Subject: No, dragons definitely can't do that. ;)
Author:
Posted on: 2015-04-20 09:47:00 UTC
And, uh... if the theory is that 'Smaug is sexy because Cumberbatch', why the bizarre and explicit statement that his voice had changed? Surely that's the last thing you'd want?
I still disagree about Ancalagon's size, but you probably knew that. The largest known creature in the 'final' version of Middle-earth is... probably Smaug, actually. He and Glaurung were about the same size as each other. Ungoliant might have outscaled them, but only after she gorged herself on the Trees. Morgoth was tall, but not ludicrously oversized. Durin's Bane was about ten feet tall. Ents are no taller than trees, Carcharoth was huge but nowhere near that scale... the Eagles are big enough to carry people on their backs, I suppose.
What I'm getting at is, you're claiming that Ancalagon is some fifty times the length of Morgoth's next-largest creature (Smaug); since dragons are three-dimensional, that's - sweet burning stars - over 100,000 times the volume (and therefore mass). I, uh... really can't accept that as feasible.
"But it's magic--" No, it's not. Flying creatures in Middle-earth fly using wings, not fairy dust. They have mass appropriate to their bodies. A mile-long dragon would way hundreds or thousands of tonnes. He'd need wings the size of Doriath to get airborne - and muscles woven with mithril. (Which latter is actually plausible: I can see him as a mithril-cored nuclear-powered flier. But still not a mile long.)
hS, applying logic to fantasy universes since 2001