[MOC - WIP] another AT-ST

[anothergol]

I know, yet another AT-ST, but I've spent days detailing it, I think it's gonna be great, if ball joints don't deceive me.

I wanted one with less "stairs effect" on the body, a sharp & flat one.

Now... I designed it by google-imaging everything AT-ST-related, and I realized that everyone was very very loosely adapting it. Is there an official blueprint for the AT-ST's? (yes I know that even in the movies different models were used).

At first I was into the details, but then realized that it wasn't that important if only a few geeks can recognize what's wrong. However, I'm after the exact metrics, and the few blueprints I found seem to have giant legs, while in the movie the legs look pretty short. Anyone?

Edit: Final picture:

(Flickr album: https://flic.kr/s/aHskooATiv)

Edited November 21, 2015 by anothergol

[Fuppylodders]

There was a hoth at-st and an endor at-st. These differred in that the hoth one had quite longer legs and what appears to be a slightly smaller (or narrower? I cant remember) 'head' while tye endor one had smaller legs and maybe a slightly bigger head.

That does look nice! But as you have highlighted, im also unsure, erring on the side that the ball joints wont have enough clutch power to hold it upright.

*edited again

Your one to me looks like it has the hoth versions head, and the endor versions legs?

Edited July 18, 2015 by Fuppylodders

[StarWars8Spoiler]

Can you show more pictures? The exterior's tantalizing and I really want to see the back and interior of this awesome model.

[La Chupacabra]

Interior is for two minifigures ?

Legs are too big comparing to the head.

Edited July 18, 2015 by La Chupacabra

[anothergol]

There was a hoth at-st and an endor at-st. These differred in that the hoth one had quite longer legs and what appears to be a slightly smaller (or narrower? I cant remember) 'head' while tye endor one had smaller legs and maybe a slightly bigger head.

That does look nice! But as you have highlighted, im also unsure, erring on the side that the ball joints wont have enough clutch power to hold it upright.

*edited again

Your one to me looks like it has the hoth versions head, and the endor versions legs?

Thanks for the info. Do you know of any online source with pics?

Can you show more pictures? The exterior's tantalizing and I really want to see the back and interior of this awesome model.

I certainly will, but I'm still working on it & ordering parts (so it's gonna take weeks)

Interior is for two minifigures ?

Legs are too big comparing to the head.

2 minifigs side by side, if everything goes right.

If you mean too thick, I can only do with what Lego has to offer, and if I want the generally neglected joint at the bottom of the legs, I have to go for 2 beams-wide legs, plus all the covering.

And if I make the head bigger, it's not minifig-scaled anymore.

But really, on different sources, the legs are either short or long, big or small compared to the body. They're always thin from a front view - but really, I can't imagine 2-plate-wide legs

-without sacrifying functional joints

-keeping things sturdy

-not using illegual techniques

The thigh, that's where I took some liberty, because I think it looks better, more like a chicken. It could definitely be thinner but it doesn't look right IMHO, and the necessary thickness of the bottom parts makes it worse.

Edited July 18, 2015 by anothergol

[anothergol]

If this is the Hoth one:

& this is the Endor one:

the difference is massive!

So I guess mine would be the Hoth one. Probably better, with the light blueish grey color anyway.

Back (using Bluerender, nice tool btw):

This said, this is a render, and between the height of a render and the actual height after all parts & joints have bended under the weight of the head, it should be noticably shorter.

Edited July 18, 2015 by anothergol

[La Chupacabra]

LOL... A render? I was thinking this is real one :)

[peffour]

I wish Lego would release one like this one, with 2 seated cokpit...

[La Chupacabra]

Show us interior please.

[Corydoras]

The ball joints will never support the weight, I'm afraid. it doesn't change the fact that the render is very nice, though.

[anothergol]

Not much to see inside, the chubby minifigs will take all the room.

Pics of AT-ST interiors that I found are pretty boring, all filled with 80's style little lights.

It opens from the front, no working hatch.

The ball joints will never support the weight, I'm afraid. it doesn't change the fact that the render is very nice, though.

I think they will, because there are other minifig-sized AT-ST's (like, the one on Lego ideas), thus probably of a similar weight, that use them.

The question is more, for how long will they? I never really "played" with bionicles, so I don't know. They're certainly very strong joints when new, athouth that varies with parts.

The foot ones shouldn't be a problem, as the center of gravity is normally at the front. That is, it looks worrying that they will lean backwards, but gravity should be pushing them front-downwards, -in theory-.

We'll see about the joints of the inter-leg beam, in the worst case I can ditch it. Those only have to support the weight of the head, though.

Edited July 18, 2015 by anothergol

[LiLmeFromDaFuture]

Ooh great start so far!

I love the use of that hinged leg joint for the lower shin despite its inaccuracies—it looks sturdy.

Don't be fooled by those ball joints! I know they're convenient, but I don't think the leg part connecting them will support the weight so well in the long term.

Those leg joints can be a hit and miss game—you wouldn't know which ones are more robust than the others.

Plus the ball cups are prone to fracturing (trust me I have many Bionicles with those joints, most which are scrapped because of that issue)

I too have seen that outrageously posable AT-ST on IDEAS. Honestly those poses can not be preformed by an actual AT-ST.

You could used this t-bar piece (4697b), but perhaps this is more appropriate for a AT-ST on a smaller scale.

Here is a blueprint of the Return of the Jedi AT-ST: Link

It has the dimensions, which could be useful, if you can read them.

[anothergol]

Plus the ball cups are prone to fracturing (trust me I have many Bionicles with those joints, most which are scrapped because of that issue)

I'm not finding those 7M ball-joint bars easily enough (3 models apparently, in dark grey), especially in new state, so I hope it won't happen to me. But I suppose that they break as you detach/attach them, not when tweaking?

You could used this t-bar piece (4697b), but perhaps this is more appropriate for a AT-ST on a smaller scale.

is there any trick for a strong joint using T-bars? I normally only use them for very light builds. I mean, they're normally much weaker than ball joints(?)

Here is a blueprint of the Return of the Jedi AT-ST: Link

It has the dimensions, which could be useful, if you can read them.

thanks

I had seen it, I didn't know it was an official one.

According to that blueprint, I have pretty accurate head metrics.

The body could be a bit thicker & wider, but length is correct. This said, the legs should be right under the big side gun, and they currently are.

Thighs have the correct length, legs too. Lower legs could be 1 stud shorter, but not possible using the ratchet join, but that's still ok.

Feet: correct width, length should be 1 stud shorter, but there is no smooth wedge that would allow this.

So it's actually all pretty correct afterall. Only legs are much thicker, but since there's no way to do this better using lego in a safe way, I'm all happy with it.

The side "gun cups" should be much flatter, but there aren't parts to do this, I'd have to either sacrifice the additional disk, or change the 5x5 scala dish for a 6x6, which I had in an early design, it doesn't look bad but a little off.

Edited July 18, 2015 by anothergol

[LiLmeFromDaFuture]

I'm not finding those 7M ball-joint bars easily enough (3 models apparently, in dark grey), especially in new state, so I hope it won't happen to me. But I suppose that they break as you detach/attach them, not when tweaking?

is there any trick for a strong joint using T-bars? I normally only use them for very light builds. I mean, they're normally much weaker than ball joints(?)

thanks

I had seen it, I didn't know it was an official one.

According to that blueprint, I have pretty accurate head metrics.

The body could be a bit thicker & wider, but length is correct. This said, the legs should be right under the big side gun, and they currently are.

Thighs have the correct length, legs too. Lower legs could be 1 stud shorter, but not possible using the ratchet join, but that's still ok.

Feet: correct width, length should be 1 stud shorter, but there is no smooth wedge that would allow this.

So it's actually all pretty correct afterall. Only legs are much thicker, but since there's no way to do this better using lego in a safe way, I'm all happy with it.

The side "gun cups" should be much flatter, but there aren't parts to do this, I'd have to either sacrifice the additional disk, or change the 5x5 scala dish for a 6x6, which I had in an early design, it doesn't look bad but a little off.

Detaching it increase chances of fracturing dramatically, but over exerting it with constant moving can weaken it overtime (because it doesn't have time to rest).

But I assume you will have it mostly on display—so it won't be so much of a problem if make a few tweaks here and there.

If you insert the t-bar into modified bricks with stud(s) on them, they can be quite resilient. But the problem is, what many parts are there to make a joint that's long enough for your walker (there is technic 1 x 5 thin liftarms with axle ends, but they might not be long enough and can fracture fairly too)?

Good to hear the proportions are coming out to your liking.

Honestly, the 5 x 5 scala dish is your best bet. I feel it's the correct size for the head.

[anothergol]

If you insert the t-bar into modified bricks with stud(s) on them, they can be quite resilient. But the problem is, what many parts are there to make a joint that's long enough for your walker (there is technic 1 x 5 thin liftarms with axle ends, but they might not be long enough and can fracture fairly too)?

I believe that the top strongest joints Lego has to offer are

-the ratchetted ones for the legs (-too- strong IMHO, I think they require crazy force to move)

-the "bit-directional" ratchetted ones, but they're too bulky (although, they allow working directly with studs, they might actually be an option for the legs)

-the ball joints, I think they're nice up to this size

-mixel joints, I love those. They're actually holding the side panels here.

-I would put friction pins last - even with dual pins, I can't imagine enough strenght, unless I'm missing some building technique to have strong pin joints

[La Chupacabra]

More renders please!

Edited July 18, 2015 by La Chupacabra

[LiLmeFromDaFuture]

I believe that the top strongest joints Lego has to offer are

-the ratchetted ones for the legs (-too- strong IMHO, I think they require crazy force to move)

-the "bit-directional" ratchetted ones, but they're too bulky (although, they allow working directly with studs, they might actually be an option for the legs)

-the ball joints, I think they're nice up to this size

-mixel joints, I love those. They're actually holding the side panels here.

-I would put friction pins last - even with dual pins, I can't imagine enough strenght, unless I'm missing some building technique to have strong pin joints

Given the limited possibilities presented here, I believe it's up to discover what supports the weight of the waist/hip & head of the walker.

I never heard of "bit-directional"—perhaps a link please?

Technic pins with friction ridges would not work so much.

I second more pics.

Edited July 18, 2015 by LiLmeFromDaFuture

[anothergol]

it was a typo, I meant these bi-directional (as opposed to tri-directional for ball joints) assemblies:

The big ratchet joint is still a perfect choice for the upper leg though, as it looks exactly like the AT-ST one (maybe Lego made it for the AT-ST & AT-AT?)

[Smitty500]

This is looking great. The AT-ST is the hardest Star Wars "vehicle" to capture, as there are different source material, and hard to saw what one should really look like. My AT-ST is slightly less bulkier than yours, and I am using ball joints on the knees and on the hips. These actually hold pretty well. What I find with Two-legged walkers (or atleast mine), is that they are limited in posing. Here is my WIP of my AT-ST.

Here are the ball joints I used

The AT-ST has a lot of articulation, but it is also very top heavy, making it difficult to balnce. What would seem like endless possibilites of posing turning into only limited stances. This is why LEGO makes their models so stiff. For the AT-ST to be perfect, LEGO needs to make smaller high-friction hinges.

But I guess that is the challenge we face, and can only make our models look greater when we overcome these challenges.

[LiLmeFromDaFuture]

it was a typo, I meant these bi-directional (as opposed to tri-directional for ball joints) assemblies:

The big ratchet joint is still a perfect choice for the upper leg though, as it looks exactly like the AT-ST one (maybe Lego made it for the AT-ST & AT-AT?)

That could possibly work .

Personally, I prefer it over the ball joints. Once I get to progressing with my AT-ST, I might implement those if the t-bars are of no use.

But find out what works for your AT-ST.

Nice work Smitty

I am fond with the shape of the head—greatly reminds me of the version from ROTJ with its stockiness.

Like this image: link

Edited July 18, 2015 by LiLmeFromDaFuture

[Fuppylodders]

I think you should build it in real bricks as you have the design currwntly, and then go from there. My at-st is ultra fragile with its balance due to the ankles, and it is the one thing on it that i have yet to fix... And seriously dread fixing because ill probably have to lighten the head substantially at the same time.

I do like how yours is done, and to be honest, it would be interesting to see how well those ball joints will do on the ankle. I wouldnt worry too much about interior as there is such limited space as you have proven, its just not worth it. Long as theres 2 minifigs glancing out of those eye holes is all that matters :D

[Raskolnikov]

I'd love to see a set like this, or get directions from you, if possible. It looks fantastic. I think the ankle joint issue is likely solvable as well -- it's probably just a question of how much aesthetics you sacrifice for stability. Either way, the "head" and legs look innovative, solid, and really good looking.

[anothergol]

I'd love to see a set like this, or get directions from you, if possible. It looks fantastic. I think the ankle joint issue is likely solvable as well -- it's probably just a question of how much aesthetics you sacrifice for stability. Either way, the "head" and legs look innovative, solid, and really good looking.

I could still put it on lego ideas when it's done.

I've built 3/4 of it using the parts I had, it'll take a couple of weeks to gather the rest.

The head already shows its weight, it probably won't move around much, but it's mainly there for rotation and a little tilting.

The hip bars.. I have serious doubts that they will hold, but I'll just dump them use a single ball joint, if it doesn't work.

The ankles are normally not an issue.

This is what I'm building:

[LiLmeFromDaFuture]

Beautiful—excellent work.

[Wodanis]

Really liking the way you made the head portion of the AT-ST. Great work!

Edited July 20, 2015 by Wodanis