Space 1999 Eagle Transporter Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • We have updated the Terms and Conditions, you will be prompted to read and agree to these next time you are active on the forum.

Dismantling the PE23 Studio Scale Eagle Transporter

This was a prototype model - before assembly :-/

I see... Thanks. I believe that the prototype still gives us important insight regarding possible methods to achieve this. One idea that came to my mind is to dip the bottom portion of the pod in liquid nitrogen in an attempt to hopefully harden the glue (hence making it more brittle) and then try to pry the thing open. I don't know how the resin and thick paint job will react to the dip though (if they have very different thermal expansion coefficients, the paint might crack as well). Does anyone have any knowledge of how painted resin will behave in such a situation?


They're cast in a mix of urethane resin and ceramic powder (possibly marble dust) called 'Polystone'. The ceramic is a bulking agent to make the resin much cheaper and it's also why they weigh so much and the parts are so hard to rework with tools. Most resins get more brittle as the temperature drops so I'd err on the side of caution if thinking about using liquid nitrogen. The model might break just as easily if not more so than the glue joint.
They're cast in a mix of urethane resin and ceramic powder (possibly marble dust) called 'Polystone'. The ceramic is a bulking agent to make the resin much cheaper and it's also why they weigh so much and the parts are so hard to rework with tools. Most resins get more brittle as the temperature drops so I'd err on the side of caution if thinking about using liquid nitrogen. The model might break just as easily if not more so than the glue joint.

Ok. thanks. Maybe the only practical solution must rely on making/obtaining(?) replacement lids for the underside of the pods, and simply destroy (with proper care) the original ones.


Seeing as changing the springs looks like a non-starter, has anyone considered just shortening the landing leg struts by a few mm to get the right height instead? You'd only need to remove the pads, make your cuts, then drill new holes and remount the pads - job done!

Also, does anyone know what the spring mechanism looks like or how it works? One of the pads on mine was binding a bit so I took it off to investigate. It turns out that the leg was slightly springy when twisted, i.e., when I twisted it the few mm it would budge it sprung straight back. This is why my pad was binding, this springy action is causing the pad to be slightly twisted against the "scissor" links. None of the 3 other legs suffer from this, and it got me wondering about the mechanism...


There's quite a bit involved with shortening, thinning and drilling the new hole for the leg so I steered clear. If you have a step by step thing that would make it easier that would be great. The length really bugs me.


If the springing mech is the same as the parent RU kit,it's just a washer,spring on top of that then a split pin thru a hole in the top of the leg shft to retain the spring.


That's the frustration. If we could just get the landing gear OUT of the side pods it would be sooooo easy just to cut the top of drill the new hole put the split pin back in and glue the bastard back into the side pod..... rude word. :x


Having recently used some, I'm even more convinced that the filler added to the resin of the PE/IR 23" model is marble powder. Great for reducing the cost of casting but destroyer of any tools should you want to cut or machine it. Basically, don't use your best tools on it.


The landing pad height issue is really bugging me now, it really spoils the "Eagleness" of my Eagle!

Has anyone thought about adding weight to the two corridor/walkway pieces to make it sit right? I was experimenting earlier and found that adding about 2.5/2.6kg made it sit about right, it even bounces nicely on the springs!

I reckon if you added 1.25/1.3kg of lead inside each of the corridor sections, maybe redistributed a little as needed to balance out the engine/CM properly, it'd be about spot on. I spose you could place it inside the pod which would make the job a LOT easier, but I couldn't comment on how well the walkway-pod connections would hold up to the added weight.

I'm off to find some lead... :brows:


To be honest,given the force it takes to compress the thing down on its springs to a realistic height,you would be hard pressed to find enough weight to do the job,unless there is any neutronium lying about..........


Landing gear squish

... just joining the discussion.

Any progress on getting the landing pad mechanisms out of the shoulder pods? Anyone?

I'm encouraged to see how creative you guys are, coming at these problems from every angle. I recently obtained one of these PE23s, myself, and am experiencing the same evolution of attitude that you all seem to have gone through. At first, I was thrilled. Then, I saw "little" problems. Now, I've simply GOT to do something about the landing gear… and the banana spine.

Regarding the landing gear springs, I appreciate the suggested alternative of simply shortening the length of the shaft to get the right height. But, that doesn't fix the real problem and, indeed, creates another one. The REAL problem is not so much the height of the gear at rest, but the lack of… "squish" (for lack of a better word) down to the right height. When landing, the pads should touch, first, and then settle down to the desired height. The springs MUST be weakened – they don't settle down at all.

If one shortens the length of the shaft to get the right height when "landed," then the shaft can't extend out to the "relaxed" position upon lift-off. (And, let's be honest, here. I'm lifting-off and landing this baby all the time!) For me, one of the most noticeable things about the smaller SFX models in the show is the rigidity of their landing gear -- it doesn't extend and relax upon lift-off. I don't want MY model to do that, too… not if I can do something about it.

I'm eager to add some new experiences to the mix, here, myself. And, I'm not afraid of cracking into this thing. I just know, however, that it will end up being a VERY long time before I ever get it back together again. I'm too much of a perfectionist. (How does the expression go? "The 'perfect' is the enemy of the 'good enough'.")

And, what's up with the PE12s? Why would they make the spine plastic? It scares the hell out of me… (mostly because my five-year-old loves to play with them). For a "die-cast" model there isn't nearly enough of it made of metal. (Yes, yes. I DO still love them, though.)


Totally agree about the spine. I always wondered why much of the eagle wasn't diecast. I guess the construction would have been more complicated with the need to remove metal flashing rather than just cleaning up the plastic.


Forum Supporter
Following on from my recent post regards T-Cutting back the paint on my lab Eagle, I decided, in for a penny, in for a pound.

It's now almost completely dismantled.
Following guides from the guys here, I started with the engine bells, popping out the baffles and unscrewing them.
The spine came away intact.
Then moving onto the bottle section. This came away with a little teasing with a screwdriver, working around the framework until the whole assembly came away intact. There are little plastic pins holding the frame to the walkway cage.

I then set about removing the cages.
There's a lot of paint on these, but a little playing about with a screwdriver revealed the locating pins, and the two sections were removed with minimal damage.

The walkway bells were simply twisted and pulled off, revealing the two screws holding the CM section in place. These were unscrewed without removing the panel they sat behind. The CM was then taken out - you have to angle the CM downward as there's a lip on the section which takes the screws.

The pods bottom plate took a little longer. I worked an X-Acto blade into the seams, cutting down as best I could to provide enough space for the screwdriver method. After twenty minutes or so, the plate came away intact bar a tiny section of half-round dressing. Tomorrow I'll get to work removing that gunk around the tabs holding the leg pod sections.

The pods quad thrusters simply popped out.

Oh - and the leg pod fiasco.
It looks as though the bottom plates of the leg sections are glued into place. I imagine there's just a void inside the solid leg pods to take the springs, as there's quite a visible gap between the bottom plate and the bottom of the leg pod. I *may* pluck up courage tomorrow and see if I can get these off...

Here's a few pics - and a thousand thanks to all those brave Alphans who went before me and provided me with insight into getting into this replica!

Hi guys, our local collectable shop has these marked down to $700 Australian, still not "cheap" but a damm sight less than they were so I have put a Lab Eagle on "lay-buy". Apparently the local distributor is dumping them on the market and have told the shop to get rid of them.

Anyway, the Lab version has the horrid chrome looking bells, can it be stripped off with oven cleaner or such or is it just best to paint over them? I have a spare set of resin main bells from my RU kit that I can paint up if needed so that is an option with some mods I guess?




Hello Everyone!
Had my "PRODUCT ENTERPRISES" 23 inch Eagle for some time now and was wondering if other folks like yourself that own A PE Eagle felt the same about the bottom of the Eagles Four Footpads -why the hell does the feet look like a dammed "reverse waffle iron?". The bottom of the feet are suppose to be completely smooth like seen in the 1999 series! I mean what an F -UP!! I was going to take a picture with a laser beam coming out of the bottom of the beak like the episode "THE MARK OF ARCHANONS" where koenig an Maya are dodging the asteroids! But that little dream is off now! All I can ask is:Dear God! Why don't these modelmakers listen to the fans! I know some of you out there who like 1999 are so dammed talented and good at what you do! Your wonderful people! But really on this what gives? Does anyone really know? Enlighten me folks! The gray colored footpads are o.k. just the bottom really fails the model! Sad Huh?! Just venting -give me your comments!



And The Moral of This Story is Kids...

Although Nice to have,:)

The 23" PE EAGLE is little more than Over-Sized and Over-Priced Toy and not really Built for Accuracy!:roll::hmm:

Yep infact they're Pretty Crude!:?:cry:

The 12" ones are much Better I.M.O.:thumbup::yes::)

Wish I'd have bought more em!:(:cry:

So if ain't Broke, Don't Fix it!:no:
Last edited:



With regard to the Pad Issues on The PE 23" EAGLE:hmm:

I think the reason they resemble a waffle is to increase strength and to reduce weight, However I too thought this was a dumb idea!:no::wtf::thumbdown: