Round2 Acquires Star Wars License

Analyzer said:
IIRC there was some old special effects article where someone from ILM had said the Tie Fighters were originally built to 1/16 scale but a 1/24 pilot had later been put in
Click to expand...

Possibly. There has been debate on RPF before regarding sizes. Even official sources can’t agree on the size of a y-wing, possibly because there were 2 versions, Episode 1(?) and 4.

One of the snowspeeders had a large headed pilot for closer up shots. So obviously the scale would change for that.

When we measure scale on other models we use the real life measurement. But we can’t do that on the TIE because there was never a full scale mock-up. Even the “full scale” mock-up of the MF was scaled down to save money and space.

TazMan2000
 
Poakwoods said:
By the way, the old 1/48 scale kit from Fine Molds is 15,7cm tall, which matches almost perfectly with the scale indicated on TheForce.net.
Also: Bandai's Tie Fighter 1/72, on the other hand, is 12.5cm tall, which enlarged to 1/32 scale would be 28.1cm tall, bigger than Fine Molds but much smaller than MPC's...

So in summary: what scale is MPC's upcoming Tie Fighter?
Click to expand...
They are representations of a make-believe vehicle.

Round2 says 1/32, so I will go with that.
 
Poakwoods said:
According to Theforce.net, "the stated dimensions of the special effects model of the standard TIE Fighter are 36cm x 38cm x 48cm". If it had been made in 1/16 scale, in 1/1 scale it would be 7 meters and 68cm tall, and consequently, in 1/32 scale it would be 24cm tall. AMT on the box states the model is 13.5 inches (34.3cm) tall.
I'm confused...
Click to expand...

The AMT model is undersized for 1/32 I believe. It is more like 1/33 to 1/35?

The "commonly accepted" scale of the AMT Tie Advance used to be 1/36. If this new tie was truly made to a similar size it would be around that scale. AMT may have adjusted scaling slightly and settled on 1/32

While interesting from a purist point of view, in the end I don't really care too much about any difference between actual vs intended scale as long as the two models are sized to each other so I can do a display with Vader and wingmen without having mismatched sizes

i.e. They can label it 1/32 then that is close enough for me, even if it is or is not accurate

They had similar problems with the Space 1999 Eagles. They settled on calling them 1/48 and 1/72 scale, but they also labelled then as 22" and 11" inch Eagles since there is still confusion over what scale the original models were based on live action sets and such
 
Last edited:
Were all the cockpit shots filmed at Elstree or at ILM? I don't want to dig through my reference to find the shooting schedule right now. Not sure when the cockpit set was built relative to the rest of production and to the building and filming of the models. The miniature was stated by ILM to be 1:16 and the 1:24 Harrier pilot was just stuck in there unpainted to give the impression of an occupied space, and never meant to be seen clearly. I think LFL currently have the exterior scaled to the interior cockpit set they built for ANH, which many (including me) feel was unrealistically large. It's not a cockpit you fit yourself in, as with the Rebel ships in the same film. It's not the underscaled freighter cockpit George had built for the Falcon, which the actors were squished into. It's a big, roomy thing Vader or another Imperial pilot could stand up and walk around in. Maybe ducking their head, but still. There's so much room next to and behind the pilot's seat... And that, itself, is just a chair they're sitting in, feet flat on the floor in front of them. No degree of incline or feet out in front to work pedals. Even if all the maneuvering is controlled by that yoke, there is absolutely no need for the cockpit to be that roomy. Seems like unnecessary extra materials and weight.

If the miniature really were 1:16, that would make the fighter only 5.76m long. Which seems much more manageable, but contradicts the cross-section drawings Joe Johnston made of the pilot in the cockpit and exiting the rear hatch, so the end result is that ILM's materials disagree with each other all over the place. Any scaling referent will be arbitrarily chosen from one of the sources given. I personally go with an interpretation of the cockpit set (as that's what we see actual actors in), but with a more reclined seat and pedals a la the sectional drawings for ANH and Rebels. And possibly with more equipment bulking out the walls and mounted though the floor than the set (and resulting model kits) were given.

I think I remember that FineMolds tooled their TIE to the ILM scale quote, but I'm not sure. While Bandai and now AMT are deriving their scaling factor from the official length, which is derived from the cockpit set, measurements for which were taken from the cross-section drawings Joe did. So this is a 1:32 model of a "real" TIE Fighter, making the "real" ship's wings nearly 11m tall. so the 48cm tall filming miniature becomes a skosh smaller than 1:22, not very helpfully landing between the 1:16 ILM purportedly intended the model to be, and the 1:24 the pilot figure implies it is.


So,
 
I will say that if indeed the original scale was 1/16, the 1/24th pilot in there better matches to the "roominess" of the filming set.

The Fine Molds and the old AMT ones seem to match starting with a possible 1/16 scale for the studio miniature which means when you put a 1/16th figure in it, or in the case of Fine Molds, a 1/72 figure, the top of their heads almost touch the top hatch and there is not much room.

Later, when Fantasy Flight games was developing the scale for the X-Wing miniature game they decided that the 1/24 pilot better represented to interior cockpit sets spaciousness and the studio ties were "officially" scaled to 1/24.

Bandai followed that same path using 1/24 as the scale for the studio model

As a result, Bandai's 1/72 tie fighter winds up larger and a 1/72 pilot in the cockpit has lots of room since it was scaled from 1/24 to 1/72 where as Fine Molds was scaled from 1/16 to 1/72 and the 1/72 figure in the cockpit fills more of that room

(sorry, I just found these in image searches so I can't give proper credit to whose they are)

here is the Fine Molds cockpit with figure

img_0171-png.png


now see how much room the Bandai cockpit has

1683579534945.png


You would get a similar result to Fine Molds sticking a 1/16 figure in the studio model cockpit

and you wound get a similar result to Bandai with the 1/24 figure

AMT seems to lean towards the Fine Molds scaling point?

Bandai Vader Tie
tie_advanced_x1_05.jpg


AMT Vader Tie
t3fnGKi.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ah, good—the solar panels look like separate parts. And I’m totally down for a TIE bomber although there’s no way it’ll be in scale with the fighter…
 
Chrisisall said:
The Falcon retooled looks too flat to me, and the sidewalls STILL seem like 5 - 10% too thick... is it just this picture?
Click to expand...
The one thing that I noticed about the MPC, that this one also does, its that overhang of the top and bottom dish.
The 5 footer comes out a bit more. Even at the two different scales, this top pic here, the Falcon top and bottom should come out at least another milimeter, maybe even 2. I think that would help.

overhang.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MARK M3
My PG Falcon build...Thoughts and a second look!
Replies
11
Views
1,118
MARK M3
MARK M3
Treadwell
Heritage Auctions pyro Red 5 wing
Replies
3
Views
338
t2sides
t2sides
azheat
Loyal Subjects Getting the M.A.S.K. (1985) Toys License
Replies
7
Views
847
Wakeem
Wakeem
AP160EDF
My Star Destroyer project…
Replies
7
Views
411
AP160EDF
AP160EDF
starks
Playmates OS Enterprise, anyone upgraded these?
Replies
0
Views
570
starks
starks
Back
Top