Subscribe
  1. Member Since
    Feb 2011
    Messages
    21
    1 Week Ago  Dec 4, 2017, 8:26 PM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4626

    Richard Baker said: View Post
    The cost of the 1:72 Bandai Falcon would be most of my years budget for the hobby- no way can I afford to 'Take one for the team' and buy a kit I am not as interested in. I do think they have done an incredible job making the definitive kit of this subject and I am confident since they are selling enough kits that they will follow tradition and produce variants with additional tooling for the ESB, TFA & TLJ editions. It make take a while, but this way I can set aside a small amount each month towards it.
    Being a single income family of four severely reduced the amount I can spend and the time I can have building, so right now I am living vicariously though others on these builds.
    agreed.. they will eventually release a 5 gear box version.. don't get me wrong I have the kit & it's great!!! But something is missing without those extra boxes.... besides there's not to many ships you can display it with IF?you wanted to be screen accurate..
    Just basically the X-wing, Y-wing & TIE fighter
  2. Sluis Van Shipyards's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jul 1999
    From
    Miamisburg, OH (near Dayton)
    Messages
    10,068
    1 Week Ago  Dec 4, 2017, 8:54 PM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4627

    Richard Baker said: View Post
    The cost of the 1:72 Bandai Falcon would be most of my years budget for the hobby- no way can I afford to 'Take one for the team' and buy a kit I am not as interested in. I do think they have done an incredible job making the definitive kit of this subject and I am confident since they are selling enough kits that they will follow tradition and produce variants with additional tooling for the ESB, TFA & TLJ editions. It make take a while, but this way I can set aside a small amount each month towards it.
    Being a single income family of four severely reduced the amount I can spend and the time I can have building, so right now I am living vicariously though others on these builds.
    I could probably scrap up money for it, but I don't think my paint job/weathering could do it justice. My skill set is just no there yet. It is way too expensive though!
  3. edge10's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jun 2012
    From
    Orlando
    Messages
    959
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 7:22 AM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4628

  4. Hunk a Junk's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 2014
    Messages
    1,096
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 8:17 AM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4629

    To me, the five gear version is a design compromise necessitated by the realities of 20th century Earth engineering. The Falcon itself is a product of an endless set of compromises, but Lucas, Johnston, and McQuarrie designed the ship for three gears and it's only because of Lucas' desire to build the entire ship full-size that they had to add extra gear just to keep the set from falling apart. If in1978-79 they'd had better construction techniques, stronger materials, or if digital technology had existed that allowed them to digitally erase any support posts, the extra gear boxes never would've been added. I don't mind them, and I have nothing but respect for anyone who feels they make the ship look better, but to me they take away from the graceful arc of the lower hull.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	latest.png 
Views:	168 
Size:	3.08 MB 
ID:	778266
  5. astroboy's Avatar
    Member Since
    May 2010
    Messages
    4,666
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 9:35 AM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4630

    Hunk a Junk said: View Post
    To me, the five gear version is a design compromise necessitated by the realities of 20th century Earth engineering. The Falcon itself is a product of an endless set of compromises, but Lucas, Johnston, and McQuarrie designed the ship for three gears and it's only because of Lucas' desire to build the entire ship full-size that they had to add extra gear just to keep the set from falling apart. If in1978-79 they'd had better construction techniques, stronger materials, or if digital technology had existed that allowed them to digitally erase any support posts, the extra gear boxes never would've been added. I don't mind them, and I have nothing but respect for anyone who feels they make the ship look better, but to me they take away from the graceful arc of the lower hull.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	latest.png 
Views:	168 
Size:	3.08 MB 
ID:	778266
    That is probably my favorite image of the falcon that there is. I remember it from one of those picture storybooks as a kid. I never had it, but I got it from the library all the time
  6. Richard Baker's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 2015
    Messages
    403
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 11:17 AM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4631

    I se your point about the original Falcon design, but sometimes circumstances can cause positive consequences. The Reliant was designed one way but approved upside down, they they had to rework the ship to work that way resulting in a mean, hunkered down adversary vessel. To me, and this is just my opinion, the Falcon looks more like an heavy, functional machine with the five gear configuration. A lot of Star wars ships down play the landing gear to the point of absurdity- the Naboo Cruiser sat on three tiny pointed struts, OK if you kept the repulsor-lifts on, but if you had to take the whole power grid off line it would either crumple the struts or sink into the ground.
  7. Member Since
    Feb 2013
    Messages
    121
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 11:20 AM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4632

    I prefer the ANH version so I'm fine having the Fine Molds kit as my representation of the five gear Falcon.
  8. astroboy's Avatar
    Member Since
    May 2010
    Messages
    4,666
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 11:29 AM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4633

    Richard Baker said: View Post
    I se your point about the original Falcon design, but sometimes circumstances can cause positive consequences. The Reliant was designed one way but approved upside down, they they had to rework the ship to work that way resulting in a mean, hunkered down adversary vessel. To me, and this is just my opinion, the Falcon looks more like an heavy, functional machine with the five gear configuration. A lot of Star wars ships down play the landing gear to the point of absurdity- the Naboo Cruiser sat on three tiny pointed struts, OK if you kept the repulsor-lifts on, but if you had to take the whole power grid off line it would either crumple the struts or sink into the ground.

    I love the republic gunship. It has no time for landing gear.
  9. Member Since
    Aug 2015
    Messages
    42
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 11:34 AM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4634

    astroboy said: View Post
    I love the republic gunship. It has no time for landing gear.
    Because it's too busy landing gear

    I'll see myself out.

    Bandai, please make a Republic Gunship kit
  10. astroboy's Avatar
    Member Since
    May 2010
    Messages
    4,666
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 11:37 AM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4635

    computergeek said: View Post
    Because it's too busy landing gear

    I'll see myself out.

    Bandai, please make a Republic Gunship kit
    I swear to god that the gunship must be the most requested prequel ship out there.

    HERE MY WORDS BANDAI!
  11. Richard Baker's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 2015
    Messages
    403
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 11:49 AM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4636

    It would be fantastic to have in 1:48 (or even 1:72) but I am afraid would would get flats for Troopers. It just not look right empty.

    It had some great variants in the Clone Wars series, search lights instead of those sperical gun pods, wild hull color designs...
  12. astroboy's Avatar
    Member Since
    May 2010
    Messages
    4,666
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 12:07 PM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4637

    Richard Baker said: View Post
    It would be fantastic to have in 1:48 (or even 1:72) but I am afraid would would get flats for Troopers. It just not look right empty.

    It had some great variants in the Clone Wars series, search lights instead of those sperical gun pods, wild hull color designs...
    Absolutely. Who wouldn't want two or three of them?

    And it's so conducive to dioramas.

    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
  13. Hunk a Junk's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 2014
    Messages
    1,096
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 12:57 PM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4638

    Richard Baker said: View Post
    the Naboo Cruiser sat on three tiny pointed struts, OK if you kept the repulsor-lifts on, but if you had to take the whole power grid off line it would either crumple the struts or sink into the ground.
    I thought those gear were appropriate to the design and function of the ship as a elegant diplomatic craft used to ferry royalty and politicians to and from populated planets. I assumed it wasn't designed with the intention of going to outer rim desert planets filled with scum and villainy. Repulsor-lift technology in the GFFA seems to be based on some sort of passive power force that works independently of a craft's main power. Luke's landspeeder had no need for struts or pads. Even when it was "off" and parked, it still hovered. The same is true for the star destroyer in Rogue One or even Cloud City. Would anyone live on a floating city that depended on an active power source to keep from falling out of the sky? The city's reactor likely powered the grid and held the city in a fixed position, but I bet that if the power failed the repulsor-lifts would keep the city afloat. Why some craft even have landing gear at all is pretty arbitrary, but being science fiction there's always a contrived explanation somewhere.
  14. blakeh1's Avatar
    Member Since
    Apr 2011
    From
    Jamison, Pennsylvania
    Messages
    2,163
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 5:13 PM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4639

    Hunk a Junk said: View Post
    I thought those gear were appropriate to the design and function of the ship as a elegant diplomatic craft used to ferry royalty and politicians to and from populated planets. I assumed it wasn't designed with the intention of going to outer rim desert planets filled with scum and villainy. Repulsor-lift technology in the GFFA seems to be based on some sort of passive power force that works independently of a craft's main power. Luke's landspeeder had no need for struts or pads. Even when it was "off" and parked, it still hovered. The same is true for the star destroyer in Rogue One or even Cloud City. Would anyone live on a floating city that depended on an active power source to keep from falling out of the sky? The city's reactor likely powered the grid and held the city in a fixed position, but I bet that if the power failed the repulsor-lifts would keep the city afloat. Why some craft even have landing gear at all is pretty arbitrary, but being science fiction there's always a contrived explanation somewhere.
    The crashed Star Destroyer on Jakku shows that there is some power source needed to keep it afloat like in Rogue One

    So because Luke's speeder floats when not "powered on" , does not mean there is not a power source keeping it working.

    Kind of like how your car clock for example keeps running when you car is "powered off" when you turn off the engine and take out the key, but disconnect the battery and the clock stops
  15. astroboy's Avatar
    Member Since
    May 2010
    Messages
    4,666
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 5:29 PM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4640

    Hunk a Junk said: View Post
    I thought those gear were appropriate to the design and function of the ship as a elegant diplomatic craft used to ferry royalty and politicians to and from populated planets. I assumed it wasn't designed with the intention of going to outer rim desert planets filled with scum and villainy. Repulsor-lift technology in the GFFA seems to be based on some sort of passive power force that works independently of a craft's main power. Luke's landspeeder had no need for struts or pads. Even when it was "off" and parked, it still hovered. The same is true for the star destroyer in Rogue One or even Cloud City. Would anyone live on a floating city that depended on an active power source to keep from falling out of the sky? The city's reactor likely powered the grid and held the city in a fixed position, but I bet that if the power failed the repulsor-lifts would keep the city afloat. Why some craft even have landing gear at all is pretty arbitrary, but being science fiction there's always a contrived explanation somewhere.
    The idea of capital ships in atmosphere has always bothered me. They should be built there and stay in orbit around planets. It's not like the enterprise should ever land.

    Plus, having gravity being an issue is a great plot device. Just look at Exodus part 2 on BSG to see it done right.

    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
  16. Hunk a Junk's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 2014
    Messages
    1,096
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 6:32 PM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4641

    blakeh1 said: View Post
    The crashed Star Destroyer on Jakku shows that there is some power source needed to keep it afloat like in Rogue One
    Not necessarily. Ships crash in battle for any number of reasons.

    I'm not saying what is better or worse or right or wrong, I'm just saying that based on what we see on screen it seems pretty clear that either a) repulsor-lifts are a passive technology that don't require a massive amount of constant energy or the technology is so robust that failures are rare to the point of being non-existent. No one would live on Cloud City or casually use floating landing platforms if a general power failure meant instant death.

    I'm okay with capital ships operating in atmospheres in Star Wars. The Devastator hanging over Jedha in R1 was pretty sweet. Star Trek less so. The Enterprise should keep it's ass--embly in space. But really, repulsor-lifts work based on whatever the script demands at that moment.
  17. Member Since
    Oct 2003
    Messages
    608
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 6:40 PM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4642

    Awesome. Landing gear. Ill bet you couldn't type that fast enough!
  18. Sluis Van Shipyards's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jul 1999
    From
    Miamisburg, OH (near Dayton)
    Messages
    10,068
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 8:55 PM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4643

    astroboy said: View Post
    I swear to god that the gunship must be the most requested prequel ship out there.

    HERE MY WORDS BANDAI!
    Richard Baker said: View Post
    It would be fantastic to have in 1:48 (or even 1:72) but I am afraid would would get flats for Troopers. It just not look right empty.

    It had some great variants in the Clone Wars series, search lights instead of those sperical gun pods, wild hull color designs...
    astroboy said: View Post
    Absolutely. Who wouldn't want two or three of them?

    And it's so conducive to dioramas.

    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

    I just want some to recreate that scene of them coming in landing like helicopters in Vietnam. That diorama pretty much builds itself. I think the Prequel haters have guaranteed no more official products of any kind from the Prequels though.
  19. astroboy's Avatar
    Member Since
    May 2010
    Messages
    4,666
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 10:08 PM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4644

    Sluis Van Shipyards said: View Post
    I just want some to recreate that scene of them coming in landing like helicopters in Vietnam. That diorama pretty much builds itself. I think the Prequel haters have guaranteed no more official products of any kind from the Prequels though.
    I like the idea of using the landed troops' ziplines to hold a gunship in the air. Make them out of spring steel or something

    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
  20. Hunk a Junk's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 2014
    Messages
    1,096
    1 Week Ago  Dec 5, 2017, 10:11 PM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4645

    Sluis Van Shipyards said: View Post
    I think the Prequel haters have guaranteed no more official products of any kind from the Prequels though.
    Oh, I don't think that's the case. Bandai released Grievous and the Jedi starfighter (much too small) in the last 4 months and a battledroid and clonetroopers before that. The issue in terms of timing is the fact that every year now they have to devote 4-5 new releases to support whatever movie is coming out. They barely have TLJ kits out and in six months they're going to need Solo kits ready. Of course, I'd like more parity between OT and PT releases, especially now that the 1/72 Falcon itch has been scratched, but truthfully we're more likely to see a 1/72 Cloud Car before we get a Republic Gunship. There will be more PT releases -- just maybe not as many or as quickly as you and I may like.
  21. Zombie_61's Avatar
    Member Since
    Mar 2007
    From
    Southern California
    Messages
    5,227
    1 Week Ago  Dec 6, 2017, 2:48 AM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4646

    Hunk a Junk said: View Post
    I never thought about it before, but I actually really like the B-wing's S-foils in that angled configuration rather than in the fully open crucifix position. Kinda wish they had done that for real.
    I do too; it somehow makes it look "sportier" and maybe more aggressive.

    Hunk a Junk said: View Post
    To me, the five gear version is a design compromise necessitated by the realities of 20th century Earth engineering. The Falcon itself is a product of an endless set of compromises, but Lucas, Johnston, and McQuarrie designed the ship for three gears and it's only because of Lucas' desire to build the entire ship full-size that they had to add extra gear just to keep the set from falling apart. If in1978-79 they'd had better construction techniques, stronger materials, or if digital technology had existed that allowed them to digitally erase any support posts, the extra gear boxes never would've been added. I don't mind them, and I have nothing but respect for anyone who feels they make the ship look better, but to me they take away from the graceful arc of the lower hull.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	latest.png 
Views:	168 
Size:	3.08 MB 
ID:	778266
    Y'know, I've been a Star Wars fan since before Star Wars became known as "Episode IV: A New Hope". But I never really paid much attention to the whole "A New Hope vs. The Empire Strikes Back Millennium Falcon" debate. To me, they're the same ship--who cares about a few minor differences? So, since A New Hope is my favorite movie from the franchise and the one that introduced us to the Falcon, I decided that was my favorite version. But your comment about "the graceful arc of the lower hull" actually got me thinking about it, so I looked at comparison photos of the two and, to my surprise, I actually like the Empire version better. I can't argue against the beauty of the graceful arc because I see it, but to me having the gear boxes both fore and aft makes the ship look more balanced. So while it's not a life-changing experience, I thank you for making that comment; at least now I know where I stand on such a comparatively unimportant issue.
  22. Hunk a Junk's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 2014
    Messages
    1,096
    1 Week Ago  Dec 6, 2017, 8:44 AM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4647

    Zombie_61 said: View Post
    So while it's not a life-changing experience, I thank you for making that comment; at least now I know where I stand on such a comparatively unimportant issue.
    Making the unimportant important is possibly the most accurate description of modeling.

    To me, the extra gear boxes throw the balance off. They add balance and stability in terms of how it rests on the ground when landed, but destabilize the symmetry when in flight. If you think about the shapes that break up the upper and lower saucer, on the ANH version both top and bottom have the jawboxes and docking ring/boarding ramp arms. Then the bottom half has the rear gear box with no large shape protruding from the upper engine deck (just a jumble of engine details). The top saucer has the cockpit and arm tunnel as well as the radar dish. So the shapes on the forward top half of the saucer balance the gear box on the back half of the lower saucer. Adding the two front gear boxes makes the design forward heavy as well as breaking up the curve that gives it that 'ship cutting through water' look.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	protrusion falcon.jpg 
Views:	120 
Size:	1.39 MB 
ID:	778536
    See? There's always room to make things even more unimportant!
  23. Member Since
    Feb 2011
    Messages
    21
    6 Days Ago  Dec 7, 2017, 1:27 AM - Re: Bandai release schedule #4648

    Agreed👍

    - - - Updated - - -

    Zombie_61 said: View Post
    I do too; it somehow makes it look "sportier" and maybe more aggressive.

    Y'know, I've been a Star Wars fan since before Star Wars became known as "Episode IV: A New Hope". But I never really paid much attention to the whole "A New Hope vs. The Empire Strikes Back Millennium Falcon" debate. To me, they're the same ship--who cares about a few minor differences? So, since A New Hope is my favorite movie from the franchise and the one that introduced us to the Falcon, I decided that was my favorite version. But your comment about "the graceful arc of the lower hull" actually got me thinking about it, so I looked at comparison photos of the two and, to my surprise, I actually like the Empire version better. I can't argue against the beauty of the graceful arc because I see it, but to me having the gear boxes both fore and aft makes the ship look more balanced. So while it's not a life-changing experience, I thank you for making that comment; at least now I know where I stand on such a comparatively unimportant issue.
    Agreed👍

Similar Threads

  1. SW Celebration 2012 - Schedule?
    sapper36, Conventions and Prop Parties
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Aug 6, 2012, 12:33 PM
  2. Breaking Bad Shooting Schedule
    Spence, Entertainment and Movie Talk
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Mar 24, 2012, 9:23 PM