Revell At-At WIP... finishing up!
- Thread starter starks
- Start date
Hagoth
Sr Member
I'd say the hole positions are close enough to start knocking them out. Looks great and captures what you are driving for.
As for the limiter shape you could go with what you already have but for something a little more accurate I'd take a trace from Analyzers first picture of the Bandai klit (#146) or the profile off the first image from AnamorphicWaynes project template (#147). The later is probably easier.
I'm pretty sure the hip plates are mirror images of each other with the slot at the same angle and relative location. Which brings up a point I noticed that the assembled background one in the awesome picture that Chaim showed (last image in #147) appears to be upside down.
And last but not least, your dioramas look great! With skills like that how could you not put this project in one of its own. You just set an additional bar level and now it will be expected!
As for the limiter shape you could go with what you already have but for something a little more accurate I'd take a trace from Analyzers first picture of the Bandai klit (#146) or the profile off the first image from AnamorphicWaynes project template (#147). The later is probably easier.
I'm pretty sure the hip plates are mirror images of each other with the slot at the same angle and relative location. Which brings up a point I noticed that the assembled background one in the awesome picture that Chaim showed (last image in #147) appears to be upside down.
And last but not least, your dioramas look great! With skills like that how could you not put this project in one of its own. You just set an additional bar level and now it will be expected!
Hagoth
Sr Member
I think that would be right. Pick your mirror plane either way. But I think the configuration will be the same. Just mirrored.
starks
Sr Member
I'd say the hole positions are close enough to start knocking them out. Looks great and captures what you are driving for.
As for the limiter shape you could go with what you already have but for something a little more accurate I'd take a trace from Analyzers first picture of the Bandai klit (#146) or the profile off the first image from AnamorphicWaynes project template (#147). The later is probably easier.
I'm pretty sure the hip plates are mirror images of each other with the slot at the same angle and relative location. Which brings up a point I noticed that the assembled background one in the awesome picture that Chaim showed (last image in #147) appears to be upside down.
And last but not least, your dioramas look great! With skills like that how could you not put this project in one of its own. You just set an additional bar level and now it will be expected!
Overlaying my leg limiter it's pretty close to AnamorphicWaynes but his doesn't have that rounded bit on the bottom i traced off the resin model.... Im thinking it's a casting defect.
Well I dont know how exciting I can make the base being snow lol but we shall see.
Cheers,
Josh
Edit to add...
Thinking about the piston operation, what have they used to make the pistons? Some c channel over a keyway? Then the cam forces it up and down? Wouldn't friction in operating be a concern here?
Last edited:
Hagoth
Sr Member
Yeah, I think you could be right. Looking at movie screen shots it seems that it had more of a flattened end there at the bottom not a rounded one. AnamorphicWaynes looks pretty close to what's on the Bandai rendition as well. I'd say flatten it off a bit and go with it.
Let's see. Ways to make a snow base exciting. A second snow base with a power generator on it across the room? Rebel trench base in between. Speeder wrapping up the legs. Put a Wampa in there running away? That should do it.
Hagoth
Sr Member
A little friction on the pistons might be useful both if they were free to move or connected. Either way friction could help hold a pose. Looks like a squared piece had a round groove under it to moved over a stationary rounded piece.
For a non-moving display a piece of c-channel with the gap filled in would do the job to position something representative of the positions seen on screen. However I'm not sure all the screen shots are consistent with the leg positions as I've read that the cam motion mechanism used (a rubber strap?) was not very reliable.
For a non-moving display a piece of c-channel with the gap filled in would do the job to position something representative of the positions seen on screen. However I'm not sure all the screen shots are consistent with the leg positions as I've read that the cam motion mechanism used (a rubber strap?) was not very reliable.
starks
Sr Member
We should be able to determine what the piston positions should be though?
Even in not incorporating it on this model I think we move forward in this thread or another with the leg design.... and at studio scale.
Just need some measurements.
I was thinking of leg construction and we can't all cnc out a leg panel but the same construction can be achieved in plastic by making a frame with a plastic skin either side. This should be achievable for most people and can post up a set of plans? Which could be up or downsized to suit ones build. If you needed a thick frame and were only working in thin styrene you could cut and laminate a number of pieces together.
And create a list of parts needed or used? Like screw sizes for example.
The advantage of metal is you can tap it for repeated scewing in and out but in plastic would not be hard to drill and set a nut in the frame work to screw into.
Cheers,
Josh
Hagoth
Sr Member
I think we can determine the intended piston positions. I have a pretty good idea of the piston cam operation and have a potential method to hard link it and move it as I think the rubber strap was intended to do but in a much more reliable way. At worse case I can pick a movie sequence that makes sense and mimic it.
If you are ok expanding this build thread beyond your subject model upgrade to a 24" tall design project I'm all in ready to info dump ideas and concepts.
Let's do it!I was going to start another thread this weekend once I get more templates (from AnamorphicWayne) converted to 3D parts. I'm planning to modify them to make a 24" (1:35 scale?) FDM 3D printable kit out of them. I can scale the design any size we want if that is not considered studio scale. I think many of the studio scale models were just barely over 24" tall. Once a scale is selected , so long as the proper clearances are designed into the parts you can fit them together straight off the printer with very little post work required. Personally I want to take the repeatable motion beyond what the studio models accomplished and go all the way to the fly wheels in the knees. I already have a pretty good idea how to do it.
With a variety of pattern templates and formats for parts, this build thread expansion idea of yours could provide a construction path using many different methods to whoever wants to dive in and to whatever depth they want. I like that.
I have a feeling the Rebels are going to get overwhelmed with AT-AT's. Maybe we also start a thread on an appropriately scaled Snow Speeder to restore balance to the force.
starks
Sr Member
Im on board! The scale sounds great to me.
Looks like I may have to get into 3d printing hahaha.
But yes, will be great to have the information all in one place for building your own... rather than just watch someone build theres.
Cheers,
Josh
Hagoth
Sr Member
No way is Starks getting out of completing this Revell upgrade. I'm expecting a fantastic snow base diorama at the end of this.
Do all studio scale build threads have to go in the Studio Scale forum? Even though it will look like one I do not plan to be held to replicating or constructing the parts in exactly the same way as the studio build. I'll be adding some additional internals and mechanisms to get the motion effect I'm looking for. I'm still going to start my thread up in the next week or so if not this weekend and want to put it in the right place.
Sym-Cha
Master Member
Hagoth ... well my notion of the Studio Scale forum is that you'd include all the parts that were used by ILM such as kitbash greeblies etcetera, so if it's just an approximation of the size then you'd be fine here in the general modeling forum ... from my point of view
Now if the snowbase diorama is going to be anything like this next picture ... those rebels better be prepared for what's coming :
Meanwhile I'll set up camp right here ... it may be a while before I need to get out my styrene strips and X-acto knife :
(Pictures from google ... not my work of art)
Chaïm
Now if the snowbase diorama is going to be anything like this next picture ... those rebels better be prepared for what's coming :
Meanwhile I'll set up camp right here ... it may be a while before I need to get out my styrene strips and X-acto knife :
(Pictures from google ... not my work of art)
Chaïm
Last edited:
Analyzer
Master Member
Hagoth ... well my notion of the Studio Scale forum is that you'd include all the parts that were used by ILM such as kitbash greeblies etcetera, so if it's just an approximation of the size then you'd be fine here in the general modeling forum ... from my point of view
Nothing has to go there necessarily, but from what I understand, regarding the purpose of that forum, it is for people who are scratch building studio scale replicas of the filming miniatures using the same construction techniques and source kits for greeblies that were used on the original. It is kind of a grey area when posting a commercial kit that happens to be studio scale like the Di Agostini Falcon or Moebius Cylon Raider etc.. but is not really technically a studio scale build
and I have seen that Hoth diorama before. It is amazing. Not sure what scale it is, or if Bandai walkers were used
starks
Sr Member
I agree, I think general modelling is fine and if the purpose is for others to add their techniques off a set of plans it's not clear cut anyway. Looking foward to your cam operating pistons plans so I can see what I can come up with.
I think thats actually all relatively simple... its the feet and ankles that scare me!
Chaïm That diorama with the dilapidated walker is so cool! I love wreckage dioramas but always win out wanting to build operational subjects, not wrecked ones.
5 am was 13 degrees C here... which is pretty chilly for Queensland... but dragged my rear out to the shed and did some dremeling and lasering before leaving for work and began on the hips so hopefully some pics up tonight.
Oh and a teaser, the chin guns arrived from shapeways... WOW.
Cheers,
Josh
I think thats actually all relatively simple... its the feet and ankles that scare me!
Chaïm That diorama with the dilapidated walker is so cool! I love wreckage dioramas but always win out wanting to build operational subjects, not wrecked ones.
5 am was 13 degrees C here... which is pretty chilly for Queensland... but dragged my rear out to the shed and did some dremeling and lasering before leaving for work and began on the hips so hopefully some pics up tonight.
Oh and a teaser, the chin guns arrived from shapeways... WOW.
Cheers,
Josh
Hagoth
Sr Member
Ah, okay, those were my impression as well for posting in the Studio Scale forum. Just going for a similar/same size and not a kit bashed reproduction. Per both of your feedback the thread will go here in the general modeling forum then. Thanks for the confirmation.
By the way, with a size comparison check of the pilot in my 1:35 scale Spitfire there is no way that size of figure could fit in the head of a 25" tall AT-AT much less three of them. I'm pretty certain the googled assertion that the AT-AT is 74' tall is not correct. Looks more like a 1:48 scale figure or slightly smaller would be more accurate which puts it at about 100-110 feet tall. What swmodelfan1977 was saying about 1:49- 1:50 makes more sense now. Regardless of what the scale is it does not change what I want to do but if I add figures to the model then maybe it becomes relevant again.
With the scale changes those 1:35 scale 20mm cheek cannons used on the studio scale (#86) just turned into 28mm. Blaster bolts. Yeah, that'll leave a mark.
By the way, with a size comparison check of the pilot in my 1:35 scale Spitfire there is no way that size of figure could fit in the head of a 25" tall AT-AT much less three of them. I'm pretty certain the googled assertion that the AT-AT is 74' tall is not correct. Looks more like a 1:48 scale figure or slightly smaller would be more accurate which puts it at about 100-110 feet tall. What swmodelfan1977 was saying about 1:49- 1:50 makes more sense now. Regardless of what the scale is it does not change what I want to do but if I add figures to the model then maybe it becomes relevant again.
With the scale changes those 1:35 scale 20mm cheek cannons used on the studio scale (#86) just turned into 28mm. Blaster bolts. Yeah, that'll leave a mark.
starks
Sr Member
Would love some pics and info of your spitfire Hagoth... 1/35 is a nice scale! I have a painting of one on my dining room wall.
I do some paintwork at our local airport... mostly Cessna 172s but some Beechcraft and Kingairs aswell, and across the runway theres a P51 and a Spitfire ( later merlin/ packard) that fly out quite regularly. Standing on the runway while these things whip by on take off is an absolutely breathtaking experience.... the sound is incredible as is the power theyre thumping out.... theyre up and off the runway in seconds... the props are huge.
Cheers,
Josh
