New Rocker detail noticed...

Shinobi Fett

Active Hunter
New Rocket detail noticed...

Hey folks...

I've combed through reference for ages and never saw this before... That is not before I noticed a fan made pack had them. There appear to be two parallel horizontal holes in the top section of the rocket, just below the top cone. Here are some reference pics. The contrast is a bit blown-out so as to make it stand out better. Has anyone seen this before? The MOM and AoSW exhibits do not have them. (Those suits were made by LFL for their respective exhibits, so differences from screen used are present) As I said, some fan-made packs have had them. Any thoughts?



Interestingly enough, I found a funny little detail from the AoSW exhibit. Besides mixing up an ESB paint bucket with an ROTJ suit... You can see a label "pack 3" on the inside of the JP


Last edited by a moderator:
cool find on the "Pack 3" label. I can see everyone with a ROTJ suit now debating what what used to label it, and others making templates to replicate the lettering exactly :D
I believe that to be franklin gothic semi-bold condensed... j/k!

Seriously, But the holes on the rocket, are they really holes, or are they markings/weathering? I think the Bradley pack has the holes, but they have been mistaken? The reference photos is mixed. Some, like the DP statue is wrong in some places, like the base cowl of the rocket, which has capsule shaped holes in it, instead of the open L channels. Just curious for something diffinitive.

During my research I only found them on the prepro and the ESB, they seemed to be just black dots that were painted on, but it is difficult to say. They may have been slightly recessed, but none of the pics are clear enough to see that level of detail.

On the AoSW pack there was no sign of them at all. I didn't notice them on the ROTJ pack either.

On the MoM pack in picture number MoM_2002-06-16_045 there is a slight hint of them that implies that they might be concaved recesses.

Great find on the "Pack 3" never notice that one before.

Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not sure what the purpse of the holes are but they are on the pre-pro and ESB jet packs because they featured a functional rocket/grappler. The flanges swiveled out. For some reason, they replaced the functional rocket/grappler with a solid cast one for Jedi. The holes may have been filled in during casting.

The suits that are on tour were not specifically fabricated for the tour. The majority of the components are screen-used. There are some prepro pieces mixed in with stunt parts, but all the parts seem to be authentic.
Maybe these pics can shed some light on the MoM examples (cropped and resized for this thread).


OK, from these pics, it looks like this rocket is a casting from the original. Maybe as Tyler says, a stunt pack. I knew the grapple blades sprung ut in the pre-pro, but didn't know the ESB one carried that over. Is the prepro pack different from the ESB? (Besides the ROTJ similar coloration)

The packs in ROTJ all featured the solid cast grappler, so I would say it goes beyond just being a stunt issue.

To the best of my knowledge the packs are more or less the same with the major diffs being the greeblies, or lack of greeblies, on the bottom and detailing. Replacing the grappler appears to be fairly easy as illustrated in the chronicles photos; it's simply attached to a pole that slides into the body of the pack.
Here are some differences. The "hooks" on the pre-pro have very aggressive cuts, and on the bottoms (tips) they show a lot of sweep back (or anhedral, depending on how you look at it). Plus the tips on the MoM exhibit examples are varied...some of the four have somewhat of a tooth while others seem shaved back on the same rocket. Maybe a little slop in modeling the rocket. Plus, I've always noticed this little chip taken out of the MoM ROTJ example prior to the hinge point on one “hook.” TD, talk about greeblies! Now it seems I'm up to my eyeballs in weeds without a weed-whacker!




This thread is more than 18 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.