OBI-WAN37

Hi, I'm trying to find out about whether or not the set 7962 Anakin Skywalker and Sebulba's podracers (http://lego.wikia.co...#39;s_Podracers) is actually proper minifig scale. Now most of you would probably guess that judging by Anio's popular UCS MoCs of Anakin and Sebulba's podracers (see: http://rebrickable.c...nakins-podracer and http://rebrickable.c...bulbas-podracer) that both include minifigures (and I'm not trying to degrade those MoCs, I think they're fantastic), that TLG's "system-scale" ones would be much smaller than actual minifigure scale. But the thing is, it says on Wookiepedia that sebulba's podracer has engines that are 7.47 m in length and a cockpit that is 3.96 m in length (http://starwars.wiki...'s_Podracer) and that Anakin's podracer's engines are 7 m long, and its cockpit is 3.15 m long (http://starwars.wiki...'s_Podracer). Multiply these by minifig scale (1/44) and sebulba's podracer's engines are about 17 cm in length, and its cockpit is 9 cm in length, and anakin's podracer's engines are about 16cm long, and its cockpit is about 7 cm long. This means that the actual models built by TLG are in some ways much larger than these dimensions, by a few centimetres in some cases (sebulba's engines: about 19.5cm, maybe even 20cm, compared to 17cm, however Anakin's engines are admittedly about 16.5 cm just like they should according to wookiepedia be). But if wookiepedia is actually accurate and those dimensions for the podracers shown in the film are correct, how come when you look at screenshots from the podrace sceen on the film (see: http://hopeliesat24f...dracer_race.jpg), the podracers look much larger that they are shown to be by TLG's rendition. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the podracers appear to be different sizes throughout the podrace scene. Is this the explanation for why wookiepedia gave the dimensions it did, or is it that the only source of information on the podracers' lengths is some EU book that had writers who didn't care about being accurate to the film. Or is it because minifigs are thicker than real people and therefore make TLG's models look smaller than they should be? Does anyone else know what the explanation is and whether or not TLG's models are accurate minfig scale? Thanks a lot. :)

Larger pic: http://www.brickshel...z_1img_1426.jpg Shadowfax, lord of all horses. Comments and criticism welcome! :)

Okay thanks everyone for your responses to my question. I thought I had already searched google for pictures of the devastator a long time ago and all I remember coming up with were what I thought were pictures of the avenger, but after reading brickdoctor's post and just simply once again searching "star destroyer devastator", I was able to find this model replica which I hadn't seen before (http://www.modelerma...SET1_000ABC.jpg), which answers my question. Really appreciate the help. :)

Thanks for the help, but that star destroyer (the devastator) was only seen on screen for like 20 seconds at the very beginning of ANH, if I remember correctly, and that's the only time you see it, and throughout the period of time the devastator is on screen the camera is shooting from underneath the ship, making it impossible for you to tell how many steps there are. How would LEGO know how many steps it has, or even any of the finer details on the ship with only such a limited amount of screentime from such an inconvenient angle? Did LEGO obtain a model on which they based 10030? Or was the ship on screen at other times throughout ANH? Thanks.

Hi, I've noticed that the UCS 10030 Imperial Star Destroyer has an upper body where on the side there are two steps on which a theoretical creature (say about 5 inches in height) would have to climb before it could reach the bridge, however I noticed that on the studio models of episode v star destroyers, there were three steps (see about 4:34 on this video) ).Is this because they are later models of star destroyers and the original Star Destroyer on which 10030 is based has only two steps, or did TLG just mess up? (because you never really see how many "steps" there are on the original star destroyer) Thanks a lot to anyone who can answer this possibly confusing question, I really appreciate any help. :)

Thanks for the reply, but I tend to disagree. Detail isn't necessarily everything. You can build lots of huge ships, cars, starfighters, trucks, trains, whatever, but no matter how big they are, even if they're one of the biggest builds of the LEGO community in the entire year, if they're not aesthetically appealing, then personally I find them of little interest. However, if you build something extremely small, without any great amount of detail or not, and it is considerably original and aesthetically appealing, then I would personally find that particular build more interesting then a 5000 piece MoC of a ship that simply doesn't look very appealing. That's why as of recent I've been building all these micro ships. They may be small, but in my opinion lots of them look pretty sleek and stylish. :)

Comments and criticism welcome! :)

Thanks for the reply! :) As for leaving the studs there, that's mostly a mixture of I've always sort of been able to visualize real-life starfighters with that texture on them, and also I'm short on pieces.xD

Comments and criticism welcome! :)

Starfighter MoC. Comments and criticism welcome! :)

Fortitudo: latin for stength. Comments and criticism appreciated!

Thanks. But would you mind telling me how you know? You see I'm thinking of buying 10221 super star destroyer so I want to be sure I'm not spending my money on something that wasn't even fully on the screen at any time. Or maybe would someone else mind verifying this just so that I can be sure? Thanks a lot.

Hi, I was just wondering, is this image from one of the six actual Star Wars films (the image at the top): http://www.comicvine...rrier-1514493/ ?

Well, that's basically all the help I need. Thanks for answering my questions once again.

Thanks. But, how would TLG have gone about designing the UCS ISD in 2002? Would they have been provided with a replica model of the ISD from Lucasfilm, or at least a digital model, or diagrams of some sort, or did they just base it off of what they saw on film/on the internet? And are the areas in which they placed the extra plates accurate, or do you think they just went with what looked most aesthetically appealing?

Hi, I really don't want to ruin this set for anybody, but I'm trying to decide whether or not to mod it. Anyway, looking at pictures online of non-lego star destroyers it seems the surface that makes up the main arrow-shaped body is quite smooth, however when i compare it to the UCS lego model, I find that the surface of the actual lego set is uneven, covered with a few 2x16 and 2x12 plates and a couple of these: http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=30356. Is this detailing accurate? Thanks.

Sorry to all and to moderators if I'm inconveniencing anyone but I thought that since each version is so much more superior to the previous that in order to give this MoC a fair shot each improved version needed its own topic, but moderators are welcome to close this topic if they want to I'll just edit the Mark 2 photo if you choose to do so. Anyway, this is a starfighter MoC. Comments and criticism are welcome!

This is a starfighter MoC. Comments and criticism are welcome.

This is a starfighter MoC. Comments and criticism are welcome!

I like this, especially the engine. Nice job.

This is a star fighter MoC. Comments and criticism welcome!

Thanks for the reply. I didn't actually construct the back as I would have liked to if I had the time and pieces, so I don't have any photographs of it. But if I did have the pieces and time, I guess I would describe it as looking like what you are probably envisioning in your head as the back.

This is a starfighter MoC: Comments and criticism welcome!

Why is it "butt-ugly"?

Hi does anyone know any possible alternatives to the bubble turrets on the 2013 Republic Gunship?