Sym-Cha
Master Member
I believe those tapered panels are 'spares' to go on the feet in case repairs or a replacement is needed by the Empire :
Chaïm
Revell At-At WIP... finishing up!
- Thread starter starks
- Start date
I believe those tapered panels are 'spares' to go on the feet in case repairs or a replacement is needed by the Empire :
Chaïm
Analyzer
Master Member
Did not notice that!
Could be a simple enough explanation. Maybe they did not bother adding those to the smaller walkers because they figured no one would notice vs the larger one that would have more close ups
starks
Sr Member
I notice on the shots with one ( we call it a toe now?) The main bodys burnt above the door suggesting the filming of the dropping at-at was filmed after the blowing up and falling on its side. So I guess that extra greeblie yeah most likely fell off.
Until it was brought up in the Round2 thread I did not realise the toes on the feet articulated down.
There seems to be a definite hole in the top of that toe greeblie to allow a rod to go through allowing flop down articulation.
On the smaller models the feet are presumably all one molded piece so would not have these constructed toe greeblies readily available to just stick to the side.
Perhaps the 'screw hole' is a casting bubble?
There seems to be no hole on the body suggesting something was screwed there where the toe greeblie has fallen off?
Cheers,
Josh
Hagoth
Sr Member
Spare toes! What an intriguing observation and conclusion. I like that! Makes sense. That is a cool possible insight into the creative details that the model builders put into the used universe of Star Wars. The small tab like protrusion at the top of the toe looks like some kind of hinge point and the attachment point by which it might be mounted on the side panel. Where the second one would have been there is a mark were it likely could have attached on the model. Something fell off I think.
Now to mix things up with more prop discontinuity. When the cable is being wrapped around the legs of the walker there are no toes hanging on the side. Note the look of the recessed small hatch panels and weathering. Then as it starts to trip and fall forward, and as it hits the ground, there is one toe hanging there. The hatch panels and weathering are different as well. Evidence of at least two different models used for the sequence. Ok, just an observation.
When Luke is lifting himself up to the belly those two toes are not hanging on the side of the walker. Then after he drops and when it is blowing up they are both there. Again two different models used for the sequence. I wonder if the model builders and prop team along with everyone else ever dreamed that such close scrutiny would have ever been paid to the action scenes of the movie.
That all being noticed I like the idea of some magnetic type attachments to clip some extra toes on the sides of the walker. I like the story they tell.
I have also been noticing the two lower armor plates at the back all over the place.
Now to mix things up with more prop discontinuity. When the cable is being wrapped around the legs of the walker there are no toes hanging on the side. Note the look of the recessed small hatch panels and weathering. Then as it starts to trip and fall forward, and as it hits the ground, there is one toe hanging there. The hatch panels and weathering are different as well. Evidence of at least two different models used for the sequence. Ok, just an observation.
When Luke is lifting himself up to the belly those two toes are not hanging on the side of the walker. Then after he drops and when it is blowing up they are both there. Again two different models used for the sequence. I wonder if the model builders and prop team along with everyone else ever dreamed that such close scrutiny would have ever been paid to the action scenes of the movie.
That all being noticed I like the idea of some magnetic type attachments to clip some extra toes on the sides of the walker. I like the story they tell.
I have also been noticing the two lower armor plates at the back all over the place.
Analyzer
Master Member
I guess they were going for the look of spare treads on tanks. Make sense
I am pretty sure those are from the Flakvierling 38. The same plate part shows up on the AT-ST as well
It is also where some parts for the side guns come from
Thanks Hagoth... and yes I noticed those plates on at least one other vehicle :
View attachment 1456918
What are they called in real life and from which original modelkit or kits were they salvaged?
Chaïm
I am pretty sure those are from the Flakvierling 38. The same plate part shows up on the AT-ST as well
It is also where some parts for the side guns come from
starks
Sr Member
Funny you added that....I was just looking at a toy speeder my boys have and noticed those plates!Thanks Hagoth
View attachment 1456918
What are they called in real life and from which original modelkit or kits were they salvaged?
Chaïm
With your wealth of knowledge Analyzer Im really looking foward to seeing you tackle your build.
Did you say 1/48 for the Flakvierling side guns?
Cheers,
Josh
starks
Sr Member
Analyzer
Master Member
For the side guns I think the 1/48 is the scale that would fit best with the Revell AT-AT based on what others have done
The original studio model I think used the 1/35 ones
division 6
Master Member
starks
Sr Member
starks
Sr Member
I had a go running a slightly higher-rez version of this image through Topaz Gigapixel AI:
Not much detail in that oval - whatever greeblies were in there must have fallen out or were removed.
Dan
starks
Sr Member
Thanks for taking the effort!
As Hagoth said, more confirmation. Looks like a screw hole in there and seems to be in the rear of the other example so perhaps is a rear stand mounting point.
I think I can spot green on the feet, the r/h lower body armour looks damaged? And may well be upside down guns suggesting this is the RoTJ model.
Cheers,
Josh
Analyzer
Master Member
Yeah, definitely seems like those oval details were easily placed in in varying orientations much like the hatch cover on the X-Wings
Hah! look at all those Kenner die-cast Tie Fighters
They even have the rear trunk in tact ( that part is removable)
I am sure they were for extreme distance shots. IIRC they were were under a major crunch for the end ROTJ battle and even at one point put in a sneaker as one of the rebel ships
Hah! look at all those Kenner die-cast Tie Fighters
They even have the rear trunk in tact ( that part is removable)
I am sure they were for extreme distance shots. IIRC they were were under a major crunch for the end ROTJ battle and even at one point put in a sneaker as one of the rebel ships
starks
Sr Member
An update to the build....
I assembled the drive motor and had no real interest in modifying it as it is quite hidden underneath but then a couple of details stood out to me I wanted to address. First the front motor. I have left it predominantly as Revell intended... there should be more detail as in ribs/ corrugations around the front circumference but as there is some serious work in me creating those and they're quite fine on the studio model I opted not to worry about them. However right on front of the drive motor is an oval shaped greeblie. Revell got this round.
Revell:
Studio:
So I made a new one, an improvement:
The rear drive motor bothered me for Revell missing the oval shaped vents on the side and an extension off the back. The very rear center should also have a grille but as it is totally covered on the Revell model by the rear oval and greeblies I have not bothered correcting something you don't see. On the studio model things sit a bit less tight around the back there.
The studio model:
Revells offering:
My altered rear drive motor with side oval grilles and rear extension:
Those side oval grilles were really kicking my arse. I made them once (took hours) and ended up too big so I ripped them off and started again.
I got the shape better, primed it, double checked the reference and realised I made a mistake. I looked at pictures showing the top of the oval and there's a flat section without grille slats. I assumed this mirrored the bottom but it doesn't... the grille slats should run all the way to the bottom of the oval. I'm not doing it a third time. You really only see a hint of it through the leg mechanisms anyway but looks a bit wrong without those grilles there at all so even a bit under detailed it is a big improvement.
The rear extension I made from a cut down zip tie.
Onto the legs next. I will address the extensions on the inside of the body center lower 3 slots as they're seen from the outside but I'm never looking under the walker so I'm not concerned here. Revell have some detail so it's not sparse although a lot is missing. The effort the model builders at ILM went to is really outstanding when you look at the reference pictures. On that note thought I would throw up photo's for those that haven't seen them of the walkers in their skeleton and the 4ft behemoth, photo must have been taken after the tow cable fall as the doors are still hanging off. Theresin casting may have been a bit sloppy as it generally is but boy these were really quality built puppets, machined metal and all.
Cheers,
Josh
I assembled the drive motor and had no real interest in modifying it as it is quite hidden underneath but then a couple of details stood out to me I wanted to address. First the front motor. I have left it predominantly as Revell intended... there should be more detail as in ribs/ corrugations around the front circumference but as there is some serious work in me creating those and they're quite fine on the studio model I opted not to worry about them. However right on front of the drive motor is an oval shaped greeblie. Revell got this round.
Revell:
Studio:
So I made a new one, an improvement:
The rear drive motor bothered me for Revell missing the oval shaped vents on the side and an extension off the back. The very rear center should also have a grille but as it is totally covered on the Revell model by the rear oval and greeblies I have not bothered correcting something you don't see. On the studio model things sit a bit less tight around the back there.
The studio model:
Revells offering:
My altered rear drive motor with side oval grilles and rear extension:
Those side oval grilles were really kicking my arse. I made them once (took hours) and ended up too big so I ripped them off and started again.
I got the shape better, primed it, double checked the reference and realised I made a mistake. I looked at pictures showing the top of the oval and there's a flat section without grille slats. I assumed this mirrored the bottom but it doesn't... the grille slats should run all the way to the bottom of the oval. I'm not doing it a third time. You really only see a hint of it through the leg mechanisms anyway but looks a bit wrong without those grilles there at all so even a bit under detailed it is a big improvement.
The rear extension I made from a cut down zip tie.
Onto the legs next. I will address the extensions on the inside of the body center lower 3 slots as they're seen from the outside but I'm never looking under the walker so I'm not concerned here. Revell have some detail so it's not sparse although a lot is missing. The effort the model builders at ILM went to is really outstanding when you look at the reference pictures. On that note thought I would throw up photo's for those that haven't seen them of the walkers in their skeleton and the 4ft behemoth, photo must have been taken after the tow cable fall as the doors are still hanging off. Theresin casting may have been a bit sloppy as it generally is but boy these were really quality built puppets, machined metal and all.
Cheers,
Josh
starks
Sr Member
Great so now we have to find a screen accurate nike for the rebel fleet? I'm guessing that was the missing ship from red squadron, one of the crew had to wear him home LOL
Cheers,
Josh
Similar threads
