BTS The Star Destroyer bridges of the Original Trilogy

Interesting. Are those Rebels Star Destroyers a precursor to the Devastator or Avenger?

 

According to Rebels Visual Guide, they are Imperial-I (Devastator type) but aside from the tractor beam targeting array, nearly everything about them shouts "Avenger" rather than "Devastator". I think the artists were more interested in evoking the Avenger's bridge than anything else - they saw it in TESB - they guessed what it ought to look like from the outside - then they created it as best they could.

The other details of the tower face also look like a simplification of those on the Avenger - diagonally slanting blocks framing the bridge, at least.

 

As I understand it, the Rebels Star Destroyers are more of an artist's interpretation rather than a different subclass.

 

Yup. I'd suggest their bridge modules, from the outside, are more consistent with bridge interiors than other ones are though.

Even the movie props have a little "artist's interpretation" (or rather, "modeller's interpretation" about them - they don't necessarily have to be perfect representations.

 

Excellent research! However, the length of the Tantive IV has been revised downwards to a length of 126 meters: StarWars.com Databank

I don't know why, but I suspect it may have something to do with its appearance in TCW.

EDIT: Oh, I missed that it had already been mentioned.

 

He's going with the figures he's worked out based on bridge sets, etc, rather than "databank figures" which are often subject to change or error.

My guess is that the 126m figure was originally only intended to apply to the Tantive III as seen in ROTS - since, based on the assumption that the "hammerhead" is the same size, it has different proportions and is shorter:



It is possible though, that for TCW, after creating the computer model and getting everything matched up, they found that it was quite a bit shorter than they were expecting.

That's probably how TIE fighters got revised downward from 8.99m to 7.24m after Rogue One.

 

Sounds plausible. Thanks Iron_Lord!

Speaking about it, I can't wrap my head around the layout of Tantive IV. In R1, the troopers are running past the cockpit, but to where? The hammerhead is only about 20 meters wide... But that's outside the scope of this thread. Just some thoughts...

 

Princess Leia: Royal Rebel reuses the Star Wars Blueprints image of the Tantive IV's interior:

Tantive IV interior

(without any of the text references to CR-70s and the Sundered Heart)

so I would guess that this is the default layout, in the newcanon era. It's probably what they use for Star Wars Rebels scenes set aboard corvettes, too.

 

The Force is with you, today I wanted to post the first parts of my new study (before I get back to home improvement) and just read your post. Here is the link - http://boards.theforce.net/threads/...r-tantive-iv-unveiled.50045075/#post-54271797 - and during the run of the study your questions will be satisfactorily answered, at least that's what I can only hope for.

From what I've concluded thus far this deck plan is inspired by the cross-section drawing from Star Wars Incredible Cross-Sections but ultimately isn't that reliable in terms of an accurate interior reproduction regarding the Tantive IV we saw in ANH.

 

Yes, the first part was interesting and I'm looking forward to the rest!

I can see where they were going with the interior sets in R1. The door to (what we know now is) the bridge can be seen in ANH (though it's a bit of a continuity error in R1 as the door in ANH looks simpler than in R1 in which the door has a "standard" opening with the black border, something the ANH door lacks. It must also be a double-door).

 

According to Rogue One there is a pentagonal hub adjacent to the corridor leading to the bridge or cockpit (dang, is that a "cockpit" or a "bridge" on the Tantive IV?) but I doubt there is enough place in the hammerhead section to accomodate the hub where Antilles was killed. Looks like I have to do that visualization ASAP...

 

Vader is shown throttling Antilles about half-way down the hull, not in the hammerhead:

ICS Corvette cross-section

That ICS book was used by the Rogue One movie-makers for the Star Destroyer - so it makes sense they'd use it for other things too.

 

I'll reply to this in your other thread so not to clutter this one.

 

Sorry if this doesn't help with the actual discussion, but I just checked the novelization again, and can confirm that a much larger bridge for the "Avenger" had originally been planned, at least if we can assume that the novelization is based on the script. Bridge size must have been reduced in later drafts due to budget limitations. Here is what it says in the book ("The Empire Strikes Back by Donald F. Glut based on a story by George Lucas", 1980 Sphere Edition):

This is on page 48 in my edition of the book. I think it's safe to assume that the "Executor" originally was meant to have an even larger bridge, being multiple times the "Avenger's" length.

 

Sith Lord 2015

It says so in the novelization, but I was unable to find that particular reference in any of the ESB screenplay drafts (the first ESB draft just featured "forward (view) port" for Vader's Star Destroyer bridge).

The problem is that we never really know to what extent the novel authors (Foster, Glut, Kahn) were authorized to embellish certain things. Take Alan Dean Foster for example, according to the ANH novelization the Devastator bridge just featured a "circular viewport".

I believe that actually ended up as the lifepod's circular viewport through which Artoo and Threepio watched the Devastator in the distance (and juding by the details on it, it would have been a rather tiny one), assuming that particular film set piece originally belonged to the Star Destroyer cockpit (no hint in the screenplay drafts).

Because of things like that, I've to take information from the novelizations with a grain of salt, unless it reflects authentic screenplay information or hints (which the novel writers received as the basis for the novelizations).

 

You are right. For me those novelizations don't really count either, especially regarding technical details. Just found this one passage interesting. As a kid having lots of imagination that's how I visualized the SD bridge in my head, as being that huge. It wasn't until about a year later that I got a chance to finally watch the actual film. So my "head canon" was always a little biased towards that novel back then.

 

I think the way that the Star Destroyers move through space in the original 77 film, to me anyway, indicate actual pilots (probably two), instead of the 'controllers' working in a pit like what was shown in TESB and ROTJ. I pictured the pilots way back then, before TESB came out, not as the pilot/gunners we see watching the escape pod carrying the droids, with their tech and stormtrooper officer uniforms, but rather as the black helmeted guys aboard the Death Star. As a matter of fact, I believe that this was how the Star Destroyer pilots were depicted in one the 1979 Russ Manning SW newspaper comics.....

 

Maybe Glut was just trying to convey the already very large size of the bridge set as filmed? As we all know, sci-fi writers have no sense of scale.

 

Nibelung

I just realize we may have all been misinterpreting this quote from the novel:

As the colossal ship began to move closer to the ice world, the planet became clearly visible through the windows which stretched 100 metres or more across the huge bridge of the warship.

Yes, the ice world would become clearly visible through the all the front windows of the huge bridge (conning tower).

 

Something else I forgot to mention in post #142:

The fact that the Star Destroyers were spoken of as "Imperial Cruisers" exclusively in the (first) film, and mostly in the script as well (I think they're called Star Destroyers once or twice in the entire final script for the film). "Cruiser", to me, implies a much faster and much smaller ship/craft, than that of the ships known as Star Destroyers in the two sequel films (ESB and ROTJ).

 

Tosche_Station wrote

I pictured the pilots way back then, before TESB came out, not as the pilot/gunners we see watching the escape pod carrying the droids, with their tech and stormtrooper officer uniforms, but rather as the black helmeted guys aboard the Death Star. As a matter of fact, I believe that this was how the Star Destroyer pilots were depicted in one the 1979 Russ Manning SW newspaper comics.....

I believe we just didn't see the Imperial pilots flying the Death Star. When Motti reported they had reached the Alderaan System he came from a location in the back of the "overbridge" but none close two the 'tulip posts' with the black helmeted guys.

Considering we see these working together with the gunners in the main ignition control room (at which real power plant did they shoot these scenes, nobody has yet found an answer AFAIK) and the blast tube, add to this Jerjerrod later turns and looks at a black-helmeted controller in ROJ to order "fire", I'm pretty certain that their main job is just to relay firing orders but I don't see any affiliation with helm or navigation.

The fact that the Star Destroyers were spoken of as "Imperial Cruisers" exclusively in the (first) film, and mostly in the script as well (I think they're called Star Destroyers once or twice in the entire final script for the film). "Cruiser", to me, implies a much faster and much smaller ship/craft, than that of the ships known as Star Destroyers in the two sequel films (ESB and ROTJ).

I concur, but both the Devastator and the "Imperial cruisers" over Tatooine are identified by the screenplay as "Star Destroyers". I think "Star Destroyer" is the umbrella term. According to the radio drama the Devastator is a "battlewagon" (aka battleship) while the ESB screenplay identified the "20" Star Destroyers that had joined the asteroid field blockade as "battlecruisers".

 

Lt. Hija

We know that the script describes the position as the bridge but there is a massive problem if that was indeed the main bridge...





There is no way that they could view the escape pods being released from the position of the bridge, not until it's quite a distance away that it would be no more than a blip in the distance. Could this be a gunnery control bridge located elsewhere, probably in a position that would give a good view to conduct planetary bombardments as well inter-ship engagements? May be they have targeting lasers that allow the main laser cannons to follow onto the target.

 

Maybe the ISD has lots of sensor cams, and can feed data from any of them, to a station that has no direct line of sight to things under the ship?

It makes sense though, that Captain Bolvan is Gunnery Captain Bolvan, not the chief officer in command of the ship. We saw that commanding officer in Rogue One - Corssin.

Maybe that was late in the process? Going by Star Wars Poster Monthly, the Devastator was a "Corellian cruiser" that was "dubbed the "Star Destroyer" by the model squad":

STAR WARS: OFFICIAL POSTER MONTHLY #13
Published October 1978 by Galaxy Publications. Text writers Jon Trux, Michael Marten, John May.

http://www.theforce.net/image_popup/image_popup_global.asp?Image=timetales/misc/arcana/pos13-03.jpg

 

No, the Star Destroyers were always "Star Destroyers," even back in the January 1975 second draft. (It was a term originally applied to a two-man fighter craft in the 1974 rough draft).

I concur with the idea of the location in the 1977 film being originally meant as the bridge (possibly with Star Trek-style viewscreen cameras) but later retconned into something else, like a gunnery port.

 

Django Fett wrote

There is no way that they could view the escape pods being released from the position of the bridge, not until it's quite a distance away that it would be no more than a blip in the distance. Could this be a gunnery control bridge located elsewhere, probably in a position that would give a good view to conduct planetary bombardments as well inter-ship engagements? May be they have targeting lasers that allow the main laser cannons to follow onto the target.

Of course not, but the screenplay is crystal clear that it is the

INT. IMPERIAL STARDESTROYER – COCKPIT
On the main viewscreen, the lifepod carrying the two terrified robots speeds away from the stricken rebel spacecraft.

CHIEF PILOT - There goes another one.

CAPTAIN - Hold your fire. No lifeforms. It must have short-circuited.

Iron_lord wrote

It makes sense though, that Captain Bolvan is Gunnery Captain Bolvan, not the chief officer in command of the ship. We saw that commanding officer in Rogue One - Corssin.

Sorry, I don't buy that the ship we saw in Rogue One was the Devastator, for the simple reason that the Rogue One VFX model only suggested an in-universe length of approx. 1,000 meters, while the Devastator would have at least been 2,000 meters long to accomodate a Tantive IV in its dorsal bay with a length between 123 to 155 meters.

However, I concur that the ANH screenplay apparently didn't reflect final costume choices for the scene we are talking about. As it appears we are ultimately looking at "chief (or master) pilot" and "co-pilot" (i.e. me...hey, shouldn't I know best? ).
Both wear the jumpsuit of an Imperial (TIE) pilot, and we saw more of these (black jumpsuits with black regulation caps) on the Star Destroyer bridges in ESB and ROTJ, locations were you'd expect and did see Imperial starship pilots.