[Thaeris]

Chaps,

I have a quick question about modeling the X-Wing which I'm sure Brand or the crew could answer easily enough:

I'm modeling the forward fuselage of the X-Wing, and it's been taking far too long. I intended for this to be a short little project, but like most of my projects, getting the project done seems to get run afowled by the intention of doing the project right. At least the intentions are good...

The model state, as you can see, is not too impressive:
https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khESQYIDyx6getU0b
https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khEd1lUcXGMFb-30L
https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khEUb-F-LSBAB2kAs
https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khEZbgQSMUymJul41

For those interested in the source image, I can't tell you where I got it, but I've had this handy on my drive for 8 years or more. Perhaps it has some flaws, but it is the best X-Wing schematic as a whole I've ever come across:

https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khDkOgBv8vMyCurP3

Basically, modeling started from the front to the back, and now is moving back to the front. What gets me a bit miffed is that it seems from most drawings, model shots, etc., the nosecone section is mostly slab sided (as a single plane), with a little curvature/filleting being produced as the nose advances towards its extremities. That single plane geometry might be producible, but it may result in other aspects of the model just not working out correctly - at least not correctly with the reference images I've been working with. As a primary model reference, I'm using the art2models X-Wing as a reference:

http://art2models.deviantart.com/gallery/
http://www.therpf.com/showthread.php?t=146279

^There are other threads with this sexy model out there if you are inclined to look.

"Blue 1" is also a nice reference model:

http://www.makmodeler.com/?p=951

I did note a small amount of curving in the unpainted art2 X-Wing near the base of the canopy, but Blue 1 is in contrast pretty much slab-sided until halfway down the nosecone.

In contrast, the full-size prop X-Wing had some additional faces in the forward hull:

https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khDpUAnRPXmWPbac8
https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khD2Z8FISYzeqwekf
https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khDwi5QVeFcMEuXkR
https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khDugoRK0lLQNsZIo
https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khD8aRvhZQYhCUsWq
https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khD7ILaKwunGXQquF

This almost seems to be reflected in the film miniature, but that's only semi-arguable:

https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khEIAPGIxeYpCK9NZ

^Note that the new CG X-Wings are kind of nice, but they really do lack a lot of the finer details, such as a pronounced chine on the fuselage sides. I found it interesting how much of an angle the full-size X-Wing has on its forward chine, while the filming model's chine is nearly flat:

https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khEA3DhKf8QhvoWGg
https://1drv.ms/i/s!As--YsoV359khEGhOesnTzodPd3N

So, because I've not quite arrived at my ideal solution for how to work with the forward fuselage, what did you guys do? I'm certain you've already been through all of the concerns I'm just arriving at now, so I'd find it very useful to know how you got around all of this.

*Edited because direct picture links were not working via my Live account.

[niffiwan]

Well, I'm not a modeller, so while we wait for some of them to appear here's the current FotG model in p3d, maybe that'll help?

[CountBuggula]

Nice collection of photos - there's a few there I hadn't seen before.

There's a number of instances where the full-size mockup hasn't matched the scale models - I believe the Lambda is another instance of that.  In each of those cases we've gone strictly off of the scale models, as they're the most available references, and there's often not full shots of the full size props to use.  We have a fairly extensive library of reference shots of the scale models for pretty much every movie ship that we've worked off of, and pride ourselves on the accuracy of our in-game models.

Good luck with your own model, and let us know if there's anything else we can help you with.  Thanks for stopping by!

Well, I'm not a modeller, so while we wait for some of them to appear here's the current FotG model in p3d, maybe that'll help?

Hmm.  I just noticed that the cockpit glass has some weird artifacts from smoothing when I converted it for p3d.  Don't worry, it definitely doesn't have that problem in-game.

[Dain]

It's so beautiful.

[Thaeris]

Thanks for the input, guys. Maybe Brand will pop in at some point?

I did find it interesting to see what was prioritized when it came to planar surfaces, with the canopy frame being one of those priorities. That cut-out at the front is the main problem, as it will do one of several things: (1.) If the whole thing is planar, it will cause the top of the nosecone to have a more vertical slope, or (2.) it will necessitate an extended set of flat planes out from the front of the canopy. The other options available are simply to make parts of the frame non-planar and move from there!

Next, really minor, minor point, but did you originally have 2 sets of wings? I notice that the lock-up point at the rear of the S-foils are the same for both wings - there's supposed to be an intersection - just take a look at the T65C-A2 drawing I uploaded.

Finally, did all my images load up? Not that my rough model state is all that impressive, but it was uploaded so it could be reviewed.

*EDIT: Looks like I might need to be logged into my Live account for those images to upload directly. Constant goofy stuff from MS...

[CountBuggula]

Thanks for the input, guys. Maybe Brand will pop in at some point?

I did find it interesting to see what was prioritized when it came to planar surfaces, with the canopy frame being one of those priorities. That cut-out at the front is the main problem, as it will do one of several things: (1.) If the whole thing is planar, it will cause the top of the nosecone to have a more vertical slope, or (2.) it will necessitate an extended set of flat planes out from the front of the canopy. The other options available are simply to make parts of the frame non-planar and move from there!

Next, really minor, minor point, but did you originally have 2 sets of wings? I notice that the lock-up point at the rear of the S-foils are the same for both wings - there's supposed to be an intersection - just take a look at the T65C-A2 drawing I uploaded.

Finally, did all my images load up? Not that my rough model state is all that impressive, but it was uploaded so it could be reviewed.

*EDIT: Looks like I might need to be logged into my Live account for those images to upload directly. Constant goofy stuff from MS...

Sadly, Brand has been absent from the mod team for several years now.  I wish he could still be around to lend his expertise, but he's moved on to other things in his life by necessity.  He's occasionally been known to lurk on the forums or IRC, but has passed the torch on and won't likely be posting any more.  He'd be the only one who could answer most of those questions, but as zookeeper has done much of the rigging, he might be able to add in some insight.

[zookeeper]

Next, really minor, minor point, but did you originally have 2 sets of wings? I notice that the lock-up point at the rear of the S-foils are the same for both wings - there's supposed to be an intersection - just take a look at the T65C-A2 drawing I uploaded.

All the 4 wings are identical, if that's what you're asking.

[rhettro]

I like this thread for inspiration.

https://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?322145-WIP-Re-creation-of-Ralph-McQuarrie-s-quot-TIE-fighter-vs-X-Wing-fighter-quot&highlight=ralph+mcquarrie

[Thaeris]

As I bungle about with this project at an embarrassingly slow rate, I do on occasion find some really interesting pieces of information. Check this out:

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/exhibit/scale.html

The problem here is that, if you're aiming for perfection, you'll never get it, for two obvious reasons:

1. The first reason is a lack of precision in the numbers - all numbers are in centimeters, which might be fine if you're dealing with something relatively large. But even the large-scale studio models aren't that large. What you end up with is ballpark scaling, which is all and good, but not really accurate. The chart is also misleading, as I've no idea if the X-Wing models have the foils opened or closed. Measurements down to the millimeter and knowledge of the foil position would be great in the linked chart, but it's just not there.

2. The second and most obvious reason is the variance in size ratios of the listed numbers. 12.5m is NOT a precise number for length - if the number is relatively accurate, there is still likely a +/- 0.05m margin by which it can vary. Granted, that isn't in truth a really big number, but it may have an effect on some of the fine details in terms of size/practicality. The effect of this can enter in when using the numbers to gauge the other dimensions of the fighter. My model started (and remains) sized to exactly 12.5m in length, and by virtue of that the X-wing with foils closed comes out to 10.66m in width. Likewise, the large-scale model numbers of 127cm in width translate to 10.95m if the length is exactly 12.5m. That's almost a foot in difference, and I have no idea if the foils are opened or closed for that measurement.

What I really ought to settle on is the fact that I'm producing an abstraction, as all art is an abstraction of some form. Technically, the only thing one could truly replicate from the film props is... only one of the film props... at a time. I can't do that either, so wrapping this thing up sooner than later is really starting to sound like a good idea.