Dreamworks and Dragons

[Whirligig Girl]

So I just watched How to Train Your Dragon 2, and I was really just confused about the aerodynamics of the whole situation. Standing on an animal's wing during flight, Not stalling out in situations that should TOTALLY cause a stall, and I'm still not entirely sure why Toothless could not fly on his own. Not to mention most designs for dragons make no sense.

Of course, it's a kids movie, but for some reason I can't forgive it.

[cantab]

So which has worse aerodynamics: How to Train Your Dragon, or Kerbal Space Program?

[Capt.Joseph Kerbertson]

So I just watched How to Train Your Dragon 2, and I was really just confused about the aerodynamics of the whole situation. Standing on an animal's wing during flight, Not stalling out in situations that should TOTALLY cause a stall, and I'm still not entirely sure why Toothless could not fly on his own. Not to mention most designs for dragons make no sense.

Of course, it's a kids movie, but for some reason I can't forgive it.

It's called a movie... fantasy, not based in reality. If you can't go to a movie and enjoy it for what it is, don't go.

[EdFred]

Has no problem with flying dragons.

Has problem with aerodynamics of said dragons.

picardfacepalm

[hawkinator]

The animators spent a lot of time trying to make it not invoke suspension of disbelief for the average viewer, but, then again, their animators, not physicists, and it's also a kids movie. For movies like this, I usually prefer to overlook such things and focus on the plot...

The reason Toothless can't fly on his own is that (in the first movie) he lost half of his tail (which is shown to act as a sort of stabilizer, kinda like a birds tail feathers[although probably not big enough, but I digress]) and he needs a prosthetic tail controlled by his rider in order to fly.

[Camacha]

then again, their animators, not physicists

I am going to stop you right there. You can be sure they have access to all knowledge necessary and available, realism just generally takes a back seat to the dramatic effect of things and storytelling. They could, but they don't.

[Godot]

Wouldn´t flying dragons be, from the beginning on, impossible creatures?

After all they would need a huge wing surface area in order to lift their weight from the ground (birds for example are rather light due to the use of a very light bone construction and tne fact that a huge part of their body houses an ultraefficient lungsystem).

Also they would need a lot of muscles in order to move their wings in order to create lift for their heavy body. And these muscles in turn would need a huge, efficient lung (it is the reason why birds have their special lung contruction) and, I guess, also a huge heart (in order to pump the blood volume fast enough to be able to supply the muscles with nutrients)

[Seret]

Did it also bother the OP that Scooby Doo could talk?

[cantab]

Wouldn´t flying dragons be, from the beginning on, impossible creatures?

After all they would need a huge wing surface area in order to lift their weight from the ground (birds for example are rather light due to the use of a very light bone construction and tne fact that a huge part of their body houses an ultraefficient lungsystem).

Also they would need a lot of muscles in order to move their wings in order to create lift for their heavy body. And these muscles in turn would need a huge, efficient lung (it is the reason why birds have their special lung contruction) and, I guess, also a huge heart (in order to pump the blood volume fast enough to be able to supply the muscles with nutrients)

Unless you follow that Nature (yes, the scientific journal) paper that proposed they be at least partially buoyant.

[Starwhip]

I have seen both movies, and appreciate them as they are. Just like I appreciate Gravity for what it is. (was?)

But I have my quirks with every movie/TV show I watch. (Except for Doctor Who, because, well, reasons.) Gravity was a good movie for it's cinematography and the overall plot, but I realize everything that is wrong with it. Same with HTTYD 1 or 2. Good movies for animation quality (actually what got me into modeling) and plotline.

When you see

, do you cringe at it? I don't. I see it as fun and amusing.

And that's my two cents.

[Debra]

Are we actually talking about dragons being able to fly here? I mean, do dragons even exist, for them being able to fly?

Let's get our facts straight: DreamWorks' How to Train Your Dragon is purely an action-fantasy film. Point hence proved.

Leave alone the movie for a minute; you should actually try playing these dragon games based on the movie. Read about it and you'll find out that even though it's meant to be a fantasy world of sorts, it actually talks about dragon flying, to give a more realistic feel to the entire game:

"Similar to other winged creatures, dragons are unable to fly in the early stages after they first hatch. They must develop the strength to lift off, which can be achieved through regular training and the lessons learned on quests. " And so on...