as the sound of the 707 jet the movie took place in...

"Surly you can't be serious..."

"I am serious and stop calling me Shirley."

gbflyer wrote:
TV is a funny business. (snip) Anything for the shot is the motto.

A large part of the problem is that many of the low-level decision makers on things like that have a very condescending and "smarter than you"attitude towards the viewers. They think they're smarter and know what will resonate with you more than you do. Spoon-feeding the viewers something that "those stupid hayseeds in middle America will accept as airplane sounds" gives them something to make themselves feel smarter about.

If they were smart they'd make a sub-plot story out of the difference between the turbine and piston engines, and how the little cutie girl can tell which one of the pilots is coming home by the difference in sound, and then create some kind of hyped up drama over it.

But... if they had any interest in honesty, accuracy or doing the right thing on any level, they would not be in the television business, trust me on that.

I didn't understand the concren about flying VFR at 700' AGL, and like 500' AGL was going to doom the flight. With 20 miles to go and good visibility and not a person or structure in sight and uncontrolled airspace? Gimme a break!!!

Gene

With hearty agreement on all the comments. I also noticed a comment, during the episode the other night, about being required to be 500' AGL when they were scud running. I wasn't seeing any man made anything to be 500' from. Anybody have any thoughts on the 500' quote? Company policy maybe?

Working vis rules up there are 1000 and one, or 500 and two. And as for me, I'll take 500 and two any day of the week.

Gump

flyingzebra wrote:With hearty agreement on all the comments. I also noticed a comment, during the episode the other night, about being required to be 500' AGL when they were scud running. I wasn't seeing any man made anything to be 500' from. Anybody have any thoughts on the 500' quote? Company policy maybe?

When you have terrain in your path that is higher than your present altitude, things get a bit ugly.. CFIT is not somthing they wanted to catch on cammera. The pilot mentioned this as one of the reasons he was going to turn around just as he broke out. I dont know if you caught it on the radio, but he had just called in to base saying he was going to alternate airport when he broke out of the clouds.

I have done a shit ton of scud running up here, but I still have minimums on each flight... Man made structures are the least of my worries when planning a scud running mission. The terrain plays into the thought process alot more.

flyingzebra wrote:I also noticed a comment, during the episode the other night, about being required to be 500' AGL when they were scud running. I wasn't seeing any man made anything to be 500' from. Anybody have any thoughts on the 500' quote? Company policy maybe?

As Gump suggested, this is a requirement that the FAA imposes on Part 135 Air Taxi operators in Alaska.

I can remember asking for a pirep from a pilot coming out of a village I was headed for. His response was "It's a scant 500 feet over, but the visibility is great". I figured my altimeter must have been mis-set prior to takeoff, cause it sure seemed like it was lower than 500 feet......Sometimes it was "It's a scant 2 miles visibility". You quickly learn that those "scant type" adjectives are radio code for "not hardly, but it works".

On television, I'm betting those folks are careful to emphasize for their POI's gratification that they're operating within their op specs....

Some days it's don't ask, don't tell.

MTV