There were multiple different versions of the BB8 prop, and the ones where it is moving quickly, well, it’s moving over a thin layer of sand on top of something more solid, and he’s got a rig attached to him, that was green screened out.
Neil was basically right, something like BB8 would have terrible traction over sand dunes.
… and it did:
We built the trikes because we needed a stable driving version. We motorized the ball and had the head move around on top by means of a curved track system. Motorized castors on the back allowed us to steer it. That version could go over pretty much any terrain. The only thing that defeated it was deep, very fine sand.
- Josh Lee
( EDIT: i hate sand, its coarse, irritating… )
The other versions were puppets, with green screened out puppeteers and control arms.
Fast moving BB8 on sand shot, done with puppet, puppeteer, and car camera:
You fell for a marketing campaign.
They absolutely did not build a real world BB8 capable of independently/remote control doing everything it does in the movies.
This is a universe with flying cars and artificial gravity as casually-deployed technology. They clearly shatter the laws of known physics with normal everyday devices. This is like complaining that flying on the magic carpet from the middle east to China in one night would burn Aladdin and Jasmine’s faces off; the prerequisites for the imaginary technology to exist in the first place preclude the objection.
Well, back in the old pre Disney days, heck back in the pre sequel days, there was actually a bunch of books, comics, video games, real nerd shit, that you did actually get bullied if you admitted to reading or caring about.
But, out of that, you did have a kind of consistent set of rules, basically a modified version of our real world laws of physics, that did largely work and made consistent sense.
Like uh, blasters, turbo lasers… they actually have ammo, its varying kinds of compressed exotic gasses that are then excited into becoming plasma.
And then when the physics diverge from reality is that there is some kind of way of basically encapsulating that plasma into coherent bolts that remain coherent and travel, though they do eventually dechore and basically fizzle out.
So, the EM force works differently in the Star Wars universe than it does in ours.
There are different kinds of propulsion and levitation technologies that actually do have different kinds of physical properties and mechanical characteristics and needed raw materials.
Repulsorlifts need to scale to the size and mass of what they are lifting, and they are only capable of basically pushing something away from a large massive body by a very small amount, they do not actually propel anything in a direction at a useful speed, other kinds of devices to that.
Sublight thrusters can move things in a manner much like jet or rocket engines, but require much more input energy. Ships often have to manage their power plants to account for sustained, extreme maneuvering, and shields, and other systems, all at the same time.
And then lightspeed/hyperspace engines are a completely different kind of thing, and are actually more about a computer calculating a trajectory that won’t have you flying into a star or planet at velocities impossible to achieve in our reality.
There are various more detailed explanations for how hyperspace and lightspeed jumps work.
There’s a whole class of Imperial Star Destroyers that basically have a bunch of huge field generators of some kind, that basically pulls any ‘nearby’ lightspeed travelling ships … out of hyperspace, so it can actually do things like blockade hyperspace routes and ambush fleets travelling through hyperspace.
There’s a whole Expanded Universe of lore and detail to go through, and evaluate and try to theorize about, you know, ‘nerd out’ over.
… or you can just say its a silly fantasy movie, who cares, its not that deep bro.
So yeah, if you’re not interested in all that lore, then you’re not that interested, and thats fine.
Oh, I’m fully on board for there being a more or less self-consistent in-universe explanation for these things. “It’s scifi/fantasy bro, just relax” is no fun at all. I would assume that BB-8 has some kind of tractor beam / particle shield technology that temporarily compresses sand and other unstable materials into a solid surface so that he can roll along at high speed no matter the consistency.
You’re talking to a proud owner of the Star Trek Technical Manual, among several other books of nothing but elaborate in-universe technical explanations of fictional technology. I love those things. Saying that a technology you see in SF-F wouldn’t work is boring. What’s fun is finding a fictional explanation for how it would work!
Oh, I’m fully on board for there being a more or less self-consistent in-universe explanation for these things. “It’s scifi/fantasy bro, just relax” is no fun at all.
… then why did you initially pretty much say “just stop thinking about it so hard”?
My criticism is more aimed at whoever would point at BB8 rolling on sand and say “That wouldn’t work!” Maybe it wouldn’t work with our current technology, but clearly they figured out a workaround. Figuring out the in-universe explanation is way more fun.
Well they certainly made RC toys that work the way it looks in the film after the fact. And all I remember him saying was impossible was how BB-8’s “head” kinda floats on top of the sphere.
Remember when he said BB-8 wasn’t possible even though it was an actual remote controlled droid rolling around actual sand?
It wasn’t though.
https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/113600/how-does-bb-8-move-in-the-sand-without-skidding
There were multiple different versions of the BB8 prop, and the ones where it is moving quickly, well, it’s moving over a thin layer of sand on top of something more solid, and he’s got a rig attached to him, that was green screened out.
Neil was basically right, something like BB8 would have terrible traction over sand dunes.
… and it did:
( EDIT: i hate sand, its coarse, irritating… )
The other versions were puppets, with green screened out puppeteers and control arms.
Fast moving BB8 on sand shot, done with puppet, puppeteer, and car camera:
You fell for a marketing campaign.
They absolutely did not build a real world BB8 capable of independently/remote control doing everything it does in the movies.
This is a universe with flying cars and artificial gravity as casually-deployed technology. They clearly shatter the laws of known physics with normal everyday devices. This is like complaining that flying on the magic carpet from the middle east to China in one night would burn Aladdin and Jasmine’s faces off; the prerequisites for the imaginary technology to exist in the first place preclude the objection.
Well, back in the old pre Disney days, heck back in the pre sequel days, there was actually a bunch of books, comics, video games, real nerd shit, that you did actually get bullied if you admitted to reading or caring about.
But, out of that, you did have a kind of consistent set of rules, basically a modified version of our real world laws of physics, that did largely work and made consistent sense.
Like uh, blasters, turbo lasers… they actually have ammo, its varying kinds of compressed exotic gasses that are then excited into becoming plasma.
And then when the physics diverge from reality is that there is some kind of way of basically encapsulating that plasma into coherent bolts that remain coherent and travel, though they do eventually dechore and basically fizzle out.
So, the EM force works differently in the Star Wars universe than it does in ours.
There are different kinds of propulsion and levitation technologies that actually do have different kinds of physical properties and mechanical characteristics and needed raw materials.
Repulsorlifts need to scale to the size and mass of what they are lifting, and they are only capable of basically pushing something away from a large massive body by a very small amount, they do not actually propel anything in a direction at a useful speed, other kinds of devices to that.
Sublight thrusters can move things in a manner much like jet or rocket engines, but require much more input energy. Ships often have to manage their power plants to account for sustained, extreme maneuvering, and shields, and other systems, all at the same time.
And then lightspeed/hyperspace engines are a completely different kind of thing, and are actually more about a computer calculating a trajectory that won’t have you flying into a star or planet at velocities impossible to achieve in our reality.
There are various more detailed explanations for how hyperspace and lightspeed jumps work.
There’s a whole class of Imperial Star Destroyers that basically have a bunch of huge field generators of some kind, that basically pulls any ‘nearby’ lightspeed travelling ships … out of hyperspace, so it can actually do things like blockade hyperspace routes and ambush fleets travelling through hyperspace.
There’s a whole Expanded Universe of lore and detail to go through, and evaluate and try to theorize about, you know, ‘nerd out’ over.
… or you can just say its a silly fantasy movie, who cares, its not that deep bro.
So yeah, if you’re not interested in all that lore, then you’re not that interested, and thats fine.
But some people are, and have been, for decades.
Oh, I’m fully on board for there being a more or less self-consistent in-universe explanation for these things. “It’s scifi/fantasy bro, just relax” is no fun at all. I would assume that BB-8 has some kind of tractor beam / particle shield technology that temporarily compresses sand and other unstable materials into a solid surface so that he can roll along at high speed no matter the consistency.
You’re talking to a proud owner of the Star Trek Technical Manual, among several other books of nothing but elaborate in-universe technical explanations of fictional technology. I love those things. Saying that a technology you see in SF-F wouldn’t work is boring. What’s fun is finding a fictional explanation for how it would work!
… then why did you initially pretty much say “just stop thinking about it so hard”?
My criticism is more aimed at whoever would point at BB8 rolling on sand and say “That wouldn’t work!” Maybe it wouldn’t work with our current technology, but clearly they figured out a workaround. Figuring out the in-universe explanation is way more fun.
Well, it is one of the most idiotic designs for a robot, ever, after all.
It would make much more sense if they put a repulsorlift in it.
You know, like the Imperial Probe Droids, or the Interrogator Droids.
The Interrogator Droid is even already spherical as well… and was in the original movie.
Well they certainly made RC toys that work the way it looks in the film after the fact. And all I remember him saying was impossible was how BB-8’s “head” kinda floats on top of the sphere.
this is slander
No, what you were saying about Neil was actually closer to slander, what with you being factually wrong and all that.
Impossible.