# The Icarus... which version though?



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Got a question: I just ordered all the original Ape movies on Blu Ray, and to celebrate my coming Ape-For-A-Day 1080p marathon I also ordered a kit of the spaceship. But which version to make it? Kinda leaning toward the Escape burned up one, but my Son says to do the pristine one before the crash in the first film. Thoughts?


----------



## Notyourhero (Jul 4, 2019)

The pristine one my friend is very sharp.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Notyourhero said:


> The pristine one my friend is very sharp.


But anyone can make a pristine one, the burned one seems like more of a challenge.... :wink2:


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

Too bad you didn't get 2 because if you had you could build one of each.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

The whole thing with this ship is a tangled mess of time loops, massive conjecture and just plain mental headaches. 

The problem is, the ship is really almost an afterthought to the central premise of the movie, being 'just something' that's on screen just long enough to make it clear that a. there's a spaceship and b. it broke and went bye-bye. Until it didn't. Kinda. Maybe. 

It would have been just as easy for the production if the film started with the astronauts pulling their raft on the shore with a line like "wow we got out of our ship just in time, it sank like a rock!". You know, I'm not sure why they didn't do it that way, It would have saved a ton of money. I guess they felt the kids would feel cheated if they didn't see a spaceship.

And therein lies the problem. We have never seen the complete spaceship. What we DO see is clearly poorly suited for any kind of exploring or even colony building. So what is one to do? Dive into conjecture. SOMETHING has to be under the waterline of what we see in the movie to enable the shown bit to bob in the water. 

So, since we don't know what should be there, the main build would be a diorama replicating the scene from the movie. 

Then we have 'plan b'. duplicating the crash site of the second ship as seen in Beneath the Planet of the Apes. Another diorama but much more busy and visually interesting.

BUT there's more conjecture at work. There's random stuff all over the place (including the landing legs/stairs from the semi-scale Jupiter II prop) that is meant to imply that phantom aft part of the ship, but it really doesn't work when you mentally 'fill in the gaps' of what is shown. Again, it was just enough to convey an impression as we get on with the activities of the other big blonde guy that's the star of the film. 

So then Escape from the Planet of the Apes. Now the ship is very much just a landing capsule, and it's all burned from re-entry and just maybe the death of Future Earth. But it's not the same ship as seen in the previous two movies. The prop was modified for the needs of the production with no regard if it actually 'worked'. Once again it's just a kind of bare bones placeholder to establish the setting of the story and quickly forgotten. The advantage is there's a number of both diorama possibilities and stand-alone display options. 

And THEN you have the ship from the Planet of the Apes TV series, which is the 'Escape' ship with a few more mods to make it TV friendly. 

It's a tough one Chris. 

Ohhhh. here's a wild idea. The ANSA test model. bare metal and composites, used for drop tests for glide characteristics. It avoids all the issues of 'what was under the water'. It rests on a wheeled cradle ready to be towed to the lifting aircraft. 

It's different. What do you think?


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

I like the very first version we see- some light scorching but not burned to a crisp. For me what makes this ship also special is that the aft section is all in your mind. Quite frankly I have yet to see a conjectural aft section which really seems to fit the design well and most do not allow enough underwater mass to project the part of the ship we do see angled up out of the water.
The ship as mentioned, is just a plot device to get people (or Apes) to the place for the story to begin. I still love the design of it- I have an old Wilco kit of it that I really want to see on the shelf someday.

In terms of how to model yours, I would go for what part it played in the films which spoke best to you. Variants of this ship are in each production, none exactly matching others so you can really have some fun customizing this build


----------



## Captain Han Solo (Apr 5, 2002)

When I built several 1/48 Crows Nest models I wanted to weather them per the opening sequence of the film. However, despite my "gentle recommendation " that I do just that, the individuals I was building them for wanted the stock, just rolled out of the factory look.

I regret not investing in a kit of my own as I had grand ideas to build it in a diorama of the crash sequence.

To me, William Creber created another work of art. Like his Gemini 12,Flying Sub and the modifications to the Seaview.
As we saw it weathered in the film, that's what I would do it.


----------



## terryr (Feb 11, 2001)

Hmmm. The first time it re-enters it's barely damaged. The second time it looks like a burnt hamburger. Both times were under computer control, supposedly. I guess being underwater fried a few circuits.

Amazing job by the Apes lifting it out of the lake, finding the hatch, and launching it in a nick of time.

As for the 'complete ship' I've seen several designs and haven't really liked any of them. Some stunk. The nose reminds me of the XB-70, and that thing was huge.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Well, Everyone has their own ideas.

What works for me is the ship as seen in the 1st film is just the re-entry capsule of a much larger ship. Most of which is still in orbit.

The reason the ship sits so nose high in the water? Artistic need. 

If I want to get clever then there is some kind of propulsion behind the cockpit. Probably heavy, causing the angle. 
In the movie it's very obvious that the ship does not extend far below the surface. 

If you want to try and get "realistic" Then the ship needed a much larger living/working area than shown for its mission. So the orbital module would allow this when attached to the main craft. 

The re-entry section appears to be "flown" to a landing. No parachutes, so it needs some sort of flight controls, be they reaction or aerodynamic. None are shown other than the "canards".


----------



## Krel (Jun 7, 2000)

They were on a one-way trip, so the ship needed to carry everything they would need not only for exploration, but EVERYTHING they would need for the rest of their lives. The ship would need to be huge, even if there was a booster in orbit. It also designed like a belly lander. For it to stick out the water like that, ,you have to think of it like an iceberg. At least 90 percent of the ship would be underwater.


The deleted beginning explains why the ship looks like that in "Escape From the Planet of the Apes". In the deleted beginning, the view is past the space suited figures, out the ports as the Earth burns-up from the bomb being set off. 



David.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

terryr said:


> Hmmm. The first time it re-enters it's barely damaged. *The second time it looks like a burnt hamburger.*


Well, I imagine Milo working on it with the glee of a child on Christmas morning, seeing what he could get to activate with no though of any actual test flight, when a soundless wall of flame appeared on the horizon, swelling to terrifying proportions headed their way... knowing their only one in a million chance of surviving it would be to launch... pressing buttons and praying to the God of science for a miracle. Flying though that nuclear inferno singed the ship's hull worse than actual re-entry... later, after the freak reverse time dilation, the aft freezing section was replaced by a heat shield sliding into place for an old fashioned splashdown on what would be the vehicle's final, desperate landing on Earth.

That's how I see it, anyway.


----------



## Hobby Dude (Aug 7, 2019)

The first series from the 70's was the best, that ship was the first one with Charlton Heston, totally in the zone! love it, who make it? Is it a kit or a toy?


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Hobby Dude said:


> The first series from the 70's was the best, that ship was the first one with Charlton Heston, totally in the zone! love it, who make it? Is it a kit or a toy?


It's a 3D printed kit I found on eBay. Gotta do searches to find the gold... ;


----------



## Hobby Dude (Aug 7, 2019)

Ah, I thought it was a new kit or a re-issue of some sort. I'll check with my buddies at my local hobby shop. Thanks!


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

terryr said:


> Hmmm. The first time it re-enters it's barely damaged. The second time it looks like a burnt hamburger. Both times were under computer control, supposedly. I guess being underwater fried a few circuits.
> 
> Amazing job by the Apes lifting it out of the lake, finding the hatch, and launching it in a nick of time.
> 
> As for the 'complete ship' I've seen several designs and haven't really liked any of them. Some stunk. The nose reminds me of the XB-70, and that thing was huge.


There is some similarity, and both are really cool looking!

I believe the POTAs ship was inspired by project Gemini. They took the Gemini with The OMS, stretched it, squashed it, added the canards, then scaled it up.


----------



## The_Engineer (Dec 8, 2012)

Well, there was a bunch of things from the 1st 3 ape movies concerning the spaceship that didn't make much sense (to me). With the 2nd movie, Beneath, the fact that ANSA sent a second ship as a 'rescue' mission never made any sense to me at all. Tyler's ship was sent out knowing that if they returned, it wouldn't be for hundreds of YEARS. Then to wait, say 1-2 years and then flip out and send a ship to rescue the first doesn't make any sense what so ever. In Beneath, we see 'Skipper's' ship which has a small rear booster attach to it, but looking at it, there's no living space and it's just too small. Then you get to Escape with the 3 Ape-onauts and it's clearly a different ship (smaller) then either Tyler's or Skipper's ships, yet we are told it's suppose to be Tyler's ship which doesn't make sense. Another problem I saw was if Skipper and Brent were suppose to rescue Tyler's crew and bring them back they would need 6 suspended animation chambers for everyone. Since their ship was the same type as Tyler's ship then they only had the 4 chambers so that meant they can only rescue 2 of Tyler's crew and therefore the other 2 were going to be left behind - which defeats the purpose of a rescue mission. Someone came up with an explanation for this by stating the crashed spaceship we saw on Beneath was piloted by Skipper only and Brent piloted another ship which landed normally. This other ship (of Brent's) was the one the apes used in Escape and was the smaller type with 3 chairs (no suspended animation chambers). With 2 ships you have the space for 7 people (Tyler's 4 + Skipper and Brent) for 6 people and space for 1 more. I really like this explanation and it does make it work.


----------



## Milton Fox Racing (May 27, 2014)

How was it described in the book? :lurk5:


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Well the only "true" novel is the original POTA by Pierre Boulle. It is a very different story from the movie, and just an ok read. I think it lost something in the translation.

The novelizations of the movies I have not read and I expect would follow the movie plot very closely.

The only real reason a "rescue" mission was launched was to allow the sequel to get made. As The Engineer points out, nothing in the original movie (or novel) story would allow for the need of a rescue mission. 

As each POTA's production gets less entertaining/watchable, I tend to disregard them. I prefer to look as the one true POTA's as the original 1968 production. But this works only for me.


----------



## alpink (Aug 22, 2010)

Burnt


----------



## terryr (Feb 11, 2001)

POTA is kinda like X-men movies. Just a loose continuity as an excuse for the next movie.

Time travel aside, the rescue mission still doesn't make sense, but sending 2 ships makes less. On the first moon landing, they didn't have 1 or 2 more Saturn 5s ready to go, 'just in case'. Nixon had a speech instead.

https://www.archives.gov/files/pres...tennials/nixon/images/exhibit/rn100-6-1-2.pdf

The real reason is that Charlton Heston didn't want to do a sequel, but agreed to make an appearance. Part 2 was going to be the continuing adventures of Taylor and Nova. SO they just changed the name on some dialogue. Brent even rides a horse with Taylors woman.


----------



## alpink (Aug 22, 2010)

may we suspend our disbelief in order to enjoy entertainment ?


----------



## The_Engineer (Dec 8, 2012)

I don't have the novel for the POTA movie but I do have the original novel from Pierre Boulle as well as the novels for the other 4 ape movies. In the original novel, it's written from the perspective of the main character who states how he and 2 other males (and a pet chimp) travel to another planet. They go into suspended animation for the trip and when they reach the other planet, the ship is left in orbit and they use a shuttlecraft to go down to the surface. This planet has talking intelligent apes and humans are dumb animals. The main character takes 'Nova' as a mate (and I think the other 2 astronauts might have been killed) and by the end of the story, he and nova go back to the ship to return to Earth. Since nova was pregnant, they don't go into suspended animation and she gives birth to a boy and the main character has taught both of them how to speak english. They land the ship on Earth and leave the ship. Off in the distance they can see a jeep coming towards them. Nova screams and takes their son back into the ship while the main character is too stunned to move. In the jeep are apes. The story ends with 2 apes that found this story written on some paper stuffed into a bottle. "A talking human from another planet? This has to be some sort of joke." 

You can see how some elements made it to the POTA movie and how Tim Burton's movie ended similarly to the original novel. There's a book that came out (last year?), The Making Of The Planet Of The Apes by J.W. Rinzler that goes into great detail about the development and making of the POTA movie. I haven't gotten around to reading it but there's a massive amount of information about the original 1968 movie. One of the interesting things I found out awhile back was there was a scene(s) filmed at the end of the movie that were cut (there's at least 1 photo) showing Nova being visibly pregnant. This was dropped when they made Beneath.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Chrisisall, I like the clean version. It's such a clean design I think it deserves a clean build.

Just my 2 cents, Build her how you like!

What kit did you get?

You got me thinking about the Wilco kit I bought years ago.




























A nice kit, but lots of voids.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

mach7 said:


> Chrisisall, I like the clean version. It's such a clean design I think it deserves a clean build.
> 
> Just my 2 cents, Build her how you like!
> 
> ...


My kit is a 3D printing from a dude on eBay. No interior. Got the model today, I'm SO happy with it. Now I need to get to work...


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Any photos of the kit?


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

mach7 said:


> Any photos of the kit?


 Here it is!


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Kinda sad that I won't be using almost half of the kit... when it was printed, the cut off point was almost precisely the Escape ship. That makes my job a lot easier. 1.6 cm of rear pod + heat shield to fabricate/add , and a thinning of the run 'between the eyes' of the ship are the main things.


----------



## alpink (Aug 22, 2010)

that is a pretty clean 3D print.
can just barely see the printed "layer" edges.
have fun


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Fun is the name of the game...


----------



## Milton Fox Racing (May 27, 2014)

I like your place mats. :thumbsup:


----------



## The_Engineer (Dec 8, 2012)

I've seen pictures of the Wilco model built by various people over the years. I thought about getting one but I don't know if they're still available or not. Chrisisall, that model looks like a beauty! Looks like a it's in 3 pieces. I saw that the cut off point is close to the Escape version. If you're planning on making that version, are you going to be exterior or interior screen accurate? (In other words, in order to fit the interior set the exterior needs to be extended a bit as the exterior full scale prop was shorten too much.)


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Chrisisall said:


> Fun is the name of the game...


You broke it! You maniac! you finally, really broke it! Awww dang you! :grin2:


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

The_Engineer said:


> I've seen pictures of the Wilco model built by various people over the years. I thought about getting one but I don't know if they're still available or not. Chrisisall, that model looks like a beauty! Looks like a it's in 3 pieces. I saw that the cut off point is close to the Escape version. If you're planning on making that version, are you going to be exterior or interior screen accurate? (In other words, in order to fit the interior set the exterior needs to be extended a bit as the exterior full scale prop was shorten too much.)


That cut off point isn't just close, it's accurate to within a mm!!! The artist HAD to have done it on purpose to make it easy to do the Escape version! Bless his heart! 
I'm doing the exterior as seen in the beginning of Escape. Always loved it. Took Super 8 movies of it on TV. A 1.6 mm extension & a heat shield need to fabricated... scribe the door lines lightly... thin the run between the windows a bit... this is a plastic I've never worked with as a kit; I must travel slowly.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Steve H said:


> You broke it! You maniac! you finally, really broke it! Awww dang you! :grin2:


 Gol dang me all to heck!


----------



## terryr (Feb 11, 2001)

alpink said:


> may we suspend our disbelief in order to enjoy entertainment ?


Someone once said of movies; " I can believe the impossible but not the improbable". Why not have James Bond have laser eyes? It's just a movie.


----------



## Milton Fox Racing (May 27, 2014)

alpink said:


> may we suspend our disbelief in order to enjoy entertainment ?


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

And on a cinematic note, looky what I found in the post today!

















Unrated & extended versions on the last two!


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Sweet! When is movie night!
I'll bring the popcorn.

;-)


Your ship is really smooth for 3D printing! Very nice.

I'll have to keep an eye on ebay incase another pops up!


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

mach7 said:


> Your ship is really smooth for 3D printing! Very nice.
> 
> I'll have to keep an eye on ebay in case another pops up!


I keep checking and it looks like I lucked out big time. The same artist sold an Escape only version previously at 17 inches... and honestly that was a bit big for my liking. I am blessed by the Gods of modeling, I guess!


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Started etching the panel lines for the hatch, extended the 'cuts' near the nose, some general sanding, but one problem is the run between the windows... this plastic sands rather badly, and though I *did* thin the whole run & taper it at the windows (the model had it the same width end to end), I'm afraid this is the limit of what I can do with that particular area. Just counting on the SEVERE carbon scoring to distract from that minor inaccuracy, I guess. Having a blast though, this is my first build this year!


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Chrisisall said:


> Started etching the panel lines for the hatch, extended the 'cuts' near the nose, some general sanding, but one problem is the run between the windows... this plastic sands rather badly, and though I *did* thin the whole run & taper it at the windows (the model had it the same width end to end), I'm afraid this is the limit of what I can do with that particular area. Just counting on the SEVERE carbon scoring to distract from that minor inaccuracy, I guess. Having a blast though, this is my first build this year!


Looks very good! I don't think the area looks all that inaccurate. 

It "looks" like ABS plastic but the sanding issues sound more like PLA. That stuff just wont sand!


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Chrisisall said:


> And on a cinematic note, looky what I found in the post today!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Um. daaa huuuur? 

I don't think I ever heard of these existing. I don't recall any mention in the many and various books I've picked up over the years (altho I missed out on the giant making-of book that came out recently)

I do know that in some cases there might be an 'overseas' version of a film with different cutting and so on, and of course that time in the '70s when some extra footage would be made for showing a film on TV (Earthquake is probably the most famous example), but 20th Fox was struggling when the last two Apes movies were made and both films show the ragged edge of no money. 

So where did these come from?

And on the kit. About what scale would you call that, or did I miss that part?


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

mach7 said:


> Looks very good! I don't think the area looks all that inaccurate.


Yeah, not too bad. :laugh:
I created the 1.6 mm extension/heat shield out of epoxy putty over a cardboard backing to reduce weight, dremel work next when it sets. I'm liking it. I may need a beach diorama with frogmen on it & sh*t...


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Steve H said:


> I don't think I ever heard of these existing.


 I only heard of them myself when the Blu Rays came out. Got the Battle single disk before I got this set, and the added scene was very nice.


> So where did these come from?


 eBay. 


> And on the kit. About what scale would you call that, or did I miss that part?


 No scale was given by the artist, but it looks like about 1/120. Or something like that.


----------



## Hobby Dude (Aug 7, 2019)

You know what that vehicle reminds me of? Well I will tell you, it reminds me of the front end of a x-15 rocket plane, why you ask? Well I will tell you, if you notice the outside cockpit of the Icarus and compare it to the x-15 rocket plane you will observe a close resemblance.....:grin2:


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Nearly done. Prime & paint then add windows.


----------



## Hobby Dude (Aug 7, 2019)

Looking good there chrisall, I found the full sized Icarus showing its engines...:grin2:


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Primed.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Someone on ebay is selling posters of the original set/ship plans from the studio. They show some detail of the rear of the ship.

These are screen shots from the listing:



















They clearly show 4 rocket motors at the rear in a diamond configuration, and good sized ones at that!

Do we ever see the rear bulkhead of the interior in the movie? If the hatch is there, it can't lead anywhere.

This configuration would explain the ships angle in the water, but is really not very "realistic".


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Chrisisall said:


> Primed.



Looking very good!


----------



## The_Engineer (Dec 8, 2012)

mach7 said:


> They clearly show 4 rocket motors at the rear in a diamond configuration, and good sized ones at that!
> 
> Do we ever see the rear bulkhead of the interior in the movie? If the hatch is there, it can't lead anywhere.
> 
> This configuration would explain the ships angle in the water, but is really not very "realistic".


We never saw the aft end of the ship in the movie, although the interior set has a hatch door which would be to access the rest of the ship. There is a video (I think) on one of the discs of Roddy McDowall getting into a helicopter at the Fox studios and was flying around where he took some photos. One of the photos shows the full scale exterior prop of the spaceship in a vertical position outside one of the buildings. It shows the rocket nozzles on the end of the main wings but none on the aft end of the body.

When they filmed the spaceship in the water, they attached weights to it to get that angle (from what I remember). There was an interior wall, about 3 feet from the windows barely giving enough space for the 3 actors to stay while to climb out the escape tube and hatch one at a time. That's probably why it was cut at that point when they shorten it for Escape. For Beneath they added that small booster section but the original prop was unchanged.


----------



## Hobby Dude (Aug 7, 2019)

I remember seeing some beds for deep space sleep in the film, if i'm not mistaken, on the model its from the red and white stripes back to the main engine stage. Its funky they way they omitted the beds on back on the external shots of the vehicle in the film. I think they should have shown the whole vehicle to "tie" it in to the internal shots in the film. I know the main focus back then was the actual costumes and sets of the incredible series back then. Wasn't Nova a saucy dish as Taylor's gal? Linda Harrison was her name I believe....:grin2::wink2:


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

@!%!!&* seam issues resolved, AFTER painting, then seeing it, then letting it dry, then sanding again...
Anyway, the white is on.


----------



## Hobby Dude (Aug 7, 2019)

Hurry, hurry, hurry Chrisall, Taylor is entering the atmosphere, get that seam! LOL!


----------



## Hobby Dude (Aug 7, 2019)

Oops, too late, LOL! Your kit is looking good bro!


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

It's from this opening...


----------



## Hobby Dude (Aug 7, 2019)

Nice! Gotta' love the original!


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

Hey! Those pilot seats look a lot like the seats in the Spindrift!


Spindrift Set 04 6-26-4 by trekriffic, on Flickr


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)




----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Slowly....


----------



## kekker (Mar 20, 2011)

Chrisisall said:


> Slowly....


...softly, catchee monkey?


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Moving right along!

Looking very nice!


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Chrisisall said:


> Escape from the Planet of the Apes: Pre-title Reconstruction - YouTube


Awww it got pulled before I could see it. Hmph.

Anyway, I am convinced that the opening of the PotA TV series used that 'pre credit' footage from Escape. That also explains the re-used set and so on. I have to love old 20th Fox for their wisdom to not be in a hurry to throw stuff in the dumpster after a production wraps.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

The_Engineer said:


> We never saw the aft end of the ship in the movie, although the interior set has a hatch door which would be to access the rest of the ship. There is a video (I think) on one of the discs of Roddy McDowall getting into a helicopter at the Fox studios and was flying around where he took some photos. One of the photos shows the full scale exterior prop of the spaceship in a vertical position outside one of the buildings. It shows the rocket nozzles on the end of the main wings but none on the aft end of the body.
> 
> When they filmed the spaceship in the water, they attached weights to it to get that angle (from what I remember). There was an interior wall, about 3 feet from the windows barely giving enough space for the 3 actors to stay while to climb out the escape tube and hatch one at a time. That's probably why it was cut at that point when they shorten it for Escape. For Beneath they added that small booster section but the original prop was unchanged.


What I recall is that the ship was mounted on a platform at the angle they wanted and the entire platform sunk. That would be much more stable so they could get repeated takes of the crew exiting and continuity maintained.

The aft of the ship for Beneath and Escape reflects cutting away the mounts used to anchor it to the platform. They're incorporated in the crash site for Beneath and cut clean for Escape, with a pseudo heat shield welded on. Or so it looks to me.

I have seen the construction blueprints before and I never recall those engines even penciled in. I don't know what is going on there.


----------



## The_Engineer (Dec 8, 2012)

I do remember a few years back reading about the filming at lake Powell, and it was mentioned that they attached weights to the full scale prop. If they used a platform, I can't remember. I have seen photos (some in B&W and some in colour) on the filming at lake Powell and they do show a large floating platform with people standing on it and some boats. There's some photos with crew and cast standing on the ship prop. I'm not sure which website it was but it was stated that there was an internal wall about 3 feet from the windows so the inside of the ship had a small space for the 3 actors to stand (not sure about height). That would be a few feet away from the back end of the prop. You can also find the photo online of the prop in vertical position outside one of the studio building. There was some info about the blowing of the escape hatch, the special effects guy misjudged the amount of explosive needed and placed too much so when the charge went off, it also blow off the bottom panel of the window groove as well as the (I think) exterior window panel. As a kid watching POTA in the 70's (and afterward) I couldn't understand what those extra panels were when the escape hatch blew off. It's obvious there's a blooper in the movie (they didn't get enough footage of the ship before the hatch blew) since we see the ship with the escape hatch blown already and then later the escape hatch is there and then it gets blown!

Edit:

I found one site that has some pictures from filming of the movie:

https://planetoftheapes.fandom.com/wiki/Pictures_from_the_set_of_'Planet_of_the_Apes_(1968)'

and here's one from this site showing the full scale prop at the studio:

https://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/99-science-fiction-modeling/357961-pota-icarus-spotted-1968-a.html

I tried to find the other photo from the Roddy McDowell online but it's a hard one to find.

With the Beneath crash site, you can see the separation line between the original prop and where the new burned-up booster is.


----------



## terryr (Feb 11, 2001)

The_Engineer said:


> Edit:
> 
> I found one site that has some pictures from filming of the movie:
> 
> ...


Looks like dry ice at the waterline. which would need a basket to hold it in place.










https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net...Powell7.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20090409204956

Too bad the studio photos didn't get the bottom.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Here it is in prep for the extreme weathering. *YES* I wrote "UNITED STATES" by hand with a sharpie. 90% of what I've done here will be covered by by carbon scoring so it won't even matter. I didn't bother with the finer red & blue stripes near the nose because they are completely gone. And before anyone says it, *YES* the blue-THEN-red stripes going towards the nose on the back end. I have no idea why they were reversed- I'm just trying to be screen accurate with this paint job.


----------



## modelmaker 2001 (Sep 6, 2007)

I like the slightly weathered versions best of all. I'm also fond of the models that show an conjectured aft end of the spacecraft. I have made a couple versions, one of which is made of paper and another which is part of a flying model rocket.


----------



## aussiemuscle308 (Dec 2, 2014)

Steve H said:


> I have to love old 20th Fox for their wisdom to not be in a hurry to throw stuff in the dumpster after a production wraps.


It takes up a lot of space to warehouse all that stuff. As it is, they have vast warehouses full of props for re-use. Also, it may take years for popularity to reach peak cult fandom when someone actually wants it.
Even Paramount had to get rid of a lot of Star Trek stuff that they just couldn't justify. (good stuff like studio models and hero costumes)


----------



## drewid142 (Apr 23, 2004)

*E_pota_wip*

I haven't chimed in here for a long time... dealing with heart issues that have taken me out of model building and everything else... but here's a look at the Escape Scene I was working on when I got shut down. I made home-made decals of the weathering from the movie and did the best I could to be true to the screen look. The plan was to do a layer of paint work on top of all the decals to hide any seams and add a little more textural gunge. I'll get back to it someday I hope, but for now I think it's a good reference for possible paint jobs. Sorry about the cel-phone quality.


----------



## Hobby Dude (Aug 7, 2019)

I noticed the Escape from the Planet of the apes Icarus was a lot smaller than the first Icarus. Heston exited through a porthole in the nose indicating a massive ship. The latter two hatches opened up on top behind the cockpit windows indicating a much, much smaller craft. I don't think the smaller craft has enough room for an escape hatch in its nose, to allow a mouse out of it. The film was into its sets and actors as verses the size and scale of the craft, or they just didn't care...


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

drewid142 said:


> I haven't chimed in here for a long time... dealing with heart issues that have taken me out of model building and everything else... but here's a look at the Escape Scene I was working on when I got shut down. I made home-made decals of the weathering from the movie and did the best I could to be true to the screen look. The plan was to do a layer of paint work on top of all the decals to hide any seams and add a little more textural gunge. I'll get back to it someday I hope, but for now I think it's a good reference for possible paint jobs. Sorry about the cel-phone quality.


Thanks Drew! My plan is the full-on Escape filth & burn job. The one you pictured looks like the TV series one. Too clean for me... 
BTW, your model is the gold standard. No kit has ever been so spot on perfect.
And I hope your heart issues get resolved soon...


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Last pic before the nasty goes on.


----------



## Hobby Dude (Aug 7, 2019)

Redstone rocket? Estes? I have one on my desk, I had it for a good 30 years, I love that kit, but i will never fly it, I don't want to ruin the capsul's escape tower, I had one back in the 80's, my first one, and it's chute didn't open up fast enough and it snapped off its tower, cool kits bro!


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Had to take out the fin colour to prep it further. My work will have to be precise. I need a whole day off for this as it will be more like performance art than straight painting. I won't lie, this will be terrifying & fun at the same time. Can I pull it off? We'll see after Friday... 








Image from my Blu Ray pause-


----------



## tracy.net (Aug 30, 2009)

Oh No don't do it it looks so Good! ARGH


----------



## Hobby Dude (Aug 7, 2019)

Red all the way!:wink2::grin2: This bird you can never change. :grin2: Keep up the good work on your Icarus, I'm a thinkin' on doing my moon base Alpha.....:grin2:


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

tracy.net said:


> Oh No don't do it it looks so Good! ARGH


Sorry man, gonna put it through a firestorm. :wink2:


----------



## tracy.net (Aug 30, 2009)

Ok how did the rest of the prep and sanding go you mentioned a sanding issue. What did you use for your etching of the hatch it looks pretty crisp from what i can see. I might get me one its a cool looking ship.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

tracy.net said:


> Ok how did the rest of the prep and sanding go you mentioned a sanding issue. What did you use for your etching of the hatch it looks pretty crisp from what i can see. I might get me one its a cool looking ship.


After I bonded the nose to the rest with epoxy putty (which is also what I fabricated the rear extension out of) and painted it I saw the seam screaming at me. I filled it with a tiny iine of epoxy putty & sanded it & re-painted the area. Not so big a dealio. General sanding of the printing lines was pretty simple and not too vexing. The hatch I drew with a fine sharpie, then used the sticky-backed tape for pressed-tape letters (yeah, hard to find these days) as a guide for a broken tipped exacto blade used backwards gently at first, but increasing the pressure on the strokes as the grooves deepened. Then I cleared the edge debris with my thumbnail. All old-school junk I picked up here & there over the years. This plastic used for printing is nice & sturdy though, worth the extra elbow grease to do the job IMO. But not so good for radical modification, which is why I accepted the slightly too-wide center run between the windows. I modified it as best I could without buying myself a nasty headache filling in torn up edges with epoxy putty & more (endless) sanding. This Escape version will hide many tiny imperfections with the ridiculously extreme weathering I need to do, or so I hope. Man, am I gonna have me some fun tomorrow! >


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Phase one complete. I strategically sprayed it with flat black & flat gray, let it dry, then sanded lightly in areas with 320 sandpaper to bring up some details. I know what you're thinking, it looks pretty clean, right? Phase two is the streaky dark copper burn s**t to be added by hand with brush & tissues. It's not over yet...


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Not getting to work on this as much as I'd like, work and stuff, y'know how it is. But every little bit helps. 
I realized that the white areas were a bit too white, so I toned them down a little before I add the dark copper burns. The only pure white should really be the scrapes that I'll add near the end. The windows will be the finishing touch.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Template for windows sitting on clear styrene sheet backed with a spritz of gray & flat black.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Okay, I just now finished... mostly. After it dries I might make some minor adjustments, and then I'll put on a protective acrylic coat.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)




----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Last touches. Acrylic coating & window frost. It's pretty much done. 
This was SO interesting to do. More fun than I've had since my Seaview.


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Lighted a little differently...


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Chrisisall said:


> Lighted a little differently...


Very well done sir!

Thanks for sharing!


----------



## Milton Fox Racing (May 27, 2014)

That looks awesome. :cheers2:


Is that a piece of Belleck in the back ground in your work shop? Interesting.


----------



## drewid142 (Apr 23, 2004)

WOW! That looks great!


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

So beat up and yet soooo beoooteeeeful! Nicely done man!


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

drewid142 said:


> WOW! That looks great!


Coming from YOU sir, that means quite a lot!


----------



## scooke123 (Apr 11, 2008)

Turned out great!


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

Trekkriffic said:


> So beat up and yet soooo beoooteeeeful! Nicely done man!





scooke123 said:


> Turned out great!


Thanks guys. Here's another pic, okay- obviously not in the same scale, but I thought it might be cool anyway. (I don't live near the ocean or I'd take a picture of it floating  )


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

I hadda do one in the water...


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Looks great in the water!

Did you ever have your ape day marathon?


----------



## Chrisisall (May 12, 2011)

mach7 said:


> Looks great in the water!
> 
> Did you ever have your ape day marathon?


Alas no; we've been watching them one at a time though...


----------

