Raskolnikov

Eurobricks Citizen
  • Content count

    363
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Raskolnikov

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Extra

  • Country
    United States
  • Special Tags 1
    http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/style_images/tags/starwars.png

Recent Profile Visitors

3011 profile views
  1. Building Mortesv's Nebulon-B Thread

    Ha, not even close. Good luck, tho!
  2. Interesting. So yeah, the bottom panels might be a little bent out of shape. That test doesn't entirely rule out a building mistake, though. And now that I look at your pics again, I'm thinking that the bottom panels might be impacting elsewhere, like around the reactor bulge. So please make sure you're able to push up on the panels in a way that can close the gap there, too (or mostly close it anyway--it's normal to have a slight gap between the bottom panels that gradually increases toward the rear of the ship).
  3. @Bender222 Yeah, that gap is larger than normal. It could perhaps be (1) a result of flexing/bending in the bottom panels, in which case taking them off and flattening/tightening them might fix it. Or it could be (2) that something is built incorrectly on the bottom of the frame or on the interior surface of the bottom panels, and as a result they're clipping into each other. So, it would be helpful if you pushed upward on the bottom panels in your first picture. Can you press the bottom panels up towards the hangar bay? Can they touch the 2x4 wedge plates shown in your first picture? If you can make them touch easily, it may just be a flexing/bending issue. If something's in the way preventing that, you'd need to find what it is (and for us to help, we'd need clear pics of the bottom panels and the frame).
  4. @Forresto Yeah, making instructions for the landing craft is on the ever-growing to-do list. Work has been keeping me pretty busy recently. I've previously made the Tyrant's TIEs available here https://imgur.com/a/9h7Bk although the cockpit design is very fragile (Aggressor's new TIE design is a significant step up, imo).
  5. I'd consider it, but no current plans. Thanks, it certainly seems that way :) Hrm, I'd be interested in seeing what that looks like. So you finished yours? How'd it turn out? Just marking this as resolved.
  6. AT-AT MOC (plus-sized -- but not super big)

    Gosh, did you actually use the old picture instructions? If so, impressive. If you haven't see 'em already, there are free pdf instructions available here: https://rebrickable.com/mocs/MOC-6006/raskolnikov/plus-size-at_at/#comments There's like a 15-page topic on that somewhere--not quite sure how you found this older post instead, sorry! Haha, yes there are instructions, and they're free. See the above link. Cheers.
  7. @Christoph27 Looks great, glad you liked it. It also looks like you're in the elite group of builders who managed to have the superstructure fitted completely properly when taking your first picture :) Any plans to fill it with a crew of minifigures? Also, an optional change to the build is to remove the lowermost 1x6 tile on the "neck" of the bridge assembly. This eases the process of sliding the bridge into place, and I think the bracket studs look fine when exposed. If we ever roll out a final update it'll probably include this change.
  8. [WIP] [MOC] [LDD] AT-M6 PlusSize

    I haven't checked up on this thread in a little while, but wow that render looks really nice. Is it as durable as it looks? And how soon until solidbrix adopts this design? :)
  9. That's a great looking UCS sticker, where's that from?
  10. Honestly, I don't think so. The design you linked definitely is one of the more creative fan interpretations. There recently was a semi-official miniature for the Star Wars Armada game, which is much more conservative in its design and, like most other representations, seems to have a superstructure and hull shape that is nearly identical to an ISD. The Armada version even has four turrets per side, and I kind of liked the three-turret versions more because I thought it was an interesting way to differentiate VSDs. Oh well. Long story short, I think based on the most definitive versions of VSDs, you really just need (1) the distinctive bridge and (2) the "wings." Other ways of differentiating VSDs seem to be optional and vary by artist. I've been meaning to take more pics of my VSD mods, but for some reason I haven't gotten around to it. Anyway, here's my one pic with crappy lighting that doesn't show much detail on the bridge changes. @Christoph27 Looking good so far, you're nearly there! Books 7 and 8 are very short, although Book 7 takes some time since certain parts of the bridge are fragile. Also, if you bought the stickers, there are turbo-lift stickers on the Death Star sticker sheet that are unused. They are intended to go on the tops of the dbg cylinders visible in your image and the ones directly below them (on level 2), but we were unable to add them via the instructions.
  11. @MattVa Sounds right to me if you're using the 600m measurement for the 418. The Constrictor is sort of an amalgamation of the 418 and the Rebels Interdictor, though, which appears to be a larger ship. So it may be roughly to scale with the 10030/Aggressor as-is. Or if you want to use the 600m length, you could maybe convert a 10030/Aggressor to a Victory, which really isn't too difficult.
  12. That sounds like an attempt to repair the bottom panel, but I may be misinterpreting. Just to clarify, it's the 3x2 wedges on the rear panels (i.e., the panels placed on book 4, page 8 or page 17) that are easy to repair. Or you can even place those wedges later, after the rear panels are in position. Damage to the bottom panels, by contrast, should definitely be avoided.
  13. @humbertj Hrm, if you scroll up (edit: check page 12 of the thread), Schneeds worked through a similar issue. My recommendation is basically just to be very careful with the bottom panels--maybe hold them to try to avoid much movement or flexing--while gently pushing the rear panels into place. The rear panels will appear not to fit...keep pushing until they snap into place. It is OK to damage the rear panels during this process (i.e., lbg 2x3 wedge plates popping off), since they are relatively easy to repair once in position. The relative weakness of the section of the bottom panel that rests of above the stand also is something that I was thinking about re-designing at some point. I believe it works as-is, but you are not the only person to ask whether it would be better if it were reinforced. Please let us know how it works out. Should be mostly smooth sailing once you get past this point. And hopefully you've become a pro at the bottom panel removal/replacement process now--might help you out later on if you ever want to move the ship in the car or need to repair any serious damage.
  14. Another 6ft long SSD Executor (fully complete).

    Wonderful! Proportions and greebles look great. I want one!
  15. @Sky8880 Glad you enjoyed it! Yeah, I always enjoy seeing pictures of the completed builds for some reason, so feel free to post some pics. There's also a tab on the rebrickable page for people to post pics, if you want. And yep, I think instructions for the interdictor are probably going to be coming in the future. I'm nearly done redesigning it to be a more suitable-for-instructions model and have increased interior space. So uh, "Constrictor II" coming soon, I guess.