Deagostini Falcon. Anyone seen this?

I did a much more clear JPEG of the parts, the differences, and the pretty simple corrections. There will be people who don't think the difference is even noticeable, but there are many that bought this model because it was advertised as the most accurate replica of the studio scale model to ever be offered. The modelers that have spend years researching every piece and part of the 32" studio model look at this error as inexcusable because the plating separation and detail are the basis of these types of spaceship designs. The armor plating overlay, the notches, the gaps between, the offsets of the gaps is what makes the model look real.

Panel Repair.JPG
 
The difference is huge, that extra step really adds to the overall looks and give the feeling of a separate plate that have been glued on top of the structure.
 
Yeah I was really surprised that the Bottom Panel was perfectly correct, but even the reissued Top Panels were missing the notches on the bottom and edge of the part. Was really disappointing.
 
I don't know if anyone else has been wondering about this but thought I would share from the Deagostini forums:

"We will fit all the main panels in Issue 46, followed by a second layer of details in Issues 47 and 48. There will be a few details left off so that those who want to custom-paint their model can do so, and then we will fit these in the mid-50s."
Best Regards,
DeAgostini Admin
 
Last edited by a moderator:
kokkari said:
I don't know if anyone else has been wondering about this but thought I would share from the Deagostini forums:

"We will fit all the main panels in Issue 46, followed by a second layer of details in Issues 47 and 48. There will be a few details left off so that those who want to custom-paint their model can do so, and then we will fit these in the mid-50s."
Best Regards,
DeAgostini Admin
Click to expand...


They are talking about the bottom of the hull plating and all the different greeblies, how they will be staged in multiple issues from issue 47 to the mid 50's. This is just to finish everything on the bottom of the ship. They are not talking about fixing anything that has been shipped with inaccuracies in the future.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Supercoolin said:
They are talking about the bottom of the hull plating and all the different greeblies, how they will be staged in multiple issues from issue 47 to the mid 50's. This is just to finish everything on the bottom of the ship. They are not talking about fixing anything that has been shipped with inaccuracies in the future.
Click to expand...

I am very aware of what they were referring to, I'm on a different subject entirely. As you may have noticed this is a general discussion thread.
 
Apart from the known detail inaccuracies, has someone attempted to check the size and shape of the kit? When it starts in Germany I would most probably subscribe if I knew that the shape and size is right, the details I would not fear to correct myself. Has someone looked into this already?

Cheers, Thorsten
 
thorst said:
Apart from the known detail inaccuracies, has someone attempted to check the size and shape of the kit? When it starts in Germany I would most probably subscribe if I knew that the shape and size is right, the details I would not fear to correct myself. Has someone looked into this already?

Cheers, Thorsten
Click to expand...

So far as I've seen the only real inaccuracies I've noted on the outside have nothing to do with the size and shape of the kit. The size seems to be dead on with the 32" incher. The outer inaccuracies are the hull plating notches on part TP-1 and TP-3, the gun turret window has to be turned about 15 degrees, the cockpit windows/hull plating are a bit off, and the damage marks are pitted oddly. Nothing that can't be really fixed. The main inaccuracies are on the interior... since it's never been done before, they seemed to minimalize alot of the detail to rush it into production. Many of the details are out of sync with the movie sets due to the floor plan they ended up using to compensate for the "Ship of Riddles" Personally they should have gone with a different floor plan that looked alot closer to the movie sets, but we make due with what we got!
 
Thank you! To which measurements did you compare the kit?

I am really not going to build the interior, I'd like to have just a replica of the 32" model. I'll probably also build the cockpit back to the 32" cockpit, if the references allow me to do so.
 
The shape and size is not exact but pretty close. There was more info on this earlier in the thread if you want to look at all 108 pages LOL. When comparing the upper turret to my MR Falcon, the Deago is slightly larger. The cockpit and cockpit tube appear to be the right size (yes we know that the cockpit windows and frames are not accurate) The mandibles toe in and the lines of the jaw boxes look like the original prop to me which seems to never be right with other models. The sidewall height looks good from what I can see from limited finished photos. Overall, I think it's much closer to the original prop in overall shape than any other model kit available. Here is a photo comparing the upper turret to my MR:
20150319_132127.jpg
 
kokkari said:
The shape and size is not exact but pretty close. There was more info on this earlier in the thread if you want to look at all 108 pages LOL. When comparing the upper turret to my MR Falcon, the Deago is slightly larger. The cockpit and cockpit tube appear to be the right size (yes we know that the cockpit windows and frames are not accurate) The mandibles toe in and the lines of the jaw boxes look like the original prop to me which seems to never be right with other models. The sidewall height looks good from what I can see from limited finished photos. Overall, I think it's much closer to the original prop in overall shape than any other model kit available. Here is a photo comparing the upper turret to my MR:
View attachment 549615
Click to expand...

I think even Dymszo said that there were a few problems with the MR Falcon that he fixed with this one.
 
From what I have read in the past the MR Falcon was about 3% undersized. So that pic of the turret looks to show that the Deag will be more correct in size to the filming miniature.
 
Supercoolin said:
...there are many that bought this model because it was advertised as the most accurate replica of the studio scale model to ever be offered.
Click to expand...

The problem is that that is pure marketing speak, and as I'm sure the marketing department hoped, people read into that all sorts of things that were never actually promised.

"Most accurate replica of the studio scale model to ever be offered" really allows for quite a bit of latitude, and in no way promises or even implies "100% accurate to the filming model", despite many people swearing it does because they really want it to.

How many studio scale models of the Falcon have been offered to date? If it were, for argument's sake, this and the MR version, and the MR happened to be 3% underscaled and missing approximately a dozen parts that this one has - it could be argued that this is "the most accurate studio scale model ever offered". That doesn't mean it's entirely correct, just that it's reasonably more correct than anything else offered.

It seems the people I tend to see most bent out of shape and outraged over the problems are people who have never built a model before, and in all probability were expecting something better than the MR Falcon with next to no effort at less than half the original price.

It certainly has some problems, and I'm not giving it a complete pass on them - but I think the biggest problem it has is the unreasonable expectations of a small (but vocal) number of builders.

Then again, by now I've been around the block a few times and have long since learned to never take a company's claims about their product at face value, and to focus more on what they don't say and how they don't say it than to assume what they are telling me is precisely what I was hoping for (IME, this approach works well with politicians too). :p
 
FlyingBrickyard,

I agree with you, and as I said earlier, I originally thought it was being petty to complain about this particular issue until they went ahead and made the corrected molds and sold the corrected part to a different area of the world so this issue would not persist in new market areas around the world. Once this "partially" corrected part became readily available, to deny access to multiple groups that were already subscribing, became a issues of "ethics". Because DeAgostini knows we have no legal recourse in the UK or US, (your post explains the reasoning for that), they decided to just ignore the problem. But by a continual posting of this minor error continues, it can effect the will of future subscribers to buy the kit, and help push DeAgostini into offering the correct parts to everyone that has the less than ideal piece already. At least for a minimal cost. For a couple bucks, they could just throw the new parts, not painted, in the same box with each subscribers next monthly order. This would be an ethical move by DeAgostini. Once this minor error was identified, it will be one of the first thing people look for when they look at the finished model. If it had been a bottom plate, the whole thing would have ultimately been moot. So many times I have seen posted, "..once you see it, you can't unsee it...", I totally agree with that statement and now it will be the first thing I look for in a build. Did this builder fix it?
 
Does anyone know if Deags has switched from UPS to Fedex for their deliveries to Canada? I was expecting a tag on my mailbox from UPS today for my month 6 package but found a fedex one instead. I work in shipping and I despise fedex (not that I have any love for UPS either, but at least I can get my package from them without having to take the day off of work). I really hope this is not the case and that they are still using UPS.
 
PeteVenkman said:
Does anyone know if Deags has switched from UPS to Fedex for their deliveries to Canada? I was expecting a tag on my mailbox from UPS today for my month 6 package but found a fedex one instead. I work in shipping and I despise fedex (not that I have any love for UPS either, but at least I can get my package from them without having to take the day off of work). I really hope this is not the case and that they are still using UPS.
Click to expand...



I received my package today. It was delivered by Fedex too.
 
Thanks for the confirmation, Zenwalker.

That really sucks. I just got off the phone with fedex and my choices are to either take the day off of work, or let them just leave the package in my hallway and hope for the best, or hop on a bus to the next city to pick it up from their depot (never mind that there is a fedex store 2 blocks from me). At least with UPS I was able to take the tag and walk down a few blocks to their store and pick it up on the same day.
 
Let's be honest guys. I see what you mean about the missed notches, etc., and I agree they messed up and certainly if you are going to re-issue parts it would be wise to get them correct, but if it was not this it would be something else:


"The interior does not match the set exactly."

"The interior matches the ANH set exactly but not ESB."

"The interior matches the set exactly but that is not correct to the model as we know because the sets would not fit in the ship."

"The tiny little mark made by someone by accident 30 years ago while carrying the model is not there."

"There is not enough detail on the tiny, little, whatchamacallit."

"It's not exactly like the 32" model."

"It's exactly like the 32 inch model but that is essentially the stunt model. It's not exactly like the 5 foot model."

"The included Chewy does not roar."

"The included Chewy roars but the roars are not the same as in the film."

The included Chewie's roars are just like in the film but it's not linguistically correct according to Wookie Language for Dummies."

"When the ramp is lowered I see the frame and ramp motor."

"When the ramp is lowered I see the interior hallway but once my included mini robotic interactive smartphone activated Han goes up the ramp and to the left the hallway stops."



Word

Tom
 
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.

Similar threads

RealDaveWinter
Finished DeAgostini build.
Replies
8
Views
1,279
mktodd
mktodd
gobler
DeAgostini (Funhome) Millennium Falcon build, Gobler 2023
2
Replies
22
Views
2,612
ErikOlson70
ErikOlson70
D
DeAgostini Millennium Falcon in another language?
Replies
5
Views
1,139
Junk Pilot
Junk Pilot
nightrider
Deagostini Falcon
Replies
9
Views
2,145
incrediblefruit
incrediblefruit
modelerdave
Falcon 3D parts replacement cockpit dash question
Replies
0
Views
300
modelerdave
modelerdave
Back
Top