New Revell Imperial Star Destroyer kit?

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

KeArn

Active Member
Bought the build and play kit at Toys R Us...
Out of box assembly...flat black primer...flat white top coat, and a dark gray wash, and finished with a flat white drybrush...
Photographed in my living room on a black blanket full of lint with natural light from the patio...

 
Last edited:

James M

New Member
If Revell had made this kit 6.5 cm shorter it would be a studio scale model (The small brass SD is 33.5 cm long).
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Robiwon

Master Member
Gone but not forgotten.
Thanks James. I never knew that little ship existed! Now I'll have to watch for it.
 

edge10

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Thanks James. I never knew that little ship existed! Now I'll have to watch for it.
The article also points out that the 3 footer and the 8 footer were used interchangeably in Empire. I didn't notice that until I saw Empire on TNT recently. Why am I always the last to know?
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

stonky

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
The article also points out that the 3 footer and the 8 footer were used interchangeably in Empire. I didn't notice that until I saw Empire on TNT recently. Why am I always the last to know?
4 footer. ;)
 

stonky

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
It's been misrepresented as 3 feet for years. I've been putting together the dimensions based on in-hand measured kit parts and my own photogrametry analysis of the actual shooting model (photographed personally when it was on exhibit in Indiana in 2013), and everything points to 4 feet (give or take an inch or two). Here's a screen capture of one of my earlier photogrammetry captures, based on hundreds of photographs (forgive the photograph of the screen, it's all that I had handy :) ):

sd_photogrammetry.jpg

Some of my WIP digital rebuild work (the point of all of this is to create a half scale model with 3D printed subassemblies):

sd_rear.jpg

The parts map thread where I've been contributing over the last few years:

http://www.therpf.com/showthread.php?t=102130

I feel like it was misreported once years ago and everyone picked up on it. My biggest and best argument against the 3 foot measurement is that I stood beside it and looked at it. :)

terry
 

Albertese

Well-Known Member
^^^
Yeah, when it was in Portland here a number of years ago, it looked about 4 feet long. Certainly bigger than 3 feet.

--Alex
 

JeffBond

Active Member
Very surprised by how nice the Revell kit is. I too plan to get the Zsevda kit but the Revell one is terrific, especially for the price--I even like the lighting feature. Also strange how they make the lighting rig into something that might actually exist inside the real ship even though you're never going to see it...
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Vacformedhero

Sr Member
Do you have any references for that?

The article above calls it out at 91cm, which is just under 3 feet:

http://www.starwars.com/news/star-wars-mysteries-exacting-executor-measurements

In the Star Wars Archaeology Panel, they repeatedly call it the '3 footer':

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUafi3EWBY8&t=12m46s

If I am wrong, please educate me.
A titbit of info, ILM's Lorne Peterson always called the original falcon the 4 foot falcon ( which is the disc diameter) rather than 5 foot front to back measurement , this always threw me off when watching the interviews too ,
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Top