Too Much Garlic
Master Member
Yeah, I've been admiring those for a while now... thought they were much larger until I near-read the size. JAW-DROPPINGLY small for that amount of detail...
ANH Pyro X-Wing References - Mainly: Red 6 Search
- Thread starter Too Much Garlic
- Start date
Too Much Garlic
Master Member
I hope no one is expecting that kind of detail richness and quality with this pilot figure. Sure I'm nuts about details... but those sculpts are freaking impossibly insanely cool made by a very, very skilled person.
jedimaster
Sr Member
Hey guy's check out pic #2http://www.therpf.com/f45/rpf-first-look-john-dykstra-intergalactic-man-magic-part-1-a-99564/
I think that pilot is really coming along Carsten. I can see Porkins in that face... but be careful not to give him too much forehead. The Harrier pilot's helmet looks really big, and your subtractive mods are really leveling it back out.
We need eye candy.
Stand by.
We need eye candy.
Stand by.
More from the SAG dvd.
Another view of Red 6... barely.
And a rare look at the underside of Pyro Red Leader.
Another view of Red 6... barely.
And a rare look at the underside of Pyro Red Leader.
Oh, I don't think anyone's doubting that. It's just that ships got switched around during editing. If Lucas/Hirsch/et al needed a ship flying left-to-right for a particular spot, they didn't give a flip how many stripes it had. They were drastically reworking the last reel of the film very late in production and had to make do with available footage.
ILMwannabe
Active Member
Red Two holds a unique position because it was both a "prototype" (first built) and a "hero" (had engine lighting effects). Try a “stop motion” of Red 12's demise in the film on your DVD player - they used Red Two for that shot and they did not harm it. You can see the engines lit in that shot. And yet, evidence seems to indicate that Red Two did not have movable wings. (No pictures seem to exist of Red Two with its wings closed). Also, Red Two (formerly Blue Leader) earned screen time - unlike the Red Y-wing “prototype”.
Perhaps the wings on the hero models did not “close” adequately, and/or would not stay closed properly. ILM’s goal was to show the wings of several X-Wings “flaring open” in the first film. Later, ESB required shots of X-Wings exclusively with closed wings. Close-up pictures of the Red Three hero show evidence that the wings may have even been temporarily glued shut, or at least the paint in some parts of the inner wings traded places!
As for the dreaded leftover armature, let’s hope it was just that and not from a hero. Perhaps it was not Red Leader’s - there has always been one “hero” model unaccounted for. A reliable source reported that five heroes were made - we know of Red Leader, Red Two, Three and Five. That leaves one.
Since Red Leader seems to have disappeared ever since ANH premiered, I suspect that early on it was given to someone as a gift or “walked” (same fate as two Y-Wings, Gold Leader and Gold Two). Why would anyone trash Red Leader?
Why would anyone trash Red 5? Yet there ya go....
The Red 3 and Red 5 wings both have grub screws retrofitted into the wings, which were most likely meant to hold the wings closed.
Red 2 has an armature, but I don't see any evidence of brass rods/electric leads on the body. Maybe since it was the first built (in December '75), it didn't get motors - just an armature.
The Red 3 and Red 5 wings both have grub screws retrofitted into the wings, which were most likely meant to hold the wings closed.
Red 2 has an armature, but I don't see any evidence of brass rods/electric leads on the body. Maybe since it was the first built (in December '75), it didn't get motors - just an armature.
MonsieurTox
Master Member
Yeah not sure about a motor but the wings of Blue Leader/Red 2 can be closed. And they used screws (they screwed the L bracket to the upper fuselage) to hold the wings opened. Those screws still can be seen.
Yeah I agree with that but I can't see what it has to do with the quote of my message ? :confused
Yeah I agree with that but I can't see what it has to do with the quote of my message ? :confused
I too ponder the fate of Red Leader. We could speculate that it was gifted. Then again that armature hiding in plain site in the group shot looks to have the wire harness individually labeled. To me this would indicate some sort of unfortunate reverse engineering. It could just as easily be an earlier prototype or the other Hero we've never seen.
I know the name of one man who reportedly took hundreds of photos of the models immediately after the films initial success. A Charlie Webb is credited as photographer from the Estes visit to Van Nuys. He is not currently available the usual online stalking methods. It's all in the Estes Christmas catalog from 1977.
What do you guys think of these kits. Frank mentioned the original canopy being discarded. While DaveG's earlier cast appears to have an original I feel that the canopy is much too wide. Then again Pyro construction could just as easily add width along with slimmer builds.
MonsieurTox
Master Member
Grant McCune has one of the filming models used for ANH in his office, I don't know if it's a pyro or Red Leader though. 
jedimaster
Sr Member
I love the kit. I agree on the canopy it appears wide when compared with the v3 but as you said it could be a pyro thing. The solid one is bloody heavy though. I am still not sure where I'm going with mine yet. So many birds so little time.
That is excting to know for sure it's an ANH X Grant McCune has preserved there. I wonder if anyone could find out. What if it's a build of one of the earlier duplicates like DaveG has?
I'm going over the Pyro kit and I gotta say it's a real privilege and pleasure to be able to build THIS. I'll be cleaning up only some of it. Also mentioned was that the extra nose is the original nose. Look closely and you can barely see some edges around the notch. Perhaps styrene padded repairs?
Fun times.
I'm going over the Pyro kit and I gotta say it's a real privilege and pleasure to be able to build THIS. I'll be cleaning up only some of it. Also mentioned was that the extra nose is the original nose. Look closely and you can barely see some edges around the notch. Perhaps styrene padded repairs?
Fun times.
I hear you, Paul. I went over the kit a little bit forensically last night. Compared to an Icons, there are clear matches proving the relation between the two - however the kit's master has clearly been restored as Frank described, so it has its own set of tells. I'm going to do some cleanup but would like to avoid accidentally building in Icons tells.
Does anyone have good info for all the Icons fuselage tells? Were they all additions, or were there any subtractions?
Fun times for sure. This thing is great.
Does anyone have good info for all the Icons fuselage tells? Were they all additions, or were there any subtractions?
Fun times for sure. This thing is great.
P.S. the wide canopy is no problem. Just soak it in very hot water for half a minute, pull it out, squeeze it a bit and run it under a cold tap. Bang, correct width. Takes literally forty seconds or so.
This canopy - even if it isn't from the original piece from this particular X, and obviously the original has some unfinished repairs, needs scribing of course and cleanup - but ooooeee, does it ever look right. The taper is right, the forward-leaning port-side pillar is right, it's just so right. Take a look at it from the front and compare to the MPC front-view of Red 5. Wow.
This canopy - even if it isn't from the original piece from this particular X, and obviously the original has some unfinished repairs, needs scribing of course and cleanup - but ooooeee, does it ever look right. The taper is right, the forward-leaning port-side pillar is right, it's just so right. Take a look at it from the front and compare to the MPC front-view of Red 5. Wow.
I can do that tomorrow after work, no probs.
It is great, but FWIW, I'm really impressed by just how close the V3 is. If you have a V3, you're doing all right. It's very obvious that the measurements which were taken from this and used for the V3 were pretty comprehensive.
The main differences are that the wing boxes are shorter fore-aft, the wings are thinner, the hull overall is slightly shorter, it's about 2-3mm deeper at the rear, it's very slightly wider (about 1.5mm, something like that) and it has the twist we've all read about. Other slight asymmetries too, like the canopy. And the surface has obviously been reworked in the various restorations; many styrene chips are very "blurred" or almost gone. Some look like replacements.
Most people wouldn't want those imperfections, and dimensionally the V3 really is very very good.
Edit: Colin won't forgive me if I don't mention he was right about the leading edge of the canopy and forward fuselage taper; tell your sister, he was right...
Second edit: forgot to mention the forward fuselage upper sides being in two blended panels (or one panel with a bend in it, however you look at it). THAT is fascinating.
It is great, but FWIW, I'm really impressed by just how close the V3 is. If you have a V3, you're doing all right. It's very obvious that the measurements which were taken from this and used for the V3 were pretty comprehensive.
The main differences are that the wing boxes are shorter fore-aft, the wings are thinner, the hull overall is slightly shorter, it's about 2-3mm deeper at the rear, it's very slightly wider (about 1.5mm, something like that) and it has the twist we've all read about. Other slight asymmetries too, like the canopy. And the surface has obviously been reworked in the various restorations; many styrene chips are very "blurred" or almost gone. Some look like replacements.
Most people wouldn't want those imperfections, and dimensionally the V3 really is very very good.
Edit: Colin won't forgive me if I don't mention he was right about the leading edge of the canopy and forward fuselage taper; tell your sister, he was right...
Second edit: forgot to mention the forward fuselage upper sides being in two blended panels (or one panel with a bend in it, however you look at it). THAT is fascinating.
Last edited:
