Subject:
|
Re: Who else wants an AT-AT?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 16:46:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
604 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, David Eaton writes:
> 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.
A more refined guess: 80' - 96'
> 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).
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).
> 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.
I still agree with this 60' - 93' measurement, but I also checked based on
viewscreen size as seen in the movie (comparing to actors in shot) and as
compared to the blueprint in the Essential Guide, and got: 75' - 102'
So, we've got:
80' - 96'
60' - 68'
60' - 93'
75' - 102'
Which yeilds an average of 79 feet tall.
And as a distribution (I may have a typo):
60 68 75 80 93 96 102
*********
**********************************
*****************
****************************
That also weighs the cockpit scene twice (75'-102' and 60'-93'), but you get
the idea... basically, I figure 75 is right around where it 'should' be, and
50 feet is just too small...
DaveE
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Who else wants an AT-AT?
|
| (...) <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 (...) (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
|
|
|
|
