# R2 "tomorrow is Yesterday" F-104/Enterprise



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Well it came.










The F-104 kit is the old Lindberg 1/48 kit. R2 updates the decals to match the show aircraft.










Oddly there is no pilot figure included in the kit. 

I've started on the kit. Here are the Enterprise sub-assemblies.










Lots of seems clean up, bit so far no filler needed.

The F-104 is an old kit from the '60s or '70s. Its all raised details and the fit is what you 
get from an old kit like this. The cockpit and gear wells are sparse on details. The gearwells
don't really matter as I'm going for an inflight aircraft.

Sadly there is no sky background to mount the ships to for a forced perspective display.
I thought that R2 would include one. It won't be hard to make, but I had hoped for it.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

I can't stop laughing, that Enterprise reminds me so much of the Gamescience game miniature.

But wait. Does it have the three 'divots' on the underside of the saucer? What's up with that?!

What little research I've done on the Lindberg F-104 leads me to believe that as misshapen as it appears to be it's actually got the right shape for the XF-104 (I think Lindberg modified the intakes to more like 'factory' F-104 standards later) when we all know that the proper aircraft should be a F-104C.

blah blah. Full marks for the idea, one star for execution and that is mostly, IMHO, the decal sheet which should work nicely with the proper plane. 

Yeah, it needed a stand and a backdrop to properly execute the 'forced perspective diorama' use.


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

How big is the Enterprise? I think the best part of this kit is the box art. Beautiful illustration!


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

So that's the Enterprise from the old 3-ship snap kit right? The one with the pylon vents on the outer sides of the pylons? I'd find a better F-104 kit to put the decals onto, even the old Monogram kit would do.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

robn1 said:


> So that's the Enterprise from the old 3-ship snap kit right? The one with the pylon vents on the outer sides of the pylons? I'd find a better F-104 kit to put the decals onto, even the old Monogram kit would do.


Someone knows better but I think they modded the tooling for that to make the nacelle pylons smooth. I see decals for the vents on the sheet. 

So that's better. Still confused by the divots on the saucer. I guess AMT must have done that way back when so it looked like the other, only existing kit of the Enterprise.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

The Enterprise is about 2 1/2 inches long. It's 1/2500 scale.

The one from the 3 ship set is about 5 inches long I think.

The shape of the F-104 is not that bad. It looks like a C to me.
The vertical stab is not a G model tail.
It's not short like the XF-104


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Mach, you have the kit and know better, so you're probably right. I was going off pics of the F-104 Lindberg has been selling (and seen on the R2 site) where the pic of the kit had that odd short/chubby look to the nose/cockpit area. The pics you've posted look NOTHING like that kit.

So, good news, the F-104 isn't quite the trash fire we all thought!


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Yah, it is definitely is not a XF-104. It does look a bit flat in the last half of the fuselage. 

The Enterprise is about 4-5 inches long. Not the 2.5 I posted.
It looks the B/C deck is the same as the old AMT 1/650 Enterprise. 
It has the 3 dimples under the saucer.

Here is the cockpit installed


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

And the Enterprise is built.


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

Yeah that's the old kit, though they did fix the vents and removed the saucer grids.


----------



## MartyS (Mar 11, 2014)

Did you sand off the raised window frames on the secondary hull or did they retool those parts to remove them? I guess they had to retool if there is now a hole for the stand. If those huge window frames are gone that is an improvement for the 1:2500 big E model.

Do the new decals include the landing gear triangles? I had to make my own when I build one of those 1:2500 kits. There were a few others missing that I had to make myself but I can't remember which ones.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

On the decal sheet, please note that there are numbers for three different planes.

In the episode, the stock shots that were used, were made up of shots from three different planes.
So you can model which ever shot you like the most.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

I am waiting for someone to build the plane partially crushed by the tractor beam- the pilot is not included since he was already beamed out.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Richard Baker said:


> I am waiting for someone to build the plane partially crushed by the tractor beam- the pilot is not included since he was already beamed out.


I have a friend doing exactly that, altho I believe he's using a better kit of the F-104, so maybe that doesn't count.


----------



## bigjimslade (Oct 9, 2005)

For comparison here's a budget F-104 kit without "Star Trek."

Monogram 1/48 F-104C Starfighter


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I have a couple of Hasegawa 1/48 F-104's. I could co-opt one for this build but I'm going to build the one that came with the kit. 

I have 3 aircraft decal numbers.

I could only find the Monagram kit on ebay. The cheapest was one was around $25 plus shipping.

No new photos but I got a couple of coats of grey primer on the fuselage and white primer on the wings.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

I picked up the Hasegawa F-104C today at Piper Hobby, which sadly is liquidating due to the passing of the owner. Anyhoo, the decals that come with the (insanely detailed) kit are not the proper livery for the real plane shown in the episode, so I spent the whole night looking for aftermarket ones (and perusing accessories). And I tripped over some fascinating info about the real plane:

It turns out it was in Da Nang in 1965 and crashed in 1967 ten days before the episode aired, in Thailand. Pilot survived, plane was a write-off (eerie case of life imitating art).

The plane's serial number was 57-0914 (shown as 70914 on the tail). At least in Da Nang, the FG numbers were removed from the fuselage on the F-104s.

Here's the accident report online:
ASN Aircraft accident 16-JAN-1967 Lockheed F-104C Starfighter 57-0914

Here's a couple of pages showing the aircraft at Da Nang in '65, including 57-0914, with loads of great general info about the F-104 (if you've got around $25k to blow, you can buy one):
Da Nang Aircraft part 1 - International F-104 Society International F-104 Society
Da Nang Aircraft part 2 - International F-104 Society International F-104 Society

It looks like I'm going to buy the AMT kit just for the stupid decals. It's actually slightly cheaper than buying the Vietnam-era decals plus a set of 1/48 stencils just to get the damn 4 for the serial number. And doing my own is a non-starter -- doesn't save me any money, and then there's my time... :|


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

asalaw said:


> ...Piper Hobby, which sadly is liquidating due to the passing of the owner...


That's sad. And it was the last real hobby shop I know of in the area.


----------



## tardis1916 (Mar 24, 2004)

robn1 said:


> That's sad. And it was the last real hobby shop I know of in the area.



From what I have been lead to believe, the sale is in place so that the owners wife can clear out the 10k + models that are in her house. After the house is cleared out, they'll make a decision on whether they'll continue operating after that.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

tardis1916 said:


> From what I have been lead to believe, the sale is in place so that the owners wife can clear out the 10k + models that are in her house. After the house is cleared out, they'll make a decision on whether they'll continue operating after that.


Bill's widow was there yesterday. When she was ringing me up, she said they're closing down. The lease is up at the end of March, and they'll remain open through 3/18 to clear out inventory, but they've been barely breaking even for years. She kept the place open because she wanted Bill to have something to be passionate about, but now that he's gone, that's no longer an option. Very, very sad. :crying:


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

asalaw said:


> I picked up the Hasegawa F-104C today at Piper Hobby, which sadly is liquidating due to the passing of the owner. Anyhoo, the decals that come with the (insanely detailed) kit are not the proper livery for the real plane shown in the episode, so I spent the whole night looking for aftermarket ones (and perusing accessories). And I tripped over some fascinating info about the real plane:
> 
> It turns out it was in Da Nang in 1965 and crashed in 1967 ten days before the episode aired, in Thailand. Pilot survived, plane was a write-off (eerie case of life imitating art).
> 
> ...



Really nice research here! Thanks!

My Hasegawa -104 is crazy detailed, a much nicer kit than the old lindberg kit. 

I'll build both because hey, it's a model and thats what I do.

Off point a bit, I have a few of the Hasegawa kits because I'm going to convert one to the NF-104.
The kit I had is the F-104G so I had to order a C model. That kit is just as nice as the G.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

mach7 said:


> Really nice research here! Thanks!
> 
> My Hasegawa -104 is crazy detailed, a much nicer kit than the old lindberg kit.
> 
> ...


Thanks -- just fell over it, really.

Yeah, the Hasegawa is incredible. I was just floored when I went through it.

Just went to my other LHS (Hobby Works) and ordered the AMT kit. With my $10 coupon, it'll come to $19, which is way better than anywhere online. Just gonna use the decals, plus the fuselage as a test bed for the bare metal finish. I have the Testors buffing metalizers on hand, and if they suck, I'll try the Alclad II. I may use the tiny Enterprise for... I dunno... chew toy? 

Maybe I'll do a bare metal finish and put it on a chain. Whatever.

I just saw an F-104-G on display at the LHS with Bavarian livery. The guy's selling it for over $300. Gorgeous job, it's the Hasegawa with PE parts (most likely Eduard). I was surprised to see it had an arresting hook. Naval variant? Do the Germans even have carriers?


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

This just in! National Museum of the Air Force has one nearly identical to the TIY plane -- the serial number is only one digit off! And tons of high-res photos, which of course are now on my hard drive. Make sure you have smelling salts if you look at the virtual tour of the cockpit. 

Lockheed F-104C Starfighter > National Museum of the US Air Force? > Display


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Nice reference photos!

All F-104s have arresting hooks, For emergency stopping.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

mach7 said:


> Nice reference photos!
> 
> All F-104s have arresting hooks, For emergency stopping.


Yeah, it comes in pretty hot. Those tiny wings don't give it a lot of margin.


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

Before you get too involved in testing metal finishes (and piss on Metalizer anyway :grin2 watch the three top vids here.



asalaw said:


> Thanks -- just fell over it, really.
> 
> Yeah, the Hasegawa is incredible. I was just floored when I went through it.
> 
> ...


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

OK, for some reason I'm suddenly hopelessly obsessed with the F-104C. ANY USAF Starfighter, not the ST episode one! I'm on the hunt for the Hobby Masters 1/72 diecast one since my modeling skills would not allow for any semi-exceptional plastic build. This one is good enough for me: Hobby Master HA1001 - F-104 Starfighter Diecast Model, #56-0891 "Really George", George Laven Jr.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Proper2 said:


> OK, for some reason I'm suddenly hopelessly obsessed with the F-104C. ANY USAF Starfighter, not the ST episode one! I'm on the hunt for the Hobby Masters 1/72 diecast one since my modeling skills would not allow for any semi-exceptional plastic build. This one has s good enough for me: Hobby Master HA1001 - F-104 Starfighter Diecast Model, #56-0891 "Really George", George Laven Jr.


The F-104 is a damn sexy beast. To my mind, it and the F-106 pretty much are the definition of Cold War Jets. Yes, there are plenty of aircraft fielded in that period but man, nothing, nothing says 'fast' and 'powerful' like those two planes, at least in my mind. 

The 104 has a sleekness to it. Pared down to the most essential parts-engine, pilot, just enough wing to keep it flying. 

It's a worthy subject to be in love with, or at least infatuated for a time.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

asalaw said:


> This just in! National Museum of the Air Force has one nearly identical to the TIY plane -- the serial number is only one digit off! And tons of high-res photos, which of course are now on my hard drive. Make sure you have smelling salts if you look at the virtual tour of the cockpit.


I saw that plane in person last summer. Did not take many photos of it. The lighting in there is pretty dim.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Just saw on their site, one of their photos is almost an exact dupe of mine. But, you can tell they used a wider lens. Here are a couple more.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

robn1 said:


> Before you get too involved in testing metal finishes (and piss on Metalizer anyway :grin2 watch the three top vids here.


I will not piss on my hobby bench. That's my cat's job, and she's union.  Will check out those vids though. Those Da Nang photos really have me excited about doing a simulated beat-up 6061 aluminum fuselage.



Proper2 said:


> OK, for some reason I'm suddenly hopelessly obsessed with the F-104C. ANY USAF Starfighter, not the ST episode one! I'm on the hunt for the Hobby Masters 1/72 diecast one since my modeling skills would not allow for any semi-exceptional plastic build. This one is good enough for me: Hobby Master HA1001 - F-104 Starfighter Diecast Model, #56-0891 "Really George", George Laven Jr.


I feel ya. At first I just tripped over that accident report, but every find has sucked me in deeper... :smile2:

Looks like the museum may have put a metallic silver lacquer over the bare aluminum parts, I would assume for preservation.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

robn1 said:


> Before you get too involved in testing metal finishes (and piss on Metalizer anyway :grin2 watch the three top vids here.


HOLY CRAP!!!!! :surprise:


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

asalaw said:


> Looks like the museum may have put a metallic silver lacquer over the bare aluminum parts, I would assume for preservation.


I was under the impression this was standard painting (silver lacquer over bare aluminum) starting sometime in the '60s.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

asalaw said:


> Looks like the museum may have put a metallic silver lacquer over the bare aluminum parts, I would assume for preservation.


Agreed.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

Steve H said:


> I was under the impression this was standard painting (silver lacquer over bare aluminum) starting sometime in the '60s.


That may be, I wouldn't know -- but both the TOS plane and the ones in Da Nang were bare aluminum, no question about it, and other than this museum plane, I haven't found any photos of this Tac Air Command livery scheme in anything other than bare metal. 

This is so far outside my wheelhouse it's on another fracking boat.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

asalaw said:


> That may be, I wouldn't know -- but both the TOS plane and the ones in Da Nang were bare aluminum, no question about it, and other than this museum plane, I haven't found any photos of this Tac Air Command livery scheme in anything other than bare metal.
> 
> This is so far outside my wheelhouse it's on another fracking boat.


*heh* I know. I run into the problem of the more I learn, the more I know I DON'T know. 

I don't have anything specific on the F-104 and I really need to try and remedy that, but taking a cue from the paint/color history of one of my favorite planes the B-36, it was originally bare metal (Aluminum/Magnesium). then it got silver lacquer with a white belly (underside wings and other bits) for 'nuclear explosion flash' protection. The silver/gray lacquer helped reduce maintenance time/costs because it didn't call for polishing after washing. Note how quickly a bare metal plane gets grimy looking in the field. Look up how the F-86 looked during the Korean war, it's shameful.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I've seen photos of US F-104s painted in SEA camo.

They were only over in theater a short time but I believe some of them got 
the camo treatment.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

mach7 said:


> I've seen photos of US F-104s painted in SEA camo.
> 
> They were only over in theater a short time but I believe some of them got
> the camo treatment.


I've seen that too, and airplane guys seem to like to do the F-104G that way. The one at the LHS was painted like that -- fantastic paint job.

EDIT -- wait, sea camo -- I was thinking of brown/OD green camo. Haven't seen sea camo yet.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

asalaw said:


> I've seen that too, and airplane guys seem to like to do the F-104G that way. The one at the LHS was painted like that -- fantastic paint job.
> 
> EDIT -- wait, sea camo -- I was thinking of brown/OD green camo. Haven't seen sea camo yet.


SEA= South East Asia.

AKA Vietnam.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

Steve H said:


> SEA= South East Asia.
> 
> AKA Vietnam.


Like I said, another frakkin' boat. 

In that case, I've seen lots. Haven't looked closely to see if it's the C or G (from captions, I couldn't tell you by looking except that I know the A has no refueling boom), but I've seen lots. I ignore them because I'm looking for the bare metal TAC look.

Just ordered one of the Eduard PE sets, the one with the belts, ejector seat, avionics, etc. Looks like the best place to find that stuff is fleabay.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

asalaw said:


> Like I said, another frakkin' boat.
> 
> In that case, I've seen lots. Haven't looked closely to see if it's the C or G (from captions, I couldn't tell you by looking except that I know the A has no refueling boom), but I've seen lots. I ignore them because I'm looking for the bare metal TAC look.
> 
> Just ordered one of the Eduard PE sets, the one with the belts, ejector seat, avionics, etc. Looks like the best place to find that stuff is fleabay.


I'm guessing the F-104s with camo were likely G models. Dang I really need to get a book on this plane if I keep talking about it 

It seems so strange to think of a jet fighter that isn't designed for in-flight refueling. What I recall, that big refueling probe on the port side was not always fitted to the -C, only attached if the plane had to perform an extended mission like flying cross country or overseas. I seem to have memories that the -G had a retractable probe on the starboard side but I may be thinking of another plane. 

*sigh* I think Amazon is gonna get some money from me soon. I hate not knowing.


----------



## MHaz (Aug 18, 1999)

asalaw said:


> Like I said, another frakkin' boat.
> 
> In that case, I've seen lots. Haven't looked closely to see if it's the C or G (from captions, I couldn't tell you by looking except that I know the A has no refueling boom), but I've seen lots. I ignore them because I'm looking for the bare metal TAC look.
> 
> Just ordered one of the Eduard PE sets, the one with the belts, ejector seat, avionics, etc. Looks like the best place to find that stuff is fleabay.


The F-104C got the SEA treatment, as well. Caracal Models makes a decal sheet for the -104 in Vietnam: Link

I know of at least 3 people who bought the kit just for the decals, then got the Hasegawa -104 to build, instead.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

MHaz said:


> The F-104C got the SEA treatment, as well. Caracal Models makes a decal sheet for the -104 in Vietnam: Link
> 
> I know of at least 3 people who bought the kit just for the decals, then got the Hasegawa -104 to build, instead.


That was the decal sheet I passed up because I'd still have to get the stencils for the numbers. Not surprised people are doing this -- someone should come out with a decal sheet for 57-0914. I wonder if CultTVman could move enough of them to make it worth somebody's while...


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Far as I know, no USAF 104s were _painted _silver. If it was silver, it was bare metal.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

John P said:


> Far as I know, no USAF 104s were _painted _silver. If it was silver, it was bare metal.


That makes a lot of sense -- my hunch is leaving the paint off was a weight-saving measure. The museum job is probably for preservation.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Yeah, from mid-WWII until Nam, since we were kicking everybody's butts, the Air Force decided there was no reason to hide any more. :lol:


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Well this sucks!

I was just looking over my Hasegawa Starfighter and I noticed that the center canopy is snapped in 2 down 
the centerline!

Being a clear part it would be impossible to repair.

I called Hasegawa's US office and they say they will get me a new one in 6-8 Weeks. If I need it sooner maybe I can 
borrow one from one of my F-104G kits. I'm sure the canopies are the same.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

Hah! Mine is cracked the same way. I'm going to try the Future fix before I call on Japan. 

It's an incredibly thin piece, so I'm kinda not surprised.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

asalaw said:


> Hah! Mine is cracked the same way. I'm going to try the Future fix before I call on Japan.
> 
> It's an incredibly thin piece, so I'm kinda not surprised.


Try calling them here:

Hasegawa - Tech Support

It took 5 minutes.

The "G" kit canopy tree is the same so I can use that one if I need to.

Looking at the Hasegawa kit just keeps blowing me away! The attention to detail is amazing.

The ejection seat has 13 parts! in a 1/48 scale kit.

Also comparing the Hasegawa and the Lindberg kit, the Lindberg kit is WAY off.
Also it looks to have a "G" tail. It's much bigger the Hasegawa kit.

The basic shape of the Lindberg kit is too oval.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

mach7 said:


> Try calling them here:
> 
> Hasegawa - Tech Support
> 
> ...


Thanks! I'll drop them a line tomorrow.

Yeah, the detail blew me away too. The panel lines, the rivets and screws, just amazing. All that detail, and I'm still getting etched parts for it. I got it bad. 

I've also got a pilot figure coming, and I'll probably pick up the Hasegawa Ground Crew B, since I want to do a diorama. It's so funny that I'm going to have to _de_-accurize the pilot, since that plain orange jumpsuit on the show bears no resemblance to what F-104 pilots actually wore. Though I have seen orange jumpsuits under those green pressure pants for high-G flight. I could use a pair of those. I'm over 50, and the ol' stream just ain't what it used to be.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

High-G chaps ain't gonna help you in the bedroom, friend. 

For me it's always kind of strange to see a F-104 pilot that isn't in the David Clark T-1 high altitude suit*. Those two images are forever wed together in my mind.

*Everyone knows this suit and its distinctive helmet. It was the 'default' low-budget Sci-Fi movie's space suit. I think the best example is in the film 'Angry Red Planet'.


----------



## MHaz (Aug 18, 1999)

asalaw said:


> That was the decal sheet I passed up because I'd still have to get the stencils for the numbers. Not surprised people are doing this -- someone should come out with a decal sheet for 57-0914. I wonder if CultTVman could move enough of them to make it worth somebody's while...


Doubtful. It'd need to be on a sheet with several other aircraft to make it worth anyone's while to print. Given what Cartograf charges for even a minimum print run of 300 sheets, doing a single jet who's only claim to fame is appearing in 1 episode of a TV show would be a losing proposition.

(I'm rather intimately familiar with what Cartograf and Microscale charge for print runs, and it's not cheap...)

Microscale prints a USAF Letters and Numbers sheet that can be found for cheap on eBay that would be the easiest route to getting the serial number and buzz number for the jet.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

CONUS F-104 pilots were had an interceptor role. Since they were flying over friendly territory they wore orange flight suits. The idea was for them to be easy to find if they ejected. 

Capt. Christopher should have been wearing the anti-G suit as I believe they were worn on every flight in a fighter from the mid '50s on.

I have a set of Cutting edge decals for my NF-104 conversion and It looks like it has a few full set of of numbers to make
any FG-XXX set.

Edit:

In the ground shot of the pilots running to the aircraft they look to be wearing olivedrab flightsuits and the F-104s have the refueling probes mounted. They have drop tanks and sidewinders.
The take off shot (actually a high speed flyby) is a clean aircraft.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

As to canopies: I wouldn't doubt you could find an aftermarket vacuform canopy out there somewhere. Squadron or Megahobby.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

John P said:


> As to canopies: I wouldn't doubt you could find an aftermarket vacuform canopy out there somewhere. Squadron or Megahobby.



Good idea!


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

MHaz said:


> Doubtful. It'd need to be on a sheet with several other aircraft to make it worth anyone's while to print. Given what Cartograf charges for even a minimum print run of 300 sheets, doing a single jet who's only claim to fame is appearing in 1 episode of a TV show would be a losing proposition.
> 
> (I'm rather intimately familiar with what Cartograf and Microscale charge for print runs, and it's not cheap...)
> 
> Microscale prints a USAF Letters and Numbers sheet that can be found for cheap on eBay that would be the easiest route to getting the serial number and buzz number for the jet.


I've seen those, but together with the Caracala Vietnam decals for the livery, I'm not saving anything compared to $19 for the model with my coupon. Still... would the Caracala ones be better quality than Round2's? That might move me.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Jamie had said last year that Cartograf would be doing their decals going forward because of the decal issues they had been having.

I just checked the decal sheet that came with the kit and they do not say Cartograf so I assume they are the same old
R2 decals.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

asalaw said:


> Thanks! I'll drop them a line tomorrow.
> 
> Yeah, the detail blew me away too. The panel lines, the rivets and screws, just amazing. All that detail, and I'm still getting etched parts for it. I got it bad.
> 
> I've also got a pilot figure coming, and I'll probably pick up the Hasegawa Ground Crew B, since I want to do a diorama. It's so funny that I'm going to have to _de_-accurize the pilot, since that plain orange jumpsuit on the show bears no resemblance to what F-104 pilots actually wore. Though I have seen orange jumpsuits under those green pressure pants for high-G flight. I could use a pair of those. I'm over 50, and the ol' stream just ain't what it used to be.



Which pilot figure? The PJ productions one?

I have Canopy masks coming and was going to pull the trigger on the excellent Eduad PE set, but honestly 
I don't know how much it will add to this already great kit. 
The cockpit has full decals and the detail is outstanding.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

mach7 said:


> Which pilot figure? The PJ productions one?
> 
> I have Canopy masks coming and was going to pull the trigger on the excellent Eduad PE set, but honestly
> I don't know how much it will add to this already great kit.
> The cockpit has full decals and the detail is outstanding.


Yeah, the PJ -- though if I get the Hasegawa ground crew too, it also has a couple of pilots. Haven't quite worked out my diorama yet, except it'll be based on the tarmac shot and include the yellow circle, and I may do the cockpit open. 

I can't economically match the air police sergeant, unfortunately-- not without modeling and printing him myself. Not important enough to me to do that. 

The Eduard PE I'm getting includes harnesses and such, plus what looks like the ejection seat ring, and additional cockpit details. Not sure if I'll use their cockpit panels unless they really add something.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I've used the Eduard PE kits on a 1/72 F-102 case X kit. They are superb and really add a sense of detail.
Many of them are self adhesive also. I might get it after I start working on the kit, but as of now I feel it would be a shame to hide all the work Hasegawa put into the molds. 

It looks to me like the PJ pilot is not "flying" the aircraft.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

mach7 said:


> I've used the Eduard PE kits on a 1/72 F-102 case X kit. They are superb and really add a sense of detail.
> Many of them are self adhesive also. I might get it after I start working on the kit, but as of now I feel it would be a shame to hide all the work Hasegawa put into the molds.
> 
> It looks to me like the PJ pilot is not "flying" the aircraft.


No, it looks like he's standing by to taxi or something. I don't want to put Christopher in the flying position-- I'm even considering having him outside the plane, though that would require a ladder as well, and everyone seems to be out of them.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

asalaw said:


> No, it looks like he's standing by to taxi or something. I don't want to put Christopher in the flying position-- I'm even considering having him outside the plane, though that would require a ladder as well, and everyone seems to be out of them.



Here is an Idea, Maybe I can cast a seated pilot in clear resin. That way he can be beaming out!


----------



## Rahn (Jun 2, 2009)

mach7 said:


> Here is an Idea, Maybe I can cast a seated pilot in clear resin. That way he can be beaming out!


You could also put glitter in the resin and place an LED under him.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I'm almost done painting this pig of a F-104!

It's snowy hear and hard to paint in my garage with the temp.



















Tamiya gloss aluminum and gloss white on the F-104 and

Model Masters camo grey on the Enterprise.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Did you leave room for the firecrackers? 

Sorry, sorry, I just...it's a creaky old Lindberg kit. I'm sure thousands were sacrificed in that manner.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

Wow... nice job, but I'm really seeing the differences from the Hasegawa kit. That Lindberg thing has no panels at all.

You guys have given me an idea for the Lindberg version after I've done the Hasegawa. I happen to have silicone and clear epoxy on hand, as well as extra-fine glitter. I'm gonna give it a shot, then put a small warm-white LED in his butt to make it _really_ look like he's beaming out. What the hell, it's worth a try...


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

The lindberg kit does have some rivets/panel lines, they are just very faint. 

No where near as accurate the Hasegawa. 

I like your idea of putting a light under the clear resin/glitter Capt Christopher. I might steal it!

I did find another PJP pilot that is in a flying pose so I ordered him and I have the Hasegawa ground set in my stash
so I should be able to figure a pilot out.

The paint is not perfect, but I'm done fiddling with it. 
The plane will look good with decals once finished but it will never be great.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

mach7 said:


> The lindberg kit does have some rivets/panel lines, they are just very faint.
> 
> No where near as accurate the Hasegawa.
> 
> ...


It's not theft if you have permission. So if it makes things more fun, I can withhold it if you want. 

"Never let the perfect be the enemy of the good." -- advice from a great mentor. 

"Good enough is good enough." -- Steve Neill quoting a useful mantra, but with the caveat that it usually means "good enough for camera."

"If it's finished, it's beautiful." -- the first art director I ever worked for, who had a budget approaching negative numbers. :smile2:


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

Lightbulb went off this morning-- when I get around to it, I'm going to do the Lindberg version as the F-104 in mid-crush, with Christopher being beamed out. I win!


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

Hooray!


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

That was my initial thought. 

I'll finish the Lindberg kit with out any damage. When I finish the Hasegawa kit I plan on making them swappable.

The Hasegawa kit undamaged and the Lindberg in mid crush.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

mach7 said:


> That was my initial thought.
> 
> I'll finish the Lindberg kit with out any damage. When I finish the Hasegawa kit I plan on making them swappable.
> 
> The Hasegawa kit undamaged and the Lindberg in mid crush.


That is what I am waiting for- not perfect 104s but one ahving an event which we have only imagined off screen since the show first aired. Not even the Remastered edition touched on this visual.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

mach7 said:


> That was my initial thought.
> 
> I'll finish the Lindberg kit with out any damage. When I finish the Hasegawa kit I plan on making them swappable.
> 
> The Hasegawa kit undamaged and the Lindberg in mid crush.


Discussing this with a friend who is doing a similar build, we came to the idea that the plane wasn't crushed so much as shook to destruction. The Tractor beam may have set up harmonic vibrations as the engine strained to 'push' the plane against the force. We looked at it as materials separated where they were dissimilar- aluminum flaking away from steel, rivets shearing from frames, the blades of the engine overrunning and finally shearing off, cutting the fuselage and so on. Then of course the fuel mists, then explodes...


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

From the script:
1st:

SPOCK: Aircraft is breaking up, Captain. 

Later:
SPOCK: Captain, our tractor beam caught and crushed an Air Force plane. It'll be impossible to explain this as anything other than a genuine UFO. Possibly alien, definitely destructive.

Myself I'm going with the tractor beam pulled the tail/wings of the F-104 towards its center of mass crushing it.
Of course the tractor beam could act on the densest part, the J-79 engine, ripping it from the aircraft and thus destroying it.

I found these guys in the Hasegawa ground crew set.










And these at the craft store:










Lets see where I can go with this.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

mach7 said:


> From the script:
> 1st:
> 
> SPOCK: Aircraft is breaking up, Captain.
> ...


Excellent! The guy on the right is flying a jet. The guy on the left is screaming, "DON'T MAKE ME TURN THIS CAR AROUND!" 

I'm going to go after a sort of all-over implosion, on the theory that while the plane can withstand fairly high Gs, it's the beam's "grip" on the plane that causes it to crumple, like a submarine beyond its crush depth.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

I think that's a pair of pilots for an F-4 or F-14, with the back seater hanging on for dear life


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Honestly, considering an F-104, I think the time between "aircraft is breaking up" and "aircraft has exploded into a ball of flame" can be measured in microseconds.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I had some fun last night. I've only cast a few small simple things in the past, but I dove right in.

Molding the pilot.










the Clear resin with gold glitter.



















And after a night of curing.










He needs a bit of cleaning up but so far I'm happy with the results.


----------



## feek61 (Aug 26, 2006)

Really a great idea; I LOVE IT!


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Very well done!


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

Excellent! He needs a few flickering mini LEDs placed where the sun don't shine. :grin2:


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I've cleaned Capt. Christopher up and painted him with some Tamiya clear paint.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

Now, that's the kind of creativity that I like to see here!

Excellent!


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Here he is with a grain of wheat bulb










Its kind of too bright. It's powered by a single AA battery.

Another issue is the F-104 fuselage is sealed and I'm having issues getting wires run into 
the seat.

I have a few ideas.

Finally the lindberg kit has no room for the pilots feet! the tub forward wall is under the instrument
panel. I'll have to cut Capt Christopher off at the knees.


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

You know what you did with the resin and glitter is one of the most creative things I've ever seen done, at least for a Trek diorama.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Wow, High praise indeed! Thanks.

It was kind of collaboration. I'm happy with how he came out.

I wish I had thought of it earlier, I'm trying to figure out how to get a light into the finished fuselage.


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

mach7 said:


> ...I'll have to cut Capt Christopher off at the knees.


Transporter accident. Explain that to the flight surgeon back at the base.


----------



## Dr. Brad (Oct 5, 1999)

This is great! Well done!


----------



## Milton Fox Racing (May 27, 2014)

mach7 said:


> ...I'll have to cut Capt Christopher off at the knees.
> 
> Transporter accident. Explain that to the flight surgeon back at the base.





Dang-it Jim! I'm a doctor - not an electrician.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

mach7 said:


> Here he is with a grain of wheat bulb
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Amazeballs!! From tossing it back and forth yesterday to fully realized today -- color me totally impressed! :grin2:

Don't fret so much about maiming Capt. Christopher. Your own photos clearly demonstrate he has a stick up his butt anyway. 

Got mine today -- OY, what a meager kit that old Lindberg thing is! Side-by-side with the Hasegawa, it's kind of embarrassing! Also picked up a basic set of Alclad II, the stainless steel and the light burnt metal, plus the slight sheen clear coat and two bottles of Testors MM gloss black lacquer. My LHS didn't have the aluminum colors, so I'll have to order those. They had a big bottle of chrome, for $33 -- _YOWZA_!! Going to do the plastic spoon test with them on Sunday & Monday (tomorrow is Farpoint Con in Baltimore).


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I'm looking forward to seeing what you can do with yours. 
I've never used Alclad before. I hear it's not bad.

Are you going to mold a pilot? My mold is still good but as you can see I did not mold his back.

He took me about 30 min with a sharp xacto to make him usable.

I have some Grain of rice bulbs on the way, The one I used belongs to my John Long P1.

Eventually I'm going to have to decide how I'm going to mount everything.


----------



## Captain Robert April (Jul 5, 2016)

Howzabout crumpling up the plane a bit?


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

mach7 said:


> I'm looking forward to seeing what you can do with yours.
> I've never used Alclad before. I hear it's not bad.
> 
> Are you going to mold a pilot? My mold is still good but as you can see I did not mold his back.
> ...


Are you kidding? After seeing you do it, how am I NOT gonna? :grin2: Besides, I have the silicone and clear epoxy resin on hand. I'll at least attempt a two-part mold, but I don't know for sure since I don't have the pilots yet. I'll be using LEDs -- I also have ridonkulous numbers of those on hand. Went through a short-lived electronics fetish about three years ago. 

What I have in my head now is the full air-diorama, with a laser-etched plexi tractor beam lit with a blue LED, and the pilot beaming out like yours. I've seen guys do amazing explosions and rocket exhaust using cotton and embedded lights, so I'll be looking at some tutorials to see if I can add some flame FX to the jet. That's purely conceptual right now -- no idea if I can pull it off. But first, I have to finish my 1/350 TOS Enterprise, then the Hasegawa plane and tarmac, and then I'll either do the Lindberg or I'll skip to my 22" Eagle, depending on my whimsy when the time comes.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

You know, if the pilot is in mid-beaming, I think it's OK if the detail of the figure is a bit soft or incomplete...


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Captain Robert April said:


> Howzabout crumpling up the plane a bit?


Replace some of the fuselage with foil. Just enough to make it look like it's peeling or shredding.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

I've also thought about cutting up some shim aluminum, or soda cans, and bending those to shape body panels coming off...


----------



## Owen E Oulton (Jan 6, 2012)

robn1 said:


> Yeah that's the old kit, though they did fix the vents and removed the saucer grids.


It's actually the Cadet Series 1/2500 Enterprise, which never had the grids. Still not retooled to get rid of the inaccurate AMT B/C deck, though...


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

asalaw said:


> I've also thought about cutting up some shim aluminum, or soda cans, and bending those to shape body panels coming off...


:surprise: Have some band-aids handy. Be careful!


----------



## Joe Brown (Nov 16, 1999)

asalaw said:


> ...including 57-0914, with loads of great general info about the F-104 (if you've got around $25k to blow, you can buy one)


Karen & I were on a flight into Miami, and after landing, while taxiing over to the gate I saw over on the private planes/corporate biz jets side of the ramp was a absolutely gorgeous privately owned F-104... or so I thought. Turns out that it was one of Starfighters Aerospace birds that hadn't been re-painted yet.

SFA F-104 fleet of 8 to be further enlarged. | Starfighters

$25K might buy you a de-mil'd non-functional F-104. Maybe. Over on Trade-A-Plane, closer to $2,000,000 for a functional F-104 with all her paperwork. 

Search For Aircraft & Aircraft Parts - Airplane Sale, Jets, Helicopters & Aviation Real Estate | Trade-A-Plane

I really couldn't guess what it's annual operational costs and certifications would run. But, if I won big at Powerball, I'd come back here and tell you all about it...


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

The thing about jets is that for every hour you fly them, there's about 6 hours of maintenance when you land.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

My itty bitty PJ resin pilot arrived today from Singapore! Amazing detail for such a tiny figure! $8 US total, I'm very impressed!


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

John P said:


> The thing about jets is that for every hour you fly them, there's about 6 hours of maintenance when you land.


And I recall the F-104 gulped fuel like the stereotypical fat man at an all-you-can-eat buffet. Drop tanks (and wing tanks as well) would probably be essential. 

Still. To actually own and be able to fly a F-104... that would really be something.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

And he doesn't even look tired!


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

That looks like a really nice figure. Very delicate sculpting. Plus, if you were to re-cast it in clear resin you'd have the option of, say, leaving the legs 'solid' to show he's in mid-beaming. 

Of course if you recast the entire figure in clear you could paint the 'outer edges' and leave a 'core' in clear glittery that's part of the typical start of a beam-up. I'm just making these suggestions because of the way this figure is cast, you have many more options it seems to me.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

Steve H said:


> That looks like a really nice figure. Very delicate sculpting. Plus, if you were to re-cast it in clear resin you'd have the option of, say, leaving the legs 'solid' to show he's in mid-beaming.
> 
> Of course if you recast the entire figure in clear you could paint the 'outer edges' and leave a 'core' in clear glittery that's part of the typical start of a beam-up. I'm just making these suggestions because of the way this figure is cast, you have many more options it seems to me.


Nice idea! I'm not doing the crush-and-beam with the Hasegawa though -- this is going to be an open-cockpit diorama, with Christopher sitting in the cockpit on standby. The R2/AMT kit is the one I'm going to do the pyro with. For that I'm going to go with a Hasegawa pilot as mach7 did. Possibly the same figure. :grin2:

EDIT -- You did just give me a great idea! I'm going to paint parts of the clear pilot with opaque paint, just little random bits here and there, and see what happens. Thanks!!


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

asalaw said:


> EDIT -- You did just give me a great idea! I'm going to paint parts of the clear pilot with opaque paint, just little random bits here and there, and see what happens. Thanks!!


Thats what I did. I painted his flight suit clear orange, the visor clear blue, the O2 mask green and his gloves/boots
black.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Work has been getting in the way, But I got a few packages and found an hour today to do a little bit.

Last week I got the back end of the F-104 painted.










This stuff came yesterday:













As with asalaw's pilot, mine is excellent! Very nicely molded.










This guy will be going in the Hasegawa kit.

I started decaling the Enterprise. 



















There are A LOT of decals on this little guy!

The bad news is the 3 bulbs I got don't work.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I got replacement bulbs but when they came they were 14V bulbs. I ordered some 3V bulbs and they finally came.

I got one glued into the seat. 










I've also cleaned up Capt Christopher a bit, drilled a mounting hole on the side of the F-104 and started 
final assembly on it.


----------



## RetiredMSgt1701 (Nov 17, 2015)

mach7, sorry to be coming late to the build but this is awesome!

This aircraft was going to be next on my bench so I am very happy to see your take on the F-104! The kit I have is the Revell F-104G and not the 50th Anniversary kit like your's; but I figured I could make the decals from scratch!

Thanks again for your thread and for the awesome build!

Steady as she goes!

Steve


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

mach7 said:


> I got replacement bulbs but when they came they were 14V bulbs. I ordered some 3V bulbs and they finally came.
> 
> I got one glued into the seat.
> 
> ...


Funny, my toilet seat looks just like that. I've always assumed it was just from eating at Chipotle and left it at that.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Things are starting to take shape. 

Final construction on the F-104 is now complete. I've started decals. I think I'm going to go with FG-926.

I've mostly finished decaling the Enterprise, just a few more window sets to put on.

Soon I'm going to have to figure out how I'll "crush" the F-104.

I have an idea on how I'll display these.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

Gorgeous!!! I love it!!!


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Coming along VERY nicely, mach7! Well done!


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I need some help guys. 



I want to subtlety warp the F-104 to look like the tractor beam is bending the aircraft. 

The model is all decaled and today I will seal it in Tamiya semi gloss clear.

I was thinking about using a heat gun, but I don't want to burn the decals.

I was also thinking of setting the oven at 220F and setting the aircraft on 3 bricks

and letting it "sag". But again I don't want to scorch anything and I might want a bit more control.



Any other Ideas?



Thanks


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

I think it would have been far easier to have warped it before the final finish- that way you could even have shown buckled hull plates.

I cannot think of any method which would not possibly damage the finish- perhaps one of those powerful hair dryers mounted to a table and just work gradually as things heat up (I know my wife's could bake chicken).


----------



## Milton Fox Racing (May 27, 2014)

My brother used to use boiling water to create wrecked model cars. That matches the glass flow point temperature of polystyrene at 100 degrees celcius (212 F).

Pouring it directly onto the area you want to bend may limit scorching and overall softness vs an overall oven heating of the whole model.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Richard Baker said:


> I think it would have been far easier to have warped it before the final finish- that way you could even have shown buckled hull plates.
> 
> I cannot think of any method which would not possibly damage the finish- perhaps one of those powerful hair dryers mounted to a table and just work gradually as things heat up (I know my wife's could bake chicken).


I agree, but unfortunately I changed the build after most of the build was complete.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

MFR, boiling water is an idea.

I'm thinking that after I've clear coated the kit it wont take the decals off


----------



## Rahn (Jun 2, 2009)

I left an Monogram AT-AT in my car, once.

Them legs warped like you wouldn't believe.

Not that that's what I was intending.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Quick research on google says that inside a car can get as high as 170F in direct sunlight, Though 130-150 is more common.

Maybe I'll put 3 foil wrapped bricks in the oven, one at the tail and two at the wing tips and put them in a 160F oven for 5-10 
min.


----------



## Rahn (Jun 2, 2009)

I would fall under 'uncommon'. In Bakersfield, CA we get well into the 100's for days. Although, I don't recall what time of year it was.

I also had this happen to one of those 'visible' submarines.

What to do with a twisted sub model?

You put firecrackers in the missile tubes and watch the mayhem.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

_Decades_ ago at a convention, there was a resin kit dealer who I later found out was recaster, but I didn't know what that was yet at the time. One of his Trek starship kits had a saucer that looked like a Dali watch. I asked him if he left it in the car or something. He said "Why, what's wrong with it?" :freak:


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I think I'll start with a 150F oven and see what happens.

I've finished model construction, decaling, and sealing.

I've painted a small canvas sky blue/white.

I have to glue some wood strips to the back of the canvas to support
the F-104.


----------



## feek61 (Aug 26, 2006)

Love the pilot beaming effect; it looks fantastic! It seems a shame to warp the model at this point. Could you just add thin sheets of styrene (perhaps bent and warped) on the surface to simulate various plates of the aircraft skin being pull and coming off instead.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Interesting idea. Let me mull on it.

One reason I'm going with the bending idea is the kit is REALLY bad. The shape is off and the detail in very soft.

This is the old Lindberg kit, it was probably first produced in the early '60s and it shows.


----------



## Captain Robert April (Jul 5, 2016)

If you don't do some sort of damage, some canon wonk is gonna point out that the Enterprise didn't beam up Capt Christopher until AFTER the tractor beam started crushing the plane, so there's that.

Maybe simulate some other damage, like fluid leaks, etc., short of crumpling the plane itself. A lot of that could be simulated by paint and other types of detailing.


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

You can simulate the wrinkled skin with aluminum foil.


----------



## MHaz (Aug 18, 1999)

Use a Tamiya Smoke wash to help highlight your panel lines, and maybe blow the wash along the flight direction to simulate escaping fluids. Don't be afraid to use multiple thinned colors, too - hydraulic fluid is a clear gold-yellow, and other fluids can be dyed red, blue, purple, etc. for easy leak identification.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

Coming along beautifully! You're looking at some great alternatives here, but if it were me, I'd try the boiling water first on a small area before going to the oven. Then again, I'm a total coward.


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

mach7 said:


> Interesting idea. Let me mull on it.
> 
> One reason I'm going with the bending idea is the kit is REALLY bad. The shape is off and the detail in very soft.
> 
> This is the old Lindberg kit, it was probably first produced in the early '60s and it shows.


Just my 2 cents: since the quality of the kit is not good anyway, I would definitely warp it. It would be a much more unique display and authentic to your subject. Just be sure the damage is extensive and looks intentional and doesn't look like a mistake on your part.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

The weakest part of any aircraft is generally the tail, T-tails doubly so. 
The wings on an F-104 contain no fuel or fluids, other than the hydraulics. Which is not very much, maybe 
a quart or two. 
The fuel is all in the fuselage. 
The engine and landing gear are the most massive (dense) parts of any aircraft.

Allow me to geek out here:

I'm going on the assumption that the tractor beam works on individual atoms, like the inertial dampeners/structural integrity
fields.

So, in my mind the tractor beam would "pull" on the engine/ landing gear harder than the fuel/airframe.

This would over stress the engine mounts and gear attachment point causing localized structural failures.

Most of the fuel is stored forward of the engine causing the engine to penetrate the fuel tanks. Short circuits caused by wiring
ripped from its mounts/components would cause arcing that would ignite the fuel. A massive fireball would ensue killing Capt. Christopher instantly, thus ending the episode for all practical purposes.

This didn't happen in the show.

All we saw was flashing bright lights/ loud humming/ mild vibration. 

Mr. Scott was told to use the tractor beam to "hold" the aircraft away from the Enterprise. So we can deduce that the tractor beam 
can "push" as well. Did the engine get pushed out of the back of the airframe? If so it would take the tail with it. This would cause
the aircraft to violently pitch downward, over stressing the aircraft and killing Capt Christopher, again ending the episode effectively.

This didn't happen.

The most likely thing to happen, based on what we saw in the show is that the tractor beam just shook the plane apart, causing the parts to be "held" in place in relation to the Enterprise. Then Capt Christopher could be beamed out. 

This would result in a cluster of F-104 parts held in formation by the tractor beam. 

I can't really do this because of where I am in construction, so I'm just going to bend the wings/tail a bit.

It's a compromise. 

I hope someone else gives the cluster of parts a try. It would be glorious!


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

Ooooooooooohhhh.... >


----------



## MHaz (Aug 18, 1999)

mach7 said:


> ...This would result in a cluster of F-104 parts held in formation by the tractor beam...


Hey, that's the definition of a helicopter - a loose collection of parts flying in formation around an oil leak...


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

MHaz said:


> Hey, that's the definition of a helicopter - a loose collection of parts flying in formation around an oil leak...


I've always said something similar as a fixed wing guy, but last year I took a lesson in a R22. It hurts me to say, but it's the most fun you can have with your clothes on!


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I think I'm going to call this done.

I baked the F-104 in a 180F oven for about 12 min, then twisted the wings and horizontal stab to simulate the tractor beam starting to damage the aircraft. The mid section of the canopy started to deform a bit.

I mounted everything on a small canvas painted sky blue with flat white.





































As said, there is much I would do differently were I to build this again.
Overall I'm happy with how it turned out.

Asalaw, I'm looking forward to seeing your build!


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

MHaz said:


> Hey, that's the definition of a helicopter - a loose collection of parts flying in formation around an oil leak...


Sounds like the old Sikorsky S-40 flying boat. It was dubbed "a collection of aircraft parts flying in loose formation."


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

mach7 said:


> I've always said something similar as a fixed wing guy, but last year I took a lesson in a R22. It hurts me to say, but it's the most fun you can have with your clothes on!


A Robinson Helicopter R22? You're braver than I am.


----------



## asalaw (Dec 23, 2012)

mach7 said:


> I think I'm going to call this done.
> 
> I baked the F-104 in a 180F oven for about 12 min, then twisted the wings and horizontal stab to simulate the tractor beam starting to damage the aircraft. The mid section of the canopy started to deform a bit.
> 
> ...


Cue A Bug's Life: "_It's so beautifuuuuuulll_..."


----------

