# !/32 flying Sub



## gaetan (Apr 6, 2005)

Hello 

Steve Iverson, on his Cult TV site just posted that the Moebius Flying sub to be released later this year will be scaled at 1/32. If we go with the dimensions Dave Mentzer gave for a FS in 1/32 earlier in February, it should be a bit over 13 inches. A good scale to be able to recognize Kowalski by his forelock.....

There is also mention of the Universal Mummy sculpted by Gabriel Marquez...

Good time to be a modelist,
Gaétan


----------



## xsavoie (Jun 29, 1999)

Well well well.Do they know something we don't or are these just nagging rumors.


----------



## Steve CultTVman Iverson (Jan 1, 1970)

This is just info thats been posted in the forums. 

Steve


----------



## gaetan (Apr 6, 2005)

I ain't personally into the secrets but I surely hope it's truth.... At 1/32 it would be big but not excessively huge. John Payne wanted it 1/48 , I would have prefered 1/24.... We will get it half way , more than acceptable to me. I hope John will be satified too. If he displays it diagonally , it should even be a tight fit for his 12''shelf.... And the most important, everybody will be happy...:wave:

Gaétan


----------



## gaetan (Apr 6, 2005)

Ouuups!!!!
When I read that on Steve site , I thought he had received some privileged info by Frank , being a Moebius retailer. Sorry if it is a false joy , but I still hope for it to be truth.......

Gaétan


----------



## woof359 (Apr 27, 2003)

*scale*

Hate to nit pic, but woodnt it be better if the scale was the same as the normal car or plane model?


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Cars and planes come in 1/32 too.

Works for me!


----------



## xr4sam (Dec 9, 1999)

I'm a happy kit assembler!


----------



## Y3a (Jan 18, 2001)

My collection of Williams Brothers 1930's Racing Airplanes are 1/32! Cool. Bigger the better! Didn't Hasagawa do a P51 in that scale too?


----------



## Auroranut (Jan 12, 2008)

I'm building a 1/32 scale Type VII u-boat for someone. It's over 6 feet long. Try fitting that in a cabinet!!

Chris.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Oh good grief, there have been tons of 1/32 airplanes for 40 years. It's a standard scale. In fact, there seems to be a current surge in new ones over the last couple of years. Check out Trumpeter and Hasegawa's catalogs.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Here's some of Trumpeter's 1/32 line:
http://www.hlj.com/scripts/hljlist.cgi

Hasegawa's:
http://www.hlj.com/scripts/hljlist.cgi (35 jets alone)

Tamiya's:
http://www.hlj.com/scripts/hljlist.cgi

Revell:
http://www.hlj.com/scripts/hljlist.cgi


----------



## DR. PRETORIOUS (Nov 1, 2000)

personally I would like to see it in the same scale as the space pod & chariot.


----------



## Captain Han Solo (Apr 5, 2002)

Flying Sub


1/24.

Perfect scale.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

woof359 said:


> Hate to nit pic, but woodnt it be better if the scale was the same as the normal car or plane model?


...............:freak:

Where were you on the 1/144, 1/128 discussions.

Give it to me as big as possible.....whatever the scale......

1/48 or 1/32 are perfect scales for this subject. 
I'm a happy camper.

I just wish there were more 1/32 scale mechanic and deck crew figures available.
Been looking for those for my reissue Viper.
As it is, all I have for that right now is a 1/32 naked lady.....................wait a minute.
That might just work.


----------



## Dave Hussey (Nov 20, 1998)

I have it on good authority that there will be a 1/32 scale _John P in Orion Slave Girl Outfit and Brandishing a Dirty Big Gun_ kit.

Huzz


----------



## Seaview (Feb 18, 2004)

Dave Hussey said:


> I have it on good authority that there will be a 1/32 scale _John P in Orion Slave Girl Outfit and Brandishing a Dirty Big Gun_ kit.
> 
> Huzz


OOOH! OOOH! OOOOH! Sign me up for one of those!!!! 
:lol:


----------



## Prince of Styrene II (Feb 28, 2000)

Dave Hussey said:


> I have it on good authority that there will be a 1/32 scale _John P in Orion Slave Girl Outfit and Brandishing a Dirty Big Gun_ kit.


Boo YA!! Now all I need is a 1/32 TOS shuttlecraft!!


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

DR. PRETORIOUS said:


> personally I would like to see it in the same scale as the space pod & chariot.


Too dang big.



Prince of Styrene II said:


> Boo YA!! Now all I need is a 1/32 TOS shuttlecraft!!


Too dang small!

Ain't you folks payin' attention to the other discussions?


----------



## Moebius (Mar 15, 2007)

Still working on some developement issues on the Flying Sub. 1/32 has been the scale kicked around, but until we officially announce, it's not a definite scale yet. Hopefully we'll have some news in the next week or so, we're pretty behind on our promised "after Toy Fair" announcements!


----------



## Seaview (Feb 18, 2004)

If I were saddled with the limitation of a 12" wide shelf space (and the misery that undoubtably accompany it if I were a prize-winning, truely brilliant kit basher ), I'd want 1/48 scale.
It's a large enough scale to have an appreciable, detailed interior and would fit nicely between my P-40 Warhawk and my ME-109. 
Although the old Aurora kit will forever hold a special place in my heart, it was, quite frankly, too small. The Lunar Models kit, now no longer available, was excellent, but far too large for a 12" shelf because of its roughly 14" diameter size.


----------



## Prince of Styrene II (Feb 28, 2000)

John P said:


> Too dang small! Ain't you folks payin' attention to the other discussions?


Nope. Just thinking of my own greed. 

I think the scale would lend nicely to dios & such.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

I'm not a fan of the "bigger is better" trend in styrene kits. Aside from having very limited storage/display space these days, I've always preferred smaller kits. I'd much rather see the FS issed in 1/48 or even 1/72 scale, but I realize I'm in the minority on this subject.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

I've never let shelf size/space determine scales of kits I would want. If it's too big for a shelf, perhaps it is a subject that can be hung "in flight" from the ceiling, or be appreciated in a display case at a local hobby shop. You can always find display space.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Prince of Styrene II said:


> Nope. Just thinking of my own greed.
> 
> I think the scale would lend nicely to dios & such.


But that would be the same size as the old AMT kit, so what would be the point? 1/24 scale in this case would make it just over a foot long. Perfect shelf size, and big enough for great interior detail.


----------



## Prince of Styrene II (Feb 28, 2000)

John P said:


> But that would be the same size as the old AMT kit, so what would be the point? 1/24 scale in this case would make it just over a foot long. Perfect shelf size, and big enough for great interior detail.


Oh, you are just too picky, aren't you! 
...
...
...
...
...

Okay, 1/24. :thumbsup:


----------



## Captain Han Solo (Apr 5, 2002)

Personally, whatever scale Frank decides on, I'll be happy!

Been waiting for this stuff ever since I saw Voyage on TV the first time!!


High Regards,

BP.


----------



## Ignatz (Jun 20, 2000)

I would go for a 1/24 scale big time! It would be a comfortable size. Big enough to be impressive and to differentiate itself from the old Aurora kit, and still not overwhelming in size. Regardless of the final scale, I hope it will be more accurate than any previous productions of the FS!

Maybe a great option would be the dual wall reactors as seen in "City Beneath the Sea", or grapple arms and landing gear as seen in some production photos of the model.


----------



## Dave Metzner (Jan 1, 1970)

Ok guys.......let's review this scale stuff ONE MORE TIME

Based on a roughly 36 ft Flying Sub
1/24 scale = 36 ft times 12 in divided by 24 = 18 inches 
The issue here, quickly becomes one of cost. 
Since the model is going to have one piece upper and lower hulls at 1/24 scale we are looking at TWO tools large enough to produce 18 inch parts - that's four 2ft square chunks of steel! 
That's a 19 inch square box to hold the finished kit.

At 1/32 we get 36 ft times 12 in divided by 32 = 13.5 inches......Now we might be able to produce Upper and Lower Hulls in one tool! Even if it require two tools the cost is a great deal less...Not to mention that a 13.5 inch hull part is much less likely to warp that an 18 inch piece!
Now the box size is 14 inches square...... Much more economical to ship!

At 1/32 we still have a kit that is nearly twice the size of the old Aurora kit with space for an interior and at a price that is more affordable than the 18 inch 1/24 scale kit would have been.....
1/32 is the standard scale for military vehicles so there is allot of stuff already in the market at that scale.

Dave


----------



## falcondesigns (Oct 30, 2002)

Hi Dave,I think we would all pay a higher price for a larger scale kit.The larger scale aircraft have been selling well in the last few years.Interior braceing similar to the center ring would take care of the warping.Alexander


----------



## toyroy (Jul 17, 2005)

Dave Metzner said:


> ...(A) 1/24 scale (Flying Sub model would be) 18 inches.
> The issue here, quickly becomes one of cost.
> Since the model is going to have one piece upper and lower hulls at 1/24 scale we are looking at TWO tools large enough to produce 18 inch parts - that's four 2ft square chunks of steel!
> That's a 19 inch square box to hold the finished kit...


Could _both_ the upper and lower hulls be divided at the dark-colored longitudinal fin extensions, similar to the Aurora upper hull? In addition to addressing the cost considerations, this would allow opening the model to display the interior in several ways.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

Dave Metzner said:


> Ok guys.......let's review this scale stuff ONE MORE TIME


I like it when Dave flares his nostriles.



Dave Metzner said:


> 1/32 is the standard scale for military vehicles so there is allot of stuff already in the market at that scale.
> Dave


..............:freak: Uh Dave, where was this mentality on the 1/128 vs. 1/144 on the scale of the SeaView??

....Banging....head.....against.....wall.......ouch!


----------



## Prince of Styrene II (Feb 28, 2000)

Dave Metzner said:


> At 1/32 we get 36 ft times 12 in divided by 32 = 13.5 inches. 1/32 is the standard scale for military vehicles so there is allot of stuff already in the market at that scale.


_See, John!!_ I told you that 1/32 would be the better choice!! 

You do have that "scale calculator" program, right?

 :roll:


*ducks & runs*


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

Some of the coolest-looking FS-1 miniatures were about a foot in diameter--I'm happy to see something about that size. Even with the interior this is not a subject loaded with fine detail--that wasn't the aesthetic at the time. So for me bigger isn't necessarily better with this subject--twice the size of the Aurora sounds good to me.

The biggest issue for me, which I'd love for Dave to address, is the wing taper--neither the Aurora nor Lunar kits got this right and featured blunt wing tips, presumably because of the difficulty in molding the correct taper. The taper, and the upsweep of the wings, is part of the Flying Sub's sleek aesthetic and very important to capture...


----------



## xsavoie (Jun 29, 1999)

Although 1/24th scale might be a dream come true for certain modelers,1/32 scale will please more modelers because of practicallity and a more reasonnable price.Although I have to admit that an 18 inches wingspan Flying Sub would be spectacular.It will have an interior with the necessary transparent parts if someone wants to light it up,as well as figures,right.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Prince of Styrene II said:


> _See, John!!_ I told you that 1/32 would be the better choice!!
> 
> You do have that "scale calculator" program, right?
> 
> ...


I believe I expressed my happiness with the 1/32 figure earlier in the thread.
:woohoo:

Also, I wouldn't mind if the top was divided up like the Aurora kit for interior viewin'.


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

John P said:


> . . . Also, I wouldn't mind if the top was divided up like the Aurora kit for interior viewin'.


Just as long as the removeable section is engineered to fit flush and snug when closed. The Aurora Flying Sub Lift-Off Top Problem is almost as legendary (and infuriating) as the AMT Classic TOS Enterprise Nacelle Droop Problem.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

1/32nd or 1/24th? It can be the same size ship at both scales according to the Irwin Allen Productions' Scale of Convenience. :tongue:


----------



## Dave Hussey (Nov 20, 1998)

I must've got lucky with my 1975 vintage Aurora Flying Sub - its lift-off top fits pretty good. And still does.

Huzz


----------



## Dave Hussey (Nov 20, 1998)

I would like 1/33.869 scale please. :drunk::tongue:

Huzz


----------



## Ignatz (Jun 20, 2000)

Can the aft compartment be a totally different scale from the flight deck?


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

It already is!


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

And just where are the intakes for those air-breathing engines anyway?


----------



## toyroy (Jul 17, 2005)

scotpens said:


> And just where are the intakes for those air-breathing engines anyway?


The intakes are next to the front windows. How the air(and water) get to the engines, _that's_ top secret. :freak: A transporter beam, perhaps?


----------



## toyroy (Jul 17, 2005)

Dave Hussey said:


> I must've got lucky with my 1975 vintage Aurora Flying Sub - its lift-off top fits pretty good. And still does...


Did the kit sit in the sun for a few hours, before you built it?


----------



## Seaview (Feb 18, 2004)

I've discovered that as far as the infernal warping of the Aurora FS top panel is concerned, it depended upon which kit was made when and by whom.
My original (pre-firecracker-by-teenage-idiot-me destruction) Aurora had a perfect fit, and my 1988 HobbyTime had a nice fit, but the Monogram re-pop was as twisted as a record album left on a windowsill in September. Hot water and blow drying helped, but did not fully heal the warpage.


----------



## flyingfrets (Oct 19, 2001)

Yep, the Tsukuda (HobbyTime) kit was just about a perfect fit on mine, but it was my understanding that they paid Monogram to repop the kit for them, ship it to Japan for packaging and then they sold 'em & shipped 'em *back* to us (for an ungodly profit...IIRC I paid $48.00 each for the two I bought), so not counting Aurora, they were all made by the same outfit regardless of who's name was on the box.


----------



## Dave Hussey (Nov 20, 1998)

Toyroy - I live in Canada.

We don't get no sun here 'cept in summer.

And on that day we all go swimming! :wave:

Huzz


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

flyingfrets said:


> Yep, the Tsukuda (HobbyTime) kit was just about a perfect fit on mine, but it was my understanding that they paid Monogram to repop the kit for them, ship it to Japan for packaging and then they sold 'em & shipped 'em *back* to us (for an ungodly profit...IIRC I paid $48.00 each for the two I bought), so not counting Aurora, they were all made by the same outfit regardless of who's name was on the box.


Wow, I guess I got a deal - I only paid $35 each for my two Tsukudas!
And, what, 5 years later (before I'de even built one) Monogram released them under their own label for $15. :drunk:


----------



## gareee (Jan 1, 1970)

So did a final announcement of size and price ever get made?

Looks like the announcement should have been made a month or two ago, from the posts here.

My .02... I bought the Moebius seaview because it was styrene, and significantly larger then the old polar lights kit.

If the flying sub came in at the same pricepoint as the seaview, and was larger, I'd be quite happy with it. If it's only a foot long, then I might just make do with my old monogram one. heck, a larger one might even accomodate the small GiJoe figures, and maybe even the new indiana Jones figures!

I'm thinking maybe something 22-24 inches long would probably be my ideal preference. (No clue what the scale would be on it.) I'd have no problem at all with the hull top and bottom being multipart, since the seam can be so easily hidden.

But for pity's sake, PLEASE cast all lightable instrument panels in clear!!! (same with the reactor wall!)


----------



## starseeker (Feb 1, 2006)

In "1/24" it would be 18" long and 17 1/2" wingspan. Of course you couldn't get a 1/24 interior into it, more a 1/32. In "real" 1/32, it would still be a reasonably large 13 1/2' long, but I'd sure prefer a 1/24, along with a sister kit featuring a 1/24 mini sub and diving bell.


----------



## solex227 (Apr 23, 2008)

starseeker said:


> In "1/24" it would be 18" long and 17 1/2" wingspan. Of course you couldn't get a 1/24 interior into it, more a 1/32. In "real" 1/32, it would still be a reasonably large 13 1/2' long, but I'd sure prefer a 1/24, along with a sister kit featuring a 1/24 mini sub and diving bell.


what would the dimensions be if the kit was 1/35 scale? 
Im my oppinion 1/35 scale I think this would be the best scale being this is a popular scale already.


----------

