# Bp's Flying Sub Build



## Captain Han Solo

*Bp's Flying Sub Build(PICS AND NEW VIDEO)*

Hi Guys.

I thought I would share some images of my current Build,..The Moebius Flying Sub.

Since Alex49xxx has an excellent Blog going, I didn't take as many "ConstructionPics"



..For all the Modelers who take six Months to a year Building a kit(Nothing wrong with that), I did not rush this build at all..It just goes together That easily:thumbsup:
Again with all my projects,Research takes up most of my Build time. But again, Having built several Flying Subs in the past(Lunar..etc..)My research was finished.

Ok..In this pic you will see I chose to seal my Flying sub(Not yet, I plan on installing a VoodoFX lighting kit), but have the upper docking ring removeable to view the interior..




This next image shows that I Drilled out the solid plastic for the speaker on the rear wall,and installed Photo-Etched Grill. I also scratchbuilt a Small Microphone...



..This next pic shows that I removed the Solid Plastic facing of the storage locker under the bunk, and Built the storage area clearly seen in the actual set.I also scratch built the "Brackets" on either side...Also a pole to hang the wet suites was also fabricated..Scratch-Built "air Tanks" and other gear will be seen here shortly



Here are the controls under the main Viewport..
I have to point out, that I used our very own member Gemini 12's Excellent decal sheet for the two scanners on either side of the main scanner.(I recommend Henry's Decal sheet for those not wanting to piant the floor or any of the interior Details:thumbsup. I personally prefer to Paint as Much as I can,I enjoy it so.



Again this build is still on going..The next big step is the Lighting Kit
Clean up the seams that will be on the viewport area etc..

Kudos to Frank, Dave and their design team on this Model:thumbsup:,Like the other kits, this is really Modeler friendly and a Joy to build


----------



## jbond

Great work--I'm trying to figure out how to have battery access for the lighting kit--I haven't checked to see whether a 9 volt battery fits through the rear hatch opening or not yet and I just don't want to cut into anything else on this gorgeous model...


----------



## Captain Han Solo

jbond said:


> Great work--I'm trying to figure out how to have battery access for the lighting kit--I haven't checked to see whether a 9 volt battery fits through the rear hatch opening or not yet and I just don't want to cut into anything else on this gorgeous model...


I thank you Sir!

Yes a 9 volt will fit perfectly through the main Hatch. That is where I plan on Mounting the On/Off Switch as well.(I did the same on my Lunar kit)

Of course, with any of this stuff, there is give and take..You/Me may end up losing some detail in the "Tunnel" area.
Having said that however, I may work it out to where the battery will slide into a Side wall compartment I may build into the Tunnel Wall:freak:


----------



## steve123

Paul, looks good! And thank you for taking pics! it's more work than folks think to set up shots and I apreciate the work. Is the trim color black? or is it blue? I've seen both, and did my 'lil sub in blue.

I'm thinking Quick-brites for my lighting(magnetic switches)..

Steve


----------



## Captain Han Solo

steve123 said:


> Paul, looks good! And thank you for taking pics! it's more work than folks think to set up shots and I apreciate the work. Is the trim color black? or is it blue? I've seen both, and did my 'lil sub in blue.
> 
> I'm thinking Quick-brites for my lighting(magnetic switches)..
> 
> Steve


Thanks Steve!

The trim color is in fact Blue. Model Master's "Blue Angel Blue"Airbrushed. As is the interior Floor.
I based it on some info I had acquired:thumbsup:


----------



## starseeker2

Beautiful work! It's like you were up in the scaffolding over the full size set, taking pictures. And this is a work that's still in progress???


----------



## John P

Looking good!


----------



## Captain Han Solo

Many Thanks my Friends

Yes, Once I acquire a Light Kit from VoodoFX, I need to seal the "clam Shell Halves" together and Remove the seams that will be around the Viewport.

Also, I have to say this Kit is a Real Beauty, and my Sratch Building Details is no reflection on it.I am just one of those who can't seem to leave well enough alone(LOL)!

High Regards,
BP


----------



## falcon49xxxx

Outstanding work so far,my friend!!


----------



## spocks beard

Excellent work on your flying sub model beatlepaul!:thumbsup: I hope mine turns out as good.:dude:


----------



## spocks beard

I forgot to ask you beatlepaul, What shade of blue did you use to paint the floor and stripes? Did you spray or air brush? And is it easier to paint the stripes first, let dry and then go over the rest of the body with yellow? Thanks!


----------



## fxshop

WOW! Mark nice job on the build, I need to get you some lights. 

Working on the FS build up as we speek.

Talk with you soon.
Randy


----------



## falcon49xxxx

spocks beard said:


> I forgot to ask you beatlepaul, What shade of blue did you use to paint the floor and stripes? Did you spray or air brush? And is it easier to paint the stripes first, let dry and then go over the rest of the body with yellow? Thanks!


He used Blue Angele Blue,it is in his post above.......As for the stripes,it is easyer to paint the stripes first and then shoot the overall color.alex


----------



## WEAPON X

BP, 

_SHEER INSPIRATION!_ :thumbsup:

- Ben


----------



## Captain Han Solo

Gentlemen, I humbly thank you for all your kind words.

But,This kit Is THAT GOOD!!!Aside from the painting and such, Frank, Dave and their design team, Have manufactured A beautiful Kit:thumbsup:

*Long Live Moebius*


----------



## Lloyd Collins

Another great job! I like to see added details, because modeling is to be fun, and it is fun to be different.


----------



## bert model maker

BP, how are the yellow hulls out of the box ? Can the kit be built with out painting except the blue ? just curious.


----------



## AJ-1701

Well that is yet again a top job mate. :thumbsup: 

Once more it is something to aspire too...  When I eventually get mine and the the figures from Drew.

Again I say excelent work you have done there. 

Cheers,

Alec. :wave:


----------



## falcon49xxxx

model maker said:


> BP, how are the yellow hulls out of the box ? Can the kit be built with out painting except the blue ? just curious.


The answer is yes,the yellow was matched to the miniature used to develope this kit.


----------



## spocks beard

I was thinking about using gloss royal blue for the floor and stripes, But i haven't decided yet. Any one else thinking about this shade of blue? Or is it a little to dark. I seem to remember the interior flooring looked about the same shade to me as this color paint.Any flying sub experts recommend another color that matches better?


----------



## falcon49xxxx

Ford & GM Engine Blue is what I used,and it matches the mininature color IMO.


----------



## Captain Han Solo

AJ-1701 said:


> Well that is yet again a top job mate. :thumbsup:
> 
> Once more it is something to aspire too...  When I eventually get mine and the the figures from Drew.
> 
> Again I say excelent work you have done there.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Alec. :wave:


 
Again I am Humbled Sir

I have seen your work my friend and it is top notch :thumbsup:

Iam sure it will surpass mine


----------



## spocks beard

falcon49xxx said:


> Ford & GM Engine Blue is what I used,and it matches the mininature color IMO.


Thanks, Where did you get this, Automotive store, Hardware? I've never seen it at a hobby store.


----------



## falcon49xxxx

It is in Testors Model Masters Enamal Line.


----------



## spocks beard

I had to go out, While out i found some testors dark blue in spray cans. I think i will go with that choice for the floor, Stripes, Hatch & viewport detailing. By the way, As this is a page about beatlepaul's Flying sub, Let me again say how great your kit looks! Please post more pix when you can,i can't wait to see it after you have installed the lighting kit!:thumbsup:


----------



## Captain Han Solo

spocks beard said:


> I had to go out, While out i found some testors dark blue in spray cans. I think i will go with that choice for the floor, Stripes, Hatch & viewport detailing. By the way, As this is a page about beatlepaul's Flying sub, Let me again say how great your kit looks! Please post more pix when you can,i can't wait to see it after you have installed the lighting kit!:thumbsup:


 
Thank you Sir

I'll post more Pics when I get the VoodoFx Lighting Kit from Randy.


----------



## Gary K

falcon49xxx said:


> The answer is yes,the yellow was matched to the miniature used to develope this kit.


The yellow styrene in the kit is close to the actual color, but if you want an exact match, spray the model with Chrome Yellow, FS13538. 

Disclaimer: I can't guarentee the color fidelity of Chrome Yellow, as formulated by various manufacturers of hobby paints, but my chip of yellow gelcoat from one of the studio models is a perfect match for FS13538 in my Fed Std fan deck.


----------



## BatToys

Is the flying sub yellow as a homage to the Beatles Yellow Submarine?

Moebius, how about a Supersized Yellow Submarine kit? 
With hatches that open showing John, Paul, George and Ringo?
This model kit will also appeal to Beatles fans!

I liked the MPC kit that had a working propeller.


----------



## jbond

Yellow Submarine came out in 1968, the Flying Sub was introduced in 1965, so maybe the Beatles were Irwin Allen fans...


----------



## Captain Han Solo

jbond said:


> Yellow Submarine came out in 1968, the Flying Sub was introduced in 1965, so maybe the Beatles were Irwin Allen fans...


 
..._In the Town where I was born....Lived a man .Who sailed to Sea.._


----------



## spocks beard

jbond said:


> Yellow Submarine came out in 1968, the Flying Sub was introduced in 1965, so maybe the Beatles were Irwin Allen fans...


The actual song, Yellow submarine was released as a single in 1966.I think the flying sub was introduced in 1965, So the Beatles may have actually been fans of the show.While i don't know if the show was broadcast over in the UK, The Beatles may have caught the show in the states while on tour here. I am a major Beatles fan:dude:


----------



## scotpens

Oceanographic research submersibles were being painted a bright orange-yellow for underwater visibility years before either the Flying Sub or the song "Yellow Submarine," so I'm sure it's just a coincidence. Besides, how could anyone fit all their friends and a band aboard the Flying Sub?


----------



## Trekkriffic

Cool buildup you have going on. Nice looking kit.


----------



## spocks beard

All this talk about yellow submarines & The Beatles has me in the mood to crack open a few sam addams & Listen to my recent Ebay prize. A mint first pressing of Sgt. Peppers lonely hearts club band from 1967. Goodnight:drunk:


----------



## mrdean

Actually Jacques-Yves Cousteau built the SP-350 or Diving Saucer in 1959. It was yellow and made famous before the Seaview.

Mark D


----------



## Doggy

Hey All;

I'm having a blast with mine too. This thing really does just fall together.

Anyway, sorry to add a discordant note, but is it just me or are the bottom fins/skids the right dimensions? In all the photos/screengrabs I've seen, there's none where I see anything that looks like the skids on the bottom of the model. To my eye, the lower fins should almost be flush with the hull, much much smaller than the ones on the model. Does anyone have a photo or screen grab showing these skids on the real filming minis? Since the kit has been thoroughly vetted already and literally no one has mentioned this, I've no choice but to assume it's all in my head....

Anyway, hell of a kit. Giant, wacky lower fins or not


----------



## jbond

Well, here's at least one miniature with skids:

http://www.cloudster.com/sets&vehicles/FlyingSub/fs24.jpg

I'm just about positive the paint scheme on the Flying Sub was inspired by the Cousteau minisub just as the LIS Space Pod was inspired by the LEM--I think Allen liked to point to real life examples to give his show's designs more authenticity--for as far as that went...


----------



## Gary K

Doggy said:


> Anyway, sorry to add a discordant note, but is it just me or are the bottom fins/skids the right dimensions? In all the photos/screengrabs I've seen, there's none where I see anything that looks like the skids on the bottom of the model. To my eye, the lower fins should almost be flush with the hull, much much smaller than the ones on the model. Does anyone have a photo or screen grab showing these skids on the real filming minis? Since the kit has been thoroughly vetted already and literally no one has mentioned this, I've no choice but to assume it's all in my head....
> 
> Anyway, hell of a kit. Giant, wacky lower fins or not


Since they were handmade, the shapes of the lower fins were different on all three sizes of studio models. I've got 3D laser scans of the 9" and 18" studio models, and the lower fins on the 9" model are much less prominent than those on the 18" model. Two things to consider: 

1. Greg Jein pulled castings from the original studio molds of the 9" and 18" models and had them laser-scanned. The Moebius model is based on a scan of the 18-incher. Did Fox's propmakers trim the 18-incher's lower fins after they pulled castings from the molds in the 60s? I don't know. 

2. The fins appear much smaller when you paint the dark blue trim along their edges. For an example, see http://cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicles/FlyingSub/fs24.jpg.

Because we're dealing with an Irwin Allen project, where there's a distinct lack of continuity between models, I'd suggest that you find a picture of the lower fins that you like (or use the studio plans, which have been posted at Hobby Talk), and trim the model's fins to match. You can't go wrong!

Gary


----------



## Steven Coffey

That is awesome!


----------



## Geoff Boaz

scotpens said:


> Oceanographic research submersibles were being painted a bright orange-yellow for underwater visibility years before either the Flying Sub or the song "Yellow Submarine," so I'm sure it's just a coincidence. Besides, how could anyone fit all their friends and a band aboard the Flying Sub?


*In the Flying Yellow Submarine of course!*


----------



## megabot11

I think this photo of the 18" miniature shows the accuracy of the larger aft bottom fins fins


----------



## megabot11

I think this photo shows the accuracy of the Moebius FS larger bottom fins, and goes along with what Gary says.

http://www.uncleodiescollectibles.com/img_lib/12398_64409_36.jpg



(Looks like the FS took some serious damage, perhaps from ome of those large spinach monsters.)


----------



## teslabe

Geoff Boaz said:


> *In the Flying Yellow Submarine of course!*


I can't believe how fast these third party add-ons are coming out......
Very funny and nice work with the photo......:thumbsup:


----------



## Seaview

:freak: Aww...dadgummit!!!! Now that tune is stuck in *MY *head!!!!! "We all live in a yellow submarine (yippee!), a yellow submarine (hoo hah!), a yellow submarine..." :drunk:


----------



## starseeker

This is what I've been wondering about for years - the different shapes of the FS. In some shots of the FS on screen, the edges of the wing trace a flat line from nose to tail (the red line below). In far fewer shots, the edges of the wing curve upwards, they follow the curve (green below) that this side shot of the 18" shows. If I remember correctly, in-flight shots? This curve also matches the blueprints for the 18". Over on the Cultman site, Brent Gair on the Forbidden Planet saucer build thread shows how he lathed the initial shape for his FS and it's a saucer-ish shape like the Jupiter 2. 
Now the difference in the ends of the wingtips of the FS isn't camera angle or lens or water distortion. Some of the miniatures definitely had this curve and some wre straight as a razor's edge. If this is the 18" miniature, then its shape seems to match the blueprint exactly. What I think must be the 36" (and the Moebius kit?) seems to have the straight wing plane, possibly because (following Brent Gair's example) it was easier to manufacture (and mold?). 
Gary Kerr, are you out there? Did some of the wingtips curve and were some straight?
Edit: this 18" picture also doesn't show the the top leading edge slats to be as steeply curved as at least one other FS, this one definitely an in-flight version. ?? This miniature has matches the Aurora kit in one way and not in the other. But it certainly is an elegant shape.


----------



## megabot11

The in flight version was definitely the 36" inch miniature. the 18" was used for the launch sequences.

I put the side profiles of both 18 & 36 to show the difference in hull shape as well


----------



## Seaview

Here is a perod photo of one of the 18" models, which is quite possibly a prototype;


----------



## Gary K

starseeker said:


> Gary Kerr, are you out there? Did some of the wingtips curve and were some straight?


Yep, I'm here. The shapes of the wingtips on the 3 sizes of FS models were different, because that's what you get when you have human beings, instead of computers, carving complex shapes from blocks of wood. In side profile, the wingtips of the 9" model are gently curved - the same as shown on the studio plans. The central portion of the 18-incher's wingtips were straight, as you can see on the Moebius model, and the wingtips of the 36-incher were similar to those of the 18-incher. 

A word of caution: be careful when analyzing the wingtip curvature, since the apparent curvature changes greatly if you're not viewing the model from straight-on.

Megabot11: You are correct - the 36" models were filmed for flight sequences (and an occasional underwater shot). Generally speaking, if you see a Flying Sub being launched from the Seaview while it's on the surface, that's an 18" FS dropping out of the 17' Seaview; however, in shots of the FS being launched from a completely submerged Seaview, you're seeing a 9" FS dropping out of the 8.5' Seaview. That's because the 17-foot Seaview model is heavier than hell. It floats just fine on the surface, but is far too unwieldy for divers to control underwater. Having lifted the 17-footer while it was at Dave Merriman's, I know of what I speak.


----------



## starseeker2

Thanks, Gary. It's great that you're here to answer such questions! Yes, it's very difficult, downright impossible to measure a vertical compound curve on a shape with a horizontal compound curve, especially if it's almost always seen at an angle.


----------



## Mitchellmania

Build up looks great! I'd love to see more pics of the front and back!


----------



## Captain Han Solo

Mitchellmania said:


> Build up looks great! I'd love to see more pics of the front and back!


 
Thank You!

I'll be putting up more Pics once the Lighting Kit is installed.....


----------



## Carson Dyle

With regard to the contours of the lower fins, that's the one thing that immediately jumped out at me as being "wrong" with the Moebius kit. Of course, as Gary K patiently explained via email, the visible "droop" (for lack of a better term) isn't wrong at all if one is using the aforementioned 18 inch studio miniature as reference.

Speaking only for myself, I favor the fin profile depicted in the studio blueprint seen below (courtesy of Dave Merriman). 



















Maybe it's because I'm used to the Aurora model (which was obviously based on the studio drawings), but I find the drooping contours of the Moebius version to be a bit distracting. Fortunately it's a very easy thing to correct, if the builder is so inclined.


----------



## falcon49xxxx

Not to sabotage my friend Beatlepaul's build,here are a few pics of my blog build.


----------



## Gary K

Carson Dyle said:


> With regard to the contours of the lower fins, that's the one thing that immediately jumped out at me as being "wrong" with the Moebius kit. Of course, as Gary K patiently explained via email, the visible "droop" (for lack of a better term) isn't wrong at all if one is using the aforementioned 18 inch studio miniature as reference.


Of course, since Nelson seemingly lost a Flying Sub every other episode, you could always rationalize that we're seeing different vehicles, with slightly different designs. Which reminds me, which SF ship had a worse track record in losing their auxillary vehicles - the Seaview losing Flying Subs, or the USS Voyager losing shuttlecraft? 

Gary


----------



## Seaview

That would be hands-down the Voyager. The Seaview lost "only" 3 flying Subs throught the series.


----------



## Captain Han Solo

falcon49xxx said:


> Not to sabotage my friend Beatlepaul's build,here are a few pics of my blog build.


*WHAT!!! HIJACKING MY THREAD!!!*

Just Kidding Alex!!

It looks great! And it is why I started this thread. To share Ideas with my fellow Modelers:thumbsup:

..


----------



## Doggy

Thanks for the input guys. I realize now that my memory was cueing off the 36" flying footage. Probably because it's when I could see the hull clearest.

I shouldn't be surprised about the IA continuity issue. I remember similar threads when Polar put out their Jupiter 2 kit.

Anyway, let me now write the words that I'm pretty sure have never been uttered prior in the history of human civilization:

Thank you Gary K. and Megabott11. You've saved me a hell of a lot of sanding. 

Woof.

PS, does Baseheart look lit up in that photo or what?


----------



## megabot11

LoL!

No Problem Doggy, And thank you too Gary.


(Ohh Gees! I almost forgot.) and great model work on the Moebius FS-1 BeatlePaul it's making me anxious to get my FS model, Hurry up guys! ship em up to Canada.


----------



## voyagefan**

[ You are correct - the 36" models were filmed for flight sequences (and an occasional underwater shot). Generally speaking, if you see a Flying Sub being launched from the Seaview while it's on the surface, that's an 18" FS dropping out of the 17' Seaview; however, in shots of the FS being launched from a completely submerged Seaview, you're seeing a 9" FS dropping out of the 8.5' Seaview. That's because the 17-foot Seaview model is heavier than hell. It floats just fine on the surface, but is far too unwieldy for divers to control underwater. Having lifted the 17-footer while it was at Dave Merriman's, I know of what I speak. [/quote]

After seeing the original 8 foot Flying Sub nose section & and knowing its history from the P.Lubliner , here is a bit of Seaview Submarine expertise,
"The 8 1/2 foot Seaview NEVER launched any sized Flying Sub as it was not equipped to do so. A bit too difficult to do in that size for the time (money) provided for the task. The ONLY time one sees the 18" Flying Sub is during launch/retrieval from the 17 footer. For that matter, the 17 footer didn't float at all, it road on a special cart that was rigged to dive/surface" P.L.


----------



## Carson Dyle

voyagefan** said:


> "The 8 1/2 foot Seaview NEVER launched any sized Flying Sub as it was not equipped to do so. A bit too difficult to do in that size for the time (money) provided for the task. The ONLY time one sees the 18" Flying Sub is during launch/retrieval from the 17 footer. For that matter, the 17 footer didn't float at all, it road on a special cart that was rigged to dive/surface" P.L.


Clearly Paul knows his stuff when it comes to VTTBOTS, but if the 8 1/2 foot Seaview miniature wasn't equipped to launch an FS miniature then which Seaview miniature _are_ we seeing when the FS is shown deploying from a fully submerged sub (a la the shot below)?


----------



## Captain Han Solo

Carson Dyle said:


> Clearly Paul knows his stuff when it comes to VTTBOTS, but if the 8 1/2 foot Seaview miniature wasn't equipped to launch an FS miniature then which Seaview miniature _are_ we seeing when the FS is shown deploying from a fully submerged sub (a la the shot below)?


 
That is the 17'3" Surface runner.

Notice NO FRAMES around the Viewports. Also the sleeker Profile evident on the 17 footer.


----------



## starseeker

megabot11 said:


> LoL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Ohh Gees! I almost forgot.) and great model work on the Moebius FS-1 BeatlePaul it's making me anxious to get my FS model, Hurry up guys! ship em up to Canada.


They've been at the local shops for a couple of days now. $85 Can.


----------



## Carson Dyle

Yeah, well, call me crazy but the 17'3" Seaview appears to be fully submerged in that shot.

If I didn't know better I'd think Gary K was slipping.


----------



## Captain Han Solo

I think it can be safely said by all the Big "Experts" Involved ,that ************* is, by all accounts, The Last word on all things Seaview, Flying Sub and "Voyage" in Particular. A great gentleman to talk to who has an infectious passion for the Seaview and Flying Sub.And is also a very gifted Craftsman.

...As great a Job Moebius has done on their Voyage Kits, They would be that much better had Paul(Lubliner) be Involved ....But that is neither my Business nor the topic of this thread..So Back on Topic..

I'll be posting more pics of my FS1 Shortly. I really want to wait until I Install the Lighting Package from Randy at Vood FX..For the Full effect..

Either way, I am having a blast with this stuff!!!!:thumbsup:


----------



## Steve H

Carson Dyle said:


> Yeah, well, call me crazy but the 17'3" Seaview appears to be fully submerged in that shot.
> 
> If I didn't know better I'd think Gary K was slipping.


Not to fan flames, but is it possible that some of those shots were done 'dry for wet'? 

Watching the Season 2 DVDs, there's some notable differences in some of the launching shots, where you can see the hydrodynamics of the FS at work, and other times it's just as smooth and straight as if it's being lowered (or raised-flipped everything upside down, see?) on wires.

Just speculating...


----------



## Gary K

Carson Dyle said:


> Yeah, well, call me crazy but the 17'3" Seaview appears to be fully submerged in that shot.
> 
> If I didn't know better I'd think Gary K was slipping.


In-DEED, Sir! How dare you!

In retrospect, I think this is the 17-footer - probably supported in a sling, or other mechanism, to keep it stable for the shot. I thought I saw faint ridges around the windows (which were only on the 8.5-footer), but they were probably video artifacts, instead. Other than this stationary scene, it seems that the 17-footer was used on surface shots, because it was too large & heavy to easily maneuver in the shooting tank.

Dave Merriman just wrote to say that he believes the 17-footer was free-floating:

"The 17 footer was indeed ballasted (foam likely) to be neutrally buoyant. I have outtakes where it's seen being pushed from one end of the lot tank by divers. It 'flew' from one end of the tank to the other. It was not strapped down for all the shots, it was indeed a free-flight miniatures during some shoots."

The 17-footer did have a mechanism attached to its bow to produce a realistic wake. It's clearly visible in a scene from "Doomsday Island", in which the model is floating motionless, with an impossibly-high freeboard.


----------



## starseeker

Yes, there's the TV Guide photos of the entire fleet floating in the lagoon, and there's the photo of the 17 going into the lagoon with the 3' saucer from Day Earth Still, among others. So it didn't just work on its cart. I'm sure someone out there must even have (had) photos of the 17 being lifted by a crane into the Green Tank. (I bet just the once, too.) Frederick Barr or Tim Colliver, if anyone would. I say again, where are the 80s fans? We're a generation too removed to have the good stuff.


----------



## SFCOM1

Gary K said:


> Of course, since Nelson seemingly lost a Flying Sub every other episode, you could always rationalize that we're seeing different vehicles, with slightly different designs. Which reminds me, which SF ship had a worse track record in losing their auxillary vehicles - the Seaview losing Flying Subs, or the USS Voyager losing shuttlecraft?
> 
> Gary


And you step a bit out of the 60's and Trek genre, I would say the Eagles in Space:1999 had a far worse track record. I would agree Seaview lost 3 FS', Voyager lost some where around 10 shuttles (including the original Delta Flyer) where if memory served Moonbase Alpha lost around 15 to 18 of their eagles (not counting reset button instances).


----------



## jbond

Yeah, it's the 17-footer in the launch sequences--although it is CLOSE to the surface! 

There is a sequence of the 8 foot Seaview "retrieving" a damaged Flying Sub that's on the bottom in at least one episode. I believe it just shows the Seaview slowly maneuvering right above the downed FS-1 and if memory serves the launch bay is open although the angle is very much from the front of the sub so you don't get much of a look at the bay.

Also, I agree that ************* is a genius and his recreations of the Seaview and Flying Sub are absolutely beautiful. As far as I know his replicas are entirely without flaw. But that's the difference between art and commerce. What Frank and Moebius did was finally get these models into the hands of people who've been waiting for them for decades--mass produced, large, complex and highly detailed models of the Seaview and Flying Sub. There is a difference between creating a 100% perfect replica and working out the logistics of manufacturing, licensing and distribution that make it possible for thousands of people to get their hands on these kits--and to be able to afford them. And I would rather have something that's great in my lifetime than something that's perfect to within microscopic tolerances ten years after I'm dead...


----------



## jbond

Another thing...the 17-footer was used underwater for the minisub/mine sequence in the Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea theatrical film. It clearly had some underwater functionality. And I've always thought the beautiful shot of the 8-window sub traveling straight over the camera was the 17-footer--there's such a massive sense of scale to that shot. If it's the 8-footer they never did a better job of making it look huge...


----------



## Gary K

jbond said:


> Another thing...the 17-footer was used underwater for the minisub/mine sequence in the Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea theatrical film. It clearly had some underwater functionality.


True. My point was that unlike the 8-footer, 17-footer was too large & heavy to *maneuver* underwater; however, it was useful for a couple motionless underwater shots, and the larger model did impart a greater sense of sense. Imagine the shots they could have filmed if they'd had access to a tank similar to the 7 million gallon tank (at the unfinished Cherokee Nuclear Power Plant) that James Cameron used to film "The Abyss"! 



jbond said:


> And I've always thought the beautiful shot of the 8-window sub traveling straight over the camera was the 17-footer--there's such a massive sense of scale to that shot. If it's the 8-footer they never did a better job of making it look huge...


I *think* they used the 8.5-footer in this shot, since bubbles are coming out of the port propulsion tube. As far as I know, they didn't install a bubble-producing mechanism in the 17' model, since it was primarily used for surface shots (and a couple motionless underwater shots). [Dave M - can you confirm this?] I agree, this was a GREAT shot, and I think the realism of the show's underwater scenes would have been greatly enhanced if the filming tank's filtration system had broken down.


----------



## Captain Han Solo

Gary K said:


> True. My point was that unlike the 8-footer, 17-footer was too large & heavy to *maneuver* underwater; however, it was useful for a couple motionless underwater shots, and the larger model did impart a greater sense of sense. Imagine the shots they could have filmed if they'd had access to a tank similar to the 7 million gallon tank (at the unfinished Cherokee Nuclear Power Plant) that James Cameron used to film "The Abyss"!
> 
> 
> 
> I *think* they used the 8.5-footer in this shot, since bubbles are coming out of the port propulsion tube. As far as I know, they didn't install a bubble-producing mechanism in the 17' model, since it was primarily used for surface shots (and a couple motionless underwater shots). [Dave M - can you confirm this?] I agree, this was a GREAT shot, and I think the realism of the show's underwater scenes would have been greatly enhanced if the filming tank's filtration system had broken down.


 

You are correct Sir:thumbsup:

The shot of the eight window Seaview "Flying overhead" Is indeed the Eight Footer..
And also because only the Port side Tube worked..The Bubbles ETC..


----------



## jbond

It's too bad they couldn't have gotten the particulate matter into a lot of the other underwater shots the way they did in that one--it really looks real. On the other hand, there's something undeniably fun about the "aquarium" look that lets you ogle every detail of the miniatures...at least until they start throwing the four-footer into what looks like ACTUAL aquarium shots later on...


----------



## Gary K

Gary K said:


> I *think* they used the 8.5-footer in this shot, since bubbles are coming out of the port propulsion tube. As far as I know, they didn't install a bubble-producing mechanism in the 17' model, since it was primarily used for surface shots (and a couple motionless underwater shots). [Dave M - can you confirm this?]


David Merriman speaks! Here is the answer, straight from The Man:

"I performed a careful survey of the big miniatures interior. I saw mounting brackets and cable runs for a car type battery with runs fore, up into the sail, and aft. 

I found no physical evidence of an air distribution system -- no bottle bracket, manifold, reducer, keel and/or propulsion tube bubble distribution lines. 

The only other practical effect mechanisms aboard was the wire and pulley network used to raise/lower the two FS hangar doors -- the handle for operation accessed through the open mini-sub hatch."

Gary


----------



## starseeker

Check the photos of the severed nose of the 8.5 (unless at some point the nose of the 17' was cut off and photographed). It has the red (?) spotlight that lights up the rear of the fs bay, the light that we see when the fs is dropped. I don't recall ever seeing a picture of any remains of an actual fs hangar in the 17', either. I've seen photos of the inside of the 17's sliding doors, the window girders, the light for the nose, even tubes for the detergent dispenser (or was that on the outside?) but the 8.5 that had at least the same amount of mechanicals, and a spotlight that glowed through the back of the hangar. Seems to me that there was two different lightings for the fs bay (one white light and the other red) and when I did mine, I chose to go with the (8.5s ?) red spot. Both miniatures capable of dropping? Given that the 10" fs mini had the up curved wingtips and the 18 had the flat wingtips, that might be a way of telling which was which.


----------



## voyagefan**

starseeker said:


> Check the photos of the severed nose of the 8.5 (unless at some point the nose of the 17' was cut off and photographed). It has the red (?) spotlight that lights up the rear of the fs bay, the light that we see when the fs is dropped. I don't recall ever seeing a picture of any remains of an actual fs hangar in the 17', either. I've seen photos of the inside of the 17's sliding doors, the window girders, the light for the nose, even tubes for the detergent dispenser (or was that on the outside?) but the 8.5 that had at least the same amount of mechanicals, and a spotlight that glowed through the back of the hangar. Seems to me that there was two different lightings for the fs bay (one white light and the other red) and when I did mine, I chose to go with the (8.5s ?) red spot. Both miniatures capable of dropping? Given that the 10" fs mini had the up curved wingtips and the 18 had the flat wingtips, that might be a way of telling which was which.


You may not have seen remains of the 17 footer FS hanger because it was removed during "a restoration".
If you have a screen capture /or other proof of the 8.5 Seaview prop launching a Flying Sub , please post.


----------



## starseeker

None. But here's one of those pictures of the spotlight in the severed nose. I don't know if this is the nose of the 17' or an 8.5' but that light matches the red spot in the oft-used drop sequence. We know the 8.5 had working doors. Working doors is all the evidence left that the 17 had a hangar bay, too. I still think, since we know that the fs minis had different shapes, if anyone cares that much (I don't) they could just watch launch/recover fx and see if they can tell which fs and which Seaview it is.


----------



## Carson Dyle

I'm no expert, but wouldn't the light seen in that shot have been used to provide backlight illumination for the control room and searchlights? *************'s movie Seaview model uses a small flashlight to achieve a similar effect, and it wouldn't surprise me to learn this is where he got the idea.


----------



## starseeker

In fact, that's that the caption of this photo (of what's definitely the 17') says it's for. But the lights are both on the backside of the fs bay, which if you look up into the bay from underneath during a launch sequence you can see takes up practically the whole cross section of the hull. I don't know if a light at the back of the fs bay could cross the hangar and reach the nose and still be bright enough to light up the front spot and the windows as we see from outside. 
(Something to check with David Merriman: was the front spot on the 17' lit? I thought he said that the front spot was in fact the detergent dispenser. I could be totally wrong about that, of course. But just to add further confusion to the confusion: 1970/80s articles say that more than one 8' was built. Is it possible that an 8' didn't have window frames? Tho the one dropping the fs has the 17s' limber holes, too.)
Something weird in the attachment in my previous post is the little Seaview on the carpet next to the nose. Could that be an Aurora kit? And if it is, how big is that nose??? 
If that is an 8.5 nose, and the 8.5 nose had a light at the back of the hangar that matched the 17s, and it had working doors, who's to say that it couldn't have dropped the 10" fs? Absence of proof is never proof. 
No, no answers of any kind. Just lots of questions. Been searching for people who might know. Ton's of Fred Barr on Google, but none that hint at a Voyage connection any more. He, more than anyone else, was The Seaview resource. A Tim Colliver has written a recent book on another obscure TV show, so he might be the same person as our Voyage historian and it might actually be possible to contact him. Be interesting to see what he might have in his archives.)
By the way, not wanting to steer this tread way off OT, but BeatlePaul, how's your build coming along? Are the lights in yet? Love to see what you've been doing!


----------



## Carson Dyle

starseeker said:


> I don't know if a light at the back of the fs bay could cross the hangar and reach the nose and still be bright enough to light up the front spot and the windows as we see from outside.


I hear what you're saying, but I'm a little unclear as to how extensive a hangar the 8.5-footer was equipped with. Assuming it had a hangar. Based on Lubliner's remarks I can't help but wonder.


----------



## Gary K

starseeker said:


> (Something to check with David Merriman: was the front spot on the 17' lit? I thought he said that the front spot was in fact the detergent dispenser. I could be totally wrong about that, of course.


More info on the 17-footer, courtesy of Dave Merriman:

"The search-light lens was formed from a cylinder of acrylic tube, about six-inches long, capped with a piece of acrylic sheet that was lath turned to give it a semi-hemispherical shape. The lens projected past the bow search-light fairing. 

There were wires and a car tail-light fixture in the well that received the search-light lens. The lens was a press-fit and was removed easily. This feature obviously made it possible to install the detergent dispensing do-dad in that well; the device used during the high-speed wave making surface shots."


----------



## Steve H

Carson Dyle said:


> I hear what you're saying, but I'm a little unclear as to how extensive a hangar the 8.5-footer was equipped with. Assuming it had a hangar. Based on Lubliner's remarks I can't help but wonder.


Well, according to his article in Seaview Soundings v.3, and the pictures included, it's pretty sure the 8 footer had a working FS hanger. I can see what looks like a guide for the doors to slide in, and otherwise it's a big empty space.

I'd like to know how they shot it. Was it just turn on the lights in the FS, push it up into the hanger and hold it, then when the AD called 'action' the 'wrangler' let go and got out of the shot, letting it drop at it's own accord?


----------



## Carson Dyle

Steve H said:


> Well, according to his article in Seaview Soundings v.3, and the pictures included, it's pretty sure the 8 footer had a working FS hanger.


Yeah, it's this recent quote from Paul that's throwing me...



voyagefan** said:


> "The 8 1/2 foot Seaview NEVER launched any sized Flying Sub as it was not equipped to do so. The ONLY time one sees the 18" Flying Sub is during launch/retrieval from the 17 footer. P.L.


I'm just trying to understand the logic from a production management standpoint; if the 8-footer was not equipped to launch an FS miniature then how extensively detailed a hangar would it have required? Indeed, why would it have required a hangar at all? Seems rather pointless under the circumstances.

I've got all my old Soundings issues tucked away somewhere. Guess it's time to dig `em out and make some scans...


----------



## Gary K

Steve H said:


> Well, according to his article in Seaview Soundings v.3, and the pictures included, it's pretty sure the 8 footer had a working FS hanger. I can see what looks like a guide for the doors to slide in, and otherwise it's a big empty space.


I have my doubts about the operability of the hangar doors on the 8.5' model. On the 17' model, the guide rails for the hangar doors curve up inside the bow and are only a few inches apart from meeting in the center. Take a look at the guide rails on the 8,5' model: http://cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicles/Seaview/8FootModel.htm. These rails only extend a couple inches inside the door opening - not nearly enough to allow the hangar doors to roll open.

This is merely conjecture, but perhaps they originally *intended* for the 8.5' model to launch & retrieve Flying Subs, but abandoned the concept when the 9" Flying Sub looked too toylike, and subsequently removed the extraneous mechanism.

Whatever the case, a translucent Plexiglas floor & back wall were fitted behind the bow windows to hide the interior of the model, then a tractor light illuminated the Plexiglas from behind.

Gary


----------



## Carson Dyle

Gary K said:


> This is merely conjecture, but perhaps they originally *intended* for the 8.5' model to launch & retrieve Flying Subs, but abandoned the concept when the 9" Flying Sub looked too toylike, and subsequently removed the extraneous mechanism.


I submit that's a reasonably credible theory. It certainly wouldn't be the first time an FX miniature or prop was intended to perform certain functions that would ultimately prove technically impractical or artistically undesirable.


----------



## Captain Han Solo

Hmnnnn....

OK Lads...

The Eight Footer *NEVER* launched any size Flying Subs...0..nothing..

When you see the Flying Sub launched, it is done with the 17'3" Surface running Seaview only..

The Detailed Interior of the 17'3" Flying Sub bay was.."Disgarded" when Pulled out for a .."Restoration" that was performed and rather uncaringly thrown in the trash..

Like the Lubliner 24" Model "Carson"(Rob) and I own, the Interior was lit by a Single automotive Headlight..(In our case, a small flashlight to give the same effect)

Rob..My lighting Package From Randy at Voodo FX is on it's way,I hope to share some pics with you guys by the Weekend, After I build it and install it in my Flying Sub...


----------



## steve123

This might not be "prototypical"...

But as I'm masking the floor of the sub I decided to mask the edge of the step where the flightdeck sits, I thought it might look cool to have that edge lit up..

Steve


----------



## Steve244

I think what separates Irwin Allen from other subjects is anything goes. In fact it has to in order to capture the spirit. Whatever looks cool is just right...


----------



## Captain Han Solo

OK Gentlmen...

I recieved one of VoodoFx's Moebius Flying Sub Lighting Kits Yesterday:thumbsup:

Reviewed Randy's Instructions and it looks to be a Breeze:woohoo:

I have already worked out where Everything will go. Since I am going to seal up my FS, And use the "removeable Docking Ring" as a way to view the Beautiful Interior, I have pretty much decided to use the "Tunnel" to house the Battery and Switch.....
Hopefully I'll Have time this weekend to work on it(My son's 11th Birthday party On Saturday)

Of course,When I do,I'll post the Pics here.


----------



## bert model maker

beatlepaul said:


> OK Gentlmen...
> 
> I recieved one of VoodoFx's Moebius Flying Sub Lighting Kits Yesterday:thumbsup:
> 
> Reviewed Randy's Instructions and it looks to be a Breeze:woohoo:
> 
> I have already worked out where Everything will go. Since I am going to seal up my FS, And use the "removeable Docking Ring" as a way to view the Beautiful Interior, I have pretty much decided to use the "Tunnel" to house the Battery and Switch.....
> Hopefully I'll Have time this weekend to work on it(My son's 11th Birthday party On Saturday)
> 
> Of course,When I do,I'll post the Pics here.


Please wish your son a very happy 11th Birthday, BP !
Bert


----------



## X15-A2

It may be true that the 8' Seaview never "launched" a "Flying Sub" but I guarantee you that long-shots looking up at the Seaview with the bay doors open were not images of that 17' model. I took that photo of the nose that is posted above and can tell you that it is from the 8' version (in case there were any doubts). Both the 8' and 17' versions appeared to be finished to the same level of detail in the bow. They both featured a soldered metal assembly representing the interior window framing and they both had a translucent white bulkhead across the rear of the F.S. bay with black silhouette detail painted on it which was the sum total of detail in the bow compartment. A large light was positioned behind the plastic panel in both which served to light the entire nose space. There was no floor or ceiling in either section, the observation nose or the F.S. bay, that level of detail would not have been visible on the TV screens of the day anyway. If you go back and check, I believe that there is a long shot looking up at the entire sub where we see the bay doors opening. After that the scene cuts to a close up of the nose and the F.S. returning to the bay. The long shot is the 8' model.


----------



## X15-A2

One further point, I don't know why anyone would think that the bubbles around the bow of the 17' model were projected into the water via the searchlight opening. When viewing the shot of the big model running on the surface towards the camera and where we are looking down on the model, it is fairly obvious that compressed air is being vented into the water via a manifold that extends in front of and below the bow of the model. This would have been part of the carriage that supported the model when it was in the water.


----------



## Carson Dyle

X15-A2 said:


> Both the 8' and 17' versions appeared to be finished to the same level of detail in the bow.


Good to know. Thanks, Phil.


----------



## falcon49xxxx

another hijack photo of mine...............


----------



## starseeker

I was pretty certain that was the 8' nose, just the tiny Seaview beside it threw me. It can't be an Aurora kit. The Comet model? 



X15-A2 said:


> One further point, I don't know why anyone would think that the bubbles around the bow of the 17' model were projected into the water via the searchlight opening. When viewing the shot of the big model running on the surface towards the camera and where we are looking down on the model, it is fairly obvious that compressed air is being vented into the water via a manifold that extends in front of and below the bow of the model. This would have been part of the carriage that supported the model when it was in the water.


That may have been me, quoting (or more likely mis-remembering) David Merriman. As for the manifold, would you mean this:


----------



## Lloyd Collins

X15-A2 said:


> One further point, I don't know why anyone would think that the bubbles around the bow of the 17' model were projected into the water via the searchlight opening. When viewing the shot of the big model running on the surface towards the camera and where we are looking down on the model, it is fairly obvious that compressed air is being vented into the water via a manifold that extends in front of and below the bow of the model. This would have been part of the carriage that supported the model when it was in the water.


Here is a picture of it.


----------



## jbond

I don't think anyone said the bubbles were projected from the bow light opening, only that the bubble mechanism was anchored at the bow light or something--you can always see the foam being generated out ahead of the bow as in the photo...


----------



## starseeker

X15-A2 said:


> One further point, I don't know why anyone would think that the bubbles around the bow of the 17' model were projected into the water via the searchlight opening. When viewing the shot of the big model running on the surface towards the camera and where we are looking down on the model, it is fairly obvious that compressed air is being vented into the water via a manifold that extends in front of and below the bow of the model. This would have been part of the carriage that supported the model when it was in the water.


I hate it when I think I'm hallucinating. 
But we all have that source: page 2 of the photo book that came with the Moebius kit, caption to the 2nd photo. David Merriman says: "with the lens removed, this served as a foundation for a detergent injection system...". 
I took removing the lens to mean that the system was internal, as they did (well, there is one shot on the DVDs of external tubes under the side keels but maybe that was early on or the 4') install the internal bubble makers in the 8', etc, but if by "foundation" he means "attachment point", then that makes sense with regards to that photo I posted above with all the external tubing attached to the 17".
I found it!!! I knew I'd read something about that somewhere...


----------



## X15-A2

That is a great shot of the big Seaview model out of the water with it's "Lawrence Welk" "bubble machine" attached! Is there a copy of that photo available that has not been contour cut? Some of the details have been cut off and it would be interesting to see the support dolly too.


----------



## starseeker

That's the only version of it that I've seen. I was just thinking about it a couple hours ago, wondering at all the hundreds of photos that must have been out there somewhere, and where are they now???
I wonder if this is the support dolly? This unfortunately is the best version I have of this photo. I had assumed that this was a transport device and that the Seaview would be floated off of this into the lagoon but perhaps not. Someone here HAS to have access to a better copy of this photo.


----------



## RSN

starseeker said:


> That's the only version of it that I've seen. I was just thinking about it a couple hours ago, wondering at all the hundreds of photos that must have been out there somewhere, and where are they now???
> I wonder if this is the support dolly? This unfortunately is the best version I have of this photo. I had assumed that this was a transport device and that the Seaview would be floated off of this into the lagoon but perhaps not. Someone here HAS to have access to a better copy of this photo.



Not much better, but better. Found it on "Mike's Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea" page.


----------



## RSN

Here are two photos I have found on the web over the years. The second one shows what has been speculated about. The bubble maker appears to be coming through the search light and extends out in front of the sub.


----------



## falcon49xxxx

"Special Effects" Wire,Tape and Rubber Band Style,by L.B.Abbott.ASC,might give you some insights as to how these effects were done.It covers the work of this gifted artist,and includes Cleopatra,Fantastic Voyage,The Poseiden Adventure,Logan's Run and more,published in 1984.


----------



## jbond

It's a great book, disappointingly light on the Voyage TV show though--it does give a good breakdown of the miniatures and effects in the Voyage feature.


----------



## Captain Han Solo

Well, to derail my own thread even More(lol)....

*Here is some info on the Voyage 17'3" miniature From a real Expert....*

*The 17'3" Seaview was NOT a free floating Miniature...It was secured to the Guide track by Tethers that ran through "holes" Located Behind the MiniSub Bay..*

*No, the Holes are no longer there..they were filled during a "restoration".*

*Also..The eight foot Seaview DID NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO LAUNCH OR RETRIEVE ANY FLYING SUBS..0..NONE..*

*When the Flying Sub Or Mini Sub was launched ,it was only the 17'3" Miniature..HOWEVER, whenever the Diving bell was Launhed it was the 8' Seaview...*

*This info comes first hand from the Man who Built the LAST Seaview ever used by Fox, For the "Fantasy Worlds Of Irwin Allen"*

*BP*


----------



## GForceSS

Nice build so far. Keep us posted.


----------



## gregsb

Quick question on the hull paint. I've used a few masking tapes, but if you spray the blue stripe first, which tape or frisket would you recommend? 

Thanks


----------



## Dave Metzner

Tamiya tape if you can find it!


----------



## falcon49xxxx

PM Moderator said:


> Tamiya tape if you can find it!



It is the best!


----------



## Capt. Krik

If you can't find Tamiya tape at your local hobby shop you can always order it from Mega Hobby. They're fast with delivery.


www.megahobby.com


----------



## gregsb

Thanks very much


----------



## gregsb

It seems like it would be easier to spray the yellow and mask the stripes. First time I'm trying this so I'm open to suggestions. Thanks again.


----------



## starseeker

Aircraft modelers in FSM seem almost exclusively to use bare metal foil for masking clear parts, where exact demarcations on curved surfaces are required. Tamiya tape seems to have been relegated to camouflage patterns and nose cones.


----------



## Captain Han Solo

*Hi Guys.*

*Ok.*

*I have installed the VoodoFx LightingKit in My Flying Sub..*

*I have to say It's Breath Taking:thumbsup::woohoo:*

*Now I am Going to post Some Pics Tomorrow and another You Tube Video..So you guys can Get the Full Effect.*

*Randy..OUSTANDING JOB AS USUAL SIR!!!:thumbsup::thumbsup:*


----------



## bert model maker

Thanks BP, we look forward to seeing your terriffic build.
Bert


----------



## Captain Han Solo

OK Men..

Here is my Moebius Flying Sub with the Voodo Fx Light Kit.

First apologies for the Pics, If I went out to buy a better camera, I would'nt be able to Buy Models:freak:

Second , this is the way I want MY Flying Sub to look like. I don't like Light sheet. To me, Vehicles of this era don't look right with Light Sheet. Now I am not knocking it, It has it uses(Star Trek "The next Generation" era), but to me, for this Model It dosen't look right.

Like the Seaview, I am trying to capture the look of the Miniature AND the full size set....





...The Floor Panels are Bright enough so they don't over power the "look"of the Model..And suggest a realistic "Scale".


..I trimed back the Bulk head on either side of the interior Viewport to allow the Light from the forward Lamps to "Glow", Like the effect the Original Miniature had..








..Again the Model is Not complete yet.
As is my usual Practice,I will not be using the kit supplied Windows, But my own "Glass", Which will be installed after the addition of Figures.(This is no slam on the Kit Parts they are Beautiful,I am just crazy that way LOL!!
I also sealed my Sub and have begun, removing all the seams. Basically around the forward Bulk head/Viewport..

The "Tunnel" Houses the Battery and Switch. I commend Moebius for Inluding the Tunnel Detail, However, I never saw it in the show, so losing it for the Battery is cool with me.(I'll post pics of this detail later...)

Again, I am not knocking the guys who are using the Lightsheet on this Build, I know some of you guys really Like it, I personally don't.It looks too artifical and it's not bright enough for MY tastes..Again I am looking to replicate what the Sub Looked like in the show...

Enjoy!...More to come!!!


----------



## gareee

Hard to tell the lighting kit is installed there... until the additional photos were added.... DROOL!


----------



## Captain Han Solo

gareee said:


> Hard to tell the lighting kit is installed there.


 

Thank you Sir.


----------



## Carson Dyle

Looks great!

I still prefer lightsheet to LEDs for this subject, but as you say it's a matter of personal taste. 

Great build-up, BP. :thumbsup:


----------



## Captain Han Solo

Carson Dyle said:


> Looks great!
> 
> I still prefer lightsheet to LEDs for this subject, but as you say it's a matter of personal taste.
> 
> Great build-up, BP. :thumbsup:


 
Many Thanks Sir

Yes above all it is a matter of taste:thumbsup:.


----------



## Lloyd Collins

Impressive! I like how you light it. Your shots of looking into the front windows, looks just like the full sized shot, minus Nelson and Crane. Only other thing to saw is, I always like your work!


----------



## Captain Han Solo

OK...

Here are several Pics of the "Business" end of my Flying Sub...

You can see(I hope), The switch mounted inside the tunnel on the left Bulkhead, just far enough so the Hatch swings open freely...





...And with the rear Engine Lights on(which are very bright, even in direct sunlight)...



Again the build is not 100% built up yet..I need to add the figures, More scratch -built detail etc..also I need to clean up some of the Paint..


----------



## Captain Han Solo

OK Guys..

A You Tube Video...


----------



## Steve H

Very, very nice! Pics like this are the best ad for the kit that I can imagine, because I'm drooling (even tho my build would never approach this quality) !

Glue on, sir! Glue on!


----------



## gareee

Great video! All the lighting kit sites should have something liek this, as well as a build tip addition as well.

Seeing something like this makes me want to buy thier lighting kit myself!


----------



## WEAPON X

beatlepaul said:


> OK...
> 
> Here are several Pics of the "Business" end of my Flying Sub...
> 
> You can see(I hope), The switch mounted inside the tunnel on the left Bulkhead, just far enough so the Hatch swings open freely...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...And with the rear Engine Lights on(which are very bright, even in direct sunlight)...
> 
> 
> 
> Again the build is not 100% built up yet..I need to add the figures, More scratch -built detail etc..also I need to clean up some of the Paint..


Paul, your work on your Flying Sub is just a thing of beauty! It looks awesome! :thumbsup: 

One day!

Could you share a little more detail on the placement of both the lighting switch and the battery? How exactly did you modify the "tunnel way"? would have any illustrative drawers that would help me during that phase of building my FS? Any help that you could share would be greatly appreciated!


----------



## Captain Han Solo

WEAPON X said:


> Paul, your work on your Flying Sub is just a thing of beauty! It looks awesome! :thumbsup:
> 
> One day!
> 
> Could you share a little more detail on the placement of both the lighting switch and the battery? How exactly did you modify the "tunnel way"? would have any illustrative drawers that would help me during that phase of building my FS? Any help that you could share would be greatly appreciated!


 
Thank you very much indeed

Sure , I would be Happy to share it with you guys...I'll see what I can come up with.


----------



## Steve H

One thing to consider, if the fit is too tight for the 9v battery? Try prying the 'shell' off the battery. It's prefectly safe, the cells inside are all sealed and self-contained.


----------



## Seaview

I love that video!


----------



## Captain Han Solo

Steve H said:


> One thing to consider, if the fit is too tight for the 9v battery? Try prying the 'shell' off the battery. It's prefectly safe, the cells inside are all sealed and self-contained.


 
...*No Need to..The Fit is Fine.:thumbsup:*


----------



## Captain Han Solo

Seaview said:


> I love that video!


 
*Thank you Sir!*

*My Good Friend Alex49xxx Sugessted I should re-edit it using my "Paul McCartney" Voice(LOL)!!!....I just Might!!!*


----------



## Capt. Krik

Great video, BP! I was hoping to see Randy's lighting kit in action. I will have to pick up one of those when they are available.

Another great buildup on the FS-1. The detail work you did on the interior is beautiful. Really accents the already great job Moebius did on the interior of this kit.

Thanks for sharing with us.


----------



## steve123

Looks beautiful! Would you think I was FOS if I said I had just put the switch in the same spot...(not copying..lol) As soon as I saw the 9 volt fit in the accessway it was a foregone conclusion. I'm about two days behind you....What did you use to get a good "stand off" on the reactor light? I think it needs to be a little away from the surface of the diffuser.


Steve


----------



## Captain Han Solo

Capt. Krik said:


> Great video, BP! I was hoping to see Randy's lighting kit in action. I will have to pick up one of those when they are available.
> 
> Another great buildup on the FS-1. The detail work you did on the interior is beautiful. Really accents the already great job Moebius did on the interior of this kit.
> 
> Thanks for sharing with us.


..*Again, I humbly Thank you*


----------



## Captain Han Solo

steve123 said:


> Looks beautiful! Would you think I was FOS if I said I had just put the switch in the same spot...(not copying..lol) As soon as I saw the 9 volt fit in the accessway it was a foregone conclusion. I'm about two days behind you....What did you use to get a good "stand off" on the reactor light? I think it needs to be a little away from the surface of the diffuser.
> 
> 
> Steve


*Great Minds think alike(lol)!*

*I actually Scratch Built a "Lighting Box" behind the Fusion Core Wall..*

*I did the same thing on my Lunar FS I built Years ago..In Randy's Kit, he gives you A peice of frosted,wavy Plastic to Diffuse the Fusion Core Light..*
*I first built up a Box out of sheet styrene, then inside the box,I put in Randy's Plastic All around the inside of my little box..the effect is quite close to the actual stage set.*


----------



## steve123

Cool! I was gonna get lazy and put the diffuser up and then have the led stand off a little bit (like a wall sconce)...Thank you...it would be fun to build these together..what movie would we watch?...lol...

Steve


----------



## Captain Han Solo

steve123 said:


> Cool! I was gonna get lazy and put the diffuser up and then have the led stand off a little bit (like a wall sconce)...Thank you...it would be fun to build these together..what movie would we watch?...lol...
> 
> Steve


*"Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea"!!:thumbsup:*


----------



## teslabe

"This is a repost from the Lighting side". First of all, I have to say,Beatlepaul, you did an amazing job on your Lunar build.....:thumbsup: I had one of those horrible kits and just had no time to deal with an over priced box of flimsy plastic and warped resin parts...:drunk:
I found someone to take it off my hands. With what Moebius did I would think anyone who bought the Lunar FS feels ripped off, I know I did....
Now, the point of my post. Here is my idea for the Reactor Wall. With how cheap MP4 players have gotten, (about $40.00), it just made sense to go this way. LEDs don't cut it, the wall needs to be animated, like on the show.
This unit has a 3" TFT LCD display and fits perfectly in the space....:woohoo:
I will be using the rear hatch with about 1" of tunnel, for a board with all the relocated buttons, USB port, (for loading new video files) and a battery charger plug. If anyone would like more info, just send me a PM. I will be posting a short video in my "My Photos" folder. The video has been posted, sorry for the poor quality.


----------



## WEAPON X

teslabe, please check your PM! - Ben


----------



## steve123

Paul, I'm going to put the reactor led between two layers of the diffuser plastic.
With a reflective back... it looks pretty cool. 
I love building cool models!


----------



## megabot11

BeatlePaul: Awsome Build!!:thumbsup:

Teslabe: Fantastic!!!:thumbsup:


----------



## teslabe

megabot11 said:


> BeatlePaul: Awsome Build!!:thumbsup:
> 
> Teslabe: Fantastic!!!:thumbsup:


Thank you my friend. Sorry for the crudness, I just wanted to put this out there before everyone gluded their sub shut.....


----------



## Captain Han Solo

teslabe said:


> "This is a repost from the Lighting side". First of all, I have to say,Beatlepaul, you did an amazing job on your Lunar build.....:thumbsup: I had one of those horrible kits and just had no time to deal with an over priced box of flimsy plastic and warped resin parts...:drunk:
> I found someone to take it off my hands. With what Moebius did I would think anyone who bought the Lunar FS feels ripped off, I know I did....
> Now, the point of my post. Here is my idea for the Reactor Wall. With how cheap MP4 players have gotten, (about $40.00), it just made sense to go this way. LEDs don't cut it, the wall needs to be animated, like on the show.
> This unit has a 3" TFT LCD display and fits perfectly in the space....:woohoo:
> I will be using the rear hatch with about 1" of tunnel, for a board with all the relocated buttons, USB port, (for loading new video files) and a battery charger plug. If anyone would like more info, just send me a PM. I will be posting a short video in my "My Photos" folder. The video has been posted, sorry for the poor quality.


 
GREAT JOB:thumbsup:


----------



## AJ-1701

BP The lighting has taken a superb job to a *SUPERBER* job. :thumbsup: 

Teslabe you scare me  (in a good way) with your ingenuity :thumbsup:

Cheers,

Alec. :wave:


----------



## teslabe

beatlepaul said:


> GREAT JOB:thumbsup:


Thank you very much my friend.....:wave: I still can't beleave how great your
Luner kit came out. That is just talent on staroids......:thumbsup:


----------



## Captain Han Solo

teslabe said:


> Thank you very much my friend.....:wave: I still can't beleave how great your
> Luner kit came out. That is just talent on staroids......:thumbsup:


----------



## teslabe

AJ-1701 said:


> BP The lighting has taken a superb job to a *SUPERBER* job. :thumbsup:
> 
> Teslabe you scare me  (in a good way) with your ingenuity :thumbsup:
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Alec. :wave:


Hi Alec, it's been some time, I hope your doing well... Thank you very much,
I'm "Beet Red" and very humbled. If you'd like any info just send a PM...:wave:


----------



## abacero

That's amazing!!! Great job Paul! Probalbly I will divert some groceries money for that beauty :jest::thumbsup: and try to follow your guide 

Best regards,


Alberto


_"There are always possibilities".- Spock_


----------



## bdavis007

Yes, I've been thinking about lightsheets as well... I looked at them several years ago and gave up after checking out several different products that either generated too much heat or made a high pitched whine. Are those kind of problems things of the past? What are some good (good value: quality and competitive price) sources?

I've got my flying sub - but currently working on a Polar Lights BigE and ready to buy a florescent neon-esque tube for the nacelles (due to the "moving" quality of the light) - has the lightsheet remained such a uniform light (in density and color) that it still kind of looks "flat"?


----------



## teslabe

bdavis007 said:


> Yes, I've been thinking about lightsheets as well... I looked at them several years ago and gave up after checking out several different products that either generated too much heat or made a high pitched whine. Are those kind of problems things of the past? What are some good (good value: quality and competitive price) sources?
> 
> I've got my flying sub - but currently working on a Polar Lights BigE and ready to buy a florescent neon-esque tube for the nacelles (due to the "moving" quality of the light) - has the lightsheet remained such a uniform light (in density and color) that it still kind of looks "flat"?


Not a fan of EL sheets.


----------



## Lloyd Collins

Beatlepaul, great little video! Always and still impressed with your models! I downloaded it for future reference.

teslade, I like your use of the MP4 player, it looks like the series. 
Can you use one of the slide show picture frames, to load images to cycle a pattern, and look real. I saw a cheap one at WM.


----------



## teslabe

Lloyd Collins said:


> Beatlepaul, great little video! Always and still impressed with your models! I downloaded it for future reference.
> 
> teslade, I like your use of the MP4 player, it looks like the series.
> Can you use one of the slide show picture frames, to load images to cycle a pattern, and look real. I saw a cheap one at WM.


It's a video player, not sure why you would need a slide show of pictures.
But yes it could do that as well....:wave:


----------



## Lloyd Collins

Thanks, I was just curious, because I really don't know how the slide show frame works. It is cheaper to ask, than to buy, and find out it won't work.


----------



## teslabe

Lloyd Collins said:


> Thanks, I was just curious, because I really don't know how the slide show frame works. It is cheaper to ask, than to buy, and find out it won't work.


Doing a slide show instad of a video, you loss the motion that the video is ment to give. It would be one still after another, no flowing motion as you'd
get with the video.


----------



## spocks beard

beatlepaul, Your flying sub looks amazing! Outstanding work on the painting and the lighting kit:thumbsup:If i can get mine to look half that good when i am finished i will be very happy indeed.One thing i will NOT do when finishing up on the paint detailing is join the blue striping to the viewport detailing.I know that the original subs had this detail, But to me it just does not look right.Anyhoo, beautiful work there my friend


----------



## teslabe

Lloyd Collins said:


> teslade, I like your use of the MP4 player, it looks like the series.
> Can you use one of the slide show picture frames, to load images to cycle a pattern, and look real. I saw a cheap one at WM.


I'm sorry Lloyd, I had a brain fart......:freak: I didn't catch the part (digital picture frame viewer) So please ignor my posts after yours. It should work as
long as it fits and fills the viewport area.


----------



## Edge

Great build BP.

Too bad there has been no interest in this thread.


----------



## Lloyd Collins

Thanks, teslabe! I had thought as much, but, I trust your expert views


----------



## spocks beard

Hi, What are the colors of the control buttons on the arms of the chairs? On the instruction sheet it looks like right side white and green, Left side white and red,But i am not sure.Also is it a good idea to glue the pins into the doors jam hinges? Thanks!:thumbsup:


----------



## johnfields

working on my FS- lots of great research here - My 2cents (for what it's worth)- Dave Merriman is a great source of information - I was in a modelling club with him when I lived in Virginia and although Dave has a unique way of expressing his views he is a tremendous model builder and researches his projects extensivley- I asked him for some research on a Skipjack a few years ago and he sent me a packet of information that you would swear came from a Navy SIMA (Shore Intermediate Maintenance Activity) Moebius has given us a tremendous model kit and I hope to do it justice. Any thoughts on how to display this baby?- I was considering a scale Seaview berth -but I dunnno -any thoughts?


----------

