11 replies to this topic

[Walter Kovacs]

When I designed my TIE Shuttle model, I knew that the design could be applied to mayn different variants that share the same hull types.  TIEs like the Bomber, Heavy Bomber, Interdictor and Hammer could be made with a few minor tweaks (OK, the Interdictor is going to require more than just a tweak).  Among the ships with similar body types is the TIE Boarding Craft.

While the ship itself was designed for use in A New Hope, it never made it onto screen.  Here is the only source image I could muster up for the Boarding Craft:


Looking at that image, there were only a few differences between the Shuttle and the Boarding Craft.  Obviously, the front of the passenger compartment has a docking ring on it.  It looks like there is a simple appendage below the pilot windscreen, perhaps for latching onto an enemy ship?  And the passenger compartment floor hangs down lower than any other TIE of this body type.  Taking these small differences to heart, this is what I came up with for the TIE Boarding Craft.

EDIT: AFter a comment about the length of the center section, I decided to make it longer.  It now extends almost all of the length of the cockpit and crew compartments.  The original pictures can still be viewed in brickshelf.  



I didn't have much to go on for what the additional parts actually look like, aside from the docking ring.  So I let my imagination run wild.  For the part under the cockpit, I felt free to add a little detailing, best seen here.



Aside from the additions, the model is exactly the same as my previous TIE Shuttle.  I didn't even bother removing the passenger seats out of the passenger compartment, as they wouldn't be visible in the finaly model.  Let's just keep that our little secret, shall we.  

The front view shows the docking ring and the additions under the main hulls.  Simple additions, but the moel does have a different feel to it.  



Another view of the front, this time from below the model.



The wings, while the same, are still worth looking at.  After all, I did spend quite a bit of time designing them.  



The back view hasn't changed much, with only the passenger side showing any alterations.

EDIT: You can see the longer center section here as well.



The Top is worth looking at, as it has the best view of the center section greebling, at least the two sides you can see.  

EDIT: Obviously, this is the best view for the longer center section.  The top greebling is the same as the original center section, merely rotated 180 degrees.  



The cockpit is exactly the same as the TIE Shuttle.  For those that haven't seen my earlier work, here is a photo, for your pleasure.



As I have said, it isn't much different from the TIE Shuttle.  That was fully intended, as designing from scratch would have been a pain.  

Comments and Criticisms are most certainly welcome.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go photograph my next UCS creation.  

Brickshelf Gallery, when moderated.

[cavegod]

havent you missed the fact that both pods are joined the full length?

[Big Cam]

^^^^^True, but still it looks pretty damn close, and that's great for having nothing but a picture to go off of.

I think it looks very similar.  I didn't even notice that the pods were connected on one and not the other until it was pointed out.

[Walter Kovacs]

cavegod, on Apr 26 2010, 03:46 PM, said:

havent you missed the fact that both pods are joined the full length?

Big Cam, on Apr 26 2010, 05:25 PM, said:

^^^^^True, but still it looks pretty damn close, and that's great for having nothing but a picture to go off of.

I think it looks very similar.  I didn't even notice that the pods were connected on one and not the other until it was pointed out.

Truth be told, I didn't notice that they were joined, either.  Most of the variants that have this style of hull aren't joined all the way down.  In fact, this one is the only one, as far as I can tell.  Figures.

[cavegod]

Walter Kovacs, on Apr 27 2010, 02:06 PM, said:

Truth be told, I didn't notice that they were joined, either.  Most of the variants that have this style of hull aren't joined all the way down.  In fact, this one is the only one, as far as I can tell.  Figures.

well simple fix and awaiting pictures of the corrected model!  

[Walter Kovacs]

cavegod, on Apr 27 2010, 09:27 AM, said:

well simple fix and awaiting pictures of the corrected model!  

It's not quite as simple a fix as you might think.  

First, the center section has the studs facing forward, so to extend that section back 12 or so studs is going to take some work on the structure underneath.  The outer walls of the cylinders will interfere with any extension as well, so some care has to be taken there, too.  And I'll probably want to add some cross members between the two cylinders towards the back to help support any extension.  I've already gone over what needs to be done n my mind, but I insist on putting it on paper before any building commences.  That's just part of my nature.

Second, and probably more importantly, I've already taken the model apart.  Which means to get any new photos, I'll have to re-build.  Not a terrible loss, as I still have all te pieces in one big box (minus those that were necessary for the next model), but it will take a bit of time to reconstruct.  

So I will get new pictures up as soon as I can, but don't expect them this week.  It's more likely that I will resurrect this topic sometime in mid-May.

[cavegod]

Walter Kovacs, on Apr 27 2010, 09:23 PM, said:

It's not quite as simple a fix as you might think.  

First, the center section has the studs facing forward, so to extend that section back 12 or so studs is going to take some work on the structure underneath.  The outer walls of the cylinders will interfere with any extension as well, so some care has to be taken there, too.  And I'll probably want to add some cross members between the two cylinders towards the back to help support any extension.  I've already gone over what needs to be done n my mind, but I insist on putting it on paper before any building commences.  That's just part of my nature.

Second, and probably more importantly, I've already taken the model apart.  Which means to get any new photos, I'll have to re-build.  Not a terrible loss, as I still have all te pieces in one big box (minus those that were necessary for the next model), but it will take a bit of time to reconstruct.  

So I will get new pictures up as soon as I can, but don't expect them this week.  It's more likely that I will resurrect this topic sometime in mid-May.

no problem lets have a topic about the tie opressor you've built!

[Walter Kovacs]

Actually, the fixes have been implemented, and the Boarding Craft is back together.  It didn't take as long as I thought it woud, and I had all the parts I needed on hand (thank God).  

All I need to do is get new photos taken and uploaded.  

I'll get to the Oppressor topic mid-week.  IMO, it rivals my Scimitar Bomber design as one of the best models I've done.   But that could just be me.

[Walter Kovacs]

Please excuse the double post, but the updated photos with the extended center section have been edited into the first post.  The new center section seems to have helped with the droop problem, as well.  There's nothing like having unintended consequences, especially when they help out.  

Enjoy, everyone.

[cavegod]

Walter Kovacs, on Apr 26 2010, 08:35 PM, said:

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go photograph my next UCS

seems you are ahead of yourself!!

http://www.brickshel...ry.cgi?f=429536

[Walter Kovacs]

cavegod, on May 3 2010, 10:43 AM, said:

seems you are ahead of yourself!!

http://www.brickshel...ry.cgi?f=429536

What, no comments on the fix?

I'm not really ahead.  That post is a week old now.  I just hope you don't have any major comments on the Oppressor.  I had to disassemble that one to fix this one.

[cavegod]

yep much better now although it doesn't appear to have and greeblies on th emiddle section but since theres only one picture artistic licence is allowed. the opressor looks excellent in my eyes