marty_hopkirk Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 (edited) 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 I'm not sure the original MGM art dept drawings will be as useful as you you think. Because, Modelmasters who made the filming miniatures did not slavishly follow the drawings as issued to them. The models were almost certainly modified when they arrived in Kubrick's model makers workshop as well, the later being undocumented. Simon Atkinson's drawings, I believe are far more accurate than most give them credit for. You really do need to contract both Ian Walsh and Scott Alexander (Chris Trice has done a lot of research as well) as I believe they may have had sight of MGM art Dept drawings and done a shed load of research on the models. Knowing Adam Johnson who mastered the forthcoming Moebius Orion kit, I have no doubts it will be on the money - his Aries I-B was nigh on perfect. 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 Thanks for the info Marty, I'll certainly make some enquiries. As far as the drawings Vs filming miniatures is concerned I can fully understand it. I've seen moon "walker" ( as the plans state) plans dated as late as 1968 that are vastly different to the model that that was built Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David H Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Hey i know i'm joining this programme already in progress, but did anyone ever make a model of the Space Station/ Moon Shuttle? Seems to me it got a lot of attention in the film too. Besides, Ed Bishop was driving!! By todays standards some aspect of the film seem right on target; other aspects appear hilariously dated. They never counted on airline deregulation, LOL d-bot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 (edited) Thanks for the info Marty, I'll certainly make some enquiries. As far as the drawings Vs filming miniatures is concerned I can fully understand it. I've seen moon "walker" ( as the plans state) plans dated as late as 1968 that are vastly different to the model that that was built The vast majority of the SFX filming for 2001 was done in 1966 and the very early apart of '67. I can't recall who mentioned it, off the top of my head - but second unit crew broke whilst filming the Space Station V fly through sequence to watch England win the world cup. The moon scenes were the very first to be filmed in late 1965 so it's interesting that there were drawings for filming miniature dated 1968. Particularly given the movie premiered in April 1968, all models would have been commissioned and built well before that. Are these the drawings the ones given to or developed by Aurora for the Moonbus? This is curious as the 'Moon Bus' it was known as the Rocket Bus in the film. Wasn't the Moon Walker in the Clarke's book the Sentinel? It's a very long time since I read it. 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) Hey i know i'm joining this programme already in progress, but did anyone ever make a model of the Space Station/ Moon Shuttle? Seems to me it got a lot of attention in the film too. AJA make a 1/48 model of the Aries 1-B (Moon Shuttle) it's uber accurate, very large and has a price tag to match. Stargazer make a 1/144 model of it as well, nice but not cheap also. http://www.modelermagic.com/?p=19581 The AJA Interior kit to fit thier it is due early Feb. AJA have a Space Station V in the works but no release date as yet. Planet X did a small scale Space Station V but it was very difficult to build and is long out of production. Marty... Edited January 26, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thx6667 Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Jonothan, 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. I don't doubt that, but I remember reading years back how Lucas had talked to Trumbull prior to making Star Wars and some of ILM's staff had worked with him on other projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 26, 2011 Author Share Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) Here is what happened to the Space Station V filming miniature. http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/faq/html/spacestation.html The pictures were taken circa '71/'72 and believed to be outside a local Council tip in Hertfordshire. The photographs were taken I believe by a local art student who recognised what it was. One of the One Man Pods is reputed to have been dumped here as well, but was either taken or vandalised very shortly after it was dumped. Marty... Edited January 26, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWP Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 Clearly showing of off the Airfix kit is. Those are extremely useful and interesting photographs. However, since the Airfix kit isn't in any of those photographs, they don't actually demonstrate anything about the accuracy of the Airfix kit. Nor anything about the accuracy of any other kit, or anything else. Now, if the photos were juxtaposed with a built model of the Airfix kit positioned at the same angle, etc., then you could make the comparison. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying that you haven't done anything to actually prove your point. (And I think it's interesting that weeks later you still feel the need to do so ....) All of my original comments still stand, but I'll freely admit that I haven't gone to any lengths to make the comparisons either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 27, 2011 Author Share Posted January 27, 2011 Tell you what, you give me and others a blow by blow account to prove the Airfix is accurate. Marty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Velociweiler Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I do have both the Airfix and Aurora kits - can't find the Airfix right now and I bought it specifically to secure additional Pan Am decals as an insurance against problems with the Aurora kit decals. When eventually the Airfix kit surfaces I may do the photographic comparison but I'll really add my comments to back Marty up. Whilst the Airfix kit superficially resembles the Orion (and closely resembles some publicity paintings of the Orion at around the time of the release of the film), it really is rendered obselescent by the Aurora kit. The Aurora kit correctly possesses the slender Stork nose, the Airfix truncates this area far too short. The Aurora windscreen more closely resembles the original, but suffers because the actual join between the transparent part and the slot cut-out in the fuselage is poor - Aurora poorly defined the edges of that slot which needs re-dressing for better fit. Actually built two Aurora examples in my time - the first was in 1977 only two years after the date on that Aurora box. On one fuselage half, on the upper surface and roughly an inch behind the windscreen is an area which is slightly distorted and needs filling - a slight fault I've seen on all the Aurora Orion mouldings - it's not a one-off. Airfix correctly depict an exhaust of some kind in mid-dorsal position. However, generally the Airfix fuselage 'crests' a good half-inch too high, and the fairing enclosing the ion? exhausts 'peaks' too high, and the shape there is quite noticeably exaggerated. In general, the Aurora kit is smooth, whilst the Airfix kit is liberally dabbled with raised sections on the body and wings which very genuinely detract from the appearance. The Airfix wings are moulded upper\lower and successfully depict the eyelet intakes on the leading edge - it would be a complete swine to attempt that on the Aurora - maybe it's a feature of the Moebius kit? Here's hoping... However, the Airfix wings are twice the thickness of the Aurora parts. At the rear of the fuselage, the Aurora kit is once again correct in shape and profile. Immediately aft of the trailing edge of the wing in the Airfix kit, the underside begins to shape to form a compound curve into the tail area, where the Aurora kit retains a flat beaver-tail until around an inch before the extreme tail, where the compound curve then begins to form. Incidentally, the 'Nuclear Engine' in the Aurora kit raised eyebrows even on release, however, they always prided themselves on some form of gimmick which might attract younger modellers, hence removeable sections on the Invaders UFO, or the Flying Sub, the Spindrift et al - they were just remaining consistent with their own practices... The Pan AM roundel supplied with both the original issue, and latest re-issue of the Airfix kit is too small - has to be so to match the engraved circular area moulded into the fuselage. Previously, at a pinch, they might have been useable to supplant to the Aurora kit if you were desperate, but now there are sufficient after-market airline sheets to render the Airfix decal sheet finally redundant. I know several people whose commitment to the hobby and Science-Fiction need no apology for, and a couple of them remain content with the Airfix kit. I think it's a personal preference, but to my eye, and I think it's a more or less settled observation, the Aurora kit is considerably more authentic than the Airfix - but nonetheless still bears improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 27, 2011 Author Share Posted January 27, 2011 (edited) kit. I think it's a personal preference, but to my eye, and I think it's a more or less settled observation, the Aurora kit is considerably more authentic than the Airfix - but nonetheless still bears improvement. Agreed. A balanced view. In contrast to BWP's post, which in my opinion is out and out trolling. Marty... Edited January 29, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatalbert Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) you guys might find this interesting.... http://www.martinbowersmodelworld.com/ Click on the how to window,there is an artical on building the Orion. Neil Edited January 28, 2011 by fatalbert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 29, 2011 Author Share Posted January 29, 2011 Yes, I have seen that. Martin has also made a Moonbus as well, details of that are in an occasional magazine he publishes called Bowerhouse. It would interesting to know more about his references. Another SFX professional Chris Trice was making an exact replica of the 63" filming miniature. I'm not sure how far he got, but I do know he was gathering references a little while back. Marty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 29, 2011 Author Share Posted January 29, 2011 (edited) I'm slowly digging through my accumulated 2001 reference material, here is a 2005 post from Chris Trice replicated verbatim: "I'm posting this both in the Orion thread and the Moonbus thread because I think it's relevant to both. I was kindly sent a copy of the original art department drawings for the Orion and it's obvious that the Aurora kit is based on these as it matches the panelling line for line. Even small rectangular panels and other details on the Aurora model that don't appear on the film model have been matched to the artwork very faithfully. I've checked the measurements and other than being a tad too long, the Aurora Orion kit is exactly a third of the size of the drawings. This would seem to lend weight to my previous ideas that the Aurora Moonbus kit is exactly a third of the studio drawings and not such a bad kit. Any discrepencies in proportion between the studio drawings of the Moonbus and filming model are likely to be down to the film model makers. I'm not saying either kit is perfect as I'm sure a few detail areas may have been fudged for the convenience of production but I'd place good money on both kits being produced with reference to the art department drawings. Also, what research I've done so far indicates that in the case of the Orion, the filming model is very close to the AD drawings in size and proportion. A few of the contours have been smoothed by the model makers but it's essentially accurate to the drawing. Would this indicate that the AD drawings for the Moonbus, the Aurora kit and filming model sharing a similar level of accuracy?" Marty... Edited January 29, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted January 29, 2011 Author Share Posted January 29, 2011 (edited) Links to Douglas Trumbell's Orion images. Less revealing than the Moonbus ones, but none the less VERY interesting. http://douglastrumbull.com/sites/default/f...es/DSC09629.jpg http://douglastrumbull.com/sites/default/f...ages/img564.jpg http://douglastrumbull.com/sites/default/f...ages/img709.jpg http://douglastrumbull.com/sites/default/f...ages/img961.jpg Marty... Edited January 29, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWP Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 In contrast to BWP's post, which in my opinion is out and out trolling. Hmm, let's add that up now ... questions, statements, and responses. BWP: Question: why is the Airfix kit considered to be so bad? Mr Plonker: Answer: "oh dear". BWP: I accept that the Airfix kit probably has accuracy issues, but IMO that does not make it the piece of trash that some people claim it is. (I do not think that anyone who has seen the film will point at the Airfix kit and say "man, that's just wrong in every detail!".) [Of course, modellers seeking accuracy tend to be especially critical of errors (and I can certainly be guilty of that myself) but words like "trash" and "garbage" frequently get flung about with little thought behind them.] Mr Plonker: "here are some photos of the filming model showing how wrong the Airfix kit is" (no photos of Airfix kit provided) BWP: photos of the filming model, excellent and useful as they are, when posted without reference to anything else, don't prove anything about the Airfix kit, because there is no reference to the Airfix kit in the posted photos. That would be like someone posting a photo of a nice day in Sydney and saying that it proves that London has terrible weather. The statement is not necessarily wrong but the evidence provided does not directly support it. Photos of the filming model in juxtaposition with photos of the Airfix kit may well prove the point ... but that was not provided. Mr Plonker: Why don't you marry the Airfix kit if you love it so much, you troll. Other people, not Mr Plonker, have provided descriptions and commentary on specific issues with the Airfix kit. I thank them for their helpful information, not to mention their ability to see that a question is not necessarily some sort of personal challenge to "authority", but might actually be a question. Well then. Proof positive, I suppose, that I am a troll. All those years wasted! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted February 1, 2011 Author Share Posted February 1, 2011 Deary, deary me. Marty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stan Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) Sprue shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/lazymodeler/s...57625889650833/ Edited February 10, 2011 by stan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obi-Jiff Kenobi Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Looking good. Thanks for the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted February 13, 2011 Author Share Posted February 13, 2011 Looking good and not far away. I see the antenna is moulded as an integral part of the fuselage, I'm guessing that assists with replicating the contours at the rear of Orion more accurately? The parts breakdown is similar to the Aurora kit. Marty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stargazer* Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 (edited) Hi Marty me-ol mate, how are you ? It is strange about the 'new' Moebius Orions scale... Is it not the same size as the old aurora and airfix kits were ??.. For years people have said that those kits 'were' 1/144 scale, even though it never said that on their boxes or instruction sheets... Now the new Moebius Orion is stated to be 1/160 th scale, and people are excepting that !!! when I could not get 'most' folk to move over the 'assumed' size of 1/144 attributed to old aurora and airfix kits, to the size it would need to be to fit the full size set (done in 1/144) into http://www.planet3earth.co.uk/2001%20page%204.htm Edited February 13, 2011 by stargazer* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted February 13, 2011 Author Share Posted February 13, 2011 (edited) Hi Marty me-ol mate, how are you ?It is strange about the 'new' Moebius Orions scale... Is it not the same size as the old aurora and airfix kits were ??.. For years people have said that those kits 'were' 1/144 scale, even though it never said that on their boxes or instruction sheets... Now the new Moebius Orion is stated to be 1/160 th scale, and people are excepting that !!! when I could not get 'most' folk to move over the assumed size of the 1/144 attributed to old aurora and airfix kits, to the size it would need to be to fit the full size set (done in 1/144) into http://www.planet3earth.co.uk/2001%20page%204.htm Good to see you found this Ian and I'm dandy. My view on the scale thing could be partly explained in that Airfix batched their Orion kit with the Skyking range for catalogue purposes, which at the time was all 1/144. Although, the kit itself was never properly a Skyking kit and as Ian says the scale was never referenced - if that makes sense? For the uninitiated among you, Ian is the maker of the excellent Stargazer Orion and as it stands the most accurate model of Orion made to date. Marty... Edited February 13, 2011 by marty_hopkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Velociweiler Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Looking good and not far away. I see the antenna is moulded as an integral part of the fuselage, I'm guessing that assists with replicating the contours at the rear of Orion more accurately? The parts breakdown is similar to the Aurora kit. Marty... Wings moulded upper and lower tho' - maybe we'll see the scalloped intakes on the leading edges? Just a tiny detail - on the Aurora, the mass balances at the trailing edge were set (incorrectly) at 90 degrees to the angle of the trailing edge. From the link photos, they've been re-set correctly to the direction of airflow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_hopkirk Posted February 13, 2011 Author Share Posted February 13, 2011 Wings moulded upper and lower tho' - maybe we'll see the scalloped intakes on the leading edges? Yes, Adam Johnson has confirmed the kit will include cannon leading edge scallops. Marty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stan Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Just some quotes from Moebius that you may have seen but might clear up some questions asked. Same size as Aurora - No bogus atomic engines - no interior - More accurate wings - corrected engine exhaust shapes - overall better details - basically an all new kit based on the Aurora... the real shooting miniatures for the movie were mostly smooth with much of the surface detail portrayed by paint not engraved details - the plan is for the final Moebius model to be faithful to the shooting models and it will not have engraved panel lines that were never on the actual shooting models-Only the engraved lines that were present on the shooting model are planned for out kit.. Plan for now is to have the kit available 1st qtr 2011 to much cost and too little return on investment in Discovery, Aires or the Pod... @ this date Orion will be the end of the line for us. As we see it, there are too many ways to spend the same tooling and development money to produce much better results for us today. This could change at some point in the future but I wouldn't count on that. If Discovery is a "must Have" for you let me suggest that you start exploring resin kits as I don't see it anywhere on our future projects list. As you state, this is a 13" kit, there's no amount of huge detail that can be included in something like this. I give up, time for me to keep off the boards for a while. Some of this has gotten so silly it's almost hard to believe. It's a plastic kit, in a very small scale. It will never be perfect, but it's the best styrene Orion that's been out. I'm not going to argue the point when everyone is an "expert" on it. Have fun with it all! 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