This was one of the first model kits I ever built (more like slapped together any old how) as a little boy back in the mid-70s. Had no paint and of course I got confused about the instructions. Still a childhood icon so thank you for showing this build.
I can watch it. I'm simply not a trekker/ie. The model was given to a family member that greatfully apprecited it. It sits with the Shatner Auto that I also got in person to go with the model.
I did the same thing you did. Just held it together and added a couple coats of glue over those wide seams. It worked out well. Same as you had to do a bit of sanding and filling. Only difference was I was building a 1989 kit that I had gotten off eBay. I really enjoyed this video.
I built the original AMT model back in the day, but it didn't come out at beautiful as yours. I kept it the natural white plastic, but painted the little parts before cementing them in place. It came with a stand, but I hung it up from the ceiling in my bedroom. If I remember correctly it had a battery with two little lights on it. You did a great job!
@@PlasticModelBuilder That's because the early editions of the AMT model were very different from what is available now. Most notably, the proportions and some details of the model are a much closer match in terms of accuracy to the 3 foot and 11 foot studio models used in the production of the series. The first three editions came with lighting, the engineering hull being designed so that the deflector cone could twist off and you could put the batteries in a rack alone with the switch and wiring that could be fed up through the dorsal neck and into the saucer to the bridge and sensor domes. The second edition later had additional wiring and bulbs so that the nacelles, with semi-clear amber red domes could be lit as well. Then, as more editions came out, the model was redone to save on production costs, despite it selling extremely well for AMT, namely by eliminating the battery rack, switch, wiring, and bulbs. The parts were retooled and became increasingly less accurate. Many modelers went to great lengths of accurize the kit to be more accurate, especially as more people obtained high-quality photos of the 11 foot model at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum, or behind the scenes and publicity photos of it and the 3 foot model.
One thing I found out about this kit is that the area where the nacelles plug into on the kit did not originally have the flat bottom. In the original 1960's run of this kit it originally had rudimentary lights but the plug for the nacelles was open bottom and a plastic pin was inserted to hold the nacelles in place. So if you open this area up it should eliminate the nacelle to hull gap commonly found on these kits.
@@PlasticModelBuilder It's the one flaw in this kit that they never thought about when repopping this kit post 1960's. But openint that part up to allow the tab to fully seat can allow for more surface area to glue it in securely just as long as you also strengthened the struts as well to reduce the twist it could be subjected to. Why not try that the next time you do this kit.
@Plastic Model Builder Do you know where I can get replacement decals? I received this kit as a gift too since I'm a trekkie, but it didn't have the decals. I'm trying to find replacement decals.
I would try going to scalemates and see if there is a manual you can download. I know I used Stoplight Red for the round tips. Copper for the Radar and Light, Dark, and Medium Gray for the other parts.
They're not hewn in stone. As with any topic, it's a matter of debate between nerds and self-appointed gatekeepers. The original filming model looks different in real life than it does on screen, and the appearance differs between the original and the remastered versions of the show. Since this will be your own, individual take model, may I suggest to trust your own eyes?
This is the 1960s AMT kit, with the warp nacelles that do not taper. Revell AG more recently had issued a new mold kit, which I understand had corrected the worst of the old model's flaws. Have you seen this younger kit? If so, is this true? Whilst you are applying the decals, you have the model inverted, the camera on the stern, with a clear view of the hangar bay doors and the overhang of the Secondary Hull immediately above. The view here shows a glaringly obvious seam gap along the centreline, requiring filling and painting. Another issue about the decals, specifically, those of the windows: all I can see are are black. Is all the ship's interior dark?
I'm not to worried about the gap. The model was a gift to my cousin and she didn't sit there to analyze every detail of it. I haven't any other kit but this one.
@@PlasticModelBuilder yeah, it arrived there after I moved south. Im sure things were colored specially for film and tv broadcast, but the result on the screen is closer to white or very light gray in most of the footage from the original (nonCGI) effects shots.
This was one of the first model kits I ever built (more like slapped together any old how) as a little boy back in the mid-70s. Had no paint and of course I got confused about the instructions. Still a childhood icon so thank you for showing this build.
Thank you for watching me build it. Not a perfect kit, but it cleans up nicely with TLC.
In my opinion, for what it's worth, the weathering counters all the work you put into making the ship look pristine.
I didn't want pristine. I was going for used. Worked well
Whether or not the modeler was/was not a fan of this series, did one heck of a good job on this kit! Kudos to the model. Kudos to tje modeler.
I can watch it. I'm simply not a trekker/ie. The model was given to a family member that greatfully apprecited it. It sits with the Shatner Auto that I also got in person to go with the model.
I did the same thing you did. Just held it together and added a couple coats of glue over those wide seams. It worked out well. Same as you had to do a bit of sanding and filling. Only difference was I was building a 1989 kit that I had gotten off eBay. I really enjoyed this video.
Thanks for watching. I'm glad it was helpful
I built the original AMT model back in the day, but it didn't come out at beautiful as yours. I kept it the natural white plastic, but painted the little parts before cementing them in place. It came with a stand, but I hung it up from the ceiling in my bedroom. If I remember correctly it had a battery with two little lights on it. You did a great job!
Mine never had a battery. It was a challenge though doing this one
@@PlasticModelBuilder That's because the early editions of the AMT model were very different from what is available now. Most notably, the proportions and some details of the model are a much closer match in terms of accuracy to the 3 foot and 11 foot studio models used in the production of the series. The first three editions came with lighting, the engineering hull being designed so that the deflector cone could twist off and you could put the batteries in a rack alone with the switch and wiring that could be fed up through the dorsal neck and into the saucer to the bridge and sensor domes. The second edition later had additional wiring and bulbs so that the nacelles, with semi-clear amber red domes could be lit as well.
Then, as more editions came out, the model was redone to save on production costs, despite it selling extremely well for AMT, namely by eliminating the battery rack, switch, wiring, and bulbs. The parts were retooled and became increasingly less accurate. Many modelers went to great lengths of accurize the kit to be more accurate, especially as more people obtained high-quality photos of the 11 foot model at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum, or behind the scenes and publicity photos of it and the 3 foot model.
Sounds like it was a great lot at one point for its time.
you beat that old kit into shape. I am sure the recipient of the model loved it.
It was loved.id still do it again. Wasn't to bad.
One thing I found out about this kit is that the area where the nacelles plug into on the kit did not originally have the flat bottom. In the original 1960's run of this kit it originally had rudimentary lights but the plug for the nacelles was open bottom and a plastic pin was inserted to hold the nacelles in place. So if you open this area up it should eliminate the nacelle to hull gap commonly found on these kits.
Interesting. I used the tube glue to keep it in there good.
@@PlasticModelBuilder It's the one flaw in this kit that they never thought about when repopping this kit post 1960's. But openint that part up to allow the tab to fully seat can allow for more surface area to glue it in securely just as long as you also strengthened the struts as well to reduce the twist it could be subjected to. Why not try that the next time you do this kit.
Great build of an old kit 👍👍 Hope you have a great/safe weekend !
Thanks. This one wasn't easy
@Plastic Model Builder Do you know where I can get replacement decals? I received this kit as a gift too since I'm a trekkie, but it didn't have the decals. I'm trying to find replacement decals.
@@dianadherrera326try HDA Model Worx or JT-Graphics.
Email the manufacturer. They still make the kit so i would think they would send you some.
Turned out really nice.. Great job 👍
Thank you. This wasn't the easiest thing to do either.
Good vid. Great kit. Other vids I've seen recommend if you are going to use the window decals, then sand off the raised windows on the model.
They aren't wrong. I just didn't feel like doing it. This was a gift for someone and I knew that person would love it forever!
12:59 I can see the air bubbles under the decals. Did they not lay flat properly due to their age?
They weren't that old. The kit is still produced. The decals are rather large on some parts so that might affect it a little bit.
Nice job. Do you know if they ever made "light" decals that are white instead of black in color?
I have no clue, but I'm sure they could be custom ordered.
Nice job! I just got the impression that the model maker was not a big Star Trek fan. 😂
Very good observation!
was the paint peel from a cheap quality paint?
Probably from not cleaning the parts before painting
where can i find a list of the different paints I would need for this build?
I would try going to scalemates and see if there is a manual you can download. I know I used Stoplight Red for the round tips. Copper for the Radar and Light, Dark, and Medium Gray for the other parts.
Thank you so much! I'll look into those!
They're not hewn in stone. As with any topic, it's a matter of debate between nerds and self-appointed gatekeepers. The original filming model looks different in real life than it does on screen, and the appearance differs between the original and the remastered versions of the show. Since this will be your own, individual take model, may I suggest to trust your own eyes?
This is the 1960s AMT kit, with the warp nacelles that do not taper. Revell AG more recently had issued a new mold kit, which I understand had corrected the worst of the old model's flaws. Have you seen this younger kit? If so, is this true?
Whilst you are applying the decals, you have the model inverted, the camera on the stern, with a clear view of the hangar bay doors and the overhang of the Secondary Hull immediately above. The view here shows a glaringly obvious seam gap along the centreline, requiring filling and painting.
Another issue about the decals, specifically, those of the windows: all I can see are are black. Is all the ship's interior dark?
I'm not to worried about the gap. The model was a gift to my cousin and she didn't sit there to analyze every detail of it. I haven't any other kit but this one.
Anyone ever think of painting on maneuvering thrusters phaser Banks Hull plating?
I personally have not studied the craft that much to know where they are.
Good morning
Good morning!
Cool video but "aircraft"???? lol
Starship? Spaceship? Battleship?
@@PlasticModelBuilder Starship
Looks like ass for a TOS Enterprise.
Good thing its my model and not yours. I'm very happy with it and the person I gave it to loved it. That's all that matters.
TV model looks white, not gray.
Thank goodness this isn't on TV! The original is a grey with green tint. It can be seen at the Smithsonian if you weren't already aware of it.
@@PlasticModelBuilder yeah, it arrived there after I moved south. Im sure things were colored specially for film and tv broadcast, but the result on the screen is closer to white or very light gray in most of the footage from the original (nonCGI) effects shots.
That was due to the bright lights in the studio.