Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com Amazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

UCS falcon rumours (that turned out to be true!)

15051535556128

Comments

  • BartelasBartelas Hiking Into Mordor Member Posts: 130
    I have to say: I got on the hype train last year when the Falcon appeared on the Death Star Box and since then I spent a lot of time thinking about it. Especially now in August when the teasers started. I don't know if I got too hyped up, but their design is for me more than disappointing. I mean they could also call this one " 10179 + Ultra-HD texture pack ". Wasn't 10179 also been designed by the Star Wars lead designer in his freetime? And now you have more than one guy designing it, a decade after the last one and what do they come up with? Not with a reinvented set, but basically with the same one. There are so many new and different parts that could have been used to create something new. 

    I am not saying it's a bad set. God no.
    It's a bad set for everyone who got in touch with 10179 and expects something different after a bloody decade!
    FollowsClosely7BSJELJ1S
  • SMCSMC UKMember Posts: 1,803
    ^ Not the only one Sumo still thinks it's only a rumour.
    CM4Spharmjod
  • piratemania7piratemania7 New EnglandMember Posts: 2,098
    ^sumo? Sumo who?
    gmonkey76SumoLego
  • CrzypenguCrzypengu United StatesMember Posts: 77
    edited August 2017
    I feel like there could still be around a 1000 or more extra parts available after the Exterior is done. You have to remember that some pieces are being swapped out and some are being added to the model. An interior of the room with the Dejarik table and the hallway leading up to the cockpit would be nice.
  • Wicket_WWicket_W Forest moon of EndorMember Posts: 17
    edited August 2017
    I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but the side docking circle airlock thing(?) seen in the falcon leak matches perfectly with the one seen floating in space in the LEGO group's teaser video.

    (Someone please enlighten me on the name of that thing)
    C0chise
  • redarmyredarmy AberdeenMember Posts: 725
    Roughly 2500 extra pieces cannot be greebling alone..and the chassis probably wouldn't have changed that much...so with that Sherlockian deduction....it must be some degree of interior or partial set scenery..either that or i'm speaking out of my arse..i know which my money is on:-)
  • PaperballparkPaperballpark UK / KLMember Posts: 3,545
    ^ It depends if they added greebling to the underside of it, which didn't have any on the original.
    bandit778gmonkey76C0chiseYeestlux
  • chrisalddinchrisalddin UKMember Posts: 2,872
    i have a grate idea. TLG should make this UCS MF a free gift with order's over £1000
    and have the offer run for6 months to give us time to save up the cash. :)
    M_Boss
  • TyresOFlahertyTyresOFlaherty USAMember Posts: 340
    edited August 2017
    Wicket_W said:
    I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but the side docking circle airlock thing(?) seen in the falcon leak matches perfectly with the one seen floating in space in the LEGO group's teaser video.

    (Someone please enlighten me on the name of that thing)
    It's an airlock, you were right :) 


    snowhitie
  • CrzypenguCrzypengu United StatesMember Posts: 77
    redarmy said:
    Roughly 2500 extra pieces cannot be greebling alone..and the chassis probably wouldn't have changed that much...so with that Sherlockian deduction....it must be some degree of interior or partial set scenery..either that or i'm speaking out of my arse..i know which my money is on:-)
    The bottom part of the set wasn't as detailed as it could have been, but I still think there could be around 1000 parts or more for an interior.
    TyresOFlaherty
  • chrisalddinchrisalddin UKMember Posts: 2,872
    re the airlock. if you think about it.
    it's a good place to have the airlock.
    as it dubble as the landing ramp.
    and i never link this before in my head. my god i am slow......... 
  • YeeYee USAMember Posts: 18
    CM4S said:
    Am I the only one who didn't think the Falcon on the Death Star box meant anything? I wasn't hyped or like "oh wow they're making a Falcon!" at all. Just.. box graphics. 
    After seeing that a year ago it's what got me to save up some cash for it. I've had $800 stashed away since July saving up a little each paycheck. 
  • PaperballparkPaperballpark UK / KLMember Posts: 3,545
    ^^^Looking at that cutaway, there doesn't really look to be many places where there should be an interior! Not sure I'd just want a circular corridor...
  • thehornedratthehornedrat Member Posts: 86
    I'm excited with this! Definitely looking better than the 10179! Also noticed the silhouette of the Star destroyer, bottom left. Just like the Death Star update of the MF, the next UCS may well be a 10030 update!
  • BrainsluggedBrainslugged England (the grim North)Member Posts: 1,106
    CM4S said:
    Am I the only one who didn't think the Falcon on the Death Star box meant anything? I wasn't hyped or like "oh wow they're making a Falcon!" at all. Just.. box graphics. 
    I think the jury was out on whether the Millennium Falcon on the box actually meant anything. Of course, in hindsight it probably did - especially if the leaked MF pic is real which has a similarly silhouetted star destroyer.
  • PapaBearPapaBear East CoastMember Posts: 408
    I'm excited with this! Definitely looking better than the 10179! Also noticed the silhouette of the Star destroyer, bottom left. Just like the Death Star update of the MF, the next UCS may well be a 10030 update!
    Good point.  Maybe I should sell mine b4 the price drops and rebuy when it does
    FollowsClosely
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,568
    edited August 2017
    ^sumo? Sumo who?
    Be careful, if you say that three times, the Birdman will appear.  Or a Vulture... or maybe Batman.

    And it appears that some unsubstantiated speculation ended up being correct by coincidence... and few pieces of verifiable evidence were actually confirmed.

    Congrats!  Can we move on to speculating about a Star Destroyer re-release!!!!
    Switchfoot55gmonkey76stluxbandit778YodaliciousFollowsCloselycatwranglermonstblitzVorpalRyu
  • PapaBearPapaBear East CoastMember Posts: 408
    Didn't the promo say it would be available @ the Lego store on Sep 1st?

    Also, an extra 2300 pieces would seem to indicate it's gonna be a lot bigger with an interior.  Don't think they would add scenery or anything else to a UCS like this.  Sell the extra stuff as a standalone set, not as an add-on to a $800 UCS.
  • mcmeadormcmeador USAMember Posts: 29
    PapaBear said:
    Didn't the promo say it would be available @ the Lego store on Sep 1st?
    Revealed Sept 1st. Available Oct 1st. 
  • MolicanMolican GermanyMember Posts: 29
    1. I am not really convinced yet... The copyright takedown could also be for the use of the lego logo on a fake picture. I personally don't believe that they are really using the lbg boat rigging thing again. Why after such along time they would rerelease one of the most expensive lego parts ever? Why not the 1x8 sand green bricks then also? I don't believe..... 
    C0chiseBartelas
  • large88large88 The NetherlandsMember Posts: 15
    Molican said:
    1. I am not really convinced yet... The copyright takedown could also be for the use of the lego logo on a fake picture. I personally don't believe that they are really using the lbg boat rigging thing again. Why after such along time they would rerelease one of the most expensive lego parts ever? Why not the 1x8 sand green bricks then also? I don't believe..... 
    Those boat riggings were used in 70810-1: MetalBeard's Sea Cow.
    Thats not very long ago...
  • jamiestjamiest englandMember Posts: 37
    large88 said:
    Molican said:
    1. I am not really convinced yet... The copyright takedown could also be for the use of the lego logo on a fake picture. I personally don't believe that they are really using the lbg boat rigging thing again. Why after such along time they would rerelease one of the most expensive lego parts ever? Why not the 1x8 sand green bricks then also? I don't believe..... 
    Those boat riggings were used in 70810-1: MetalBeard's Sea Cow.
    Thats not very long ago...
    Wrong colour......
  • legojeroenlegojeroen NetherlandsMember Posts: 31
    Molican said:
    Why after such along time they would rerelease one of the most expensive lego parts ever? 
    As a huge middle finger to those who are selling it for an insane price on Bricklink
    FollowsCloselysid3windr
  • large88large88 The NetherlandsMember Posts: 15
    jamiest said:
    large88 said:
    Molican said:
    1. I am not really convinced yet... The copyright takedown could also be for the use of the lego logo on a fake picture. I personally don't believe that they are really using the lbg boat rigging thing again. Why after such along time they would rerelease one of the most expensive lego parts ever? Why not the 1x8 sand green bricks then also? I don't believe..... 
    Those boat riggings were used in 70810-1: MetalBeard's Sea Cow.
    Thats not very long ago...
    Wrong colour......
    Colours are not an issue, lbg is an active colour, as long as the mold exists.
  • MolicanMolican GermanyMember Posts: 29
    edited August 2017
    ^ I'm aware of all these points. I of course meant the BL prices. I think sometimes Lego does not rerelase colours on purpose, as for example the 1x8 sand green brick could have been of use in the ghost house and Slave I also. Just to make pieces rare... Well, we'll see in September :-) 
    Again, I just wonder why they would use the rigging thing again. It's "ok" on 10179, but it's about time for a new look. 
    FollowsClosely
  • alldarkeralldarker NetherlandsMember Posts: 225
    @CCC: well said, and very comparable to my own thoughts regarding this set. It's exactly what I both expected and what I wanted. 
    Back in the day I ordered the 10179 UCS MF on day one. I opened the seals carefully only to check the number on the certificate, and never opened anything else, keeping the set MIB until about four years ago, when I sold it (at an excellent profit) to pad a downpayment on our house. I've never regretted selling my 10179, as even back then there were rumours of a potential rerelease of a UCS MF. And man, did I ever hate that open cockpit construction. But I knew that I'd always be down for a newer version of the UCS Millennium Falcon, same scale, but improved. Just like this one is. Even with the single lone image we are able to see now, I couldn't be happier with it. A (limited) interior would be VERY welcome, but to be honest, most of my models are only ever on display, and I've always found the interiors of the modular buildings to be a waste of parts. 
     
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 18,312
    edited August 2017
    Molican said:
    I think sometimes Lego does not rerelase colours on purpose, as for example the 1x8 sand green brick could have been of use in the ghost house and Slave I also.
    They could have put 1x8 sand green bricks into the Haunted House, but was it needed? No. I think the designers have to justify bringing back an old part - it is not just a case of let's put one in for the hell of it. In the case of the haunted house, I cannot think of anywhere in it that a 1x8 brick was needed that couldn't be done with the existing sand green 1x2, 1x4 and 1x6 bricks. If using a 1x8 brick had truly enhanced the set, I'm sure they would have done it.
    Aanchir
  • MolicanMolican GermanyMember Posts: 29
    OK, two more points. What about the rectangular antenna? There is a dish on the picture... And can anyone identify the lbg bars behind the circles/outlets? They look more like the old style from 10179, which are out of production (BL part #4095).
  • large88large88 The NetherlandsMember Posts: 15
    edited August 2017
    ^there is a new version of this bar still in production #63965

    It seems this set is based in the old trilogy, there are images of classic Star Destroyers on the leaked image as well. Maybe they will include a rectangular antennae as well...
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 18,312
    Given the BB-8 hint, I'm hoping they do it so that the user can upgrade it from the OT to the TFA version themselves. I doubt it is many extra parts necessary to convert the dish.
  • MAGNINOMINISUMBRAMAGNINOMINISUMBRA Member Posts: 993
    This baby's got a few surprises left in her, sweetheart!
  • piratemania7piratemania7 New EnglandMember Posts: 2,098
    Is it released yet?
  • magpie9magpie9 Member Posts: 11
    If the image of the Falcon on the Death Star box was a clue to this set like countless people seem to believe, then where is Cloud City from the Slave 1 box or the AT-AT from the Snowspeeder box? It's all just a coincidence. Designer videos have so far been the only thing that may have held hints with both the Falcon(being eaten by the cardboard spaceworm) and the Helicarrier from a couple years ago.
  • MolicanMolican GermanyMember Posts: 29
    large88 said:
    ^there is a new version of this bar still in production #63965


    That's not the point. If some (chinese/japanese) afol just pimped his 10179 with new parts and used the well-discussed cockpit part to make a fake picture, he may have forgotten to replace the old style bar with #63965. The old style 6.6 bar has a shorter short side, which looks also better when building the 10179 cockpit. If the bars in the pictures are old style: fake. q.e.d.
  • willp2003willp2003 Member Posts: 88
    People wondering where all the extra parts are going - What about a stand? All that greebling will use a lot as well. 
  • PaperballparkPaperballpark UK / KLMember Posts: 3,545
    Molican said:
    large88 said:
    ^there is a new version of this bar still in production #63965


    That's not the point. If some (chinese/japanese) afol just pimped his 10179 with new parts and used the well-discussed cockpit part to make a fake picture, he may have forgotten to replace the old style bar with #63965. The old style 6.6 bar has a shorter short side, which looks also better when building the 10179 cockpit. If the bars in the pictures are old style: fake. q.e.d.
    I understand what you mean. Very clever thinking! Unfortunately I can't quite make them out...
  • pvp3020pvp3020 Member Posts: 101
    CCC said:
    I think the designers have to justify bringing back an old part - it is not just a case of let's put one in for the hell of it. 
    ^This. My understanding is that designers are given a budget - i.e. how much it will cost to produce the set. It's cheaper to pick from the existing parts palette. If a designer wants to bring back an old part/colour combo, they would have to justify the additional costs involved. I don't believe Lego purposely keep parts rare for their exclusivity and aftermarket value. It's a different story for minifigs of course! 
  • piratemania7piratemania7 New EnglandMember Posts: 2,098
    ^I understand; but in this one instance it is very difficult for me to believe that a "budget" was of primary concern when it came to designing this set.
    FollowsCloselyYee
  • SMCSMC UKMember Posts: 1,803
    SumoLego said:

    And it appears that some unsubstantiated speculation ended up being correct by coincidence...
    This thread started because there was information, a rumor if you like of a new UCS MF. Importunately this rumor came from a reliable source, so what have we learnt? That reliable sources are on the whole reliable.

    Then we also got clues coming from Lego. When @CM4S said that someone spinning around on a designer video could mean we were getting a carousel I thought he was reading a bit too much into it. But I was wrong and I learned to trust CM4S instincts a bit more and also that Lego really does leave clues of upcoming sets in these intros.

    Maybe you should try and learn from this, you have spent the last few months jumping on anyone that dared to suggest for example that a cardboard space slug in a design video might be related to an upcoming set.

    And now rather than have the good grace to say I was wrong you are still asserting that it was just a coincidence.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 18,312
    SMC said:
    SumoLego said:

    And it appears that some unsubstantiated speculation ended up being correct by coincidence...
    This thread started because there was information, a rumor if you like of a new UCS MF. Importunately this rumor came from a reliable source, so what have we learnt? That reliable sources are on the whole reliable.
    Of course reliable sources are reliable. Because if they are not reliable, then they are no longer reliable sources. The question then is how unreliable does a reliable source have to be before they are no longer reliable.
    SMC said:

    Maybe you should try and learn from this, you have spent the last few months jumping on anyone that dared to suggest for example that a cardboard space slug in a design video might be related to an upcoming set.
    There is no proof as yet that the cardboard whale is a space slug or is related to the UCS Falcon in any way. And there probably never will be any proof. It is the wrong shape and completely the wrong scale for the UCS MF. It might be an in-joke if the designer wanted a whale on the Carousel and was over-ruled in favour of the frog. It might be another set in future, it might be a set from the past. Is it meant to be the whale from 31051? It must just be a couple of guys dicking around. We'll probably never know unless they say what they were doing.

    Was the nought and crosses in the Brick Bank video an indication of the Friends tic-tac-toe polybag. Or harking back to older tic-tac-toe sets. Or just coincidence?

    The Assembly Square video (maybe others too) has a couple of them doing the classic Batman and Robin climbing a rope at the start, yet the Batcave came out before it. Does this mean we are getting another classic Batman set? Or just that the Batcave was coming out about the time they made the video and they thought it was cool to pretend to climb like that to celebrate the release.

    pharmjodSumoLegostluxPitfall69
  • pharmjodpharmjod 1,170 miles to Wall Drug, USAMember Posts: 2,899
    I think @SumoLego is having fun with everyone and being ridiculous. He's not wrong that all of the speculation and rumors are still essentially coincidental unless actually confirmed by LEGO as intentional. I could however be wrong. I do know that he has been incredibly generous with everyone he's ever traded with on the forum so I don't much care about his lawyer quirks =)
    SumoLegoMuftak1sid3windrstluxmonstblitzPitfall69
  • piratemania7piratemania7 New EnglandMember Posts: 2,098
    Let's focus please no derailing!
  • legoleppylegoleppy MarylandMember Posts: 73
    Just a thought for all those extra pieces that I don't think has been mentioned. I know the previous MF was huge and without a stand. How many pieces would make for a vertical stand so the top of her ship would be displayed?
    catwranglerPapaBearYee
  • catwranglercatwrangler Northern IrelandMember Posts: 1,824
    I'm wondering if it'd be sturdy enough vertically, but what if it was displayed leaning back a little (like a book on one of those stands you get to hold cookbooks open in the kitchen)? Those of you who own the original UCS Falcon - do you think a stand could be brickbuilt that could support its weight if it were vertical? 
  • Rainstorm26Rainstorm26 Chicago Burbs USA (and sometimes Ireland)Member Posts: 1,004
    I think I know what all the extra pieces are going to be used for instead of an interior. They have designed the new UCS MF to be a hybrid of #10179 and Insult on Hoth with small little models to be placed all around the MF.   
    Yee
  • JooTogJooTog Southern CaliforniaMember Posts: 939
    The Death Star has 20+ minifigures, so I do not think it is unreasonable for this set to have 10+ or even 20+ minifigures. With the anniversary of Ep 4, the rumored mynock (Ep 5), and the hinted BB-8 (ep 7,8), you will think all movies featuring the MF will be represented.

    On all the extra pieces, I do not know, but I appreciate a nice stand. An interior will be nice, but I can do without. Maybe just a bunch of brick-built asteroids? ;-)

    Also, I mentioned before that with the rumored 2 radars I will have to buy 2... but now I think I will need a third one to have with no radar as at the end of ROTJ :-D
    Yodaliciousbandit778
Sign In or Register to comment.

Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?

Please use our links: LEGO.com Amazon

Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Brickset.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, the Amazon.com.ca, Inc. Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.