Jerac
-
Posts
497 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Everything posted by Jerac
-
Honestly I did not consider white at all, it might bee too much of a contrast. I guess this is much like x-wings; half of people make them white and the other half makes them grey.
-
It seems roughly right to me. Are you considering replacing some of the plates with tiles? That would surely look good, unless you go for UCS-like look by default.
-
I used small minifig axes in the prototype (old firemen figs used those). Screwdrivers are more clean/elegant solution but what you need is actually a tiny piece of bar sticking out of headlight brick. If you have a piece of flex hose to cut, it would be perfect; you can get away with little 1-stud-long pieces if you wish.
-
Hooray! Each new Star Destroyer makes me happy! :D But I need to spoil your fun (or extend it...?) a bit! Your bridge is too big for the ship. It is among the best photos I could find to get correct shaping and proportions. Try to use it and the result will be great. As for bridge's width, go for slightly wider than top terrace's width. In this scale you are using, you can even go for the same width.
-
Shiiiiit. And I did the same thing in the T/A... My experience was different, I couldn't align all the hinged slopes and it was easier to me to connect them while separated. I'll try to collect more feedback, if people are upset about this I'll update instructions. This is not a major change. LEGO designers have hell of a job to solve such issues, I wonder how many great designs were rejected only because it was impossible to make them easy enough in instructions. ------------- Thanks for appreciation, guys! Always welcome!
-
BrickVault.Toys MOC Discussion and Progress!
Jerac replied to Peasantseverywhere's topic in LEGO Star Wars
As for TIE instructions, their parts lists (xml and pdf) should be perfect now. Initially I have had some issues, mostly because of wildly different formats of parts between ldraw-based software, ldd and mlcad. Now the process I use is automated to a very high extent which eliminates the main cause for errors: human factor :) -
Thanks! Please tell me if you have any feedback about the intructions! Designing the MOC itself is super fun, but I am growing fond of designing build order as well. If there is anything which is hard to attach, hard to spot or just plain awkward please tell me so I can improve further instructions.
-
The Solo movie TIE Fighter shares very little parts base with my designs. This is because I use bricks for panels instead of plates, and the core sphere in my design uses mostly plates, few slopes and eight obvious dome parts, while solo set is built with large amount of tiny slopes. Hatches and windshield themselves are cheap and are not any significant position on the parts list pricing.
-
Thanks! I still wouldn't like to fly the Advanced if I had to choose between this and any other shielded TIE, but well, I guess I am not a Sith Lord anyways! All in all though, I have went through similar process as you. Except for me it was x-wings vs TIE fighters, first being classic nice spacecraft and second - odd ugly monstrosities. Now the TIEs are the single most awesome spacecrafts I know and x-wings are... just another winged fighters. I've been playing with some photoediting recently and finally got Vader figure... worth it?
-
Thanks! Classic TIEs are not the end of the project. I have at least three more things to build for sure and plenty of ideas later on. And breaks are for the weak! But the next thing I am attempting is super hard... there will definitely be some time before I release it, or even another ship might get finished before. As for the windshield piece - it matters not for me. Both are good.
-
Absolutely great! I am torn between display version and microfighter-style version, but both are fabulous. And then your photography is excellent, especially this shot on dark! An entire diorama of Hoth in such style would be fantastic!
-
Hi everybody! Finally done! The hardest of the Big Four! The TIE Advanced was meant to be released along with the classic TIE Fighter instead of the Interceptor, but it has proven to be much harder build than I anticipated. I thought, having more space for the pylons since they are bigger would make them easier; well not so - they are supposed to be little tapering hexagons with holes, ugh! :D I thought, I have a great idea for angled panels which is scalable and will work for everything; well not so - the T/A is too small to use the same solution. I thought, scaling would be easy because this is perhaps the most covered ship on google photos; well not so - most of these photos are useless for scaling. This all made it a nice set of LEGO challenges which I love to solve so much. To be very honest, this is not a very nice design! Its front-end is blunt, its rear is oddly curved which does not match angled panels at all, and it absolutely does not feel "evil" like the dagger-edged Interceptor. Despite this, it still has this iconic-kind of design which makes it so unique. No franchise makes ugly ships anymore, everything has to be cool. Boring! So the ship has four engines. Who knew? The model technically is the smallest TIE craft out of all original trilogy ones. It requires about 860 pieces and is actually lighter than the basic TIE Fighter. Fun thing, for the boss to have the smallest ride, even though it has double the 'cylinders' under the bonnet. This is a commisioned build and instructions are available at http://brickvault.toys I hope you like it - I sure enjoyed the building and design experience!
-
Lego Jedi Interceptor 75038 wing angle problem
Jerac replied to EggomyLego's topic in LEGO Star Wars
I checked plenty of click hinge pairs and indeed they have some minscule angle differences. This seems to come from the fact you can manually adjust the angle slightly even within one "click" range. As usual in such cases, solution is to increase friction or add tension. If you can add something between the hull and the wings to force them into exact angle, it should be more even. You can also pull them towards the hull using rubber bands in some hidden spot. I can't offer exact solution because I don't have this set, but it definitely is doable. -
X-wing has wings. Lifting surfaces. It also benefits from having guns far from the ship's core for some reason. Tie Hunter is another product of "hey, let's take some TIE parts and randomly mix them" so I consider it just as wrong. Keep in mind I am not talking about quality of build - which is fine - just practical aspect. But then, practical aspects for fictional spaceships... not very important :D
-
I on the other hand do not understand the benefit of having the panels angled outwards. The ship presents bigger target and would be less manouverable than a standard variant.
-
It is a MOC, which stands for My Own Construction.
-
I am waiting for the new TIE pilot minifig. It is possible the designs will be updated to fix some issues they have.
-
This is a prototype, but principle is the same. See these little clips at the bottom of the panels? They are what enables the T/I to stand upright ;)
-
ARGH! The intent for these litle clips at the bottom of interceptor's panels are to make it stand upright! It does not need to sadly look down, but it can carry Empire's banner with pride! I am happy that you like the designs. It is really heartwarming to see people build my designs and like them. As for rebel ships, well, I generally prefer to build things which are not covered by other builders too much, because with high-end and common designs like X-Wing you're going to reuse techniques used by somebody else. There is not much to invent there, as everybody already did everything. Y-Wings are perhaps easiest ships to build too and again, there are plenty of them. The old A-Wing of mine will eventually be updated and instructionized. In original form it literally relied on stickers to hold itself together so it wasn't very good design...!
-
You will get pdf and xml for bricklink from brickvault too. To be honest, I am not sure. But I think it is so shady I won't risk using the software at all.
-
stud.io has some problems... first being license which says anything uploaded to it becomes property of bricklink, second being the fact it crashes on importing anything bigger than 100 pcs on all machines I tried ;p
-
In this build there is no difference between jumper pieces. You can use whichever you want. Thanks for pointing out that one variant is significantly cheaper than the other one, I will have that in mind next time I publish instructions. So far the only ship requiring very specific piece subtype was the interceptor with its odd headlight-to-clip technique, which uses these: Plate, Modified 1 x 1 with Clip Vertical - Type 2 (thin U clip) Any other variant won't work because it won't fit into headlight backside.
-
You can take a screenshot of the instruction, trim to the part in question and link it here.
-
Thanks! I am actually working on it since some time. Ideally it should be published along with standard TIEs to make a trench run but... well, things did not end up being ideal. So far I went through three prototypes and I don't like any one of them enough to be finalized. I tend to design many builds simultaneously so while I am tinkering with the T/A, it is possible that another ship ends up being finished before. The biggest problem for me is lack of good source material. There are plenty of photos of a T/A studio ILM model, but every single of them has very strong perspective which makes taking measurements difficult. I tried, but model built with that data ended up looking "just weird" which is a sure signal something is off. Since I accept only what I consider absolute perfection, I will publish the T/A only if it is as good as possible.
-
Eventually it will be, but it is already on brickvault.toys