Victory class Star Destroyer - Ertl conversion

Pixelworks

New Member
Recently I came across an old Ertl Star Destroyer kit (scale 1:4222), I knew from the start that it had major issues with screen correctness and the overall level of detail, but I thought what the hey... I was bored and it was dirt cheap, so I bought it.

Ertl Kit box.jpg


After doing a bit of research and pondering what I was going to do with it, I discovered that size-wise it is incredibly close to what a Victory class Star Destroyer would be in the same scale as the Revell Venator kit and the Zvezda Imperial Star Destroyer (both 1:2700) . Then the idea was born… combine it with an Acclamator class, Venator class and the Imperator class and you get a nice "from-then-to-now" diorama.

There is little data on the Victory class, but it was the first step towards the Imperial class and away from the republic Venator class. The Venator class was developed to carry fighters and transports, which was in-line with the needs of the republic during the clone wars, the empire, however, wanted to control through fear and needed a platform with more firepower and less fighter craft. For this reason the Victory class had multiple variations in the attempt to find the right combination of firepower. This trial and error laid the groundwork for the Imperial class that we all know so well in the films. The main structural differences between the Victory class and the Imperial class is
  • the fins on each side that open for reasons of atmospheric manuverability,
  • the Victory is a triangle shape whereas the Imperial class' is more diamond shaped with a slight slanting in the back as well.
  • a more box-like, elongated bridge
  • and of course the size, the Victory class is roughly half as large as the Imperial class and slightly smaller than the Venator class.

As with all my models I will be putting in an Arduino chip to light it and do all kinds of other fun stuff including motorizing the fins on the sides to open and close them. The major difficulty will be that the detail on the kit is made for a 1:4222 scale and will need to be doctored so as not to create a mix-match of scales. So the fact that the Ertl kit is so lacking in detail is actually a good thing. ;)

I will be basing my conversion on the artwork done by Ansel Hsiao

ansel-hsiao-vsd56.jpg



Well that is the plan, I will have to see where this road takes me. Thanks for watching.
 
Last edited:

Pixelworks

New Member
Just to illustrate the size difference, here is an overview of the ships from the film and models i intend to use. For the Acclamator class the only one I know of is the kit by JPG Productions… the only issue is that it is 1:2256 as opposed to the other ships that come in at 1:2700. I might have to go from scratch for this one.

[Edit] As per the discussion below, the scale for Venator is corrected to 1:2256


 

Attachments

Last edited:

Analyzer

Sr Member
Looking forward to it!

I have an MPC/ERTL one that I kind of abandoned after picking up the Zvezda

This seems like the prefect use for it!
 

Pixelworks

New Member
Looking forward to it!

I have an MPC/ERTL one that I kind of abandoned after picking up the Zvezda
Thanks for tuning in.
Yeah, I sure can relate to that. Quite a while back I wanted to do a battlestar galactica, back then 200 USD was a good deal for the Revell kits. Well, I bit the bullet and bought one but in the end it was so incorrect, that I was seriously considering sanding everything down, basically using it as a frame for a scratch job. Around that time, Moebius announced that they would be doing a TOS Galactica. Overnight the price of the Revell kit went down to 50 USD and less. Needless to say, I bought a Moebius kit and the Revell kit went back on the shelf and has been collecting dust ever since.
 

Analyzer

Sr Member
Hah, been there done that.

I overpaid for things that either wind up getting a release or a better model

I also have a Revell Galactica, but luckily I got that one for free
 

Sent

New Member
I had the same idea, but I'm waiting with it realisation till I improve my skills. I can give you one advice though - change your reference pics, because the attached one in the first post is terrible representation. There's no official model or image of Victory, because that thing came from books from different authors, but that render, while very detailed, is also wrong on so many levels. There should be one turbolaser battery more on each side, "wedding cake" should look more like ISD one, bridge should have one deflector dome more and more antennas, it also look like shape is totally wrong. Here's correct one https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/4/41/SWArmandaCoverArt.png

Also, I'm not that sure if those "fins" really should open or not, because a) it looks supid and b) every pic I saw was missing pistons, hinges or any kind of mechanism, which should move that fins up.
 

Pixelworks

New Member
[...] There's no official model or image of Victory, because that thing came from books from different authors, but that render, while very detailed, is also wrong on so many levels.

Also, I'm not that sure if those "fins" really should open or not, because a) it looks supid and b) every pic I saw was missing pistons, hinges or any kind of mechanism, which should move that fins up.
Thank you for your subjective input. Yes there are some aspects of the artwork that are off, but on the other side as you mentioned, there is little or no documentation on the Victory Class and on top of that between the Victory I and the Victory II there were even more modified versions. So who is to say what is incorrect?

Not sure where you got your information that there is only one deflector dome, but in all of the reference pictures I have found there are two...
Specifications Victory-d.jpg
 
Last edited:

publiusr

Active Member
I'm sad that the prequels and Rogue One had Star Destroyers and their Ilk capable of hovering.

It made the Victory special--the idea of a Star Destroyer coming down like NuBSG did, kicking up a huge shock wave.

Only New Order capital ships should hover.
 

Sent

New Member
So who is to say what is incorrect?
that's why I said there's no official model, so in theory "everything goes", but that one particular render is, at least in my opinion, far off from "general agreement" how Victory Destroyers looks like :p Their design definitely isnt as divisive as, let's say, Immobiliser/Interdictor design

Not sure where you got your information that there is only one deflector dome, but in all of the reference pictures I have found there are two...
View attachment 965243
there's one smaller dome on the back of the bridge, just behind antennas. It's even on the pic that you've provided now, but it's missing on that high-detailed. To be honest I'm not sure if it's actually another deflector, but it looks like smaller version of it :p

I'm sad that the prequels and Rogue One had Star Destroyers and their Ilk capable of hovering.

It made the Victory special--the idea of a Star Destroyer coming down like NuBSG did, kicking up a huge shock wave.

Only New Order capital ships should hover.
so much this.
Even more thant that - ISD hovering over city looked just stupid (aside from weight and thruster issues, how do you even want to support troops, when your wapons are on the trenches and upper side of the hull?), almost as bad as death star pooping out from hyperspace over it.
 

Lichtbringer

Sr Member
I know that the Acclamator from JPG is off, but according to Revell.de (couldn't find it on Revell.com), the Venator is 1:2700 as well.
A straight lie to get more sales.

Their Venator was the first kit in that scale (1/2256), then several kits from other companies (Anigrand SD, Nebulon Frigate and MonCal Cruiser, JPG Acclamator, Dreadnaught and Victory, just for example ......) were made in the same scale to match.

Revell only "updated" the listed scale when they started to offer the reboxed Zwezda SDs under their own name. Well, if it ups the sales .....
 

Pixelworks

New Member
there's one smaller dome on the back of the bridge, just behind antennas. It's even on the pic that you've provided now, but it's missing on that high-detailed. To be honest I'm not sure if it's actually another deflector, but it looks like smaller version of it :p
Ahhhhh, ok now I know what you mean. The little dome in the back contains the aft targeting systems, the two larger domes are the deflectors. ;) Yeah, it is missing from Ansel's artwork, I will be basing my conversion on his art, but it will not be a 1:1 copy of it. The targeting system will certainly be added, as well as the forward viewing station and the elongated bridge, which are all missing from his design.

I have not decided yet regarding the set of only 3 turrets. I would like to keep the turrets the same caliber and same size as the Venator and I do not know yet if 4 turrets will fit. I do not want to make the turrets smaller as 1). it makes no sense that the Empire would use smaller turrets on a newer ship and 2) optically it would bust the scale. I am designing some 3D turrets I will know more once I have them printed.
 

Pixelworks

New Member
Revell only "updated" the listed scale when they started to offer the reboxed Zwezda SDs under their own name. Well, if it ups the sales .....
Thanks for the heads-up. I just did some measurements and you are absolutely correct. The Revell Venator kit measures in at just under 52cm, considering that the accepted 1:1 length is 1137 meters, the kit would need to be about 10cm shorter.

That really is a bummer.

[Edit] - I updated the comparison picture above accordingly and added the length measurements.
 
Last edited:

Pixelworks

New Member
just finished up designing the turrets. I designed them all so that a strand of FO can be fed up from below to light up the hollow area behind the windows. Here are the primary turrets along the tower:

VSD_Primary Guns CAD.PNG


These are the secondary turret in a row above the primary turrets and also placed in various other locations around the ship:

VSD_Secondary Guns CAD.PNG


here are the point turrets located at the very front of the ship:

VSD_Point Guns CAD.PNG
 

Pixelworks

New Member
звездные войны - имперский звездный разрушиТедь
Star Wars - Imperial Star Destroyer

my Russian is a bit rusty but I searched .ru to find out how much the Zvezda destroyers are going for over there. In the end they are not as much cheaper as I would have thought. You can get them from Russian hobby shops for between 4 739₽ and 5150.00 ₽ the latter of which converts to 68 Euro. Seeing that I have found them in eBay for 85 Euro, there is not a huge difference.

Strangely, I could not find them on the Zvezda site

Does anyone know if there are any differences between the Zvezda kit and the Revell version (#06719)?
 
Last edited:

Analyzer

Sr Member
A straight lie to get more sales.

Their Venator was the first kit in that scale (1/2256), then several kits from other companies (Anigrand SD, Nebulon Frigate and MonCal Cruiser, JPG Acclamator, Dreadnaught and Victory, just for example ......) were made in the same scale to match.

Revell only "updated" the listed scale when they started to offer the reboxed Zwezda SDs under their own name. Well, if it ups the sales .....
Yeah Revell is notoriously bad with their scale listings. They frequently have incorrect scales listed. I remember they changed the scale of the tie fighter quite a few times as well as the scale of the sound and play X-wing and several others

Thanks for the heads-up. I just did some measurements and you are absolutely correct. The Revell Venator kit measures in at just under 52cm, considering that the accepted 1:1 length is 1137 meters, the kit would need to be about 10cm shorter.

That really is a bummer.

[Edit] - I updated the comparison picture above accordingly and added the length measurements.
I think it is close enough that most will not notice or care
 

Richard Baker

Sr Member
I recall a couple of diagrams showing those outboard 'wings' as being movable covers for broadside missile launchers. A weapons hit would detonate the missiles so they would stay protected until use. This to me makes more sense than having them act as wings for in-atmosphere flight- the Acclamator and Venator classes managed just fine without some little fins along the side.

I do like having a different number of side turrets than the Imperial class- whatever makes the Victory look like something other than a rescaled ISD is good in my book.

This is a great project- I am really enjoying watching this thread!
 

Pixelworks

New Member
[...] This to me makes more sense than having them act as wings for in-atmosphere flight- the Acclamator and Venator classes managed just fine without some little fins along the side.

I do like having a different number of side turrets than the Imperial class- whatever makes the Victory look like something other than a rescaled ISD is good in my book.
Thanks for your words. My thoughts exactly, both on avoiding a miniature ISD look as well as those stubby little "wings".
 

The BDK

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I always loved the design of the victory class saying back to the X-wing games. Really wish they'd actually used it in the prequels instead of the Venerator. Or a Vic instead of the Dauntless in Rogue One above Jedha.
 
Top