Hobbyist Forums banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,440 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I haven't hunted down my copies of these kits in my basement yet, so I wanted to ask about them.

The big Flying Sub - is it already designed to have a lift-off top or is it supposed to be sealed? The Aurora kit was, but this isn't the Aurora!

The Voyager - same question as above. I'm guessing this one is, because it is an old Aurora kit.

The LIS Space Pod - is it designed to have the door open or closed?

I know I can build them either way anyway, but I was curious as to the original design and intent of the construction of these kits.

Thanks!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,992 Posts
The Flying Sub Top hatch assembly is designed for removal. The Voyager I'm not sure of as I don't have the kit. The Space Pod however is designed with working hinges on the door.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,863 Posts
The Voyager never had any capability to remove the top; you just view the interior through the forward windshield and bubble top. You can CAREFULLY remove the Flying Sub top and it fits well enough that you've only got a minor seam along the edge, although the "beak" above the windows has a seam that's more visible. Ideally it the upper hull should be glued and the seams sealed, just as on the upcoming Jupiter 2, but the large locator pins make them fit quite well without gluing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,823 Posts
I loved the idea of Aurora's removable tops- sometimes the only way to see an interior.
I hated the execution of it however- the Spindrift kit always had problems fitting right unless you either used with strong magnets or tried re-warping the top hull.
I thinl Moebius's solution is pretty good- the top docking collar gives you a pretty good view of the interior. I think I will not glue the upcoming J2's top hull on though- a great interior like that I do not wish to limit by the viewport windows...

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,773 Posts
None are DESIGNED with lift off tops...the docking upper docking ring can be made removable on Flying Sub.. the rear door of space pod is designed to work as ar the rear hatches of flying sub...
You can leave the top of FS-1 loose if you don'r mined the visible seam lines.
Voyager is intended to be closed up when built..

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,781 Posts
I loved the idea of Aurora's removable tops- sometimes the only way to see an interior.
I hated the execution of it however- the Spindrift kit always had problems fitting right unless you either used with strong magnets or tried re-warping the top hull.
I thinl Moebius's solution is pretty good- the top docking collar gives you a pretty good view of the interior. I think I will not glue the upcoming J2's top hull on though- a great interior like that I do not wish to limit by the viewport windows...

.
Has anyone ever considered cutting up the top of the large FS kit and emulating the Aurora removable top Flying Sub? Just cut along the outside of the strakes, glue the wings on...

It would probably be wacky to do, and you'd have to come up with some fairly beefy latches or something.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,830 Posts
Has anyone ever considered cutting up the top of the large FS kit and emulating the Aurora removable top Flying Sub? Just cut along the outside of the strakes, glue the wings on...

It would probably be wacky to do, and you'd have to come up with some fairly beefy latches or something.

To be honest, I actually did consider doing exactly that, but then thought the better of it because there is no "Aurora" style engine room, which I think is more impressive to look at than the winding hallway.
However, feel free to do that with yours and post some pics; it's always nice to have some variety. :wave:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,781 Posts
To be honest, I actually did consider doing exactly that, but then thought the better of it because there is no "Aurora" style engine room, which I think is more impressive to look at than the winding hallway.
However, feel free to do that with yours and post some pics; it's always nice to have some variety. :wave:
ME?! Oh, brother, not me, I don't have the chops for that sort of thing!

Because, see, I have this crazy idea that just maybe the interior isn't actually symmetrical , that by cheating the angles of the two rear angled walls some (the bunk and...what's on the other, the reactor wall? ) you can line up the rear hatch to the center...well, maybe not. Dammit.

It just, it seems there HAS to be some odd optical thing going on. Look how there's that odd cutout around the hatch, like it's a separate bulkhead, why make it like that? Why not dress the wall so the hatch is on the same flat as the other items 'planted' on?

WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?!?! AARRGGH! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,823 Posts
The hatch behind the wall could hav been a cost saving choice. Instead of building the hatch into the Flying Sub interior set it could have been a functional 'wild' hatch piece from the Seaview interior they could just place behind the wall opening.
Have one physical hatch serve several different locations- those things had to be expensive...

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,781 Posts
The hatch behind the wall could hav been a cost saving choice. Instead of building the hatch into the Flying Sub interior set it could have been a functional 'wild' hatch piece from the Seaview interior they could just place behind the wall opening.
Have one physical hatch serve several different locations- those things had to be expensive...

.
I was thinking that too, but, were they? I mean, they're not FUNCTIONAL hatches, the dogs don't work, you can SEE that the 'quick acting lock' arms don't ever move.

It's a curious design quirk, isn't it?
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top