Fallenangel

After a day and a half of trial and error, I've made quite a bit of progress: I've reinforced the pivot, improved the wingtip laser cannons, and constructed the bottom half of the rear fuselage. I've also made some progress on the nose, but that's nowhere near final, as I'm still considering alternate methods. There's also some makeshift landing skids I put to hold the thing up. The astromech droid and pilot are placed roughly where they're supposed to be, but I really just put them there to give a sense of scale. As of now, the whole thing measures just over 40 studs in length - a little bigger than my last one, but seeing as both Bruce Lowell's and Brian Tobin's X-wings were over 40 studs, I'd say the size is about right. After the negative feedback regarding the 8L gun pieces used in the laser cannons in the last rendition as well as comments about the cannon being too thick, I switched to 12L Technic axles which maintain the length but allow for cannons that are both thinner and more sturdy. As you can see, the cannons are quite long enough, extending well past where I predict the cockpit to be. The 1x1 cones used to attach the flashback suppressors are also accurate, as there is a slight taper in that region. I'm still considering these, though. I tried Brickdoctor's suggestion of pneumatic T-pieces to achieve the "T" inside the air intakes, but they keep falling out since the "macaroni" pieces don't stay in place very well. I'll make it work... I'm hoping this will show KielDaMan the importance of constructing a proper bottom for your MOC: A 4x4 tile is attached at an angle with a clip to achieve an accurate and somewhat functional cargo storage area. The same feature is also represented with 2x4 wing plates attached with SNOT. A few rail plates act as stoppers for the S-foils, in accordance with the studio model. (Many MOCers make the mistake of constructing a vertical gap for the opening wings, when the groove on the studio model is actually horizontal, as I've mentioned in the thread about the 10215 UCS Delta-7.) Thanks to dateman for inspiring me to represent the sloped underside with stacked plates. I was about to use click hinges like I did for the rear, but it turned out to be too fragile. (By the way, while I was building this, the whole thing has completely fallen apart on me at least three times. Don't think I'm a slow builder.) Additional thanks to dateman for the nose design - I'd had the idea of using this with this for a while, but it wasn't until I saw a similar method on his model that I decided it looked okay. As for the back, I used click hinges to create the bottom half of a hexagon. After stressing the importance of a hexagonal rear fuselage on others' MOCs, I knew I'd be in trouble if I didn't include the feature myself! By the way, there's a piece missing there - I actually had a 1x3 tile next to the 2x3 plate, but I guess it fell off and got mixed in while I was putting away my bricks for the day. As you can see, the midi-scale Star Destroyer's parts have served me well. I also have an exploded view of the pivot mechanism: The system is composed of two symmetrical modules, each with two flaps where they attach to the wing. A Technic pin bit protuding from the module on the left plugs into a hole in the back of the module on the right to allow the two pieces to rotate. My prototype system only had two pairs of click hinge plates; I haven't had any structural problems since adding the third. Of course, I've also tweaked the wings slightly, so that accounts for stability as well. Argh, I just remembered that I forgot to take a picture with the wings open! You can't tell, but the angle that's achieved with the rail plates is like PERFECT. Much narrower than the huge angle you get when you use click hinges like I've been doing. As for MLCAD, I'm able to construct most of one of the wings, but it's proving difficult to align the components of the laser cannon, both with the 2x2 bracket and with each other. The same goes for the hinged brick. Is there any sort of trick to it, or is it just one of those things that take practice? Also, the wings are symmetrical, so I'm trying to duplicate them, but I can't select the entire wing... should I use the 'Import Model' feature? Oh, and another caption for the dismantled ARC-170 above. Its current condition is even worse, but I forgot to take a picture of that too. Pilot: How was I supposed to know they'd shoot us out of the sky? Gunner: You idiot, we were on CORVIS MINOR! (If you've read X-wing: The Krytos Trap you would get this...) EDIT: Brickdoctor, you've changed your avatar!

Yes, parts are one of my biggest issues right now. I was even considering building this model in MLCad and then ordering all the parts (in the style of Walter Kovacs) but the angles of the rear fuselage are just too difficult for me (I suck at CAD). Maybe one of the LDD pros on this site can do it for me... Yes, lowlead's X-wing did something similar to that. I remember I was about to do that for this rendition, but then I held it up to the light and it was just really shiny. I'm not sure why, but somewhere along the way I decided that those large half-cylinder pieces just look too <insert that tiresome argument>. I prefer the look of the 45 slope bricks, even if they are too blocky. I have tried to cram a 1x1 in there but that 1x2 is just too thick! If the hole was 3x3 like in the LEGO Star Wars engine piece it would fit easily, but not in a 2-stud diameter hole. Brian Tobin says: Posted here when I asked him to critique the last version of my X-wing. And this guy's X-wing was what inspired me to make my own. Truly raised my standards. What's more, he's been doing this for 20+ years, so he definitely knows what he's talking about. Yes, I was originally going to use minifigure lances for the guns, but those turned out to be too long. I don't have anything the right length and color... it's not easy with a small collection. Besides, the old gun pieces have a bit of a nostalgic feel to them. Now I know how Anio feels when I critique his UCS customs

Well they can always say that it was "just out of camera range" like the old Kenner toys... But you're right. An AT-ST would really make the set. As Brickdoctor pointed out, all those Ewok traps need something to trap.

I actually thought it looked kind of cute from that angle... Those hinge bricks in the legs tend to come in pretty useful (such as in an X-wing), as does a Technic gearbox. I also see the large slopes from the 8097 Slave I in dark grey.

It's finished! Many more pictures in the gallery (when public) Questions, comments and suggestions welcome! Thank you to everyone who has followed along and gave suggestions on this MOC! -------------- Dec. 22, 2010: X-wing version 8 WIP After a long delay, X-wing version 8 is finally coming along! Yeah, I like to build the wings first, since they're the most straightforward. There aren't really any tricky angles like there are in the forward fuselage. To be honest, I haven't really gotten into my bricks in a while, so this was kind of a warm-up before I tackled more SNOT-intensive areas. It's going to be quite difficult to top marshal_banana's fantastic front fuselage design; I think I may have to borrow some of his ideas. Many thanks to Brian Tobin (aka errbt) for the engines. As you can see, my design is quite similar to his, and it was he himself who gave me the idea of putting the curved corner pieces on the 4x4 round brick so that I could properly represent the air intakes. Yes, I know there should actually be a "T"-shape in there; I could only fit a 1x2 tile in the allotted space. errbt did offer an alternative; however, in the end I decided against it, since 1) I do not use bricklink, so I wouldn't have been able to use that piece anyway, 2) a printed tile just wouldn't look right there, and 3) maybe most importantly, X-wings do not have turbines. The 33 slope bricks may look fine in this shot, but in real life I think they're a bit too fat; I'm considering using the 2x4 slope bricks instead, though I don't think I have enough. Notice the beautifully constructed boosters. Notice also how there is only one. Sadly, I don't have enough 2x2 round bricks to build all four of them. In the last rendition, I downsized the laser cannons to 1x1 and used the round bricks from those so that I could include all the boosters, but after errbt pointed out the importance of making the enormous laser cannons the right size I knew I had to fix that first. In the meantime, I'm hoping that someone here can provide me with an alternative... A shot of the rear. Compare with this picture. The top of the slope should line up with the edge of the angled portion of the wing. Again, the boosters are a definite issue. this would work very well (Brucey-wan himself did use the piece for his X-wing, after all) but alas, I do not have any. As I've said, suggestions to alternatives would be greatly appreciated. Brickdoctor, this means you. Note the use of 3x12 wings. errbt (yes that guy again) pointed out on his MOCpages that neither 6x12 nor the older 4x8 wings quite capture the angle of the T-65's wing. Both he and Brucey-wan used 2x4 wings, which gives the wing the additional length of one stud; I didn't want wings that were two plates thick, so I used the closest match. Interestingly enough, my first attempt actually used 3x12 wings as well; it was only in later versions that I switched to the more conventional 6x12 wings. This design may look familiar to some to you; in fact, it's largely based off of the cannons on the 7191 UCS X-wing. Of course, it resembles the studio model fairly well; one of the few things that the 4502 X-wing got right was the little bit protuding from the rear of the cannon. I didn't really want to use the astromech body, but as I said, I'm short of 2x2 round bricks, so this is the best I could do while still conforming to errbt's (and my) standards. My prototype pivot system allows the S-foils to slide into attack position beautifully: For those of you who are interested, the wingspan is 36 studs, which translates to roughly 12 meters. The X-wing's dimensions are nearly square, and its official length is 12.5 m, so it's about right. Of course, the mechanism is quite skimpy at the moment. I'd had the design in my head for a while now, but the wings turned out much heavier than I had expected, and those click hinge plates don't hold very well. On top of that, the guns are also pretty flimsy. Swooshing this mechanism is not even an option, as it would fall apart if a 10-year old even tried to pick it up, much less walk around with it. Hopefully when I'm finished with the rear fuselage I'll be able to reinforce the pivot a bit more. More on the guns: this is the longest design yet. I'm hoping these will finally extend past the cockpit, as the guns on my last rendition barely reached that point. Yes, I used the cannon pieces from the original 7140 X-wing; this is my most efficient integration so far. I've managed to use both the 3-stud long area and the 1-stud bulb at the tip to my advantage so that they accurately portray the slighter thicker portion of the cannon's body and the little bit just behind the flashback suppressors, respectively. Of course, looking at the studio model, the taper should be more subtle, but this is the best I can do with these pieces. If someone could offer an alternative... While I'm talking about the flashback suppressors, note that unlike the previous rendition, I've used 1x2 tiles with one stud rather than the more conventional inverted dish pieces; over time, I've increasingly had the impression that said dish pieces don't really capture the thin look of the flashback suppressors on the studio model. Comments and criticism are very much welcomed. In particular, I'd like to hear from marshal_banana, Swash Buckler (though it appears that at the moment he is Taking a Break), roguebantha, and everyone else whose X-wing I've roasted. Please, show me what you know about X-wings. Oh, one more thing; to build this MOC, I've had to tear apart over half of my sets, so sadly that nice display I posted in the home and army thread is now gone. The only sets left intact were 6206, 7660, and the midi Falcon. The crew of 7259 made it all right, though their ship's had some trouble: Pilot: What the MEGABLOCKS happened to my ship? Churchill, there's your little Q to the right, just under the pilot. I hope that with the completion of this MOC I'll be able to prove to Brickdoctor that I can, in fact, build some of these ships myself. That's all for now, more coming soon! Note: no midi-scale sets were harmed in the making of this MOC. Except one: 8099.

Yes! The ultimate LEGO Star Wars set that both kids AND AFOLs might like. Of course, there is an issue that people might want to buy more than one AT-ST... but I guess Chewbacca could also work as a generic Wookiee. And if I remember correctly, the life-sized AT-ST prop can only fit one in the cockpit, but again, it's not like you can see the driver from the outside, so I wouldn't mind too much.

From this picture, I can confirm that it is the same headdress. As nice as the mechanism for the walker is, I don't see why they couldn't have just used a ball joint. How can it stand up? I don't recognize the black tubelike pieces attached to the legs. That's a very well concealed blunt missile launcher. I don't see why it's below the actual cannon though... The only way the battle droid can stay on the walker is with that handlebar. Interesting. Has anyone else noticed that even though the droid is a driver he still has a "straight" arm?

Well let's see... The 7263 TIE fighter is VERY close to the one in 10131 as well as the original 7146. The speeder bike in 4482 AT-TE is VERY similar to the one in 4483 AT-AT. The last few T-47s we've had (8089, 7666, 4500) are pretty close. The Lambda shuttle in 7264 Imperial inspection is identical to the one in 7166. THE 6212 X-WING IS ALMOST EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE 4502 X-WING. LEGO's reused the recent BARC speeder design as well as the STAP design. Anakin's pod was released twice in 7131 and 7171. They are identical. That's all I can think of right now. I know Anakin's Delta-7B was one of the first to include the 'better' flick-fire missiles - it was a highlighted feature in one of the reviews here. Now what's this about the 8093 having an ejector seat? LEGO wouldn't release a Nebulon-B (since the Redemption was a medical frigate), so I see no reason why they would release a Pelta other than to shower us with new minifigures. On the other hand, the Radiant VII played the role of a Jedi shuttle in Episode I, so both minifigure collectors and starship enthusiasts (such as myself) would win.

It's the question that drives us Sion... Hopefully, it's a modified Consular-class frigate. I'm just hoping that they don't just make a white version of 7665. That fat middle section was all right the first time, but a second rendition should definitely address that. And by "plain old spectators" I suppose you mean colored Q-tips... Seconded. I think that would actually belong in this thread... From Brickdoctor's reasoning I suppose 11 minifigures would be about right, but taking set quality into account, I don't really think LEGO could include more than 8 and still do a decent job at that price level. Remember, $150 doesn't mean the same 4504 Falcon with more minifigures... or at least I hope it doesn't.

No problem brickartist. It is true that I post frequently in this forum, and that some of my comments can be a bit pointed. No, English is my second language. However, it does help that I live in an English-speaking country. I remember that when I first joined this forum people were going "SW this" and "MF that" and I had no idea what they were talking about. You're probably right about the latter statement, though I don't see anything wrong with having above-average standards of accuracy. The only thing that determines the standard of accuracy for me is what people are capable of doing with LEGO, and some of the MOCs I've seen on this forum (Walter Kovacs's TIEs, for example) very much conform to what I see as accurate by LEGO standards. THIS! Of course, the price isn't exactly likely ($100+ for an Expanded Universe set?) but I can definitely see this working as a great set. I've always liked the look of the Ebon Hawk. Unless we get a new scout trooper mold with the Ewok Attack set, I don't see that happening. Personally I think the current scout trooper mold is a very good one, so I wouldn't expect a new mold, although some nice new helmet and torso printing for the 41st trooper's camo is a possibility. I'm just hoping that LEGO's new habit of printing the legs on all their minifigures doesn't continue, or else we'll be seeing 200-piece sets for around $50. AT-ST, complete with rolling logs, Ewok twin battering rams, Ewok hi-jackers on vines, and Ewok hitchhikers with rope.

Hooray for spare parts MOCs, especially when they turn out nice like this one... The sides of the speeder seem a bit too flat. "Cad Bane's speeder" is actually just a Coruscant taxi (deformed to fit the style of the cartoon) which has rounded edges extending all the way around the vehicle. At this scale, I think that a couple of these would help capture the shape at the sides. From what I can see in the screenshot, the speeder should have a lump in the middle above the centre headlight. Perhaps this could be achieved by making the sloped bricks in the center a plate or two higher than the surrounding bricks. It looks as if you've actually made that region smaller by using a sloped brick which is shorter than the ones surrounding it. Where are the three headlights in the front? The boosters should sit much higher on the ship, on level with the saucerlike region on top. I don't mind the red too much... reminds me of one of my old MOCs which was also built from spare parts.

Actually, considering the fact that they continue to represent some near-human species with the standard minifigure heads (I'm thinking of Asajj Ventress, Sugi, and Cad Bane) I wouldn't be surprised to see a Ki-Adi Mundi minifigure with a standard head. I've always thought that Ki-Adi Mundi was one of the more normal-looking non-human Jedi. However, he does have that little braid at the top, so... I think somebody pointed out a few years back that one of the hat pieces from some Indiana Jones set (the boat chase in Venice, if I remember correctly) could also represent the lump on his head quite nicely, The_Box Lando wore Han's clothes in Empire. However, he does get promoted to a general in Jedi, so a Jedi-themed Falcon could be an opportunity for a new torso print. And his "gibberish-speaking monkey co-pilot" is Nien Nunb, who is Sullustan... You are correct in saying that with Ki-Adi Mundi all the Jedi from the first LEGO Star Wars game would exist in minifigure form. Season 5?!

Sorry to be 'obnoxious' again, but I simply wanted to comment on what other members have said: Of course, with the 8099 midi-scale star destroyer's frame, you would have to take into the account the fact that an Executor using the same basic desgin would look quite fat unless it were a minimum size (something I mentioned in my review of the set, I might add). :blush: This probably has something to do with the fact that I often end up putting a negative tone into my posts to avoid awkward grammar (much like now). And when I'm trying to prove a point I guess it's a bit difficult for me not to sound as if my opinion is the only 'correct' one. I apologize, please remember that I'm not a native English speaker but thank you KielDaMan StoutFiles and Ritz Brick for your support. It's not every day that people you barely know would defend your behavior on an Internet forum. I seem to recall that when I suggested a midi-scale Slave I during my first month on this forum it was shot down with the argument that no one would recognize the ship. Might I inquire into the reason for this change in consensus? Brickdoctor does have a point with the 30th anniversary sets. Also remember that going by that rule the only two films they've really commemorated in this way are Star Wars and Empire. Still, personally I would like a Wookiee ornithopter set simply because it could signify the return of $10-$15 sets which are not battlepacks into the Star Wars line. To paraphrase what another LEGO enthusiast said, it is true that those small sets did fill a significant niche in the Star Wars canon with such small vehicles as the 74-Z or the escape pod launched from the Tantive IV. (They were also cheap ways to get nice minifigures.) There's been a lot of bashing of the N-1 in the past, but I don't believe I've ever heard of it referred to as a 'child's plaything'.

Going with Brickdoctor's suggestion I'm not going to continue the canon discussion, but I would like to know why The Force Unleashed games are the only "official" games. So they're making sets based on minifigure demand now? Well we know they have a Cato helmet mold, so that may indicate an upcoming episode featuring her... and I suppose another Clawdite minifigure would be nice.

Sorry. I suppose I should stop before I'm relocated to the Chamber...

You said almost exactly the same thing on FBTB only two hours ago... you even called it "Boba Fett Slave 1 Ship". It's "Boba Fett's Slave I", not a "Slave 1 ship". In addition, the convention is that UCS is pronounced "you-see-ess" as an acronym, so "an UCS" isn't right... Given the fact that you only see the Slave I on screen for less than 30 seconds in Empire, I doubt LEGO would release such a set. The Slave I may be a whole lot of fun for the kiddies (seeing as LEGO's done three renditions now) but it probably wouldn't sell well as a UCS. It is true that Slave I did play an important role, but it doesn't have a shape which is recognizable at a glance. And while I disagree, the general opinion is that Slave I isn't as iconic as other ships LEGO has released as UCS sets, such as the X-wing or the Falcon. What's more, a decent UCS Slave I would have to be truescale, which means it would have to be around 65 studs in length and cost several hundred dollars. I'm not sure people would pay that much for a ship they barely recognize (although the recent $80 rendition may prove me wrong). As for a Thrawn set, I can see LEGO releasing a mole miner with a spacetrooper inside it. And I think I've already mentioned the possibility of a Skipray blastboat with either Luke or Mara. I can't think of any interesting starships they could include in a Wayland set except a Lambda shuttle... Midi-scale Dreadnaught would be great... but if LEGO's going to continue the midi-scale line, a Tantive IV seems like a better choice. It would continue the practice of making iconic starships which are already UCS sets into midi-scale sets.

Well of course it needs a complete redesign! It wouldn't necessarily have to be larger though. And even if it is, you can't see the pilot inside the fighter clearly so I don't think I'd mind too much. Either your standards are too low or mine are too high...

I think someone's already made ALL of those suggestions... and battle packs have to contain vehicles of some sort or else Hasbro will whine about it. Seven or eight minifigures would really be pushing it for a battlepack... we're lucky to get four. The only reason the Expanded Universe sets have gone on sale is because none of today's children have the slightest idea what they are. As I've said before, LEGO needs to release something from the Expanded Universe that people would recognize. A battlepack with a decently scaled AT-RT, 74-Z speeder bike, or BARC speeder would be really nice. What if LEGO just made a set with one light ground vehicle (such as an AT-ST) and included a bunch of troops with it? One AT-RT with driver, then three 7th troopers (Cody's men, I believe. I'm thinking of the Outer Rim Sieges and Clone Wars Chapter 22...) Or one droideka with five battle droids. A CR20 troop carrier and six clone troopers...

I can infer from your signature that you are primarily a minifigure collector, so I can see where your argument is coming from. But I would have to disagree. For me, the vehicle or starship is what really makes a set. Not only is it more durable and playable (read: easily modified) than the minifigure, but it's most of what you actually pay money for. In most cases, a minifigure from a set on bricklink is much cheaper than the same set without minifigures. I suppose that this new set would have appeal to minifigure collectors such as yourself, but the poorly designed ship makes this set a disappointment. Even if this ship were chrome silver and came with the entire Jedi Council I would pass this set because that design is just so terrible. I would agree with you on that point, though I think that the ice cutter in the Hoth trooper battlepack is more of a counterexample, as it actually represents something from the films. (Still, an Atgar cannon or an anti-infantry battery would also have been nice.) The battlepacks really are a great opportunity for LEGO to rethink their small vehicles, like their BARC speeders and 74-Z speeder bikes; I wish they would take advantage of it. The BARC speeder really needs a smaller, sleeker redesign.

Not bashing here... I'm just stating the facts. I even said I liked the triangular design of the Delta-7! Wookieepedia says: Expanded Universe lit is and always has been part of the official canon. It's a lot more than "what if". That would be the Star Wars Infinities comic book seires, which truly are "what if" scenarios and not considered canon. Why does no one acknowledge this? I suppose if you consider the portion of the Expanded Universe that the Prequels contradicted to be apocryphal, your argument would be correct. But the Expanded Universe came before the Prequels. Even the first film could be considered to contain retcons if you're basing the argument off of the original novelization. And as for the BARC speeders, I'm just annoyed because they're too darn BIG.

I suppose so. And besides, it's not like they care about the number of retcons they've made at this point...

Yes. You can see one briefly at 12:05.

But LEGO's already made STAPs that are much closer to the right size than these new ones. With all their fancy new molding power I'm sure LEGO could make some new parts which would allow them to retain the size while increasing detail. And it probably wouldn't be any more costly than the BARF trooper's amazing new helmet. And I don't think the fins are any larger on the blue models than they are on the brown models. (They shouldn't be, since they are the same vehicle.) Those flag pieces really aren't necessary. And DarthR2-D2 what do you mean by "the astro droid the JSF"? If you're referring to the astro-droid in the Jedi starfighter it's an R2 unit which for some reason is labeled as an R8 unit. R8-series droids actually look like this. If LEGO's taking stuff from Hasbro, surely Saesee's fighter will look like this (since there was a Hasbro toy that could do this).

I really don't think it's the color of the fighter that disappoints so much as the actual shape. From what I can see LEGO refuses to make any efforts toward replicating the streamlined look of the real Delta-7; there may be some non-Clone Wars fans who don't like the triangular design but I prefer it to this craptastic attempt at a triangle that LEGO has maintained since Anakin's fighter in '08. Why is everyone complaining about the color? The color does not affect the look at all! All of these Delta-7Bs have almost exactly the same shape; I really don't think making it green, purple, or some other color would improve the look. It's really LEGO's poor design and subsequent lack of improvement that fails. Actually, I would consider the STAPs to be another of the lower points of this set because LEGO has been going downhill with them. The STAP in the 7654 Droid Battle pack was just a little too big; the blue one in the 7675 AT-TE was enormous. I consider scale to be the most important aspect with smaller vehicles where the driver or pilot is clearly visible since it is the impression of the driver on the vehicle that creates a lot of that vehicle's "look"; put another way, the vehicle is most recognizable when the driver is on it. When I saw the preliminary pictures of the new battlepacks and this ENORMOUS BARC speeder I couldn't even tell it WAS a BARC speeder. What's with the exaggerated platforms anyway? The original LEGO STAPs didn't even HAVE platforms, probably because it was too small of a detail to include at minifigure scale. Mace Windu's grey astro-droid is designated an R8-series as if the E-wing escort starfighter had been around during the Wars. Well the speeder should be a lot SMALLER but LEGO just reused the same large design from the battlepack so I suppose it is just a case of LEGO being lazy.

They can print the guy's HAT but none of the pieces on the ship? Regarding the review, I think a lot of people want to see more pictures of the ship's features and less of the parts.