Question: Differences of 1/144 Falcons

[Jimmer]

After seeing user JNordgren42 's work on his 1/144 Bandai Falcon I really have the itch to build one in this scale, it just looks like a really fun build.
* And check out JNordgren42 's build, he's been out of the game a while but is coming back into the hobby full force.

To any members who have built different versions in this scale (or members who are more familiar) are there significant differences in the different film versions (Lando's excluded, of course), and is there a version that would be more accurate or a "better" version?

I know they're more accurate to each film (square dish for sequel versions for example), but I generally mean is there a version that is preferred overall for whatever reasons.

Thanks in advance for info /opinions.

 

[3Dsf]

Well there are only three basic Falcons marketed at that size.

1) there’s the Fine Molds kit. Which was okay for its time but is a bit limited in detail, has some geometry issues, and is based on the 32” Empire version. It’s OT however and a bit smaller than the Bandais. And long out of production.
2) there is the Bandai Solo/Lando Falcon.
3) there are the Bandai sequel ones, which are based on The Force Awakens digital Falcon, with two minor subreleases for the next films. They’re all sequel versions and not OT but have magnificent detailing.

 

[3Dsf]

Bandai’s 1:144 Millennium Falcons: model kit reviews - 3dsf.info

Useful information and a review of Bandai's 1:144 kit of the Millennium Falcon fantasy spacecraft.

sites.google.com

 

[Jimmer]

Well there are only three basic Falcons marketed at that size.

1) there’s the Fine Molds kit. Which was okay for its time but is a bit limited in detail, has some geometry issues, and is based on the 32” Empire version. It’s OT however and a bit smaller than the Bandais. And long out of production.
2) there is the Bandai Solo/Lando Falcon.
3) there are the Bandai ones, which are the Force Awakens digital Falcon with two minor subreleases for the next films. They’re all sequel versions and not OT but have magnificent detailing.

Thanks for the info.
I should have worded my question a bit better..meant between the Bandai versions..my fault.
I think I found an article that covers it..but thanks again.

 

[Jimmer]

Bandai’s 1:144 Millennium Falcons: model kit reviews - 3dsf.info

Useful information and a review of Bandai's 1:144 kit of the Millennium Falcon fantasy spacecraft.

sites.google.com

Thanks much, nkg.
This is what I needed.

 

[JNordgren42]

Thanks for the kind words Jimmer, I'm having a lot of fun with my build.

On the subject of the Bandai 1/144 Falcons, I'd go with the Rise of Skywalker version (the one I have). It has the parts for both the bow tie and circular rectenna dishes and the corrections that were included in the Last Jedi version (mandible sidewalls are no longer incorrectly mirrored). As far as I know it is just one additional sprue with the dish parts and the new seated figures, everything else in the kit is the same.

 

[Inquisitor Peregrinus]

JNordgren42, dusting off this thread to ask if your opinion on how good the TROS Falcon is as a base to make an OT model. Are there aftermarket parts to make it more accurate to the physical model? Build logs from people who have retrofitted it? Or is it close enough it can be fudged with careful execution of paint and weathering?

 

[JNordgren42]

JNordgren42, dusting off this thread to ask if your opinion on how good the TROS Falcon is as a base to make an OT model. Are there aftermarket parts to make it more accurate to the physical model? Build logs from people who have retrofitted it? Or is it close enough it can be fudged with careful execution of paint and weathering?

I'm certainly not an expert, but leaving off most of the sidewall pipes gives a good quick and dirty approximation. I think 308 Bits on Shapeways has accurizing parts, but they're expensive.

 

[3Dsf]

To accurize the Bandai ROTS Falcon so it's OT style you need to replace the sidewalls, cannons, docking rings, maintenance pits, and a few other components.

Bandai’s 1:144 Millennium Falcons: model kit reviews - 3dsf.info

Useful information and a review of Bandai's 1:144 kit of the Millennium Falcon fantasy spacecraft.

sites.google.com

 

[Inquisitor Peregrinus]

Thanks, guys. I don't normally work with 1:144, so I really had no idea where to begin assessing.

 

[Chrisisall]

Thanks, guys. I don't normally work with 1:144, so I really had no idea where to begin assessing.

I got that kit & reworked the bottom pits & customized the sidewalls & escape hatches (mainly cutting pieces out). If you have patience & can scratch build bits of walls & stuff, this is a fantastic kit.

 

[Inquisitor Peregrinus]

How thorough is the detailing? Does the underside have the landing downlight cans and mind-your-head red lamp housings?

 

[3Dsf]

How thorough is the detailing? Does the underside have the landing downlight cans and mind-your-head red lamp housings?

Which? The Bandai kits? Because they have neither.

 

[Inquisitor Peregrinus]

Which? The Bandai kits? Because they have neither.

Good to know. I'll make sure I have the right size plastic tubing and something for the lights at the top.

 

[Keiko]

The 144 Bandai is a very nice kit, but it does have some accuracy issues, "from a certain point of view". It's based on the digital files that the ILM FX people create for the sequel trilogy. Though they ostensibly based their digital model on the 5' Falcon, they did take some shortcuts among other differences. I've not finished my kit, but I did mess around with some of the work. It's a side project that I do in bursts among my other works.

Some observations:
The panel lines on the underside are symmetrical about the long axis of the ship, which is not accurate.
The pits on the underside are also symmetrical and neither is accurate to the original 1977 prop nor the 5 landing gear modified version of the same model from 1980 onward.
The radar dish base is inaccurate.
The side panels, escape pods etc. also inaccurate.
The detail along the spine of the cockpit tube is coarse and way too tall.

All this said, it's a very nice kit. Bandai achieved their mission, but were working from inaccurate digital sources.

I've done a fair bit of work correcting some of these issues, I'll put some photos here. It DOES represent the landing lights, but not the red "don't bump your head" lights. Look closely and you'll see the white plastic of my modifications here. I didn't go for absolute perfection, but got it a lot closer to the 1980 onward appearance of the 5' model.

 

[Inquisitor Peregrinus]

Keiko, exactly what I read in nkg/3Dsf's review, linked above. I have sheet styrene and photo reference, and am not afraid to grind off hull plating and redo it, in limited locations. I'm going to make those ventral maintenance pits asymmetrical to match the filming model, and am enquiring after 50% scaled versions of the 1:72 ones. I'm going with aftermarket upgrades from nkg, 308bits/Tony, Green Strawberry, and Paragrafix, plus continuing to search farther afield for ROTJ crew figures and photoetch replacement Koolshade. Tony has the don't-hit-your-head lights as upgrade parts for the 1:72 Falcon, and I'm seeing if I can get those done at half-size also. Between all of those sources, most of the problems will be addressed, and I have the elbow-grease and patience for the rest. Thanks for the evaluation and insight.

 

[3Dsf]

Good to know. I'll make sure I have the right size plastic tubing and something for the lights at the top.

Oops wait - the 144 Bandai has the plates that were added to the underside of the 5 foot Falcon model where the brass tubes for lighting went. So you can easily drill those out and add fibre optics.

The red safety lights are so small that a simple red-coloured fibre protruding is adequate. They'd be too small to 3D print properly.