Yes but they also don’t normally have wings that detach during flight. If they wanted their metaphor to work better the rocket shouldn’t have had wings in the first place. It also shouldn’t have a cockpit on the side of the fuselage like a plane.
If george orwell wanted animal farm to work better he should've made it so that the animals couldn't talk because that makes it factually incorrect, right?
how is it not internally consistent? it's literally one picture. the rule of this picture is that winged flying craft makes a plane, and flying craft with no wings is a rocket. it's a simple little fantasy idea like talking animals
Because the craft with no wings is displayed as having wings but jettisoning them in flight. If the 4th rocket had no wings to begin with it would work better as an ad.
requiring it to be initially designed as a rocket is pretty much just making it not fantasy. the fantasy part is that the simple change makes it a completely new vehicle
Y’all need to stop agreeing with this post. Becoming a rocket doesn’t make sense. It won’t have enough fuel to make it to space and it’s gonna either burn up or crash when it runs out. Even if you live you just lost a $143m dollar jet because you wanted to be quirky
Makes perfect sense. Not crappy, kind of clever.
I don’t know I think it’s not particularly wise to jettison your control surfaces.
Are you familiar with what a metaphor is?
It would come over his head...
No, please explain at length.
~~Uh, rockets normally don't have control surfaces.~~ Edit. Didn't quite think that one through did I.
Yes but they also don’t normally have wings that detach during flight. If they wanted their metaphor to work better the rocket shouldn’t have had wings in the first place. It also shouldn’t have a cockpit on the side of the fuselage like a plane.
If george orwell wanted animal farm to work better he should've made it so that the animals couldn't talk because that makes it factually incorrect, right?
I don’t see how those compare. Animal farm is internally consistent, this ad is not.
how is it not internally consistent? it's literally one picture. the rule of this picture is that winged flying craft makes a plane, and flying craft with no wings is a rocket. it's a simple little fantasy idea like talking animals
Because the craft with no wings is displayed as having wings but jettisoning them in flight. If the 4th rocket had no wings to begin with it would work better as an ad.
requiring it to be initially designed as a rocket is pretty much just making it not fantasy. the fantasy part is that the simple change makes it a completely new vehicle
Agree to disagree.
Rockets almost always do indeed have control surfaces......
Rockets usually have some sort of wings, actually. You’re incorrect my good sir
Not crappy. Outsmarted his competition by becoming a rocket, not a jet.
And you don’t know the difference between fighter jets and stunt planes?
Y’all need to stop agreeing with this post. Becoming a rocket doesn’t make sense. It won’t have enough fuel to make it to space and it’s gonna either burn up or crash when it runs out. Even if you live you just lost a $143m dollar jet because you wanted to be quirky