My Very Easy Method for Spotting Millennium Falcon Differences

[Jaitea]

Theres a thread over at Starship Modeller about the likeliness of Bandai releasing a large scale Millennium Falcon model kit hopefully soon, the main topic being whether it will be based on the 5 foot Falcon or the 32" Falcon......and the likeliness that it would be a tie in with the new film coming out at the end of the year.

If it is an Episode 7 Millennium Falcon then it would be based on the 5 footer (with a different Radar dish...after the Lando incident)

I gave a brief history of the Falcons appearance which was like this:

Well my love is the 5 footer....(gasp....shock!!)

I know everyone is probably sick of me going on about it

It IS the Millennium Falcon, all the work that went into it....all the details, super fine details,....but the model was BIG & heavy and hard to get those agile & active shots.

So a smaller 'stunt' model was needed,....'dont worry the audience won't notice the difference because when the stunt model is on screen, there'll be so much motion blur',.....when the camera has to linger on the Falcon in the film (obviously apart from the full size set....and 2 other shots....stuck on a Star Destroyer & dangling from the Medical Frigate....could you imagine the size of making a Star Destroyer Command tower for the 5 footer?) the higher 'Real' Falcon....the 5 foot ship was used

When the SE OT was re-released 1n 1997 a new shot of the Falcon was required to show it's engines warming up as it lifts off from Mos Eisley....A CG model was constructed using a combination of both Falcon Models,....the back end is mainly the 5 footer, but the front end is the 32"

Later a matte painting of the Falcon parked in the Death Star Docking Bay was re-composited using what looks like the same CG Falcon....but the back end is now 32".....so this shot is probably the physical 32" studio model

On now to what we can get

MPC's model was of the original Falcon & really not bad,....I love that model...nostalgia

I think Fine Molds released their 1/72 model of the falcon in 2005 before Master Replicas MF, they decided to make a scale model off the 32" I don't know how much access the FM modellers were allowed, but they got some fundimental measurements wrong

When Master Replicas were releasing their studio scale model of course they made a 'Replica' of the 32"....they were allowed complete access to it and successfully duplicated it,.....but the 32" didn't really deserve this superstardom,....it wasn't meant to have all this attention & people scrutinising it's every detail,....it wasn't the REAL Falcon

So now all these years later DeAgostini is letting us build up a part-work Falcon,....studio scale...again of the 32"

The Millennium Falcon returns in 2015's 'The Force Awakens'.....what are they using?

They obviously need this ship to be active & agile....but the main thing....they want to take us back to the 'Old Star Wars',....they want us to see the detail

So they've made a hyper detailed CG model of the REAL falcon,......the original Falcon,..the 5 footer is back..

...everything is there (apart from the dish that Lando Knocked off)....but more, finer greeblies

So Bandai have got the Star Wars licence for Japan,...all of the kits they've released so far & are planning on releasing are Original Trilogy kits (Thankfully Prequel kits are not the priority at the minute)...theres XWings, TIE Fighters, Scout Walkers, Droids, Speeder Bikes, Stormtroopers & Vader......

....no Millennium Falcon....(well theres a tiny one).....what do I think/hope they are planning?

One of the first releases of kits from EP7 would/should be a lovely 1/72 Millennium Falcon....which would be of the REAL Millennium Falcon

Bandai have so far surprised us with superior engineered & detailed kits than even FineMolds have given us, with optional parts for building different versions....Imagine if a new 1/72 Falcon kit allowed us to decide on a 3 gear ANH Falcon / 5 Gear ESB, RoTJ & beyond version,....the option for circular or rectangle dish

How much would it cost though?

When they built the original 5 footer, they never made landing gear for her.....the clever idea was to build the full size prop as close to the 5 foot model as possible.....3 landing gear......they only built about half of the ship into the soundstage wall,....an extra support for the front end of the ship was disguised as a refuelling/charging hose going up into one of the open areas beside the lower jaw.....the soundstage was redressed from Mos Eisley to the Death Star hanger and the job was done

For Empire Strikes Back a more fuller Falcon was needed for the Hoth & Bespin Landing platform,....they couldn't get away with adding support from a wall.

Extra support was needed for it to stand unaided and so the Falcon gained another 2 landing gears as a 'Han & Chewie improvement'

The 5 foot model was then also modified with the 2 extra landing gear boxes & gear for the ship landing on the Cloud City platform.

The 32'' was modelled with the same 5 gear boxes......and gears,.....was that the 32'' we see leaving the Bespin platform?[/QUOTE]

After that a lot of posts were about how to spot differences between the different models, so I thought I'd make it easier

OK......The Differences of the 5 footer Star Wars version (or A New Hope) to the same model modified for Empire Strikes Back.....the additional Landing gear boxes:

...and a broken Quad gun after ESB:

Now for the differences of the 5 footer & the 32"

Front on.....differences in the Mandible ends:

Next the boxes on the mandibles / hull

The Cockpit:

The Starboard Mandible:

The Dish:

The Quad Turret;

.....and the back end, the spacing of the vertical Fuel drive pressure stabiliser things:

Thats it for tonight,.....there are obviously TONNES of differences,......But at a glance, you should be able to pick out which version you are looking at from any angle

Hope this is a help

John

 

[retiredadguy]

I likes it!

The 5ft version that is. Thanks for the breakdown. I like the fact that the new Hasbro REBEL falcon seem to be a combo of the best of both 32" and 5 ft version.

Even has the mandible tow in. Although I would have liked to see the R side wall follow the 5ft version instead of the round ball greably.

 

[Tom1971]

The 5 foot version is my one true love.

Great thread.

 

[Vacformedhero]

Thanks john, this is a great thread for us doing the hasbro , I am leaning to the 5 foot model but am slowly getting the differences clear in my head, these details are great.

Can you confirm the front mandible detail made from the ferrari f1 engine on the real falcon, this is a flat 12 so there should be 6 holes top and bottom

 

[Vacformedhero]

Thanks john, this is a great thread for us doing the hasbro , I am leaning to the 5 foot model but am slowly getting the differences clear in my head, these details are great.

Can you confirm the front mandible detail made from the ferrari f1 engine on the real falcon, this is a flat 12 so there should be 6 holes top and bottom

Another question is there a chart to explain the scale differences between the models, for example the shape difference on the five foot model front mandible is called out on the maps as 1/24 scale panther g , now I know for scaling the Matilda model from the 5 footer to match the hasbro I need 1/76 (if building an exact replace of the 32 inch I would need 1/72 scale Matilda tank) the Matilda is slightly easier as it's original was 1/35 , so which scale should 1/24 be brought down to rescale the 5 footer to hasbro, is it a case of getting the nearest scale of 1/48 ?

 

[spacebob]

Fantastic thread,
I'm still learning the differences and I can't get enough of this sort of thing I love it.

 

[tek2graphics]

That's awesome! Helps allot!
Han and Chewie were always upgrading! LOL

 

[newmagrathea]

Great post. Very helpful.

 

[samster27]

Great info J. Hockey Puck 32 for me all the way.

 

[Jedi Dade]

OK to be fair... the 5 footer had the additional landing boxes added for TESB as well. So from TESB on all falcons had 5 landing gear. So that does not really help distinguish... unless you are looking at reference FROM the 1975-1978(ish) timeframe. Just sayin' .

Suffice it to say that there are tons of small differences in all areas of each model. "In general", the 5 footer is more highly detailed - made for more close up shots. If you're using reference for your models you need to spend a bit of time to determine details so you can tell which model your reference is from.

As for the Hasbro - its a mish -mash of both models... it will never be a "replica" (unless you basically rebuild it into one of the versions)- but it can be an AWESOME model.

Jedi Dade

 

[Jaitea]

OK to be fair... the 5 footer had the additional landing boxes added for TESB as well. So from TESB on all falcons had 5 landing gear. So that does not really help distinguish... unless you are looking at reference FROM the 1975-1978(ish) timeframe. Just sayin' .

Suffice it to say that there are tons of small differences in all areas of each model. "In general", the 5 footer is more highly detailed - made for more close up shots. If you're using reference for your models you need to spend a bit of time to determine details so you can tell which model your reference is from.

As for the Hasbro - its a mish -mash of both models... it will never be a "replica" (unless you basically rebuild it into one of the versions)- but it can be an AWESOME model.

Jedi Dade

Yeah the first two images are there to demonstrate the evolution of the 5 foot model through the OT.....intentionally and accidentally

J

 

[crackerjazz]

Theres a thread over at Starship Modeller about the likeliness of Bandai releasing a large scale Millennium Falcon model kit hopefully soon...

Wow!!! Maybe that's why Bandai's taking this long to show any signs of the MF. You can't build a Star Wars line without a Falcon. If Bandai can make big Gundams they can certainly make big Falcons -- and with "authentic" Bandai parts. I haven't even gotten a Hasbro yet and here comes another one to save up for --- I'm not complaining!

 

[Hunk a Junk]

Between ANH and TESB, the 5-footer also had a series of lights added to the lower hull following the perimeter of the saucer and two lights added to the front of the lower jawbox. You can see them here https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=B9FE0AEBDC25FDBC&id=B9FE0AEBDC25FDBC!3093&v=3 and in the movie the first shot of the Falcon after they've landed inside the asteroid cave is the 5-footer with the lights on.

 

[CessnaDriver]

Reminds me how much I hate those landing gear bays they added after ANH.
UGLY! She was far more svelte looking without that junk up front.

 

[TazMan2000]

Thanks for posting that. Very educational.

TazMan2000

 

[Dedalus5550]

I'm a little unclear on something, unless I missed it. Does the MF in the new movie have the extra gear boxes. If it's based on the 5-footer, does that mean it does not? Or if since the boxes were added to the 5-footer model, they ARE on the "new" version?

And me? I love the extra gear boxes. It kind of evens out the mass between front and rear. Without them, it's a little like the way the star destroyer gets bigger as you go back. And while I like the SD, it wears the design better, like someone having the right body to pull off a certain look. But I always feel like I'm in a minority of one at The RPF.
Mike Todd

 

[Darth Humorous]

The 32'' was modelled with the same 5 gear boxes......and gears,.....was that the 32'' we see leaving the Bespin platform?J

The “32 incher” never had actual landing GEAR added to it for ESB…at least none that was seen in the unmodified OT. Only the “5 footer” had the gear. This is just one reason why why I stated in the afore mentioned SSM thread that the “5 footer” IS the miniature we see both landing and taking off from Bespin.

Mark

 

[Jaitea]

The “32 incher” never had actual landing GEAR added to it for ESB…at least none that was seen in the unmodified OT. Only the “5 footer” had the gear. This is just one reason why why I stated in the afore mentioned SSM thread that the “5 footer” IS the miniature we see both landing and taking off from Bespin.

Mark

Well I was just putting that out there,....The gears were made for the 32' for some reason,.....maybe they thought the 32' might have been useful for the Bespin shots but were unhappy???

J

 

[Darth Humorous]

I'm a little unclear on something, unless I missed it. Does the MF in the new movie have the extra gear boxes. If it's based on the 5-footer, does that mean it does not? Or if since the boxes were added to the 5-footer model, they ARE on the "new" version?

Mercifully, the hull shape does indeed look like that of the “5 footer”, and after reviewing the trailer showing the Falcon maneuvering over what looks to be a Tatooine landscape, I can see all 5 landing gear hull boxes, which includes the 2 additional front boxes. This is as it should be. They were added to the miniatures, the set ship, and matte painting in ESB, and this full complement of hull boxes showed up in all seen manifestations of the Falcon in ROTJ. Why go backwards for ep. 7?

Ironically, ANH is the odd man out without the extra hull boxes. Actually, even though the ANH set Falcon didn’t have the extra hull boxes, it DID have one of the “landing legs” in the guise of the pipe-looking utility in the exact location of where the landing leg would protrude (from beneath the hull box) in the next film. Since it was a half Falcon, only the right side support “leg” was there. But it was necessary to include it even in ANH for stability/safety reasons. After it was decided to make a full set Falcon for ESB, rather than having to disguise TWO safety supports as two such “utility pipes” appearing no mater where the Falcon landed, someone finally figured out to “celebrate” these additional supports as actual landing legs. The new hull boxes were added for consistency.

Mark

 

[Darth Humorous]

Well I was just putting that out there,....The gears were made for the 32' for some reason,.....maybe they thought the 32' might have been useful for the Bespin shots but were unhappy???

Yes, actual gear WERE made, but unless someone has better info on this, I believe they were made and added to the “32 incher“ later for the modified trilogy, because it is the “32 incher“ that was scanned or photographed for insertion into the films, replacing the unattended and PARKED set Falcon images, thus landing legs were required at that point. Personally, I think that was a rotten choice.

Mark