Hobbyist Forums banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,339 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Original AMT Star Trek ShuttleCraft...woefully inaccurate even with tons of modifications. Hopefully Round 2/Polar Lights will produce one from a new mold...For now, this will have to do. It came real close to being chucked into the garbage...Just holding on to it for nostalgia sake at this point.
Once I get up and moving again, I may repaint/decal it again...NOT sure if it's worth the aggravation


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
I just saw a fan film "Avalon lost" something, something. On youtube. It actually opens with "in the Avalon Universe". And they redid the designs of the shuttle, Exeter and uniforms, but in a really good way! While the short wasn't the greatest, it was fun to see them change things so that they weren't quite the same as, physically, the CBS IP designs. Yet, names like United Federation of Planets and USS Exeter and Starbase 5 (i think) were used. The uniforms were leather, but in the colors of TOS - gold, red, blue.

Perhaps, this shuttle is from the AMT Universe....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,032 Posts
Inaccurate maybe, but better than straight out of the box, for sure... I just pulled my shuttle out of the stash, and will be making some corrections/additions to it, as well.



I think 'accuracy' on a model can only go so far, I mean, if you drill down far enough you will need a 100x microscope to cut, glue and paint... who's got the intestinal fortitude to manufacture a Millennium Falcon cockpit interior at 1/500? Wait, don't answer that...


'Accurate enough for me' I think is what most model builders shoot for (hobbyists, not pro builders of course) unless I'm much mistaken. I also think a lot depends on the amount of time you have, your 'skill' level, talent, finances, etc. Something like this kit which is relatively simple right off the sprues, can become exceedingly complex if you think of adding an interior, lighting, engine effects, and so on, to say nothing of correcting the inherent flaws in the kit. All that said, there's plenty of room on this kit for added detail, given the size of the subject in relation to its scale, it lends itself rather easily to modifications. On my shuttle I'm looking at putting together an interior with some lights, and replacing the kit-supplied engines with styrene tube, and of course scratched rear landing strut. But, it still won't be completely 'accurate.'
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,339 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Inaccurate maybe, but better than straight out of the box, for sure... I just pulled my shuttle out of the stash, and will be making some corrections/additions to it, as well.



I think 'accuracy' on a model can only go so far, I mean, if you drill down far enough you will need a 100x microscope to cut, glue and paint... who's got the intestinal fortitude to manufacture a Millennium Falcon cockpit interior at 1/500? Wait, don't answer that...


'Accurate enough for me' I think is what most model builders shoot for (hobbyists, not pro builders of course) unless I'm much mistaken. I also think a lot depends on the amount of time you have, your 'skill' level, talent, finances, etc. Something like this kit which is relatively simple right off the sprues, can become exceedingly complex if you think of adding an interior, lighting, engine effects, and so on, to say nothing of correcting the inherent flaws in the kit. All that said, there's plenty of room on this kit for added detail, given the size of the subject in relation to its scale, it lends itself rather easily to modifications. On my shuttle I'm looking at putting together an interior with some lights, and replacing the kit-supplied engines with styrene tube, and of course scratched rear landing strut. But, it still won't be completely 'accurate.'


Well, Im spoiled with the Bandai PG Falcon. It's a dead on copy to the 5' filming miniature. Yes, I realize that this kit was made a long time ago and it is indeed a sentimental favorite.

Accurate is accurate.

"Accurate enough for me" translates to...Im too lazy to get it right, I don't have the skill to get it right...ETC,ETC.

I would prefer it to be the same as the Filming miniature...Not the full size set.Which in reality wasn't exactly full size.
For me getting any build accurate is the fun in it...and the real skill.Anyone can slap together a model and throw a thousand arguments why they did it a certain way.

Don't get me wrong, I just enjoy getting the subject matter, whatever the subject matter is a plane, tank or pretend spaceship. In the case of the unreal subject matter, one needs to pick which version they wish to replicate. In my case, it's usually the filming models...yeah a model of a model.

I am simple guy..real easy, pick the one you want to replicate, in this case the studio miniature and get as close to it as possible.
I don't need the interior.

As far as lighting...For me, just the rear engine. Perhaps some scale lighting inside the cabin. That's it. The nacelle caps DIDN'T light up on either the miniature or the full size(not full size) Prop.
Don't care what they did in the "Remastered nonesense".That's just me.


Hopefully Round2 will eventually surprise us with an announcement that they're kit will be available soon. The 1/350 Enterprises and 1/350 Klingon battle cruiser are an excellent base to get truly "accurate" builds.

Thanks.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,032 Posts
Well, Im spoiled with the Bandai PG Falcon. It's a dead on copy to the 5' filming miniature. Yes, I realize that this kit was made a long time ago and it is indeed a sentimental favorite.

Accurate is accurate.

I would prefer it to be the same as the Filming miniature...Not the full size set.Which in reality wasn't exactly full size.
For me getting any build accurate is the fun in it...and the real skill.Anyone can slap together a model and throw a thousand arguments why the did it a certain way.

I am simple guy..real easy, pick the one you want to replicate, in this case the studio miniature and get as close to it as possible.
I don't need the interior.

As far as lighting...For me, just the rear engine. Perhaps some scale lighting inside the cabin. That's it. The nacelle caps DIDN'T light up on either the miniature or the full size(not full size) Prop.
Don't care what they did in the "Remastered nonesense".That's just me.


Hopefully Round2 will eventually surprise us with an announcement that they're kit will be available soon. Their 1/350 Enterprises and 1/350 Klingon battle cruiser are excellent base to get truly "accurate" builds.

Thanks.

Totally agreed! If screen accurate is what you're after, then of course pursue your goal, nothing less will do and I totally concur. It's true, you could make any old excuse about a lack of accuracy, I guess it depends on the physical limitations of the scale you are working in. Also agree with the nacelle caps not lighting, my engine lights will be rear only. Both the Enterprise and Klingon Cruiser are perfect for accurate builds, yes. At 1/350 there is room to create screen accurate replicas, which I do find very satisfying, don't get me wrong! :grin2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
Awesome diorama, and a fantastic effort on the Galileo!

Round 2 had I believe a 1/32 Galileo in development with a full interior about 3 years ago or so and scrapped it in favor of the 22" Eagle 1.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,824 Posts
Round 2 had I believe a 1/32 Galileo in development with a full interior about 3 years ago or so and scrapped it in favor of the 22" Eagle 1.
From what I remember- it was referred to as being "shelved", not completely cancelled and no reason was given. While a 1:32 scale with full interior would be wonderful, I would settle for a 1:72 exterior only as long as the hull was correct.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
850 Posts
Awesome diorama, and a fantastic effort on the Galileo!

Round 2 had I believe a 1/32 Galileo in development with a full interior about 3 years ago or so and scrapped it in favor of the 22" Eagle 1.
Since I have already done my interpretation of the Aqua Shuttle from TAS, doing the standard shuttle should not be too difficult. The most difficult part will be shoe-horning the interior set into the shape of the filming model. There is no way to do it and have it screen accurate, that is one of the many reasons that Round 2 did not produce the model.

 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top