Subject:
|
Re: 2000 A-Wing comments
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Thu, 28 Oct 1999 20:42:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
721 times
|
| |
|
|
In lug
> >
> > I'm going to amend my own message here, since I just bothered to get out the
> > size comparison portion of the BTM Cd. It lists the lengths, in meters, of • the
> > ships as follows: SLAVE I - 21.5, Y-Wing - 16, X-Wing - 12.5, A-Wing - 9.5.
>
> Here are my calculations of the ideal -v- actuall dimentions of the A-Wing.
> They are based on a length of 9.5 meters, 2.86 studs/meter, and the schematics
> available on www.starwars.com .
>
> Total Length
> Lucas: 27 studs TLG: 22 studs
>
> Wingspan (not including guns)
> Lucas: 17 studs TLG: 12 studs
>
> Wingspan (including guns)
> Lucas: 21.3 studs TLG: 16 studs
>
> Width of red area in middle
> Lucas: 6 studs TLG: 4 studs
>
> Length of fuselage fore of the engines
> Lucas: 15.5 studs TLG: 15 studs
>
> Length of engines
> Lucas: 11.5 studs incl. thrust vector control TLG: 6.5 w/o thrust vector
> control
>
> Length of fuselage between the engines
> Lucas: 7 studs TLG: 4 studs
>
> Height of fuselage (not incl. cockpit)
> Lucas: 3.55 studs TLG: 3.6 studs
>
> Height of fuselage (incl. cockpit)
> Lucas: 5.1 studs TLG: 5.6 studs
>
> So the length should be about 30% greater--esp behind the cockpit, and the
> width should be about 40% greater. The height is just fine, but with the
> other dimentions makes the A-Wing look a bit too "chunky" as someone noted.
>
> > So I was off saying the A-Wing was half the length of the X, but still, I • think
> > TLG's model is fairly accurate, at least when compared to the tiny model of • the
> > Slave I.
>
> Certainly the scale of the A-Wing is much better than Slave 1, but as others
> have mentioned, the fact that it's a small fighter means we hold it to the
> standard TLG set with the X and Y.
>
> With the size they made it, I have to say I'm pretty much pleased. Bricks for
> the stabilizers. Looks like the cockpit is hinged for easy access. Generally
> nice shape. The guns could have been attached more creatively, and I would
> have liked them to take a stab at the thrust vector controls. Also an attempt
> at adjustable stabilizer wings would be cool.
>
> Like I said, I'll be getting lots of these, but I'll be making plenty of
> modifications. Anyone have a good idea for getting the notch in the front?
> How about for the thrust vector controls?
>
> -John Van
Just wanted to get my 2 cents worth in as well. As far as I am concerned the
sets are basically fine. Granted they are not to exact scale and such, that is
what building your own version from the ground up is for. I mean if one thinks
about the new Star Wars sets as compared to say regular Legoland Town sets from
the early to mid 80's, the Star Wars sets are a "truer" version of what they
are modeled after say as any one of the numerous helicopter sets TLG offered.
But I am reserving this opinion for the Falcon until we see real end product
pics.
thanks for your time.
Travis
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: 2000 A-Wing comments
|
| Kevin Knoot <Kevin-Knoot@uiowa.edu> wrote in message news:FK9p1n.BDp@lugnet.com... (...) A-Wing (...) that (...) such (...) the (...) the (...) length (...) the (...) Here are my calculations of the ideal -v- actuall dimentions of the A-Wing. They (...) (25 years ago, 28-Oct-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
