# 22 inch Space: 1999 Eagle



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

This is going to take a while....


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Yup, but you have to build it now. You can't get it all back in the box!


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

I did, but I had to take each bag out and put it face down on the table in order. Then I put it all back. I wonder how much effort is put into designing the box and packaging to just fit...?


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

It does seem pretty easy to get the Eagle kit back in the box, I couldn't do that with the Batmobile kit, that box needs to be about an inch larger, it was bulging a bit before I opened it...

I'll probably start on the Eagle this weekend.


----------



## bigjimslade (Oct 9, 2005)

Does it include the Revel Gemini figures as pilots, like they had on the show?


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

bigjimslade said:


> Does it include the Revel Gemini figures as pilots, like they had on the show?


Yeah, the figures do look like the Revell Gemini ones, only difference looks like a square pack added to the chest. The helmets are certainly not Space: 1999, and there's the storage pockets on the legs:


----------



## GordonMitchell (Feb 12, 2009)

An exact copy of the Mercury/Gemini astronaut figure originally used in the studio models would probably have had Revell put a CAD order on R2 hence the new addition to the chest

Gordon M


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

GordonMitchell said:


> An exact copy of the Mercury/Gemini astronaut figure originally used in the studio models would probably have had Revell put a CAD order on R2 hence the new addition to the chest
> 
> Gordon M


It could well be, but I think it was more in line with trying to do a simple tooling mod to make them look a bit more 1999-ish. There's that huge debate over should the kit be an attempt to copy the 44" filming miniature or be more an attempt to represent the Eagle as a 'real' vehicle with 'correct' Alpha Moonbase astronaut pilots. 

Lordy that's a soft looking figure. Just as well you can barely see it in the kit.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Got the interior of the cockpit done:


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Nice Start!


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Putting the front pod together you realize that door is impossible, the top 1/3 of the passageway we see in the show would go through the curved back shell of the pod. 

Now to sand the seams, looks like they should disappear with minimal work, fingers crossed.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

MartyS said:


> Putting the front pod together you realize that door is impossible, the top 1/3 of the passageway we see in the show would go through the curved back shell of the pod.
> 
> Now to sand the seams, looks like they should disappear with minimal work, fingers crossed.


Oh yeah. Interior scale Vs. exterior scale is a BIG issue with the Eagle. It would be solvable if not for those Gemini astronaut figures in the 44" miniature. I don't think we even SEE them in the show itself, I believe they were just used as a 'key' to make the use of live action footage synch better.

The passenger pod is even worse (in the scale dilemma).


----------



## f1steph (Jan 9, 2003)

Well you backwall and pilots are way to nice then the original crappy Gemini astronauts and backwall. Here's what the original looked like:

Beware: you might get sink when you'll see this:

https://goo.gl/photos/vXhQdgp96DV45H2X7

You did a nice job with your backwall and astronauts.... any plans to light the cockpit?


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Yeah, props to R2 for taking the 'risk' of actually sculpting detail on the back wall instead of going with the original choice of flat and plain and a decal. Of course that is not at all true to the 44" filming miniature. boo hoo.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Fist coat of white on, when putting the shell together of course a drop of glue somehow landed on the inside of one of the windows... :crying:

Looks like I'll have to fill in the edge of the windows with some micro crystal clear.













f1steph said:


> https://goo.gl/photos/vXhQdgp96DV45H2X7
> 
> You did a nice job with your backwall and astronauts.... any plans to light the cockpit?


Wow, that is minimal... Old school not worried about HD type of model...

No, I am not doing any lighting.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Mostly done with the front pod, can't remember if there was a name for it on the show...


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

In modelling circles it's often called the beak, but I think command module works also.


----------



## RetiredMSgt1701 (Nov 17, 2015)

The Command Module "Beak" look fantastic, Marty!

Outstanding work!

Steve (One of Many, Master of None!)


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

*Question for those that have built this already.*

Question for anyone that has built this model: Is the "backbone" structure strong enough without the passenger module?

I noticed in the instructions it says to remove some pins from that module if you intend to remove it later, I'm just wondering if that weakens the model at all? I was thinking I'd like to have the option to remove it if I ever get around to 3D printing other modules.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

My gut feeling is that it might be a little delicate without the passenger module. I'm sure it's fine for static display (esp. if you play with the landing gear springs to 'soften' them a bit) but I wouldn't take a chance on flying it about cis-lunar (that is, around the room) space sans pod. Crashing is RIGHT OUT. 

I'm sure SOMEONE out there has carefully and precisely duplicated the plastic spine parts in brass tubing and sheet and have a very very sturdy Eagle.


----------



## The_Engineer (Dec 8, 2012)

I'm not sure about the R2 model kit, however the Product Enterprise 22" model had the passenger pod permanently attached. I have their 12" ones and after I bought one of them, I was curious how strong the spine was without the pod in place. I was able to get the spine to slightly twist abit. The 22" Eagle models are more fragile and most (I think) have permanently glued the passenger pod into place. A few have it detachable but have not posted how strong it is without the pod in place. The best option might be to replace the spine and 'cages' with brass for extra strength if you want to detach the pod and have it off for long periods of time (as well as going whoosh). If you want to very quickly swap the pod modules out and have one in place all of the time, then staying with the kit's plastic spine should be fine.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Guess I'll see when I get it all together how I feel about making the passenger pod removable. I was thinking it wouldn't be too hard to 3D print the nuclear waste cargo platform, but probably would add extra support along the top that isn't there in the filming model.

At least 7 hours of fitting and gluing and I have a bunch of sub assemblies done, doesn't seem like much for that amount of time, and lots of cleaning up still do to on them before I start painting...

It did take a lot of extra time dry fitting those cage parts together so when I glued them the angles would be correct. Basically held them together with rubber bands and it wasn't easy keeping them from flying apart while assembling them, but I got good angles and the glue joints look good.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

I know it's been pointed out by others but I've got to post a picture of the lunar landers used as greeblies...










Got the front and rear cages almost done, I'll add another coat of white after the landing pods are glued on.

Here's the landing pods dry fit:


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Getting the engine mixing chambers together was an adventure...


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

#%@^*&&$%#$%^ Noticed I messed up the landing gear pods, I double checked them and then just went ahead and grabbed the wrong ones when gluing....

Was easier to fix than I thought it would be, there are several extras of those dome shaped things on the sprues, gluing one on was pretty easy, and the extra one came off really cleanly with a razor blade, some sanding and painting and you have to look really close to see the fixes...


----------



## escape068 (Jan 26, 2016)

Nice work it's coming along great.................Can't wait to see it finished!!

I will be building the MPC825 kit soon


*Does anybody know the difference between this kit MPC825 and the MPC874 Special edition besides the 3 I listed?
*
*Any new retooling on the MPC874 compared to the MPC825?

*SPECIAL EDITION INCLUDES:

•EXCLUSIVE 18” x 24” Poster featuring artwork from the 22” Eagle packaging!

•AUTOGRAPHED mini-print personally signed by Eagle designer Brian Johnson IN EVERY KIT!

•ALL NEW 9 1/2” x 13”decal sheet by CARTOGRAF featuring surface weathering panels and more!


*There is also the MPC838 Cargo Pod Edition*

*Does anybody know if the cargo pod from the MPC838 kit will fit on the MPC825 kit?*

Thanks!!


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Decided to go with the red and black stripes on the backbone.
I've seen some pictures with pale blue rectangles along with the grey ones on the passenger pod, sort of liked that look, not sure I'll attempt it.

Everything glued up and almost done painting so far (passenger pod is not glued to the backbone):


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

She is ready for her final coat of white:

This thing is huge.... :grin2:


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Still not sure what colors to use on the landing pads...

Sanding the sprue tabs off these little guys was a challenge:










Starting to look like an eagle:


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

I know this is a weird thought: I always thought the Eagle was white from what I saw on TV. Why do I feel slightly disappointed that it IS ALL WHITE? I was hoping for some subtle coloring, metallics on the engine assemblies, not just the engine bells. 

I don't know. Just feel like something more is needed. 

Your build, however, is wonderful. Although, I did buy the aluminum accessories, I also bought Extreme Metal Polished Aluminum to experiment with for the plastic engine bells.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

charonjr said:


> I know this is a weird thought: I always thought the Eagle was white from what I saw on TV. Why do I feel slightly disappointed that it IS ALL WHITE? I was hoping for some subtle coloring, metallics on the engine assemblies, not just the engine bells.
> 
> I don't know. Just feel like something more is needed.
> 
> Your build, however, is wonderful. Although, I did buy the aluminum accessories, I also bought Extreme Metal Polished Aluminum to experiment with for the plastic engine bells.


Well, he's not done yet. I'm assuming there's going to be some weathering and maybe some shading, but not to the extent many other take it.

'factory fresh' would be an interesting paint variation.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Yeah, I know it's a bit white, this paint really reflects the camera flash, it's not that bright white to the naked eye, but it is still too white. Not sure how I'm going to deal with that. I'm not real good at weathering.

I had bought several different silvers for the engine bells, one of them was more titanium than silver, not good for the engines but I think it will do well for the landing gear with a very thin coat of grey over it.

Not sure if I want to make the main engine bells look discolored from heat, thought about putting them on a drill to spin them while spraying some very thin black. Guess I could try it, can always repaint them silver again if it doesn't look good.

Got all the smaller thrusters attached as well as the final black areas painted:

(this picture is closer to what it looks like to the naked eye)


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Ya know, it's interesting how more sleek the Eagle looks with the landing gear 'retracted' (or in actuality, not attached). I still believe that at one point it was thought to pull in the legs for atmosphere flight but for some unknown reason it was decided to just let it all hang out.

Which does make its own sense as it makes the craft more visually interesting and complex, also echoing the LEM as well as the 2001 Moonbus.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

*Eagle landing gear full retraction.*



Steve H said:


> I still believe that at one point it was thought to pull in the legs for atmosphere flight but for some unknown reason it was decided to just let it all hang out.


It's pretty obvious it was designed with retraction in mind:



















Since the eagle did go into atmospheres it makes sense, the drag on those landing pads would tear them off at high speed.

Going to try using superglue instead of putty to fill in the very slight landing gear seems, first time trying that.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Steve H said:


> Which does make its own sense as it makes the craft more visually interesting and complex, also echoing the LEM as well as the 2001 Moonbus.


Looking at my pictures I can understand why they didn't design the gear for retraction, all the hardware for the pads would be hidden inside the wood block, so the landing gear would be boring looking when they did closeups of landing.

A scissor lift type of retraction would look cool and work for both landing and flight, but building a bunch of those would have been a lot of work. Rod and spring with some bits tacked on is way more cost effective than beams and rods and sliders and turnbuckle screws. Well, maybe no screws, there would have just been 2 modes, so they could have built it with a spring for extended and get the nice bounce during landing, then take out the spring and push the pad in for flight.


----------



## SUNGOD (Jan 20, 2006)

charonjr said:


> I know this is a weird thought: I always thought the Eagle was white from what I saw on TV. Why do I feel slightly disappointed that it IS ALL WHITE? I was hoping for some subtle coloring, metallics on the engine assemblies, not just the engine bells.
> 
> I don't know. Just feel like something more is needed.
> 
> Your build, however, is wonderful. Although, I did buy the aluminum accessories, I also bought Extreme Metal Polished Aluminum to experiment with for the plastic engine bells.





I can't remember exactly as I haven't watched it for a while but I think the Eagles started out as all white but then later more grey panels etc were added (which I think looks better).


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

MartyS said:


> Looking at my pictures I can understand why they didn't design the gear for retraction, all the hardware for the pads would be hidden inside the wood block, so the landing gear would be boring looking when they did closeups of landing.
> 
> A scissor lift type of retraction would look cool and work for both landing and flight, but building a bunch of those would have been a lot of work. Rod and spring with some bits tacked on is way more cost effective than beams and rods and sliders and turnbuckle screws. Well, maybe no screws, there would have just been 2 modes, so they could have built it with a spring for extended and get the nice bounce during landing, then take out the spring and push the pad in for flight.


Ah, you see, you're not thinking like Anderson's effects people. 

Landing gear retraction:there's a plug in the gear pod, extended gear and retracted footpad as separate units. Plug either in as needed for shot. done. 

If it was NECESSARY to show an actual retraction (or deploy) sequence they would resort to the overscale close-up specialty model (which, of course would have detailing and paint apps somewhat inconsistent with the 44" filming miniature). This specialty miniature would also be used for closeups of a landing gear pad crushing something or tripping a mine and exploding and so on.

See? Easy as can be. 

But seriously, I do wonder about the change of mind. Maybe it was thought swapping out retracted and extended gear would hamper the reuse of effects shots. They seemed to have a hard enough time with something as obvious as the 'science' pod after all.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Sure, swapable modules would be the easy way to go. But I was thinking more of something that would be realistic, something that would look like it really worked, the gear as designed could not retract all the way.


I'm trying to think if they ever showed a eagle flying through the atmosphere of a planet? Plenty of coming in for a landing or taking off or low circling, but I don't remember any of one simply flying around at altitude. So I guess they never really had a need to show the gear retracted.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Got one landing gear set done for color testing, really tempted to leave it like this, next step was going to be a light coat of grey over the metallic color.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Atmospheric flight, I remember Alan enjoying flying while the moon was given a temporary atmosphere in "The Last Sunset". Another, is "All That Glisters". That first time I saw a closeup of the bottom of the Science Pod, which had smaller versions of the main landing pads. Apparently, from a photo, the Cargo Winch Pod has those same smaller pads. Not the ones we normally see on the Transport(?) Pods they use.

In "The Missing Link", Koenig is injured and they have to use a magnetic winch to lift the Command Module off the crashed Eagle to take him to Alpha. There is a good shot of the size they chose to represent the cage door, once the CM is lifted out of the way.

Another thing I noticed is that in Series 1, there is only one sliding door between the Command Module and the corridor it is connected to. Series 2, they have two sliding doors.

I'd post pictures, but this site won't let me upload them. I have to do a song and dance through Photobucket, and I am too tired to do that now.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

charonjr said:


> Another thing I noticed is that in Series 1, there is only one sliding door between the Command Module and the corridor it is connected to. Series 2, they have two sliding doors.


Ah, the doors on the passageways inside the cages, there's no where for them to slide to, the boxes that have all the equipment on them are the same size as the doors. And it's not like they could slide into space, there are tubes for the cages in the way outside the boxes. Must be some kind of super fast 3D printer that takes apart and rebuilds the doors as they slide open or closed, yeah, that's it....:grin2:


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Getting closer to a lander gear paint scheme I like, now have to decide between leaving the darker metal color as is or coating it with a very thin coat of dark gray, or maybe just a hint of black.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Did you weaken or modify the springs to get a better 'squash' from them when the kit sits on the shelf? I understand they're a bit stiff for the proper look.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Steve H said:


> Did you weaken or modify the springs to get a better 'squash' from them when the kit sits on the shelf? I understand they're a bit stiff for the proper look.


I did notice they are very stiff. Just did a dry fit and the ship does ride a bit high.

I guess heating them would be OK for this application, it weakens them but also makes them more brittle. It's not like these will be getting much of a workout sitting on a shelf....

I did a very dilute thin coat of black and think this is it for the color scheme, camera makes it look more black, it's still metallic looking to the naked eye:


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

One thing that was suggested way back when was to use some wire cutters and just snip out a coil or two. That way you get the 'squash' without endangering a weakened spring shattering or otherwise malfunctioning.

It's a thought.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Yes, the only problem with that is the springs are shorter and will not push the rods out, but I guess gravity can take care of that when holding the model, don't really need to ever have it upside down except to take some photos to make it look like it's flying overhead...


----------



## krlee (Oct 23, 2016)

MartyS said:


> Getting closer to a lander gear paint scheme I like, now have to decide between leaving the darker metal color as is or coating it with a very thin coat of dark gray, or maybe just a hint of black.


Here is what I did on my landing gear:


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Had to take several turns off the springs, also stretched and compressed them with pliers to weaken them a little, still a bit too strong but looks about right sitting on the pads.

Think I'm done with painting, only other model I've ever tried to do weathering on was the Bandai falcon and I wasn't really satisfied with how that came out, not sure what I could use to practice on. Don't want to mess up 3 weeks of work...

Anyway, here's the final color scheme:


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

I like! Very nice, clean work!


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

MartyS said:


> Ah, the doors on the passageways inside the cages, there's no where for them to slide to, the boxes that have all the equipment on them are the same size as the doors. And it's not like they could slide into space, there are tubes for the cages in the way outside the boxes. Must be some kind of super fast 3D printer that takes apart and rebuilds the doors as they slide open or closed, yeah, that's it....:grin2:


Another choice is multidimensional TARDIS technology!


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

The decals for this thing are hilarious, there is everything, including the kitchen sink... :grin2:

I guess someone on the design team had a bunch of dry transfers sheets for making bathroom blueprints. There's something that I doubt exists any more.

Looking at various pictures the markings seem to be pretty random between filming models, so I guess you can't go wrong putting them on...

First few on:


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Decals are done with a satin clearcoat over them, seems those bathroom fixture drawing were use like greeblies on the filming models, so I added a few extras to my Eagle.

Maybe at some point in the future when I get more practice at weathering I'll add some dirt to it, but for now it's going to stay factory fresh.

Bunch of picts:


----------



## porschespyder83 (Jul 7, 2017)

so much passion put into this. Great job


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Just want to say what a beautiful, clean build this is. We get so used to weathering and panel lining and aztec-ing and pre-shading and all, and really one doesn't have to always do that. 

Factory fresh. Ready to crash or otherwise be blown up by the weekly Mysterious Unknown Force.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

I did preshade all the stuff inside the cages, it just doesn't show up all that well with the tubing in the way and causing shadows, you can sort of see the greeblies are darker than the rest of the model.

The panels/aztecking were black painted on the raw plastic, I wanted them to be subtle by the time all the layers of white went on and they came out pretty much the way I wanted, with some fainter with more white on top of them.


----------



## Scifitodd (Jan 14, 2014)

MartyS said:


> Decals are done with a satin clearcoat over them, seems those bathroom fixture drawing were use like greeblies on the filming models, so I added a few extras to my Eagle.
> 
> Maybe at some point in the future when I get more practice at weathering I'll add some dirt to it, but for now it's going to stay factory fresh.
> 
> Bunch of picts:


Fantastic looking eagle Marty, she's a beauty!


----------



## Dr. Brad (Oct 5, 1999)

Great job on this - It almost makes me want to cough up the dough for one!


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Dr. Brad said:


> Great job on this - It almost makes me want to cough up the dough for one!


Ditto me too 

How well does it assemble? I mean can a guy just glue the framework together on an average surface or does it require exact perfectly level and smooth and flat steel industrial assembly tables and such?


----------



## bigjimslade (Oct 9, 2005)

Info on the studio model:


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Steve H said:


> Ditto me too
> How well does it assemble? I mean can a guy just glue the framework together on an average surface or does it require exact perfectly level and smooth and flat steel industrial assembly tables and such?


The tubing work does take a lot of patience, depending on how good you want it to look I guess, I didn't follow the instructions very closely for some of it.

For the spine I dry fit the entire thing with rubber bands holding it together and then use liquid glue on the joints, everything squeezed together nicely making it look solid without the need to putty at all. But it took a lot of attempts to get the dry fit parts to stay together. 

If I were doing it again I would not follow the directions for the end cages. I think it would be easier to wait until the boxes are done, put the top and bottom tubing parts on and then do the side angle parts. The instructions want you to use an end piece as a guide to glue the angles first, don't know why they do it that way. I dry fit the cages with rubber bands for that step to get the angle parts correct but it would have been easier to add those parts after the center parts were attached to the boxes.

The engine cages were a bear to dry fit and glue, took about 10 tries to get them stable since there are a lot of parts the same length and when you pop one in the entire thing can fall apart.

Amazingly once you do get all the parts dry fit with rubber bands around them all these assemblies are pretty darn stable, so you can hold them and move them around to get the glue into the joints.

I don't think I used a flat surface at all, you use parts of the model to line stuff up, you just have to remember not to glue to those parts... :wink2:


----------



## KUROK (Feb 2, 2004)

Nice looking model! 
Great work!


----------



## lunadude (Oct 21, 2006)

KUROK said:


> Nice looking model!
> Great work!


Agreed! Clean build.


----------



## CapnTightpants (Aug 8, 2017)

I built 3 of these over the course of a year and a half; two for myself and one commission job. Eagle with Winch Module coming soon.
Eagle on the left is the first I built and meant to represent 44" Eagle #1 early in the first season with the only modifications being the addition of Steve Coates' Command Module window frames and cockpit lighting. Eagle on the right is meant to represent 44"Eagle #1 about halfway through the first season. In addition to the window frames and cockpit lighting, it's tricked out with both aluminum accessory sets and a set of custom aluminum Command Module sensor dishes.


----------



## CapnTightpants (Aug 8, 2017)

Steve H said:


> Just want to say what a beautiful, clean build this is. We get so used to weathering and panel lining and aztec-ing and pre-shading and all, and really one doesn't have to always do that.
> 
> Factory fresh. Ready to crash or otherwise be blown up by the weekly Mysterious Unknown Force.


More like by Alan Carter's flying skills.


----------



## f1steph (Jan 9, 2003)

CapnTightpants said:


> More like by Alan Carter's flying skills.


Hihihi, that's a good one..... Carter's pilot skills weren't the best in the fleet, actually, he was best known for his bad temper and his freaking habit to question orders coming from the top......


----------

