#1
|
||||
|
||||
Star Trek Klingon Rocket Model
Star Trek Klingon Rocket Model
In 1975, Estes came out with the two ST models. I went to look at the catalog and notice my Klingon Battle Cruiser does not look like the catalog model. The catalog model has a tube instead of a flat balsa base where the vertical fins are located. The fins are different also. Interesting, did this version ever get out to the public?
__________________
If it flies, I can crash it! |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Looks like they used non-finalized prototypes for the 1975 catalog images.
Earl
__________________
Earl L. Cagle, Jr. NAR# 29523 TRA# 962 SAM# 73 Owner/Producer Point 39 Productions Rocket-Brained Since 1970 |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
So does anyone have this original version of the Klingon Cruiser?
__________________
If it flies, I can crash it! |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I guess that is what I was trying to say by “non-finalized prototypes”: that particular model shown in the 1975 catalog was NOT the final model style/shape. I would be very, very surprised if ANY were even produced in that configuration other than that prototype. Once the final configuration/style was settled on THEN instructions were prepared, packaging designed, decals made and parts produced and kitted. Earl
__________________
Earl L. Cagle, Jr. NAR# 29523 TRA# 962 SAM# 73 Owner/Producer Point 39 Productions Rocket-Brained Since 1970 |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
The version you have is the only one I'm aware was ever kitted.
One of mine is from the original production in '75 and is the same.
__________________
When in doubt, WHACK the GAS and DITCH the brake !!! Yes, there is such a thing as NORMAL, if you have to ask what is "NORMAL" , you probably aren't ! Failure may not be an OPTION, but it is ALWAYS a POSSIBILITY. ALL systems are GO for MAYHEM, CHAOS, TURMOIL, FIASCOS, and HAVOC ! |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
I recently built one of the Estes Klingon Battle Cruisers - I was rather underwhelmed with the kit - it took a great deal of effort to come up with what I'd rate no better than average finished product (I haven't tried to fly it yet).
I picked up a Starship Enterprise kit at the same time, but that box remains unopened. Is it a better kit? Or will I be similarly disappointed? |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
The Enterprise is a bit more challenging than the KBC.
__________________
If it flies, I can crash it! |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
The Starship Enterprise has a lot of vacuum-formed parts in the kit. That is a difficult kit to build. I have seen one fly on a C6-3, and it flies okay, but then I would not fly one very often.
__________________
'Til next time, Mike Toelle NAR 31692 L1 SAM 0373 |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
At least the Klingon Battle Cruiser flies in a "scale" appearing manner.
The Enterprise with that MORONIC "flight probe" mis-deal is an ugly joke, just like the Star Wars TIE Fighter. Way beyond Ridiculous and well into ABSURDITY.
__________________
When in doubt, WHACK the GAS and DITCH the brake !!! Yes, there is such a thing as NORMAL, if you have to ask what is "NORMAL" , you probably aren't ! Failure may not be an OPTION, but it is ALWAYS a POSSIBILITY. ALL systems are GO for MAYHEM, CHAOS, TURMOIL, FIASCOS, and HAVOC ! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Have both and have only flown the Enterprise one time, it is a very hard rocket to prep and fly's like a brick with a motor attached. The klingon on the other hand fly's good the best flight I had was with a composite motor with a six second delay. the thing actually went into a guild after the motor burned out and the chute ejected with the rocket still in a horizontal attitude.
__________________
Neal Miller Master Blaster NAR# 58296 |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|