Hobbyist Forums banner

1 - 20 of 108 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,550 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The landing gear is one of the neatest things about the Jupiter 2, so it should have a thread of its own. Some folks have asked about how to adapt their build to allow the gear to be changed easily from deployed, to retracted. Others are making functional landing gear.

Let me start off by asking: of those building functional gear, how many care about making the strut move, as on screen?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
Well, that's one of those big questions, isn't it? I mean, it's built wrong to be functional (upside down), right?

I contend that IA would have preferred there be no strut, and the legs look more like the C-57D of Forbidden Planet or the rear stairway of a 727 (which was fairly new in service thus sexy), but the practical realities of the 'full size' set precluded that as an option.

but let's work with what we see. If the strut were flipped, so it COULD retract as it slid back in its (assumed) track, would that eliminate some of the space issues?

Just thoughts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,550 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
...I contend that IA would have preferred there be no strut...but the practical realities of the 'full size' set precluded that as an option...
If he didn't want the struts, they wouldn't be there. What makes you think Hollywood couldn't figure a way to supported the mock-up without the struts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,719 Posts
My 24" J2 weighs alonst exactrly 10 lbs. The landing gear is .040 styrene with a pivot of 1/8" styrene rod. All the landing gear does is keep the footpad in position. Virtually all the weight is borne by the strut. The strut is essential. I should do a moment of inertia calculation on it to be precise.
TR: the hero had a mess of wires and springs and pulleys inside. But I read that it was operated from the outside by said strings, "like a puppet". I've been trying to think of a way of making those doors slide up and to the side w/o all those fiddly bit. Getting the gear to go up and down is easy. Some kind of threaded rod will do the trick. But what if the threaded rod also engaged a circle for a brief time. The circle could have an incline around its bottom circumferance. Travel along the incline would raise or lower a captive attachment to the door. A stop point on at the ends of the incline would slide the door out of the way. The threaded rod would engage and disengage the circle at the beginning (or end) of raising the landing gear. You could make all motions work from one central source.
I don't know if I've described this terribly clearly. I don't know if my sketch makes it any clearer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
If he didn't want the struts, they wouldn't be there. What makes you think Hollywood couldn't figure a way to supported the mock-up without the struts?
I think it could be, but the problem is making that conform within the existing G XII/J2 design constraints.

As has been mentioned before, the strut seems to be the actual main load bearing element. Removing the strut puts all the load on that narrow ring around the fusion core, which also affects the stability.

Now, the 'full size' set didn't need to worry about hinges or retraction devices, but it DID have to worry about actors walking from the front viewport to the stairs. I suspect the strut beefed up the center of gravity from shifting from actor motion and made the whole thing more stable.

On the filming model, you might not need to worry about the landing gear sans struts being fully load bearing because it might well be supported by the wires, but you do still have the issue of needing a more elegant mechanism to move the legs. Maybe a large 'quarter moon' toothed piece and a gear capped motor..I'm probably using totally incorrect terms here but I can SEE it in my head, so.

It's just my thoughts and speculation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,550 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
...As has been mentioned before, the strut seems to be the actual main load bearing element. Removing the strut puts all the load on that narrow ring around the fusion core, which also affects the stability...
I'll call. We don't know what makes the ship fly, let alone what materials the hull and landing gear are made of. Sure, without the struts, the entire load would be borne by the gear legs. What information about the strength of materials used on the Jupiter 2 are you holding back from us?

And Starseeker: what information about the design of the landing gear hingeing have you been holding back from us? :confused:

Steve, if I may ask, what evidence do you have that Irwin Allen did not want struts on the landing gear?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
I'm thinking that the "upside down cylinder on the ram jack" are the struts like an aircraft. They would actually compress and absorb the shock of the landing. The Hyd. Sys. that actually raises and lowers the gear would be a deferent system altogether. The jacks would be up in the gear well and wouldn't necessarely be seen. Something to think about.

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,107 Posts
I noticed today, that in Derilict the foot pads wobbled back and forth when coming down, in Blast off the legs never went all the way up, looks like they got stuck as the saucer left.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,550 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
...I read that (the hero landing gear) was operated from the outside by said strings, "like a puppet"...
Y3a suggested that, as a project. I just don't know, but puppet wires moving relative to the model sounds like something difficult to hide from the camera.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
I'll call. We don't know what makes the ship fly, let alone what materials the hull and landing gear are made of. Sure, without the struts, the entire load would be borne by the gear legs. What information about the strength of materials used on the Jupiter 2 are you holding back from us?

And Starseeker: what information about the design of the landing gear hingeing have you been holding back from us? :confused:

Steve, if I may ask, what evidence do you have that Irwin Allen did not want struts on the landing gear?
Well, we're discussing the real world filming model and the 'full size' set piece, and that is the thrust of my train of thought, what logic I may have and all that. If we want to get into speculation and 'how did it work if it was real' that's a whole 'nother bag of fish. :)

Real world? The Jupiter 2 setpiece was probably steel pipe and plywood, plus the mechanicals for the fusion core lighting (a part which, as has been said before, was detached and used for other things in the show), whatever spots were placed inside to light the actors, and whatever minor set dressing stuff was used to make the window area somewhat match the main set on the soundstage.

And as to IA and the strut/no strut idea, I just look at the design of the stairway and the leg and all, and it sure says 727 to me. I have no FACTS mind, but I look at other productions before and after and he seemed to like very 'clean' designs. Elegant solutions. That strut on the landing gear smacks of brute force and practical necessity.

We won't discuss the Space Pod at this point because there's a whole bunch of reasons that looked the way it did :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,550 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
...I've been trying to think of a way of making those doors slide up and to the side...Getting the gear to go up and down is easy. Some kind of threaded rod will do the trick. But what if the threaded rod also engaged a circle for a brief time. The circle could have an incline around its bottom circumferance. Travel along the incline would raise or lower a captive attachment to the door. A stop point on at the ends of the incline would slide the door out of the way. The threaded rod would engage and disengage the circle at the beginning (or end) of raising the landing gear. You could make all motions work from one central source...
Starseeker,
I'm having trouble picturing the orientation of your mechanism components. Would you please provide another view, showing how your "circle" relates to the threaded rod? Does the circle engage the threaded rod, or a traveler which moves along the rod, as it turns?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,550 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
I'm thinking that the "upside down cylinder on the ram jack" are the struts like an aircraft. They would actually compress and absorb the shock of the landing. The Hyd. Sys. that actually raises and lowers the gear would be a deferent system altogether. The jacks would be up in the gear well and wouldn't necessarely be seen. Something to think about.
Yes, I think that's the idea. :thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,550 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
...in Blast off the legs never went all the way up, looks like they got stuck as the saucer left.
Yes, there's lots of weird stuff in that sequence. Notice later the fusion core with only one stopped light- and it's dangling by a thread!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,132 Posts
Y3a suggested that, as a project. I just don't know, but puppet wires moving relative to the model sounds like something difficult to hide from the camera.
Actually you see strings and wires in many of the effects shots if you look at them now as still pictures.

I never noticed in this shot of the full size mock up the radar unit that projects from one of the roof hatches

http://www.flickr.com/photos/modern_fred/2110246226/
 
1 - 20 of 108 Posts
Top