Ahhight, back to Space Buckets. So named by me as they were inexpensive plastic Space Toy sets which came packed into a plastic bucket, or at least the one I had as a kid came that way. That would have been c. 1971 - 1975 or so, four to eight years old, and as I like to say we all had them when we were kids. The amazing thing is, people are still making them today, almost fifty years later: Click here to visit the Hing Fat corporate site's bulk vendor page for their "Space Astronaut" toy sets.
They all came with the lander, a similarly white plastic Lunar Rover, maybe a rocket or two, more elaborate versions would have a Skylab-looking space station, the same US flag on a pile of rocks that's been around in every Army Man set ever made. Couple dozen of the distinctive looking astronaut forms, the one above cast in white but most commonly found in gray. Later variants of the set would include the Space Shuttle, booster rockets and brown fuel tank. We all had one, and I want to know when the forms originated, who was responsible, and which spaceman figures were issued with the "original" sets.
As mentioned in the video a valid point was made to me in that the idea of finding an "original" of a toy still being produced today in exactly the same way is sort of a lost cause. And I do intend to obtain a new/sealed Space Bucket set with a lander just to be able to compare them. Pass it off to young Jasper down in DC when he's old enough to not want to swallow the astronauts, or whatever. Use it to make art. I'm sincerely interested in the history of the thing and did indeed to a couple (now four) hours of research into early Lunar Module concept designs to see if there's a precedent for the (likely) Hong Kong based designer who arrived at the Space Bucket LM form.
Source: Reddit.com
A possible contender for the design referenced by the lander -- An early Lunar Module concept design by General Dynamics from 1962 (dig the Mercury flight suit, useless in a full vacuum for very long: Looks like an "Operation Moon Base" dude). Certain features look about the same as the Hing Fat lander, especially the legs & how they attach to the descent stage. The round top is about right as well, with the extended "arms" likely eliminated as a cost saving measure in reproducing the toy as a cheap mould form. Thrusters clipped off and stuck to the four corners which would have been the windows, antenna stuck on top and crew hatch eliminated (see schematic drawing below). Also looks like it went on a diet too: Hing Fat's is skinnier, with certain rounded edges redefined in angular terms.
No ladder to worry about: At this early stage NASA accepted the idea that the crew would toss a rope ladder over the side and shimmy up & down like spiders. In .6 gravity, wearing a pressurized EVA suit. So, they had a lot yet to learn, and the above mockup demonstration mockup was never flown. Anywhere.
Kind of has a similar design profile.
UPDATE: Here is a video of a twenty minute project proposal film by General Dynamics, trying to get the NASA Lunar Lander contract which ultimately went to Grumman. It's pretty much a dry corporate presentation by suits but has some cool test aircraft footage and an extended look both at and inside of their prototype mockup towards the end:
Here's the schematic, source forgotten but it was something NASA.
Pretty sure that's the same critter. Note crew hatch at top, which would have also docked with what became the Command Module. The craft had a descent stage which would remain on the Moon after the mission and serve as a launch pad for the ascent stage / crew compartment -- a key weight saving feature meaning less fuel to carry just to get the crew back onto the Command Module.
Lunar Orbit Rendezvous was the only sound method by which we could land on the moon in 1960. Direct Ascent would have required a rocket with enough fuel in it to blow up Cape Canaveral. Earth Orbit Rendezvous would have required us to assemble a rocket in orbit and cost four times as much, presuming we were even able to figure out how to assemble a rocket in orbit at all. Only L.O.R. got us on the moon with one rocket & a minimal crew, with a small separate lunar landing ship the key to the proposal. It had to be light enough to be carried all the way there fully fueled, with the Apollo system's only non-rendudant weakness its ascent stage engine. Grumman's never failed, and history has written that NASA picked the right contractor.
The lander pictured as a new production item from the SCS Direct "Big Bucket of Astronauts" set.
There you go. That's why we call em Space Buckets. We all had one ...
... Let's take a look at the components.
The snap-in removable thruster bits were the first things to go, and while this is going to sound pathetic I have a vestigial memory of chewing on them. Kids do that.
Top stage pegs neatly into the four holes. Some production units of the lander have a decal sticker on the descent stage face plate resembling technical parts.
Likely produced in a single mould, with the antennae, thrusters and any other gray pieces from the set cast with the gray astronaut forms. The used set I obtained back in March (1980s) had both gray and white astronauts. I recall the set I had as a kid being all white, and also having a batch of colored MPC astronauts as well. To date I have never seen the colored MPC spacemen included in sets which featured this vehicle. Just the Hing Fat guys.
Pegs for peg holes. Though the height of the dome is too small for two astronauts to stand inside of, though they can just sort of rattle around in there.
Possible scratched-out or defaced marking to the left. Otherwise there are no markings anywhere on the lander or its antennae.
The descent stage bottom. No base details or engine bell to worry about. They just did it as a shell.
All components disassembled. Just big enough so that a young set of hands can assemble them into something diverting. Not meant to be an impressive showpiece or revolutionary vision. Just a dumb plastic toy.
The two Ts facing top-ways replaced the egress hatch on the dome.
Empty triangular cutouts replacing windows.
Holes for the thrusters, which are a nice touch.
The legs on my childhood lander were the next thing to go. Kept mine even after one snapped off, and with a nasty crack running up one of the sides for the end of its life ... Someone eventually scrapped it and I was heartbroken. Now landfill which will never completely bio-degrade but beyond reach to reclaim, hence the compulsion to find an "original" astronaut bucket set. Might also explain current fascination with any toy forms depicting a spindly-legged Lunar Module type vehicle.
Very unique design. Looks like a robot's head.
Rabbit ears.
Simple, easy and pure. Good designs persevere, and they are still making them.
<3
Nobody else I am aware of tried to do this lander design as anything but the simple plastic version shown here. You never see it as a Japanese derived tin plated working vision of the form. It was never included in any of the classic era Marx Space Toy sets, there's no die cast or model kits I can think of (correct me if wrong: would love to find one!!). Everyone else's Lunar Module looks like the Grumman design that did the actual flights, which I think is a point of pride for the designers of the Space Buckets toy range. It's unique to their sets, and I wonder why, other than disinterest due to its (apparent) place on the lower strata of space toy design.
The same mould forms, still being injected and pressed out somewhere on mainland China today, almost 50 years later. This thing is a quiet masterpiece even if just a cheap plastic anonymous piece of disposable pop ephemera. It's a toy, and never intended to impress anyone. Just sell units and last exactly long enough for its owner to get decent play life out of it. A+
"Well, we'se should prolly get back on board now, Captain Skippy. Down to about sixteen minutes of suit-tank time."
" ... Charlie ... Charlie, there's no ladder on this thing there, Charlie. And how do we get back inside?? There's no door over here."
Gunning for pesky Russian Space Junk while awaiting re-supply after going insane. Beats cleaning out the A-compartment.
Would love to know how it came to be ...
No comments:
Post a Comment