x-wing drawings?

[Colin Droidmilk]

I'll give it a try, start me out slow as i am not great with camera stuff, how do i determine the height of the work surface? I will likely slap myself in the head for asking that but i want to be sure i am getting it right...

Thank you so much for working this and for those photos! They were great for showing up close how you worked the mod, but yeah, the camera was a bit close to really show off the new angle, due to the wide-angle distortion inherent in close-up photography. If you can be bothered, it'd be cool if you took another 3/4 shot but from about ten feet back with the camera zoomed in (should then look something like the photos below). The viewpoint's good, you just need to stand way further back and zoom in. That's how to get a good undistorted shot of a model ( sorry to be such a fussy, finicky pain in the neck). The side and top shots you took were great; the mod has really corrected that inverted angle on the starboard side, and it's much, much closer to the Red 3 photo now.

 

[Miniaturizer Ray]

how do i determine the height of the work surface?

Just measure the distance from the floor to the top of the bench. What I'm thinking is, if we decide on a reference point - say the front edge of the "windscreen", for example, and line that up with a piece of A4 paper, say, then I can say "measure x inches back from the corner of the sheet of paper, y inches to the left, and z inches from the floor, and take the picture from there". We'll still have to rotate the images to match the views in the Red 3 pictures because the model was mounted at an angle, but that's easy to do. If you tell me what camera you're using, I can probably even tell you how to set the zoom.

Edit: Scratch the bit about telling me what camera you're using; it's a Fuji Finepix A360, right? My detective skills are not as sharp as they used to be, either

 

[Nwerke]

Just had a thought. I'd love to be part of this but as I say, my Max skills suck. Ray or Flint, any chance you could export the model in .dxf format or similar? If so I could mess with it in Rhino - maybe generate some lofts or something, if that'd be useful? I'd love to help out somehow.

 

[Miniaturizer Ray]

Trouble is, there isn't really much of a model to export. The scene file mainly consists of 45 cameras and matching image planes, and Flint's job is to build a model that matches the views through the cameras. As far as I can tell, there isn't really a convenient way of doing this in Rhino. If you know differently, let me know how, and I'll try and set you up a .3dm. Alternatively, if you have access to 3ds Max 2009 or up, I can coach you a bit on how to work in Max. My old X-wing mesh was basically created polygon-by-polygon; no complicated skills required, just click and drag, and an insane amount of patience.

 

[ILMwannabe]

Wouldn't there just have been ONE fuselage master, which all the many miniatures would have been cast from...?

As I recall, ILM had trouble getting the motors and goodies inside to fit and/or work right, so the lower fuselage apparently went through more than two modifications.

The lower fuselage of Red 2 (formerly Blue 1) and maybe Red Leader had the proton torpedo tubes farthest aft, and they were slightly longer than later versions.

The proton torpedo tubes on the Pyros were slightly smaller and farther forward.

And those on Red 3 and Red 5 were much farther forward still.

The rear section of the fuselage is less tall on Red 5 compared to Red 2 and 3.

The nose variations were already discussed here (although it should also be mentioned that Red 3's nose is very different - the lower rear half [where the nose meets the fuselage] does not have the same angle on the sides as the others).

Also the cockpit window cutouts are also different. Red Leader's was unique - it featured less angular cuts and a large rear window. The window cutouts on Red 2 and 3 are practically identical (when viewed from the top).

There are other differences as well. So again, there was no "standard" X-Wing mold.

mslz22: a question continues to nag me: all the pictures I've seen of the ILM Pyros show the fuselage and canopy as one piece. Why is it that "pyro castings" which appeared on Ebay which show the canopy as a seperate part, as well as some with a round socket already cut out for the droid - features not seen on the ILM Pyros? Anyone?

 

[Flintlock]

I guess it's not too complex...

 

[modeleers]

Great images!
So who is at the helm
& can I get printouts of this for a fuselage approx. 6'8" long?

 

[INCOM]

Great images!
So who is at the helm
& can I get printouts of this for a fuselage approx. 6'8" long?

Wow! Are you planning a 1/6 X-wing?:love

 

[Colin Droidmilk]

I guess it's not too complex...

Fantastic! Looking good.

I've been thinking again about the comments from Nwerke and ILMwannabe about the fuselage differences, and have come round to the idea of doing a proper analysis of them all. Then, maybe ultimately the thing to do would be to build cg models of all 4 heroes and a pyro.

To get the ball rolling, I took a closer look at the Red 5 front view assymetry, and made a quick drawing to express it. Note how the cockpit is shifted right over to the port side and how the port fuselage wall is far steeper than the starboard wall. Looks like somebody sat on it. So, these are features we expect to see show up in any CG drawing of Red 5, I guess. It's worth noting that the slope of both canopy walls is much shallower than the EFX and the V3.

My drawing is copied from a VHS frame from the original release. It's not totally accurate, sure, but the point is to log and show up the kind of symmetry anomalies required for an accurate Red 5. A more accurate image should be derived from the DVD of the original release - it's the shot where Wedge saves Luke.

 

[Nwerke]

There are other differences as well. So again, there was no "standard" X-Wing mold.

Vince, just to nitpick there was a single standard mold for hero fuselages (well, a mold for the upper half and a vac buck for the lower), and another mold for pyro fuselages).

Why is it that "pyro castings" which appeared on Ebay which show the canopy as a seperate part, as well as some with a round socket already cut out for the droid - features not seen on the ILM Pyros? Anyone?

Seems the piece they were cast from had its canopy removed so that the cockpit could be moulded.

 

[Colin Droidmilk]

Vince, just to nitpick there was a single standard mold for hero fuselages (well, a mold for the upper half and a vac buck for the lower), and another mold for pyro fuselages).
.

The single mold for the upper fuselage causes the commonality I was on about...

It follows that all heroes may be as whacked out of true as Red 5. What do you reckon? I've never come across any dead-on undistorted front views of the others so I can't check...

 

[Flintlock]

The single mold for the upper fuselage causes the commonality I was on about...

It follows that all heroes may be as whacked out of true as Red 5. What do you reckon? I've never come across any dead-on undistorted front views of the others so I can't check...

So all the X's had a common mold for the upper half? Red 3 appears to be pretty distorted, but some of that could be from

1) being filmed under the high-intensity light
2) warpage over time since '77

Right now I am trying to figure out what the dimensions were supposed to be, i.e., the 'ideal' that was intended when it was built, not counting for errors introduced while building and that have accrued since then.

Then we can incorporate deviations from that...

Is there decent enough reference of the others to see how they vary with a good degree of accuracy?

P.S. I can't really trust the Maxi Brute any more. There is one measurement that's WAY off - the distance between the R2 unit and the back window. With that said, however, I am surprised at how other measurements match up almost exactly.

The separate piece that goes on the very end has different geometry. The last picture I posted is based on the Maxi Brute, but I've already fixed the errors and it looks much closer.

 

[Nwerke]

No, no! There's not commonality, the pyro fuses were made up from a different mould, as I said. You know - the left/right castings that you see in the "sunglasses" pics? These were taken from a built-up master that was offered by PiH last year (sadly it is now badly warped so it couldn't really be used to take a mould as-is. Though if it was mine, I'd give it a shot anyway.)

This master was made up from a hero upper fuse casting and vac-form lower, bonded together then split down the middle vertically instead of horizontally.

The castings were done in urethane foam rather than resin, by the way. (I don't think urethane resins were on the market yet; foam came first.) Not sure how stable it is in thin foam shells - probably no more so than resin, so the castings may have distorted over time. I'd bet there's a fair amount of asymmetry on the original, no. 1, wooden master, however. Done in a hurry and all...

As for ideal dimensions, well, I guess with the new references we should now be able to derive a pretty rock-solid set of figures for heros, but pyros are going to be different again, with a bit of extra shrinkage. Personally I'm a huge pyro fan - so, hey, you guys draw up an idealized hero, and I'll do the pyro, how about that? I know, I know, I'm weird...

Ray, thanks - I'll look into that and let you know.

 

[Colin Droidmilk]

Red 3 may well have become distorted over time (though I can't see for sure if it is distorted, myself) but Red 5's distortion dates from filming and possibly, from the original sculpt. I suppose it could have warped under the lights at the time but I don't reckon this could have caused the asymmetry of the cross-section through the cockpit area, because nothing is actually bent or buckled in that shape I drew; all walls are straight, they're just different lengths. And that suggests to me the upper fuselage buck was sculpted that way.

The below Red 3 front view is useful, but it's not dead-on, so it's hard to tell whether it's symmetrical or not. It looks like it might have the same asymmetry as Red 5 but if so, it appears to be mirrored...

 

[Colin Droidmilk]

No, no! There's not commonality, the pyro fuses were made up from a different mould, as I said. You know - the left/right castings that you see in the "sunglasses" pics? These were taken from a built-up master that was offered by PiH last year (sadly it is now badly warped so it couldn't really be used to take a mould as-is. Though if it was mine, I'd give it a shot anyway.)

This master was made up from a hero upper fuse casting and vac-form lower, bonded together then split down the middle vertically instead of horizontally.

The castings were done in urethane foam rather than resin, by the way. (I don't think urethane resins were on the market yet; foam came first.) Not sure how stable it is in thin foam shells - probably no more so than resin, so the castings may have distorted over time. I'd bet there's a fair amount of asymmetry on the original, no. 1, wooden master, however. Done in a hurry and all...

As for ideal dimensions, well, I guess with the new references we should now be able to derive a pretty rock-solid set of figures for heros, but pyros are going to be different again, with a bit of extra shrinkage. Personally I'm a huge pyro fan - so, hey, you guys draw up an idealized hero, and I'll do the pyro, how about that? I know, I know, I'm weird...

Ray, thanks - I'll look into that and let you know.

I'm misunderstood! By commonality I mean similarity of form, that which all ILM Xs have in common which every replica and kit so far has failed to capture. Heroes have it, pyros have it. It stems from the original sculpt of the upper fuselage - which is present in all ILM Xs, even the pyros since, as you said, they came from a built-up master which came from a hero upper fuselage casting.

All heroes and pyros tend to look more like each other than they look like any replica or kit yet offered. That's what I mean by commonality. Pyro and hero cockpits for instance look of a kind when placed next to EFX or V3.

Shake... (hands, like)

 

[modeleers]

Wow! Are you planning a 1/6 X-wing?:love

And the 'Y'! - My friend, Nathan (who built thee Indy 'Mine Car'), & I are going over the logistics. I have access to a Very large roto-cast device (9 ftr), so I'm thinking it's a Go, but only if I can acquire (or draw myself) some desent plans.
A mistake in That scale would read as plain as a full scale Stop Sign, so it has to be 'Right' from the get-go.

 

[Colin Droidmilk]

Is there decent enough reference of the others to see how they vary with a good degree of accuracy?

Well if there is I don't have it, I fear. My big plan of charting all the differences will probably not get very far. However, more ref exists out there, that's for sure...

 

[Nwerke]

I was mainly referring to Flint's question about moulds. Of course they all have a common ancestor!

 

[Flintlock]

And the 'Y'! - My friend, Nathan (who built thee Indy 'Mine Car'), & I are going over the logistics. I have access to a Very large roto-cast device (9 ftr), so I'm thinking it's a Go, but only if I can acquire (or draw myself) some desent plans.
A mistake in That scale would read as plain as a full scale Stop Sign, so it has to be 'Right' from the get-go.

When I am done with X and Y wing dimensions I'll make some drawings that you can scale up to any size you like.

 

[modeleers]

I'm gonna write the Pope & submit your name for Sainthood!
In short - Thanx!