# Randy Cooper Galileo on the bench...



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

This subject has always been a personal fave (and I think the design holds up beautifully, thank you very much). 

Like a lot of old school TOS modelers I was more than a little disappointed with the old AMT kit. Fortunately Randy Cooper has ridden to the rescue with this faithful reproduction of the original Galileo, and all I can say is IT’S ABOUT TIME. After slogging ¾ of the way through another, particularly demanding model (http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/showthread.php?t=203471 ) I needed a sanity break, and the shuttlecraft has been a fun yet challenging* diversion.

Randy did a great job with the master, thanks in part to Phil Broad’s thoroughly researched and beautifully executed building drawings…
(http://www.cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicles/STShuttlecraft/ShuttlecraftPlans/GalileoVaultContours.htm ). 

There aren’t a lot of parts, which suits me fine.









The biggest (well, second biggest) challenge was scratching a new set of hollow engines to replace the solid resin parts that came with the kit. I used PVC pipe because I happened to have a length of the right gauge on hand, but the stuff is a nightmare to work with. Thank God for Evercoat putty. Seen below: the original solid resin engine (top) along with the putty-slathered replacement part. 









I needed hollow engines to accommodate a pair of aftermarket warp lighting circuits (originally purchased for that little PL TOS Enterprise kit I never got around to building).









Getting sharp, straight, crisp corners on those landing gear and step ladder cavities took a lot of puttying, filing, priming, and sanding.









*This is the first kit I’ve ever wired for lighting, and it’s been an ongoing education (special thanks to GKvfx for being my lighting guru on this project). It was a bit tricky creating a hidden channel through which to run the leads from the light circuits in the engines to the 9V power source in the hull. Thin strips of styrene helped hide the trenches beneath the web supports that came with the kit.










The twin, port side “mystery openings” at the underside of the prow presented a minor problem; the poorly molded resin parts which came with the kit defied my efforts to clean them up. Fortunately my friendly neighborhood laser-cutter guy was kind enough to whip up a replacement pair free-of-charge. 









Yeah, I know it’s a small detail, but the extra measure of crispness makes a big difference.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Although Randy offers a full interior, I opted to forego this in favor of the sort of frosted window illumination effect found on the FX miniature. There were a lot of reasons for this, some practical (save money) and some aesthetic (as spaceship interiors go, the Galileo's is pretty boring), but mostly it was a question of laziness.

The next time you see this interior it’s going to be filled with a rat’s nest of wires, foil, and LEDs.

















The top and bottom hull halves fit together pretty well, but you can see where I’ll have some puttying to do around the seams.

Here’s where AMT really blew it. What were they thinking?

The featureless rear bulkhead seen below is just a piece of styrene sheet I installed in the lower hull so I’d have something to mount the battery compartment and power switches to. 









The inner lower bulkhead seen above will ultimately be concealed by the exterior façade piece pictured below. Small magnets will be used to hold the piece in place .









Next step is to install the interior and impulse engine lights, which will basically be a series of LEDs fit onto carefully positioned styrene “trees” and diffused with 1/8" vellum sheeting (the same stuff I’m using for the windows). Tinted photographic gel will be used to control the variance in color temperature between cabin lighting and thruster glow … but I’m getting ahead of myself.

Stay tuned for further updates.

More info about this and other Randy Cooper models can be found here: http://randycoopermodels.com/


----------



## KUROK (Feb 2, 2004)

Great photos!

Keep 'em coming.

A favorite subject of mine...


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Carson,
how long didi it take to get the kit from Randy?
I've got one on order and I'm getting antsy...

and what can I do to get a set of those "mystery grill covers"?

Hmmm?


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Nice, clean build, Rob! Also, nice BIG model! Very impressive thus far! :thumbsup:


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> how long didi it take to get the kit from Randy?


Since I placed an order early on I anticipated a bit of a wait while Randy worked to complete the master and make the initial castings. Last I heard he was on location working a job, so that may have put a crimp in his GK delivery schedule. Why don't you drop him a line?



Lou Dalmaso said:


> and what can I do to get a set of those "mystery grill covers"?


I may have a couple extra I can send you (I owe you for those circular dial masks). 

Shoot me a PM with your snail-mail addy.


----------



## Steve Mavronis (Oct 14, 2001)

No disrespect but to me Randy's model's roof taper looks different compared to both the full size prop and filming model? It looks too high on the front end to me compared to the reference pictures on this page:

http://www.cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicles/STShuttlecraft/GalileoTop.htm


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Carson Dyle said:


> Since I placed an order early on I anticipated a bit of a wait while Randy worked to complete the master and make the initial castings. Last I heard he was on location working a job,
> 
> *>SNIPPAGE!<*


Per a pretty recent post by someone else at Starship Modeler, he's in Utah. Somewhere in or around the Ogden area, IIRC, as he recently showed up at ShoCon selling his kits and showing off upcoming masters.


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

I have this kit... also opted for the one w/o the interior... but now I am thinking about ordering another but with an interior.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Steve Mavronis said:


> No disrespect but to me Randy's model's roof taper looks different compared to both the full size prop and filming model?


Yeah, the leading edge of the roof is a bit too rounded, and it slopes a bit too low. This causes the subtle finned effect of the original to become slightly exaggerated, but it's an easy fix.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

Griffworks said:


> Per a pretty recent post by someone else at Starship Modeler, he's in Utah. Somewhere in or around the Ogden area, IIRC, as he recently showed up at ShoCon selling his kits and showing off upcoming masters.


According to his site, he took the Galileo molds with him to fulfill his orders as they come in.


----------



## capt Locknar (Dec 29, 2002)

Wow thats pretty impressive kit. How much and where???


I never really cared for Galileo but this kit has changed me mind LOL. 
Really looks good there Carson. :woohoo:


----------



## mikephys (Mar 16, 2005)

That kit is making me rethink my opinion of the TOS Galileo too! There's more to that design than first meets the eye.
Very nice build Carson. She's a beauty already!


----------



## Lloyd Collins (Sep 25, 2004)

Rob, she is looking real fine! I like that you are putting lights in her, as of the size, it would be a crime not to.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

I managed to get the bulk of the wiring done this weekend. 










This was just a test for placement, to make sure the lights were the proper distance from the windows to create a nice, even glow.










The ambient room light was pretty low when I took these, so the interior effect is not as bright as it appears. Photographic gel will warm up that cabin lighting, but you get the idea.


----------



## JGG1701 (Nov 9, 2004)

VERY NICE!!!:thumbsup: Dang , I wish that I could afford one of these!:freak:


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

Looks incredible...and this is one of the great underrated designs in my opinion. Take a look at the 1963 Studebaker Avanti--the designer of that car worked on the Galileo and you can see a number of design elements from the car in the shuttlecraft.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

jbond said:


> Take a look at the 1963 Studebaker Avanti--the designer of that car worked on the Galileo and you can see a number of design elements from the car in the shuttlecraft.


_Raymond Loewy_ worked on the _shuttlecraft?..._ 



















Clearly the two vehicles share certain design characteristics, but this is the first I've heard of the Loewy/ Galileo connection.


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

Coming along very well!!! :thumbsup:


----------



## lunadude (Oct 21, 2006)

jbond said:


> ...the 1963 Studebaker Avanti--the designer of that car worked on the Galileo...


The TOS shuttle design, was attributed to Matt Jefferies and Thomas Kellogg. Kellogg worked with Lowey, on the Avanti.
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Class_F_shuttlecraft
http://articles.latimes.com/2003/aug/17/local/me-kellogg17


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Interesting!

I'd always attributed the shuttle design solely to Jefferies. 

I'd love to learn more about Kellog's involvement. He must have been interviewed regarding this subject; I'll see what I can dig up online. 

Thanks for the heads-up, Jeff (you too, Lunadude).


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

lunadude said:


> The TOS shuttle design, was attributed to Matt Jefferies and Thomas Kellogg. Kellogg worked with Lowey, on the Avanti.


Well, ain't that a kick in the head! I'd never heard of Thomas Kellogg. According to the L.A. _Times_ obituary, he was part of a four-member team that designed the Avanti, supervised by Loewy.


Carson Dyle said:


> Clearly the two vehicles share certain design characteristics, but this is the first I've heard of the Loewy/ Galileo connection.


Maybe I'm missing something here, but the only thing I can see in common between the boxy Galileo shuttlecraft and the Coke-bottle curves of the Avanti is that both vehicles have asymmetrical thingies up front (the hood bulge on the Avanti, the grilles on the Galileo).


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

The way in which the front of the Avanti appears to be sandwiched between the sides reminds me of the shuttlecraft. 

I tried to find more info regarding Kellogg's contribution to Trek, but so far nothing has turned up. I'll keep looking, but if any you Treksperts can shed additional light on the Kellogg/ Galileo connection please do.


----------



## terryr (Feb 11, 2001)

Kellogg may have been an expert on the practical portion of the build. Avanti was fiberglass. Or maybe the interior.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B02E7DB1030F93AA2575BC0A9659C8B63

"After the Avanti, Mr. Kellogg went on to work on designs for exteriors of Rolls-Royce, Porsche and recreational vehicles; dinnerware for Wedgwood; the interior design of the DC-10 aircraft for McDonnell Douglas; and the shuttle craft for the ''Star Trek'' television series."

There's Tom Kellogg website but it wasn't responding.

http://www.tomkelloggdesign.com/


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Two places you _won't_ find any mention of Mr. Kellogg's contribution to the shuttle design are _The Art of Star Trek_ and _The Star Trek Sketch Book_. 

Ditto _The Making of Star Trek_ and _Inside Star Trek_.


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

Jefferies' original shuttlecraft design was so far from what they wound up with I wonder how involved he was with that final design--so much was dictated by what they could build, it really went off in another direction. I'm sure Jefferies supervised the interior and the exterior elements that mirror the Enterprise like the engines and entrance door.

The Avanti has that "sandwich" effect Carson mentions plus the slope of the front of the car is quite like the nose of the shuttlecraft. They share the same clean, angular look.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Yeah, I'd love to know more about how we got from here...










...to here:










Specifically, it would be interesting to know to what extent Kellogg determined the look of the exterior. I mean, has anyone here ever laid eyes on any of the man's sketches? Or know of anyone who has?


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Well,
I think the answer is spelled out on the blue page..
They musta been "directed" by AMT to redesign something that would be easier to make a model of.

and what's easier than a refrigerator box on its side?


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

Not easier to make a model of--easier to construct full size. That's where the real cost of doing complex, curved shapes would have come in. AMT showed they could easily do complex shapes in model kit form with the Klingon ship--but if they'd had to build that as a 20-foot stage prop on a budget the Klingon design would no doubt have been simplified in the same way.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

A friend and fellow Trek fan who once spoke to Gene Winfield about his role in the shuttle design/construction had this to offer:

_"Gene Winfield told me that Jefferies brought him a curved, unbuildable (at least, unbuildable within their budget) design. Winfield had one of his guys draw up a blueprint for the framework of the familiar, slab-sided design, then went over to Jefferies' house to finalize the plan."_

Success has many fathers, lol.


----------



## X15-A2 (Jan 21, 2004)

As to Mr Jefferies contribution to the final design of the Shuttlecraft, we need look no further that the note he wrote on his sketch of their design: "As redesign by AMT-Phoenix to suit mfg capability, interior also by AMT"

He didn't design it, he only approved it (and probably made small suggestions).


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Yeah Phil, that's my interpretation as well.

All of which makes me wonder what happened to the original design sketches.


----------



## jackshield (May 20, 2008)

Carson Dyle said:


> Yeah Phil, that's my interpretation as well.
> 
> All of which makes me wonder what happened to the original design sketches.


i thought those were the orange and green ones


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Well, if Jefferies didn't design the shuttle and only approved AMT's redesign (as his handwritten notes seem to suggest), what happned to the design sketches Jefferies approved?


----------



## jackshield (May 20, 2008)

Carson Dyle said:


> Well, if Jefferies didn't design the shuttle and only approved AMT's redesign (as his handwritten notes seem to suggest), what happned to the design sketches Jefferies approved?


the orange and green sketches have signature, but i cannot make it out.
but on one it states "round design to expensive" (or something to that effect)
i'm actually glad that design fell thru, it would have looked like many other space vehicles of the time, i have always liked the unique look star trek took on. are aerodynamics really required in space, obviously mr rodenberry didnt think so.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

jackshield said:


> the orange and green sketches have signature, but i cannot make it out.


The signature is Jefferies', but his drawing of the final shuttlecraft design is apparently based on someone else's (i.e. Thomas Kellogg's) concept. 

It's the original concept sketch (or sketches) I'd love to get a look at, but so far as I've been able to determine they've never seen the light of day -- at least not as far as the fan community is concerned.


----------



## X15-A2 (Jan 21, 2004)

By "original" are you referring to those drawn by "Kellogg" or whoever was on the AMT end of the design process?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Either one. 

I've long been under the impression that Matt Jefferies designed the Galileo single-handedly. Now I learn someone else was primarily responsible. That someone else must have generated concept sketches, and it's those sketches I'd like to see.

But, you know, good luck with that one, lol.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Carson,
I hope you find your "missing link" of sketches.

I know that who-ever did come up with the final design of the shuttle must have at least been sensitive to Jeffries' design of the E in that the shuttle nacelles look like miniature versions of the Big E nacelles. 

I guess thats the big reason I assumed that Jeffries designed both from the ground up.

I like the original designs, but I have to say the bean counters were right about it. It would have been a nightmare to handle with the state of special effects in the '60's.

plus how much fun would the "galileo 2" have been?


----------



## X15-A2 (Jan 21, 2004)

We missed it "by that much", Mr Kellogg just died about 7 weeks ago. Drat.

Here is the dope on Mr Kellogg:

New York Times

Thomas W. Kellogg, 71; A Studebaker Avanti Designer

By DOUGLAS MARTIN
Published: August 19, 2003

Thomas W. Kellogg, an industrial designer who worked on the Avanti, a radically styled, powerful sports coupe that could not save its maker, Studebaker, from financial collapse, died on Thursday in Newport Beach, Calif. He was 71 and lived in Irvine, Calif.

A daughter, Kris Machado, said Mr. Kellogg suffered several broken ribs two weeks ago when his car hit a center divider. He had also had congestive heart failure and lung disorders for years.

The Studebaker-Packard Corporation was teetering on the brink of financial collapse when Sherwood Egbert became its president in 1961. He decided the company needed a hot, splashy car and hired Raymond Loewy, a giant among 20th-century designers, who had earlier worked for Studebaker and whose designs ranged from streamlined locomotives to the logos of Shell and Lucky Strike.

Just 10 days after being hired, Mr. Loewy put together a team of three designers to work with him -- John Ebstein, Robert Andrews and Mr. Kellogg. Mr. Loewy, who died in 1986, rented a two-room bungalow near his own home in Palm Springs, Calif., for a design studio. In two weeks, they had produced a small-scale model of the Avanti, whose name comes from the Italian word for forward.

A few weeks later, a full-scale model was completed. Studebaker's board ordered that the car be built as the company's answer to the Ford Thunderbird, with the provision that it be ready in one year. It was a great success when introduced at the New York Auto Show in April 1962.

The car was a two-door, four-passenger coupe with a long hood, short trunk, an asymmetrical power bulge on the hood, virtually no chrome trim and no fins. The interior was inspired by aircraft flight decks, with numerous toggle switches on the console.

The Avanti exhilarated sports car enthusiasts and was even exhibited as sculpture in art galleries, but it was not enough to save Studebaker. The company, which had stopped making Packard automobiles in the late 50's, closed its American Studebaker operations in 1963 and its last plant, in Canada, in 1966.

But the car refused to fade away; a succession of small manufacturers have since made cars inspired by and sometimes named for the Avanti. Mr. Kellogg helped design some of them. There are also Avanti owners' groups, which invited Mr. Kellogg to speak.

''I've concluded that the car is cosmic,'' Mr. Kellogg said in an interview with The Associated Press in 2000. ''It has some sort of personality or spirit that keeps finding people to take it over and stroke it and keep it going.''

Thomas William Kellogg was born in Monrovia, Calif., on March 31, 1932. He grew up on a farm in Illinois, with early memories of sitting on his father's lap and holding the steering wheel of the family car. At 15, he learned to drive in a Studebaker.

He graduated from the Art Center College of Design in Pasadena in 1955. Mr. Loewy became aware of his work when he visited the school. Mr. Kellogg was totally unprepared for the master designer's call.

''At first he thought it was a joke,'' Ms. Machado said, ''but then he heard the French accent.''

Mr. Kellogg is survived -- in addition to his daughter, who lives in Aliso Viejo, Calif. -- by his former wife, Greta, of Irvine; another daughter, Kara Kellogg of Irvine; his son Thomas Jr. of Irvine; his sisters Diane Lowe of Glendale, Calif., and Susan Farrel of Torrance, Calif; his brother, Garth, of Palm Desert, and four grandchildren.

After the Avanti, Mr. Kellogg went on to work on designs for exteriors of Rolls-Royce, Porsche and recreational vehicles; dinnerware for Wedgwood; the interior design of the DC-10 aircraft for McDonnell Douglas; and the shuttle craft for the ''Star Trek'' television series.

In the hospital room where he died, according to his daughter Ms. Machado, Mr. Kellogg remarked, ''This is a nicely designed room.''


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

I hate to break it to you Phil, but he died in 2003.


----------



## spockboy (Dec 19, 2007)

*Where the Galileo ended up*

Here's where the old girl ended up before being restored.
I have pictures of her first being built if anyone is interested.
Let me know and I'll post them.


----------



## Spidey7 (Jun 5, 2008)

Yeah, Yeah, Post 'Em!!!!! BTW your link requires a password.


----------



## spockboy (Dec 19, 2007)

*shuttlecraft pics*

Actually Carson posted a link to the site (that I got the pictures from) a few messages back. 
Here it is again.
This site is remarkable!

http://www.cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicles/STShuttlecraft/GalileoTop.htm


I actually found a really badly made video of a team restoring the shuttlecraft,
I'll try to post it up on Youtube.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

The genesis of what wound up as the Galileo appears to have come from a series of thumbnail sketches Jefferies did for other assorted utility craft ideas. I'll see if I can dig it up (I'm pretty sure I have it on photobucket somewhere...).


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

Got it.










A closeup on the winner...


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

I think Andy Probert reworked some of these ideas into his "Sphynx" design that also went unused.

Still prefer the final design to Jefferies' rendering but if it was done before AMT got into the game that could have provided the direction for the final design. Obviously domes, and curved glass canopies were considered out of the question for numerous reasons from the expense of making large clear pieces like that for the full size prop vehicles to the reflection problems and views of the interior that would have made them a nightmare for the miniature process photography.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

spockboy said:


> Actually Carson posted a link to the site (that I got the pictures from)
> SNIP
> This site is remarkable!


Yep.

As it happens, the Cloudster site is maintained and operated by HobbyTalk member Phil Broad, aka X15-A2.

Captain April: Thanks for posting those sketches. Clearly the doodle of the "personnel carrier" bears a resemblance to the Galileo.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Carson,
I got the vents yesterday, they look fantastic!!

Many, many thanks!

Now if I can just get Randy to send me the kit...

but for NOW, I got some really keen vents!


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

I sometimes come here to vent too.


----------



## GKvfx (May 30, 2008)

Yeah, nobody vents like Carson......

:freak:


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Defintely have to crack into this kit soon. I'm waiting for Just an Illusions lighting kit to be available, for one thing. He says overhead and impulse exhaust lightsheet.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

John P said:


> I'm waiting for Just an Illusions lighting kit to be available, for one thing. He says overhead and impulse exhaust lightsheet.


Yeah, I know Gil is working on what I expect will be a sweet little light kit -- especially if you're planning to include the shuttle's interior. Randy incorporated something similar into his model, and it looks great.

My only question is whether Gil's kit could be powered via an internal battery source (as opposed to AC). If I'm not mistaken, the flat lighting system Randy used on his own model requires an AC connection; something I wanted to avoid.


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

A thought on powering the model externally. 

Two small holes could be drilled into the bottom of a nacelle, dropping bare wire through from the body (along the pylon) and possibly using two small 'contact plates' underneath, but leaving the bare wire exposed would work too. 

By putting similar contacts into a 'base plate/platform/stand and running the wiring through that to the wall, the model would get power when on the base, but not when being flown around the house 

Someone pulled a similar trick on his RC Avenger either here or over at R.I. recently. He ran the wallwart wires up through the stand and the only evidence on the Avenger were two very small copper contact points on the bottom.

An elegant solution, providing the best of both worlds.


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

I would like to see more on that idea.


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

I looked around for about 20 mins and I could not find the SD thread on either board. I gotta remember to subscribe to a thread when I see something cool so I don't lose track of it like this. Very annoying. The photo of the contact points on that SD is still sharp in my mind. I saw it in the last few weeks at most, but I just can't find it anywhere.

Essentially, it's the same principle as model trains and race cars. Power the track, set your engine on top, watch it go. 

The current is so neglibible that there is no physical danger should it be touched as the wall wart steps the juice down to 'safe' levels. If your kid or pet or drunk friend touches the base contacts, they'll get the mildest of shocks (like touchng a 9v to your tongue to see how much zap it's got left (an old musicians trick). It won't burn a piece of paper laid across it. The model itself has no current when it's off the stand. If you put it on 'backwards' the only danger is that it will not light. Nice. I'll post that darned pic when I find it as I plan to do something similar.

Sorry to digress, Carson!


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Been a while since I’ve posted, but after a brief vacation I’m back on the case.

Someone was asking how I fashioned the diagonal vents on the replacement engines, and I suspect I used the same technique Randy did: trimmed-out bits of pre-scribed styrene (I made two sets of extras in case I screwed up). 










In my case I bonded two sets of three vents to two pieces of thin styrene in order to more closely replicate the full-scale mock-up. The trick is to pre-bend the styrene parts by taping them against the curved engine piece, soaking them in hot water for a few minutes, and then popping them briefly in the freezer to set. This makes it a lot easier to affix the finished parts to the replacement engines.










Someone else wrote…

_“How did you treat the edge along the front of the shuttle (above the windows) to sharpen that a bit? I read that it looked a little too soft, but didn't appreciate how much till I could see it in person. Maybe I've been warped by the AMT version, but I think there should be a sharper angle there.”_

This may be the one aspect of this ship AMT got right, lol.

For reasons known only to him, Randy elected to have the forward section of his model’s “roof” slope downward into the forward bulkhead, joining the two with a soft curve. On the original full-scale mock-up there was (is?) no downward slope at the leading end of the roof, and the demarcation line between roof and forward bulkhead was/is considerably sharper (i.e. an edge instead of a curve). The result of this (as mentioned upthread) is that the fin effect created by the side bulkheads appears much taller and more pronounced at the prow of Randy’s model than it does on the production versions. Accuracy-wise, it’s the model’s only significant flaw* (at least the only one that appears significant to me).

Thing is, after pondering my options fix-wise, I came to the conclusion that, as inaccuracies go, this one just doesn’t bug me that much. At least not enough to spend the time and effort required to fix it.

Call me lazy, but I began this project as sanity-saving diversion from my labor-intensive Flying Sub build, and not to create the indisputably accurate “last word” on shuttlecraft models.

*For the record, in case there's any doubt, I hold Randy's work in very high regard. His Galileo model is far and away the best and most accurate version of this subject ever offered, and any nit-picks are just that. 

I know craftsmen like Randy can get fed to the teeth with the sort of Monday morning quarterbacking typical of sites like this, but I also know they can appreciate the desire by some kit-builders to "get it right." In this case, as I stated above, whatever issues Randy's shuttle has are easily addressed by those less lazy than yours truly.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Carson,
Thank you muchly for the info. 
At the risk of asking too much, do you have an order number for that prescribed styrene? I'm going to have to order some online. 

If it ain't an RC dunebuggy or Thomas the Tank Engine, then my only local Hobby shop aint got it.


was it Evergreen sheet? or another brand?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Sorry Lou, but I just grabbed a loose strip of groovy styrene from my supplies bin. 

Pretty sure it's the Evergreen stuff, but I couldn't swear to it.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

Carson Dyle said:


> Call me lazy, but I began this project as sanity-saving diversion from my labor-intensive Flying Sub build, and not to create the indisputably accurate “last word” on shuttlecraft models.


_Really_ impressive work on the nacelles so far. Of course, a real lazy person would have looked at the original solid ones and opted for a engine-powered down Galileo with lighted interior. Like this lazy schmuck:

http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/showthread.php?t=133100&highlight=galileo&page=11

Those lighted nacelles should be pretty cool, congrats for going the extra mile!


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

I was thinking a big wad of Aves and a lotta sanding would cure that sloped forehead, but I'm gonna agree with Carson and be too lazy. Besides, I'm gonna make it one of the others besides the Galileo, and who knows, that one MAY have had a rounded edge there!


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Finally, a small update.

It took me a while to figure out how to get a perfectly smooth semi-gloss finish over the decals. I ended up using a rattle can of the appropriately named "Mr. Semi-Gloss" (the Gunze stuff), followed by a lot of buffing-out with polishing abrasives. 










If you've never sanded over decals before, it can be a little nerve wracking; rub too hard, and you'll go through the clear coat and mess up the decal beneath. I practiced a few times over spare markings to get the hang of it, and am pretty pleased with the results.

Having finally solved the clear coat issue, I should be able to wrap up the rest of the model fairly quickly (yeah, yeah, famous last words).


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

I can't see any trace of film at all!
Well done:thumbsup:


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

GORgeous!!

Those window rims take a lot of cleaning up to get that smooth. At least they will on mine!


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

Looks good from what I can see.


----------



## Richard38 (Apr 16, 2002)

Carson Dyle,

Man that has to be the the most AWESOME Shuttle finish I have ever seen!!!! I love what you have done with the RC Galileo

Richard


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

VERY nice work.


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Yes, Rob - beautiful work thus far! Excellent job on the decaling.


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

Sweet finish, Rob. :thumbsup:


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Thanks, guys.

I completed all wiring chores over the weekend, and plan to insert the color temp gels over the cabin windows and impulse deck tonight. Once that's done I'll be able to seal up the hull, fill the seams, and commence with the final finishing and detailing.

Time to start thinking about a display stand...


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

Carson,

As for the stand...how's about making it look like a chunk of the shuttlebay? maybe the turntable?

Thanks for providing the inspiration! (and the vents) I'm still hunting for ribbed plastic to remake those rectangles on the nacelles, but I'm really getting psyched to start work on this. I'm thinking of making the door "work". (insert evil grin here)

I'm gonna take my time and make it my winter project, and it's an example like yours that gives me something to shoot for.


----------



## Antimatter (Feb 16, 2008)

I never understood why the ship has warp nacells but does not have a warp drive.


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

I think the ship WAS intended to have a low-grade warp drive. They just never indicated this consistently through the visual effects, particularly in Galileo Seven where dialogue indicates use of "booster" rockets and heated gas is shown venting from what looks like the warp nacelles. I don't think it's ever stated that the shuttles are incapable of FTL travel, and if you look at the way they're used in several episodes ("The Menagerie," "Metamorphosis" "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" and others) it makes absolutely no sense that the ships don't have warp drive. Clearly the details of the shuttle nacelles were designed to mirror the Enterprise warp nacelles,


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

The story problem with using the shuttle is that dramatically, the shuttle had to have a limited fuel source to keep the characters in jeopardy.

It would be natural since Shuttles were meant to be short range work horses meant to carry either more equipment than would be practical to beam, or to ferry diplomats.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Antimatter said:


> I never understood why the ship has warp nacells but does not have a warp drive.


It did have warp drive. At no point did they ever say it didn't, and in a few episodes it MUST have had it.

When Kirk and Mendez took off after the Enterprise when Spock stole it in The Menagerie, what would have been the point if their shuttle didn't have warp drive?

How could Loki (or was it Beale? They all look alike!) have stolen a shuttle and run from system to system if it didn't have warp drive?

Why would they be transporting Comissioner Hedford in The Changeling in a subwarp vehicle?

They may be small, slow and have limited range, but they definitely had warp drive.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

The only place where it was stated that shuttlecraft do not have warp drive was in the novel _Spock Must Die!_ - at no time was it indicated in the series' episodes.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

I remember seeing a TOS Story Department memo in which the shuttlecraft's warp capability was referenced. It may have been in The Making of Star Trek, or perhaps the Star Trek Writer's Guide. 

In any event, it was always the producers' intention that the shuttles should have a limited warp drive capability. 

It's been a while since I've seen The Cage, but doesn't Mendez make some sort of comment apropos of warp technology when the starbase shuttlecraft he and Kirk are in becomes stranded?


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

well if Mendez and Kirk are in a shuttle and that shuttle passes the point of safe return, then that shuttle must have a limited amount of fuel.

If Scotty is draining phasers for fuel, then that must be what the shuttle runs on.

I prefer the Animated show's solution. Long range and standard shuttles. 

I can be persuaded that some shuttles may have been fitted with a low power warp engine, but the first one seen on screen (if you don't count the "Vulcan warp sled" in TMP which I assert was a standard pod on a warp capable sled) weren't seen till Next Gen.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Yes, they apparently had limited fuel. Maybe the warp nacelles were energized by something other than a matter/antimatter reactor.


----------



## X15-A2 (Jan 21, 2004)

"matter/anti-matter" IS fuel. So yes, the warp drive uses "fuel".


----------



## Antimatter (Feb 16, 2008)

It's just something the writers and the model makes/designers didn't get with each other on I guess. No biggie.


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

Carson Dyle said:


> It's been a while since I've seen The Cage, but doesn't Mendez make some sort of comment apropos of warp technology when the starbase shuttlecraft he and Kirk are in becomes stranded?


Not really. All that happens is that the shuttlecraft runs out of fuel and Mendez says, "We coast."

But there would hardly be any point in chasing after the Enterprise if the shuttlecraft had only impulse power. It would be like a snail chasing a bullet train.

BTW, I assume you mean "The Menagerie," the two-part first-season episode that used the original pilot as a story-within-a-story. Actually, the title of the pilot film was changed from "The Cage" to "The Menagerie" before it was screened for NBC, but fans refer to the pilot as "The Cage" to distinguish it from the two-parter.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

X15-A2 said:


> "matter/anti-matter" IS fuel. So yes, the warp drive uses "fuel".



D'OH!!! :lol:


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

<geek> oh really?
I thought the basic warp theory involved gaining energy from the reaction between matter and anti matter, channelling it thru dilitithum crystals and sending it out to the warp field generators </geek>

there would be no fuel as such except the magnetic containment of antimatter and whatever chunk of matter you would put up against it.

any traditional fuel stored on board would be used for the impulse engines and/or manuvering thrusters.


----------



## X15-A2 (Jan 21, 2004)

The "reaction" between matter and anti-matter is an explosion (release of energy) when the volume of the two components is converted completely from mass into energy. The matter and anti-matter are thus consumed as fuel. What happens to that energy after conversion from mass is anybodys guess.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

something I always wondered about...
I can guess that anti-matter is something that is created in the physics lab and contained in magnetic "bottles", but what do they use for plain old matter? rocks? dirty laundry? or have we've finally gotten an answer to the age old question...where does the poop go?

the closest example I would equate the warp engine to is a steam engine. water is matter, fire is anti-matter, steam is the reaction, dilithium is the pressure valve and the warp field generators are the gears and pistons.

so yes, in that water and fire are consumed, so is the matter and antimatter. It's just that the m/am reaction is so total and clean, it's very efficient and therefore a very small amount of it lasts a very long time.


----------



## Larva (Jun 8, 2005)

In TOS it was explained, fairly simply, that the mutual annihilation of matter/anti-matter created the vast energies to propel the Enterprise at speeds far beyond light velocity. Other space-warping and bending ideas filtered into the explanation through non-canon sources over the years. The purpose and use of dilithium crystals was never well-explained in the TOS years, but it was implied that the crystals were integral to the matter/anti-matter reaction. Many fans assumed that the crystals were used to create anti-matter, but again, not canon.

It wasn't until TNG that we learned (Okuda, or some technical staff expert) that the Dilithium Crystals were used as the medium for focusing and controlling streams of matter (in the form of deuterium hydrogen) and anti matter (anti deuterium). The crystals were mounted on an armature that extended into the reaction chamber in main engineering. The energy released was then channeled out via "warp conduits" to the nacelles. This layout was really pioneered in ST:TMP, though the dilithium chamber didn't appear until Wrath of Kahn in a new little room where Spock would later die.

It'll be interesting to see how the whole engineering process is portrayed in the new film.

Eric


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> something I always wondered about...
> I can guess that anti-matter is something that is created in the physics lab and contained in magnetic "bottles", but what do they use for plain old matter? rocks? dirty laundry? or have we've finally gotten an answer to the age old question...where does the poop go?


Well, we know that in a self-contained environment like a starship, NOTHING goes to waste. So . . . 

Actually, isn't scooping up matter (in the form of free hydrogen atoms) the function of those buzzard collectors, or whatever the nacelle domes are called?

According to Wikipedia:

In the Star Trek fictional universe, vessels commonly have magnetic hydrogen collectors, referred to as Bussard collectors or Bussard ramscoops. Those are seemingly fitted on the forward end of the twin "warp nacelles", and have a "reverse" function that allows for spreading hydrogen as well as sucking it in. Starfleet (and presumably similar alien allied vessels) therefore are mixed-mode propulsion vehicles, utilising matter-antimatter total conversion for interstellar flight, and utilising the ramscoop effect while moving at respectable sublight speeds to replenish matter-based fuel reserves. These ships also have diverse application of mass converted to energy (e.g. transporters, replicators, etc.) and therefore monatomic hydrogen and helium provide a ready source of clean nucleons for these purposes.

Note that the Bussard collectors on starship engines are not the same thing as the theoretical Bussard ramjet. Frankly, I prefer to believe that everything runs on Unobtainium. It's a lot simpler.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

In the The Menagerie (which we just TiVo'd, as it happens), the computer describes the starbase shuttlecraft as having "ion-powered" engines. These engines, while capable of propelling the vessel at faster-than-light speeds, are also apt to run out of "fuel" if the plot requires it.

Anyway, we've reaffirmed what most of us already knew: the TOS shuttlecraft was intended to have a limited warp drive capability. Anyone who wishes to further discuss ST propulsion systems is welcome to start a separate thread on the subject.


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

I thought we'd BEEN on a separate thread for the last 18 posts!

Oops, make that 19.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

_Buzzard _collectors? Are a lot of those flying around in space?

The fuel is generally accepted these days to be deuterium in a semi-frozen slush form.


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

[IMG-LEFT]http://www.toonopedia.com/uimages/toons/b/beaky.jpg[/IMG-LEFT]


John P said:


> _Buzzard _collectors? Are a lot of those flying around in space?


Of course! They scavenge the corpses of all those dead Redshirts.



John P said:


> The fuel is generally accepted these days to be deuterium in a semi-frozen slush form.


Starfleet has a slush fund??


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

Who's up for a Deuterium Slurpee?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Having affixed amber gels to the inside of the cabin windows with double-stick tape and hot glue, I’m FINALLY ready to seal the upper and lower hull halves together. I rigged a small light box around the thruster ports, which seals the light in while keeping the surrounding wires out.











Power switches and battery access are located at the stern.











Chopped up bits of razor blade are used to magnetically attach the rear bulkhead façade to the model. I used razors because they’re obviously very thin, and I didn’t want a visible gap to show between the inner bulkhead and the façade plate.











I didn’t use any gel over the thruster ports, as I wanted the engine glow to be both brighter and cooler than the cabin illumination. Those white super-brights burn a little on the blue side, which in this instance suits me just fine.











It’s subtle, but the amber gel does a swell job of warming up the cabin.


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

Magnifico!!


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Gorgeousity abounds thar! :thumbsup:


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

Wooo! that is looking gooooooooood!!!


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

That's _really_ looking promising:thumbsup:


----------



## TOS Maniac (Jun 26, 2006)

oH I thought that the ship ran on Deutronium, which is somehow drilled out of the ground and put in liquid plumr bottles which have been spray painted silver and....

oh wait

wrong series. sorry.


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

Nice up dates!

Gettimg me interested in cracking mine open!!!


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

Very nice, Rob. :thumbsup: Which CTO for the gels?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

SteveR said:


> Which CTO for the gels?


Beats me, lol. I just grabbed some trims from work.

We use a lot of AP2110 "Apollo Orange" for in-house shoots, but the stuff I grabbed appears to be more of a medium straw color. I had to double the layers to reach a desired shade, so I wouldn't recommend what I used anyway. 

BTW, have any of you Randy Cooper fans checked out his site lately?...

http://randycoopermodels.com/

I WANT THAT "APES" SHIP NOW.


----------



## Steve Mavronis (Oct 14, 2001)

The Blockcade Runner looks cool..!


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

Yes..... I gotta say if he does the Icarus... I'm getting one!!!


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

Me three!


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

So here's something you don't see everyday.

I've recently been putting the finishing touches on my Galileo. I keep the model on a high shelf (out of kid range) when I'm not working on it. A couple of weeks ago I noticed one of the two batteries protruding out of the battery compartment. Upon closer inspection, the battery looked like this...










How bizarre is that? The model had been sitting on the shelf, completely untouched, with both batteries hooked up but with the power turned off, for over a week when I noticed the damage (the "reaction" or whatever occured managed to push the magnetically attached rear facade plate clean off the model). At first I thought I'd made some sort of terrible wiring error, but having experienced no further trouble two weeks after replacing the batteries I've ruled out my bad wiring theory. 

Any of you electronics experts care to take a crack at the mystery? I've had a fair amount of experience using 9V batteries, but I've never had one "explode" on me. If it was somehow caused by something I inadvertently did I'd like to know so I can avoid making the same mistake in the future.


----------



## Steve244 (Jul 22, 2001)

some sorta reaction between the alkaline battery and finishing material? Internal short excited it? You connected it improperly?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Steve244 said:


> some sorta reaction between the alkaline battery and finishing material? Internal short excited it? You connected it improperly?


Well, I connected the faulty battery exactly the same way I connected the replacement battery, and I've had no trouble with the replacement whatsoever. As for an internal short, I suppose it's possible, but I was very careful when hooking everything up (just ask my wiring guru GKvfx), and in any case wouldn't an internal short have effected the operation of the lights? Whatever caused the battery to, ah, malfunction, it had zero effect on the light function itself (thank God).

Re: the theory that the alkaline battery may have reacted with the finishing materials, again, I suppose it's possible, but I fail to see how a combination of hot glue, fully cured 2-part 5 min. epoxy, and a couple of coats of fully cured Tamiya spray lacquer would produce the reaction shown above. 

`Tis a puzzlement.


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

It was good to see this thread come back, but definitely for the wrong reasons. I'm glad your wiring didn't blow out!!!

I was thinking that a pair of batts could have fed back at each other, but it's a polarity issue at that point and, as you say, that was not the issue. 

If there was some metal debris stuck in the contacts of the bad battery, that would have fed back and blew it out. But it should have happened fairly quickly (hours) as it would have heated up tremendously first. Is there evidence in the resin of the battery shape where it rested? If no slight malforming, then that wasn't it. Resin would have defintely captured an impression is my bet.

Mixing battery types and conditions can do that. An old battery paired to a fresh batt will cause an imbalanced draw and could, but...

And sometimes batteries are just bad. Usually they simply leak and corrode. I've used 9v's for my guitar pedals for decades and never once did I ever have as cool a result as that. I'm envious!

You could always file a lawsuit. lol!


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Model Man said:


> Is there evidence in the resin of the battery shape where it rested?


The battery compartment is constructed out of styrene, but there's no evidence of overheating (other than on the battery itself, of course). As I said, there was no damage to the model whatsoever (whew)!

Ah well, chalk it up to a freakishly bad battery.

I'll post pix of the finished model within the next couple of weeks (assuming it doesn't melt, blow up, or turn into a styrofoam dodecahedron).


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

Like you said.... no damage to the model.... which is what really counts!

Battery going bad... what ever.... easy to replace...

Model work.... not as easy!

Model Gods were watching over YOU! :thumbsup:


----------



## Steve244 (Jul 22, 2001)

Carson Dyle said:


> Well, I connected the faulty battery exactly the same way I connected the replacement battery, and I've had no trouble with the replacement whatsoever. As for an internal short, I suppose it's possible, but I was very careful when hooking everything up (just ask my wiring guru GKvfx), and in any case wouldn't an internal short have effected the operation of the lights? Whatever caused the battery to, ah, malfunction, it had zero effect on the light function itself (thank God).
> 
> Re: the theory that the alkaline battery may have reacted with the finishing materials, again, I suppose it's possible, but I fail to see how a combination of hot glue, fully cured 2-part 5 min. epoxy, and a couple of coats of fully cured Tamiya spray lacquer would produce the reaction shown above.
> 
> `Tis a puzzlement.


no no... I meant a short inside the battery!


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Yeah, well, that may well have been the case. Hopefully, having encountered such a bizarre anomaly once, I won't run into it again anytime soon (knock on wood).


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

Carson - I know you were using magnets to secure the back panel on the model. Could there have been some interaction between the battery and a closely-placed magnet?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

That's a very good question, and something I've wondered about. Thing is, it would have to have been a pretty powerful interaction to chew up the battery that way. Damn thing looks like someone took a pair of pliers to it. The replacement batteries have shown no signs of wigging out on me yet, but I'll continue to keep an eye on them.

How `bout it... anyone ever heard of a 9V suffering this sort of structural failure when placed in close proximity to a small but powerful magnet? Bare in mind battery and magnet were separated by a thick (1/16) sheet of styrene, and at no point was the business end of the magnet aimed directly at the battery.


----------



## Seashark (Mar 28, 2006)

In my expert (yeah right) opinion, it's just a bad battery. I do have a question. 

-Was the model being stored Near any strong magnetic fields, microwave or other appliances? 

I do have a suggestion, you may want to keep the batteries out of the model from now on. Just to be sure.


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)




----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Seashark said:


> Was the model being stored Near any strong magnetic fields, microwave or other appliances?


No, not at all.



Seashark said:


> you may want to keep the batteries out of the model from now on. Just to be sure.


The thought occurred to me, but I've checked the batteries every day for the past two... actually it's more like three weeks now, and there's been nothing to suggest the possibility of a repeat meltdown. 

At the risk of playing with fire, I wanted at first to try and recreate the accident in order to isolate the cause. Since I haven't been able to generate so much as a slight rise in battery temperature since the initial incident I'm leaning more and more toward the defective battery hypothesis. 

Naturally I don't want my model to go up in flames, but I_ do_ want to be able to switch on the lights without having to constantly be loading and unloading the damn batteries.


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

Seperated by a thick (1/16) sheet of styrene has no effect on a magnet. The magnetic field should pass thru that as if it wasn't even there!

Agree.... bad battery.

Do not leave in.

Thank Model Gods for watching over you and model!


----------



## GKvfx (May 30, 2008)

Maybe you should consult with this guy on your next lighting project:










Gene


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

Model Man said:


>


Or, possibly:


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

Mornin', Carson.
Have you caught any gah-remlins lurking around the Gal lately? She must be close to finished otherwise?

Best wishes on an awesome build! The last few photos prior to the battery were looking superior! I'd love to see a vid clip of the nacelles in action!


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Funny you should ask. I found some time to work on her this weekend, and managed to finish up all painting chores save for the final satin-gloss coat(s). 

I hafta say, this was a surprisingly difficult model to mask off properly, especially along the edges of the lower hull where the two shades of grey meet. My fingers are_ still_ cramping up from having to work the tape in and around the cramped recesses between the warp pods and the hull, lol.

The weather was a little too cold (and oddly humid) this weekend for me to feel comfortable laying down multiple coats of Mr. Surfacer, but that's the next step. After that I'll buff out the remainder of the hull with abrasives to ensure a perfectly smooth surface, apply the remaining decals, seal the decals with a few more coats of Mr. Surfacer, and, lastly, buff out the topcoat for a semi-glossy satin finish. Have I mentioned that working with decals is a real pain?




























The forward landing pads are finished, but have not yet been permanently affixed to the pods. I'm still putting the finishing touches on the rear strut, which I built from scratch (the one that came with the kit was a little dodgy).

I'll post pix of the finished model as soon as I git her done, time and weather permitting. In the meantime I may as well get started on that Moebius Flying Sub...


----------



## BolianAdmiral (Feb 24, 2009)

Absolutely beautiful. 

-BolianAdmiral


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

Nice up dates.... Hey, I did not know that there was a landing pad on the shuttlecraft?  Referring to the pads from the nacells.


----------



## Lee Staton (May 13, 2000)

Breathtaking, Rob. Simply outstanding.

Lee


----------



## isd804 (Jul 7, 2005)

Is the Gal done? Been following the build and very nice. In fact, it inspired another sale for Mr. Cooper.


----------



## Steve Mavronis (Oct 14, 2001)

Beautiful


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Some of you will already have heard the sad story, but it is my grim duty to report that, like the doomed craft featured in “The Shuttlecraft Galileo”, my model experienced severe structural failure and was lost.

Long story short, a post-it note used to mask part of the hull during touch-up painting pulled up a decal stripe I mistakenly thought had been sealed beneath clear coat. The resulting “tear” in the finish meant I had to completely sand down the port side of the hull, decals and all, and basically start from scratch finish-wise. I was in the process of doing just that when the port side engine winglet I was resting my hand on cracked at the seam, pulling the pod lighting wires out of their housing, detaching the port warp pod from the hull, and effectively obliterating many months of hard work. I couldn’t bring myself to take pix, but suffice it to say the severity of the damage was such that there was simply no way to correct it without performing major surgery, and even then it never would have been 100%.

This was a classic case of a little problem that steadily snowballed beat by horrible beat into a massive, unfixable disaster. I’ve never had a model get away from me like this, at least not this late in the game and with such horrible finality, but there’s a first time for everything. I’d like to think it will be the last time, at least for a while (knock on wood).

Anyway, here are the last pix I took…























































If there’s a silver lining to this gloomy tale it’s that I’ve already ordered a replacement kit from Randy, and will be tackling the subject again after I’ve finished a couple other projects. My friend GKvfx calls me a glutton for punishment, but this ship is one of my faves, Randy did a great job on the pattern work, and I’m determined to wrestle the beast into submission, lol . 

Fortunately I took a lot of build pix, which will provide me with a solid roadmap of what to do (and what not to do) the next time out. 

One thing I do intend to correct on the next model is the height of the forward edge of the roof relative to the sides. I should have dealt with this issue on the first model but I got lazy. Next time I’ll get it right.

In the meantime I’m just finishing up the construction phase of another TOS subject, and will post pix within the next few days.

Assuming I don’t botch it again.


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

Ah! That's a real shame, it was coming along so beautifully!


----------



## isd804 (Jul 7, 2005)

Staggering. I'm so sorry. But, she was very pretty! Good luck on the Galileo III...


----------



## jaws62666 (Mar 25, 2009)

Hey how big would you say this kit is in inches. Ive been wanting to get a nice sized and detailed kit for a while now. The Amt model is too small for me. i was thinking of getting the playmates toy and fixing it up.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

I never actually measured it, but it's somewhere between 12 to 14 inches long.

Here's a link to Randy's site...

http://randycoopermodels.com/2008/06/13/galileo-shuttle-craft/


----------



## lunadude (Oct 21, 2006)

Hard lesson, but I am paying attention. Thanks for sharing the excellent build experience.


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

I had a heck of a time with the decals on mine too. Sorry to hear of the loss but I'm glad you are getting another one, because this kit is awesome!


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

lunadude said:


> Thanks for sharing the excellent build experience.


Yeah, that's one of the few things I was able to salvage from this mess. 

Kidding aside, I learned a lot on this build, and that's not something I take for granted.

Speaking of salvaging, GKvfx visited me shortly after the disaster occurred, and the first thing he did was start digging tossed parts out of the trash. I told him they were cursed, and warned him that if he attempted to use any salvaged LEDs or wiring I would not be held responsible for the results. Naturally he ignored my pleas, and naturally he paid the price; no sooner had he gotten the smashed hull home than a sharp piece of protruding brass rod sliced into his finger. 

The thing's cursed I tells ya! Cursed!


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

Sorry to hear your loss, Rob. 
That is tragic way to go. Such a beautiful job on that finish too. Maybe it is better not to see the post mortem pix. Remember her as she was. Hope Gene's recuperating. 

Gremlins are no joking matter. Doing the kit a second time means it will go faster and better. I'll be following your roofline fix as one of these is in my eventual future. 

Will you get the guts this time around as well?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Model Man said:


> Will you get the guts this time around as well?


I thought about it, but for some reason, when it comes to this particular subject, I like the simple, no interior, "FX miniature" look. 

File under the sometimes-less-is-more category.


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

That's a real shame, Rob. On the bright side, the finish on her in the last pictures you took were really, really impressive!


----------



## weird (Jul 24, 2007)

How do you keep the dust from getting on the surface of the ship while the paint is drying?

I haven't been able to paint a model without some amount of dust getting on the paint.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

weird said:


> How do you keep the dust from getting on the surface of the ship while the paint is drying?


A couple tips:

1) Go to Target (or wherever) and get yourself a plastic storage container. Keep the inside of it clean. As soon as you lay down a coat of paint on a model part place the wet part inside the (covered) container and keep it there until the surface of the part is dry to the touch and ready for the next coat.

2) Be prepared to sand/ buff out the painted surface of your model after the paint has dried (for lacquers I usually allow 24 hrs). This is how you'll get rid of stray dust particles, which hopefully have been kept to a minimum thanks to tip #1 (if you're serious about a blemish-free surface I strongly recommend investing in a set of polishing abrasives). 

3) Use lacquer-based or water-based (acrylic) paints. Avoid enamels like the plague, as they take way too long to dry.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Gorgeous work! Too bad it didn't last but then, philosophically, nothing lasts forever, eh?

This was resin, right? There are some really hard to support areas on that ship with that much resin. It's almost like working with porcelain, IMHO.

Thanks for the tips on the paint finishes and dust :thumbsup: That has been a real problem for me of late.


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

The "wings" and nacelles on this kit are the most vulnerable spots by far. I took my time with them and used metal pins and JB Weld to attach them. They seem pretty sturdy, but my guess is they wouldn't survive a drop of any height.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3156/3062956452_ecea7916ea_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3244/3062116901_a7d4da553d_b.jpg

In a way, mine is a real sister to your ship, Rob. I followed your build and used many of your ideas on lighting and battery placement for mine. Your ideas were excellent, really solved a lot of head-scratchers for me, and enabled me to finish it in about a month. 

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3008/3062956522_b8113f36bb_o.jpg

As for the decals, I'm not surprised that you had trouble with them. Luckily, I scanned the decal sheet before I began applying mine. Several of the originals ripped (the red dye on the sheets was particularly brittle) so, I wound up using reprinted decals in several areas. I wasn't 100% happy with how the decals turned out, and have thought several times about sanding mine down and replacing them.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3151/3062116803_8489034493_b.jpg

Still, it was a great learning experience with resin. thanks again, Rob for all your great ideas on this kit. I appreciated watching your build-up!!!


----------



## PhilipMarlowe (Jan 23, 2004)

Krako said:


> The "wings" and nacelles on this kit are the most vulnerable spots by far. I took my time with them and used metal pins and JB Weld to attach them. They seem pretty sturdy, but my guess is they wouldn't survive a drop of any height.
> 
> http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3156/3062956452_ecea7916ea_b.jpg
> http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3244/3062116901_a7d4da553d_b.jpg
> ...


Impressive work:thumbsup:
I really like the lights and base, and leaving the "step" opened on the nacelles was a nice touch!


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Krako said:


> In a way, mine is a real sister to your ship, Rob. I followed your build and used many of your ideas on lighting and battery placement for mine. Your ideas were excellent, really solved a lot of head-scratchers for me, and enabled me to finish it in about a month.


It is apparent that Rob is the Samuel P. Langley of this model kit--so far. I'm sure his next one will be beautiful and longer lasting, however.:thumbsup:

Krako--your build is incredible! You've brought out the best in this kit and it is surely more than special effects worthy, IMHO.:thumbsup:


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

Thanks! Again, if it wasn't for Rob's build-up, I wouldn't have even _bought_ this kit. Seeing his progress pics drove me over the edge and made me order one.

I can't wait to see the next one Rob works up. Especially if it has the corrected roof line.


----------



## weird (Jul 24, 2007)

Carson Dyle said:


> A couple tips:
> 
> 1) Go to Target (or wherever) and get yourself a plastic storage container. Keep the inside of it clean. As soon as you lay down a coat of paint on a model part place the wet part inside the (covered) container and keep it there until the surface of the part is dry to the touch and ready for the next coat.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the great tips! I usually just use acrylic, as it is easier to clean up, but I have never been able to have a nice clean finish like your models.

Like everyone else, I cannot wait to see the build up of your replacement Galileo.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

I appreciate the kind words, gents.

For me, the biggest hurdle to overcome on the rebuild will be finding a suitable type of tubing to use for the engines. The solid resin parts supplied with the kit do not readily lend themselves to the installation of lights, and the PVC pipe I used for the engines on this model was an absolute nightmare to work with. I hope to be able to find something else I can use (possibly acrylic tubing; styrene would be ideal), but locating the exact diameter to mate seamlessly with the end caps is proving to be a bit of a challenge.

FWIW I did use short lengths of brass rod to reinforce the winglets where they attached to the hull, but it obviously wasn't enough to support the weight of my hand as I sanded down the hull. Those of you building this model are advised to go easy!

Another word to the wise: do not attach the 4 sections of winglet support webbing until after the engine & winglet assemblies have been attached to the hull. Having the support braces already attached caused me all sorts of masking and sanding problems when it came time to paint. This means the working edge of the supports will have to be shaped perfectly before affixing them to the underside of the model, because, trust me, you do not want to have to putty and sand gaps in this cramped and hard-to-reach area. Far better to spend the time pre-fitting the parts for easy installation after the winglet/ engine assemblies have been attached and the underside of the hull has been painted (even if you have to fashion your own replacement supports out of styrene).

As for the decals, yeah, they suck. On the rebuild the red striping will be painted and only the lettering will be decal. Well-bloody-sealed decal.


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

Rob, I used the provided resin engines and hollowed them out far enough to accomodate the circuit board and wiring for the rotating lights. I used the same light kit as you for the engines.


----------



## GKvfx (May 30, 2008)

Carson Dyle said:


> ......As for the decals, yeah, they suck. On the rebuild the red striping will be painted and only the lettering will be decal. Well-bloody-sealed decal.


Two words - rub down dry transfers.

Gene


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Unfortunately the solid resin engines which originally accompanied the kit were pretty badly warped. I tried straightening them out in hot water, but was unable to get them suitably symmetrical. Maybe the next ones will be better, but I think I'd still prefer some material other than resin for the engines.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

GKvfx said:


> Two words - rub down dry transfers.


Word.

Next time...


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

Carson Dyle said:


> ... I hope to be able to find something else I can use (possibly acrylic tubing; styrene would be ideal), but locating the exact diameter to mate seamlessly with the end caps is proving to be a bit of a challenge.


Have you tried Hastings Plastics yet, Rob? 

Colorado and ... 17th (I think). They're on the south west corner either way. On the right as you enter the store is a huge display of acrylic tubing. I think you gotta buy a minimum length, but it comes in lots of diameters. They do custom orders, but whether it's worth it I couldn't say. 

Prices generally are very reasonable. 
Worth the shot if you are in the hood.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Model Man said:


> Have you tried Hastings Plastics yet, Rob?


Funny you should mention it; I've got a "Hastings run" planned for later in the week. :thumbsup:

HP and I go _waaay_ back, but since moving from Santa Monica I've found it harder to catch them during regular business hours.


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

Krako, nice job on you kit!

Question tho, the lighting of the nacel.... is that artistic license or did they light up?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

The warp pods were not illuminated on the TOS FX miniature.


----------



## Krako (Jun 6, 2003)

But they look soooooo much cooler lit up! 

I thought Rob's use of the nacelle lighting kit for the 1/1000 PL TOS E was a great idea, so I stole it. The rotating lights really add a lot to the model. All my friends who have been over think that part is pretty cool. 

I also took some license in changing the rear engine light from white to red. I really liked that they changed it to red in the remastered TOS episodes.

Speaking of the rear engine - Rob, I decided not to use the clear honeycomb piece in my rear engine because the piece didn't have a very clean pattern on it. I created a decal for it instead, and put it on a clear piece of plastic. If you'd like that decal image, just let me know.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Krako said:


> Rob, I decided not to use the clear honeycomb piece in my rear engine because the piece didn't have a very clean pattern on it. I created a decal for it instead, and put it on a clear piece of plastic. If you'd like that decal image, just let me know.


Thanks for the kind offer, but I think I'll stick with my plan to replicate the look of the original TOS FX miniature. Boring I know, but what can I say... that's the version of the ship I grew up with, and I guess I'm kind of married to it. 

I love what you did with your model, btw.


----------



## isd804 (Jul 7, 2005)

If I may, what is the outside diameter of the nacelles? I've got a kit on the way, but opted for the version with the interior - somehow I thought the nacelles were hollow on that version, but probably I'm wrong on that score. So, I'll be replacing my nacelles when the kit arrives, as well.


----------



## halcyon_daze (Jan 6, 2004)

A little off-topic Rob, but what kind of rig is that you used to hold up the model in the pics you took?


----------



## isd804 (Jul 7, 2005)

That's a Panavise camera mount.


----------



## halcyon_daze (Jan 6, 2004)

isd804 said:


> That's a Panavise camera mount.


Thanks!


----------



## halcyon_daze (Jan 6, 2004)

Another quick question Rob...how do you attach your models to this mount?


----------



## GKvfx (May 30, 2008)




----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

now, that just makes the baby Jesus cry...


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

Looks like it didn't take re-entry too well. 

Something like that happening to me would make me want to take awhile to go back to building that kit again.


----------



## isd804 (Jul 7, 2005)

Looks like the light kit can be salvaged....?


----------



## moogybaby (Jun 7, 2006)

Impressive builds. So sad to hear about what happened to your model.

Tom


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

isd804 said:


> Looks like the light kit can be salvaged....?


See my previous post re: THE CURSE.



starmanmm said:


> Something like that happening to me would make me want to take awhile to go back to building that kit again.


Yeah, I was worried about that, which is why I forced myself to begin another TOS model immediately. Like, the same day. I'll try to post progress pix on a separate thread later today.

Like falling off a horse...


----------



## drewid142 (Apr 23, 2004)

Rob

You must ALWAYS look at the bright side...

...although I have noticed, that sometimes, there is no bright side.



the drew


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

A couple people had asked what sort of mounting plug I used to attach the model to the Panavise stand. I confess I don't know the exact name of the part shown, but the images below should point you in the right direction. Just screw it in to the hull and, bam, you're ready to go.



















It accommodates a 3/8" mount, which is standard for mounting cameras to tripods, and it's also a good size for many mid-sized spaceship models (this is probably what I'll use to mount my Moebius Flying Sub to the custom display stand I'm making).

I can't tell you how handy this sort of mounting system is when it comes to building a model that doesn't "sit" very well on its own. In this case I was afraid the weight of the Galileo model would place undo stress on the load-bearing winglets. And yes, I'm aware of the irony here.


----------



## halcyon_daze (Jan 6, 2004)

Thanks! If anyone knows where to find this part, or what its precise name is please let me know! In the meantime, a visit to the local hardware store is in order.


----------



## starseeker (Feb 1, 2006)

They're called 'insert nuts". If you don't have a well stocked hardware store, Lee Valley sells them. You drill a hole in your material smaller than the brass nut, get a 2 or 4 inch 1/4" bolt, thread a regular nut about 1/2" from the open end of the bolt, thread this little guy up against the regular nut, and then use the bolt to turn it into the hole. Don't try to insert them with a screwdriver; if you're working with wood, it just won't stay square, and if you're working with plastic, it won't stay square either and when you inevitably slip, you will damage the plastic and even if you don't slip, you will still likely damage the plastic trying to get it flush. Also it looks best to insert them upside down.
And I'm so heartbroken at the state of your Galileo, words just can't express it. That's... what can you say? 
Would it be too awful to mention anything about that being just about the nicest finish I've ever seen? But we all know the next one will somehow be even more amazing.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

starseeker said:


> They're called 'insert nuts". If you don't have a well stocked hardware store, Lee Valley sells them. You drill a hole in your material smaller than the brass nut, get a 2 or 4 inch 1/4" bolt, thread a regular nut about 1/2" from the open end of the bolt, thread this little guy up against the regular nut, and then use the bolt to turn it into the hole.


"Insert nuts." 

Okay, then.

Yeah, I figured there was probably a better way to do what I've done in the past, which is basically just drill a hole and screw the thing in with a screwdriver. I've never had a problem doing it that way, but sooner or later I'm sure I would have. Thanks for the tip. :thumbsup:



starseeker said:


> And I'm so heartbroken at the state of your Galileo, words just can't express it. That's... what can you say?


"I screwed up. 

Bummer. 

Next."


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

Hahaha, I have one of those crazy things sitting on my desk right here right now. Gonna use it for a woodworking prject I'm doing. Funny!


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

If you're not going to use the wreckage for a cool diorama or something, I'll give you $20 for the remains.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

PerfesserCoffee said:


> If you're not going to use the wreckage for a cool diorama or something, I'll give you $20 for the remains.


Shoot GKvfx a PM. Maybe he'll share the curse with you. 

Just don't come crying to me when the thing starts bleeding on you.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Carson Dyle said:


> Just screw it ...


Ah, how often I've said that very thing after a modeling disaster.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Carson Dyle said:


> Shoot GKvfx a PM. Maybe he'll share the curse with you.
> 
> Just don't come crying to me when the thing starts bleeding on you.


:roll:

I'll let him take all the risks then:thumbsup:


----------



## trekkerguy (Oct 7, 2009)

Carson: did you finish this beautiful piece, the second time around? If so, can you post pics?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Prep work has begun on the Galileo Redux, but there's not much to show yet. I _did_ have a custom set of dry transfer hull markings made which should make the finishing process a lot less painful.

I'll post pix once there's something to show.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Good luck! :thumbsup: Looking forward to another fine job (minus the disaster at the end).


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Kewel news, Rob. Who did your custom dry transfer decals?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Griffworks said:


> Kewel news, Rob. Who did your custom dry transfer decals?


JT Graphics created the art file, and these guys are producing the actual DT's...

http://www.aeroloft.com/index.html


----------



## starmanmm (Mar 19, 2000)

Pricey to do?


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

I love when things work out like this for folks. Kewel news, Rob. Here's hopin' you're happy w/how it turns out this time. As usual, I'm excited by viewing the work of others. What can I say, I like to watch? :devil:


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

starmanmm said:


> Pricey to do?


The art file didn't cost that much, but dry transfer sheets aren't cheap. I went with the most inexpensive vendor I could find, based on the recommendation of a friend who'd used them in the past.

These days it's hard to find outfits that do this sort of work. Dry transfers are quickly becoming a lost art, but for crisp, sharp, bright hull markings there's nothing better.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

I generally shy away from resurrecting ancient threads, but I thought this might be of interest to Galileo fans.










I stumbled upon the above image while perusing the "Forgotten Trek" website. Many of you have no doubt seen it, so my apologies if I'm arriving late to the party. 

Previously in this thread mention had been made of the AMT/ Thomas Kellogg/ Avanti connection, but until yesterday I'd never laid eyes on any of the actual design work created by the Kellogg team. 

http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/showthread.php?t=229854&page=2

This "missing link" in the shuttle's evolution is one of the coolest bits of TOS imagery I've come across in quite some time.

Note the car-like antennae.

Special thanks to Doug Drexler for unearthing this long lost (at least, to me) piece of TOS history. Here's a link to the original Drex Files thread...

http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/04/05/thomas-kellogg-the-avanti-and-the-galileo-shuttle/


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

Wow, that IS cool! Thanks for posting it!


----------



## Lee Staton (May 13, 2000)

Thanks for the image, Rob. I wound up making a post on the old Drex thread thanks to you!

Lee


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

The longest Galileo thread ever… continues!

In the time it would have taken Polar Lights to announce another cancellation, Randy Cooper has updated his Galileo kit. What with my original build-up of this model having gone tragically awry a few years back (see above), I thought it was time I took another crack.

This version will NOT be lit (I know, I’m a lazy SOB), but it will feature an interior. I tried to buy the kit sans interior, but Randy wouldn’t let me. Since he had to pay for the interior parts this here Scotsman was damned well going to use them! Who cares if you’ll barely be able to see them thru the forward windows!

I’ll post more pix once I get the hull halves together. I’m seriously considering having custom adhesive vinyl paint masks made for the livery markings. It’ll depend on the cost, but aesthetically speaking it’s clearly the best way to go.

Stay tuned!


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Must build mine some day. :lol:


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Assembly is essentially complete. Just waiting on some custom paint masks for the hull markings (hurry up, Lou)! :smile2:


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Very nice, very clean! It almost looks like it was cast in one piece of fine china. There sure are some surprisingly complex surface relationships on that.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Had to have a new set of landing lights laser-cut. Fortunately I still had the CAD file!





Steve H said:


> There sure are some surprisingly complex surface relationships on that.


Yes indeed! Those who think it's just a flying box have never really taken a good look. 

If R2 does ever get around to releasing an injection-molded kit, and assuming I'm still alive, I'd love to build the Kellogg design team version as depicted in the rendering posted earlier (i.e. sans warp nacelles).


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Carson Dyle said:


> *snip*
> 
> If R2 does ever get around to releasing an injection-molded kit, and assuming I'm still alive, I'd love to build the Kellogg design team version as depicted in the rendering posted earlier (i.e. sans warp nacelles).


Couple things on that pic pop out at me, one trivial, the other...I dunno. 

It's got a lot more random markings than would be usual for the time. 

And, this is what's breaking my brain. Is that a 'sunroof' I see on that front roof panel? It would be a cool look in something made today but I could see that as a total nightmare circa 1966. Thoughts?


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Steve H said:


> Is that a 'sunroof' I see on that front roof panel?


My guess is the entire front of the Kellogg shuttle (as well as the roof) was intended to be one big window. But who knows.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

Carson Dyle said:


> My guess is the entire front of the Kellogg shuttle (as well as the roof) was intended to be one big window. But who knows.


Well, that would be _one_ way to see the interior more clearly.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Carson Dyle said:


> My guess is the entire front of the Kellogg shuttle (as well as the roof) was intended to be one big window. But who knows.


Huh! So, just the one view in that drawing? 

Man, that would have been even more a nightmare to shoot. Every interior shot (except the most tight closeup) would require bluescreen or rear projection. 

But it sure is pretty


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

That giant window/roof makes more sense that having three small windows up so high that the pilot cannot see through them.

That proposal design could be done today with current technology, but even a motion picture in the sixties would have problems with it.


----------



## Radiodugger (Sep 27, 2011)

Man, that Randy Cooper Galileo is schweet! Gah! $300! Nope. Not in my lifetime. Boy, if R2 would make something like this... 

Doug


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

I'm working on it.... Really!


----------



## Radiodugger (Sep 27, 2011)

Carson, that tragedy that happened to your first model there...that is SO typical of resin! It's brittle, it warps...I had the 24" Seaview from Monsters In Motion. Paid over $200 for the thing. Fins broke, it was HEAVY, and not really well finished. Moebius went LIGHT YEARS beyond with their big Seaview(s)!

Don't get me wrong, I _do_ use resin! Just small parts, though. I used to cast in RTV at one time...I used auto body filler. Clear resin, too, with the color kit, of course. But a giant like that Galileo...woo. $300 is WAY too much to spend for me. Carson, you must be _made of money_ to have up and bought _another one_, after that fiasco! LOL!

Lou, are you _really working on it?_ 1 1:32 scale Galileo? Polystyrene kit? Are you connected to Round 2? Man...that Randy Cooper Galileo _tweaked_ me! Carson, I hope you have excellent luck with this one! :thumbsup:

Doug


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Radiodugger said:


> Carson, you must be _made of money_ to have up and bought _another one_, after that fiasco! LOL!


I actually spend very little money on models these days, having over the years accumulated most of the subjects I'm interested in building. In fact, a recent eBay sale of a few kits I knew I'd never get around to building financed the new Galileo purchase.

Honestly, I'd hoped to be able to build a Round 2 Galileo, but after waiting for several years I finally lost patience with those guys. When Randy announced he was releasing a "new and improved" version of his kit I just couldn't resist.

I've finally got the hull color mixtures where I want them, and will be laying down the paint this week. Lou should have the paint masks to me sometime after Wonderfest, at which point I'll start in on the hull markings. Stay tuned!


----------



## Radiodugger (Sep 27, 2011)

Carson Dyle said:


> Stay tuned!


You bet I will, Carson! That Galileo is so beautiful! Pleeeeease _be careful_ with her! :thumbsup:

Doug


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Radiodugger said:


> Man, that Randy Cooper Galileo is schweet! Gah! $300! Nope. Not in my lifetime. Boy, if R2 would make something like this...
> 
> Doug


Round 2 _was_ making a great Galileo kit, then it was cast into limbo possibly never to be heard from again.

Not officially cancelled, just limbo...


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Aaaaand that's a wrap. Finally!

Hull markings are painted on, with an assist from vinyl masks.

I decided to add a little weathering (green, blue, rust and dark grey oils) over the gloss finish. Makes the model look more like a real ship, as opposed to a desktop display model.

Still hoping R2 will come through with an injection-molded kit, but in the meantime I'll have to make do with this one. 

IMG_9050 (1) by Rob McFarlane, on Flickr

IMG_9031 by Rob McFarlane, on Flickr

IMG_9045 (1) by Rob McFarlane, on Flickr

IMG_9034 by Rob McFarlane, on Flickr

IMG_9044 (1) by Rob McFarlane, on Flickr

IMG_9037 (1) by Rob McFarlane, on Flickr

IMG_9049 (1) by Rob McFarlane, on Flickr


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

Simply wonderful.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Beautiful job, as always! I keep saying that, but it's true. 

I'm assuming the weathering color choices was partially informed by the recent information in re. the recent restoration of the 11 foot filming miniature of the Enterprise? It would be logical.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Steve H said:


> I'm assuming the weathering color choices was partially informed by the recent information in re. the recent restoration of the 11 foot filming miniature of the Enterprise? It would be logical.


Yeah, I referenced the 11-footer for the weathering tones.


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

Fantastic work as usual Carson. Excuse my ignorance if you already mentioned this but did the kit come with an interior?


----------



## Sparky (Feb 21, 2004)

Your Galileo came out great. I am working on mine and this just inspires me to get it done faster :smile2:. I'm doing the open door and full lighting option. 

Randy's directions indicate to pin the struts to the engines. Did you need to pin the engine struts to the main body? 

To Trekkriffic's question, the kit does come with a full interior (main console, 7 chairs, floor, side wall computer consoles, those viewers on the swing arms, overhead light, and rear room tanks). Cool kit.


----------



## StarCruiser (Sep 28, 1999)

Sooooo...much nicer than that old AMT POS... :wink2:


----------



## JGG1701 (Nov 9, 2004)

Beautifully well done!:grin2:
Jim G.G.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

yes, a full interior is included.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

sparky said:


> did you need to pin the engine struts to the main body?


*yes!!!*


----------



## Sparky (Feb 21, 2004)

Thank you, sir. This is my first garage kit build and I am trying for the (likely impossible) goal of zero screwups and redos.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Sparky said:


> Thank you, sir. This is my first garage kit build and I am trying for the (likely impossible) goal of zero screwups and redos.


Best of luck! You've chosen a very challenging model for your first garage kit build, but if you plan ahead and take your time I'm sure you'll be happy with the results.

Happy building!


----------

