1/700 & 1/350 scale BH Cygnus builds
- Thread starter PrimitiveDave
- Start date
psimon
Well-Known Member
If they both match the pipe connections fine at either end there's probably no difference between the two--or you already have them matched up with the correct end of the ship.
I also compared the files and did not see a difference. This is a good thing since I saw during this test that one of my parts is damaged. Not only are some of the rods broken but the height of one of the end openings is short so the lightbox armature would not have fit into it. I ordered another one. If I had caught this earlier I would have asked for a refund like I did with the underside length piece. :/
mythshaker
Active Member
Well, Shapeways has just cancelled the FUD bow internal framing. Not all that unexpected. It just took them a [long] while. I wonder how many times they tried. It's pretty much hidden anyway so WSF it will be.
Nwerke, Shapeways said they sent you additional feedback, anything interesting? Or just no.
The interesting pieces are the main engine mounts, which the port has been finished for weeks, but the starboard sits in production, and the lower starboard rear framing. The other 3 rear frames have been complete a while.
That only leaves the observatory drum, which they have already done one for me, and the front engines in this order.
Nwerke, Shapeways said they sent you additional feedback, anything interesting? Or just no.
The interesting pieces are the main engine mounts, which the port has been finished for weeks, but the starboard sits in production, and the lower starboard rear framing. The other 3 rear frames have been complete a while.
That only leaves the observatory drum, which they have already done one for me, and the front engines in this order.
Paul you should request a refund anyway. I'm sure SW will give you a hearing. Post a pic of the fuel pipe arrangement?
MS, "just no" I'm afraid. I wasn't very optimistic either!
I still have orders waiting that were placed weeks ago, where five parts are shown as done and one keeps sitting as 'in production'. It may indicate repeated failed attempts, or not, or who knows what. My starboard engine mount failed the first time despite being a mirror image of the port one which worked fine. I changed it and mine worked OK in the end but it sounds like they still struggle with it. Inexplicable really.
There's another price deadline going on (though it only impacts designers themselves). I've been frantically working up more parts the last several days but upload has been a highly random struggle - Netfabb helps a lot but you still find a tiny irrelevant tweak can be the difference between a successful upload and a rejection. Changing some minor variable on an export setting by one or two digits, for example. Weird.
Anyway I think I have finally got Fuel Module A units which look good, and I took the opportunity to include some more of the fuel piping on those. I also worked up the Fuel Module B piping as separate units, since the B modules themselves are already uploaded and verified. (Verification isn't something to throw away lightly, as you're seeing.)
MS, "just no" I'm afraid. I wasn't very optimistic either!
I still have orders waiting that were placed weeks ago, where five parts are shown as done and one keeps sitting as 'in production'. It may indicate repeated failed attempts, or not, or who knows what. My starboard engine mount failed the first time despite being a mirror image of the port one which worked fine. I changed it and mine worked OK in the end but it sounds like they still struggle with it. Inexplicable really.
There's another price deadline going on (though it only impacts designers themselves). I've been frantically working up more parts the last several days but upload has been a highly random struggle - Netfabb helps a lot but you still find a tiny irrelevant tweak can be the difference between a successful upload and a rejection. Changing some minor variable on an export setting by one or two digits, for example. Weird.
Anyway I think I have finally got Fuel Module A units which look good, and I took the opportunity to include some more of the fuel piping on those. I also worked up the Fuel Module B piping as separate units, since the B modules themselves are already uploaded and verified. (Verification isn't something to throw away lightly, as you're seeing.)
PS not sure it translates to Dave's version, but the pipes associated with Tanks A and B do differ end-to-end on my version. In part they have to since there's a different junction to the "fuel manifold" spheres at each end for the B pipes, but also the A pipes differ in spacing since they have to dive into the superstructure framing. The framing cells are spaced differently at each end, so that dictates that the A pipes can't be identical at each end.
At least, it does on my version. Dave may have been cleverer than me!
At least, it does on my version. Dave may have been cleverer than me!
mythshaker
Active Member
Only things remaining on my older order now are the observatory drum and the front engines, which are now back in processing from production. Can you make the upper and lower observatory bases the same material options? The upper has white detail but not FUD and the lower has FUD but not white detail.
Have you tried the white detail material yet?
Good luck with the upload schedule!
Have you received your Palomino yet?
Have you tried the white detail material yet?
Good luck with the upload schedule!
Have you received your Palomino yet?
Ack, the front engines are better ordered from Pinshape, IMO. One of the few things their system can handle - just got mine and they did a nice job, a bit cheaper than SW.
Oh, okay, I've enabled the other detail materials for the lower deck observatory. For the upper one I'm afraid FD and FUD are not printable. Go figure. Nope, not tried WD as yet.
I'm still waiting on the lower engine deck piece for the Pal. It's en route now, once I have it I'll post some pics. So far it is a definite improvement on the Mk 1 version!
That door isn't a kitbash AFAIK, though I agree it looks a bit Eagle-ish. Regarding FX flubs there are quite a few but they worked wonders for the time, especially considering how much was done in-camera. The big one for me is that as the Palomino flies over the bow of the ship towards the dock; you can see right through the structure of the Cygnus model to a model and cable support rig below it (mentioned above).
You can also see right through the model to the starfield in front of it as the Pal makes her initial approach just before diving under the Cygnus's stern. (There are several spots where lightbox structures were absent, though logically they should exist.) Throughout the film a number of asymmetries, changes and unintended breakages are visible on the models; there are missing struts, pipes and struts which have broken free at one end and are just hanging in mid-air, etc. There's also the relative attention given to detailing on the 2 12-foot Cygnus models - one was more heavily detailed on its upper side and the other, below. This is noticeable when you see shots of the stern where the notionally identical upper and lower deck structures are clearly less dense for one or the other deck - especially around the edges, with lots of uprights missing from the lower deck in many shots. (I've idealised my model a bit, as if the Disney people had the time and budget to make both models to a 100% standard).
Then there are odd changes; the fuel pipe spine crossover just in front of the probe ship landing platform has 4 pipes in many shots and only 2 in others. In that version, the pipes which should connect to the crossover just go straight into the sides of the spine instead. Originally the design was going to have a lot more transfer tubes and piping all over the place and some brackets for this were built, but never used. (They're at the bases of the struts which support the big main transit tubes.)
I could go on all day.
Oh, okay, I've enabled the other detail materials for the lower deck observatory. For the upper one I'm afraid FD and FUD are not printable. Go figure. Nope, not tried WD as yet.
I'm still waiting on the lower engine deck piece for the Pal. It's en route now, once I have it I'll post some pics. So far it is a definite improvement on the Mk 1 version!
That door isn't a kitbash AFAIK, though I agree it looks a bit Eagle-ish. Regarding FX flubs there are quite a few but they worked wonders for the time, especially considering how much was done in-camera. The big one for me is that as the Palomino flies over the bow of the ship towards the dock; you can see right through the structure of the Cygnus model to a model and cable support rig below it (mentioned above).
You can also see right through the model to the starfield in front of it as the Pal makes her initial approach just before diving under the Cygnus's stern. (There are several spots where lightbox structures were absent, though logically they should exist.) Throughout the film a number of asymmetries, changes and unintended breakages are visible on the models; there are missing struts, pipes and struts which have broken free at one end and are just hanging in mid-air, etc. There's also the relative attention given to detailing on the 2 12-foot Cygnus models - one was more heavily detailed on its upper side and the other, below. This is noticeable when you see shots of the stern where the notionally identical upper and lower deck structures are clearly less dense for one or the other deck - especially around the edges, with lots of uprights missing from the lower deck in many shots. (I've idealised my model a bit, as if the Disney people had the time and budget to make both models to a 100% standard).
Then there are odd changes; the fuel pipe spine crossover just in front of the probe ship landing platform has 4 pipes in many shots and only 2 in others. In that version, the pipes which should connect to the crossover just go straight into the sides of the spine instead. Originally the design was going to have a lot more transfer tubes and piping all over the place and some brackets for this were built, but never used. (They're at the bases of the struts which support the big main transit tubes.)
I could go on all day.
Um, okay, haha. OK, what to cover? Well, there’s the interesting shadows inside the lit superstructure. There are four long dark areas along the upper spine and more around the vertical sides at the rear of the stern, also what appear to be a couple of large angled pipes flanking the rear central viewing area or hangar or whatever it is. These are actually the model’s steel armature showing through the translucent covering.
The Disney art department blueprints demonstrate that the original plan for the mandibles and bow area was for the framing to be built around an internal lightbox, same as the rest of the ship. In the end only the part between the dock and the observatories was boxed in, at least on one of the two models. Just before the Palomino takes off, there’s a panning shot of the front of the ship – you can see right through the mandibles from front to rear. (Same deal at the beginning of the film, you can see through from the rear of the mandibles as the Palomino does its flyby.)
But there are behind-the-scenes shots (and probably some in the film, can’t recall) where the model appears to have structure inside the mandibles. My guess is that the first model followed the plans and they didn’t bother for the second one, but ended up shooting more with that model. (Most likely the two models were built at pretty much the same time, but perhaps that one was better overall for some reason?)
The bridge is shown in some of the early concept paintings as being tiltable. This was actually designed and built into the filming models - that’s what the big half-circle details right under the bridge are about. Originally they each connected to a couple of servomotor type housings sitting below them, and the four girder support struts didn’t exist. All changed at some late point; it’s possible some of the BTS photos were just taken at times when the four supports were temporarily removed but the servo housings were gone in the film so I think not. My guess is the concept was abandoned because the tower looked too spindly and needed visual beefing-up.
Did you know each main engine has a little catwalk all the way along the top of it, complete with a handrail and several sets of steps?
1979 saw the release of two films that are rare in science fiction in that both featured starships with well-realised interiors which *actually fit inside their exteriors*: the USS Cygnus and the Nostromo. Well, mostly, I'm not sure about the Nostromo's engine room.
The Cygnus main corridor, of silly asteroid notoriety, is simply the entire volume of the spine of the model. The walkways along the sides of the corridor are at the level of the bottoms of the side “modules”, as they should be, and the doors out to the side modules are in the right places. There are of course many FX flubs and/or compromises where things were changed around on the basis of ‘it’s only a movie’, but the concept and design work was unusually careful for the period.
The odd details under the side modules are interesting. Those concept paintings which appear to show the ship under construction, where modules are in flight as separate units – they’re actually in flight, as separate units! The domes under the modules are control bridges, and the four odd antenna-like things are actually folded landing gear. Each module is a separate lab/ship which can presumably fly off on its own research mission. They each have an airlock at the front and rear ends, connecting to the next module in sequence. Even the fuel tank modules have these airlocks, and walkways for EVA activity.
The models were actually designed with all this in mind, with each side module as a separate ‘wild’ unit which can be removed. Not sure they were built that way as well but it seems likely given details of some of the destruction shots.
The ship is 2352 feet long and the middle section is about 200’ wide and 50’ high at the modules. All the Disney drawings were dimensioned in ‘real-world’ units.
Will that do for now?
The Disney art department blueprints demonstrate that the original plan for the mandibles and bow area was for the framing to be built around an internal lightbox, same as the rest of the ship. In the end only the part between the dock and the observatories was boxed in, at least on one of the two models. Just before the Palomino takes off, there’s a panning shot of the front of the ship – you can see right through the mandibles from front to rear. (Same deal at the beginning of the film, you can see through from the rear of the mandibles as the Palomino does its flyby.)
But there are behind-the-scenes shots (and probably some in the film, can’t recall) where the model appears to have structure inside the mandibles. My guess is that the first model followed the plans and they didn’t bother for the second one, but ended up shooting more with that model. (Most likely the two models were built at pretty much the same time, but perhaps that one was better overall for some reason?)
The bridge is shown in some of the early concept paintings as being tiltable. This was actually designed and built into the filming models - that’s what the big half-circle details right under the bridge are about. Originally they each connected to a couple of servomotor type housings sitting below them, and the four girder support struts didn’t exist. All changed at some late point; it’s possible some of the BTS photos were just taken at times when the four supports were temporarily removed but the servo housings were gone in the film so I think not. My guess is the concept was abandoned because the tower looked too spindly and needed visual beefing-up.
Did you know each main engine has a little catwalk all the way along the top of it, complete with a handrail and several sets of steps?
1979 saw the release of two films that are rare in science fiction in that both featured starships with well-realised interiors which *actually fit inside their exteriors*: the USS Cygnus and the Nostromo.
Well, mostly, I'm not sure about the Nostromo's engine room. The Cygnus main corridor, of silly asteroid notoriety, is simply the entire volume of the spine of the model. The walkways along the sides of the corridor are at the level of the bottoms of the side “modules”, as they should be, and the doors out to the side modules are in the right places. There are of course many FX flubs and/or compromises where things were changed around on the basis of ‘it’s only a movie’, but the concept and design work was unusually careful for the period.
The odd details under the side modules are interesting. Those concept paintings which appear to show the ship under construction, where modules are in flight as separate units – they’re actually in flight, as separate units! The domes under the modules are control bridges, and the four odd antenna-like things are actually folded landing gear. Each module is a separate lab/ship which can presumably fly off on its own research mission. They each have an airlock at the front and rear ends, connecting to the next module in sequence. Even the fuel tank modules have these airlocks, and walkways for EVA activity.
The models were actually designed with all this in mind, with each side module as a separate ‘wild’ unit which can be removed. Not sure they were built that way as well but it seems likely given details of some of the destruction shots.
The ship is 2352 feet long and the middle section is about 200’ wide and 50’ high at the modules. All the Disney drawings were dimensioned in ‘real-world’ units.
Will that do for now?
mythshaker
Active Member
I've wondered just what the command modules were for.
I find it interesting that there are heat shields for the front engines and the rear out board engines to protect the adjacent structures but not for the main engines adjacent to the same structure for the outboard rear engines.
I find it interesting that there are heat shields for the front engines and the rear out board engines to protect the adjacent structures but not for the main engines adjacent to the same structure for the outboard rear engines.
32buds
Well-Known Member
Absolutely, but if you come up with any more info-please don't hesitate!
I always thought the ship was designed as one piece, but had noticed the "landing gear" under each module. Was curious about that.
Also, the steps and grabrails on each engine. So much detail and very rarely, if ever, glimpsed on screen.
Just goes to show that big models are best for an effects movie.
As for the heat shields for the inward rear engines, maybe the fx team thought having another set of shields would spoil the look of the ship at the rear.
After all, it's all about the girders....
I always thought the ship was designed as one piece, but had noticed the "landing gear" under each module. Was curious about that.
Also, the steps and grabrails on each engine. So much detail and very rarely, if ever, glimpsed on screen.
Just goes to show that big models are best for an effects movie.
As for the heat shields for the inward rear engines, maybe the fx team thought having another set of shields would spoil the look of the ship at the rear.
After all, it's all about the girders....
Yeah, the inboard engines are oddly different in that regard but appear to function the same way. There's a lot of tankage but realistically it's not enough to feed one of those huge engines, let alone five pairs. Another mystery is the 10-degree inwards angle of all the engines. They don't appear to vector their thrust, so it's hugely wasteful and inefficient, but it looks good. Similarly, heatshields would wreck the aesthetics for the inboard engines and if there's one thing this ship is all about, it's aesthetics!
I wonder if at one point the Palomino crew were going to escape in a Side Module ship, rather than the Probe Ship? I doubt it because we know the Probe Ship was a feature of the story from a fairly early stage. I forgot to mention that the two "Power Centres" were originally Spaceport A and Spaceport B. The sides and part of the top dome were to be big side-retracting Rolladoors, and the Probe Ship landed there. No idea why this was changed, perhaps putting the landing pad on the top of the spine might have been felt to offer more visual pop or something.
Speaking of the Spaceports/Power Centres, their side modules differ from all the others in only being 7 girder bays long rather than 10. Originally they were to be 10 bays long, meaning the ship would have been somewhat longer overall. There's a surviving blueprint for this version of the spaceport modules. Again, no idea why this was changed.
Coupla last tidbits, the original name of the ship was USS Centaurus, and most of the Disney blueprints are so labeled. Some also have hand-drawn notes and details in blue biro, possibly by the director, calling out locations for various scenes.
I wonder if at one point the Palomino crew were going to escape in a Side Module ship, rather than the Probe Ship? I doubt it because we know the Probe Ship was a feature of the story from a fairly early stage. I forgot to mention that the two "Power Centres" were originally Spaceport A and Spaceport B. The sides and part of the top dome were to be big side-retracting Rolladoors, and the Probe Ship landed there. No idea why this was changed, perhaps putting the landing pad on the top of the spine might have been felt to offer more visual pop or something.
Speaking of the Spaceports/Power Centres, their side modules differ from all the others in only being 7 girder bays long rather than 10. Originally they were to be 10 bays long, meaning the ship would have been somewhat longer overall. There's a surviving blueprint for this version of the spaceport modules. Again, no idea why this was changed.
Coupla last tidbits, the original name of the ship was USS Centaurus, and most of the Disney blueprints are so labeled. Some also have hand-drawn notes and details in blue biro, possibly by the director, calling out locations for various scenes.
32buds
Well-Known Member
Re: 1/700 & 1/350 scale BH Cygnus builds
Decided to set up what I've gathered so far. Clearly it's thrown together at present, but it's just to show where I am with this at this time. Looking forward to getting the rest.
Oh,Martyn. I'll be ordering that lower spine antenna from your shapeways store too. The ship just doesn't look right without it.
Sorry about the double posting of one of the pictures. Uploading issues on my part(lack of patience)
- - - Updated - - -
Decided to set up what I've gathered so far. Clearly it's thrown together at present, but it's just to show where I am with this at this time. Looking forward to getting the rest.
Oh,Martyn. I'll be ordering that lower spine antenna from your shapeways store too. The ship just doesn't look right without it.
Sorry about the double posting of one of the pictures. Uploading issues on my part(lack of patience)
- - - Updated - - -
AAAAAAAHHHHH!
Decided to set up what I've gathered so far. Clearly it's thrown together at present, but it's just to show where I am with this at this time. Looking forward to getting the rest.
Oh,Martyn. I'll be ordering that lower spine antenna from your shapeways store too. The ship just doesn't look right without it.
Sorry about the double posting of one of the pictures. Uploading issues on my part(lack of patience)
- - - Updated - - -
Decided to set up what I've gathered so far. Clearly it's thrown together at present, but it's just to show where I am with this at this time. Looking forward to getting the rest.
Oh,Martyn. I'll be ordering that lower spine antenna from your shapeways store too. The ship just doesn't look right without it.
Sorry about the double posting of one of the pictures. Uploading issues on my part(lack of patience)
- - - Updated - - -
AAAAAAAHHHHH!
Attachments
Looks good, man.
Oh hey I finally got the lower engine deck of my Palomino. All good. After seeing just how fine the smaller elements are (hairlike), I've decided to upload a 1/192 version. Usual place. Quasi-affordable in WSF nylon, bloody expensive in FUD resin.
1/192 is the scale of the 12-foot Cygnus models and smallest Palomino model, so this is technically studio-scale. (It's not a proper SS replica in our terminology obviously.)
Merry Christmas!
Cheers,
Martyn
PS 1/350 on the left, 1/192 on the right:
The original 1/192 Palomino model:
Oh hey I finally got the lower engine deck of my Palomino. All good. After seeing just how fine the smaller elements are (hairlike), I've decided to upload a 1/192 version. Usual place. Quasi-affordable in WSF nylon, bloody expensive in FUD resin.
1/192 is the scale of the 12-foot Cygnus models and smallest Palomino model, so this is technically studio-scale. (It's not a proper SS replica in our terminology obviously.)
Merry Christmas!
Cheers,
Martyn
PS 1/350 on the left, 1/192 on the right:
The original 1/192 Palomino model:
Definitely an improvement on the original version, but fragile, and yeah the top antenna is too flexible, I'll need to replace it with wire. Not bad overall but there's a bit of a quality issue; the engine deck part is gorgeous; they really brought their best game for that one. Smooth glassy surfaces, not frosted at all. But the main hull part and hull bottom, um, more 'snowfield'. Definitely rougher surfaces than I was expecting.
Definitely rougher surfaces than I was expecting.mythshaker
Active Member
Shapeways says the USPS lost my mandibles. So they are redoing them, now expected shipping date is 14 January. They say they are also having problems printing the Observatory drum, hmmm did they have problems with the first one? and the front engines. Should be finished by Friday.
