[LDD] Mortesv's CR90 corvette (reverse-engineered version)

[bricksmarlin]

@ecmo47 looks good so far

@wmxproductions you don't need the 2x2 round bricks!

[EKae]

@ecmo47 Looking good! Also, good to hear the engines are stable! ?

[EKae]

Received some parts for the CR90 Liberator today!

I'm still waiting for an order from Germany, but when that arrives I'll have 75% of the Liberator parts.

Also, May the 4th be with you! :)

[ecmo47]

Starting the fuselage but have run into a small issue that has to do with the side airlocks. As noted a few pages back, the side airlocks did not line up with the upper radar pedestal on the original plans. The fix is to move the side airlocks back one stud which isn't hard.  The problem is what to do with the resulting 1 stud gap. 

@EKae: did you move all of the flags back one stud to compensate?  

[EKae]

@ecmo47 No, I didn't move the flags because it would then move them all one stud backwards towards the engines, therefore making it one stud farther away from the main body :)

I instead put two 1 x 2 45 slopes that faced towards the flags, as pictured above.

Edited May 5, 2017 by EKae

[mortesv]

But that is not how it is supposed to look! :)

See the pictures from the side in my original post :)

 

 

[ecmo47]

I was comparing EKae's model with the Mortesv's which is why I asked. On EKae's model there are 8 studs on the top spine where Mortesv's only has 7. Looks like to fix it properly, you would need to shorten the entire fuselage by one stud.

Mortesv:

7 stud spine by Scott Roys, on Flickr

EKae's:

8 stud spine by Scott Roys, on Flickr

 

 

[bricksmarlin]

That's true, unfortunately.

It has to be 7 studs long to look like the original.

But should not be a big problem.....hopefully.

[DarthTwoShedsJackson]

  On 5/5/2017 at 1:02 AM, ecmo47 said:

Starting the fuselage but have run into a small issue that has to do with the side airlocks. As noted a few pages back, the side airlocks did not line up with the upper radar pedestal on the original plans. The fix is to move the side airlocks back one stud which isn't hard.  The problem is what to do with the resulting 1 stud gap. 

@EKae: did you move all of the flags back one stud to compensate?  

Expand  

I do not have my reference pictures on hand of the Tantive IV studio model, but as for the Corvettes from the REBELS show, both the cylindric radar mount and the passenger access lift do not line up with the side airlock cylinders, the latter of which are placed slightly forwards in comparison to the former:

That took me a while to solve properly and in a clean way on my smaller scale Corvette, too.

Edited May 5, 2017 by DarthTwoShedsJackson

[mortesv]

Looking at the studio model the are pretty well lined up.

http://www.modelermagic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/IMG_1625.jpg

Edited May 5, 2017 by mortesv

[DarthTwoShedsJackson]

  On 5/5/2017 at 1:28 PM, mortesv said:

Looking at the studio model the are pretty well lined up.

http://www.modelermagic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/IMG_1625.jpg

Expand  

Yes, I suspected that. The Corvettes from REBELS are designed slightly differently in certain areas. So to get a REBELS-version right, you need to get that offset between the horizontal airlock cylinders and the vertical cylinders of the radar mount and passenger access lift right - especially on a model of that scale and detail.

[EKae]

Is it possible the top radar dish is set backwards one? This would solve both the 7 vs 8 studs and the airlocks on the sides . . .

Even if it were not the the problem you could do that anyway and it would be easiest :)

[mortesv]

  On 5/5/2017 at 1:36 PM, DarthTwoShedsJackson said:

Yes, I suspected that. The Corvettes from REBELS are designed slightly differently in certain areas. So to get a REBELS-version right, you need to get that offset between the horizontal airlock cylinders and the vertical cylinders of the radar mount and passenger access lift right - especially on a model of that scale and detail.

Expand  

Hehe, I don't think the difference is not to warrant a studs difference.

And I don't think the difference was intentional on Rebels - they just got lazy :) :D

[DarthTwoShedsJackson]

  On 5/5/2017 at 2:35 PM, mortesv said:

Hehe, I don't think the difference is not to warrant a studs difference.

Expand  

No, it doesnt. I offset mine by the thickness of one plate...

[mortesv]

  On 5/5/2017 at 2:42 PM, DarthTwoShedsJackson said:

No, it doesnt. I offset mine by the thickness of one plate...

Expand  

So you are sticking with the Rebels design ;)

[DarthTwoShedsJackson]

  On 5/5/2017 at 3:20 PM, mortesv said:

So you are sticking with the Rebels design ;)

Expand  

For my Corvette, yes, because its story is firmly rooted within the show.

Just out of curiosity, I studied the Tantive IV as it is shown in Rogue One. At the end of the movie, there's a short scene where it directly passes the camera. Clicking through the quick sequence frame by frame, I was able to grab a screenshot where the starboard docking ring points directly at the camera. I know quite a bit about 3d models, perspectives etc. and how easy it is to get a wrong impression because of a slightly off-centre perspective, so I chose a structure to visually indicate when I had the correct frame - the docking apparatus on the lower end of the passenger lift section (in the red box). If you'd look at the frame directly before or after the chosen frame, the edges of the front and rear little cylinder of this apparatus are round because the camera is not pointed directly at its centre. In the frame I've chosen, they are straight - strongly suggesting that the vertical camera-axis is parallel to a vertical axis going through the apparatus' centre. Also, the round docking ring is perfectly at the centre of the cylinder in which it is housed.

I don't need to be right, I just find it interesting. At the end of the day, this is a nitpick either way.

Edited May 5, 2017 by DarthTwoShedsJackson

[mortesv]

I appreciate what you did here (I make computer games and work with 3d), but I am not sure it is conclusive :) The discrepancy is so small that I would venture it falls within the margin of error that the camera and side ring is not 100.0% facing each other :) The cylinder on top is slightly smaller than the side rings which alsomuddies things a bit.

In any case there is no evidence here that the back of the center ring should be further forward than the back of the top cylinder :)

In the end the studio models dictate what I build - and there are many differences between them and the new digital models :) :)

[ecmo47]

Progress on the fuselage has been slow mostly due to the way LDD sequences the build. The problem is that it never finishes the center core of construction which means that nothing is stable. After struggling through the first 100 steps and crushing various sub-assemblies, I gave up and hide every piece until I was down to the central core of the model.  Once there, I fixed several bothersome issues that strengthened the overall structure and will make it much easier to complete the overall build.

Here is the central core. The first thing to fix is a missing 1x4 technic brick. I took out the 1x8 technic brick (highlighted in green) and replaced it with a 1x12.

Fuselage fix 1 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

Next, I removed the pieces highlighted in yellow....

Fuselage fix 4 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

and replaced them with a 1x12 and 1x4 technic brick as shown in green.

Fuselage fix 5 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

Next, I removed the 2x plates shown here in Reddish brown.....

Fuselage fix 6 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

and replaced them with the parts shown in green.

Fuselage fix 7 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

Next I removed the 2x plates shown here in red.....

Fuselage fix 8 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

and replaced them with four 4x8 plates shown here in green.

Fuselage fix 9 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

Lastly, add two 2x8 plates (shown in red) to bridge the gap between the 2x and the 4x plates. You could fill in the entire gap but that would be over-kill.

Fuselage fix 10 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

The 4x plates secure the 1x4 (with 4 studs on side) bricks that I had problems with during the initial LDD construction phase. They don't move now!

I used LBG and DGB for any replacement parts shown in color here. None are seen so you could use any color you have in the parts bin.

 

 

Edited May 7, 2017 by ecmo47

[mortesv]

There is a much simpler way to build the core ;)

[ecmo47]

....and we have all be dying to see your plans!!!

But would your internal frame be able to double as the Mighty Mallet of Mjolnir?

DSC01989 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

Edited May 7, 2017 by ecmo47

[ScottishDave]

Well, I dunno how mortesv did it (and he's entitled to be coy since he's selling us the instructions) but I did find a much simpler way.

Here's how it looks:

Lots of 2-stud wide plates - any size will do, but the longer the better: some technic beams, and 1 x 2 - 2 x 2 brackets (all the same orientation).

The only "trick" was to put some of the brackets right under the docking port connectors, for added firmness.

And yeah, it was pretty strong. I swung the engines around by the spine as well. Didn't think of the Mjolnir joke though - good one! :-).

[mortesv]

@ecmo47Looking good Scott :)

 

 

[EKae]

@ecmo47 Good Job! Hopefully I'll be able to begin soon . . . :)

[ecmo47]

Last update for the night.

I figured out how Mortesv accomplished that sloped area between the top gun turret and the cockpit.

Remove the bricks with studs on the sides to create this open area:

DSC01992 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

Make the sloped top fin to look like like this:

DSC01994 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

Looks like this when installed:

DSC01997 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

I spent a bit of the afternoon re-working the top turret. Not sure it's better but I liked the curved back I achieved.

I completed the cockpit per the LDD instructions. It's got some issues!

The Dark-red round 4x4 plates are 1 plate too high. Also, the whole cockpit is about 2 plates too high. You look at any picture, Mortesv's included, and you will see that the horizontal center of the cockpit lines up with the center of the fuselage. You can see below that it clearly does not. 

DSC02001 by Scott Roys, on Flickr

No solution yet but I'm working on it. 

[wmxproductions]

Thanks for the updates Ecmo, do you think its possible after building you can update the LDD and share the new one with us?