# Marsliner from Glencoe



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Picked this up at my local hobby shop yesterday. I already have one of these built as the TWA Moonliner (I like how they incorporated "TWA" into the decal sheet) I plan on building this one as the "in flight" version with the landing gear pods retracted in against the hull. This will require minor surgery to accomplish but I think it will look cool.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Fastway isn't that bad a name for a Spaceline, actually. 

Say, what are your thoughts on if the kit originally had working landing gear? The current parts have the look of being somewhat altered or modified, as if maybe part of the tooling was missing or damaged. I recall the Space Station kit had (has?) an odd surface texture caused by working oxidation out of the form, or at least that's what I was told. 

It seems like the landing gear SHOULD move, it's not like having to carve grooves into a solid hull or anything. And moving parts were a common feature back in the day. 

(man, when I think of all those Monogram and Revell kits I built back in the day, late '60s until my armor years of the mid-'70s, the hinged wings, the opening bomb bays, the retracting landing gear, with nothing but Testors tube glue..how did we survive?  )

I love the look of that kit. I really need to get one.


----------



## CaptCBoard (Aug 3, 2002)

Even the original Moonliner was not capable of retracting its landing gear. I am referring to the blueprints, not the real deal at Disneyland. The designers just made it look like this would work, but the struts spanning between the leg and the fuselage have nowhere to go. As designed, they are supposed to pivot on the leg bracket while the inboard ends are traveling on a 'trolley' climbing up the recess in the fuselage. There just isn't enough room for everything within the confines of that recess. It might be accomplished by redesigning the 'trolley' so the struts can fold in completely flat or making a pocket in the recess for the end of the trolley's travel, making it possible for the angle of the struts as they fold in to fit correctly. I tried to solve this issue when I was making my 1:24 scale model, but it just got too complicated!

Scott


----------



## Paper Hollywood (Nov 2, 2011)

I'll be interested to see your progress on this build. I've had this model in the box in my closet for years and I'm just certain I'll get around to it one day(!?). I've noticed the leg bracket issue in studying the model and pics of the large scale versions. There certainly doesn't appear to be room for everything. Luckily this rocket was only designed to stand in theme park.


----------



## spawndude (Nov 28, 2007)

Definitely my favorite scifi rocket model.

I do wish someone (Mobieus) would reissue this and redesign the hull so you don't have to align the three pieces of the hull and then have to add the pointy tip.


----------



## Krel (Jun 7, 2000)

spawndude said:


> Definitely my favorite scifi rocket model.
> 
> I do wish someone (Mobieus) would reissue this and redesign the hull so you don't have to align the three pieces of the hull and then have to add the pointy tip.


Glencoe has recently reissued the kit, but it is the original. No redesign.

David.


----------



## DCH10664 (Jul 16, 2012)

Looking forward to seeing your progress on this build ! :thumbsup:


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

Ah yes the banana peel ship. Spent hours just getting rid of the seam lines between those hull sections. That was before I discovered AVES and was using Squadron green putty. Eeeesh!


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

DCH10664 said:


> Looking forward to seeing your progress on this build ! :thumbsup:


Progress will be slow with my new job, I have 50 hours on schedule for this week. I will only have wednesday and thursday off this week. I will spend most of wed. recovering.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Krel said:


> Glencoe has recently reissued the kit, but it is the original. No redesign.
> 
> David.


True, this was issued in 2014. one thing I notice is that the molds are beginning to show some deterioration. There are minor surface blemishes on all of the "banana peel" sections and on 3 of the 6 pieces of the landing gear pods, nothing nowhere near as bad as the space station model and these are easily sanded away.


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

There were injection pin sinkholes in the original release too. 

Here's my liner in a diorama I built some years ago.










One suggestion, the decals were crap and disintegrated on contact with water. I would suggest coating them with liquid decal film and a few shots of decal bonder or Testors gloss lacquer before soaking them. Even then they may fall apart on you. I ended up airbrushing the striping and the large TWA letters on my ship using the decals as templates for cutting the masking tape.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Trekkriffic said:


> There were injection pin sinkholes in the original release too.
> 
> Here's my liner in a diorama I built some years ago.
> 
> ...


Excellent job, I remember seeing that a while back. The injector pin sinkholes is not what I was referring to, there are some surface blemishes on almost all of the pieces. I tried to get some pictures and this is the best one I got. As I said, it is not bad and easily removed with minor sanding.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Boy, can see there's gonna be work to even all that out.

Hey, Wolfe, do I see correctly, in your pic, there's a door etched into the hull? I thought there wasn't a door, which would be a significant problem. 

And here I was thinking I'd need to break out an oval template and carve my own (when I get my own kit that is).


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Steve H said:


> Boy, can see there's gonna be work to even all that out.
> 
> Hey, Wolfe, do I see correctly, in your pic, there's a door etched into the hull? I thought there wasn't a door, which would be a significant problem.
> 
> And here I was thinking I'd need to break out an oval template and carve my own (when I get my own kit that is).


There is a recessed rectangular door, I looked back at my original kit that I built years ago when Glencoe first issued it and it is on that one as well. The door decal that comes with the kit has rounded corners and is narrower and taller than the molded in door. If you wanted an oval door, it would be easy enough to trim some .010 styrene to fit in and give you a recessed oval door.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

To get the pods flush against the hull, the first thing is to remove the raised squares that the twin supports attach to. 
No, that is not a glue spot on the hull, but one of the raised blemishes from the obvious mold degradation, easily sanded away.










A couple minutes with a sharp #11 blade and they are gone.


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

One thing you may want to do is fix the feet so they can swivel rather than being fixed in one position. I used these beads to make ball joints so the footpads could move. The beads were metal but came with holes drilled through them luckily:










I cut the feet off their pegs and hollowed out the tops to accomodate the beads which were mounted to the ends of the pegs using brass rod. Plastic rings made from styrene tubing were then slid over the pegs down onto the beads where they were glued to the tops of the footpads trapping the beads.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Trekkriffic said:


> One thing you may want to do is fix the feet so they can swivel rather than being fixed in one position. I used these beads to make ball joints so the footpads could move. The beads were metal but came with holes drilled through them luckily:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Here is the modified and unmodified landing gear pod:










And what they look like on the ship:










This model is going to take a lot of putty to get smooth, lot of sink holes to fill where the alignment pins are. It is a cool little weekend project so far.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

I have a strange creative suggestion. Don't I always? 

What do you think of leaving the sink holes in? Using them to imply the 'wrinkling' aluminum skin can undergo in aircraft?

I have seen pictures of operational B-36s and B-52s where they almost look like flying washerboards there's so much ripple in the aluminum, and in the case of the B-36, magnesium.

It's easy to imagine that a SSTO like this would put all kinds of stresses on the (presumed) outer hull.


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

Steve H said:


> I have a strange creative suggestion. Don't I always?
> 
> What do you think of leaving the sink holes in? Using them to imply the 'wrinkling' aluminum skin can undergo in aircraft?
> 
> ...


Those dimples could also suggest micrometeoroid impacts.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Steve H said:


> I have a strange creative suggestion. Don't I always?
> 
> What do you think of leaving the sink holes in? Using them to imply the 'wrinkling' aluminum skin can undergo in aircraft?
> 
> ...


Interesting idea, but in this scale those sinkholes would be larger than a man's head. I have seen the rippling like you mention in aircraft and these sinkholes are just too drastic, besides, I don't mind a little bondo in the body as long as it looks good.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Because I am crazy. 

Looking at Wolfe's build so far, I find myself wondering about this ship, how it was used (OK, was supposed to be used, blah blah.), what the operational norms were. 

IIRC it was an Atomic powered SSTO, using the '50s thinking that there would be massive gyroscopes at the center of mass to turn the ship, and vanes in the exhaust for vectoring. The original concept was Moon Liner, and the (rather dangerous from a construction viewpoint!) ring of windows around the midsection were for the passengers to get a good look at space (and served as a visual cue to the 'ride' at Disneyland).

OK, so it returns to Earth. How does it enter the atmosphere? The traditional way would be backing down on it's tail of atomic fire, but I could see it also enter nose-first, turning to its tail when it neared the space port. Except that wouldn't be too comfortable for the passengers. So backing down the whole way is the most likely, yes?

I wonder if this design is practical for suborbital hops, or if that would be like using a Thoroughbred race horse to plow a farmer's field?

And yes, I'm very very sad that we don't actually have ships like this flying to a space station and to the moon.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Got the pods glued in place, started on the filler in the sinkholes and it is going to need just a small bead of filler where the pods attach to the body. I had hoped to get this at least to the primer stage this weekend but mandatory overtime took one of my three days so I only had two days to work on this. Perhaps I can get the filler work done with what's left of today and get a coat of primer on it then next weekend I can finish it.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

That, sir, is a gosh darn rocket ship if I ever saw one.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

I am so tempted to add fins to it on the landing gear pods, but I won't. I remember seeing pictures of the full size version at Disney when I was a kid and wondering why it didn't have fins, after all, rocketships need fins.


----------



## WOI (Jun 28, 2012)

This ship is a real classic piece of work!!!!!!!!


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Today is my "friday" so I will get back to this and other projects either tonight or tomorrow. My "weekend" is being cut short again with mandatory overtime on thursday, so I hope to finish this before then.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Got the first primer on this, still see some minor things that need attention, will get back to this on my next "weekend".


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

I have decided that if I get another one of these I will do it up as a classic 1950's rocketship. I will add fins to the existing landing gear pods, eliminate the steering vanes in the existing rocket motor, add "steering" motors to the ends of the pods where the footpads are and move the landing gear to pods on the outer edge of the fins. I will either make the cockpit area wider or eliminate it altogether.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

And a look at the original Glencoe issue from around 15 or so years ago, seems that my decals have begun to flake off, no problem, I can scan the decal sheet from the new issue and fix that problem.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

BWolfe said:


> I have decided that if I gst another one of these I will do it up as a classic 1950's rocketship. I will add fins to the existing landing gear pods, eliminate the steering vanes in the existing rocket motor, add "steering" motors to the ends of the pods where the footpads are and move the landing gear to pods on the outer edge of the fins. I will either make the cockpit area wider or eliminate it altogether.


OK, just because I can't stop commenting... 

idea #1. Cutaway version. Show the fuel tanks, the Atomic Motor, the gyroscopes for changing ship orientation, the command cabin, the passenger deck, the cargo hold, and so on. Make it like those beautiful Renwal and Revell kits of the late '50s-early '60s. I don't think there was ever any actual Disney-drawn plans so it would be an exercise in pure imagination. (no, I could never do this, my skills are nowhere near what it would require)

idea #2. Add the fins, but mount them between the landing leg pods. Keep the landing legs. add the needed vernier motors and maneuvering thrusters. Cockpit is OK but needs a bit of reshaping and fewer side windows. Needs a cargo hatch in addition to the passenger hatch. 

I'll probably think of more later.


----------



## Telkel (Sep 16, 2010)

I'm building the Glencoe Space Station at this moment - parts of the kit are indeed pitted - due to rust in the original mould. If you have this kit, be prepared for lots of sanding and filling! By the way, don't use thread for the condenser pipes, use 0.5mm brass rod. It's nice to have a model that closely resembles the 'Wheel' from George Pal's film 'Conquest of Space.' I just wish it was larger scale.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Telkel said:


> I'm building the Glencoe Space Station at this moment - parts of the kit are indeed pitted - due to rust in the original mould. If you have this kit, be prepared for lots of sanding and filling! By the way, don't use thread for the condenser pipes, use 0.5mm brass rod. It's nice to have a model that closely resembles the 'Wheel' from George Pal's film 'Conquest of Space.' I just wish it was larger scale.


I used nylon upholstery thread on mine, seems to be working OK. 

I actually kind of like the rough texture. Makes it seem like it's either very old or it's covered in thermal control material.


----------



## WOI (Jun 28, 2012)

That one is a real well-built piece of work!!


----------



## spawndude (Nov 28, 2007)

Telkel said:


> I'm building the Glencoe Space Station at this moment - parts of the kit are indeed pitted - due to rust in the original mould. If you have this kit, be prepared for lots of sanding and filling! By the way, don't use thread for the condenser pipes, use 0.5mm brass rod. It's nice to have a model that closely resembles the 'Wheel' from George Pal's film 'Conquest of Space.' I just wish it was larger scale.


Lots and lots of sanding and filing. Fortunately its pretty soft plastic.
I used stiff florist wire spray painted black. About $2 for a pack that will last a lifetime. Looks great even if I do sayso myself!!!

Definitely don't want to used thread.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Got the first couple of coats or white on this, looking good so far.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Modified the exhaust nozzle to accept a display stand rod.


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

Cool. Very V2-esque.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

These old Strombecker kits are cool. Yeah the molds were stored in sub par conditions. When Glencoe got them, they apparently took a lot of work to get them to be "this good". The space station is really bad. There was rust all over the molds, so the kit has a sort of tree bark/beach sand texture. Nothing a LOT of sanding won't fix...


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Started with the decals, the tail stripes line up nicely.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Oh, that's beautiful. Making me want to try my hand with one, which means it sits in the closet for, like, a year.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Got the rest of the decals in place, only real blunder I made is the position of the two large "TWA" decals, they should have been in front of the first ring of windows instead of between the rows of windows. I made this the TWA Moonliner and did not check reference photos before placing the decals. I may print new decals and put them in the right spot, but that will have to wait until my next "weekend" off. Still have some details to paint and need to add the windows, I will use crystal clear for that instead of the inaccurate kit windows.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

I know you're building this basically 'stock', with the landing gear up of course, but I'm kind of surprised you didn't do something with the cockpit windows. I really don't know WHAT should be done, but the 'frames' look so awkward and clunky. Thinner frames would be completely unrealistic, cutting them off completely and having 'wraparound' cockpit glass also unrealistic. Oh! I've got it, I think. They should be rounded rectangles. At least the side ones. And I don't think they should go all the way down to the hull. maybe that's what bugs me, the way they just open all that way down. But that's for the next build.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Finally got the finishing touches on this, had to repaint the clearcoat 3 times, kept finding dust in it after it dried. Decided to live with the position of the TWA decals since it matches my "gear down" version I did years ago. Still need a display stand, that shouldn't take more than an hour to put together.


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

Now I wish I had another one of these to build in flight mode. Would be neat displayed alongside my landed version:


----------



## scooke123 (Apr 11, 2008)

Well done - I really like the retracted version.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

Trekkriffic said:


> Now I wish I had another one of these to build in flight mode. Would be neat displayed alongside my landed version:


They are in stock at culttvman, $14.95! I am actually thinking about getting another one to do a generic 1950's style rocketship. Build it like I did this one, with the gear pods retracted, add fins to the gear pods, move the landing gear to new pods on the fin tips and add "steering motors" to the end of the gear pods. I would also either do away with the cockpit or modify it.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

BWolfe said:


> They are in stock at culttvman, $14.95! I am actually thinking about getting another one to do a generic 1950's style rocketship. Build it like I did this one, with the gear pods retracted, add fins to the gear pods, move the landing gear to new pods on the fin tips and add "steering motors" to the end of the gear pods. I would also either do away with the cockpit or modify it.


Or even play with the scale! Fill in the windows on the hull, slice off the 'cockpit' and lay in a frame and glass, make it maybe 1/72 scale and a crew of two or three.


----------



## spawndude (Nov 28, 2007)

Anyone that has this kit did you have problems with the legs?
The first kit I bought the legs halves were all the same side!
The second kit legs were the correct opposite sides but two of the leg sets were warped beyond use.
The third kit had one slightly warped leg set


----------



## WOI (Jun 28, 2012)

Sweeet!


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

spawndude said:


> Anyone that has this kit did you have problems with the legs?
> The first kit I bought the legs halves were all the same side!
> The second kit legs were the correct opposite sides but two of the leg sets were warped beyond use.
> The third kit had one slightly warped leg set


I have had two of these so far, an original re-issue from Glencoe nearly 20 years ago and this recent reissue, no problems with the legs.


----------

