SW – ANH (5 Foot) - Studio Scale Millennium Falcon Build

I believe the photo on the bottom is from Bandai 1/72 falcon's manual, if you're referring to that. I believe there was a link to that somewhere...

Thanks. I've just found the instructions but I'm wondering now if there is a higher quality image out there somewhere
 
this is the largest scan i have. found it online somewhere. probably from here or another thread at RPF. couldn't upload the full page pdf if anyone's looking for that so here's a link --millenniumfalcon_72_markinglocation.pdf
 

Attachments

  • ea720d8e2e085e41a6d2562baec88154.jpg
    ea720d8e2e085e41a6d2562baec88154.jpg
    7.8 MB · Views: 419
Last edited:
Brand new to this web. At 75, I have built many aircraft and ship models as a hobby. After reviewing this thread and other related information here, I have begun down the long road of attempting to build a Studio Scale Millennium Falcon. The design of this space ship is genius and is as creative and unique as the Disney Nautilus. Recently, I had an opportunity to discuss the incredible drawings developed and posted by a senior member of this forum and his team. As an x-aircraft mechanic that became an engineer, this work is first class. My goal is to build as accurate a model as possible. Using model wood working as a structure, brass plates will be uses as a skin. Some operating aircraft features are planed. Basic construction on the 4 ft. disc has started. I’ll post pictures as I proceed when I have something that is worthy.

One critical tolerance I need help on are some dimensions around the armor overlap edge, in case I am fortunate to kit-bash or obtain printed “greeblies” much later.
1. inside height dimension of the disc and mandible sides less armor skin thickness.
2. depth dimension of those two channels.

Saying this another way, in profile, the 2“ thick Mandibles slip into a 2.625” slot in the Disc. Both have detail that goes into side channels covered by overlap. Size of Geeble vary, but must be accommodated by a properly designed recess.

Thanks in advance, Searun
 
Brand new to this web. At 75, I have built many aircraft and ship models as a hobby. After reviewing this thread and other related information here, I have begun down the long road of attempting to build a Studio Scale Millennium Falcon. The design of this space ship is genius and is as creative and unique as the Disney Nautilus. Recently, I had an opportunity to discuss the incredible drawings developed and posted by a senior member of this forum and his team. As an x-aircraft mechanic that became an engineer, this work is first class. My goal is to build as accurate a model as possible. Using model wood working as a structure, brass plates will be uses as a skin. Some operating aircraft features are planed. Basic construction on the 4 ft. disc has started. I’ll post pictures as I proceed when I have something that is worthy.

One critical tolerance I need help on are some dimensions around the armor overlap edge, in case I am fortunate to kit-bash or obtain printed “greeblies” much later.
1. inside height dimension of the disc and mandible sides less armor skin thickness.
2. depth dimension of those two channels.

Saying this another way, in profile, the 2“ thick Mandibles slip into a 2.625” slot in the Disc. Both have detail that goes into side channels covered by overlap. Size of Geeble vary, but must be accommodated by a properly designed recess.

Thanks in advance, Searun
Welcome aboard Searun! As you saw, not many have tackled that ship...and at Studio Scale with accurate details. Seems like you're one of those person who will see it through;) Eager to see your next update (y)
 
Welcome aboard Searun! As you saw, not many have tackled that ship...and at Studio Scale with accurate details. Seems like you're one of those person who will see it through;) Eager to see your next update (y)
Thanks joberg.
I have been retired for two years now, so dedicating time is possible. I am astounded at the skill you folks demonstrate with computer programs, use of plastic, molds, photography, and 3-D printing. While design drawings & construction have been my career, my hobby materials & model methods have not graduated much past aircraft fuselage & ship hulls using the old school kit methods.

That said, given excellent drawings, I can build. The bug has bitten me on this unique design. I will post pictures, but must have something that is worthy to show on a web forum that has such a high level of professional skill.
 
Thanks joberg.
I have been retired for two years now, so dedicating time is possible. I am astounded at the skill you folks demonstrate with computer programs, use of plastic, molds, photography, and 3-D printing. While design drawings & construction have been my career, my hobby materials & model methods have not graduated much past aircraft fuselage & ship hulls using the old school kit methods.

That said, given excellent drawings, I can build. The bug has bitten me on this unique design. I will post pictures, but must have something that is worthy to show on a web forum that has such a high level of professional skill.
Well, since you gave your age, I believe you know "Old School Techniques" as well as "New School" ones. And it's great to straddle both worlds if I may say so myself (I'm 63, btw). So, yes...I'm sure your next update will show your skill level and your dedication to this crazy project (y)
 
Gentlemen,
The more I select materials for my studio scale ANH MF from posted drawings it’s amazing how they match construction. Expected on aircraft and machinist work but not always in industrial plants.
I am working on the cut out location for the main landing gear bays projected onto the disc‘s central core for retractable gear. When drawn to scale for construction, the drawings on the thread accurately show the significant slope / taper from base of the main landing gear pod. Crazy interesting shape, by the way, that begs for accurate reproduction.

Needed Dimensions:
1. Center line of main gear doors.
2. Also, if possible, an appropriate edge distance measurement when viewed from the top of the “plateau” of the pod, for one of the rectangle corner points on the L/G door perimeter. Failing that, the span between the main gear.

Reason for request:
Looking at the Pictures of the 5 ft. Studio Model, original drawings,1/144 Bandai model and the measuring off the 1/2 scale DeAgostini bottom view “Photograph” (which is not a drawing), I can not get consistency of the main landing gear pod or door rectangle footprint at the tapered top of the L/G pod. Yes I can approximate, but would like to be as accurate as reasonably possible to the ANH Studio model.

Thanks in advance for any help.
 
Sir, the Bandai Perfect Grade kit is indeed the perfect reference for the 5ft original miniature. Although expensive, the resale value would be solid if you decided not to build it too. Direct measurment.scaled up appropriately would give you what you need. The decal sheet is also spot on, the Bandai team really did the research. The 1/144 kit is not nearly as accurate... I got one just for this purpose though for my own 1/48 scale project. Best wishes doing fantastic work!
Regards, Robert
 
Sir, the Bandai Perfect Grade kit is indeed the perfect reference for the 5ft original miniature. Although expensive, the resale value would be solid if you decided not to build it too. Direct measurment.scaled up appropriately would give you what you need. The decal sheet is also spot on, the Bandai team really did the research. The 1/144 kit is not nearly as accurate... I got one just for this purpose though for my own 1/48 scale project. Best wishes doing fantastic work!
Regards, Robert
Thank you very much for the advice rbeach84. My build continues with tolerances that enable some adjustment were dimensions on some details remain questionable. The Andre Team overall drawings are my Bible. Can not have enough reference material when scaling up to a large model size. Minor measurement errors can “explode.” Working on a retractable landing gear system within the disc skeleton before starting basic skinning. Then will post some pictures. This thread sets a very high bar on craftsmanship.
 
One approach is simply to take the Bandai Perfect Grade 1/72 Millennium Falcon, and multiply any measurement on it by 3.51152 to arrive at a perfectly scaled 1/20.5 ILM 1976 original.
 
One approach is simply to take the Bandai Perfect Grade 1/72 Millennium Falcon, and multiply any measurement on it by 3.51152 to arrive at a perfectly scaled 1/20.5 ILM 1976 original.
Thanks Studio Kitbash. Love your math.

I went to school with a slide rule. Little known fact is that most nuclear power plant system mechanical & thermodynamic calculations were done using a slide rule to 3 figure accuracy until engineering companies started to buy a few hand held HP calculators that were then “share” with other departments. Obviously, not the reactor physics or pipe stress. God forbid however if you dropped your box of FORTRAN cards on the way to the computer room.
 
Thanks Studio Kitbash. Love your math.

I went to school with a slide rule. Little known fact is that most nuclear power plant system mechanical & thermodynamic calculations were done using a slide rule to 3 figure accuracy until engineering companies started to buy a few hand held HP calculators that were then “share” with other departments. Obviously, not the reactor physics or pipe stress. God forbid however if you dropped your box of FORTRAN cards on the way to the computer room.
Love the stories Searun! Keep us informed about those times(y)(y) Wait until Quantum Computing makes its entrance;)
 
This thread is more than 3 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top