 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jan 8, 2015 - 4:14 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
jenkwombat
(Member)
|
I didn't know it was three years between New Hope and Empire. So that makes sense.
Yes, 3 years between "A New Hope" and "Empire", and 1 year between "Empire" and "Jedi", if memory serves.
A few Star Wars ship-related nerd questions of my own:
1) Just how big is the Blockade Runner, and what is the "floor plan" (for lack of a better term) of the interior? I've always been a little confused by where all these hallways are, in what appears to be a pretty tiny ship in the comparison diagrams I've seen.
2) In the Millennium Falcon's gun ports, how does the artificial gravity function? In other words, the seats are facing straight up and straight down, but Han and Luke, to all appearances, look to be sitting horizontally by the way they are affected by gravity.
I know, I need to get out more....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jan 8, 2015 - 6:44 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
dogplant
(Member)
|
Smart place to put your fuel tanks Empire! Or were they Doppler radar domes?
Shield generators if I recall my X-Wing correctly. 
In 1993, I worked as a production assistant at a special effects company in LA with Pete Gerard, one of the original model crew from "Star Wars" (although he's uncredited, I think). I got to geek out with him a little about his experiences, and he told me an anecdote that when they were building the conning cower, whatever it's called, of the star destroyer for "Star Wars" somebody grabbed a couple of 70s-style crystal shower faucets from a hardware store and plonked one either side of the top of that T-bar shape just because it looked cool, like geodesic globes. When "Empire Strikes Back" rolled around, years later, the modelers cursed that decision because they had to remake that very complex geometric shape from scratch for the scaled-up model of where the Falcon stows away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jan 8, 2015 - 8:34 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Joe E.
(Member)
|
Smart place to put your fuel tanks Empire! Or were they Doppler radar domes?
Shield generators if I recall my X-Wing correctly.
In 1993, I worked as a production assistant at a special effects company in LA with Pete Gerard, one of the original model crew from "Star Wars" (although he's uncredited, I think). I got to geek out with him a little about his experiences, and he told me an anecdote that when they were building the conning cower, whatever it's called, of the star destroyer for "Star Wars" somebody grabbed a couple of 70s-style crystal shower faucets from a hardware store and plonked one either side of the top of that T-bar shape just because it looked cool, like geodesic globes. When "Empire Strikes Back" rolled around, years later, the modelers cursed that decision because they had to remake that very complex geometric shape from scratch for the scaled-up model of where the Falcon stows away.
Holy smokes, that's awesome!!  What else did he tell you?!
To answer sol's questions...
(1) How come you can't see the left side arm (mandable?) from inside the Millennium Falcon's cockpit windows during space flight? They clearly stick out 20 feet or more?
All the camera angles for "crew in cockpit" shots throughout the trilogy are ones in which the mandibles wouldn't be visible. Note there are some shots where the camera is located on the port side of the cockpit (essentially sitting where the starboard mandible is, looking sideways across the cockpit, so that you see out the starboard side of the cockpit), as well as a number of shots in which the camera looks forward out of the cockpit - sometimes from the back, behind the seats, from a POV where the mandible would be visible if it weren't occluded by the bulkhead, and sometimes from farther forward, and the mandible would be visible if the field of view were wider. At least that's the intent, I think; it's possible that in some shots, the mandible should be slightly visible in the frame given the exact position of the camera, but that's the apparent intent (borne out by the fact all the "sideways" shots that show a view out the side windows have the camera on the port side of the cockpit, looking starboard).
(2) Where exactly does the Millennium Falcon (a freighter) store cargo?
(My guess it doesn't. It locks onto a cargo unit and holds it between its two forward arms.)
There have been a few different "official" interior layouts for the Millennium Falcon in published materials; though imperfect, here's one of the better ones, IMO, showing it to have multiple holds (and of course we do know about the smuggling compartments below the deck plates):
(3) If the Millennium Falcon is moving horizontally, how can the Tie Fighters attack vertically?
(note the Falcon guns are on top and bottom of the hull)
The TIEs were flying around the Falcon during her escape from the Death Star, moving from one gun turret's field of fire to the other as they zoomed around.
As you've undoubtedly noticed, the main hull is mostly slightly curved so that the ship is thicker in the middle from top to bottom (where the turrets are) than at the outer perimeter. According to a number of EU sources going all the way back to Brian Daley's fondly-regarded Han Solo novels, the firing arcs of the guns extend slightly past horizontal, so that they actually overlap slightly for a thin section around most of the ship (except where sections of the ship protrude into what would otherwise be those firing arcs).
According to Daley's accounts of Han and Chewie's pre-ANH adventures, when manning the guns together in combat, Han and Chewie would score points against one another for the most kills, and the narrow zone covered by both guns is called the Money Lane - kills made in that zone count double, since they fall under the shared responsibility of both gunners.
(4) When did Han have the time between A New Hope and Empire too completely redesign the Falcon's landing gear skids from three bays to four?
Five, actually, not four. It's well established that Han extensively tinkers with and modifies the Falcon when circumstances permit, so the addition of two more landing gear in that three-year period seems in keeping with what we know of how they operate.
The real-world reason for it is that the (nearly) full-scale Falcon exterior set piece required more support than was provided by the gear it had in the original movie, so additional support was provided by the "docking equipment / fuel line" umbilical connection seen to starboard and slightly aft of the forward gear. Note that it had such connections in both Docking Bay 94 in Mos Eisley and in the hangar aboard the Death Star; it was awfully nice of the Empire to fuel up the Rebels' ship! Naturally, the in-universe explanation is that since the Falcon was forcibly brought in by tractor beam and her crew was pretending to have abandoned ship, she was guided in by automated systems that normally also brought in unmanned supply ships and the like, and automated routines connected the umbilical as a matter of course. When it came time for the sequels, they couldn't continue to just have conveniently-placed umbilicals everywhere the Falcon would land, so they modified the design to incorporate the two additional forward landing gear.
(5) Why does Han have 3D chess on his ship? Isn't that a thinking man's game?
And Han can't think? Besides, Chewie plays, and so do some paying customers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
