Hero X-Wing Build

Looking great. I'm eager to see how the fuse extension looks together with the lower half and nose. As soon as I received my pyro I was in two minds about trying that extension, because it looked to me there was a chance the extended section may wind up being too thin and narrow. If it did, it would be caused by the taper of the fuse being fractionally more abrupt than original ILM, which I suspect it might be. Couldn't really test it out 'cos I still have my nose piece on. If I find myself envious of your and Julien's finished extensions though, then I may well have to follow you guys! The extension is certainly looking very tempting so far on that upper half.
 
Yeah, there are so many angles.... By 'taper' I just meant the aggregate general taper of the whole thing.

That last photo - the canopy angles in that pic drove me insane for 2 years because they just don't happen like that on the V3. But with the pyro casting we can now have that stuff! Oh, joy!
 
Yeah, canopy angles are all over the place depending on the photo you're looking at and the individual model, since each one was cut by hand. They even differ from side to side on the same model.

I think this is one of those areas, and there are several others, where the builder has some discretion in terms of cleaning things up so that they look better than the originals.
 
True, but there's very little leeway really on the canopies, I reckon, apart from differences in strut thickness, since the canopy form is very much determined by the canopy base in the fuse and the fuse sidewall angles. For instance there's no way you could cut the V3 canopy off and build a new one that looks like the one in that photo - because the fuselage is a different shape. The only canopy you could build for the V3 is the V3 canopy. The X-wing canopy is so much a projection of the fuse geometry. And the reason the canopies differ from side to side ( such as the forward leaning port vertical strut) on the same model is down to the asymmetry of the fuselage, I think. With ILM the port fuse wall is just steeper than the starboard fuse wall; this lopsidedness knocks the canopy into asymmetry too. The scratched canopy I'm making for my (solid) pyro came out much more like an ILM canopy than the V3 because all the geometry around it, from which it is 'projected', is ILM.

I'm not one for cleaning up the look of the ILM canopies. I even love the completely busted Red 2 canopy!
 
I hear you. My canopy tinkering will be mostly limited to tweaking those vertical struts. Even then, since this is a hero fuselage pattern that I'm creating, I'll have the option of customizing the canopy for each subsequent copy.

That's how I plan to address the differences in the shape of the rear window for each hero, for example.
 
Glad to see things are still moving. It's great to see excellence in the making. Wish I had more time to take this avenue myself. Looking good man.
 
Thanks guys.

Yeah, Julien, I just measured the dimensions of the Sherman hull on the casting and compared that to the real thing to get the correct scaling. Thought it was going to be more than 2%, but was pleasantly surprised by how close this casting is to the original source.
 
Yeah 2% is a very low value, that's what you get usually with one generation, but all depend of the kind rubber and resin of course...
Very clever idea BTW, gonna do the same thing ! :)
 
K, that's perfect !! You recreated the master beautifuly ! You're really a true geek when we know the casting will have to be trimmed to fit the rear of the X-Wing !

I love it. :love:thumbsup
 
Thanks guys!

Yeah Julien, I thought about trimming the pattern smaller, then decided it would be fun to recreate the whole thing, including the base. :)

I think the ILM guys knew what they were doing when they made their original rear-plate pattern oversized. They had to attach the cast resin upper fuselage to the formed styrene lower, and each hero model was a little bit different along that seam as a result, with the most noticeable variability showing up in the size and shape of the rear end. So it was a good idea to have some wiggle room in their rear plate castings.
 
Yup, I had the same wiggle-room issue in mind when I did this a million years ago:
attachment.php


...although apparently I didn't anticipate needing any wiggle room at the top. :lol

I will have the rest of the bird to show one day, I swear... :)
 
Thanks Ed.

This rear plate is going to help me figure out the best way to restore the back end of this hollow pyro fuselage casting. I already know I need to add and sculpt a bit of material back there, the question is how much and where. Once I make a first generation casting of this rear plate and compare everything to photo reference of the hero models I can finally suss that out.
 
Hi does anyone have the measurements for the x wing i need the size of the studio model i would like to build one from scratch please help thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Treadwell
Heritage Auctions MPC X-Wing
Replies
4
Views
382
Keiko
Keiko
PVmodels
Help identifying maker of this studio scale X Wing kit?
Replies
6
Views
897
Captain Dunsel
Captain Dunsel
chazzychaz
Tie bomber wing mount scratch build.
Replies
2
Views
489
joberg
joberg
RealDaveWinter
Question regarding the Estes 'Maxi Brute' X-wing kit
Replies
5
Views
871
PHArchivist
PHArchivist
AlexD
Studio Scale X-Wing: Red Four
2
Replies
25
Views
4,693
AlexD
AlexD
Back
Top