Space 1999 Eagle Transporter Forum


Go Back   Space 1999 Eagle Transporter Forum > Main Mission > The Hangar

Notices

SPONSORED BY
&

Reply Bookmark and Share
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 28-03-2007, 09:48 PM   #1
ajmadison
Chef
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Shrewsbury, ma
Posts: 24
Default Fundimensions/AMT-ERTL Eagle Command Module

First off, I have a pair of these old kits that have been assembled and disassembled a couple of times. I've been thinking of taking what's worth salvaging (which some of you may tell me is nothing) and scratching up the rest into a decent model.

Secondly, I remember from a ways back that there is a profile issue with the nose cone/command module from this kit. Admittedly, I've never compared the kit parts with a reasonable drawing, so that may be all I need to do, but could someone describe to me what is wrong? Are there problems along more than one elevation, e.g. overhead profile and front profile? Or is the command module just too small? I know that the sensor indents need detailing & correction, and I'm not asking about that. Or is the panel detailing wrong?

Thanks...
ajmadison is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 28-03-2007, 09:55 PM   #2
AceMartini
Communications Officer
 
AceMartini's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,056
Default

I think the main problem is that the CM is too shallow and needs to be more bulbous. It's a tricky thing to correct, since the side walls are already roughly the correct height.

Small Art Works sells a more accurate CM casting.

http://www.smallartworks.ca/News/News.html
AceMartini is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 28-03-2007, 10:05 PM   #3
DX-SFX
Chief Medical Officer
 
DX-SFX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,094
Default

It's not really fixable depending on your personal standards of accuracy. You can make it better but you can't make it right.
DX-SFX is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 28-03-2007, 10:52 PM   #4
AceMartini
Communications Officer
 
AceMartini's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,056
Default

And the Small Art Works CM is a little too bulbous around the rear (it seems to me) -- but can be shaved down.
AceMartini is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 28-03-2007, 10:59 PM   #5
DX-SFX
Chief Medical Officer
 
DX-SFX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,094
Default

Agreed. I did some subtle reshaping on the Metaprobe which uses the same CM.

http://www.eagletransporter.com/foru...r=asc&start=40
DX-SFX is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote

Old 29-03-2007, 02:24 PM   #6
john_trek
Astrophysics Technician
 
john_trek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 313
Default

The biggest sin is that it is too short in height. I took one of the halves and traced the outline on a peice of sheet plastic (0.04 mil I think .... don't really remember). I cut that out and glued top and bottom to it, making the nose just a bit taller.

That improved the look a lot, and with a quick look my module looks pretty accurate.

This all works only if you are also planning on detaching the CM from the front frame work and making it truely a separate peice as it should be.

Plus I ended up rebuilding most of the aft section of the module to include a command module door matching the interior set. But that part was only necessary because I wanted to be able to display it separately.

All told, once you correct the height problem, I think the CM isn't all that bad on the kit.
john_trek is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 29-03-2007, 06:58 PM   #7
ajmadison
Chef
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Shrewsbury, ma
Posts: 24
Default Thanks Folks

Thanks,

I compared the AMT/MPC Eagle with some of the more recent orthogonals. Eek. My initial assessment was correct. There's almost nothing worth salvaging. Here's my short list of the major faults:

1. CM not shaped correctly. Though reshaping the back half and shimming the top & bottom halves would greatly improve the profile.

2. Main truss trapezoid too wide and the sides too steep.

3. Fore & aft cages front profile octagon too squat.

4. RCS/Landing pad pods not tall enough in the middle.

5. Passenger module roof window area too steeply angled.

Past experience is that when the list of problems starts looking like this, I'm really better off scratchbuilding the whole thing. I'll get it done sooner and the end result will be better. Sigh...
ajmadison is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2007, 11:29 PM   #8
deerstalker36
Weapons Technician
 
deerstalker36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Bunbury, Western Australia
Posts: 145
Default

I've just started on my mpc CM. detached it from that horrible lump of plastic at the back and inserted the strip of plastic between.
Now its just down to adding some layers of plastic to the rear and reshaping them to fit. It doesnt look bad at the mo.

one thing i cant decide on tho is whether to have a door to the rear of the CM because that would match the interior shots, or ive seen some pics where there's just a shaped square of plastic connecting it to the main corridor

colin
deerstalker36 is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This site and contents are copyright Bernard Walsh 2010 all rights reserved, no reproduction of material in any form without written permission email: Bernie.walsh@mac.com