Jerac

No worries! Don't worry about "skill level". This was not my first a-wing, this is a last one in a long line of ships. The first one I remember was REALLY wrong and also about twice as large as this one :D

Thanks! Which central fuselage area are you referring to? I might have made something wrong, sources are sometimes pretty inconclusive and they are easy to interpret wrong. Most of it is legal, but some places are tough to do (you have to attach a tile to four clips at once at one point of time, for example). It shouldn't be too hard though, and it requires no rubber bands to hold itself together ;) There is one place where geometry doesn't work out, but this is intentional. Sides of the nose are pulled together and joined with a ball joint in a way which normally would require them spaced a bit more narrowly. This way it is done, they are slightly bent inwards - which increases tension a bit (which in turn makes it more rigid), reduces width to desirable level and closes some holes. About the same, yes. Only "about" because it is pretty difficult to scale the TIEs themselves... To me, though, it looks just right.

There are not many fictional spaceships as recognizable as the x-wing. Because of that, most of us had built one at some point of time. After all, it is both iconic and pretty simple: long, thin nose, four wings on hinges, cockpit somewhere in the middle and long guns on wingtips. It was built so many times it is as boring as it is popular, which is why I never attempted doing it. If not BrickVault, with whom I am cooperating on making models with instructions, I would probably never make my own. Eventually though popular demand made it an obvious choice and so I started. What was initially a build stuck somewhere between one TIE or another, took me about four months to complete, which is huge for such a relatively small ship. Let me present you the finished product first. Because we were not entirely sure which color variant is the best, I ended up making three - this way everybody will have one which fits him! So: are X-Wings simple? I just can't emphasize on how wrong was I. There are so many things that need to be done right. Thin wings. Front fuselage which has no parallel surface and has an annoying stripe which interferes with structural work inside. Rear fuselage which is neither rectangular or hexagonal, it is something else. And don't even get me started on the cockpit situation. LEGO part designers made one cockpit which has good front, but bad back, and then the new one has good back, but bad front. Had they merged the designs into one it would be perfect, and without it we can only pick whether we will have abnormally wide nose section, or abnormally square-looking cockpit. Altough there are many great X-Wing designs in the AFOL world, most notably those from Atlas, Cehnot, Inthert, Mike Psiaki and Dmac, among many others, most have their noses either studded, or with jagged edges. So instead of starting with the wings, I started with the front fuselage, as it was the most difficult part. And after all what can be hard with simple wing-opening mechanism? This was the fist sketch. I had no clue how to join this all, and tried all possible cockpit pieces, but I liked the idea of using hinges to make smooth upper sides of the ship. But since my designs modelled in LDD end up being... uh, not too perfect, I had to move to real bricks, and fast. So immediately after a batch of pieces including the cockpit arrived, I made the real version of the nose. ...yeah, so it does not look like the LDD one, because the LDD one was really bad. This one features a lip I was pretty sure was the standard feature of the x-wing, later I discovered that the lipped version is a hangar model, and miniature model has none of it. Also, I noticed the fuselage is already too high so it will have to be lowered later on. Here it has some of the rear fuselage, and first of many variants of nose tip. So far so good. Except it totally did not hold together, so... I also got a hunch that something odd is going on with the proportions at this stage, but "eeh this is a prototype, I will get back to it later". Having front part more or less done, I started doing the wing gearbox: It worked well enough so far, so I could return to the nose area. It was too high, nose top was too long and some of other proportions were wrong. So I fixed it: The X-wing's cockpit front panel does not line up with top surface of the nose, there is a slight angle change. I wanted to have that, but obviously overdid it badly... it looks sort of vulture'ish here too, due to the nose, doesn't it? There. Much better, isn't it? I added cheese slopes on top of 2x2 slopes behind the canopy so I could make the cockpit lower in relation to rear fuselage. I also made a better nose tip. Even the bottom was shaping up quite nicely. By that time, however, issues with wing mechanism became too apparent. It clogged often, was wobbly because each wing was held only on one technic beam, and tended to detach bottom fuselage panels every time when it was opened. Something had to be done, which meant another major rework. Eventually after about two weeks of tinkering, I maged to find a solution which in short space (6 studs) contains an 2x2 gearbox and two attachment points per wings, with added benefit of entire assembly built sideways which greatly helps with wings stability. What the final model uses for wing mechanism is an evolved version of this mechanism. Notice how the control knob is on the bottom of the ship... With wing core situation solved, I could move on to landing gear, which proven to be super simple but effective. Building, however, is not just about the design itself. Sometimes you have to tend for the workplace as well, because I eventually ended up with such a situation: ...so where is that part? In the apartment I was renting back then, I did not really have enough space for building. Or, anything really. ...so I moved. How often do you move to finish a MOC? :D This was just before the departure. Having the workspace situation resolved, I could get back to work. By that time I also got most of the parts I required to finish the ship, so I made all the components or their placeholders, and pondered why it still felt wrong. It took me a while, but this happened to be caused by rear fuselage. You see... I had it like on the left, while it should be more like the one on the right. Easy to fix? Except because the ship has no internal frame, it is held by the outer parts. So any rework in this area was causing issues everywhere else. I figured out a way. Yup, from that moment on, the tile-to-clip connection is main structural connection of the ship. Basically the idea is that front fuselage attaches to rear fuselage by these areas (and similar on the underside), and they all together "wrap around" the wing structure. It holds together surprisingly well, to the point it ended up being the final solution! This was the version tested by BrickVault. In case of some harder models, and X-Wing totally qualifies, we do an additional verification step to ensure all works. The results of the tests were, if I remember correctly: - landing gear collapses - nose top part cannot be attached properly - angled fuselage sides cannot be angled properly - rear fuselage top part randomly pops off not to mention several issues with the instruction itself. ...and what do you mean R2 doesn't fit? Here during debug of the front cover issue. If you work in IT, you know these dreaded words: "hmm it works for me". Yet for brickvault guys, this connection was not possible because the jumper tile was too deep. The issue, as usual, was caused by a part being placed far away, in this case - under the cockpit. Making instructions introduces entire new class of problems. How often do you debug a MOC? Now, remember what I said about the control gear being installed on the bottom? The idea was that an axle would go through the stand, with a nice knob to spin the gearbox to open/close the wings. Unfortunately though, the force required to open up wings is so high, the axle bent and twisted in a way which made operation through the stand impossible. It surprised me, because turning it with fingers is reasonably easy. This issue I did not solve. The only thing I could do was to move control point from the bottom to the top. This triggered YET ANOTHER F**** REWORK, this time of both the underbody top fuselage panels. I lost count here, but it seems the rear part was redone about 5 times totally, with smaller numerous adjustments during the way. The story came to an end after four months of work, several rebuilds, several totally wrong ideas, and a lot of beer drunk. I hope this wall of text is interesting for someone. Thanks for reading and tell me what you think! ------------ This build was done with collaboration with BrickVault. You can watch a video review here: Instructions are available here: https://www.brickvault.toys/collections/all

Sure, no problem! Here you have the relevant brickshelf folder: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=365955 As for the lxf I'll send it later today when I get back from work. Guessing the date will be tricky. I am pretty sure it was pre-SW sets which means pre 1998, or maybe equal? For 100% though it was before official a-wing debuted, because I remember how much in love was I in with it and since then, all my a-wings were copies of the official set. Let's settle with 1998 then!

I found these instructions lying in some old, forgotten place at brickshelf... remember brickshelf? This is page three of four. All hand drawn, with each mistake being permanent. I wondered if I could decipher all that, and to be honest, it was all surprisingly clear! About 30 minutes of LDDing later and let me present you... the A-Wing of my childhood! Aaahh memories. I did not have white wings, which is why it is partially black, and piece palette, obviously, was pretty limited. The thing was built like a rock, you can even see the technic-bracing which also goes inside! I was building everything to be able to withstand dropping from a desk without losing any part, but if I recall correctly, this particular build survived being thrown across the room. I am also genuinely surprised its proportions are not that bad, with me having no resources aside from watching EP6 over and over again; this was pre-internet times here in Poland. So there it is. 20 year old piece of history and perhaps that one Jerac's A-Wing you did not know of :D

Damn. I really need to make myself one of these SDs. Will you get very mad if I make it a little bit more tiled? :)

Its looks don't match the original. Big deal. Take what's good, scrap the rest, build new one. Iterating a design is normal process of creation, and critique during iterations only helps making next one better.

Hah it is copied so well it has even the domes in incorrect size, much like in original Chimaera's bridge ;D

No further help! Eventually you'll see! :D

Thanks! Teaser... hm. So it is very common, but also very hard. It is small but big, depending how you look at it. And it has a freakin wobble problem I am trying to fix, which is why it got delayed that much :D

Think of this this way: LEGO is the official dealer and Bricklink is a huge market where everyone can sell and buy pieces without any regulation. I am both happy and sad to be successful enough to cause visible dent on the market! Supertruper1988's suggestion is right. Bricklink prices react to market demand, but LEGO as a top-level supplier remains unaffected. I guess over time it will be better to go for LEGO shop for pieces, especially considering they generally have good prices, just long delivery time. Big thanks again for appreciation, and please say whatever suggestion on the builds&instructions you guys come up with. Everything helps! I might be a MOCer since ever, but instructions and planning for other people building my designs... this is entirely new thing! Cheers!

Thanks again for appreciation! It is nice to get a coin or two, but people liking my creations are what is truly heartwarming and proving it is worth doing! Actually neither of these reasons! I did this to try another guns and cockpit solution. The one used in standard Imperial T/F is, altough a little bit more true to real model, is very fragile and difficult to adjust. Multiple photos of people doing it wrong prove it. Naturally it is not their fault, but designer's. Eventually T/F will be updated and it will get this newer gun solution used in FO TIEs.

I see now. Good upgrade! It proves every model can be always made better. Thanks!

I would like to see it. Sounds interesting, but I somewhat can't imagine it ;)

We need to make some sort of modelling resource with only good quality sources ^^ As for criticism I like it and I *need* it to function properly so please never hesitate. At worst I am going to ignore it. Thanks for clearing that issue with my last photo. I also have seen this "blue 12" one and was just as stumped. I knew it was not a fan model - these don't have all this bracing for live action - but it also did not match anything in the movie. Not to mention I associate slightly different colour with "blue". http://www.theforce.net/swtc/index.html This website has some good photos of original models from various exhibitions. They are, sadly, in deteriorating quality, especially seen on TIEs. http://swc.fs2downloads.com/reference/starship_modeler/Rebel/X-Wing/ This is to be used with caution; not all of these might be actual studio models!

I didn't know about the "pyrotechnic" version and I too noticed the issues with some of them having a lip or not (and inconsistent colouring between hangar and miniatures). I don't use *only* the movie stills, I use them as a primary source, but if there is a good footage of studio models, it is as good or even better. If photos like this one existed for each ship it would be sooo simple: This is a good shot to get lengths of various components of an x-wing. ...and so is this. So yeah, I try to find the best possible sources and plenty of them. The problem I remember I had was guessing if a particular photo was depicting one of studio models, or not. For example: Tthi This might be useful for scaling, but is it one of the six ships seen on the table? Eventually I will try an x-wing myself and then I'll have to get to know all this... EDIT: I found an error in my notes, thanks to you! I now started investingating the lip and noticed sometimes I scaled things to the length of the opening cockpit canopy piece, and sometimes to the bluish framing outside. Stupid error but easy to do on side shots.

I've been examining x-wing for scaling some time ago. This is perhaps the most inconsistent model existing. I swear, every major scene uses different model. So ANH hangar scene has one variant of an x-wing, ANH battle of Yavin uses another, in ESB there is third x-wing and - on Dagobah - fourth... and they all differ: Some are longnosed, some are big-engined, some are clean, some dirtier, wing span changes, wingtip distance when open... Not to mention there are dozens of studio-scale unofficial models which further complicate things. There are not many quality a-wing models existing, so if you see a real plastic a-wing then there is a high chance it is actually a studio model. For an x-wing this is reversed, there is very little chance of the photo depicting a studio model.

For some reason it looks very feminine to me. Perhaps this is because how thin the arms and legs are?

I think this is my favourite executor-type SSD in LEGO, regardless of scale. Even though I particularly dislike wedge plates because they have studs, the patterned texture of hull plating achieved by using various tiles is perfect!

Initial photos in the first post show an old-school frame which was so meh I couldn't really recommend anything except "redo it from scratch", but this latest version I see is already much better! It is very strong, braced with liftarms - good way to go! As for the connectors, put them *inside* the frame, not outside. Hull plating is sloped, meaning gravity will try to pull it outwards, which will also try to pull out your connectors from the frame. You can try to brace them or you can use geometry to your advantage - if you put these connectors to the inside, they will be pushed into the frame all by themselves! Now for the bottom plating the situation will be reversed: connectors installed on the outside of the frame will be pulled towards it (which is good), so all in all I guess you need to have them on both sides. If your ship is going to be sufficiently big, you will discover the nose will droop. This is because a "legally-built" frame has some slight gaps between pieces and under enough weight, they will close. You will have two options to solve this: - introduce stress in the build deliberately. Stress already closes these gaps I mentioned and gives you more control of frame's behavior, but it will indeed bend the pieces. I had no option with the 2-meter long SD but this was really extreme case. - make an angled beam running along the center beam, to make the frame triangular also when looking from the side. Black part is what you're doing right now. Blue part will solve the problem with drooping nose if you have it. Green beams could be useful for attachment of the hull plating.

Because I put first-level-canon sources at absolutely highest priority and he does not. Long story short, for me, if data gathered from movie contradicts data gathered from any other source, the movie source wins. Guys at rebelscale on the other hand use CGI shows models for scaling which is no-no of monumental scale to me, considering how different these CGI models are. If I understand it right, his entire analysis is based off proportions of stormtroopers' height to the canopy diameter in this image: Unfortunately this is from CGI show and if you take a look at standard TIE/lns parked to the left and right, you'll see they're vastly different. So if you have bad data in the very beginning of analysis this is going to mess up results of everything else later on... I posted this one: to pinpoint another issue in scaling. How high exactly a minifig is? If you make it as high as an average human, you will have trouble with pilots not fitting into narrower cockpits (think A-wing, Naboo N1 and similar). If the minifig is as wide as aferage human, he would be basically kid-sized. So if this is flawed on such a fundamental scale... how can you even determine how long a meter is in LEGO universe, if you use people/figs for scaling? Also books. If he used anything from images from the "ultimate guide to star wars vehicle" series, like this one: ...then I am very sorry, but it is totally, utterly wrong. If you compare movie studio models with these schematics, you'll realize there might be not one drawing without very significant flaws. The same goes for games; if a game designer faces a choice: preserve truthful scaling or make the model fit the game for whatever reason, I tell you, he will *never* go for the first choice. I also dispute the claim of TFA TIEs being smaller than normal ones. Why would Sienar Jaemus do this? It is like making a new version of Ford Focus, just 10% or so smaller. It would be a total redesign of every single component; you can't just downscale a thing and declare it done, because in modern engineering, you're always using some standarized component. Think of a lamp in the aforementioned Focus, if you make the lamp smaller, a standard bulb won't fit - and would Ford make its own bulbs too? All in all, I believe there is no way to accurately scale everything using absolute values (like meters), and you can basically only compare ships to each other, end even this only if they end up being shown in the same scene... and then you notice movies are inconsistent within themselves, like you noticed, and you just do whatever seems right because it is wrong anyway :D

Don't trust "official sources": They're exactly identical. It would be unlikely for differently sized ships to be exactly the same proportions.

May I ask which method do you use for scaling? I am not denying (nor accepting ^^) your claim, but I could never find any good source when it comes to dimensions of TIE craft. Until new trilogy, there was not one scene with both the ship and a human figure together, which could be use for comparision. All other sources cannot be trusted, as they are all interpretations. This is the only shot from movie I can think of which can be useful for determining scale. Of course I know these do not have to be the same scale, but it somewhat makes sense for them to be. This, as far as I know, was used to shot interior of the TIE. It also shows minimum possible size of the TIE ball: So I really did it so wrong? TIEs are not small ships. Really! ..but then... ...which is why I am curious, which methodology do you use? Thanks in advance!

For it to be stable, no. If you add tiles there - which you can do yourself to try it - you will notice top and bottom panel halves won't be fully clipped together, and as a result, they will sometimes disconnect. For display purposes it is enough but the compromise in durability was so big I decided to leave the gaps.

This exact change is part of an update which will come eventually, but I got a little stuck on something else. Good to know it solves the issue though, so thanks!