# New Star Destroyer Kit from Zvezda



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

So, I've never heard of this company before, but apparently Zvezda is releasing a 60cm (23.6 inches) Star Destroyer in December. Looks cool I guess. Kind of out of the blue.

https://www.facebook.com/Zvezda.ModelKits/posts/798131456956327


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

This popped up a couple months ago as just an announcement- glad to see the follow through.
Zvezda specializes in cartoon figure kits and most people thought the model would be based on the slightly wonky looking one from the 'Rebels' animated series. 
*This looks a LOT better*
It appears to be a replica of the ISD II from the bridge detail- that is my favorite version. I am impressed by what parts breakdown I see- like to bee more of the super structure details.

Between this kit and Revell my money would go to this one for sure. Bandai had better get their wheels turning faster if they are to enter the filed with their large ISD kit- tha market is getting a lot of options now...


----------



## Newbie123 (Sep 7, 2016)

Zvezda is a Russian company, I believe. The used to do primarily re-pops of older kits, primarily Aurora/Lindberg/Heller/Italeri aircraft and military. It's been a while since I've built any of those subjects, but I can't ever remember Zvezda doing an original tooling. Either times have changed or this is might be a re-pop of the Revell or of someone who hasn't announced their kit yet? Very intriguing.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

FB is blocked here at work, can someone put up pictures as an attachment? So this is not the wonky looking Rebels SD then?


----------



## MHaz (Aug 18, 1999)

Newbie123 said:


> Zvezda is a Russian company, I believe. The used to do primarily re-pops of older kits, primarily Aurora/Lindberg/Heller/Italeri aircraft and military. It's been a while since I've built any of those subjects, but I can't ever remember Zvezda doing an original tooling. Either times have changed or this is might be a re-pop of the Revell or of someone who hasn't announced their kit yet? Very intriguing.



Zvezda actually does plenty of their own tooling these days. They have the most accurate Su-27 Flanker in any scale in their 1/72 Su-27SM, and many of their other kits are extremely well done. On par with Hasegawa, Tamiya, etc.


----------



## electric indigo (Dec 21, 2011)

This might be the Star Destroyer you're looking for...


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

robiwon2 said:


> FB is blocked here at work, can someone put up pictures as an attachment? So this is not the wonky looking Rebels SD then?


https://scontent-mia1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/14615771_798131340289672_975341313900765666_o.jpg

https://scontent-mia1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/14633454_798131293623010_6897830052929671750_o.jpg

https://scontent-mia1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/14711281_798131290289677_3228799610085418520_o.jpg

https://scontent-mia1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/14711086_798131286956344_2999908184257380629_o.jpg

https://scontent-mia1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/14715549_798131333623006_3748615057488866421_o.jpg

https://scontent-mia1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/11224354_798131336956339_4578891484013429283_o.jpg


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Thanks edge10!

Wow, is all I have to say. Sitting here looking at the 23 inch mark on my yardstick! If this actually hits the market I'll definitely be in for one or two. That is unless Bandai can trump this.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Possible box art for the kit. Listed at 1/2700 scale. Posted by geck on SSM.

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/1015360-zvezda-9057-star-destroyer


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

This could be very interesting. I'm sure the experts here will be able to tell if it's a kit that has 'borrowed' its master from some previously existing kit.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

Steve H said:


> This could be very interesting. I'm sure the experts here will be able to tell if it's a kit that has 'borrowed' its master from some previously existing kit.


Says new tool under the product description.


----------



## veedubb67 (Jul 11, 2003)

Says it's 60cm (approx. 24 inches) long, so I doubt it's a repop.


Rob
Iwata Padawan


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Those parts trees do not look like any previous model- they look great!

Finally a nice sized Star Destroyer without play action features.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Check out the sprue attachment points, very small, almost Bandai like.


----------



## StarCruiser (Sep 28, 1999)

Seems to blow the thrusters off of the old MPC junker!

Bandai might do a better job but even then, this looks like a nice kit.

Zvezda has done quite a few nice kits over the last 10-15 years. They released a fairly good 1/350th scale HMS Dreadnought a few years back. Easier to build than the slightly better Trumpeter version of the same ship...


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

The question is, where will we be able to buy these from?


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

More images.


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Where did you dig those up DanielB? It's OK if you can't say.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

edge10 said:


> Where did you dig those up DanielB? It's OK if you can't say.


Someone posted them under General Discussion on Keeperoftheforce.com


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

Revell who?


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Heyyy, just a minute here! I don't see ANY fold out landing gear! How can it land without opening panels to make landing gear! :devil:


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

The main hull looked weird at first until I realized they made the hull in forward and rear sections as well.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Giggity Giggity!!!


----------



## Owen E Oulton (Jan 6, 2012)

Zvezda has only recently branched out into doing the aforementioned cartoon kits with their Cars and Planes licensed kits. Before that, as well as doing the odd re-pop from Italeri (among others) they also produced their own kits. Prior to the late '90's, they were typical of the other iron-curtain countries' kits - mostly Soviet subjects of debatable quality. Since then, they've produced kits of very good quality. Their figures in 1.35 scale, once of such poor quality that they made Italeri figures look like Michaelangelo sculptures, are now about equal to ICM or Dragon quality. 

One neat thing about this SW SD is that it's very close to 1/2500 scale and so is compatible with R2/AMT's Star Trek "Cadet" line of starships... I'm more of a Star Trek fan than a Star Wars fan (I like both), but I'll definitely look at getting one to go with my Starfleet ships!


----------



## StarCruiser (Sep 28, 1999)

Yea - give those Constitutions and Galaxies something to womp on...


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

Looks good, but shouldn't there be a smaller hanger ahead of the large hanger? Or is that only on the New Hope version?


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

spock62 said:


> Looks good, but shouldn't there be a smaller hanger ahead of the large hanger? Or is that only on the New Hope version?


The one in the picture above is the smaller hanger.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

spock62 said:


> Looks good, but shouldn't there be a smaller hanger ahead of the large hanger? Or is that only on the New Hope version?


That is the small hanger. The bottom half looks to be in sections. The large hanger is not pictured.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

Drilling all these windows out will be a bitch. Gonna need one of these...

https://www.amazon.com/Tamiya-74041...8&qid=1477094434&sr=8-1&keywords=tamiya+drill


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Daniel_B said:


> Drilling all these windows out will be a bitch. Gonna need one of these...
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Tamiya-74041...8&qid=1477094434&sr=8-1&keywords=tamiya+drill


Or do what the Japanese lighting masters do, recast parts in water clear resin.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

Is this going to be a better kit than the old MPC kit?
Sure seems like it might be.

Zvezda has been getting exponentially better over the years.
Some of their panel lines on aircraft (Boeing 787 Dreamliner that I have) are so fine that you're afraid that any amount of paint might fill them in.

They are also the ones who did the 1/72 'Black Swan' from Pirates of the Caribbean a few years back (which is now released under the Revell of Germany label...... Minus a few licensed parts).

Like any company, the quality can depend on the team behind it and the reference material used.

If you will notice though, this is not specifically the ESB Star Destroyer nor is it the ANH SD.
It appears to be a mashup of both SD's.

It us however unfortunate that it is yet another scale.

My hopes are still on Bandai for a good SD and 1/72 Falcon.
But its nice to have options.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

Steve H said:


> Or do what the Japanese lighting masters do, recast parts in water clear resin.


Then you'd have to make tiny little circular and rectangular masks which would be almost as much a pain.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Daniel_B said:


> Then you'd have to make tiny little circular and rectangular masks which would be almost as much a pain.


Or you paint and gently scrape. It's not like Enterprise windows after all.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

Okay, who's going to be the first to fill in all of the engraved panel lines on the hull and pencil them in just to be more "accurate"?


----------



## fluke (Feb 27, 2001)

I'm running for cover for you dude!
Funny!!! :laugh:


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Yes, the hull is split in forward and rear sections. Only the forward half is shown. Can't wait to see what the engine panel looks like.


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

My bad, didn't pickup on the hull being front and rear halves at first. So far it looks like this kit will leave Revells in the dust.


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Zombie_61 said:


> Okay, who's going to be the first to fill in all of the engraved panel lines on the hull and pencil them in just to be more "accurate"?


Since this kit is not being produced by the lowest bidder, I don't think that will be necessary.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

This kit certainly looks intriguing. I wonder what the availability will be here in the US?


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Trek Ace said:


> This kit certainly looks intriguing. I wonder what the availability will be here in the US?


Assuming no embargo, I believe that if nothing else, Hobbylink Japan will have it for sale.

I've been looking over the Zvezda models listed at HLJ (and a hella lotta aftermarket resin and PE parts for their kits, which implies an active and engaged consumer base  ) and I was struck by an odd feeling.

Am I the only one who sees the variety of subjects and suddenly has flashbacks to '60s Airfix and Frog kits, with a hint of '70s Tamiya? They just 'feel' like that's their kind of energy. 

The pics of this Star Destroyer really look sharp. Maybe they're the company to do a large kit of the Blockade Runner.


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

This is nice! And, it is a nice size! I am looking forward to this.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Just posted over on the RPF by Darth Africanus!


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

That seems pretty impressive. 

BUT WAIT! It doesn't have moving gun turrets! NO SALE!!! :devil:

But seriously, that sure looks like a contender to my eyes.


----------



## INVAR (Mar 28, 2014)

Steve H said:


> That seems pretty impressive.
> 
> BUT WAIT! It doesn't have moving gun turrets! NO SALE!!! :devil:
> 
> But seriously, that sure looks like a contender to my eyes.


Will have to get this too.

December they say eh?


We shall see…..


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Whatever's in that box, it's the only thing I've ever wanted.


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

Checked with CultTVMan to see if it might be sold in his shop but he has not heard this will be available in the US yet. Anyone know if it is coming to the US? Would like to get an idea of price.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

There will always be a way...


----------



## MHaz (Aug 18, 1999)

It depends on if it gets embargoed. Granted, there is always a way to get items like that into the US, but there have been instances where unlicensed kits have been seized and destroyed by Customs - MMD/Squadron had a whole shipment from Trumpeter/Hobby Boss and others delayed because there were kits of a USCG cruiser in the shipping container that weren't properly licensed by the DHS (which is a whole 'other ball of wax of ludicrousness unto itself).


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

I'm just wondering how long it'll be before they start selling it as "Empirical Space Cruiser" because Disney found out about it.


----------



## MHaz (Aug 18, 1999)

Zombie_61 said:


> I'm just wondering how long it'll be before they start selling it as "Empirical Space Cruiser" because Disney found out about it.


There's actually a very good chance that it's a legitimately licensed kit - Zvezda has the license for model kits based on the "Planes" movies, so they've worked with Disney before. My worry is that their license is such that they can't legally sell the kit in the USA, since Revell has the Star Wars license here. (Maybe Revell is going to rebox it for the US...?)


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

MHaz said:


> There's actually a very good chance that it's a legitimately licensed kit - Zvezda has the license for model kits based on the "Planes" movies, so they've worked with Disney before. My worry is that their license is such that they can't legally sell the kit in the USA, since Revell has the Star Wars license here. (Maybe Revell is going to rebox it for the US...?)


I'm just going to grab one off ebay when they come available.

Thats how I got my P.O.C. Black Pearl from them.

No problems.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

Now, heres another possibility.

Sure, Revell just released their own SD.

But Revell of Germany has on numerous occasions, sold Zvezda kits under their banner.

And since they have a SW License, maybe thats an avenue.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

New pics of this kit. This thing is GORGEOUS!


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)




----------



## electric indigo (Dec 21, 2011)

Impressive.


----------



## INVAR (Mar 28, 2014)

Wow - most impressive!

It would be perfect if the garbage chute hatch was present on the back of the conning tower. Maybe they are still tooling that?


----------



## Jiver (Jul 18, 2009)

ClubTepes said:


> They are also the ones who did the 1/72 'Black Swan' from Pirates of the Caribbean a few years back (which is now released under the Revell of Germany label...... Minus a few licensed parts).


Actually, they did a licensed 'Black Pearl' first, but there were some issues wich lead to the Swan kit, minus nameplate and a few parts. I have the Pearl and it's a really nice, high quality kit.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Until Bandai puts out a kit, this Zvezda kit will be the gold standard as far as injection styrene SD kits go. The comparisons between this and the Revell are laughable. It's amazing that somehow Zvezda can somehow pull off a fairly accurate kit and somehow Revell just can't possibly do it.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

Hunk A Junk said:


> ...It's amazing that somehow Zvezda can somehow pull off a fairly accurate kit and somehow Revell just can't possibly do it.


I wonder how much of that is because of Disney--maybe they _want_ Revell to produce simplified, toy-like kits for younger modelers.

The more I see of the Zvezda kit, the more impressed I am. Sadly, I just don't have the space for a kit that big.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Hunk A Junk said:


> Until Bandai puts out a kit, this Zvezda kit will be the gold standard as far as injection styrene SD kits go. The comparisons between this and the Revell are laughable. It's amazing that somehow Zvezda can somehow pull off a fairly accurate kit and somehow Revell just can't possibly do it.


Can it be as simple as the people at Zvezda actually CARE about the subject and thus have devoted lots of love and attention to this kit?

They understand that it's a global market now and I'm SURE they must be aware of the bar set by the Bandai kits. 

It's a beautiful thing, what I see in the pics so far. I'd like to see them tackle a good sized Blockade Runner, 1/144 would be nice.


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

Steve H said:


> Can it be as simple as the people at Zvezda actually CARE about the subject and thus have devoted lots of love and attention to this kit?...


Or they just take pride in their work.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Zombie_61 said:


> I wonder how much of that is because of Disney--maybe they _want_ Revell to produce simplified, toy-like kits for younger modelers.


I think we only need to look at the Star Wars kits Revell was putting out before Disney took over. Inaccurate? Check. Toy-like? Check. Box-scale? Check. Pre-painted with horrible brush-on "weathering"? Check. Chunky, overly-simplified Snap-kits? Check.

The people at Revell clearly think Star Wars modelers just don't care and aren't worth the effort. They clearly think Star Wars modelers are children who play with their models. When it comes to Star Wars, they're a model company that would rather be a toy company. Which would all be fine except that it's Revell's s--t that sits on the shelves at major retailers representing Star Wars modeling to consumers. It's Revell that somehow keeps convincing the higher-ups at Disney and Lucas(less)film to give them the license rights when other companies are obviously doing superior work. Why can't the Bandai and Zvezda kits be sold at Target and Walmart? Why is the product from a German company produced in China somehow more worthy of sitting on American shelves than a Japanese or Russian product made in China? As a corporation, Revell's greatest talent isn't in the products they make, but the iron grip they have on the distribution market. In a hobby where creativity is supposed to be king, their lack of effort combined with a cynical, indifferent distribution monopoly is just galling.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Newbie123 said:


> Zvezda is a Russian company, I believe. The used to do primarily re-pops of older kits, primarily Aurora/Lindberg/Heller/Italeri aircraft and military. It's been a while since I've built any of those subjects, but I can't ever remember Zvezda doing an original tooling. Either times have changed or this is might be a re-pop of the Revell or of someone who hasn't announced their kit yet? Very intriguing.


Zvezda started out doing original kits some 25-30 years ago. They also partnered with Italeri and have issued some ex Italeri armor kits under their name, and also via Italeri, some of the Heller German soldier sets. They have never sold Aurora or Lindberg kits. You might be thinking of Smer, a Czech company that has copy cat Aurora WW1 planes and ships, and repops of ex Heller planes. Zvezda did the Black Pearl pirate ship kit a couple years back, and they currently offer a large number of military kits; planes, ships, tanks. Their stuff is hit or miss, though. Some kits are quite good and some are pretty crappy. They have been doing other licensed stuff like Cars and Planes kits. The Star Destroyer is licensed, apparently, for sale only in Russia proper.


----------



## electric indigo (Dec 21, 2011)

I wonder if Revell Germany will actually sell this kit in Germany, as they offer other Zvezda kits under the Revell brand here. It would fit in their Fine Molds line of Star Wars kits.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

Hunk A Junk said:


> I think we only need to look at the Star Wars kits Revell was putting out before Disney took over. Inaccurate? Check. Toy-like? Check. Box-scale? Check. Pre-painted with horrible brush-on "weathering"? Check. Chunky, overly-simplified Snap-kits? Check...


Valid point. But you could say the same things about the first Star Wars kits produced by MPC/AMT in the 1970s. Maybe Lucasfilm is to blame?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to defend Revell. I've built a number of their kits over the last 40-something years, and they ranged from "pretty darn good" to "what were they thinking?" But I do think it's unfair to place all of the blame on them without knowing the specifics of their contracts with Disney/Lucasfilm.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Zombie_61 said:


> Valid point. But you could say the same things about the first Star Wars kits produced by MPC/AMT in the 1970s. Maybe Lucasfilm is to blame?
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to defend Revell.


True. And don't think I'm ranting at you. I'm an old man shaking his fist at the sky. DAMN SKY!!!

I can forgive kits made in the 1960s and 70s for inaccuracies since there were no computers, no Internet, and not even VCRs to freeze-frame footage to look at screen shots. By the end of the 90s, however, modelers had screen shots and reference photos easily accessible online where we could immediately see glaring inaccuracies. If we had them, there's no reason a kit manufacturer couldn't see them too. Now, the original assets are CG and can be sent to kit makers with a click of a mouse. It's just hard to fathom how any company could have an excuse anymore for inaccurate, poorly detailed kits aside from simple laziness or indifference. It's even harder to understand when a company like Bandai is cranking out the same subjects as Revell (the U-Wing, for example) and getting the details right while Revell simply can't (or won't). I just want them to do better -- and if they won't then pull their license and give Bandai the market to expand.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Hunk A Junk said:


> True. And don't think I'm ranting at you. I'm an old man shaking his fist at the sky. DAMN SKY!!!
> 
> I can forgive kits made in the 1960s and 70s for inaccuracies since there were no computers, no Internet, and not even VCRs to freeze-frame footage to look at screen shots. By the end of the 90s, however, modelers had screen shots and reference photos easily accessible online where we could immediately see glaring inaccuracies. If we had them, there's no reason a kit manufacturer couldn't see them too. Now, the original assets are CG and can be sent to kit makers with a click of a mouse. It's just hard to fathom how any company could have an excuse anymore for inaccurate, poorly detailed kits aside from simple laziness or indifference. It's even harder to understand when a company like Bandai is cranking out the same subjects as Revell (the U-Wing, for example) and getting the details right while Revell simply can't (or won't). I just want them to do better -- and if they won't then pull their license and give Bandai the market to expand.


Well, we've had this discussion, and we'll never really KNOW, but it seems it really goes to, what, Corporate intent? Company philosophy? 

It *appears* that Revell looks at the Star Wars license as simply a line on their profit/loss and return-on-investment sheets. What is the bare minimum they have to spend to make a profit? Recall, every step in the process is money. Doing that research to make SURE you've got the right CG models to render into the prototyping and tool cutting programs takes time and research. Anything that involves a person doing SOMETHING costs money. And I'm guessing they're making enough profit off what they're doing to not consider making any changes. 

Bandai, OTOH, feels their reputation is on the line. They have a team of highly motivated people who actually CARE about the subject (license) and the Corporate culture is willing to listen to that and use it (because it has proven to be successful with other product lines), the stereotypical Japanese attention to detail has been taken to insane levels on these kits and by all indications they're making money hand over fist in their domestic market. 

I don't BLAME Revell for their thinking, I just find it regretful and short sighted.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

Hunk A Junk said:


> True. And don't think I'm ranting at you. I'm an old man shaking his fist at the sky. DAMN SKY!!!


No worries my friend, I understand and share your frustration.



Hunk A Junk said:


> ...It's just hard to fathom how any company could have an excuse anymore for inaccurate, poorly detailed kits aside from simple laziness or indifference. It's even harder to understand when a company like Bandai is cranking out the same subjects as Revell (the U-Wing, for example) and getting the details right while Revell simply can't (or won't)...


This is why I'm thinking Revell could be producing these kits in accordance with their agreement with Disney/Lucasfilm--they want Revell to produce toy-like kits for beginning/younger modelers so they can slam 'em together and play with them.



Steve H said:


> Well, we've had this discussion, and we'll never really KNOW, but it seems it really goes to, what, Corporate intent? Company philosophy?
> 
> It *appears* that Revell looks at the Star Wars license as simply a line on their profit/loss and return-on-investment sheets. What is the bare minimum they have to spend to make a profit? Recall, every step in the process is money. Doing that research to make SURE you've got the right CG models to render into the prototyping and tool cutting programs takes time and research. Anything that involves a person doing SOMETHING costs money. And I'm guessing they're making enough profit off what they're doing to not consider making any changes.
> 
> ...


Interesting point and, to be honest, one I hadn't considered. The thought process at Revell could very well be, "Our bread-and-butter is the car and military kits we've been cranking out for the last seven decades. This silly sci-fi stuff doesn't warrant the same level of attention from us."


----------



## JeffBond (Dec 9, 2013)

Now while we're (with some good cause) slamming Revell, it's been noted elsewhere that the Zvezda SD bridge (a rather huge feature on the model) is about 20% too big, which would be a massive job to fix; other details are innacurate too. Nevertheless I can't wait to get the model. It's anyone's guess as to whether Disney supplied Zvezda with inaccurate research or exactly what happened but it's safe to say there's always going to be something that makes these things affordable models as opposed to museum quality scale reproductions of the subjects.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

I'm not up on all the fine detail and differences of the Star Destroyer in its various incarnations and appearances, is there a possibility that what Zvezda made is a valid variation as seen in (something)? 

It seems to me that making that bridge so much larger is an odd mistake to make, given all the other seeming attention to detail and, as we've discussed, pride in their work.

OTOH, as we all know all too well, crap happens. Was this tooled in China or made in Russia (or likely Czech Republic or something)?


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Steve H said:


> I'm not up on all the fine detail and differences of the Star Destroyer in its various incarnations and appearances, is there a possibility that what Zvezda made is a valid variation as seen in (something)?
> 
> It seems to me that making that bridge so much larger is an odd mistake to make, given all the other seeming attention to detail and, as we've discussed, pride in their work.
> 
> OTOH, as we all know all too well, crap happens. Was this tooled in China or made in Russia (or likely Czech Republic or something)?


Speculation is, that the model that Disney/Lucasfilm is giving the licensees is incorrect. Apparently the one in Battlefront is off in the same ways.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

edge10 said:


> Speculation is, that the model that Disney/Lucasfilm is giving the licensees is incorrect. Apparently the one in Battlefront is off in the same ways.


!!!

Interesting. Is it possible that for whatever reason this is what Disney/Lucasfilm CHOOSES licensed product to look like, it's a form of 'retcon' for whatever reason?

Or the more likely nobody who actually understands the difference is dealing with the companies. 

I think it will be VERY interesting...say, the Bandai Vehicle Model Star Destroyer. Was the bridge oversized on that kit? I'm sure it's more tricky to tell with the smaller kit but there are very very smart and knowledgeable and clever people here who could tell.


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Steve H said:


> !!!
> 
> Interesting. Is it possible that for whatever reason this is what Disney/Lucasfilm CHOOSES licensed product to look like, it's a form of 'retcon' for whatever reason?
> 
> ...


Interesting question:

Bandai's mini:
ƒr�[ƒNƒ‹ƒ‚ƒfƒ‹�@ƒXƒ^�[�EƒfƒXƒgƒ�ƒCƒ„�[�@ƒŒƒrƒ…�[

Zvezda:
http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/99-sc...-star-destroyer-kit-zvezda-3.html#post6070305

To me, it looks like Bandai's little kit doesn't have that problem.


----------



## publiusr (Jul 27, 2006)

Interesting article on SD proportions
Star Destroyer Proportions


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

LRZ on the RPF posted these images of his Revell SD, looks like it suffers from a too large bridge as well.

With two new kits now sporting the oversized bridge, could this be intentional and canon in the new movie???


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

robiwon2 said:


> LRZ on the RPF posted these images of his Revell SD, looks like it suffers from a too large bridge as well.
> 
> With two new kits now sporting the oversized bridge, could this be intentional and canon in the new movie???


From what I understand, it's known that the CGI asset for the Star Destroyer in Star Wars Battlefront is also known to have a bridge that is oversized. My guess is that CG asset is the one given to Revell and Zvezda and they pattern their kits with the same error.


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

The Rogue One SS is based on the 4ft/ANH/Devastator model. Both of these new kits, and the Bandai mecha kit are based on the 8ft/TESB/Avenger model.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Well, worse comes to worst, we can just believe that given the size of the Empire, there may well be different navel yards making the durn things...


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Who wants to bet that if Bandai were to put out a larger scale SD kit that there would be zero discussion about whether its proportions were correct.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Hunk A Junk said:


> Who wants to bet that if Bandai were to put out a larger scale SD kit that there would be zero discussion about whether its proportions were correct.


Oh, I dunno. I expect that if and when they pull the trigger on that it's gonna get a super microscopic overview.

I kind of wonder what kind of display base they'd give it.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

I'm skeptical at this point if a Bandai Star Destroyer is going to happen. I hope it does. But I would have figured they'd try to have it with Rogue One if they were going to do it.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Daniel_B said:


> I'm skeptical at this point if a Bandai Star Destroyer is going to happen. I hope it does. But I would have figured they'd try to have it with Rogue One if they were going to do it.


If not for Rogue One, there still is a Han Solo movie coming. If they go ahead with some backstory about young Han spending time at the Imperial academy, I bet they'd get some SDs in there. It's Disney.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

Here is a photo of the upcoming 2-foot Bandai Star Destroyer bridge.

Looks somewhat similar to the Zvesda one. Empire style.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

Trek Ace said:


> Here is a photo of the upcoming 2-foot Bandai Star Destroyer bridge.
> 
> Looks somewhat similar to the Zvesda one. Empire style.


I hope it's upcoming. It's just vaporware until they make an official announcement.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

I am soooo not sweating whether the bridge module on the Z-SD is a few millimeters larger than it should be. When this kit lands, and IF its easily available to anyone who wants it, there will be 3D printed replacement pieces available within days. Swapping out the bridge tower for a smaller one should require zero effort.


----------



## Newbie123 (Sep 7, 2016)

Revell-Germany has announced something surprisingly similar. Possibly a re-box?
Geschenkset Imperial Star Destroyer · Revell · 06052 · 1:2670
April 2017. Wonder if that's after the Zvezda (or Bandai??) release.



Hunk A Junk said:


> Swapping out the bridge tower for a smaller one should require zero effort.


Just a $60 part from Shapeways. Sigh.


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

Newbie123 said:


> Revell-Germany has announced something surprisingly similar. Wonder if it's a re-box?
> Geschenkset Imperial Star Destroyer · Revell · 06052 · 1:2670
> April 2017. Wonder if that's after the Zvezda (or Bandai??) release.


Most likely it will be the Zvezda kit, since RoG has re-boxed some of their kits before. Should make it easier to obtain, but it would be even better if Revell of USA did their own re-boxed version.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Would Revell really have both their new SD and the Z-SD on the shelves at the same time? Wouldn't that just be cannibalizing sales from themselves? Of course, this is Revell we're talking about, so of course this could be their plan.:laugh:


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

Hunk A Junk said:


> Would Revell really have both their new SD and the Z-SD on the shelves at the same time? Wouldn't that just be cannibalizing sales from themselves? Of course, this is Revell we're talking about, so of course this could be their plan.:laugh:


Well, they currently sell the Fine Molds kits while selling cheaper, less accurate, snap kit versions of the same ships, so selling both SD kits isn't too much of a stretch, IMHO. This would fit into their idea of offering entry-level kits for kids and more advanced kits for experienced modelers. But, the re-boxed Zvezda SD might just be available through Revell of Germany.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Pulled from Revell of Germany's website.








http://www.kitreviewsonline.de/dire...die-neuheiten-des-i-quartals-2017/#more-16028


----------



## Owen E Oulton (Jan 6, 2012)

robiwon2 said:


> Pulled from Revell of Germany's website.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


"As you can see, the new year will be at the beginning without the great novelty - at least in Bünde - but for this the East Westphalian manufacturer provides us with a whole lot of outstanding kits, which in cooperation with ICM in particular from Ukraine and Zvezda from Russia."


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

Owen E Oulton said:


> "As you can see, the new year will be at the beginning without the great novelty - at least in Bünde - but for this the East Westphalian manufacturer provides us with a whole lot of outstanding kits, which in cooperation with ICM in particular from Ukraine and Zvezda from Russia."


Looks like photo of original movie prop. Also, there's no scale listed and neither is the Zvezda name. I'm not going to get too excited yet until Revell confirms it, but I'm hopefully optimistic that this will be the Zvezda kit.


----------



## bigjimslade (Oct 9, 2005)

Daniel_B said:


> So, I've never heard of this company before, but apparently Zvezda is releasing a 60cm (23.6 inches) Star Destroyer in December. Looks cool I guess. Kind of out of the blue.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/Zvezda.ModelKits/posts/798131456956327


They are well known in the ship modeling community for their kits of Russian subject.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

The instruction sheet has been posted!!!!

https://vk.com/doc49818189_439024462?hash=0a03aa4ac068bac9cb&dl=40f2221216c8c8d596


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

And so easy to read too LOL. I sure hope this is available in the US and not too pricey.


----------



## INVAR (Mar 28, 2014)

Definitely DEFINITELY going to have to find a way to get one of those.

I just worry Revell will dump those into their "Masterpiece" (aka Fine Molds) line, and charge $300.00 per kit.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

INVAR said:


> Definitely DEFINITELY going to have to find a way to get one of those.
> 
> I just worry Revell will dump those into their "Masterpiece" (aka Fine Molds) line, and charge $300.00 per kit.


*heh* well, I'm not much of a betting man but I would not put money against that happening.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

INVAR said:


> Definitely DEFINITELY going to have to find a way to get one of those.
> 
> I just worry Revell will dump those into their "Masterpiece" (aka Fine Molds) line, and charge $300.00 per kit.


Isn't this kit close to 2' long? With that much styrene, so many small parts to create molds for, and U.S. distributors having to pay import fees, I'll be surprised if it's under $200 regardless.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

I suspect the price will come in around the same as the TOS-E or the 22" Eagle. Maybe more for import costs. I can't see it going for as much as the FM/Masterpiece Falcon. There are nowhere near as many small parts all individually molded.


----------



## electric indigo (Dec 21, 2011)

Their larger battleship kits are going for around 70 Euros here, so there's hope the SD won't end up far from that.

Edit: Just found the announcement at a german online shop: 90 Euros!


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

INVAR said:


> Definitely DEFINITELY going to have to find a way to get one of those.
> 
> I just worry Revell will dump those into their "Masterpiece" (aka Fine Molds) line, and charge $300.00 per kit.


WELL..................
Your talking about the Falcon, which when it came out 10 YEARS ago, ran for $250.00 at least.

10 years later, $300.00 is not out of line.
And the prices I've seen on it, are still around $250.00, so really considering inflation, its cheaper than when it was first released.

Considering that you'll be able to get the kit from Zvezda on either eBay or Amazon, I wonder why people are concerned if Revell repackages it or not.

There ARE some details about the kit that concern me though.
Where the two radar domes connect to the conning tower, there are HEXAGONAL 'baskets' if you will.
This detail is not accurate at all to the ESB-SD.
So im wondering where they got their CG file (or what info they used to generate a file).


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

robiwon2 said:


> The instruction sheet has been posted!!!!
> 
> https://vk.com/doc49818189_439024462?hash=0a03aa4ac068bac9cb&dl=40f2221216c8c8d596


Ugh!!!!!
Looking at the direction sheet, I see the same flaw that the new Revell 1/4000 scale kit has.

This DOES answer one question for me, that Zvezda appears to have gotten their data from the same source.

This is going to be really hard to describe, but here goes.
If you look at the direction sheet, look for the side view (shown periodically on the steps) of the SD on the left side of the pages.

Notice how the side trench is perfectly horizontal and that the front of the conning tower is square to this......
Meanwhile, the superstructure follows the diagonal angle of the hull.

In reality on the studio miniature, the conning tower is square to the rest of the superstructure - not the side trench.

So, the fix will either have to be to cut down the neck to bring the angle back to square. Or someone might do a correct part on Shapeways or something.

Also, the conning tower is again too big (like it also is on the Revell kit).


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

ClubTepes said:


> Ugh!!!!!
> Looking at the direction sheet, I see the same flaw that the new Revell 1/4000 scale kit has.
> 
> This DOES answer one question for me, that Zvezda appears to have gotten their data from the same source.
> ...


I think it's helpful to point out these differences with the studio original. It sounds like the conning tower angle is an easy fix, but the size far harder. Shapeways will undoubtedly offer a replacement for those who can't live with it. To my eye, the size discrepancy isn't so noticeable that I'd spend the money to swap it out, but that's just me. I once spent months wrestling the AMT kit into something passably resembling a SD. The Z-SD is a much better starting point, IMHO.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

A complete new bridge may match the cost of the kit itself. I would settle for a more accurate bridge face piece to replace the kit part.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

electric indigo said:


> Their larger battleship kits are going for around 70 Euros here, so there's hope the SD won't end up far from that.
> 
> Edit: Just found the announcement at a german online shop: 90 Euros!


Is that MSRP or is that a discounted pre-release/reservation price?

Either way, that's not too bad at all. Shipping will be a king b--ch I expect.


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

electric indigo said:


> Their larger battleship kits are going for around 70 Euros here, so there's hope the SD won't end up far from that.
> 
> Edit: Just found the announcement at a german online shop: 90 Euros!


This for the battleship or the Star Destroyer. (90 Euros is not bad if for the Star Destroyer).


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

ClubTepes said:


> Ugh!!!!!
> Looking at the direction sheet, I see the same flaw that the new Revell 1/4000 scale kit has.
> 
> This DOES answer one question for me, that Zvezda appears to have gotten their data from the same source.
> ...


This might help in your explanation:

ILM Modelmakers Share Star Wars Stories and Secrets - Tested

Check out picture of SD with George Lucas standing behind it.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

Opus Penguin said:


> This might help in your explanation:
> 
> ILM Modelmakers Share Star Wars Stories and Secrets - Tested
> 
> Check out picture of SD with George Lucas standing behind it.


Yes, thank you for helping to illustrate my point.

As this shows, if one looks at the bottom edge of the conning tower, its easy to see that it is parallel to the upper edge of the the main superstructure.

It is not this way on either the Revell or the Zvezda kit.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Amazingly the Armada game piece of the SD got the bridge angle correct!


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

The thing is... the artist in me looks at conning tower angle and thinks it looks better angled to be parallel to the ship's center line. :wink2: So now I have to decide: do I fix it to keep my rivet-counting brethren from vomiting if they see my build or do I build it so it looks pleasing to my eye? (Actually, I know the answer to that) Truthfully, the ILM original looks like the one that's wrong even though its not. Are there pictures out there of the 3-foot ANH version to see if it's the same on that one? We'll have to see what the new Rogue One digital asset looks like.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

I think, and this is just random thinking, part of the issue may be that the Star Destroyer may have been built more with an eye towards the impression it gave on film than what an 'objective' view, outside of film language context, wants, expects to see.

If that gaming miniature Robiwan2 shows is, indeed, accurate, then consider: If that was filmed head-on, the expectation would be seeing the 'face' of the bridge complex flat on, which brings the rest of the 'pagoda' parallel and brings the 'nose' up, creating a bit of foreshortening. It makes the 'whole' wider, larger, more menacing. 

At least that's my best guess.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

Here are a ton of shots of the ANH 3-footer. It looks like the conning tower is indeed parallel to the upper hull surface, but to my eye it doesn't seem as noticeable as it is on the ESB 8-footer. It might be that the 3-footer's triangular hull thickness is flatter than the 8-footer (which looks beefier). If Bandai produces their own kit, I wish they'd make it the ANH version. The 8-footer has more detail, but the ANH is the original and, to me, it's proportions and detail will always be "right."

https://onedrive.live.com/?id=B9FE0AEBDC25FDBC!7065&cid=B9FE0AEBDC25FDBC


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

robiwon posted some new pics over at the RPF:

New Zvezda Star Destroyer Model kit - Page 7

Mostly sprue shots.


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

The shot of him holding it gives it good scale. This thing will be awesome if we can get it for an affordable price.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Just bought one on eBay.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

robiwon2 said:


> Just bought one on eBay.


May I assume you're getting the drill and fiber optics and the LEDs ready?


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Steve H said:


> May I assume you're getting the drill and fiber optics and the LEDs ready?


Ah, you know me all too well.....


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

I have to say, that's some impressive, thought-out packaging going on there. Looks very classy! Don't forget to check under the 'tray' in case there's other stuff.

Seriously, that looks like world class packaging. These boys are in it to compete.


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Robn1 found these two shots on the bay of e:

001_zpsnxwhwpyf.jpg Photo by robn1 | Photobucket

002_zpseaopiybk.jpg Photo by robn1 | Photobucket


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Looks like the release date might be the 15th!


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

robiwon2 said:


> Looks like the release date might be the 15th!


An official release? available in places other than ebay?

I see the kits are dropping into the $120 range including shipping. Getting there...


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Just got notification that my Zvezda Star Destroyer has shipped!!!!!!!!


----------



## oshkosh619 (Feb 24, 2009)

Mine has shipped from Russia With Love! Now the waiting game begins...


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Unboxing video posted by Madhatter on SSM.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

I'd love to get one of these now, but I gave the wife a Christmas list with seven Bandai kits that I was behind on thinking she might get me one or two and she ended up getting ALL of them. So I'll be plenty busy. It's a good problem to have. :grin2:

But my birthday is in six months, so hopefully by then the prices will have stabilized and maybe even gone down a bit.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Hunk A Junk said:


> I'd love to get one of these now, but I gave the wife a Christmas list with seven Bandai kits that I was behind on thinking she might get me one or two and she ended up getting ALL of them. So I'll be plenty busy. It's a good problem to have. :grin2:
> 
> But my birthday is in six months, so hopefully by then the prices will have stabilized and maybe even gone down a bit.


Plus by waiting a bit you get the benefit of the experience of those who go before you, various correction and enhancement sets (both photoetch and 3D Printed) and the inspiration from some kid in Japan who typically creates a jaw dropping replica beyond the scope of mortal man...


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

robiwon2 said:


> Unboxing video posted by Madhatter on SSM.


Found another one (mine's better :grin2: ) with some nice close-ups of some of the parts.


----------



## electric indigo (Dec 21, 2011)

"Imperskij Zvezdnyj Razrushitel!!!"

Looks like you could get an exclusive 1/2700 Tantive if you had pre-ordered the kit.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

edge10 said:


> Found another one (mine's better :grin2: ) with some nice close-ups of some of the parts.


The close-ups are awesome! Really gives you a good sense of the parts. Man, I can't wait to see people super-detail the schmidt out of this baby!


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Comparison picture posted on the RPF this morning. Left to right is a Randy Cooper, then the Anigrand, next is the Zvezda, and last, a resin kit. A few things I noticed. First, I'm surprised how close in size the Zvezda is to the Ani. Also notice that the bridge and superstructure are nearly the same size between the two.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Hobby Terra in Ukraine has the kit in stock now... $165 so it isn't cheap. But they are a reliable vendor.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

I have to say, I'm enjoying this journey. I would never have thought the shapes and relationships of those shapes of the Star Destroyer were as complex as they seem to be.


----------



## Newbie123 (Sep 7, 2016)

Interesting. The bridge on the Z looks proportional to the Cooper kit, while the Ani looks much smaller proportionally than the Cooper but proportional to the resin kit.


----------



## publiusr (Jul 27, 2006)

We need someone with Shaw's skills to do drawings--showing the evolution of Star Destroyer models. Zvezda, Revell and Disney's die-cast seem similar.

For years, this kit influenced not just models but toys:
1995 AMT ERTL STAR WARS STAR DESTROYER FIBER OPTIC MODEL Kit No. 8782 Complete | eBay

The trench made the ISD look a bit taller. Look at the filming model--and the treanch is thinner--that has been seen--and now new die-casts of all sorts have the edge almost razor thin.

Zvezda seems to split the difference a bit. The trench is there--but not as tall as on earlier kits.

I wonder if this artist influenced things: nice Victory Victory-class Star Destroyer ? Fractalsponge.net

http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=33784


----------



## publiusr (Jul 27, 2006)

robiwon2 said:


> Amazingly the Armada game piece of the SD got the bridge angle correct!


The arrow hull seems a bit wide.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

I think there are a couple of interesting things going on there in the design.

1. The way the bridge block, tower and the whole 'pagoda' on the top of the ship 'cheats' the design depending on viewing angle and makes it look HUGE from behind, just insane huge.

2. If you have the bridge block facing head-on that brings the nose up, creating a foreshortening and making the ship seem wider. 

We see both of these quite clearly in Star Wars. The real one. What some call 'episode IV'.


----------



## publiusr (Jul 27, 2006)

Now, is there a "fold" in the lower reactor dome/fuel tank structure--or is that supposed to be a true hemisphere?


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

I ordered mine and was told it was shipped on the 7th. I just got a tracking number on the 15th from USPS saying "We have received notice that the originating post is preparing to dispatch this mail piece." I think that means it is ready to leave Russia and head to the states.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Steve H said:


> I think there are a couple of interesting things going on there in the design.
> 
> 1. The way the bridge block, tower and the whole 'pagoda' on the top of the ship 'cheats' the design depending on viewing angle and makes it look HUGE from behind, just insane huge.
> 
> ...


That is the brilliance of the design!
The human eye insists on seeing the side tech as parallel to the superstructure so you get a forced perspective effect from some angles. When seeing the ship from the rear 3/4 you get that same effect along with the engine cutout going to another vanishing point. The top/side view gives you another persective shift with the bridge and superstructure 'roof', in the forward view the ship looms over you even at a distance.
It is a remarkable design


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

publiusr said:


> Now, is there a "fold" in the lower reactor dome/fuel tank structure--or is that supposed to be a true hemisphere?


It's never been a true dome hemisphere.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Double Giggity!!!!

Latest update from USPS Tracking- *"Processed Through Facility	ISC NEW YORK NY(USPS)	December 22, 2016 1:45 am"*

It's in the States!!!!!


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

American unboxing video from Jason Eaton:






Sorry, but it looks like you will need to watch this one at youtube.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Well, I have filed a claim with the US Post Office for finding a lost package! My SD landed in NY on the 22nd and has not been tracked since, no movement out of NY, no new tracking info. The most it would have spent in NY would have been a couple hours before it was shipped out again. It has now been one full week with no movement. With the claim I filed hopefully the lost SD will be found, but at this point I'm holding very little hope. It may be gone for good.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

I hope it was insured- hate to hear this and thinking happy thoughts...


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

I wouldn't worry too much, not yet. It doesn't show it being cleared thru customs and it hit at the peak of holiday crazy time. 

I had an amazingly horrid epic time with with a package shipped from Japan, where it was bounced BACK to Japan claiming the OCR scanner couldn't find a valid delivery address (even tho the captured scan SHOWED the address clearly) and I had to work with the local office to watch the journey very carefully on the re-return..I finally got the package, a one week express took over two. 

Stuff gets stuck. It's a big box. Filing the claim was a good move and maybe it'll get it unstuck. Fingers crossed for you!


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Thanks guys. Fingers crossed....


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

You know, re-reading the USPS page there, I can't help but wonder if maybe it hasn't actually left Russia yet.

Not to make things worse, just speculating here.

Well, no, I'm probably wrong. See, what I was thinking was that USPS NYC may have gotten the electronic "You will be getting this package" message but not the physical package yet, just the note and the web notification doesn't have enough options (for no good reason) to differentiate. I was told by a senior person at the local hub that the consumer side of their site was pretty bad compared to the internal tracking. 

Maybe you might want to go to your local package hub and talk to someone there in person. I've found it works much better to be able to look someone in the eye and get them involved with you as a person, not just "email #10604" of their workload.

Hang in there!


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

The tracking states that it has been processed thru the facility in NY, so I would say it is definitely state side right now. Goggled "what is ISC NY" and upon reading some reviews it seems a package could sit there a few hours up to several weeks or months! 

Keeping the hope alive....


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

A few months ago I have an Amazon package tracked as far as our local Post Office and then it totally disappeared from the planet. It has yet to show up anywhere- as far as the main shipper was concerned it was off loaded at the postal facility, as far as that facility shows it never arrived.
It was a 3TB drive and expansion pod for my son's PS4- a birthday gift. Amazon managed to get a replacement shipped for free which did arrive on time for his party but to this day nobody knows what happened to the first shipment- it still shows pending arrival on the order page...

I do hope your package reappears on the radar and we start to see the photos of your build. Ordering online is a blessing and a curse- only way to get some things but you feel so helpless watching the updates...


----------



## electric indigo (Dec 21, 2011)

Maybe they think the package contains the droids they were looking for...


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Good news. I just got an email stating that it arrived in Harrodsburg KY, where I live. That's extremely odd as it did not go thru our Louisville hub, all packages go thru Louisville. Well, should be delivered tomorrow.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Another oddity, I got another email this morning saying the kit arrived at my local PO at 5:24am this morning. How can the same package, arrive twice at the same location, 14 hours apart????

Oh well, should be on todays truck for delivery.....


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Sounds like their tracking system is erratic. At least you know it is still in motion and you should have an enjoyable weekend!


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Sitting here watching for the mail man to pull up.....


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

And he pulled up with this!!


----------



## INVAR (Mar 28, 2014)

Awesome for you! 

I remain envious.

I will have to wait a bit more before I can splurge and attempt the buy.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Victory! It looks like the box took some hits and survived!

Enjoy!


----------



## MEGA1 (Jul 18, 2000)

*Star Destroyer Now Available*

The Star Destroyer from Zvezda is now available in limited quantities from MegaHobby.com 

https://www.megahobby.com/products/star-wars-star-destroyer-1-2700-zvezda.html


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Don't let the mouse find out about that!


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Yeah it was shipped in a mailer bag, not a box. But it's all good. The contents were well protected by the sturdiness of the box itself.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

MEGA1 said:


> The Star Destroyer from Zvezda is now available in limited quantities from MegaHobby.com
> 
> https://www.megahobby.com/products/star-wars-star-destroyer-1-2700-zvezda.html


Thanks for that heads up. Just snagged one.


----------



## JeffBond (Dec 9, 2013)

$170 without shipping?!? I would stick to eBay if I were you...


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

About the cheapest on eBay your going to get one is $120 shipped. That is still coming from Russia along with that uneasy queasiness of it actually making it here without being confiscated by customs for some silly reason.

If you have the money, getting one that is already in the states relieves a lot of stress. Trust me.


----------



## Daniel_B (Jun 28, 2016)

JeffBond said:


> $170 without shipping?!? I would stick to eBay if I were you...


That's fine with me to get it sooner. I already have one coming from Russia, but it could be a month before it gets here. I may just resell that one.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

The price includes free shipping, if you choose that option.


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

robiwon2 said:


> And he pulled up with this!!


From Russia with Love!:grin2: 
Sure it's a relief that it arrived. Enjoy the build and post pictures!


----------



## crowe-t (Jul 30, 2010)

Is there a particular E-Bay seller that anyone recommends?

I see MegaHobby has them but at $169 that's a lot.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Just too much woolongs for me. Oh well.


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

John P said:


> Just too much woolongs for me. Oh well.


Maybe if you settle for one, instead of your standard case of whatever your buying, you could afford it.


----------



## bigdaddydaveh (Jul 20, 2007)

Anyone else hear the rumor that Revell was going to rebox/release this in the US next year?


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

bigdaddydaveh said:


> Anyone else hear the rumor that Revell was going to rebox/release this in the US next year?


We know that Revell of Germany is going to offer this kit. No news on Revell USA.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Yes, Revell of Germany will get it in April. Zvezda has stated that Europe will get the kit but not the US.

Oh, I stated on mine yesterday by the way. I'll put a WIP soon. But to tide you over, here is a shot of the new 15 inch lights and sound Revell kit _inside_ the Zvezda's lower hull!


----------



## JGinyard (Nov 5, 2016)

My Zvezda Star Destroyer was delivered yesterday thankfully moments before I was about to head out. I'm glad I caught it because I really wasn't looking forward to rescheduling a delivery from Russia and possibly having the post office screw it up and return it. I actually had that happen to me once with Bandai's 1/144th Falcon. It went all the way back to Japan when someone failed to process the redelivery. Anyway, the Zvezda kit is a beauty with fine, crisp details and regardless whether you choose to modify / accurize or build it stock, there's very little room to complain. As far as an injection kit of the Star Destroyer, this is king of the hill for now. If and when Bandai decides to make one, we'll reexamine that statement.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Glad you got yours in!!!

I have the whole ship mocked up in sub assemblies on my bench right now. Waiting on my fiber optic order to arrive.

Looking at the ship almost brought a tear to my eye. This is truly the Holy Grail of Star Wars models we have been wanting for the last 40 years!!!


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

robiwon2 said:


> Glad you got yours in!!!
> 
> I have the whole ship mocked up in sub assemblies on my bench right now. Waiting on my fiber optic order to arrive.
> 
> Looking at the ship almost brought a tear to my eye. This is truly the Holy Grail of Star Wars models we have been wanting for the last 40 years!!!


Wife: What's wrong honey?

Robiwon: It's just these darn allergies... <sniff> <sniff>


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

edge10 said:


> Wife: What's wrong honey?
> 
> Robiwon: It's just these darn allergies... <sniff> <sniff>


Hunk a Junk's wife: "Jeez, honey. You're crying? It must be because of a model. Again. I'm going to the liquor store." 

:wink2: 

(Just kidding. My wife is great. She got me seven kits for Christmas. Just yesterday I told her, "I don't need to get any new kits for a while. I've got enough in the stash to last for a decade." She responded, "It's a relatively cheap hobby. Get what makes you happy." She's mine. ALL MINE!)


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Hunk A Junk said:


> Hunk a Junk's wife: "Jeez, honey. You're crying? It must be because of a model. Again. I'm going to the liquor store."
> 
> :wink2:
> 
> (Just kidding. My wife is great. She got me seven kits for Christmas. Just yesterday I told her, "I don't need to get any new kits for a while. I've got enough in the stash to last for a decade." She responded, "It's a relatively cheap hobby. Get what makes you happy." She's mine. ALL MINE!)



I look at the Star Destroyer as 'the last kit I'll ever need to buy' (yeah right!), due to the detailing that you could do with it.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

LOL, my wife is very supportive. Two years ago I asked her if I could drop the money on a Salzo Galactica. She said yes without batting an eye.


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

I broke down and ordered one. It will be February before I get it though, but total price was $110 including shipping!


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Congrats, your going to love it!


----------



## Opus Penguin (Apr 19, 2004)

Got notification it shipped!


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Here is Stellar_Expanse's (from the Starship Modeller forum) OOTB build:

http://i.imgur.com/lhrAdw8.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/1YHca3J.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/PggFMFN.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/sMjzUku.jpg

Posted here:

Starship Modeler Discussion Forums :: Log in


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

That is a sweet OTB build, Edge. To me, that's the perfect paint job for this kit. Simple, but with just enough shading (blackbacking or wash or whatever he did) to bring out the detail without going over the top. Really nice. The only thing I might add to my build is I plan to make a template with masking frisket with random small squares that I can add all over the hull to break up the white. Maybe some extra pencil panel lines if I really want to busy it up.


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Hunk A Junk said:


> That is a sweet OTB build, Edge. To me, that's the perfect paint job for this kit. Simple, but with just enough shading (blackbacking or wash or whatever he did) to bring out the detail without going over the top. Really nice. The only thing I might add to my build is I plan to make a template with masking frisket with random small squares that I can add all over the hull to break up the white. Maybe some extra pencil panel lines if I really want to busy it up.


Just to be absolutely clear: That is Stellar_Expanse's build not mine. Currently money is a too tight for me to afford the kit. One day, but not today.


----------



## Hunk A Junk (Jan 28, 2013)

edge10 said:


> Just to be absolutely clear: That is Stellar_Expanse's build not mine. Currently money is a too tight for me to afford the kit. One day, but not today.


Oh, I know. I haven't been over to starshipmodeler's forum in years, so I'm glad you pointed to it.

I could get a Z kit, but I've got plenty on the bench and in the stash until at least my birthday later this year. There's also a small part of me hoping that Bandai will announce a bigger kit soon. If they don't by mid-summer, I'm all in.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Hunk A Junk said:


> O
> I could get a Z kit, but I've got plenty on the bench and in the stash until at least my birthday later this year.


I've got plenty until at least my 200th birthday!


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

John P said:


> I've got plenty until at least my 200th birthday!


When 200 years old you reach, looks so good you will not!


----------



## publiusr (Jul 27, 2006)

Even the left-over sprue looks like it would be interesting.


----------



## bragstone (Apr 14, 2007)

Hi all
I have a question where does parts K3 and K4 attach? I assembled 98% percent of this kit and spotted the parts on the tree, however I can not find it in the instructions.


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

bragstone said:


> Hi all
> I have a question where does parts K3 and K4 attach? I assembled 98% percent of this kit and spotted the parts on the tree, however I can not find it in the instructions.


The kit has two sets of side walls for the bridge tower for some odd reason, that's probably what you have there.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

robn1 said:


> The kit has two sets of side walls for the bridge tower for some odd reason, that's probably what you have there.


Are they identical?


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

Richard Baker said:


> Are they identical?


I've only seen pics but they seem to be.


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

disregard.


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

These are the sprues with the duplicate parts, pics from Randy Cooper.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

That's odd, and curious. So they are the same parts? Huh. 

Given the parts breakdown on those two trees I can't help but wonder if that one tree, the one that isn't all bridge tower parts, was designed to be used for another, maybe future kit, and it made sense to put those tower parts there because they'll be used in a different way.

Or the parts count was so crazy they just forgot they were there.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Thanks!
Side note- first time I saw the underside Bridge piece- need to make that port side vertical bay looking thing we see in close up in TESB...


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

Tony, aka 308bits on Shapeways, just released these screen accurate shield generators. I'll add them to either this build or my second one in May. The bridge will need to be modified to make these fit since Zvezda added that wonky hexagon base on top.

https://www.shapeways.com/product/N2WHGUDYS/star-destroyer-zvesda-1-2700-shield-generator


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

robiwon2 said:


> Tony, aka 308bits on Shapeways, just released these screen accurate shield generators. I'll add them to either this build or my second one in May. The bridge will need to be modified to make these fit since Zvezda added that wonky hexagon base on top.
> 
> (picture snipped for bandwidth )


Those look really cool, but I have to ask. When you say screen accurate, is that accurate to one or the other of the filming miniatures, or accurate to the enlarged closeup model that was blown up in....was it Return of the Jedi?

Because it would not surprise me at all if there were differences between the two, ya know. 

It's an interesting question, really. Different models, miniatures fulfill different purposes. Obviously a larger 'close up' model will be able to have more detail then a part that is only a few inches on the full miniature. This question should apply to the larger 'face' of the bridge as well. If one details their Star Destroyer to match the various 'close up' super detailed segments can it be said to actually represent the filming miniature? 

Is a puzzlement.


----------



## robiwon2 (Jun 26, 2016)

I will have to ask Tony which ship he used as reference for this.


----------



## electric indigo (Dec 21, 2011)

More interesting is the question how much of the amazing detail will survive in the printed parts.


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Steve H said:


> Those look really cool, but I have to ask. When you say screen accurate, is that accurate to one or the other of the filming miniatures, or accurate to the enlarged closeup model that was blown up in....was it Return of the Jedi?
> 
> Because it would not surprise me at all if there were differences between the two, ya know.
> 
> ...


It matches the 8 footer (Avenger).


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

edge10 said:


> It matches the 8 footer (Avenger).


OK, so it matches a detail on an actual effects miniature and is not built from the 'close up' model designed to be blown up. 

Fair enough! 

I wasn't trying to throw shade on an aftermarket product, it's just after page after page of discussion on the 11 foot Enterprise miniature I guess I've gotten sensitive to the whole ' exact prop replica' Vs. 'idealized model treating the subject as a real vehicle that may not exactly match the effects miniature' pseudo war. 

I've yet to see anyone building their Enterprise (any scale) stating they want to EXACTLY and PERFECTLY match the colors of the 11 foot miniature go all the way and remove detail on the left side (and other places!) of their model, so they fail, FAIL on the 'recreate the 11 foot model perfectly' scale. *pant* *rant* *pant*

Whew. I need a nap.


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Here you go, take a gander for yourself:

http://www.modelermagic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/KG_AVENGER_STUDIO_MODEL-103.jpg

From this set:
Modeler's Miniatures & Magic


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

edge10 said:


> Here you go, take a gander for yourself:
> 
> http://www.modelermagic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/KG_AVENGER_STUDIO_MODEL-103.jpg
> 
> ...


*phew*

There sure is a LOT of stuff stuck onto that miniature, huh? I can't even imagine how many man-hours and kits were used. Yet oddly enough it brings to mind the thoughts of Mike Trim (Thunderbirds, Captain Scarlet, UFO and so on), who comments (The art of Mike Trim, 2006) on builds such as this as nonsense, just piling the 'detail' on smothers the design, overwhelms the viewer and so on. The approach he prefers tries to find a reasonable usefulness to the parts used, so they seem to have an actual function. I can understand his point. I look at those pics of the Star Destroyer, MUCH more detail than you could ever really see when watching the movie, and I do find myself looking at parts and thinking "Huh. Well, what's that for?" And of course once you take in the SIZE, the supposed scale of the ship it becomes "So they made that part of the ship look like that because, they had nothing better to do?" 

I know the purpose of all the 'Gubbins' (what the Century 21 team called 'greeblies') is to make the model visually interesting, not just giant sheets of off-gray plastic flaring and 'hot spotting' all over the place when filmed, and we're not really meant to SEE all that. It's just a tad jarring.


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Niart17 over at the RPF has made replacement parts for the shield generators and engine bells:

https://www.shapeways.com/product/2...-set-for-z-s-star-destroyer?optionId=62042208

https://www.shapeways.com/product/RTHEZG2NQ/star-destroyer-upgrade-set-no-1-1-2700?optionId=62043040


----------

