PHArchivist
Master Member
I think I'm in love...
1/72 moonraker 747
- Thread starter b26354
- Start date
vaderdarth
Master Member
That looks awesome!
Chrisisall
Master Member
You know, I don't own that Bond movie, but this makes me want to now....
Thanks Guys - I have no idea where Im going to put it when it's finished - it's 38" long and is quite heavy with the shuttle on it's back. But at least, with removable wings, it's much more manageable for painting or walking through doorways.
I have it mounted on a lighting stand at the moment - which means there's a 5/8" hole in the bottom just behind the wing.
Aside from a bit of paint work all I have left to do is fix the angle of the tailplanes (they pivot at the moment) and adjust the angle of the extra vertical stabilisers on the end. And make some window frames for the cockpit.
Some more research shows that there were at least two (possibly 3 since one exploded) 747's made for the film in different scales. There are 2 in this behind the scenes pic - the one Derek Meddings is working on appears to be about 1/72 scale and has a less pronounced bulge under the wings and wider stripes than the one seen in the shuttle ignition shot which was probably 1/50 scale or maybe even larger.
I have it mounted on a lighting stand at the moment - which means there's a 5/8" hole in the bottom just behind the wing.
Aside from a bit of paint work all I have left to do is fix the angle of the tailplanes (they pivot at the moment) and adjust the angle of the extra vertical stabilisers on the end. And make some window frames for the cockpit.
Some more research shows that there were at least two (possibly 3 since one exploded) 747's made for the film in different scales. There are 2 in this behind the scenes pic - the one Derek Meddings is working on appears to be about 1/72 scale and has a less pronounced bulge under the wings and wider stripes than the one seen in the shuttle ignition shot which was probably 1/50 scale or maybe even larger.
JMChladek
Sr Member
I wonder if any decent shots exist of the 747 crash site. Granted Meddings was known for doing the bold effects, but that aerial footage of the 747 crash site in the Yukon was a nice example of more subtle miniature work. Too bad you couldn't make out much of it in the film.
Very nice work as always. Looks like you are in the home stretch now.
Very nice work as always. Looks like you are in the home stretch now.
PHArchivist
Master Member
They showed that in Moonraker?
JMChladek
Sr Member
Yup, it was the bit where Q activated a large view screen in M's office and showed the site of the crash in the Yukon. If I recall correctly, you could see a lot of snow covered trees, part of a wing with engines and a small section of the fuselage, but it was tough to make out any fine detail. Yet Derek's team did a great job in making it obviously not look like a model either. I'm just curious as to how far they went with the detailing.
PHArchivist
Master Member
Will most definitely need to check that out. Don't recall that in all the times I've seen the film (or I've forgotten).
Master Tej
Active Member
Hey, I was just looking through a list of the "Top 10 Unluckiest Airlines" in fiction, and couldn't help but notice this.
Apparently, it was in a 1977 film called Airport 77 about a jet that is hijacked for the priceless art it is carrying. I immediately saw that the color scheme of the stripes is the same as the Moonraker 747! Could it be the same one? Maybe.
Nothing new for you to use, just something neat, is all. And a bump.
- Master Tej -
Apparently, it was in a 1977 film called Airport 77 about a jet that is hijacked for the priceless art it is carrying. I immediately saw that the color scheme of the stripes is the same as the Moonraker 747! Could it be the same one? Maybe.
Nothing new for you to use, just something neat, is all. And a bump.
- Master Tej -
American Airlines rented a real plane to the Airport 77 production company (they did the same in Airport 75 as well) so the blue-white-red line would have had to match the real AA livery. And, in the 70's NASA's 747 had the same stripes - since it used to be an AA plane which is what the Moonraker 747 is based on.
getting closer - got the tailplanes and vertical stabilisers attached. And window frame on the cockpit (needs paint). And some decaling underway.
a bit of turbine detail - 3D printed:
getting closer - got the tailplanes and vertical stabilisers attached. And window frame on the cockpit (needs paint). And some decaling underway.
a bit of turbine detail - 3D printed:
JMChladek
Sr Member
The reason why American Airlines 747s appeared in the Airport films AND one got sold to NASA for use as 905 was because the airline overbought the aircraft. American back then was primarily a domestic route airline back then (before they snapped up international routes in the airline de-regulation period) and was utilizing the 747s on trans-continental flights between Los Angeles, New York and I believe Washington DC as well. They believed that passenger numbers would be up enough to fill the planes, but the higher numbers didn't materialize and the energy crisis also didn't help matters. One thing they did was to put in a Piano bar in some of the planes, where a pianist would play songs on request for first class passengers on the red eye flights (taking out about three or four rows of seats in the process). But ultimately they ended up parking a few of those planes and so one 747-100 became available for NASA to acquire for use as the space shuttle transport in the early 1970s (after taking part in wingtip vortex experiments for NASA). A few of the other 747s in their fleet ended up getting either sold or leased to other airlines.
So when the Airport 75 and 77 disaster films were filmed, American Airlines 747s were available for repaints. The funny thing is if you watch the 747 in Airport 77, ALL the shots showing an actual 747 in the film with the Stevens colors are of it on the ground. All the aerial scenes (and underwater ones) are of a model or stock footage. Those particular 747s were built I believe in California, although I can't recall for sure if Universal Studios had their own effects house (Universal Heartland) by that point or if they had contracted out to someone else.
Airport 75 made use of an actual 747 with the altered AA livery and a bit of a "makeup job" to make it appear as though it collided with a private airplane (with Clay Lacy's lear jets shooting the air to air footage). That particular 747 was used through the early 2000s as a cargo hauler for UPS after it ended its days as a passenger airliner. I think it is retired from service now, as are most of the 747-100s world wide.
As for the Moonraker connection, the aircraft in the film was essentially NASA 905, complete with the same tail number, but with a Drax logo in place of the NASA one. The real NASA 905 kept its American Airlines colors until about 1984 when it was repainted in the blue and white livery in preparation for taking Enterprise to the Paris Air show that year.
So when the Airport 75 and 77 disaster films were filmed, American Airlines 747s were available for repaints. The funny thing is if you watch the 747 in Airport 77, ALL the shots showing an actual 747 in the film with the Stevens colors are of it on the ground. All the aerial scenes (and underwater ones) are of a model or stock footage. Those particular 747s were built I believe in California, although I can't recall for sure if Universal Studios had their own effects house (Universal Heartland) by that point or if they had contracted out to someone else.
Airport 75 made use of an actual 747 with the altered AA livery and a bit of a "makeup job" to make it appear as though it collided with a private airplane (with Clay Lacy's lear jets shooting the air to air footage). That particular 747 was used through the early 2000s as a cargo hauler for UPS after it ended its days as a passenger airliner. I think it is retired from service now, as are most of the 747-100s world wide.
As for the Moonraker connection, the aircraft in the film was essentially NASA 905, complete with the same tail number, but with a Drax logo in place of the NASA one. The real NASA 905 kept its American Airlines colors until about 1984 when it was repainted in the blue and white livery in preparation for taking Enterprise to the Paris Air show that year.
PHArchivist
Master Member
I seem to think I read that the underwater model shots for Airport '77 were filmed in Florida, suggesting Universal may have farmed it out.
Any idea if there are any clear (behind the scenes) shots of the "make-up job" on the Airport '75 jet? It looks very real in the film, but shots are usually in motion from distance. I'm curious how detailed the painted-on damage looked in person, or in "real life".
Sorry to de-rail the Moonraker thread a bit. But in a similar vein, I have a 1:100 747 model I've considered making into a movie bird - Moonraker, Executive Decision, Airforce One, or Airport '75.
Any idea if there are any clear (behind the scenes) shots of the "make-up job" on the Airport '75 jet? It looks very real in the film, but shots are usually in motion from distance. I'm curious how detailed the painted-on damage looked in person, or in "real life".
Sorry to de-rail the Moonraker thread a bit. But in a similar vein, I have a 1:100 747 model I've considered making into a movie bird - Moonraker, Executive Decision, Airforce One, or Airport '75.
Mike J.
Master Member
I dunno if the underwater model shots were filmed here (FLA), but apparently some 1:1 live action filming was done here, in a spring, like Creature from the Black Lagoon:
Florida Memory - Filming of "Airport 77" underwater
-MJ
Florida Memory - Filming of "Airport 77" underwater
-MJ
Dimosthenis
New Member
Stunning build!!
This scene is actually from Airwolf. The episode "Flight 093 Is Missing". Airport 77's 747 was Columbia Airlines although they both shared the same basic AA livery. I'm thinking this footage actually WAS from Airport 77 with the Stevens Corporation name edited in since all the scenes showing this plane are the exact same scenes as in Airport 77. Just wanted to point that out.
Similar threads
