# Blade Runner 2049 Spinner - a better look



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

A diecast replica but now we can see some of it's details, such as a single rear wheel for ground mode...

Cinemachines/ Blade Runner 2049: Spinner 6inch Diecast Vehicle (Completed) Other picture2

Replica details (two sizes)
Cinemachines/ Blade Runner 2049: Spinner 6inch Diecast Vehicle (Completed)
Cinemachines/ Blade Runner 2049: Spinner 3inch Diecast Vehicle (Completed)


----------



## Xenodyssey (Aug 27, 2008)

But has anyone got a modeling license for the movie and plans to do kits from it? Aoshima?

I have to say a single rear wheel makes it look unstable.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Fujimi would be a logical choice since they already have made several kits from the original movie but I have not heard about anyone getting the official license for the new film yet.


----------



## electric indigo (Dec 21, 2011)

Here's the full-size prop at a recent VR advertising event










See also:

The cars of Blade Runner 2049


----------



## terryr (Feb 11, 2001)

Xenodyssey said:


> ...
> 
> I have to say a single rear wheel makes it look unstable.


They sell a bunch of these.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRP_Can-Am_Spyder_Roadster










I had to wonder why the original had such fat tires, when it flew everywhere. The update is more 'realistic' that way.

Now just explain how it gently floats up into the air without a blast wave on the ground.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Interesting shot of the original Spinner in the new movie- looks like it is being used as a power source from the thick cables leading away from it








But it is not the same one we saw in the original film- notable differences are the front wheel swivel covers have different detailing and the oval window on the side which is split by the door is missing- a repositioned '44' is in that location


----------



## StarCruiser (Sep 28, 1999)

No - it's the single FRONT wheel that looks unstable:


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

terryr said:


> I had to wonder why the original had such fat tires, when it flew everywhere. The update is more 'realistic' that way.


But the original version is prettier.



> Now just explain how it gently floats up into the air without a blast wave on the ground.


Antigravity technology. Or pixie dust.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

The designer, Syd Mead, always described it as using ducted air (which would have caused an incredible back wash during liftoff), most descriptions usually involve some sort of anti-grav or repulsor lift system-


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

I find the new Spinner very unimaginable and a cheap knock off of the original by building it on a trike.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Yeah, the idea was that a Spinner (or other brand of flying cars) was an aerodyne vehicle, where air is blown over specific surfaces to generate lift (which just seems like magic to me but it's a real thing  ), so yes, there should have been a hella powerful downwash from a police Spinner and that's a thing Ridley Scott missed. 

It wouldn't have to be anti-grav to work, it would just require a very powerful yet lightweight power plant to run the jet engines. It's just a matter of directing the thrust over the right aerodynamic surfaces. See also Avro 'aerocar' or flying saucer. That never really did what it was supposed to do but it was mainly a control issue that would likely be child's play with today's computer assist technology.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

The original Spinner design was elegant- the curves spoke of advanced engineering and professional industrial manufacturing.
The New Spinner has that cheap built from flat planes look that just screams movie prop.

I really wish that they could have had Syd Mead on the design team once again


----------

