 | | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) The Super Star Destroyer and the regualar Star Destroyer have the same bridge. In Empire Strikes Back, Han attaches his ship to the back of a Star Destroyer Bridge. In Return of the Jedi, Han flies past the Super Star Destroyer Bridge. Not (...) (22 years ago, 18-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Death Star Size Comparison Chart
|
|
(...) Taken from the summary of the "Dimensions" section of this page. (about 1/3 of the way down the page) (URL) presently-available evidence indicates that the diameter of the first Death Star is in the range 160 - 165km, although the purely (...) (22 years ago, 18-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
Another piece of evidence supporting this: given that the Star Destroyer and SuperStarDestroyer have at least similiar shaped bridges: if the bridges were the same size (which is a valid assumption), then the length is 17.6km. But if the (...) (22 years ago, 18-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Borg Cube Added [Re: Size Comparison Chart (Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5)]
|
|
(...) This reference isn't canonical, but it's a start: (URL) Well, the Sulaco's kind of a pipsqueak compared to other starships. What about the Nostromo? I can't find any dimensions, other than an indication that it masses 63,000 metric tons. Dave! (22 years ago, 18-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Death Star Size Comparison Chart
|
|
somehow i think there's a problem here. in another thread this info is given: "Super Star Destroyer: 12,800 Meters Death Star 1: 120,000 Meters in Diameter Death Star 2: 160,000 Meters in Diameter" that would make DS2 slightly larger than DS1, not (...) (22 years ago, 18-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Death Star Size Comparison Chart
|
|
Using all the 'on screen evidence' here is a size comparison of both Death Stars in relation to the Super Stardestroyer. (URL) Petrucelli (22 years ago, 18-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Borg Cube Added [Re: Size Comparison Chart (Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5)]
|
|
(...) Unfortunately I have been unable to find any size measurements for the Alien movie ship. I did however as the Subject says, add the borg cube to the chart. (URL) note that some sources claim the Borg Cube is 5x5x5 kilometers, I used the more (...) (22 years ago, 18-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Well-- strictly speaking we know the *mass* is roughly the same. But you're right: we don't know the density of the planet, hence we can't *REALLY* guess at the planet's volume... And therefore you can't guarantee the curvature of the planet (...) (22 years ago, 18-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Size Comparison Chart (Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5)
|
|
(...) It's got to be close to the SW regular star destroyer size. The drop ship seemed to be millenium falcon sized, and from the footage the mother ship didn't seem all that massive. Unfortunatly I don't remember much actual footage of the (...) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Technically, you can guess that Endor's gravity is very close to that on Earth, but that doesn't mean the mass is the same unless you also assume their densities are the same. Jeff J (yummy nits to pick!) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Ben's LEGO Millennium Falcon back on-line
|
|
(...) I've seen it before, but never commented. It's utterly incredible. Jeff J (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: New Space Ship: AstroFoxx
|
|
(...) Well... I don't think they had to fudge together that excuse. A Parsec (parallax-second) is defined by Earth's motion around the Sun. How would Han know (being from a galaxy long, long ago and far, far away) how we would define a Parsec? ;) (...) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Fresh X-wing pics....
|
|
(...) Nice - very authentic! Jeff J (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Wow! Check the price of this fig.
|
|
Warning. This is not my auction and I don't think anyone here should bid on it (we are all smarter than that anyway). Tell me if this seems strange to you... (URL) would sell mine if I didn't think this was a bit unethical. FUT LUGNET.MARKET.THEORY (...) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Legitimate Tusken Raider fear
|
|
(...) An (un)fortunate side effect of the lightsaber is that victims who are merely wounded seem unlikely to die of a grisly infection, what with the cauterization and all. It's a real shame, too, as a full-blown bodyrot can really get your point (...) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Legitimate Tusken Raider fear
|
|
(...) Yeah, bad directing call on Lucas' part there. The Sand People run *after* we see the shot of Obi-Wan, making the viewer think that it's Obi-Wan that they're running from, when in fact, they're running from what they think is a Kryat Dragon. (...) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Legitimate Tusken Raider fear
|
|
(...) I don't remember where I read it, probably the novelization, but it was suggested that Obi-Wan was immitating the scream of a Kryat (sp?) dragon which would be something the Sand People normally run from. Obviously looking at him he wasn't a (...) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Legitimate Tusken Raider fear
|
|
As I am preparing myself for the Attack of the Clones DVD to come out, something suddenly occurred to me. Remember back in Episode IV A New Hope (The first Star Wars Movie for you novices out there) when Luke was being beaten and robbed by the (...) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Yet more new slopes appearing in 2003 SW?
|
|
"Mr L F Braun" <braunli1@pilot.msu.edu> wrote in message news:H42Gxx.7An@lugnet.com... (...) To me it looks like it is a 2x4 piece, so in one plane it will be flush with a 45deg slope and in the other with an 18deg (new-ish 2x4) slope But, I hope (...) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Size Comparison Chart (Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5)
|
|
(...) Yes. Exactly this movie. You know... this starship of Ripley.. ;) Rene (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Size Comparison Chart (Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5)
|
|
(...) On the bottom right side of the chart: Sovereign Class (Enterprise-E) Galaxy Class (Enterprise-D) Ambassador Class (Enterprise-C) Excelsior Class (Enterprise-B) Constitution Class (Enterprise-A and Enterprise-nil) (...) Huh? Do you mean the (...) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Size Comparison Chart (Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5)
|
|
(...) Actually I did NOT creat it. This was created a few years ago as a "public domain" comparison chart for use in the 'versus' newsgroups. (alt.startrek.vs.starwars for example) (...) -Mike Petrucelli (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Size Comparison Chart (Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5)
|
|
Very nice ! But I'm missing the USS Enterprise starships. And what about this starship from Alien ? Thanks. Rene (...) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Size Comparison Chart (Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5)
|
|
(...) (URL)It is a rather nice chart for its accuracy and its simplicity. ~That's amazin' Thanks sooooo much for creating it!!! --==Richard==-- James Wilson also created: (URL) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Size Comparison Chart (Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5)
|
|
Given the size and number of tangents the other thread took, I started a new one so all interested persons would get a good 'heads up.' This is a very accurate comparison chart. (At least as far as you can go with fictional source materials.) (URL) (...) (22 years ago, 17-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Yeah, James, I know what you mean! I didn't mean to come across as being so militant about this stuff. Believe it or not, I don't sit and obsess about SW scale and such, or spend lots of time researching it (heck, I've only made it through a (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) I have to admit it, I've been out-geeked. And on a subject I would never have thought of as controversial. Going home now to polish my pocket protector. It's lost some of its luster... James (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Fair enough, and I enjoy a good sci-fi tale as much as most geeks. I just get a big kick out of it when people start arguing about the size of the "real" prototype from a movie. Especially the ones that are completely CGI! Or cartoons - ever (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Yet more new slopes appearing in 2003 SW?
|
|
Maybe our clamoring for split slopes finally sunk in? ;-) Now all they need to do is make split versions of all the train slopes, and John Neal's head will explode over all the new 8/10/14/20-wide possibilities ;-) (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Sun ONE (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) That's what I really dislike about SWTC. He pulls some factoid that sounds right, and uses it as though it were fact. I first noticed that on his description of AT-AT stride length, but also on his AT-AT height description, and (IIRC) some of (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) True, but good science fiction has enough grounding in reality to make it believable and maintain continuity with itself. While Curtis Saxton takes this to an extreme, I find nothing wrong with using the best reference possible to ascertain (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Actually, it would be 33 feet long (see my previous posts)! -Brian (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Well, my latest post, responding to Jason, out-geeked all of ya! James, i'd recommend that you compare the pic in the link below to the schematic in your above link. It shows how horrible and off-scale "schematics" can be! (URL) why I don't (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Brian Tobin writes: <major snippage> (...) ROTFLMAO!!! "Truth?" It's not called Science _Fiction_ for nothing!!!!! That said, there's way too much information there. James (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
a LEGO version of the super star destroyer at the same scale as the ISD would be like 24 feet long! Wouldn't that be awesome?!?!? _leni (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Jason, unfortunately you've used a reference for the Executor class Super Star Destroyer length which falls for the old "5 mile fallacy" or to be more precise, "8 mile fallacy" (no, nothing to do with the new Eminem movie). Every "official" (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) (URL) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) And, just for grins, here's one with a Super Star Destroyer, Star Destroyer, and NCC-1701D on one image, to approximate scale. (URL) I've got to go take my antigeekery meds. James (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Okay, smarta@@, how's this: (URL) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | More SW Pods BIs
|
|
A&M Productions is proud to annocunce two more star wars pods BIs. We have added Jamie Neufeld's Tie Intercept and Millennium Falcon. You can get them here: (URL) via the BI portal. -A&M Productions (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.inst, lugnet.starwars, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
'Fess up...we all have this as our wallpaper :) -G (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Yeah, uh huh. You had 'em bookmarked already. Geek. <gdr> Chris <>< (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Gotta love Google's Image Search. :) (URL) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Hmmm. Maybe Joe Meno's original pic is the right size, then. Now, where's a good 3-view of an ISD.... James (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Hmm. Still wrong. A Victory Class Star Destroyer is only 900 meters. :) (URL) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Unfortunately, you're still using a pic of a Victory Class SD, which isn't as large as an Imperial Class, so technically it's still incorrect. <gdr> ~GAMH (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) That was a major screw-up in the movie! The shaft they were in is only a little over 115 feet deep. Unless they suddenly decided that all the decks were half height... Actually, (according to the deck plans) the NCC-1701-A has fewer decks than (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Ain't that the truth! Joe Meno :) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Hey, don't feel bad. In the haste to solve the important issues of the day, we sometimes jump too soon. James (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Yep, you're right. I used the wrong ratio (which was mentioned in an earlier note in this thread), as opposed to the actual lengths. Oops. Jason Spears has redone and corrected this. And I a little chagrined:) Joe Meno (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Sorry, didn't use the actual lengths, but the size ratio that was mentioned earlier in this thread. My mistake. Joe Meno (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Sorry, gang...I used the scale that was mentioned at the beginning of this thread. Completely forgot the numbers. This looks more reasonable. Thanks for the clarifications! Joe Meno (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) I hope Scotty thanked the battery manufacturer. Energizer bunny? James (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) LOL! Well, I used this diagram for relative size (not much else) so I needed a side view, and the fact I found this one first. My mistake:). (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) *one of top 5 TNG episodes--Relics Dave K p.s. whoever said the overlay of the Starship Enterprise and the Aircraft Carrier Enterprise was right--it was the original 1701, no bloody A, B, C, orrr D... I'll try looking thru my archives and see (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
How's this look? (URL) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Joe, Given the dimensions Adrian posted earlier, I'd say one of your graphics is the wrong size. He's got the ISD at 1600 meters, NCC1701D at 641 meters, just over 40% as long. James (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Super Star Destroyer: 12,800 Meters Death Star 1: 120,000 Meters in Diameter Death Star 2: 160,000 Meters in Diameter -Jason (URL) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Using the picture Joe posted, I redid the scales. 1600/641 = ~2.496. With that in mind, I think this picture is a little more on scale. (URL) Spears MichLUG - (URL) Page - (URL) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) <sarcasm> You call this thorough?! Where's the Super Star Destroyer? Where's the Death Star?!? Sheesh! </sarcasm> Thanks for doing the research! James (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) And your scale's off. the ISD is 1600 meters, the Enterprise under 700, so the ISD should be over twice as long. Adrian -- www.brickfrenzy.com (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) <geek> You're using an image of a Victory Class Star Destroyer. I think the current discussion is in regards to the Imperial Star Destroyer. :) </geek> ~GAMH (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Hehe. Hey, I didn't make 'em, I just found 'em. No need for wrath :) Adrian (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Wowzers! I need to go through those charts:) But I did a quick graphic that seems to indicate that Enterprise is too big, or the ISD is too small. I grabbed some graphics of both and scaled them together: (URL) really have a hard time seeing (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Please don't take this the wrong way, but I hate you! Okay, really, those are cool. James (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Ask and you shall receive. (now somebody ask for me to win the lottery *heh*) (URL) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Yeah, I thought that too, but hey, numbers don't like. I think the sizes of Star Trek ships are misleading because of the warp nacelles and thin, streamlined shapes, whereas the ISD is this big bulky monster. The Borg Cube is, by the way, (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Joe Meno writes: <snip> (...) Me, too. hmmm, how hard would it be to re-size images? But where to find them all. (...) Me, too. Mental picture is that the ISD would dwarf any Star Trek craft, except the Borg cube, and I don't (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Hm, makes me wish that there was a size comparison chart of these... Joe Meno PS Is it me, or is the ISD really that small? I keep on thinking that Enerprise-D would be smaller than the lengths suggest. (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) My favorite line from "Stand by Me" (Other than "S*** my fat one, you cheap dime-store hood!" James (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) A little bit longer, no more than a 50 foot difference in length. (...) Actually, if you can find the book The Making of Star Trek, there is a diagram that is a size comparison. Turns out that the TV Enterprise was about as long at the (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Hm, I thought that Enterprise-D was 2000 ft long, as the original ship was in the 950 ft length (Enterprise-A went to 1000 feet), and D was supposed to be twice and long and twice as high. My thought is that Enterprise-D would be smaller to (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) USS Enterprise NCC-1701: 289 Meters USS Enterprise NCC-1701A: 305 Meters USS Enterprise NCC-1701B: 467 Meters USS Enterprise NCC-1701C: 526 Meters USS Enterprise NCC-1701D: 641 Meters USS Enterprise NCC-1701E: 700 Meters USS Enterprise CV-6 (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) IIRC, I saw an overlay of the top view of 1701-D on the modern Enterprise aircraft carrier--they were the same length--front of saucer to back of nacelle is the same length as bow to stern. 1701-D was somewhat wider than the aircraft carrier, (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | RE: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Don't know (...) Don't know (...) SUPERMAN! Duh! Cus he's a real man. Might Mouse is just a cartoon mouse. Mark M. (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) Okay, next question: how big would the original Enterprise (original series) be? (somewhat serious) How about the aircraft carrier Enterprise (WWII)? (somewhat not serious) Or modern Big-E aircraft carrier? (somewhat not serious) Or, an even (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
(...) IIRC, the enterprise-D is supposed to be just under a kilometer long, so it would be just under 2/3rds the length of an imperial-class star destroyer(1.6 Km or a mile) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | how large would the ISD be compared to the Enterprise-D?
|
|
How large compared to an ISD would NCC-1701D aka Enterprise-D be? (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Yet more new slopes appearing in 2003 SW?
|
|
(...) Those slope indeed to appear to be what you describe. This should help us get some interesting roof designs. Now we only need the inverse. -Jason +---...---+ Jason Spears MichLUG - (URL) Page - (URL) (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Yet more new slopes appearing in 2003 SW?
|
|
Hi, all. Check out the nice box scan from FBTB: (URL) Look at the sonic cannon. Look at the feet. Those don't look like the rounded facet-slopes we've been seeing this year--rather, they look like half of a 3x4 wedge, which should go flush with the (...) (22 years ago, 16-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: AT-TE!!! AT-TE!!!
|
|
(...) It would be neat to see a storyteller set with maybe a clonie and battledroid, or a collectors 3 pack of 2 regular clones and 1 clone commander. My cents, which I can't quite add up, they're foreign :( Hehe, ~Evan Butzlaff (22 years ago, 15-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Ben's LEGO Millennium Falcon back on-line
|
|
(...) So THAT'S why they have a "preview post" option! So I could have seen that I typed "1" instead of "i" in my second "dirty Falcon" link: It should be: (URL) (22 years ago, 15-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Ben's LEGO Millennium Falcon back on-line
|
|
Ken, have you ever REALLY looked closely at the Falcon? The ship is covered in oil smears, laser burns, and DIRT! It ain't a shiny, new YT-1300. I think the dirt and discoloration adds to Ben's version, especially since the Falcon isn't white to (...) (22 years ago, 15-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: AT-STP
|
|
Now that's cool! I'd say that qualifies as a "tricka**" pod (see (URL) didn't read your message, just clicked on a picture link, and for a minute I didn't even realize it was a Pod. James Wilson Dallas, TX Lugnet #1783 (22 years ago, 15-Oct-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: Ackaly creature
|
|
Hey Bruce - This is cool!! Keep it up, I love your creations :-) -Tim (...) (22 years ago, 15-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: AT-TE!!! AT-TE!!!
|
|
(...) The red battle droids were a new division. That's the official reason they were red. According to the movie and the book. Just my 1 and 1/2 cents. Josh Wedin (22 years ago, 15-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: AT-TE!!! AT-TE!!!
|
|
*sigh* When are we going to be able to get cheap Clone Troopers. I'm sure a lot of kids are going to be disappointed that they can't get em because their parents can't afford the big sets. (22 years ago, 15-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Tusken Raider Camp
|
|
(...) That's exactly what one of my sons said after I've taken the pics. If the pics didn't come out fine, I would have redone the layout for it. It was kinda tough going with the limited supply of tan pieces that we've got. So we had to make do (...) (22 years ago, 15-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Tusken Raider Camp
|
|
That's right! Since I couldn't find the ninja headpieces which I originally intended to use for them. Regards, ACPin & Sons (...) (22 years ago, 15-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Tusken Raider Camp
|
|
(...) The scene takes place just before Anakin comes to the rescue of Shmi who's been captured by the Tusken Raiders. I couldn't find the ninja headpieces which I intended to use for the female, so I used the next thing that caught my eye. It's the (...) (22 years ago, 15-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: AT-TE!!! AT-TE!!!
|
|
(...) Wait, you mean that's NOT logical? :-) Thanks, that's what I thought, that there were slight differences, but then again it could just be my mind playing tricks on me. Kyle (22 years ago, 13-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: New Sets 2003
|
|
(...) a good question...! (...) sounds very feasible... thanks for the insight - I don't often get more than one of any set so I hadn't noticed this phenomenon 'til now. I hope that more sets with trays make an appearance in the future... :) cheers, (...) (22 years ago, 14-Oct-02, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: AT-STP
|
|
Hehe. It's the AT-ST AFTER it got squished by those logs... :^) Very nice. -Stefan- (22 years ago, 14-Oct-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: AT-STP
|
|
(...) Thanks Sean. I don't see how those Imperial Engineers did it. :-) -Chris (22 years ago, 14-Oct-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: AT-STP
|
|
(...) I wouldn't think so. :-) (...) Thanks Gil - that was my number one goal with this one - the face. -Chris (22 years ago, 14-Oct-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: AT-STP
|
|
(...) Thanks John. Poseability - it's got a bunch, too much almost. 11 points of articulation, most rotating on two axes. -Chris (22 years ago, 14-Oct-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: AT-STP
|
|
(...) Thanks Andrew. That pod of yours is great! I can just see swarms of them running around in comedic fashion, doing something....comedic. :-) -Chris (22 years ago, 14-Oct-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: AT-STP
|
|
(...) Wassssup (...) -Snip (...) Looks great Chris. Makes it more realistic when it doesn't stand well : ) Hasta La Vista, Sean (22 years ago, 14-Oct-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: New MOC: AT-STP
|
|
You mean in can't handle a load of logs rolling down into it's feet ;) I'd say you didn't almost capture the feeling of it. I'd say you did. Awesome. Cheers, -G (...) (22 years ago, 14-Oct-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Tusken Raider Camp
|
|
I think that is a painted Imperial Guard hood. But it does look nice. :) -Alfred (...) (22 years ago, 14-Oct-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
