Diego Quijano Posted November 29, 2010 Share Posted November 29, 2010 Great film indeed. I also would like to build some of the movie models. We´ll see. Q Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obi-Jiff Kenobi Posted November 30, 2010 Share Posted November 30, 2010 If they are anything like the quality of your TIE Fighter, they'll be well worth seeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) I have just heard from Adam Johnson who patterned the model. He will be selling a range of decals for this kit on his website and they will include: Pan Am, BOAC, TWA and Qantas. Adam also tells me this is the dog cahoonas as regards accuracy and although it is the same size as the Aurora kit, it is all new. Marty... Edited January 7, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obi-Jiff Kenobi Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Absolutely superb! I've been considering building my old Airfix kit as a 'MkII' (to explain the inaccuracies) in BOAC livery. Looks like I might be getting a second Moebius kit instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 9, 2011 Author Share Posted January 9, 2011 Absolutely superb! I've been considering building my old Airfix kit as a 'MkII' (to explain the inaccuracies) in BOAC livery. Looks like I might be getting a second Moebius kit instead. If its the same standard as his Aries IB it will be something to behold. Marty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 The Moebius kit should render the Airfix kit utterly redundant, if we are being honest the Stargazer and before that the Aurora did anyway. Marty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWP Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The Moebius kit should render the Airfix kit utterly redundant, if we are being honest the Stargazer and before that the Aurora did anyway. Unless, of course, you could not get one of those other kits. And I don't believe that the original Aurora kit was that accurate -- nor, for that matter, is the Airfix kit all that inaccurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 Unless, of course, you could not get one of those other kits. And I don't believe that the original Aurora kit was that accurate -- nor, for that matter, is the Airfix kit all that inaccurate. The Stargazer kit is still in production and readily available. On what basis is the Aurora kit not accurate? Aurora had access to the original MGM art department drawings and based the kit on those drawings. Whilst not absolutely perfect (mainly due to 1960s moulding technology) it was surprisingly accurate to the filming miniature and was effectively a 1/3rd scale model of the said miniature. Unlike he Airfix kit which is as all but faux. A clear case of not having a enough knowledge, before typing. Marty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWP Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The Stargazer kit is still in production and readily available. At what price? The Airfix kit was readily available for many years at a reasonable price (albeit in a dreadful suggested paint scheme) and, more importantly, was available in places where "Stargazer kit" would elicit a response of "huh?". Many, many people who might have purchased an Orion kit (of any sort) would either not know about the existence of Stargazer or be extremely unwilling to pay for a resin kit (or even reluctant to build a resin kit if they could afford it). "In production" is not at all the same thing as "readily available". On what basis is the Aurora kit not accurate? Funny, the many, many times I've seen 2001, I don't once remember seeing the back fall off of the Orion revealing its "atomic engine". I wasn't suggesting that the Aurora kit was in any way bad, just that it was not the be-all and end-all ... it was not so superior to the Airfix kit that the latter becomes only so much dog faeces. Unlike he Airfix kit which is as all but faux. I hear lots of people say that. And yet, I look at the kit, I look at the film, and they sure look very similar. I have no doubt that there issues, but they don't leap out at me. I sure wish someone would itemise the exact problems, but everyone seems to be too dismissive of it to take the time. A clear case of not having a enough knowledge, before typing. You should be able to resolve that problem with a little bit of forethought, but I don't think anyone will hold it against you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 At what price? The Airfix kit was readily available for many years at a reasonable price (albeit in a dreadful suggested paint scheme) and, more importantly, was available in places where "Stargazer kit" would elicit a response of "huh?". Many, many people who might have purchased an Orion kit (of any sort) would either not know about the existence of Stargazer or be extremely unwilling to pay for a resin kit (or even reluctant to build a resin kit if they could afford it). "In production" is not at all the same thing as "readily available".Funny, the many, many times I've seen 2001, I don't once remember seeing the back fall off of the Orion revealing its "atomic engine". I wasn't suggesting that the Aurora kit was in any way bad, just that it was not the be-all and end-all ... it was not so superior to the Airfix kit that the latter becomes only so much dog faeces. I hear lots of people say that. And yet, I look at the kit, I look at the film, and they sure look very similar. I have no doubt that there issues, but they don't leap out at me. I sure wish someone would itemise the exact problems, but everyone seems to be too dismissive of it to take the time. You should be able to resolve that problem with a little bit of forethought, but I don't think anyone will hold it against you. Oh dear. Marty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thx6667 Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Velociweiler Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I have just heard from Adam Johnson who patterned the model. He will be selling a range of decals for this kit on his website and they will include: Pan Am, BOAC, TWA and Qantas. Adam also tells me this is the dog cahoonas as regards accuracy and although it is the same size as the Aurora kit, it is all new.Marty... Do you know if they'll be depicting the (very small number of) stencils and airframe detail markings the studio original had? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chadders Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I hear lots of people say that. And yet, I look at the kit, I look at the film, and they sure look very similar. I have no doubt that there issues, but they don't leap out at me. I sure wish someone would itemise the exact problems, but everyone seems to be too dismissive of it to take the time. Ok Airfix kit problems. Front intake is flat not slanted, cockpit windows flat not slanted and the wrong shape, cabin windows too large, rear fuselage not bulbous enough......... I can't remember anymore, but google "correcting Airfix 2001" will bring up everything you need. I'm expecting the Moebius one to be pretty much spot on after seeing the work they put into the 2001 Moonbus last year Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 (edited) Do you know if they'll be depicting the (very small number of) stencils and airframe detail markings the studio original had? My understanding is the Moebius kit will be entirely smooth as per the filming miniature and it will include a large "aztec" style decal sheet to replicate the panel lines, that on the filming miniature were drawn on in pencil. The last I heard there will be no Pan Am livery included in the kit. Hence, I suspect why Adam is making them available via his website. Ok Airfix kit problems. Front intake is flat not slanted, cockpit windows flat not slanted and the wrong shape, cabin windows too large, rear fuselage not bulbous enough......... I can't remember anymore, but google "correcting Airfix 2001" will bring up everything you need. It is proportionally all wrong: not long enough for it's width. Virtually every cross section is dubious particulary the profile in front of the flight deck, the motors sit far to high on the fuselage and the orifices are the wrong shape and lack detail. The fuselage should have slight kick-up on top of the flight deck. The wing are are off as well - not to mention the panel lines, which are no where near either. Just compare the Airfix kit with the drawings in the Piers Bizony book and everything jumps out. I'm expecting the Moebius one to be pretty much spot on after seeing the work they put into the 2001 Moonbus last year Mark All Moebius did with Moon Bus was undertake a 3D scan of an Aurora kit and repop it with one slight adjustment to correct the warped top. The reason it is an accurate kit is because Aurora had access to MGM art departments drawings and the original filming miniature. It is even possible to identify some of the kit parts that the MGM model makers applied after they recieved the model from Mastermodels. The internal is a little off and Stargazer (Ian Walsh) has done a neat correction kit to make it more cannon - but effectively one is trying to fit a set into a model that didn't fit in the first place. Incidentally in the film it was refered to as a "Rocket Bus", not the "Moon Bus". Marty... Edited January 12, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWP Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 Ok Airfix kit problems. Front intake is flat not slanted, cockpit windows flat not slanted and the wrong shape, cabin windows too large, rear fuselage not bulbous enough......... I can't remember anymore, but google "correcting Airfix 2001" will bring up everything you need. I'm expecting the Moebius one to be pretty much spot on after seeing the work they put into the 2001 Moonbus last year Thanks for the information (and for not being a plonker). I'm quite looking forward to the Moebius kit also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 13, 2011 Author Share Posted January 13, 2011 (edited) Thanks for the information (and for not being a plonker). I refer the honourable gentleman to his opening comment on the matter, below. And I don't believe that the original Aurora kit was that accurate -- nor, for that matter, is the Airfix kit all that inaccurate. You decide. Marty... Edited January 26, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 (edited) Two classic shots of Orion III from the movie. It's quite clear from these how far off the Airfix kit is. Marty... Edited January 25, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thx6667 Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 (edited) A lot of it is in strong shadow, light blasting it reveals its much more chubby. Edited January 25, 2011 by Jonathan Mock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 (edited) A more revealing movie image. Clearly showing of off the Airfix kit is. Marty... Edited January 25, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 (edited) An even more revealing image - A Douglas Trumbull photo of the original 64" filming miniature. Marty... Edited January 25, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 A Douglas Trumbull production photo of Orion entering Space Station V (not used in the movie) This is a good one showing the proportion of Orion. Marty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chadders Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 And so the debate continues. 40 years of Modelling and no one has come up with a diffinative view of the Clipper. Whenever you see a model, all your seeing is one persons interpretation of the pictures they've seen. Unless someone comes up with a set of original drawings then all your going to here is " your wrong " " no your wrong". I spent 2 months researching this last year and in the end thought sod it, build it and enjoy it coz it's never going to be correct!!! Having said that, from conversations I've had, I PERSONALLY feel that the reissue is going to be the closest yet. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thx6667 Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 A Douglas Trumbull production photo of Orion entering Space Station V (not used in the movie) But "homaged" in Star Wars when the Falcon enters the Death Star hangar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 (edited) Chadders - Have you seen these images of the filming miniature? If you want drawings you need to look at Simon Atkinson's ones of Orion in Filming the Future, also have you contacted Ian Walsh and/or Scott Alexander? Jonathan, the above could not have been homaged in Star Wars, as Trumbull has not long let that image out his archive and it did not make the final cut of the movie. Marty... Edited January 26, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chadders Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Yep got those images. If you notice the windscreen on image 2 shows no resemblance to the image in post 45. That's why I've given up. Lighting an image hides may a detail. I'm also very familiar with Simons "plans" but again are simply one persons version of true fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now