Scaling Different Ships Properly

[Polygonix]

I know that a lot of Star Wars ships vary in scale depending on the movie etc. I am trying to figure out if anyone has 'standardized' various ships so that when I make models I can have them scaled appropriately.

For example if I use Wookiepedia for the lengths of ships I see that the Tantive IV is 150 meters long which at 1/1000 scale puts it at 150mm in length. Measuring the Bandai "1/1000" blockade runner it is 127.04mm in total length. The "1/2700" scale blockade runner I purchased off Shapeways is 47.30mm in length instead of 55.56mm and is supposed to work with the Zvesda Star Destroyer which is in scale to Wookiepedia says.

If I Google Tantive IV length it says 126.68m in length which puts it real close to the Bandai 1/1000 and to the Shapeways model. This correlates to the 'starwars.com' length in the databank which I presume is the official number?

Any help would be appreciated.

 

[Polygonix]

Sorry if this thread is in the wrong forum. I have been told the General Modeling would be more appropriate. If there is any way to move this or delete it please let me know.

 

[Potroclo]

You've put the finger in the sore spot with the Tantive IV. It's a CR-90 corvette and its plans were originally published with errors in scale in early EU material, there's different sources and most come short of its actual length. Some of those appearing in EU where even retconed to be CR-70s which are basically scaled down CR-90, just to explain the differences in size. Now, with the new Disney Canon I guess it's even more complicated, that 150m length seems totally arbitrary: I doubt the original Tantive model had such a round number.
I'ld say for this particular ship, scale it relative to the Devastator (I-class Star Destroyer), so 127m give or take a couple meters seems good.

 

[Analyzer]

Yeah as mentioned above, There are official numbers, but those are not always accurate to what was seen on screen

You can start with them as guide lines, but strictly following them leads to situations where one companies 1/72 Ties are smaller than another, or even with the same company, you get 1/72 stuff, that has to wind up scaling pilots up or down to fit them

For example, the Bandai 1/72 B-Wing. The pilot figure is too small for 1/72, which implies the ship itself is too small, but yet it scales out to what "official" numbers say it should

So best you can do is accept that "close enough" is often what you have to settle for

 

[rbeach84]

Analyzer hits it on the 'head': everything is a guestimate for 'vessels' that have no verifyable scaling element present to connect them to the full size, physical world. Obviously, exact precision is not possible if the only element is a human figure, unless the specific individual's height is known which helps with accuracy. And for designs that have no visible scaling element (like the Tantive V), then everything is up for grabs...

Fortunately, some of the designs incorporate elements that are depicted full size. R2-D2 is one such 'yardstick'. Given the 'droid is part of the X & Y Wing designs, the size and hence scale of the filming models can be determined exactly based on the known dimensions of the real "character".

In the case of the Slave 1, it can be scaled accurately using the composite scene where Han (in carbonite) is being loaded with Boba Fett standing on the ramp, by using the known height of the actor (Boba, not Han...) The side view of the filming miniature in the loading scene is perfect for solving the problem independently of any contrived 'wiki' values.

A third case exists for the B-Wing where a model figure of known scale is used in the filming miniature, setting the scale of the filming model by default. As long as the model pilot and the full size scenes are in reasonable agreement (as the B-Wing scenes seem to be), this is a workable solution. The B-Wing filming model is then 1/32 scale.

The A-Wing is a favorite 'bone of contention' for scale. The primary issue is that the 'human scale' element is obviously larger in the model than in the live action scenes that show the pilots against the cockpit's aft bulkhead giving an impression the cockpit is roomier than the model suggests. In fact, the model cockpit seems to lack full accomodation for the pilot's limbs! This is a case of 'what looks right' depends on which standard is used for determination since the two (live or model) are in obvious disagreement. Since I like 1/48 scale, I prefer the size of the old MPC A-Wing to the Bandai "1/72" kit, which seems too 'big' for 1/72 and too small for 1/48... but it is so beautiful!

Lastly, consider the situation where there is no visible scaling element but there is a full size 'set' to which the model can be compared. Obviously, the Millennium Falcon falls into this category. However, there are a range of sets depicting various portions of the "ship" and some cannot be considered 'full size' but rather 'theatrical' in nature. The only viable possibility is using the cockpit for comparison, though that is fraught with inaccuracy because of the changes in the set size between the Ep's IV and V interior sets and similar differences with the external sets. So, determining a size of the 'real' craft must come from making a series of logical assumptions and functional decisions (how big was that door compared to the actors, how wide was the set's ramp, what was the size of the circular window on the cockpit cone based on the interior view, etc.) The result is the well known problem with the MF's interior not fitting within the exterior. But since the cockpit 'capsule' is basically the only element visible on the model that also is seen (at least from the inside) in the movie scenes, we must then start there and then do our 'best' for the interior (if such is attempted...!)

In the end, scale will continue to be subjective for most of the Star Wars machines (and anything that only actually exists as a model) while the rest can present with various levels of accuracy. If it matters to the modeler, taking an 'engineering approach' to the question of scale is the best strategy. Just be careful to 'show your work' and don't let the fun become lost.

Regards, Robert

 

[Duncanator]

Boy, oh, boy! You've jumped in to the deep end!
Movie model scale can be a very loose thing. Even when the originals were made, the scales were approximate.

So I wouldn't worry over nailing a scale exactly on some of the models.

During movie production the phrases "close enough" or "they'll never see it" are what we often default to when we can't make sense of the designs we are given to build. Just build it, and let the fans sort it out.

Just keep your sense of humor about it all!