 | | Re: Unused "feature" in 7675 Clone Wars AT-TE?
|
|
(...) I haven't had the pleasure of building the AT-TE just yet. I have to wait until X-mas until Stacy will let me have mine. However, the feature you describe sounds very similar to the handle that was incorporated into the 10178 Motorized Walking (...) (16 years ago, 12-Aug-08, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Unused "feature" in 7675 Clone Wars AT-TE?
|
|
(...) I've found that T-handle to be a remarkably effective way to carry your AT-TE around...as for a Gunship carryall, I have no idea, but it would be fun to make one as a MOC, wouldn't it? Scott (16 years ago, 12-Aug-08, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Unused "feature" in 7675 Clone Wars AT-TE?
|
|
I recently built the new AT-TE (one of the least interesting Republic/Imperial war machines as far as I'm concerned), and aside from the loss of the speederbike in the trunk, and 75% of the crew (if they want to use the main cannon, the pilot will (...) (16 years ago, 11-Aug-08, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: 3839a resurrected in #7662? Someone please verify?
|
|
(...) I don't know about the handle length issue, but the Type A plate has handles that are centered vertically on the plate, and which do not meet flush with the bottom of the plate. The Type B plate has handles that are slung lower and blend into (...) (16 years ago, 4-Aug-08, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: 3839a resurrected in #7662? Someone please verify?
|
|
(...) In the Type I version the rods are slightly longer and have a different position vertically. I can't remember if they're higher or lower than Type II. I thought Clark had an illustrative picture in his BrickShelf gallery, but I can't find it. (16 years ago, 4-Aug-08, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.parts)
|
