 | | Thats no moon!!!
|
| I would have figured someone would have posted about this. (URL) scale (URL) (19 years ago, 20-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) (URL) (19 years ago, 20-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) That ARC-170 Starfighter looks wicked! KDJ ___...___ LUGNETer #203 (19 years ago, 20-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) Star?! Thanks for all the photos Lar. (19 years ago, 20-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) It's a shame that LEGO goofed and made the Death Star and mini Executor at two different scales. The second Death Star is not 160 km in diameter, as the model's label states. It is in fact about 900 km in diameter. (19 years ago, 20-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) Well, that may be a fact, but if it met the mini-USS Enterprise, which one would win? Nyah! -Erik (19 years ago, 21-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) The second Death Star wasn't damaged - it was "unfinished" (but still fully operational). Buy two? Nah, buy three - build both the "finished" Death Star I and the "unfinished" Death Star II. Don't forget to swarm both with lots of mini-mini (...) (19 years ago, 23-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) Well, not that it was a goof. Cuz, really, an executor in that scale would be a dot or something. There's just no point. I think they made it as small as possible while still being able to see what it was. Heh, I suppose really it's a shame (...) (19 years ago, 23-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) Let's disregard that the actual size differential is about 11x (according to some sources) and go with a more realistic upsize of 5x in length, width, and height. That would give a convincingly "wow, that's bigger" model, and stick with the (...) (19 years ago, 23-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) How would an an aircraft carrier get into outer space in the first place?!? Nyah, Nyah, Nyah! James Wilson Dallas, TX (19 years ago, 23-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) Thats simple. All you have to do is be too close to the super-dimensional fortress Macross when it performs a hyperspace fold jump thingy. Your previously seaborne carrier will now be floating in space :-) Steve (19 years ago, 23-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) Naw, just do what the USS Nimitz did in "Final Countdown"..., but jump in space rather than time. ;] KDJ ___...___ LUGNETer #203 (19 years ago, 25-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) Simon, why do you think that Death Star II is 900 km in diameter? Please check out: (URL) clearly states that it is in fact 160 km in diameter. The first Death Star was 120 km.: (URL) am I wrong? If I am right the scale is not all bad. If it (...) (19 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) According to the Dorling Kindersley books 'Star Wars Incredible Cross-sections' and 'Inside the Worlds of Star Wars', the first and second Death Stars are 160 km and 900 km in diameter respectively. See also the Star Wars Technical (...) (19 years ago, 15-Mar-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) Apparently someone at LEGO choose to trust the official website. (I could wonder who actually filles data into that site) (19 years ago, 16-Mar-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!!
|
| (...) Looks like a direct response to AFOLs complaining that there isn't a quick way to build up their collections of the new colors. I bet if you dropped that sucker it would make a heck of a 'splash'! JohnG, GMLTC (19 years ago, 19-Mar-05, to lugnet.starwars)
| |
