Jump to content
xanderf

Anyone notice the massive re-scaling of the GR75 in 'Rebels' this week?

Recommended Posts

Not just an aesthetic 'from the outside' thing that could be interpreted to be a stylistic change and nothing else (IE., the 'giraffe-class Star Destroyers').

 

No, they pretty clearly re-interpreted the 'sensor pod' on top of the GR75 as its bridge - you can see from the perspective of the shot, here, that the crew is DEFINITELY in that pod on top:

 

gr75%20scaling.jpg

 

...and especially noting the room as they pan around it when taking damage (last shot, there)...

 

That pod on top is pretty clearly *at least* as large as the Millennium Falcon's cockpit.

 

This makes the GR75 *considerably* larger than the model we currently have for it - at present, there is no way any crew could possibly fit up there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The epic ships are epic scale. 

 

"Too large for the Standard Play format, this iconic vessel is instead intended for use in the game’s Cinematic Play and Epic Play formats. The first X-Wing starship released outside of the game’s 1/270 scale, the GR-75 enters the game at a new, relative scale that dwarfs the game’s smaller starfighters but still allows you to maneuver it in battle. Moreover, the GR-75 is so massive that it comes with two new damage decks to track hits against the fore and aft sections of its hull."

 

Source: https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2014/4/30/the-first-transport-is-away/

 

JohnItsAllFine.gif

 

Edit below.

 

Now because The Mouse likes lore and technical stats about the same amount as happily married parents, we'll have to go on Legends stats to find the cockpit size.

 

Legends says 90 meters total ship length. Thank goodness the Empire chose the metric system. Now using blanditio-vanilla MS paint and a net-ripped meter stick, we can determine the size of the cockpit.

 

Y5bTKep.jpg

Using the magic of metric, we equate cm with m, and stretch the ruler until it is roughly 90m long. We then match it up with the ship diagram, and play the counting game.

 

1, 2, 3, 4, 5 meters wide and...

 

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 meters long; give or take a meter for slapdash inaccuracies.

 

Unless you have an easy 5-meter visual reference, this won't mean much. Soooo.....

 

legacysediments.jpg

 

The internet saves us again.

 

Look at the person. Look at the five meters. Now look at the rebels pictures. Make your own conclusions.

Edited by OneKelvin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That "Sensor Pod" has ALWAYS been the bridge for that type of ship! 

 

It's been mixed - it certainly looks like it was always intended to be the bridge, and I think some plans started calling it a sensor pod only to try to explain why it would otherwise be too small to be a bridge.

 

Still, the difference in scale is a lot different than the 1/270 of typical models vs 1/350 of the 'Epic'-scale.  Given that pod must be as large as the Falcon cockpit, it should make this ship quite a bit larger than a CR90.

Edited by xanderf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That "Sensor Pod" has ALWAYS been the bridge for that type of ship! 

 

It's been mixed - it certainly looks like it was always intended to be the bridge, and I think some plans started calling it a sensor pod only to try to explain why it would otherwise be too small to be a bridge.

 

Still, the difference in scale is a lot different than the 1/270 of typical models vs 1/350 of the 'Epic'-scale.  Given that pod must be as large as the Falcon cockpit, it should make this ship quite a bit larger than a CR90.

 

Nope, it was never called Sensor Pod. It was called Command Pod. Important difference ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Legends says 90 meters total ship length. Thank goodness the Empire chose the metric system. Now using blanditio-vanilla MS paint and a net-ripped meter stick, we can determine the size of the cockpit.

 

Y5bTKep.jpg

Using the magic of metric, w

 

Look at the person. Look at the five meters. Now look at the rebels pictures. Make your own conclusions.

 

The problem is that the illustration you are using was created to match what the EU says is the ship details (IE., 90m, that pod is the bridge, etc).

 

It's not to scale with what the actual filming model looks like...

 

GR-75_Medium_Transport.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's not to scale with what the actual filming model looks like...

 

GR-75_Medium_Transport.png

 

 

You make a valid point.

 

I would suggest that the ship may be altered or a class similar, but not identical to the basic GR-75 hull.

 

Unfortunately, with the destruction of the Jedi archives (and the decanonization of the EU) we lack a unified body of technical information to draw from. Years were spent answering these very questions: What does a Tauntaun eat in its natural habitat? What are the specific effects of Force use on the psyche? What are the exact dimensions of Cloud City or the GR-75?

 

The questions that matter to the makers now are; Would people even watch a hero who's parents lived? Will people call us racist if we hire more diversely? Should little girls want to grow up to be princesses with blasters, rebellious tomboys with blasters, or sandy small-town salvage yard workers with bo-staves? (We gotta tell them, cause, y'know... no parents.)

 

Since the latest Star-Wars cutaway book left out bits like hyper-drive capacity, max acceleration in a vacuum, and consumables; I'm thinking we'll have to answer these questions ourselves for the foreseeable future.

 

Well, at least until the producers play KSP. Then all will be right in the world.

 

(Of course the new book did include things like inert gasses pocketed in Whipple-shield armor to reduce blaster impacts, so let's not despair about the state of the tech-lore just yet. ;) )

Edited by OneKelvin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Unfortunately, with the destruction of the Jedi archives (and the decanonization of the EU) we lack a unified body of technical information to draw from. Years were spent answering these very questions: What does a Tauntaun eat in its natural habitat? What are the specific effects of Force use on the psyche? What are the exact dimensions of Cloud City or the GR-75?

 

The Story Group still have the "Holocron" (an archive of all this info) and they draw on it for future books.

 

And of course, books are being rereleased in updated, "newcanon" format (with a few things modified). Notably, Complete Locations has now been released as a newcanon reference book, with some locations from The Force Awakens added, planet sizes (mostly copied from the EU's Essential Atlas) etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bit of a shame that the GR-75 is so small scaled compared with the basic ships, it is starting to look a bit puny next to, say, the VCX-100.

The Gozanti is meant to be about 60m and is scaled about right to the smaller ships (which is probably because it mounts TIE fighters on it so it has to be the right scale). Now the 60m Gozanti model is as big if not slightly bigger than the theoretically 90m GR-75. The Tantive IV and Raider are more beastly compared to these, clocking in about 150m, but the figures are considerably bigger (although even so, are scaled at a smaller scale even than the GR-75.)

Edited by The Inquisitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When in doubt, go to the source. With canon ships from the films use the Dr. Saxton method of determining the size and scale relative to known objects.

Never, never, never use on screen, visuals to determine scale. Whether filmed models, cgi, or traditional animation, the visuals are always far too prone to having inconsistent depictions and model making errors to be at all reliable. It's why we have arguments over the size of a-wings, y-wings, tie fighters, hwks, SSDs, cr-90s, and so many other things.

Just accept that the visuals will have errors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is one thing 'Rebels' is consistent at, it's re-using 3d models once they add them.  Hell, the Y-Wings have already been in 2 of the 3 episodes since the new model debuted.

 

So I assume we'll be seeing this canon-clarifying GR75 next to a CR90, shortly.  Ideally on the ground, where you don't have the no-way-to-judge-distance issues from space shots.

 

The nice thing about the CGI series is that the models are all "the same scale" - they are rendering the scene in one pass.  This is very unlike the OT 'film' SFX scenes, where the models were largely shot one-at-a-time and re-composited into a single scene in post-production (resulting in radically inconsistent scaling, even when it COULD be remotely possible to guess at despite the lack of a common frame of reference).

Edited by xanderf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

When in doubt, go to the source. With canon ships from the films use the Dr. Saxton method of determining the size and scale relative to known objects.

Never, never, never use on screen, visuals to determine scale. Whether filmed models, cgi, or traditional animation, the visuals are always far too prone to having inconsistent depictions and model making errors to be at all reliable. It's why we have arguments over the size of a-wings, y-wings, tie fighters, hwks, SSDs, cr-90s, and so many other things.

Just accept that the visuals will have errors.

 

Well it isn't so simple:

If several methods of measuring give approximately the same numbers these numbers should be used. (Executor, AT-AT)

If there are single outliers ignore the outlires. (CR90)

Only if there is a wide range of different measurments you can say 'nah, it's inconsistent'.

For example the SSD was first 8km because somebody eyeballed it (bad method). Then it was 12km by using the bridge tower as fix point compared to a normal ISD. But the tower was bigger. So by using some scenes (especially the one of Tydirium arriving at Endor) you can very good determine the size. And it's consistent.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

When in doubt, go to the source. With canon ships from the films use the Dr. Saxton method of determining the size and scale relative to known objects.

Never, never, never use on screen, visuals to determine scale. Whether filmed models, cgi, or traditional animation, the visuals are always far too prone to having inconsistent depictions and model making errors to be at all reliable. It's why we have arguments over the size of a-wings, y-wings, tie fighters, hwks, SSDs, cr-90s, and so many other things.

Just accept that the visuals will have errors.

When we see somebody climbing into an X-Wing, we know exactly how big it is.

Hell even the HWK-290 has a consistent size across its appearances. Its appearances, not its in-book mentions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kids these days, they have no understanding of how these things work.

 

rebel-transport.jpg

 

Ok first, you put the figures up front to pilot the ship, that is where the bridge is. Second, that sensor pod thing is actually a handle that allows you to get a real good grip on the ship so you can use it more effectively as a weapon to smash your brother's face with, unless mom is around, in which case it's the thingy you twist to pull the ship apart.

 

It was intended to be the bridge but even in the movies ILM never made the model large enough to be a full bridge when compared to the models of the X-wings they used to fly beside it. The bridge is just a bit bigger than an xwing which can only hold one pilot.

Tyrant-disabled.jpg

 

However, a single dude sitting in the GR-75's cockpit isn't nearly as interesting as a crew interacting in the GR-75's bridge. It's always better to tell a good story than to go full aspergers and pull out a ruler. It's a fictional ship, it doesn't exist, so it really doesn't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

When we see somebody climbing into an X-Wing, we know exactly how big it is.

 

Didn't Saxton argue somewhere that "life-size" SW movie props (such as the Y-wing) are actually not life size, but only 90% of full scale? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...