# AMT Leif Ericson with lights is out now



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Picked one up today at Hobbytown USA for $35. Its nice to see the real LE kit back and not just the UFO Mystery Ship. Kit is in a box and not an annoying $20 tin. The artwork looks about like the original, and the back has pictures of the kit. I have not opened mine yet to see exactly what you get, but it looks to be nice. Given its only $10 or so more than the glow kit, they aren't ripping you off for the few new parts and the lights.


----------



## Guy Schlicter (May 3, 2004)

djnick66 said:


> Picked one up today at Hobbytown USA for $35. Its nice to see the real LE kit back and not just the UFO Mystery Ship. Kit is in a box and not an annoying $20 tin. The artwork looks about like the original, and the back has pictures of the kit. I have not opened mine yet to see exactly what you get, but it looks to be nice. Given its only $10 or so more than the glow kit, they aren't ripping you off for the few new parts and the lights.


I got mine yesterday. Very nice kit.


----------



## RMC (Aug 11, 2004)

any pics ???????????


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

It's official.

Life. Is. Good.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

RMC said:


> any pics ???????????


no as I mentioned I have not opened the box yet... should be the usual pics on the Round 2 site


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Meggahobby emailed me they were in and I ordered it! should be here by tuesday.


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

I will try to take some pictures tomorrow night...

kit comes molded in hospital-green plastic, with the original small chrome sprue restored, along with the clear red engine pieces. Molding is a bit rough... lots of flash and crud. A few parts were broken, like the nose cap, which has two large sprue attachments on two points (and it has to be bent back to fit in the box). Nothing a little tlc won't fix. The kit instructions are pretty basic but passable. The LED lights are not complicated and the battery box/switch are pre wired. The design of the model makes painting a bit awkward. You might do best by trapping the LED's into the main hull but not adding the engine parts. You could mask the wires and bulbs so filling, sanding and painting the body can be done. Then add the engine pieces around the LED's


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

OK, big question. Anybody doing some PE or other media upgrade or detail parts? I'm guessing new decals or a reissue of the decals for the Glow UFO version may show up.

I'm wondering why Platz in Japan is calling the kit 1/650 scale. Didn't some very clever people figure that 1/500 was about as reasonable as could be?


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

I know the kit has the original decals which were not in the UFO release but it also has a lot of the optional decals from the UFO, or at least similar to those. The decals in the kit are bagged with a piece of protective paper over the images, and the instructions do not show all the decals.


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

Steve H said:


> OK, big question. Anybody doing some PE or other media upgrade or detail parts?...


PE set is on the drawing board. I'm still working out exactly what it will encompass.



Steve H said:


> I'm wondering why Platz in Japan is calling the kit 1/650 scale. Didn't some very clever people figure that 1/500 was about as reasonable as could be?


1/500 sounds pretty darned good, but I'm guessing they're saying 1/650 to go along with the AMT Enterprise and Klingon kits. (Of course one could also say it's 1/600 to match the upcoming ones from Revell.)


----------



## cozmo (Nov 29, 2004)

Steve H said:


> OK, big question. Anybody doing some PE or other media upgrade or detail parts? I'm guessing new decals or a reissue of the decals for the Glow UFO version may show up.
> 
> I'm wondering why Platz in Japan is calling the kit 1/650 scale. Didn't some very clever people figure that 1/500 was about as reasonable as could be?


Frank figured out the scale, he also supplied the clear engine masters for R2.

There are still a few of these upgrade kits.





You have to modify the doors yourself


Now that the kit is released as the original Leif, I would be willing to take those nasty glow-in-the-dark UFO's off y'all hands...


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

djnick66 said:


> I will try to take some pictures tomorrow night...
> 
> kit comes molded in hospital-green plastic, with the original small chrome sprue restored, along with the clear red engine pieces. Molding is a bit rough... lots of flash and crud. A few parts were broken, like the nose cap, which has two large sprue attachments on two points (and it has to be bent back to fit in the box). Nothing a little tlc won't fix. The kit instructions are pretty basic but passable. The LED lights are not complicated and the battery box/switch are pre wired. The design of the model makes painting a bit awkward. You might do best by trapping the LED's into the main hull but not adding the engine parts. You could mask the wires and bulbs so filling, sanding and painting the body can be done. Then add the engine pieces around the LED's


*Are you talking about the very Tip of the ship as the "nose cap"?? mine seems to be intact..or is it something that goes on the front nose?? I dont see any issue with box size..there was plenty of room to fit everything in the box, it seems..do you have a part number?*


----------



## JGG1701 (Nov 9, 2004)

cozmo said:


> Now that the kit is released as the original Leif, I would be willing to take those nasty glow-in-the-dark UFO's off y'all hands...


Who's ya callin' nasty???
http://s377.photobucket.com/albums/...JGG1701/?action=view&current=minimovie001.mp4
-Jim


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Cosmo, that's still some good stuff you got there, and I'm in awe of your work. 

But your answer is a bit vague, do you mean that 1/500 still holds or do we now believe that 1/650 is the most accurate scale?

And I've got to scan this picture I found recently in an old book about movie effects, it's a preproduction drawing of the Space Clipper from 2001 docking at the station and it's a COMPLETELY different direction from what was used in the film- and it's perfectly, exactly the kind of shuttle described in Pournelle's CoDominium books. Boat hull for water landing, swing-wing, shovel-nosed. You'd love it.


----------



## JGG1701 (Nov 9, 2004)

Steve H said:


> But your answer is a bit vague, do you mean that 1/500 still holds or do we now believe that 1/650 is the most accurate scale?


http://frank.bol.ucla.edu/le.html#kitscale
-Jim


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Zathros said:


> *Are you talking about the very Tip of the ship as the "nose cap"?? mine seems to be intact..or is it something that goes on the front nose?? I dont see any issue with box size..there was plenty of room to fit everything in the box, it seems..do you have a part number?*


You know the large nose piece with the four corner points at the back. The way the piece is aligned at a 90 degree angle to the sprue means it will not fit in the box without being bent over. Mine was bent over and the two big sprues sort of cracked/split at the edge of the part. Basically to get the nose to fit into the box they have to bend it over and that can cause damage.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

JGG1701 said:


> http://frank.bol.ucla.edu/le.html#kitscale
> -Jim


OK, yes, I know the site, amazing work there. But the way Cosmo worded his reply it seemed to imply that Frank, in addition to supplying the masters to help R2 re-tool the missing parts that he's revised his opinion on the scale as well.

So the question is, has R2 stated that the scale is now 1/650 or is this something that, for whatever reason, Platz in Japan sent out? At least I'm pretty sure Platz is still doing distro for R2. 

And they do list the 'mystery ship' version as 1/500. So huh, right? 

Because I know Hobbylink Japan doesn't have the time to work it out, they're publishing whatever they've been given by the kit maker.

It's not life or death, it's just one of those nagging things that I need cleared up for my mental health.


----------



## Frank2056 (Mar 23, 2007)

Steve H said:


> It's not life or death, it's just one of those nagging things that I need cleared up for my mental health.


It's so easy to check at the Round2 site:

http://www.round2models.com/models/amt/leif-ericson

*1/500 *

You can make it any scale you want; 1/500 is closest. I/400 would be tight, but OK. 1/650 or 1/700 would just be too big.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Frank2056 said:


> It's so easy to check at the Round2 site:
> 
> http://www.round2models.com/models/amt/leif-ericson
> 
> ...


Thank you. I guess 1/650 would work assuming one wants lots of giant windows in your warship. 

But again one could just sand off all the window indicators and make it any scale as you say. Even 1/1000. I'm guessing the Japanese vendor decided that since this was a Star Trek kit (yet it isn't) that it had to be in scale with the other recent AMT re-pops. Or something. 

Look, I KNOW it was was figured to be 1/500 and I like that, I'm just trying to dope out what's going on in Japan with the release. It's crazy but I do things like that.


----------



## Frank2056 (Mar 23, 2007)

Steve H said:


> Look, I KNOW it was was figured to be 1/500 and I like that, I'm just trying to dope out what's going on in Japan with the release. It's crazy but I do things like that.


It's radiation from the blown up"nucular" reactors. It knocked a few bits loose from the HLJ computer, turning 1/500 into 1/650. Mystery solved!


----------



## Zathros (Dec 21, 2000)

djnick66 said:


> You know the large nose piece with the four corner points at the back. The way the piece is aligned at a 90 degree angle to the sprue means it will not fit in the box without being bent over. Mine was bent over and the two big sprues sort of cracked/split at the edge of the part. Basically to get the nose to fit into the box they have to bend it over and that can cause damage.


*Ahh..I see what you mean...mine, fortunately for me..fit well inside the box with room to spare somehow..its not damaged at all..If I were you, Id contact Round 2 and get a replacement part..

Z
*


----------



## Nyrath (May 3, 2004)

Paulbo said:


> PE set is on the drawing board. I'm still working out exactly what it will encompass.


When the set becomes available, please contact me so I can put a link to it on my Leif Ericson website.


----------



## Nyrath (May 3, 2004)

cozmo said:


> There are still a few of these upgrade kits.


Ah, I'll have to link to them on my Leif website to help customers find them.


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

Nyrath said:


> When the set becomes available, please contact me so I can put a link to it on my Leif Ericson website.


I certainly will. Thanks for the offer!


----------



## cozmo (Nov 29, 2004)

Paulbo said:


> PE set is on the drawing board. I'm still working out exactly what it will encompass.


Any hints on what will be on it?


----------



## Edge (Sep 5, 2003)

Hmmmm, there appears to be a little Voyager among all the wheeled vehicles.


----------



## Nyrath (May 3, 2004)

Edge said:


> Hmmmm, there appears to be a little Voyager among all the wheeled vehicles.


Yes, and the wheeled vehicles include the Landmaster from DAMNATION ALLEY, the Ark II, a SHADO Mobile from UFO, and the Chariot from LOST IN SPACE.

Cozmo, do you still have a website?


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Paulbo said:


> PE set is on the drawing board. I'm still working out exactly what it will encompass./QUOTE]
> 
> Well, I have ideas but no telling if anyone thinks the same as I do
> 
> ...


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

Very nice thoughts ... and I at least think a little like you as most of those ideas were already on my list (and a few have been added) 

I should be starting work on this tomorrow.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Paulbo said:


> Very nice thoughts ... and I at least think a little like you as most of those ideas were already on my list (and a few have been added)
> 
> I should be starting work on this tomorrow.



Excellent!

I keep having so many odd ideas on how to paint this ship. Part of me wants to go with late '50s SAC and all metal (maybe even with Orange or Red Hi-Vis panels on the wings!), part of me wants to do shades of gray in some kind of quasi-aztec scheme, maybe some kind of space splinter camo, I dunno. So many possibilities!


----------



## Joe Brown (Nov 16, 1999)

Steve H said:


> I'd really like to see some replacement landing gear for the scout. I've never bought that the parts included were meant to be actual landing gear, they look more like elevation jacks to raise the ship for maintenance or retracting docking clamps.


Some ways back I did a thread about the scout landing gear:
http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/showthread.php?t=319285


----------



## cozmo (Nov 29, 2004)

Nyrath said:


> Yes, and the wheeled vehicles include the Landmaster from DAMNATION ALLEY, the Ark II, a SHADO Mobile from UFO, and the Chariot from LOST IN SPACE.
> 
> Cozmo, do you still have a website?


Nope, SBC finally closed it down. Hadn't been able to access it for years to change things.


----------



## JGG1701 (Nov 9, 2004)

Hey, is that Scout ship still available for purchase & where please?
-Jim


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

Quick question on other people's copies - specifically the shuttlebay:

Mine lookes like somebody on the crew ran around with a giant spitball gun shooting it wherever he/she/it/they could. These are molded bits of kit-colored plastic and look like some nasty damage to the mold that wasn't fixed. (Rust damage, perhaps?)

Is anyone else's like that?


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

Yes but I recall mine looked like that when I built the Mystery Ship 35 years ago

It would not be hard to make a new bay from sheet plastic. You could make it either the depth of the kit bay, or a bit shallower or whatever you wanted.


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

Thanks for mentioning the way back when. That just jogged my memory of some bad molding from way back when. Now I've got to go pull my 20 or so year old Mystery Ship out of the archives and take a peek at the shuttlebay.

Cleaning out the problems isn't tough, it's the destroyed detail that'll occur that I'm concerned about. Especially with the floor, there's not an easy way to clean out the problem areas without destroying kit detail.

Basically, I'm in the quandry of "do I create graft-on panels, or a complete replacement shuttlebay".


----------



## JGG1701 (Nov 9, 2004)

Paulbo said:


> Basically, I'm in the quandry of "do I create graft-on panels, or a complete replacement shuttlebay".


I did this:
Copied a pic of diamond plate & glued it down.
-Jim


----------



## cozmo (Nov 29, 2004)

Paulbo said:


> Basically, I'm in the quandry of "do I create graft-on panels, or a complete replacement shuttlebay".


Is there anything in the old shuttle bay worth keeping? Other than the door stops.

Its too deep by half. The detailing is soft, with no practical purpose.

There is a real world comparison to guide you though. Baltimore or Virginia class cruisers had hangars with roof openings. I saw some photos (in an old time book) of one once. As long as you want to improve the kit, go all out.

Just remember the reactor is under the center of the shuttle bay. You need to provide an option to eject it through the floor.:tongue:


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Now Cosmo, be fair. You've got ONE idea of the internal layout and it's good, serious work, but others may have other ideas


----------



## cozmo (Nov 29, 2004)

Its my delusion and I'm stickin' with it.

Next thing you will tell me is to take off my SSC uniform.

Oh, and every body else's is wrong.


----------



## Frank2056 (Mar 23, 2007)

Cozmo is right, though - the existing bay is just awful. The details are poor, ridiculous and grossly out of scale with the rest of the ship (the doors have knobs on them!):










I have one of his shallower docks and it does look good and probably closer to the boxtop artwork.

I made a replacement bay with straight walls (the kit's walls are sloped, probably to make molding easier):










In my original LE:









With a1/500 figure. You can see the printer marks. If I redid this with the newer Shapeways ultra resolution printers, they wouldn't be as noticeable:










I also made a thinner version with separate walls for easier painting and detailing:



















These would probably be too expensive to reproduce as they are (the walls are very thin). Cozmo's set is cheaper and has more goodies in it.

Frank


----------



## JGG1701 (Nov 9, 2004)

Found this at JT-Graphics site:
http://jt-graphics.com/P_RP.html#JTR-034
Appears to have a lot of detail.
You might have to scroll up to #JTR-O34
-Jim


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Well, again it can be anything one wants, if the bay is too deep to the liking, make it less so and all that. 

But allow me a moment of evil please as I laugh politely at those who make an effort to remake the landing bay and still leave the GIANT PIVOT PEGS for the hinges. 

ETA: I had the kit when it came out way way back in the day and I don't recall any obvious molding flaws in the bay. Detail was sufficient for a kid painting it with Testors square bottle enamel paint and a brush is what I recall.


----------



## Nyrath (May 3, 2004)

Robert Merill had some innovative ideas for the Scout ship's landing gear.
http://www.projectrho.com/SSC/leifGallery/leifCGI10.html

(scroll down to section that starts with _Robert Merrill was a proponent of tandem bogie wheels, flanked by fold down landing skids._)


----------



## Frank2056 (Mar 23, 2007)

Steve H said:


> Well, again it can be anything one wants, if the bay is too deep to the liking, make it less so and all that.
> 
> But allow me a moment of evil please as I laugh politely at those who make an effort to remake the landing bay and still leave the GIANT PIVOT PEGS for the hinges.


I left them in just to see if I could make a drop in replacement. The hinges (if any) shouldn't be visible at all. If you look at the boxtop artwork, the bay is pretty shallow - closer to Cozmo's than the kit's version. The details are completely different, too.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Frank2056 said:


> I left them in just to see if I could make a drop in replacement. The hinges (if any) shouldn't be visible at all. If you look at the boxtop artwork, the bay is pretty shallow - closer to Cozmo's than the kit's version. The details are completely different, too.


I know, it's all good, I'm just kidding around. If I didn't love the subject I wouldn't have such interest. 

But on reflection, those hinge pins are actually some rather well thought out engineering. They seem to do a great job of making opening doors that sit nice and flush.


----------



## cozmo (Nov 29, 2004)

Nyrath said:


> Robert Merill had some innovative ideas for the Scout ship's landing gear.
> http://www.projectrho.com/SSC/leifGallery/leifCGI10.html
> 
> (scroll down to section that starts with _Robert Merrill was a proponent of tandem bogie wheels, flanked by fold down landing skids._)


Pretty neat, thought about doing it that way but a hatch integral with the landing skid was overly complicated. I went with a forward hatch similar to that of a B-17 in the port floor of the cabin.



Steve H said:


> But allow me a moment of evil please as I laugh politely at those who make an effort to remake the landing bay and still leave the GIANT PIVOT PEGS for the hinges.


It cannot be helped. That is the way that type of door was designed. It needs over sized motors in the hinge to compensate for planets with greater gravity than Earth normal. The motors are in the hinge because of space limitations in that part of the ship.


Jeeze, do I have to think of everything? Oh, wait, I did.:tongue:

Scissor type doors would have been nice, but have y'all ever tried to make working scissor doors in that scale? The builders had modelers in mind when creating the Galactic Cruiser.


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

cozmo said:


> ...Scissor type doors would have been nice, but have y'all ever tried to make working scissor doors in that scale?...


Hmmmm... I like that idea! (He says running to the virtual drafting table to see if it's possible to make for the PE set.)


----------



## cozmo (Nov 29, 2004)

Paulbo said:


> Hmmmm... I like that idea! (He says running to the virtual drafting table to see if it's possible to make for the PE set.)


Oh great, do you know how many I would have to change if you came out with that set?



Grumble, grumble...shoulda' kept my trap shut. That'll teach me.


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

Just got the model--it's cool to have the retro box.

Why is it molded in this dumb green plastic?


----------



## Frank2056 (Mar 23, 2007)

jbond said:


> Just got the model--it's cool to have the retro box.
> 
> Why is it molded in this dumb green plastic?


I don't have one yet - other than the engineering sample - but I thought it was supposed to be blue-ish. Not as blue as the original, though.

The boxtop artwork is from my original kit's boxtop, which Jaime modified.

Steve, the doors fit as well as they do (for a kit of its age) in part because of the slop in the hinges. I think roll off doors that open sideways would also work, but not look as cool.

Paul - couldn't you make a PE shroud that looks like a massive door engine but covers the hinge and slot? The doors would have to stay open, though.

Frank


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Frank2056 said:


> I don't have one yet - other than the engineering sample - but I thought it was supposed to be blue-ish. Not as blue as the original, though.
> 
> The boxtop artwork is from my original kit's boxtop, which Jaime modified.
> 
> ...


By Roll Off doors are you thinking something akin to the turret doors (and early bomb bay doors) of a B-36? Because I was thinking how neat that would look, and even be reasonably practical if a scout needed to launch while the ship was in atmosphere.

Not sure I'm keen on a 'W' or folding door concept just for the complexity of it. When you're dealing with pressure doors simple is best. Of course if they were REALLY as simple as could be they'd open INWARDS so the pressure would keep them closed and sealed. Of course they open outwards so that if needed they can just vent the atmosphere and launch hot.

And I don't think a shroud needs to be made to cover the stock pin. I'm thinking something 'U' shaped, or 'sideways' U planted on the wall at the hinge hole. detail might be etched into the 'tail' of the U or...I should sketch it but if I did I'd be even more a laughing stock. 

But I'm thinking there are ways to detail up that area that leaves the hinges still working. That would have the most appeal to the most builders I think, because those that want to do more work will do it anyway.


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

Drat! I think I've got a good solution to a mechanism for the doors but ... the curvature of the hull is problematic. Flat doors just won't cut it and adding the proper curvature to the door parts will put this outside the comfort level of 99.9% of builders.

Back to plan 1 - glue on detail panels for the inside of the doors to give them a bit of interest.


----------



## Frank2056 (Mar 23, 2007)

Steve H said:


> By Roll Off doors are you thinking something akin to the turret doors (and early bomb bay doors) of a B-36? Because I was thinking how neat that would look, and even be reasonably practical if a scout needed to launch while the ship was in atmosphere.


Pretty much - either retracting into the hull somehow, or just rolling off on the hull, towards the engines.

A fixed cover to hide the door hinge, but still allow them to work is possible.

Paul, A thin PE framework that glues to the doors should work. The doors have to be as thick as the kit doors are (at least along the narrow fore and aft edges), because they rest on the columns in on the fore and aft walls of the scout bay. This keeps them flush (or close to flush) with the outer hull.

Frank


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

I don't think anyone has posted photo's yet.

Here is the R2 Leif Ericson, next to the R2 UFO Mystery Ship, next to the old AMT UFO Mystery ship.



































































It looks like the neck has NOT been restored to the original length. I think Jamie said it would not.

No Sounds of Space record. 

It's molded in a funny blue color, no problem as I will paint it.

I'm glad to have this kit back! Thanks Jamie and R2!


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

The last photo, I can only link 8.










And just for fun my UFO converted to the Leif


----------



## JGG1701 (Nov 9, 2004)

Hey, thanks for the pics!!!:thumbsup:
When you get the light kit out of the bag, please post some more pics.
Thanks,
-Jim


----------



## Frank2056 (Mar 23, 2007)

mach7 said:


> It looks like the neck has NOT been restored to the original length. I think Jamie said it would not.
> 
> No Sounds of Space record.
> 
> ...


I discussed the length issue in this thread, about the engineering test version of the kit.
It's probable that the loss in length happened when they redid the molds for the split neck UFO (the master was split, then the mold cut from the split master, I'm guessing). Joining the neck and fuselage wouldn't restore the missing bit because it wasn't there when the mold was made.
The original LE mold probably wore out and is almost certainly no more.

The record wasn't included because of messy rights issues, plus the question on how to distribute the "Sounds of Space". Record? When my buddy digitized the record on his old turntable, we had to dust it off and try to remember how that ancient tech worked. CD? They're going the way of vinyl. Also, I'm not sure that that work of "art" was worth resurrecting in the first place. If you want to hear it, it's out there... 

Frank


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Thanks Frank,

I remember reading that thread now. I do like the darker red engines, and LOVE the old stand.

No real loss on the sounds of space record, as you say it really is not worth the effort it would take, and it is online.

Mark


----------



## Spockr (Sep 14, 2009)

Frank2056 said:


> I discussed the length issue in this thread, about the engineering test version of the kit.
> It's probable that the loss in length happened when they redid the molds for the split neck UFO (the master was split, then the mold cut from the split master, I'm guessing). Joining the neck and fuselage wouldn't restore the missing bit because it wasn't there when the mold was made.
> The original LE mold probably wore out and is almost certainly no more.
> 
> ...


Frank can you elaborate on the "messy rights issues"? Who actually does the voice over? Who created the sound effects? Its certainly an oddity. Sold with a 60's toy but really has more of a 50's feel. A while back I was trying to chase down info about where that record came from and only came up with bare threads of information. (Auravision 33 1/3rpm 1967)
Any details you might share would be appreciated.

Regards,
MattL


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Spockr said:


> Frank can you elaborate on the "messy rights issues"? Who actually does the voice over? Who created the sound effects? Its certainly an oddity. Sold with a 60's toy but really has more of a 50's feel. A while back I was trying to chase down info about where that record came from and only came up with bare threads of information. (Auravision 33 1/3rpm 1967)
> Any details you might share would be appreciated.
> 
> Regards,
> MattL


The main problem. in theory, is the licensing of the music. While it may be 'stock cues' that were common on various TV shows back in the '60s, the license would have been for the specific use on the 'flexidisc' as produced by AMT. Clearly since AMT no longer exists as it was when the contract was put together there would have to be a new contract with the rights holder which would, even if there wasn't a huge increase in the fee would still be money spent for a 'gimmick' that doesn't add actual value to the kit the way the new LED lighting system does.

I'm all for nostalgia. If possible I would have included a 'flexidisc' (actually I think it was cardboard, wasn't it?) of the original with a CD version for modern listening just to shake things up but the cost... I don't think it would be good to add another $10 or so to the kit MSRP for that, do you?

*hah* of course part of the problem of my idea is, does there exist ANYWHERE the technology to make a cardboard record anymore?

No, no, I think the record is one of those things that is best left to the gimmicks of the past, let's concentrate on getting the kits back.


----------



## Frank2056 (Mar 23, 2007)

The rights issues are as Steve mentioned. Getting the rights to the music and the spoken words would add time and cost, all just for nostalgic reasons.

The record in the original kit is plastic coated cardboard, with the track pressed into the plastic using a process called "Auravision". Reproducing the record would also require a license for this technology. I bet only a tiny fraction of LE buyers still have a working record player. 

All of the detective work on the record contents was done by a couple of Leif Ericson and music fans. This is from my LE page:



> David Penn and Scott Snell did an amazing job at identifying both the source of the music and the spoken words in the record. The lyrics are from a 1967 psychedelic rock record called "Cosmic Sounds" by The Zodiac. The music was originally used in "The Twilight Zone" and was released in "The Twilight Zone: 40th Anniversary Collection" set."


----------



## Nyrath (May 3, 2004)

The new red engines are marvelous! Frank2056, you did a top-notch job.


----------



## Frank2056 (Mar 23, 2007)

Nyrath said:


> The new red engines are marvelous! Frank2056, you did a top-notch job.


Thanks Winchell! I'm happy with the results. There are some minor differences between the original engines and my version, but they're hard to see unless you have both versions next to each other.


----------



## idMonster (Jun 18, 2003)

I just noticed something interesting about the Shuttle Bay detailing decals. They're drawings of AMT's Death Star surface display base from their TIE Fighter kit.

Gordon


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Instead of the expense of including a record or CD, maybe provide a download link to an MP3?


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

John P said:


> Instead of the expense of including a record or CD, maybe provide a download link to an MP3?


Except how is that a 'keepsake'?

And the various licensing rights would still have to be paid.

No, this is a non-solution. server space costs money. access costs money. maintaining costs money. And, if I may show a personal bias, promoting an 'internet only' kind of thing buys into the idea that intellectual property is a mayfly thing of no import because:

Let's say they did do a link. OK, if you buy the kit you get the link,right? How many people will clamor for the link just to 'see what the fuss was about' that haven't bought the kit? Does it matter? On the one hand, no, so what, it's a goof from the '60s big deal. On the other, R2 would have assumed 'eyeballs' based on kit sales and structured their web and server accordingly and suddenly it's getting millions of hits, overloading, incurring charges for overages, blah blah blah.

If it's to be a nostalgia bonus item it should be in some way physical. That makes it more real. Companies die. web links die. Something packed in a kit box lives on.

Of course it doesn't matter, it didn't happen. What MIGHT have been fun is a CD in a sleeve made to look like the cardboard record, and on the CD not only the record but also some videos about the revival of the kit, maybe an essay on the history of the kit, maybe a mock documentary on the history of the ship, things of that nature. Yes, it would have cost money to produce. It would have been cool and unlike ANYTHING done in the market. Ah well. At least the kit is back.


----------



## JGG1701 (Nov 9, 2004)

Steve H said:


> What MIGHT have been fun is a CD in a sleeve made to look like the cardboard record,



G I Joe did! :thumbsup:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1966-GI-JOE...ps=63&clkid=2920278031575204527#ht_500wt_1202
-Jim


----------



## Dr. Brad (Oct 5, 1999)

I am so glad to see this kit back! I've downloaded the original track - now all I need is the kit, and time to build it!


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

JGG1701 said:


> G I Joe did! :thumbsup:
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/1966-GI-JOE...ps=63&clkid=2920278031575204527#ht_500wt_1202
> -Jim


Sunnavugun!

But isn't that a fan-created thing?

I still have my record from my space capsule, it's pressed in orange vinyl. 

Otherwise yes, that's the direction I would have gone in.


----------



## Vardor (Mar 11, 2004)

The "Sounds of Outer Space" is on You Tube at 



 
Enjoy!


----------



## Frank2056 (Mar 23, 2007)

Funny how that video credits everyone from NASA on down but lifted the text from my web page without crediting it.


----------



## Captain April (May 1, 2004)

Ooops...


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

Frank2056 said:


> Funny how that video credits everyone from NASA on down but lifted the text from my web page without crediting it.


Well, it's the internet, it's all free, right? Everybody knows that anything you get from the internet is 'yours' and....

Oh, I can't go on. Happens to me all the time. Sorry that hit you, with all the excellent work you've done to keep the flame alive.


----------

