Building the 8' Star Destroyer (superstructures done)

faustus100 said:

Only a person who doesn't have a true understanding of studio building would say that. It's one thing to studio build,it's quite another to studio build a hero ILM lmodel.

Click to expand...

I do hope you know I was being sarcastic. Especially because I spent almost 19 years making a star destroyer thats not even close to this level.
The only thing better would be to build a real mile long working one.

JediMichael said:

I do hope you know I was being sarcastic. Especially because I spent almost 19 years making a star destroyer thats not even close to this level.
The only thing better would be to build a real mile long working one.

Click to expand...

Careful! George might just digitally alter you out of this thread if you keep that up!

PS. I'm trying to be funny, too! LOL!

Joe

joewhite said:

Careful! George might just digitally alter you out of this thread if you keep that up!

PS. I'm trying to be funny, too! LOL!

Joe

Click to expand...

Doesn't he now have to beg Disney to do that....

JediMichael said:

This thread is 4 and a half years old now....at this point of building this, George would be like, "Don't worry about finishing the model, we already finished the movie without it." haha

Click to expand...

Hmmm, sarcasm or not, I don't feel Julien had to defend himself so nicely over a comment like this.
Most just don't have a clue how long it takes to make a big SS replica model. A huge amount of time is spent pouring over ref continuously, building sections, re-doing & tinkering to get somewhat accurate.
Kit collecting can take years, Juliens SD is a major wallet depleter for sure. I spend around $5000 a year on kits for the Falcon as an example, that's around 4-5 years of collecting alone!.
We work on these alone, no around the clock crews, just one guy plugging away when time permits.
Keeping up enthusisam for one build over say 3-8 years is tough too, but with the staggering amount of help & support from members here, it gets done, somehow!.
A positive comment goes a long way in fueling the fire for a big SS build!.
Stu

Droids are amazing!!!
Hats off, Julien-san!!

katsu

Someone over on scifi-meshes linked over to this. Totally floored. Amazing work, sir.

Thank you very much

This build is fantastic! I love the detail on every part.

Monsieurtox, wow! i am blown away by this build. incredible work! i signed up for this forum just so i could watch this one. i can only imagine how much time and hard work you have invested in this build. very nice work. ive been building models for most of my life, and my stuff has been featured in mags, and books, and ive done articles.....but my stuff pales in comparison to this!

time to see what else is going on here....ill post some stuff about me in the "intro" section. keep up the wonderful work!

cheers
Bryan M

Over the last evenings I re-read the whole thread and enjoyed every single picture.
That was way more satisfying than watching football - lol
I cannot thank you enough for sharing so much insights.
Cheers,
Andreas

struschie said:

Over the last evenings I re-read the whole thread and enjoyed every single picture.
That was way more satisfying than watching football - lol
I cannot thank you enough for sharing so much insights.
Cheers,
Andreas

Click to expand...

Thank you veru much guys !
I hope to be able to work on it soon !

Haha Andreas, watching all the games is a good excuse for me to let the resin parts or molds cure for a good 105 minutes lol

This build is beyond amazing. I'm floored by the detail and effort involved.

- Pauli

Thank you Pauli !

I just finished reading through this entire thread and all I can say is "Wow!". Amazing work by you and all the folks who helped research the parts.

I wish we had your help when we repaired the real one back when it got damaged being shipped to the Smithsonian during the production of Episode 1. (or was it Ep 2? They kinda blur together.) At any rate, the reference we had was pathetic compared to what you guys have accumulated. And who knows how many repairs of repairs of repairs we were repairing. In addition to repairing the broken sections, we tried to replace as many lost parts as we could identify. I WISH we had your collective knowledge when we had to do that.

The damage to the big SD was pretty extensive. One of the large acrylic hull sheets had cracked and had to be replaced, and a number of parts had broken or fallen off including the conning tower which was completely smashed. I was tasked with rebuilding the conning tower from the pile of broken bits that the Smithsonian sent back to us. A funny thing was that; being the Smithsonian, all of the parts had been individually bagged in little ziplock bags including the dust, debris and broken fibre-optics strands that they swept out of the bottom of the crate. They were very thorough! I spent the next couple weeks matching up paint chips and glue marks in order to put the pieces back together.

The "old guys" like Lorne Peterson and Steve Gawley could only remember things like "I think the ship kits were by Tamiya," so tracking down missing parts was a detective story for us, just like for you. You guys probably got more things right than we did due to our limited time. You all should be applauded for the research you've done to figure out what was used by guys who were just grabbing whatever looked good at the time. Truly amazing!

Great story, thanks for sharing!

Wow! I noticed in some pics taken at the archive that the "nose" of the model was sagging. Was this from damage done during shipping as well? Looking at photos of it under construction, it seemed there might not be enough "structural integrity" to the armature to prevent this from happening. The hangar bay seriously cuts into the available space for structure in that part of the ship. (Funny thing is, the smaller 4-foot model had an even deeper hangar bay, so even less room inside the model.)

The reason I was studying this is because I am about to start building a 4-foot ANH version for a client. Engineering the structure has been a bit of a challenge. Julien, you might want to be very careful when designing the armature and bulkheads for your 8-footer. If the sagging nose was *not* the result of a shipping incident, it might indicate structural weakness in the design itself.

Also, recently I was very lucky to have the opportunity to do some repair work on the original Battlestar Galactica filming model. After more than 35 years the glue bonds were starting to fail and the parts kept flaking off. We were very lucky to know where almost every single missing part went and we brought quite a few spares with us. I can only imagine though what might happen if that model were to be shipped somewhere. . .

Having built two studio-scale replicas of the Galactica and having shipped both of them successfully, I honestly can't believe how the studios transport these kinds of items. From what I can see, they build a wooden platform and mount the stand and model to it. Then, they assemble a wood crate around it. The trouble is, ALL shock and vibration is transmitted directly to the model this way. When I crate a model, I suspend it in a bed of very soft foam rubber inside the wooden structure. The idea is to make sure there is no direct contact between the crate and the ship. I know this requires a lot of effort and planning. But, if I was in charge of shipping something as priceless as a screen-used Star Destroyer, I would spare no expense or effort to make sure it got to its destination unscathed. WTH?

star-art said:

But, if I was in charge of shipping something as priceless as a screen-used Star Destroyer, I would spare no expense or effort to make sure it got to its destination unscathed. WTH?

Click to expand...

Could not agree more.

Thanks John,

Awesome story ! This model is pretty hard to reproduce due to the numerous variations from a movie to another and from an exhibit to another ! I believe she was a bit redressed for ROTJ and the Hangar bay more detailled for Star Tour. Then the various repair, the nose being one of the most difficult to nail because there's not that much hi res pics of its original state and it was repaired so many times, the parts being glued the wrong way each time It was different again for Star Wars Identities ! Too bad they havent documented it more when she was built. I'll have to make some choices for mine and go for what I think to be right but I'll never be sure I choose the right way !

Wow that sucks for the arcylic hull sheet you had to replace ! Anyway it was well done because I cant spot it Do you which one you replaced (top/lower-/port/starboard side) ?

The conning tower (mainly the domes with all those T supports and spindles) are very fragile. I remember when I was building mine, I put it on the floor for some reason, and as I walk, didnt notice it and put a kick into one of the domes... Some T supports never been found (but replaced ).

I was so happy to see her in person, even after having stared at thousand of pics of her, it was magic ! It's one of the Star Wars models they put the more care on and it shows ! The repairs are pretty well done ! Too bad the original paint have started to get that yellowish tint

Haha yeah I hear you about the old ILMers ! When I met Lorne some years ago Ive asked him about that profile they used on the leading edges of the hulls and about the engine bells. Of course he replied about the ANH not the TESB model !
Fortunatly enough Paul Huston have been quite helpful and still has good memories about this model. Ease was not of much help when I asked himm a question about the basic shape of the superstructures (basic but important !). But he was remembering thr brand and color of the paint they used to paint her (invaluable since that's not one of the usual brands they used for their models).

The lower spine is falling off, you'll have some more job to do when she gets back.

Duncanator said:

I just finished reading through this entire thread and all I can say is "Wow!". Amazing work by you and all the folks who helped research the parts.

I wish we had your help when we repaired the real one back when it got damaged being shipped to the Smithsonian during the production of Episode 1. (or was it Ep 2? They kinda blur together.) At any rate, the reference we had was pathetic compared to what you guys have accumulated. And who knows how many repairs of repairs of repairs we were repairing. In addition to repairing the broken sections, we tried to replace as many lost parts as we could identify. I WISH we had your collective knowledge when we had to do that.

The damage to the big SD was pretty extensive. One of the large acrylic hull sheets had cracked and had to be replaced, and a number of parts had broken or fallen off including the conning tower which was completely smashed. I was tasked with rebuilding the conning tower from the pile of broken bits that the Smithsonian sent back to us. A funny thing was that; being the Smithsonian, all of the parts had been individually bagged in little ziplock bags including the dust, debris and broken fibre-optics strands that they swept out of the bottom of the crate. They were very thorough! I spent the next couple weeks matching up paint chips and glue marks in order to put the pieces back together.

The "old guys" like Lorne Peterson and Steve Gawley could only remember things like "I think the ship kits were by Tamiya," so tracking down missing parts was a detective story for us, just like for you. You guys probably got more things right than we did due to our limited time. You all should be applauded for the research you've done to figure out what was used by guys who were just grabbing whatever looked good at the time. Truly amazing!

Click to expand...

Charles, I never noticed the nose was sagging. Where do you think the weak point of the armature is ?

Do you think adding an extra lenght of tubing (maybe smaller diameter) between the 2 red lines would help to avoid any nose sagging ?



I agree with you, the hangar bay doesnt give that much room, the outer diameter of the tubing is 3" and that's a tight fit, the roof of the hangar bay is in contact with the tube.

I will reinforce the front of the inner frame, thanks for the tip Richard !

star-art said:

Wow! I noticed in some pics taken at the archive that the "nose" of the model was sagging. Was this from damage done during shipping as well? Looking at photos of it under construction, it seemed there might not be enough "structural integrity" to the armature to prevent this from happening. The hangar bay seriously cuts into the available space for structure in that part of the ship. (Funny thing is, the smaller 4-foot model had an even deeper hangar bay, so even less room inside the model.)

The reason I was studying this is because I am about to start building a 4-foot ANH version for a client. Engineering the structure has been a bit of a challenge. Julien, you might want to be very careful when designing the armature and bulkheads for your 8-footer. If the sagging nose was *not* the result of a shipping incident, it might indicate structural weakness in the design itself.

Also, recently I was very lucky to have the opportunity to do some repair work on the original Battlestar Galactica filming model. After more than 35 years the glue bonds were starting to fail and the parts kept flaking off. We were very lucky to know where almost every single missing part went and we brought quite a few spares with us. I can only imagine though what might happen if that model were to be shipped somewhere. . .

Having built two studio-scale replicas of the Galactica and having shipped both of them successfully, I honestly can't believe how the studios transport these kinds of items. From what I can see, they build a wooden platform and mount the stand and model to it. Then, they assemble a wood crate around it. The trouble is, ALL shock and vibration is transmitted directly to the model this way. When I crate a model, I suspend it in a bed of very soft foam rubber inside the wooden structure. The idea is to make sure there is no direct contact between the crate and the ship. I know this requires a lot of effort and planning. But, if I was in charge of shipping something as priceless as a screen-used Star Destroyer, I would spare no expense or effort to make sure it got to its destination unscathed. WTH?

Click to expand...

I suspect it failed at the point where the tube ends. A 3-inch diameter tube is HUGE. I think that could be way overkill -- even for a model this size. I would probably use 1 1/2" IPS pipe. It's thicker and stronger than metal tube. A Schedule 40 pipe should work very well. The actual outside diameter is just 1.9 inches. You might be able to extend it almost all the way to the nose. Plus, you can use off-the-shelf fittings for the model mounts. PM for more info. I can point you to the ones I use in the Galactica.