 | | Re: Thats no moon!!! —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) (URL) (19 years ago, 20-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!! —Kyle D. Jackson
|
| | | | | (...) That ARC-170 Starfighter looks wicked! KDJ ___...___ LUGNETer #203 (19 years ago, 20-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!! —John Cooper
|
| | | | (...) Star?! Thanks for all the photos Lar. (19 years ago, 20-Feb-05, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Thats no moon!!! —Mark Chittenden
|
| | | | (...) 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!!! —James Wilson
|
| | | | (...) 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)
|
| | | | |
