Yuku free message boards

Jeff, I've been using Squadron white though I just picked up some Tamiya again hoping that will solve my 'goo' problem.

The squadron has been adequate for most resin work I've done over the last year. I started with Testor's and didn't like the way that applied. Moved over to Tamiya and liked that alot, but it was getting expensive for me. Thus I went to squadron which is bigger quantity for lesser $ than Tamiya.

Squad cures far faster and sands nicer than Tamiya. However, I would characterize Squad as cake-like when dry, 'light and fluffy'. Whereas the Tamiya dries hard and dense like a rock. However, Tamiya can take days to fully cure depending on thickness.

Scott has convinced me to step up to auto body putty, but I have not done that yet. Dynacron was one of them, he mentioned the other somewhere in a post on this site.

And...
I did not have any misalignment between the engines. The nacelles went on the pylons perfectly straight (but be sure to have a good look when doing that).

And the pylons went on to the hull in perfect alignment with each other. If you have surfaced the 'connection sides' of hull and pylon, then be careful that you didn't change that angle! That would throw off your symmetry!

These two images best show the symmetry.




Basically this model is so huge that you can't hold it far enough away to squint-check the symmetry and still hold the engine tight to the body while it sets. But do your best! This is another situation why you don't want the neck on the body getting in your way. Worry about the body first and the neck and head separately until the last moment!

Basically, trust to Scott's engineering for the symmetry!

One note is that while I was bringing the ship in and out of the house to spray it the other day, I caught the port nacelle on the screen door which popped the nacelle/pylon assembly right off! Fortunately, the nacelle is wrapped in plastic and I am hoping that protected it from any damage from catching or falling. The pylon was fine. I simply blobbed the glue in again as mentioned previously, the pylon sat flat and everything is nice again, though I have minor putty and sanding to do on the new seam line.

Lou, What procedure do you recommend for painting that sensor tunnel? Rear wall (gold?), then silver sides, mask it off (tissue wad inside?) for Bulb's final green? Or the reverse? Or different?

How were the painting angles in there? Use a flattened toothpick to dab the sensor back wall?
Thanks!

I thought I got it from Phase Pistol's diagram, but I now see that the gold is actually copper and the silver is gray. Hmm. I can't log into your hobby link page now, but I thought that the sensor tube looked silvery -could have been the lighting /gloss.

Was there really a sensor spike? I've heard it both ways now.

I remember it on the kit as well, which is why I figure it's not really there (though it could have easily fallen out of the film model and never noticed at the time).

Most of the TOS screen shots you will ever see aren't good enough to tell any detail. I guess I figured it was hollow as the TMP D-7 had it as a torpedo tube (as did the TOS, though it was never fired was how I thought of it). Klingons just go in and kill, what do they need sensors for?

Look forward to the piX! Post here if you like, I don't remember my log in for hobbytalk here at work, but would see them later regardless.

TMP was indeed the first. It always looked like a torpedo tube (that was never fired) to me. It could have been the garbage chute for all I really knew.

I always wondered about the disruptors too... I figured they came from the cross band on the nacelle front. (And what are those grills for on the Crown?)

I also kinda figured that the tube was 'supposed' to be the gun, but when the fx crew got the plates and the script description didn't match what they wree looking at, they faked it as best they could.

From there, it became stock footage and thereby reference material for how to do it the next time. I think there's only two actual shots of the d-7 firing, straight on looking up and a 3/4 port bow angle. None others spring to mind...

A few of you must be along on your kits by now, start up a new thread and let us see!!!!

I've come across a few other owners on other model forums, but I could not track down their kits. How many of us are there out there afterall?

Scotthm,
You're widening the neck and tapering the head? I don't know that I've ever seen pictures of that area in detail to know rightly where you are going with that idea. Pix of your work would help me understand.

Outside of the IDIC pages, I think this forum became one of the most comprehensive collections of d-7 pix with the Roddenberry and Smithsonian pix (in the other topic) that there is. And if the Roddenberry is an exact duplicate from AMT, then it's near as original and accurate as you can get it would seem.

Look forward to reading about your other quandries and pix when you get them going!