Subject:
|
Re: Who else wants an AT-AT?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Thu, 4 Jan 2001 22:10:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
677 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Jonathan Castellino writes:
> 1st rule: NEVER go by what you see in the movie!! In one scene, the AT-AT's
> could easily be 100 M tall, wheras in the scene when the foot steps on
> luke's snowspeeder, it is significantly smaller (to scale w/ the foot, maybe
> 10 M tall at the most....)
<fanatic level=almost_there>
Very true. There's a lot to consider :)
There are a couple key scenes to derive the AT-AT's actual height.
1. Luke ascending to the underbelly (there's a shot available on
www.starwars.com)
2. The foot trampling the snowspeeder
3. The interior shots of the AT-AT's head.
Looking at #1, The smallest result I can get, assuming Luke is about 6 feet
tall (no, I don't know how tall he actually is) is that the AT-AT's 70 feet
tall. That's assuming he's as crunched as possible when ascending and being
a little generous on looking at the image. Assuming his arms are stretched
upwards (taking away from his height in the photo) I get that the AT-AT is
upwards of 100 feet tall. Suffice to say, it's very hard to tell.
On to #2. I don't have an image of the snowspeeder being crushed on hand,
but if memory serves, the foot just about covers it (toes included)... I
could be off base here. I also don't have a snowspeeder length on hand. As
another off-handed guess, I think they're between 12 and 20 feet long. Now,
an AT-AT foot (going by the blueprints in the Essential Guide to Vehicles),
is just under 1/4th the height of the AT-AT. So that translates to between
48 and 80 feet tall (a little over in each case). (the 20 foot measurement
sounds a bit long, but I derived that based off of the scale model used with
the included pilots, wherein the pilots are significantly smaller than I
think they 'should' be.)
As for #3, we've got to look at both blueprints of the head's height and at
the general amount of space shown in the cockpit. As seen, there's plenty of
room to stand up in there, and some overhead space for the 'periscope' the
commander uses. Again, assuming the commander's height at 6 feet, and
checking against the blueprints, I get reasonable values between 60 and 93 feet.
Assuming that all these ranges are plausible, the only range they agree on
is between 70 and 80 feet. Very loose, and I'm sure the actual numbers
disagree a lot, but certainly I think between 70 and 80 feet would 'fit'
into each case pretty reasonably.
> .....anyhow, according to the "vehicles and
> vessels" book, it is approx. 15 M tall (20 M long).
Ok, I've got to leave work in a minute, so I'm not gonna go into as big a
deliberation, but a big problem here is with the blueprints. If an AT-AT's
15M tall (almost 50 feet) (actually the Essential guide says the AT-AT is
'over 15 meters tall'), a person 6' tall just barely is able to stand in the
head of the AT-AT, leaving none of the head room seen in the movie in the
cockpit. Also, comparing such a measurement to the shot of Luke ascending
the AT-AT (putting it on the blueprint image) it's WAY off scale. It DOES,
however, just barely fit when thinking about a snowspeeder's relative size
in such a scale... But basically, what it says to me is that the AT-AT's bigger.
> Anyhow, I usually go by
> lego man height rather than width (lego men ought to look ata a strict
> diet...lol...) to determine scale.
Again, true. I usually go by 7mm = 1 minifig scale foot (1 stud = 8mm).
That's based on an average height of 6 feet and a minifig actual height
being around 42mm (depending on any neck gear and hair style/hat-- also
girls with 2x2x2 slope dresses are a bit taller).
> A lot of the AT-At MOC's out there appear
> to me way too large. it gives them more character, but they always seem way
> to big according to the "vehicels and vessels".......
Actually, most that I've seen DO look bigger than 50 feet, but then again, I
don't usually jive with the 50-foot measurement... :) So I'm usually OK with
the AT-AT minifig-scale MOC's I've seen (6 total, plus 2 others I've just
heard about) Actually, I think all of them have been pretty on par with the
70-80 foot range...
Ok. I'm done.
</fanatic>
DaveE
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Who else wants an AT-AT?
|
| (...) Hey All, I don't want to sound rude but why not avoid the "argument" and confusion. I haven't read all of this conversation but according to my blueprints the AT-AT is 15.5 meters equaling 50.8524 feet. Why not just go with 50 feet? Joe (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | Re: Who else wants an AT-AT?
|
| (...) A more refined guess: 80' - 96' (...) I checked snowspeeder length a bit more closely. They're about 16 feet long, +/- a foot. So revamp that guess to 60' - 68' (a little over in each case). (...) I still agree with this 60' - 93' measurement, (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | Re: Who else wants an AT-AT?
|
| (...) I'm not sure that the average minifig would be six feet tall. The women should be a bit shorter than the men (they wear shoes with high heels under the dresses, most likely), let's say that their average is 5 and a half feet tall. There are (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Who else wants an AT-AT?
|
| 1st rule: NEVER go by what you see in the movie!! In one scene, the AT-AT's could easily be 100 M tall, wheras in the scene when the foot steps on luke's snowspeeder, it is significantly smaller (to scale w/ the foot, maybe 10 M tall at the (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.starwars)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
