Five Foot Falcon Armature

[bwayne64]

Hi Guys,
Didn't want to hijack the great thread of Andre and Maruska. Just been playing around with an armature design for the 5 footer. The pictures show 1/8 aluminum plate for the formers. They could be made from thicker plywood as well. I may need some diagonal formers at the intersections, but it may already be overkill, LOL. I'm showing 2 1/4 inch aluminum pipe for the mountings. It will allows the model to be mounted from 6 different points. May never get around to building another large model, but doesn't hurt to piddle in Lightwave a bit, I'm rebuilding the model that Andre provided in Lightwave format. It's what I'm used to using. These guys have been awesome in sharing all this great info. Just wanted to contribute a little if possible. Let me know how it could be improved, I ain't no engineer, LOL, Cheers,

Joe

 

[bwayne64]

Here's a side view. Kinda busy, but it shows the basic shapes.

 

[bwayne64]

It's a good thing I'm not sensitive to rejection, ............

LOL.

 

[eagle1]

It's a good thing I'm not sensitive to rejection, ............

LOL.

Hey Joe,
Sorry, meant to reply a while back, but yeah your armature is very interesting & yet another way of doing it.
There's just so much you could throw in this void that it is inevitable we will all come up with different designs. I do like yours though.
I'm trying to keep mine simple & at a cost that I'm happy with. Trying not to over engineer the thing too, which can happen real quick without realising it!.
Beautiful renders too Joe, me, cardboard mock ups, paper & my head, yikes!!.

Stu

 

[bwayne64]

Thanks Man, I was just joking around, I couldn't resist playing around with the 5 footer. I actually started working on a plug for the main body. I know I shouldn't start on this beast, considering the fact I'm building the Galactica. Oh well, I have more time than sense, I hope, LOL. As for over engineering, I'm the poster child for that, Cheers,

Joe

 

[Lee S]

Surely you'd need the 'engine' side to be different/shorter and the front to have a couple of additional supports down the mandibles?
Just being devils advocate

 

[Junk Pilot]

That's why I like the design on Jason's 32in McQuarrie Falcon framework because with a bit of tweeking it could offer a very sturdy, light weight frame. Not only that you can incorporate the holes to insert handles to move it just like the original model.


(Jason, I hope you don't mind me using this photo as an example)

Surely you'd need the 'engine' side to be different/shorter and the front to have a couple of additional supports down the mandibles?
Just being devils advocate

 

[bwayne64]

Surely you'd need the 'engine' side to be different/shorter and the front to have a couple of additional supports down the mandibles?
Just being devils advocate

Thanks for the input, I left out the wip notice in the post, The engine would have lighting and the frosted shield back there. I totally didn't think about the mandibles. I guess I was thinking that they would be strong enough on their own to support themselves. But it would be easy to extend the armature into them. I was hoping to get responses like this, as they are very helpful. Still working on it. When I get the shell finished, then I can get my hands and rulers on an actual thing. Virtual things are great in their way, but nothing beats good ole fashioned hands on, Cheers,

Joe

 

[bwayne64]

That's why I like the design on Jason's 32in McQuarrie Falcon framework because with a bit of tweeking it could offer a very sturdy, light weight frame. Not only that you can incorporate the holes to insert handles to move it just like the original model.

View attachment 439582
(Jason, I hope you don't mind me using this photo as an example)

Oh that is pretty ! I started with wanting to mount this huge model from six different directions. Then thought about the weight of this huge beast. I also considered the left over tubing I have from my Big G project. With those things I then just try to fit everything into the 3d model. Like I mentioned earlier, with the shell finished I'll be able to fit everything into an actual physical structure. I can go back and forth between the 3d model and the real one, tweaking both as I go. Not exactly Cad/Cam but a good process to get to the final product. Of course without
the great work by Andre and Maruska, I wouldn't touch this beast with a 10 Foot armature, LOL. Cheers,

Joe

PS Correction on the tubing size. The original model had 2 1/4 inch mounts, mine will be 1.90 Aluminum tubing. Just because I have a lot of it,

 

[DARKSIDE72]

The various mounting points were only useful for shooting the models for different shots. If you have a 1.1 5' falcon sitting in your collection, who's going to give a flying flip as to HOW it can be potentially mounted? Having a solid way to display such a model is important. Multiple points are redundant.

 

[Junk Pilot]

Absolutely correct there, in which case the only real way to mount it then is from underneath..

 

[dsp5500]

Yes and No, The best way to have a secure bottom mount is to make the armature like the original. Giving you the other mount points by default even if you don't use them.

 

[Junk Pilot]

Perhaps but weight will be the biggest factor when it comes to the overall model. Personally, I think any one choosing to build this would be mad if they didn't try to reduce the weight where it didn't need as many as 4 people to move it like the original.

Out of curiosity does anyone know roughly how much the 5ft Falcon weighs?

 

[bwayne64]

The various mounting points were only useful for shooting the models for different shots. If you have a 1.1 5' falcon sitting in your collection, who's going to give a flying flip as to HOW it can be potentially mounted? Having a solid way to display such a model is important. Multiple points are redundant.

Who says I'm not going to film it, And who's going to give a flying flip that I have a Five foot falcon at all, except guys like us. To me I'll know what's inside my models, and I do care. It's all an individual thing. Nobody has to build the way I do. Cheers,

Joe

 

[DARKSIDE72]

Well not to ruffle panties or anything... I MEANT for practical purposes. Yes two mounting points are great for painting. But 4-6 is redundant in general. If you aren't a studio.

Who says I'm not going to film it, And who's going to give a flying flip that I have a Five foot falcon at all, except guys like us. To me I'll know what's inside my models, and I do care. It's all an individual thing. Nobody has to build the way I do. Cheers,

Joe

 

[bwayne64]

Well not to ruffle panties or anything... I MEANT for practical purposes. Yes two mounting points are great for painting. But 4-6 is redundant in general. If you aren't a studio.

No panties to ruffle here, I wear only hanes man drawers, LOL. It's all just personal opinion man, its not a law of modeling. What's practical about spending thousands of dollars on a big piece of plastic. If it were practical, we could eat them when finished, Cheers,

Joe

 

[DARKSIDE72]

Practical giant pieces of plastic... **** no! lol I just tend to cut corners where I can personally. Makes for more donor kit money.

 

[joberg]

Those mandibles could be secured to the main body using the cantilever principle (Google is your best friend)...economy of material while keeping the same type of design bwayne64 did in the first place. And yes, at least 4 mounting points should be the norm:behave

 

[bwayne64]

Practical giant pieces of plastic... **** no! lol I just tend to cut corners where I can personally. Makes for more donor kit money.

Yes, definately can go for more money for donors. I have 3 or 4 thousand denaros in donors for various builds. What is wrong with us, is there a cure,

 

[DARKSIDE72]

No absolutely no cure...SS modeling is worse than general prop collecting. :lol

Yes, definately can go for more money for donors. I have 3 or 4 thousand denaros in donors for various builds. What is wrong with us, is there a cure,