Han ANH hero - site and antenna

Discussion in 'Star Wars Costumes and Props' started by moffeaton, Jan 4, 2006.

  1. moffeaton

    moffeaton Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,860
    Some say the Hero had the T-track and antenna (liek the MerrSonn) and some say it didn't. Here's a low res crop of an unpublished photo that sure makes it look like it did:

    [​IMG]

    So help me out - what am I looking at here (besides T-Track and antennas, lol.)
     
  2. moffeaton

    moffeaton Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,860
    Here's one more that shows the two other Mauser-based builds used for production - they all share these parts...

    [​IMG]
     
  3. Lordsandy

    Lordsandy Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    716
    No doubt in my mind.

    They should have moved the Q tips up so they fit in the notches of the booster.

    Jim
     
  4. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    Ok, debunking time...

    Let's first look at this photo: if there were "antennae," the rounded switches should have been visible just to the left of the scope:

    [​IMG]

    To be fair, there does appear to be something jammed in between the suppressor and the bull barrel in some post-production shots, but as the attached photo analysis files will show, there are wide feature and image quality discrepancies between the various photos, and there is no conclusive evidence that the antennae interpretation for the Han ANH hero blaster is even remotely correct.

    Bottom line, in pre-production photos and publicity stills, the MG81 suppressor is centered around the bull barrel, most likely using the booster-cone inside, which had a slip-fit over the bull barrel. Here's a real MG-81 booster/flash hider with cone:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    At some point before principal filming, the Han blaster was disassembled (or even before it was assembled) and cast to create the 2 or more Merr-Sonn variants (with and without the suppressor). Greeblies were then added to the castings, including the T-tracks and "antennae" on top of the bull barrel, after which the castings were sprayed black. When the Han blaster was reassembled for filming and later for the post-production publicity stills, the booster cone (or whatever was holding the suppressor concentric to the bull barrel) went missing, thus accounting for the off-center suppressor and upward slant. "Something" - could very well have been a T-track and one Merr-Sonn "antennae" - was used to minimize or obscure the suppressor deviation in SOME of the post-production stills. In yet others, the image has CLEARLY been manipulated with sloppy copy-pastes that are misaligned, out of scale, and mismatched for brightness, sharpness, and resolution. There are too many details to try and explain textually, so I'll let these photos do it for me:

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    I've been proven wrong before, so by all means please try and convince me that's the case :D

    - Gabe
     
  5. moffeaton

    moffeaton Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,860
    It's a nutty process sifting through 30 years of photos and retouched posters and negatives, that's for sure. But the pic I posted wasn't photoshopped - it was scanned from a negative. You think there was a negative made from a photoshop job of a picture not even slated for promotional use? I guess it's possible....

    I think that the scope is obscuring the t track and antennas in that first shot of yours - I have 8 shots from that photo session - and the only one that shows the area clearly is the one I cropped/posted. The other seven are from the same day/shoot (the neatives have identifying marks that back this up, besides hair and costume tells) but as crap luck would have it - they all obscure the t-track area.

    [​IMG]

    A lot of Chronicles photos were silhouetted from their backgrounds (I have the source files, pre-silhouette) - that's why the switch/t-track look truncated. Sloppy graphic artistry is to blame on that one :(

    Here's something interesting - same shoot - but should we see an antenna? Maybe you're right - who knows :p

    [​IMG]
     
  6. DL 44 Blaster

    DL 44 Blaster Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,730
    While I believe the MG81 was centered doesn't that still mean the antennae could be applied to the barrel up to the point of the suppressor...even the T-Track for that matter.....

    Steve
     
  7. moffeaton

    moffeaton Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,860
    Why would they photoshop that area for one picture? I don't see what they were trying to do. I have a few instances where in a negative, you see something, and then everywhere else, it's gone - but nothing has ever been "rubber stamped" for what looks like the sheer hell of it, hehe.

    Case in point. Original on the left, public consumption on the right:

    [​IMG]
     
  8. DL 44 Blaster

    DL 44 Blaster Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,730
    :confused :eek Now that is creepy...I honestly didn't know they did this :$

    Steve
     
  9. moffeaton

    moffeaton Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,860
    Makes you realize that a LOT of our props are wroooong.
     
  10. mgoob

    mgoob Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,390
    I believe that the T-track is there.

    I believe that the antennae things are switches, and should be called as such.

    Chris T. has a photo of a switch that looks very much like the thing on the Merr-Sonn and the Solo.

    I won't repost the photo until he chimes in.

    Probably obscured in the photos above.


    As for mounting the MG81 surpressor, don't forget that the so called "bull barrel" (or long rifle barrel adapter, as I call it) was screwed into the adapter.
    The adapter has 2 triangular protrustions (horizontally) on either side.
    Sinatra pushes these things in to snap the rifle barrel in place after he screws it in (hotel scene).

    THEREFORE, I propse that the surpressor was pushed onto the barrel adapter, and the 2 triangular pieces clicked in place against the inside threading of the flash surpressor.

    It now can tilt up or down, but not lateraly (sp)

    The screw on the bottom of the surpressor pushed it up, but since there was no screw from the top, it was sometimes tilted down, using the triangles on the barrel adapter as a pivot point.
     
  11. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    Jason, I do indeed believe that an edited photo could and would have been re-shot to create a new negative. Back in 1977, how else could they have published the modified image? Photo reproductions were done that way all the time... Photoshop was a good 2 decades away... ;) Plus there's just no arguing away the fact that that particular shot of the suppressor & bull barrel area in your first post was heavily manipulaed.

    I strongly disagree. In all the examples of Merr-Sonns and Han heros with "something" apparently jammed up against the suppressor, that detail is either tangent to the suppressor or it blatantly protrudes above it, like in this shot:

    [​IMG]

    Magnified 200%:

    [​IMG]

    Magnified 400%:

    [​IMG]

    Now look at the Chronicles shot below - you can clearly see one switch to the left of a t-track fragment:

    [​IMG]

    As you know, Tom M. put forth an intriguing new theory today at T4 that some or all of the post-production shots used the screen-used scope, bracket, and suppressor, but used a cast resin Mauser w/bull barrel - possibly one of the the Merr-Sonns - as a baseline, because Bapty may have by then taken back its firing Mauser and reused it for other film productions. That could also very well explain the chipped front grill near the magazine floor plate, the dirty transition from the grill to the magazine near the mystery disc, the mystery disc itself, and of course the difficult to interpret fragments on top of the bull barrel, as the shot above shows. I'm amazed how all these years we simply assumed that that blaster was based on the firing Mauser... Now that I pour over all the photos, it looks too black to be real in the promotional stills and Chronicles, compared to the pre-production RHS and LHS of the hero buildup. :confused

    [​IMG]

    Of course, not knowing the chronology of promotional stills (pre vs. post production) leaves some unanswered questions. For instance, in the manipulated photo in your first post, the Mauser baseline is clearly a real gun, since you can see the trigger and the hammer is cocked back:

    [​IMG]

    Here we still see the mystery disc and the chipped & dirty grill. So Tom, if you're reading this, at least this particular photo seems to be poking a hole in your theory... :unsure

    I'll put together a 3D CAD assembly file of the suppressor and bull barrel with a t-track and one switch on the right hand side to show you that it would be plainly visible above the scope. Hopefully I can get someone to overlay the two. :)

    By the way - where is Chris Trevas? The antennae on the Han ANH hero was is pet theory. I'd like to see him defend it. :D

    - Gabe
     
  12. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    mgoob, you may be correct in principle, but the threads end halfway into the suppressor, and then the inside diameter decreases a bit:

    [​IMG]

    The bull barrel/adapter tabs don't protrude out far enough that they'd come into contact with the threads, but perhaps they do come into contact with the inside wall of the booster or booster cone, since we can see the edge of one or the other through the upper vent hole in these photos:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    But in order for them to make contact, the suppressor would have to be lowered, , i.e., pushed down by the socket cap screw on the bottom, because from end to end, the tabs don't quite reach the full inner wall diameter. that would certainly explain both the off-center suppressor and its wobble in some of the promotional shots. In photos where the suppressor and bull barrel ARE concentric (centered), either additional mechanical means or the original booster cone were used, and borrowing Tom's theory again, if a casting of the Mauser was used, those bull barrel end tabs may have not have even been there.

    For those who are unclear about what's being discussed:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    And before anyone says anything, the lower receiver of the Naked Runner Mauser is NOT the same one used in ANH, so don't go thinking that the scope bracket thumbwheels are what left the mystery disc residue, because there are no holes on the LHS of the ANH blaster:

    [​IMG]

    Thanks for the Naked Runner pics, Tom, and thanks to Whacky for hosting. :)

    - Gabe
     
  13. Anakin Starkiller

    Anakin Starkiller Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,265
    Gabe, do you think that the cocked hammer in this image

    [​IMG]

    might possibly be a result of photo editing.

    The reason I 'm asking is because
    1. You have already shown that image itself has been tampered with to make the flash suppressor appear centered.

    2. The hammer does not look right to me, it looks like it is placed too far back to actually be attached to the mauser where it is supposed to be.

    Dan Stokes
    DDStokes@aol.com

    Edit-- Aditional thoughts

    Looking at this picture some more, I wonder whether the tirgger area might be editied a bit. When I look at this pic, I can bearly see a trigger, just Harison's finger and then blue. Is it possible that the blue might be air brushed in to make the gun look more real? The reason this idea occurs to me is thta, if this is a resin stunt, then the trigger area would probably be filled in like it is on the Merr son. But in this picture it is not, but this might be because the photo finifher air brushed some blue behind Harison's finger.
    If you look at this pic
    [​IMG]

    It appear that we are seeing the same gun. Now I know the quality is not the best, but it looks like the area behind the trigger is filled in, which would indicate to me that the gun is based on a resin stunt similar to the Merr Son.

    What are everyone's thoughts on this?

    Dan Stokes
     
  14. Anakin Starkiller

    Anakin Starkiller Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,265
    One more thought. In other publicity photo's Harison is shown carrying an E-11. The reason I bring this up is because he does not use a real gun, but instead carries one of the cast aluminum stunts that the sandtroopers used in the Tuinisia shoot.

    Also, in Carrie Fisher's publicity shoots, she carries a merr son stunt.

    I'm wondering if having a real fireing mauser to carry in the photo shoot might have just presented a logistic pain in the *. What sort of paperwork would you need to bring a firing mauser pistol into a photo studio in England in the 70's. I know that now, fireing guns are a pain in the * to own and carry in England.

    For filming a fireing gun might have been needed to create the fx shots with flash and smoke, but for a post production publicity shot, wouldn't it just have been easier to bring a resin stunt?

    my .02

    Dan Stokes
    DDStokes@aol.com
     
  15. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    Both good points about the hammer, Dan: its front edge does look extremely fuzzy and the neck WAY too long... I'd post a photo of my Denix hammer pulled back, but could someone provide one showing a cocked MGC or real Mauser in the same orientation?

    Since there was no Photoshop or any kind of digital photo editing back in 1977, the cut & paste job had to have been done with an X-ACTO knife and jiggling a piece of paper between the enlarger lens and the photo paper during the development cycle.

    As for the reasoning behind the editing: the suppressor was off-center, tilted, and had some piece of junk jammed into the top to try and compensate, and Lucas deemed that unacceptable. So the photo jocks tried to re-piece & reposition the suppressor so that it looked centered, and made a frakkin' mess of it. :p

    And as Dan correctly points out again, we must consider that there was more than one Han Blaster on the set. Usually there are dummies to be worn in the holster and to be drawn out when a shot is not to be fired. On the days were you need a shot fired, the production has to have a licensed armorer from the gun supply company, in this case Bapty, providing on set supervision. The rest of the time you don't want to pay someone to be there when a live weapon is being worn in a holster, so no live weapons are worn in costume holsters, usually.... Add to that the fact that the firing prop would unlikely have anything glued to the barrel that could fly off under pressure & vibration, and there's no way that the t-track and switch greeblies were attached other than with glue.

    Bottom line, you never see any antennae greeblies on the blaster EVEN ONCE during the film, so why even try to make it ugly based on a few Merr-Sonn castings, silhouettes, deep shadows, and poorly manipulated images... :confused

    - Gabe
     
  16. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    NEWSFLASH:

    The hammer and safety in the edited photo are CLEARLY hanging OUTSIDE the rear of the mauser. The problem is the retraction of the hammer doesn't extend that far back from the upper receiver of the gun. Also, the shark-fin shaped feature on the safety lever between the hammer and the block should not be visible on an assembled Mauser. Conclusion: the hammer/locking group in that picture was not in the gun when it was photographed

    So what we've got is not just a stunt resin Mauser for the promo-shoot buildup, but also a pasted-in hammer/locking group from a real Mauser so that the photo would truly look like Han is in an "action pose," ready to fire. Furthermore, that area has been totally blackened by the retouch artist. Invert that picture in photoshop and it's quite evident. :eek

    [​IMG]

    I've also been told that the Mauser in the photo appears too long - I'm expecting a photo of a real cocked Mauser by tomorrow that hopefully one of you can superimpose it on the photo, because I can't.

    Mgoob - surely you can confirm this since you own a Mauser or two... ;)

    Thanks to Tom for his priceless insight and multiple epiphanies today. :thumbsup

    - Gabe
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 8, 2018
  17. Anakin Starkiller

    Anakin Starkiller Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,265
    If that is a resin blaster, then I am going to say that what we are seeing behind the flash hider is indeed the t-track and antenna found on the merr son, But it looks like it has been cut down or sanded down so that the flash hider will fit on it. It is possible that these items were molded onto the stunt blaster, or were cast in resin and then added, but on this version, they decided to chop the piece down a bit so that it would fit better.

    At least that's what I'm seeing.

    Dan Stokes

    DDStokes@aol.com
     
  18. SFPROPS

    SFPROPS Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    931
    The mauser in the above photo looks like it was painted, and the "mystery" disk is an area where there was once something but it fell off leaving the raw nature finish of the mauser exposed. The "gunk" chould be gloppy paint. That happens sometimes when you paint something oily.
     
  19. wuher da brewer

    wuher da brewer Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,781
    One of the inset pics of the Merr-Sonn on Moffeaton's post (post #2) lends a lot of credence to the metal T-track theory as you can see the edge of the track and it looks like bent thin-walled metal.
     
  20. mgoob

    mgoob Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,390
    Here's some photos of the "clips" at the end of the barrel adapter:
    [attachmentid=5815]

    These are the 2 things that would keep the surpressor on the pistol, and allow it to pivot up & down.

    This is from the comic book "Tales of Star Wars" (probably the photo as posted above):

    [attachmentid=5816]


    Here's a photo of the Broomhandle from a Naked Runner behind the scenes publicity still (Sinatra is holding it, BTW):

    [attachmentid=5817]

    Using this as a basis of camparison to my C-96 (SN = 312401), I'd guesstimate the length of the barrel adapter to be 2 9/16"

    GABE: if my length is close, how far into the MG81 surpressor does that put the end of it?
    Does it line up w/ your guess from the above photo (seen thru hole)?



    I'll borrow a camera tomorrow & take a photo of my C-96 w/ the hammer cöcked in firing position.


    BTW The pistol was used next in the 1972 Hammer Film The Satanic Rites of Dracula:
    [attachmentid=5818]
     
  21. spinner 44

    spinner 44 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    941
    Very very interesting reading...

    I have thought a bit about it and mixed it in my mind and I have come to the following ideas and questions. Some of them may have been discussed before, so sorry if I sound like an old record lol.

    I think 2 ANH Han blaster non-GK were used: a hero firing blaster and a stunt blaster.

    The hero is only used in the "stop that ship" sequence, and it can be seen shooting (flame flash) and the hammer can be seen cocked. It is easy to assumed this was a working real Mauser. It was made of a working Mauser, the upper part of the Naked Runner Mauser, the M-81 flash suppressor and the metal scope mount. The only clear photos of this one that I have seen are the 2 side pics with the greenish background.

    The stunt is seen in the "smugglers compartment" scene. You can clearly see the silver disc in the Mauser left side (I think it was painted to look like real metal), same goes for the silver touch in the Mauser magazine front, the head screw holding the flash suppressor and if you have a very sharp eye, the top of the bull barrel is not flat. Exactly the same characteristics as the blaster used in the photo session posted above. Tilted scope too.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    Buttons over the barrel

    [​IMG]
    silver disk

    As Dan said with the very restrictive UK laws concerning guns, it is only logical that a working gun was used only in the scenes were it was needed to shoot. Being that the "stop that ship one". In every other scene the gun would have substituted by a dummy one, being safer and easier for shooting the film. As Tom M. said this one was made from a cast from the "Naked Runner" Mauser with some greeblies added before (buttons, t-track), and the added the real scope and mount system as well as the real M-81 flash suppressor to give it a more authentic look. This version would have been used in non firing scenes and post-prod photo shoots, some of these were retouched before being released. Before Photoshop, and since the 20's, the graphic arts people did it by making a big print of the photo, retouching using brushes, airbrush, cutting and pasting and the re-shooting the pic to have a "new" original.

    Now a question for you guys... As the only 2 pics we have of the Hero Han blaster (those two side shots with greenish background) do not have either the front grill of the disc. What if the hero firing gun was that one, no grill, no disk, a different Mauser body. Why not? After all the only element in common between Han's Mauser and the Naked Runner one (in the pics mentioned) is the receiver with that particular bull barrel. I think is a very plausible theory. Maybe the Naked Runner Mauser body was not usable, maybe they used it just to make the casting, maybe there was a rush in the production....

    I have been freeze framing the "stop that ship scene and I could not see any grill lines on front of the Mauser (thought that is no definitive proof as the film is a bit grainy) So do you have any clear photo that the firing blaster ever had the front grill?

    This thread is going to get some steam me thinks.

    Thank to Wackychimp for the hosting the pics..
     
  22. amish

    amish Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,046
    I hope that this picture adds some relevance to this. It is from a plublicity shot and I have lightened it to bring out a little more detail of the blaster. I am by know means an expert on greeblies and such, but I hope this will be of benefit to someone.

    [​IMG]
     
  23. gavidoc

    gavidoc Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    941
    All I'll say is that it's amazing what you can see in that photo when it is a high res shot.

    Trust me, it's what Moffeaton and others say it is.

    That photo only shows one but you can see where there was another on the other side.

    The greeblies on the MerrSonn (both the q-tips) and the t track are in the actual casting and are not addons.
     
  24. gavidoc

    gavidoc Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    941
    I've got some photos of my ANH Hero buildup with the hammer cocked at home. I'll try and find them and post them this evening.

    [image]http://propaholics.wolfchasers.com/maian_uploader/uploads/hammer.JPG[/image]

    As for this shot of the mystery disk area.

    I strongly believe that is a real lower receiver. Why? On my real mauser, when I put my mystery disk on my gun and then popped it off, it looked the exact same. I believe what you see there is exposed steel.

    Also, we don't know that the those photos from the Pre-production of the gun aren't actually retouched either.

    It's always looked to me like the left side of the Han gun was kind of fuzzy in the areas where the mounting points for the Naked Runner bracket would be.

    MR even stated when researching this gun that there was a 2nd hole in the rear of the gun (near the hammer) that was not clearly visible in publicly available photos that pointed strongly to the use of the Naked Runner lower receiver for the actual hero gun.
     
  25. dcarty

    dcarty Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,980
    It would make perfect sense that the ANH Hero was also the complete "Naked Runner" Mauser (it would certainly explain the "silver disc"). One detail I will point out from proprunner's pics in Gav's response above is that the safety on the "Naked Runner" Mauser appears to be the hollow variation where the ANH Hero is the solid type. Although this doesn't mean that the part wasn't replaced at some point.

    Cheers,

    Dave C
     
  26. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    It looks like a consensus is building for there having been both firing and stunt versions of this blaster. The firing blaster may not have had a front grill or any bull barrel greeblies, and the lower receiver replaced due to holes on the LHS from the Naked Runner scope bracket mounting points. On the stunt we would have had a grill, greeblies, and a mystery disc, possibly from an imperial disc that's rumored to have been attached to the LHS (pending photographic confirmation, of course).

    Let's confuse the issue with some more photos:

    Here's a shot of Han during the "Stop that ship." scene with the grill and the mystery disc visible (does this mean the firing hero had these features, or the stunt was swapped for the firing blaster during the scene?):

    [​IMG]

    But wait. Look at Ford's gloved thumb: seems to be lifting the elevation sight:

    [​IMG]

    And if so, that would mean: real Mauser.

    and here's another studio shot, where you can actually see the hammer cocked, and no sign of greeblies - not even the rear edge of the t-track or rod (and if you look at me posing with my MARK IV above, you get almost an identical perspective and angle - without the greeblies):

    [​IMG]

    This is yet one more studio shot, again, where NO greeblies can be found on the bull barrel, but the hammer is cocked:

    [​IMG]

    So is that a real Mauser or a stunt? Looks real to me... unless they cast one with a cocked hammer or the hammer/safety grouping was somehow attached to the stunt. :confused

    - Gabe
     
  27. gavidoc

    gavidoc Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    941
    I think that the one you see with the greeblies and the Pre-Pro shots are possibly the SAME gun.

    The spot wehre the mystery disk goes is the bare steel with some of the bluing removed due to glue (same thing happened to my gun).

    I'm not so sure that the lower receiver where the mystery disk goes is actually a "hole" in the receiver anymore. To me it looks like it could be where there is still blueing left on the receiver. Therefore, I am beginning to believe that MR was wrong when they said there was a 2nd hole in the lower receiver or that there were any holes at all.
     
  28. Anakin Starkiller

    Anakin Starkiller Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,265
    Crap...

    Thanks alot, Gabe. :angry Just when I thought I had this thing figured out, you come along and confuse me again. :$


    In looking over this pic
    [​IMG]
    I'm not quite sure what I'm seeing here. It might be that the sight is being raise, but since the underside of Han's glove is black, it might just be that you are seeing the black part of the thumb of the glove resting on the the gun.


    Dan Stokes
    DDStokes@aol.com
     
  29. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    Gav, I agree with your mystery disc opinion, but not about the greeblies. :)

    On the mystery disk, the dark circle in the middle is definitely off center, and looks too small to be a tapped hole. Whatever had been glued there must have had a small depression in the middle, thus no glue on the steel.

    - Gabe
     
  30. moffeaton

    moffeaton Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,860
    See if these help in the whole stunt vs real mauser body issue:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  31. mgoob

    mgoob Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,390

    IF SO, then the framelock was swapped b/c the Naked Runner uses the lighter weight safety (hole in it) whilst the ANH safety is solid.

    IMHO, it's a different lower.
     
  32. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    SHINY... :D

    Looks like someone took a heat gun to those airplane radial engine cylinder halves...

    So - should the imperial disc go on the Han blaster, or do we fondly remember it as "what should have been" and keep the featureless disc?

    [EDIT]: Dan, there's a reflection off the black feature that pretty much says that's the elevation sight. The geometry looks right, too. Do you have a photo of Han's gloves showing where the black begins?

    - Gabe
     
  33. Anakin Starkiller

    Anakin Starkiller Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,265
    Check out the safety on the top picture of the Merr Sonn. It is hollow

    Weird

    Dan
     
  34. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    Here's a theory to chew on:

    What if the Merr-Sonns were based on the lower receiver from the Naked Runner Mauser and used the imperial disc and that smaller disc in the rear to cover up the scope bracket mounting holes? Then, for the sake of consistency, the imperial disc was glued onto the Han firing blaster, but fell off during filming, possibly due to friction or snagging with the holster...

    DISCUSS. :D

    - Gabe
     
  35. Reel Fakes

    Reel Fakes Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Am I the only one who sees some "clone-stamping" going on in those Merr-Sonn pics?
    Where the Mauser info would be...
     
  36. moffeaton

    moffeaton Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,860
    I see what you mean... could be.
     
  37. DL 44 Blaster

    DL 44 Blaster Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,730
    Could the trigger be of some help? On the stunt resin one it's all together and on a real or Hero the trigger is defined and separate. Are their any shots to debunk whether or not it is a Hero or Stunt based on the trigger casting?

    Steve
     
  38. lonepigeon

    lonepigeon Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Wow, I missed this whole big discussion.
    I could've saved you guys some grief.

    This is correct Gabe. I've said this several times before. There are many differences between the Merr Sonns and the Han Hero the big one being that the lower half of the Mauser used is different. The smaller disc on the back is not covering the Naked Runner scope mounting holes - it's actually the remains of the scope mounting bracket. There's another underneath the Imperial disc on the front. Apparently those two large scope bracket mounting posts did not come off. Bapty had to saw them off leaving those discs behind (or they were cut off on the castings, hard to say- note the rough file marks in different directions on the 2 Merr Sonns). They covered the front one with an Imperial disc and left the rear one. Ultimately this was probably why they replaced the lower half of the Mauser.

    The antennas and T-track are added onto all the blasters so their exact position and length vary.
    They were apparently damaged on the ANH Hero at some point so that they looked like the Chronicles pics by the end of filming.

    Lots of weird conspiracy theories in this thread. The fact is you can follow the ONE single Han ANH Hero through all the photos. The simplest way to notice this is by the scope. The Hensoldt scope has the exact same wear marks in the pre-production pics before the greeblies were added as it does in the in-production/promo pics and the post-production Chronicles black and white pics.

    I have never found a single pic showing an Imperial disc glued on the Han ANH Hero, but I agree with Gav that it was very likely there at some point and broke off before or very early in production leaving a circle of missing gun bluing.
     
  39. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    Chris, thanks for your insight into the Naked Runner Mauser. As usual, it's illuminating. :)

    However, I have to continue to stand firm in my empirical observations - most of the blaster photos show no top barrel greeblies whatsoever when the suppressor is centered - only when it's pushed down, and I submit that something was jammed in between the suppressor and barrel to compensate and recenter it.

    I'd respectfully ask to see CONCLUSIVE evidence to support your conclusion that the firing hero Han blaster had anything on top, especially since we've now established that the cocked-hammer "action pose" image Jason first posted was a bad touch-up job to recenter the scope. As far as what's visible in other photos, perhaps what was used to recenter the suppressor was deliberately made to look like the Merr-Sonn greeblies because they set a precedent for those features.

    - Gabe
     
  40. lonepigeon

    lonepigeon Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Well, if you don't believe the photos posted so far I don't see what will convince you.
    I disagree that there was any touch up work done to those photos.
    I looked at your observations of the photos, but just don't agree with your points.
    It looks like you've labeled points of JPG artifacting and used the poor clipping path outlines of the Chronicles pics as "evidence". There's really bad rippling edges in the first large pic you posted which is evidence that someone rotated it in such a way that the image was resampled (which explains some of the image defects you've pointed out).
    I'll give you the point that the small scallop looks odd, but that could also be a machining defect. I'd have to look at other pics.

    The only photos I've seen offered as "evidence" of the details missing on the Hero are underside shots where the parts wouldn't be visible much if at all. Besides if you look at the whole pics I think you'd discover that most were all taken at the same time and you'd be trying to convince people that the parts disappeared midway during the photo shoot.
     
  41. lonepigeon

    lonepigeon Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    Looking again at all pics I think I now have an explanation.
    Gabe pointed out that one antenna is missing in the Chronicles pics.
    I believe it is also missing in the photo Jason first posted to start this thread.
    Looking at Chronicles it's evident that the T-track ridge is broken. The back half of the ridge is missing.

    I believe the T-track used on the Merr Sonn's is resin. The short barrel Merr Sonn is missing one antenna exposing an area of white T-track (spraypaint missed that area which was covered by antenna head). I know they were running short on the stuff so maybe they cast some of the saber grips. The E-11s made use of brown T-track (painted black) when they ran out of black.

    Now, if you think of the T-track as broken in Jason's 1st pic the rest makes sense.
    The ridge looks complete because of the black scope behind it.
    With the ridge broken the stem of the antenna on the scope side is visible.
    This also explains why we don't see a clear antenna head on this side which if it was there seems like it should stick up higher.

    In the next two pics Jason posted (post #5):
    1. The T-track and 1 antenna are obscured by the scope.
    2. The antenna hed is not visible since there is not one on that side.

    Next Gabe posts another pic (post #11). The antenna head is clearly visible sticking out from behind the bull barrel. It should be since this is the side that still has the antenna.
    In this post Gabe also points out there is only one antenna in the top view Chronicles pic (the scope side).

    This now proves how the barrel details appear and disappear within the same photo shoot.
    It was not photo manipulation.

    [​IMG]


    To clarify some other points:
    - The antenna pieces remain consistant in length on all blasters which is why the antenna overhangs the barrel on the ANH Hero blaster, yet fits fine on the Merr Sonns. The Merr Sonns have more bull barrel exposed than the Hero.
    - The T-track varies in length between each blaster.

    PS - In post #16 Gabe says that the hammer and safety on a real Mauser can't be positioned like in the photo. I'm not sure what supports this opinion, but my MGC can do that. The Mauser also does not look "too long" to me.
     
  42. lonepigeon

    lonepigeon Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    I'd like to also point out that I think there were resin Han ANH stunt blasters though I have yet to find any photo evidence of one.
    The ESB/ROTJ stunt blasters were cast from the ANH Hero. None of the glued on detail bits are the same, but like the Merr Sonn's I suspect the Hero was cast plain and details were added.
    You can see a pic of the stunt here:
    http://www.partsofsw.com/RangedWeapons/dl44stunt.htm

    Note that the scope bracket mounting points match the ANH Hero.

    Another odd note:
    The original Han ANH Hero also appears to show up during ROTJ in the Endor bunker cut scenes with the Hensoldt scope still attached. I don't think it disappeared from Bapty until after ROTJ.
     
  43. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    Chris, your "hail Mary" pass for the antennae theory contains so many actionable statements, forgive me for quoting you from start to finish, but you leave me no choice...

    I'll tell you what will convince me: 3D CAD. Photos lie all the time: graininess, pixilation, dirt, and severe lighting make us see things we expect to see. So expect some shiny 3D CAD over the next couple of hours... :D

    I only talked about Jason's "action pose" photo s being touched-up. If you honestly believe it wasn't touched up, I'm sorry, but I'd have to conclude you're in deep denial or realize I'm right but refuse to admit you were wrong. And I say this with no disrespect, only bluntness. :)

    Evidence? Evidence of what? You're the one claiming there are "antennaes" and t-tracks on the bull barrel. :p Don't you feel that to introduce a new theory, the burden of proof rests on YOU????

    Chris, *I* rotated the image. Guilty. But all you've just said can be debunked if I do the same analysis in the unrotated original hi-res file. Those "image defects" are native to the original file, and I noticed them before I rotated the cropped blaster. I challenge you to prove me wrong (burden on the prosecution - you made the accusation... ;) )

    Thanks for finally acknowledging the obvious, but my gratitude was short lived given your untenable alternative. Trust me when I say this: the screen-used MG81 flash hider has NO machining defects. You've seen this part from every angle and from very close up. Must I repost them all to show everybody? This is the ONLY time two adjoining cuts look completely out of scale with respect to each other. :p

    Sorry, Chris - wrong again. Here's a sweet shot of the firing hero in the Cantina:

    [​IMG]

    Do you see the border of a t-track, whole or fragment? A switch? A rod? I see nada. No resampling, no artifacting, no clipping path outlines, no rotation, no rippled edges can be used as excuses for not seeing anything, sorry...

    More in the next post (Invizone imposes a limit on quotes per post. :unsure )

    - Gabe
     
  44. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    (...continued)

    Either it's there in Jason's photo or it's not. Or if something's there, I contend that it can't be a switch because you'd see it protrude above the suppressor, regardless of the t-track's condition.

    Belief is nice, Chris, but we're dealing in empirical facts. So tell me: what other prop in the entire Episode IV prop pantheon used resin t-tracks, unless they were featured on a cast stunt (and thus un-removable)? You just admitted that when they ran out of black strips for the E-11 they used brown ones. Seems like they drove to the nearby auto parts store when they ran out of black... This was hardly a scarse item, come on... :p Besides, looking at my Merr-Sonn comparisons in my first post in the thread, you can clearly see them hanging off the bull barrel and a little sliver is bent - a resin cast wouldn't be able to preserve that detail, and it looks different on each Merr-Sonn. But back to the Han blaster: doesn't it make much more sense that the most prominent weapon in the movie would use the most premium parts? I'm happy you have faith in your belief, but you've just introduced a new theory without a shred of evidence.

    Actually, that makes no sense whatsoever, unless you're still in denial about the touch-ups... :rolleyes

    There's no stem there, Chris. I prove this beyond any doubts further down. :D

    Huh? Are you now saying there's NO antennae head/switch? :confused You're really not making any sense...

    Only if you assume there's something there to begin with. If something's obscured or blocked, you can claim it's anything... :p

    Oh, don't you wish... :D Proof of Chris' fatal error is upcoming, folks - I'm not just stalling...

    That would mean that we actually expect to find extra rod length overhanging the bull barrel, correct? I love it. :lol Ok, proof is coming up, people - I ORDER you not to glaze over. :p

    I'll actually concede that I was wrong here. Why? Because I did some Googling and discovered incontrovertible photographic evidence. (Sorry, Tom):

    Here you see the safety lever "shark fin":

    [​IMG]

    and here you see the fin exposed when the hammer is drawn back:

    [​IMG]

    Chris, can you provide incontrovertible proof of your claims, or just incon'Trevas'able? ;)

    - Gabe
     
  45. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    (...continued)

    And now, for the coup-de-grace...

    If you don't mind, Chris, I'm also quoting what you posted at T4, since I'm rather pleased with my rebuttal there:

    There are lots of claims being made here as statements of fact, which are by no means the case, as I plan on proving.

    So let me get this straight... The work in progress (WIP) Han blaster first used the entire Naked Runner Mauser with the holes on the LHS and the cut-down mounting spacers. No front grill, no imperial disc, no scope, no bracket. The MG81 suppressor is nice and centered, but rotated 90 degrees and located further out on the bull barrel. All well & good. And just for the sake of argument, the antennae & t-track greeblies were there, but it would still be nice to see concrete, incontrovertible evidence to support your theory.

    Let's examine the antenne greeblies on this handsome Merr-Sonn replica:

    [​IMG]

    and how your greeblies would look in CAD on the Han blaster:

    [​IMG]

    I deliberately kept the t-track and rods short, for reasons you'll soon see.

    Anyway, that WIP blaster is dropped in rubber and several casts are made for the Merr Sonns. Chord, connector, imperial dic, boxes, and radial engine or (pipe fitting) parts are added, and they're spray-painted black. We know all these greeblies were added after the casting, not before, but only the t-track, switch levers, and rods were allegedly already on the WIP Han blaster before casting. But then you say about the Merr-Sonns:

    That would mean that if the switches and t-track are glued up against the rear of the suppressor, they would have to be removed and reglued when the suppressor was pushed further down the bull barrel.

    Hmmmm... Ok, unlikely... but not out of the question. That's supposing the "antennae" and t-track greeblies were in place before the molding. If I misunderstood and you're asserting that they were added afterwards, when the suppressor was pushed further down over the bull barrel, then please disregard this particular challenge.

    Then the WIP Han blaster gets its lower receiver swapped out and another one put in with tapped holes for the ANH scope bracket. That lower receiver then receives the front grill and imperial disc - the latter, I suppose, for consistency with the Merr-Sonns, although the Merr-Sonns don't have a front grill. Ok, I'll accept that, even though there's no rhyme or reason for the decision, because on the new lower receiver, there's no cut-down spacer or hole to cover on the LHS.

    The MG81 suppressor is reattached, this time with the vent hole facing up and a socket cap screw holding it onto the bull barrel. At this time, the scope & bracket assembly is also attached.

    Later, during filming, Ford is called in to provide a few promotional shots against a neutral backdrop. The imperial disc, if that's what it was, has by now mysteriously fallen off and never replaced. If there was anything on top of the barrel, we'd be able to see it here:

    [​IMG]

    Don't buy it?

    The CAD doesn't lie:

    [​IMG]

    :cool

    In only one of those shots, just discovered recently at OfficialPix.com, do we see any evidence of something on top of the bull barrel. You must have thought: "HOT *... Gabe just delivered the Smoking Gun on a silver platter: there it is, black against blue, THE SWITCH... :lol ":

    [​IMG]

    But you got your hopes too high... :( Just comparing this photo to the Chronicles shot and the Merr-Sonn switches, there's no evidence of a rod or t-track, only a "hump." If it were a switch, we wouldn't be able to see the bottom of the switch where it connects to the rod because the t-track would obscure it. Besides, on the "hump", the rear looks rounded, not sharp-edged, although I concede that could be due to pixelation. But pixelation cannot account for the fact that the transition from the bull barrel to the upper receiver is unobscured by any top-mounted greeblies. If there were a rod and t-track, it would create an entirely different silhouette: a hung-over t-track and rod, a rod which you claim to see in Jason's "action pose" shot. That's why I kept both short in the CAD model. Besides, in the Chronicles top view, what you call the t-track appears significantly off-center, far more into the RHS than the LHS. It's downright asymmetrical. Should we duplicate that on our replicas? :p Finally, for the sake of argument, if we assume the rod was lost, wouldn't it take the switch with it, like you're claiming it did on the LHS?

    Still don't buy it? Ok, fine...... But once again, the CAD doesn't lie:

    [​IMG]

    Oops... WHERE'S MY ROD? I HAVE LOST MY ROD, THE POOR BABY. :confused

    [​IMG]

    (in my best Elaine voice: "Maybe the dingo ate yo' baby.") :lol

    :cool

    Another thing. In the OfficialPix photo, the suppressor is clearly off-center, meaning that the inside wall of the suppressor is pressed against the top of the bull barrel, or, as I've been postulating, against something jamemd in between the suppressor and the bull barrel in order to compensate for the lopsidedness. You can even see that the suppressor tilts up. Why is this significant? Because you'd have to see MUCH more switch protruding over the suppressor than it protrudes over the centered suppressor in my CAD model...

    Jason's heavily and poorly retouched "action pose" shot (there it is, Chris: unrotated and without redlines, and it's still a gorram mess.) doesn't count in my book: any greeblie detail beneath the scope is horribly mangled by cutting & pasting, airbrushing, and possible darkroom manipulation. That Chris is stubbornly clinging to his refusal to admit this image has experienced heavy, blatantly obvious photo manipulation is not my concern, but since Chris' research, opinions, and bold assertions have carried a lot of weight in this forum for the better part of a decade, it takes a rude, crude, socially unacceptable bastard like me with a pair of brass balls to challenge his claims. :D

    The only other photo showing "something" on the RHS is in the top view from the Chronicles, which can be argued is a post-production shot:

    [​IMG]

    The t-track like feature appears to be in pretty bad shape, and it's not actually on top but off to the RHS (now why would they deliberately glue something lopsided like that on a hero firing blaster? :p ) There's no visible rod, and there's obviously nothing on the LHS of the "T" (but that's ok, because Chris concedes that). And whatever's on the RHS is still open to interpretation, however it's understandable that wishful thinking might lead one to conclude it was the same as the Merr-Sonn switch greeblie. It's really a shame that not a single other photo of the Hero blaster (as it was configured during filming) bears this out.

    And Chris is trying to sell you all on the idea that it's a conclusive feature that should be idealized as a full t-track with not one, not one incomplete, but TWO COMPLE "antennae".?.?.?. :eek

    And a closing thought: even if everything Chris says is true, his antennae got broken off, as was his t-track, just as whatever was on the Mystery Disc, so early in filming, if not before, during rehersals or preproduction, that there's not a single screen grab from Episode IV that shows even a scintilla of evidence that this feature was there. Perhaps we should return the imperial disc to its proper place because it too appears on a Merr-Sonn? :p

    Chew on that, fellow blaster fans. It's not that I don't respect Chris or his enourmous - scratch that - legendary - contributions to the collective Star Wars prop community. I just vehemently disagree with his interpretations and conclusions, based on hard empirical evidence and indisputable CG recreations, not faith in some iffy photos...

    Finally, regarding this statement:

    Sorry, but the following comparison pretty much rebutts your belief that they're the same up to the suppressor and break-off:

    [​IMG]

    [Jerry Springer moment]

    In this hobby, belief and faith are only as good as your evidence. That's why we still have amazing discoveries after decades of conventional wisdom that ultimately proved wrong because it wasn't based on substance. :angel

    [/Jerry Springer moment]

    DISCUSS. :D

    - Gabe
     
  46. gavidoc

    gavidoc Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    941
    Hi Gabe,

    I didn't get a chance to really read your posts in response to Chris but I did want to comment on one thing you said.

    I 100% disagree with this statement and personally I'm kind of shocked that you said it. :)

    To rely 100% on what Cad data tells you on the computer screen is a flawed way of thinking. To trully be able to judge if something is there or not is to make a 1:1 scale physical model.

    I use 3d Cad all day at work like you do and if we did that (ie: Cad doesn't lie) we'd be royally screwed and would end up wasting thousands of dollars for tooling that just didn't give a full representation of what we thought it did.

    Of course, you're an engineer and I'm a industrial designer so that might explain it. ;) :p
     
  47. gavidoc

    gavidoc Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    941
    Here's those pictures I was talking about with the cocked hammer so you can see a real Mauser.

    Not the best quality and of course, when the hammer was cocked, the safety was engaged so I included a 2nd photo which shows the tab that you guys were talking about.

    Also see the steel on the front where the mystery disk was. I painted the gun black but had the "disk" there before I painted it. When I removed the disk, it took some of the bluing off the original gun.

    [image]http://webpages.charter.net/jrmyers01/images/anh01.jpg[/image]
    [image]http://webpages.charter.net/jrmyers01/images/anh02.jpg[/image]
     
  48. Prop Runner

    Prop Runner Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,230
    Gav: thanks for responding so early. :D

    I agree that CAD isn't infallible, but in this case we're REVERSE-ENGINEERING found items, not designing unproven new ones. My CAD is pretty * accurate to the found items. Maybe not 100% on the bull barrel, but at least 95%. Will you at least concede that ACCURATE CAD is more reliable than grainy, manipulated, poorly lit photographs?

    And yes, I'm an engineer, and as you well know 3D parametric CAD has saved industry millions of dollars in retooling and poor product performance due to misinterpreted mockups, prototypes, and blueprints. With 3D CAD you can analyze interferences, clearences, and drafts, perform FEA, heat transfer, fluid flow, mechanics and dynamics simulations, and of course simplify toolpath plotting for CNC machining.

    Regarding the mystery disc, I'm pretty sold on your interpretation - I was since you first posted it, in fact. :) Sorry I neglected to confirm it because the topic of the thread was the sight. :angel If you look at the Cantina shot I posted, you can see a clean, flat, reflective surface, and Ford's finger shadow is unbroken as it crosses over onto the disc area. So yeah, you're absolutely right. :thumbsup

    And perhaps you were composing your post on the hammer & safety while I was composing mine, but I admitted Tom's theory was wrong before you posted your confirming photos.

    I think the debate really boils down to this: is the detail atop the bull barrel (but leaning to the RHS) the cosmetic Merr-Sonnesque "antennae" & t-track, or a functional piece of "somthing" used to re-center the suppressor?

    I also want to ask this: does anyone but Chris question the visual evidence of heavy manipulation of the bull barrel area of Jason's first photo, and more specifically, my analysis of the manipulation? If so, please provide conclusive evidence that I'm wrong, just as Gav did. :)

    - Gabe
     
  49. spinner 44

    spinner 44 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    941
    I guess you have realised this already, but if you see the Chronicles pic the t-track is off-centered to the symmetrical axis, and tilted to the right. (you pointed that already Gabe, sorry)

    Plus I'm 120% the button-antenna detail only on the right hand side. There is simply no photo evidence of ANH Han blaster showing that on the left side.

    Gabe, I suggest you check the stills I posted before (when Han gets out of the smugglers compartment). Keep a sharp eye on top of the bull barrel. There is something there that may be the button and t-track. But again the side of the gun that we see that we see is the right one.

    Crappy blow ups due to poor image resolution but you get the idea

    Original freeze
    [​IMG]

    "retouched" to show a barrel with no greeblies -what it should look like

    [​IMG]


    I also have question here regarding the silver disc. If the lower receiver is not the same one as the Naked Runner Mauser, the why is the disc in the almost same exact position were the piece for supporting the scope originally was? It would make perfect sense that when they made the customization on the Naked Runner gun this depressed disc and the hole in the center (to pass a screw) was made? Why repeat the same on a different gun?


    My two cents
     
  50. gavidoc

    gavidoc Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    941
    [​IMG]

    Do you not see the greeblie behind the suppressor and on the bull barrel in this photo?

    Rod is even there and is on the right hand side (scope side) of this photo.

    And if this t-track/switch is rotated to the right side, you wouldn't see the top of the switch sticking above the suppressor.
     

Share This Page