Kristof

@jdubbs, @icm Good points both of ya, I just wish you did the discussion in a different thread :) Then I would possibly add my own insight and experience in this. But I feel like this MOC WIP topic has been diverted enough already and I encourage everyone not to steer it any further away from its point. @Midlife-crisis is there any chance you can do the air intakes without the flex tube? That means achieving that curved slope ring by some radial array structure instead? Just asking, I know that the flexitube is the goto solution for most people in most such cases, but for some reason, it always felt... Idk, not satisfactory to me :) Second, I am wondering what is your motivation to use the technic beams for the support struts to the engine blocks, instead of technic bricks. In my experience stacked technic bricks (or not even stacked) work better in preventing some bending, which seems to be the case here. Technic beams are IMO a good substitute when they are reinforcing the structure in 'tension' or 'compression', but not necessarily when the load is lateral and you want them to stay straight :) Last, I have my fingers crossed for self-supporting landing gear, although I have my doubts about the current design. But really, if it was my decision to make, I would even allow some sacrifices on accuracy in order to make the side/back landing feet beefier and better structurally incorporated to the frame in order to achieve that! clear stands just suck IMHO :D

One of the best photography I have seen in any pictorial review! It could very well be the best set of pictures of this set ever taken... The timing is a bit weird tho, having the set just retired not too long ago :)

And the sour grapes are even worse when you compare the two designs... I mean no offense to the lego designer but the official deigns falls terribly short :(

Fantastic. These small models really look so much better on real pictures compared to renders! I actually had some reservations when I first saw the renders on Rebrickable - I was about to comment that the wings are too thick with the 1x2 wedges. But seeing it on pictures now it really looks way less prominent and doesn't bother me anymore. Great design!

@Rubblemaker *love of interesting models If I had to guess, I'd wager that they are gonna sketch out Nebulon as well and then make the epochal release to make everyone happy :D

Who made the deafening noise then if not the Lego community itself :) Btw mocs like yours is exactly why there is no real need for official UCS frigate IMHO.

Where did you get that impression from? If you look at the variety of SW designs, there are a lot of engines which are stylized similarly to this (some podracers for instance... or one could argue that even ships like Venator have somewhat similar feel to them) This particular design (which btw evolves from this design by the same guy) looks fantastic, but the truth is that it still just mimics the general appearance of a somewhat stylized long radial jet engine. It seems that we (people) just tend to like it better than a plain dish with a glow inside, which is supposed to represent some ion engine. The truth is, however, that even in the vague terms of sci-fi realism, there is no need for having these long turbine-like chambers with tons of greebles to have a 'space engine' :D I might have gone off to a tangent here though. I wanted to argue that not all of the SW ships have engines that look alike and that this style of engine is indeed sometimes used. The most characteristic feature (IMO) of this particular design is the angle of the 'flaps' on the end, which then form this sort of partial helix. I think that is not typical for SW :) But I don't think it would look too odd on a fictional SW universe model. Beaware the huge gap between building such engine digitally and rendering it with all the fancy copper chrome elements, and trying to align all these obscure connections IRL :D

it looks to me like the model is just squished lengthwise... quite considerably, that is. Any chance that the reference picture has some weird aspect ratio distortion going on? I personally like the longer/narrower design much better, but maybe some other photos of the on-screen ship make it look chubbier? :D

@Midlife-crisis off to the good start! Mind you linking the original? I can't find it by name somehow... @Brick-Wombat I think they would need to grow quite a bit! :D Though, frankly, I think you are right and I would totally use those and just match the scale to them.

@mcphatty No need to illustrate, you explained that perfectly. I didn't realize these bricks are through-hole! As such I am no longer worried about the connection :D

Cool little design! And great instructions - Thanks for sharing. The only thing I don't particularly love about this one is the winglet connection - that black bar stud might hold in the open stud of the brown 1x2 just fine, but it just feels a bit on a flimsy side, given the relatively substantial wings. I'm sure looking forward to seeing the completed models!

@TheNerdyOne_ gotcha, I agree it's better to avoid falling into that rabbit hole in this thread. I just like when the models which are meant to be built from real bricks do get that treatment eventually - I guess something in me want to keep LEGO as much of a haptic thing as possible :) I'm looking forward to the YT builds. And really... don't let the haters get underneath your skin for this :D

That's a considerable amount of work :D even just to build it in cad and render it all... I really like some of the designs. Some are not terribly exciting on their own but the fact that they fit the scaled fleet does indeed make it cool! It would be cool to see some real pictures if you actually have some of the builds IRL. The renders just look... synthetic in a way :)

I think building it IRL is not only the right choice but also a necessity in case you want your model to be not just a virtual design concept with no real ambition of being a constructible model. Not only will the building in real bricks solve your alignment issues but (and more importantly) it will prevent you from ending up with a design which is totally infeasible due to lack of structural strength :)

Some of the posts make me wonder whether these people even like the aspect of assembling the lego set, enjoying the way it's put together and appreciating the final design... It sounds like for some of you it would be better to get a massive die-cast model with a bunch of collective items, no matter what they are, as long as they are rare and you can cherish them for that and just look forward to the set to be discontinued :D Apparently (and thankfully) Lego has plenty of other customers so they don't have to turn their big sets into some price-inflated exclusive collectible packs. Nothing against a few minifigs in any sort of set and if there is some exclusive, well so be it, still fine, likely helps some people to pull the trigger, nothing too shabby still. But to make it THE big deal and regard to the rest of the set as to 'pile of bricks' seems to me like missing the whole point of lego fandom :)

I like the model and I am a big fan of its general concept of a smaller, affordable yet still visually impressive piece. It gives me similar vibes as official Lego models do!There are two things that I am not a huge fan of visually. First - the uneven 'paneling' that runs down the main vertical fuselage, formed from alternating LBG tiles and arches just seems too 'uniform' in its appearance. I think just one or two of these pieces changed to DBG, using the 1x2x2/3 arch with cut corner or maybe throwing some LBG ingot in there would break it up IMO! Second (and that's the problem of many Nebulon mocs) the 'wall' of the thruster section facing inwards is just too flat and plain. The opened gaps between plates and scattered trans plates just don't create enough of the depth of the texture. I think that at a cost of a few dozen extra parts (mod. plates, jumpers, clips) one could bring some more texture and get rid of that :)

:D :D

Slave I here, the same reasons as @Midlife-crisis :) Next up would be R2, Tantive-IV, Lambda...

@Brikkyy13 I'd say you made the right choice :D

^^ We shall see. The number of lego fans that primarily crave for size seems to be large, which would support your fears.

@Kit Figsto your thoughts make sense and I sure can't fully disregard them. You might be right and I'd almost think the same unless lego actually gave that ship as a UCS set option. That means they are actually ready to make it happen, which further relates to them probably having a pretty good idea about it. And if not aiming for a minifig compatible scale, what do you think they would make the set be like instead? These minifig scale mocs have between 1500 and 2K pieces. Assuming that the part count grows with volume, by the time you make the model 30% larger in each dimension you likely almost double the part count, which would make this another ginormous UCS. And frankly, 30% larger than minifig scale would still look and feel like a close miss, rather than 'intentionally' larger... Looking at UCS models from the past decade (ignoring the obvious outliers like Hoth battle), they are either very much smaller than minifig scale, or somewhere between 1.5x and 2x the minifig scale (Jedi starfighter, X-wing, TIE, Y-wing, Snowspeeder...), or they are officially presented as minifig compatible (Slave, Lambda, MF). The conclusion that I'm drawing is that it feels kind of uncanny to make something which is 'just shy' of being the proper scale. So by that logic, if you are right, we would be looking at some ~4k piece monster of a Gunship (How about this one :D) and that is IMO not very likely either :) But maybe... I still have my fingers crossed for a minifig compatible size, aiming that $200 price point.

I appreciate the self-referencing joke with that 'fancy' title graphics :P I still think it would be better if you threw the legacy logos to the trash as a long overdue and started making some titles that look like something from at least the last decade, if not the present one :) That aside, nice review :D I am absolutely not interested in the set and I still enjoyed reading through!

I wish that UCS wasn't interpreted as Uber Colossal Size :) It is true that the Gunship in 'minifig' scale is really pretty much the same size as the 2008-20014 playsets. But these were actually pretty large, weren't they? Judging by some great mocs of LAAT done at this scale, it could make for 1500-2000 pcs. set, which I think is just great for UCS. At least it would be affordable to not just top gamers this time :D How much more detail could this UCS rendition bring over the sets... well that's more valid concern IMO, but I think it's the same as with any other model. For just a casual fan, or a kid the improvement could likely be insignificant, but I am sure that there is enough scope to make collectors happy :) I highly encourage anyone who is not strictly against the Gunship to begin with to check out these mocs by David Buchholz, JBB (recently redesigned by Chef) or Caleb Ricks! Just by comparing those wonderful designs, hopefully, you will get the same impression that I have, which is that this model really has some potential for ingenious design solutions! Jeez, do I perhaps sound like I have a horse in this race? :D

^^ I hope :) Especially here the open-mindedness is pretty widespread. Though I still see plenty of comments in other groups (FB, brickset comments...) which scream this 'prequel==couldnt care less' mantra :D As if it was not the design of the craft that also mattered (I know that the movie context is a factor too, but shouldn't be the only one!).

@AfolFree summed up my thoughts entirely. Perhaps I'd just alter from 'loving' Nebulon very much to 'kinda liking it as an in-universe design' :) My hopes would be that they could achieve a similar result with the Gunship as they did with the UCS Slave I. Minifig scale, yet highly intricate, and really very much unlike anything that was MOCed before. There have been some really decent mocs, but every once in awhile, lego designers can figure out impressive things. Plus the potential for some new molds (for the laser domes?) seems great too. Lastly, it's not just another big grey thing to sit on a couple of stands, taking up massive shelf space. I hope that no-interest-in-anything-prequel cult won't smear the clear judgment for some people :D