Jump to content

rx79gez8gundam

Eurobricks Vassals
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    92

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by rx79gez8gundam

  1. rx79gez8gundam
    I have...issues...with the official UCS AT-ST. It's too wide, the head shape is wrong, and it overall just looks off. I've been re-working my own design and I think I've got it just about right. I worked from pics of the various studio shooting models and the full size props used on location for ROTJ. Note that as their are discrepancies between the scale models and the full size props it's imposdible to match both, but I think I suceeded in a good mix. My MOC is also fully poseable, has a detailed interior based off the Star Wars Incredible Cross Sections book, and holds two figures in the cockpit. The link to my Flickr with several photos of it is below. https://www.flickr.com/photos/rx79gez8gundam/54807601417
  2. rx79gez8gundam
    I'll try to work on making plans for this one. This is one of my only non-digital only MOCs so it's never been created in Stud.io. I have recently re-worked it a bit, it's now slightly larger and the hangar has been redone and moved forward. The engines and cannons were also re-worked, along with the dorsal superstructure and Tantive IV corvette.
  3. rx79gez8gundam
    Thanks! My goal was to offer a highly detailed alternative to the UCS Destroyer, as it's just too big and too expensive for the average person! I can afford to buy it currently, but I simply have no room to display it if I did. This model is just under 2' long and takes up far less space, and being based off an existing set offers a good starting point for someone to mod. There are also few Imperial-II Star Destroyer models out there, both UCS to date have been of the Imperial-I class Devastator. I made sure to stay away from using exotic parts as well. I'm working on plans in Stud.io, will be offering them once complete.
  4. rx79gez8gundam
    As beautiful as it is, not everyone has either the funds nor the display space for the UCS Star Destroyer. To that end, I offer a highly detailed yet modestly sized alternative that is a modification of an existing set, 75055. This is a model of Vader's Imperial-I class Star Destroyer Devastator as seen in Rogue One and A New Hope, but can also be reconfigured using easily swapable modular parts into an Imperial-II class Star Destroyer as seen in The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. The original set has had the internal playset removed, a complete ventral hull added with main hangar, detailed engines, and two new command towers. The model has been slightly enlarged to 1/2700 scale and is 23.5" long. The command tower, main batteries, and dorsal axial cannons are modular to convert between versions. The Mk I also has removable waist mounted quad cannons and engine thrust vanes. Completing the model is a display stand and a microscale Tantive IV Corellian Corvette, that while slightly overscale still fits perfectly in the main hangar and can be attached there. I used photos of the original Devastator filming model from A New Hope and the larger Avenger filming model from The Empire Strikes Back as reference. More pics available at https://www.flickr.com/photos/rx79gez8gundam/. Star Destroyer - 75055 Mod by Justin Davies, on Flickr Star Destroyer - 75055 Mod by Justin Davies, on Flickr Star Destroyer - 75055 Mod by Justin Davies, on Flickr Star Destroyer - 75055 Mod by Justin Davies, on Flickr Star Destroyer - 75055 Mod by Justin Davies, on Flickr Star Destroyer - 75055 Mod by Justin Davies, on Flickr Star Destroyer - 75055 Mod by Justin Davies, on Flickr LEGO Star Destroyer - 75055 Mod by Justin Davies, on Flickr
  5. rx79gez8gundam
    Model features geared turret traverse and barrel elevation controls, gunner and fusing operator's seats, folding legs, removable front and rear axle assemblies, steerable front axle, and opening sight port on gun shield. More pics available at https://www.flickr.com/photos/rx79gez8gundam/with/50514485912/. WWII German 88mm Flak 37 by Justin Davies, on Flickr WWII German 88mm Flak 37 by Justin Davies, on Flickr WWII German 88mm Flak 37 by Justin Davies, on Flickr WWII German 88mm Flak 37 by Justin Davies, on Flickr
  6. rx79gez8gundam
  7. rx79gez8gundam
    Because of the funky minifigure proportions, I "fudge" things as necessary. In this case I went with the most readily visible part of the figure in the model, which is the head.
  8. rx79gez8gundam
    Working on making one available.
  9. rx79gez8gundam
    Look at the studio model picture I posted above. The current LEGO minifigure/x-wing size relationship has been closer to 2/3 scale. My design is closer to a true 1:1. When building my T-65B (off which my T-70 model is based) I also used a 1:72 scale Revell X-Wing kit, as well as pictures of the various studio models and planform drawings.
  10. rx79gez8gundam
    Look at pictures of the studio models. If anything I'm undersized. Note the size of the pilot in relation to the size of the craft. I posted a T-65B X-Wing the other day, this model uses the same basic hull. The color on this one is white (muted it in the render).
  11. rx79gez8gundam
    Yes it is.
  12. rx79gez8gundam
    Adaptation of my Incom T-65B X-Wing model. Features the same geared S-Foil mechanism, working landing gear and opening canopy. LDD does not yet have parts from the Force Awakens sets, so I substituted an R2 astromech and Rebel pilot for now. Will post pics of real model once I've collected the parts.
  13. rx79gez8gundam
    Collecting the parts currently, almost have them all. Also working on a T-70 model, will post pics when it's finished.
  14. rx79gez8gundam
    Yes I have. There is no adequate transition for the studded end, and they would preclude the ability to feature functional landing gear.
  15. rx79gez8gundam
    Thanks! Seamless design is always a big goal of mine, as is as nearly studless as possible. Overall I strive for accuracy first, playability second, and size/number of elements a distant third. That's why so much of my work is huge! This is actually one of my smaller sets. That said, I think I actually nailed all three on this one. No worries, a better TIE is on the way!
  16. rx79gez8gundam
    I set out to create a more screen-accurate minifigure scaled X-Wing, and this is my result. The model is built to accept the canopy used in the new Poe's X-Wing Fighter set (75102), but it is not yet available to use in LDD so I created a stand-in for now. I am collecting the pieces to build the model, which is 1471 elements total. It features a geared S-Foil wing system controlled by the wheel on the back, opening canopy, and positionable landing gear with doors. Please visit my Mocpages to see more of my work. Comments/feedback appreciated!
  17. rx79gez8gundam
    You have had ample opportunity to bring new ideas and thoughts into the conversation, instead you have restated the same argument again and again. Your last few posts have added nothing to the conversation whatsoever.
  18. rx79gez8gundam
    A debate is an exchange of ideas, where each side presents new (emphasis on this word) arguments to bolster their case and attempt to persuade their opposition. You keep restating the same argument, like a broken record. You bring nothing new to the conversation, and are bordering on a flame war. As for Itaria, I've read through all your old posts, I can't fathom why you're even still reading this thread if it offends you so much. You seem a glutton for punishment. If the topic bothers you, go on to another.
  19. rx79gez8gundam
    I wasn't aware of the Turkish Stars, thanks for the correction! I know what you mean about military MOCs being somewhat derided. I struggle to get mine any kind of views or comments, and they seem mostly snubbed. It's really disheartening overall. Even when I make non-military models I seem to be ignored. I personally enjoy building military equipment, particularly aircraft, because it's what interests me having grown up in the shadow of an Air Force base. I also feel military aircraft have a lot more aestheticly pleasing "fiddly bits" about them than the typical civilian aircraft does.
  20. rx79gez8gundam
    So is beating the dead choir horse because you can't make it sing.
  21. rx79gez8gundam
    There are modern military sets available, produced by Mega Bloks under their Call Of Duty series. You also have the options of custom LEGO sets from numerous niche companies online, or you can recreate some of the sets people like myself, MadPhysicist, and scores of others have produced of modern militaria. LEGO is going to stick to their position of "no military" for the forseable future. There is obviously a market for military building sets, and has been for quite some time as competitors have produced and sold them mainstream for years. If the market did not exist the product would never have been on the shelf. This isn't an argument over morals or personal tastes, it's simply basic market math. If LEGO chooses to eschew this share of the market, then they can claim a moral stance and take the loss that branching into that market could otherwise bring. Being that LEGO is one of if not the largest toy company on the planet currently, I doubt they will notice nor care about any said loss. For the rest of us, I suggest if you want to see it, build it. It's what I do.
  22. rx79gez8gundam
    I wouldn't exactly call the Phantom "little", but it certainly proved that with enough thrust a cinder block could fly.
  23. rx79gez8gundam
    The US Navy's aerial display team the Blue Angels transitioned from the Grumman F-11F Tiger to the McDonnell Douglas F-4J Phantom II in 1969. In 1974, due to the fuel crisis, they switched to the more economical McDonnell Douglas A-4F Skyhawk II, continuing in that aircraft until 1986 and the switch to their current aircraft, the McDonnell Douglas/Boeing F/A-18A/B Hornet (now C/D). The Phantom II notably was also flown by the US Air Force display team the Thunderbirds at the same time as the Blue Angels, the only time both teams have flown similar aircraft (although the Thunderbirds flew the USAF F-4E variant). The models feature detailed pilot and WSO cockpits with opening canopies, opening radome with antenna, retractable landing gear, folding wings, deployable ram air turbine (RAT) and Naval style inflight refueling probe, and positionable flaps, flaperons, spoilerons, leading edge flaps, airbrakes, tailplanes, and tail hook. See more at my Mocpages account. Blue Angels 4-ship diamond of F-4Js. The Blue Angels' F-4J solo aircraft 5 and 6 perform an "Inverted Dirty Pass", wherein the two aircraft make a formation flyby of the crowd with one aircraft inverted. The "Dirty" in the name is an aviation term that refers to the high-drag configuration of the aircraft, with the landing gear and tail hooks deployed. This maneuver is unique to the Blue Angels and not performed by the USAF Thunderbirds.
  24. rx79gez8gundam
    ALL HAIL OUR GLORIOUS MOUSEY OVERLORDS!!! (happy thoughts...happy thoughts...must think happy thoughts...)
  25. rx79gez8gundam
    Please visit my Mocpages or my Flickr accounts to see lots more pics of my models, including all their details and features. I only have one picture rendered of the Bell 212 so far, but my UH-1N Twin Huey model is functionally identical and has lots of images.
×
×
  • Create New...