BAH! Flames of hate! Rebels is great!

Nothing personal.

Jack Sutter - ‎X-Wing Miniatures Mods and Repaints (Armada and IA too) - March 26

"I removed the stock gun and added turrets from a Decimator to give the craft a better field of fire. The containers are N scale 20 foot shipping containers."

I prefer the original turret, but as soon as I learn to magnet, this is on my to-do list.

Jack Sutter - ‎X-Wing Miniatures Mods and Repaints (Armada and IA too) - March 26

"I removed the stock gun and added turrets from a Decimator to give the craft a better field of fire. The containers are N scale 20 foot shipping containers."

I prefer the original turret, but as soon as I learn to magnet, this is on my to-do list.

This is awesome.

Does anyone have one of the Falcon pushing freight?

I actually really like the punishing one model, but admittedly for a slightly odd reason. It's one of the few non-starfighters that actually seems sized and proportioned property for what it is supposed to do/how many people it is supposed to carry. The YTs, Firespray, Decimator and even to an extent a Lambda all must use time lord technology to fit people and cargo alongside engines, hyper drives, power plants, shield generators, life support, guns, etc. don't get me started on the HWK. Really just the Punishing One and the Ghost really pull that off for me. Well, and the aggressor, but that's technically classified as a really big starfighter. At the same time, I don't buy that engine as one off a Neb-B.

Edit: I take back what I said about the Decimator. That one is borderline, but with minimal cargo space and spartan living quarters, I can believe that has a crew of 6-8. Cramped, but not unlike a military submarine.

I actually really like the punishing one model, but admittedly for a slightly odd reason. It's one of the few non-starfighters that actually seems sized and proportioned property for what it is supposed to do/how many people it is supposed to carry. The YTs, Firespray, Decimator and even to an extent a Lambda all must use time lord technology to fit people and cargo alongside engines, hyper drives, power plants, shield generators, life support, guns, etc. don't get me started on the HWK. Really just the Punishing One and the Ghost really pull that off for me. Well, and the aggressor, but that's technically classified as a really big starfighter. At the same time, I don't buy that engine as one off a Neb-B.

Edit: I take back what I said about the Decimator. That one is borderline, but with minimal cargo space and spartan living quarters, I can believe that has a crew of 6-8. Cramped, but not unlike a military submarine.

If you start looking at stats you really need to consider conditions. While cargo room is usually expressed in tons that is a measure of weight or mass and certainly not a measure of volume. It takes a lot less space to haul a ton of gold than it would take to haul a ton of Aluminum or a ton of packaging peanuts.

When it comes to living conditions who has ever said that living onboard a ship, especially a combat ship, is going to be nice and comfortable. Have a little space for sanitation and somewhere to provide nutrition and sleeping may happen just about anywhere. A submarine is probably a great example of what to expect onboard many ships and I don't know that moving to surface ships is going to offer a huge increase in available space.

I actually really like the punishing one model, but admittedly for a slightly odd reason. It's one of the few non-starfighters that actually seems sized and proportioned property for what it is supposed to do/how many people it is supposed to carry. The YTs, Firespray, Decimator and even to an extent a Lambda all must use time lord technology to fit people and cargo alongside engines, hyper drives, power plants, shield generators, life support, guns, etc. don't get me started on the HWK. Really just the Punishing One and the Ghost really pull that off for me. Well, and the aggressor, but that's technically classified as a really big starfighter. At the same time, I don't buy that engine as one off a Neb-B.

Edit: I take back what I said about the Decimator. That one is borderline, but with minimal cargo space and spartan living quarters, I can believe that has a crew of 6-8. Cramped, but not unlike a military submarine.

The Ghost has all kinds of room!

The YTs, Firespray, Decimator and even to an extent a Lambda all must use time lord technology to fit people and cargo alongside engines, hyper drives, power plants, shield generators, life support, guns, etc.

Nah, they don't need to be like the TARDIS ^^

http://s1172.photobucket.com/user/KommissarJH/library/?sort=3&page=1

Jack Sutter - ‎X-Wing Miniatures Mods and Repaints (Armada and IA too) - March 26

"I removed the stock gun and added turrets from a Decimator to give the craft a better field of fire. The containers are N scale 20 foot shipping containers."

I prefer the original turret, but as soon as I learn to magnet, this is on my to-do list.

This is fantastic, and as I am the OP, think it fixes the look of the ship. Can you post the link to the origional modification? I'd like to ask Jack Sutter where he got the cargo containers so I can copy it.

Jack Sutter - ‎X-Wing Miniatures Mods and Repaints (Armada and IA too) - March 26

"I removed the stock gun and added turrets from a Decimator to give the craft a better field of fire. The containers are N scale 20 foot shipping containers."

I prefer the original turret, but as soon as I learn to magnet, this is on my to-do list.

This is fantastic, and as I am the OP, think it fixes the look of the ship. Can you post the link to the origional modification? I'd like to ask Jack Sutter where he got the cargo containers so I can copy it.

One of these should work... I hope.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1536099843345877/permalink/1698499563772570/

https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=jack sutter retouched jumpmaster

Jack Sutter - ‎X-Wing Miniatures Mods and Repaints (Armada and IA too) - March 26

"I removed the stock gun and added turrets from a Decimator to give the craft a better field of fire. The containers are N scale 20 foot shipping containers."

I prefer the original turret, but as soon as I learn to magnet, this is on my to-do list.

This is fantastic, and as I am the OP, think it fixes the look of the ship. Can you post the link to the origional modification? I'd like to ask Jack Sutter where he got the cargo containers so I can copy it.

If they are just N scale shipping containers, than pretty much *any* model or hobby shop should have them. That's one of the standard sizes of model train kits.

That also opens up a lot of other possibilities if you want to do the cargo haul "in line" - different types of containers, including fuel containers, etc.

They may even have more futuristic looking streamlined containers (depending on what the shop is carrying) that could fit the look a bit better...

Like I said, Grand Designs. How many times have the windows ever fit the house on that show? It's literally part of the drinking game for it.

I'd say the Falcon is a good bit more symmetrical except for the cockpit location. I've even heard a fairly decent reason for that; being all the way over to the one side it makes visibility on that side much better so docking maneuvers on that side will work better. On the Jumpmaster it's not over far enough to make that reasoning work and then it lacks symmetry in pretty much every way.

The reason for the offset cockpit is actually more mundane. Originally the model was going to land horizontally, but fly vertically. This would result in the cockpit being up top, and the turrets firing sideways. The cockpit would rotate to match orientation. The idea to have it horizontal in flight was down to Lucas thinking it simply looked better. They decided to leave the cockpit as is because the redesign to centralise it would have added time to the shoot they didn't have, since that would have been the third redesign of the model (the CR90 was the original Falcon, believe it or not).

I've never understood this idea of ships flying in a certain orientation - it's space, there is no orientation!

Jack Sutter - ‎X-Wing Miniatures Mods and Repaints (Armada and IA too) - March 26

"I removed the stock gun and added turrets from a Decimator to give the craft a better field of fire. The containers are N scale 20 foot shipping containers."

I prefer the original turret, but as soon as I learn to magnet, this is on my to-do list.

I thought the jumpmaster was supposed to have been designed as a scout ship, not a freighter.

Like I said, Grand Designs. How many times have the windows ever fit the house on that show? It's literally part of the drinking game for it.

I'd say the Falcon is a good bit more symmetrical except for the cockpit location. I've even heard a fairly decent reason for that; being all the way over to the one side it makes visibility on that side much better so docking maneuvers on that side will work better. On the Jumpmaster it's not over far enough to make that reasoning work and then it lacks symmetry in pretty much every way.

The reason for the offset cockpit is actually more mundane. Originally the model was going to land horizontally, but fly vertically. This would result in the cockpit being up top, and the turrets firing sideways. The cockpit would rotate to match orientation. The idea to have it horizontal in flight was down to Lucas thinking it simply looked better. They decided to leave the cockpit as is because the redesign to centralise it would have added time to the shoot they didn't have, since that would have been the third redesign of the model (the CR90 was the original Falcon, believe it or not).

I've never understood this idea of ships flying in a certain orientation - it's space, there is no orientation!

In a movie there is, though, because it looks better. Especially in Star Wars space that follows its own logic (see WW1 dogfighting).