Meet the 23-Ton X-Wing, the World's Largest Lego Model 121
First time accepted submitter awaissoft writes "There's big, then there's really big, and then there's colossal, which might be a good word to use when describing a near 46,000-pound Lego X-Wing that made a triumphant debut Thursday in New York's Times Square. The full-size replica, about 42 times the size of the Lego Star Wars X-Wing set available on store shelves, celebrates the debut of Cartoon Network's The Yoda Chronicles, which premieres on May 29 at 8 p.m. It took a small army of 32 Lego master builders, housed in a facility in the Czech Republic, to build the 45,980-pound, or 23-ton, Lego ship. It stands 11 feet high and 43 feet long, and contains more than 5 million Lego pieces."
Problem (Score:5, Funny)
The wings don't lock into the attack position. My nerd rage knows no bounds.
Re:Problem (Score:5, Funny)
wings
I think you mean S-foils [wikia.com].
You can turn in your nerd card at the door.
Re:Problem (Score:5, Interesting)
I think you mean S-foils.You can turn in your nerd card at the door.
"S-foils, also known as Strike foils or Stability foils, and on occasion as X-foils,[1] were movable wings..."
You can turn in your engineering card at the door.
Re:Problem (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, everybody knows they're wings (that's somewhat inherent in X-Wing).
Nerds call them S-foils.
Re: (Score:2)
Nerds call them S-foils.
Maybe starwars nerds have no problem with the wide assortment of whimisically named technology in the movies, but engineering nerds like myself are somewhat annoyed by the totally counterintuitive and useless name of 's-foil', which only a starwars nerd would recognize. For the rest of the world, the engineering term wings are a better description. Of course, in about 30 seconds, my computer's going to catch fire and begin vomitting angry noises as it's assaulted by millions of angry Lucas-lovers beating th
Re: (Score:2)
They would be wings if their purpose was the generation of lift. It's not, so they're not.
So during the Battle of Hoth when they were seen in atmospheric flight... they were purely ornamental?
Re:Problem (Score:5, Funny)
So during the Battle of Hoth when they were seen in atmospheric flight... they were purely ornamental?
Since they (along with most other spacefaring ships) were shown taking off and landing vertically, yeah, pretty much. Actually, the silly canonical explanation is they were for heat dissipation and "stabilization", just like the TIE fighter's "radiators" (which are clearly useless as airfoils).
Though given this thread is arguing engineering principles in one of the most unscientific major sci-fi series in recent history, I think we can all safely claim various levels of pathetic nerddom. Sigh.
Re: (Score:3)
Space != Sci-Fi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So is the amazon, or new york, or any other place I've not visited before then.
Re: (Score:2)
Well take off and landing is one thing (Not needing an airport infrastructure), but for actual battle in an atmosphere, I would expect wings would give you an advantage. Save power on lift and more power towards forward speed. Otherwise you will need the thrust shooting at an angle to keep the ship in the air. Also banking and and turning would be easier too. In space you wouldn't need wings, but stabilizers... however the wings on an X-Wing would be huge for what is needed.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah that's something like the retcon they went with. Lucas has said that the original intent there was for Han to spout fancy-sounding nonsense and Obi Wan to catch him at it. There was no explicit dialog of Obi Wan calling him out, we were just supposed to be able to tell from the actors' expressions. The idea was to further set up Han as this con man type figure and also show that Obi Wan is pretty worldly himself. Unfortunately bad directorial choices about cutting between cameras ruined the effect.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What's that crunchy-crackly sound? Is it straws being grasped?
yes, my rotary-wing helicopter (Score:2)
agrees with you. who would use the term 'rotor' or 'blades'?
Re: (Score:2)
You both know "wing" is the name of a group of fighters, right? Not just the component?
Re: (Score:2)
What the fuck has that got to do with it? Are you suggesting that X wing fighters fly in an X formation?
Re: (Score:2)
It makes more sense to me that you might classify something as a "wing fighter" while referring to the organizational term, rather than the component that the fighter clearly doesn't have.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
This has totally turned from humour into an actual nerd fight.
I'll get the popcorn.
Re: (Score:2)
wings
I think you mean S-foils [wikia.com].
You can turn in your nerd card at the door.
Logic 101:
All S-foils are wings. Not all wings are S-foils.
The clue is in the name "X-wing".
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I am surprised that the lego pieces at the bottom don't get crushed from the weight.
Glue (Score:2)
Re:Glue (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Glue (Score:5, Funny)
nonsense. the force is holding this one together.
I see no duct tape in the pictures. I think you're mistaken.
Re: (Score:2)
This is not the glue you are looking for.
Re: (Score:2)
Weighs 45,979.61 pounds (including bricks and steel infrastructure)
I don't think glue would cut it with something this size, and the loads it needs.
Re: (Score:2)
Never mind that, I want to know who has enough money to buy 22 tons of LEGO. That stuff's more expensive than gold.
Re: (Score:3)
From what I have hard, the Lego model makers use solvent to chemically weld the pieces together.
When they can get a legal permit, they use GBL [wikipedia.org] -- which unfortunately would turn into the drug GHB when you add water. Otherwise they use MEK [wikipedia.org]. GBL is believed by Lego to be less toxic than MEK. (Well.. you are not supposed to drink either, so this is about skin contact and fumes.)
It's amazing, (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Will it blend?
Seems legit. . . (Score:1)
I'm sure this is a real thing someone actually did and not just a poor photoshop someone did to try to increase the traffic to their blog.
Re:Seems legit. . . (Score:5, Interesting)
It's in Times Square. Not exactly an obscure location.
Also, totally visible from my desk, which for once made having offices in Times Square not suck.
Re: (Score:2)
Then may I suggest links to some legitimate press coverage, rather than a link to an obscure blog no one goes to with a low resolution photo?
Re:Seems legit. . . (Score:5, Informative)
Dunno what counts for you, but here's a few:
Cnet [cnet.com]
gizmodo [gizmodo.com]
Starwars.com [starwars.com]
Re:Seems legit. . . (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, I already googled it. I feel like an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
These are the links I was looking for.
Re: (Score:1)
It's in Times Square. Not exactly an obscure location.
Also, totally visible from my desk, which for once made having offices in Times Square not suck.
You have a job where you can see times square from your desk and you say it sucks? I would trade your view for mine of a black topped parking lot and a building on the other side of it for yours any day of the week, so would millions of others who don't get to see times square of all places.
You need to appreciate what you have.
Re: (Score:3)
You have a job where you can see times square from your desk and you say it sucks? I would trade your view for mine of a black topped parking lot and a building on the other side of it for yours any day of the week, so would millions of others who don't get to see times square of all places.
You need to appreciate what you have.
And you what you have. I would take you up on that trade in a heartbeat.
The only plus is that I moved to the opposite side of the building so I'm not facing the giant flashing Nasdaq billboard all day long. There are flashing lights everywhere, it's very crowded, and the food is mediocre and expensive. I've worked in a few different parts of Manhattan and this is by far the shittiest.
Re: (Score:2)
It's in Times Square. Not exactly an obscure location.
Also, totally visible from my desk, which for once made having offices in Times Square not suck.
You have a job where you can see times square from your desk and you say it sucks? I would trade your view for mine of a black topped parking lot and a building on the other side of it for yours any day of the week, so would millions of others who don't get to see times square of all places.
You need to appreciate what you have.
Lucky! The pair of ye. The only view I have is from whatever webcam I happen to browse to.
Re: (Score:2)
You guys get to look out windows?
Re: (Score:3)
You guys get to look out windows?
Yeah. Corporate policy. Everyone is forced to use Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
I work near Penn Station and it's pretty terrible but not nearly as bad asTimes Square. The obnoxious lights, the swarms of tourists, the constant noise. I know a few people who work overlooking Times Square and while it's a nice place to visit, you wouldn't want to deal with that every day. Plus to top it all off, everything around there is a tourist trap. There's practically no good food around (it's almost all chains since not many small places can afford the rent) and all of the prices are ridiculously
Re: (Score:2)
The best offices I've seen are around Chelsea and the West Village, and any place that overlooks the park.
We only moved to Times Square about 6 months ago. We were in Chelsea before that, and I absolutely miss that office.
Re: (Score:2)
All I can see from my window is a flower-strewn meadow, a hill, a forest, a wind turbine, an orchard. And it's all mine.
Times Square? Black-top parking lot? You can keep them.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds kinda like the Adobe, Microsoft, and (coming soon) NSA campuses in Lehi. Less forest and more snowcapped mountains though.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It is made from large Lego bricks ... made from Lego bricks.
I also thought that the picture in the article was photoshopped, until I saw close-up pictures of each "brick" being jagged.
A bit blocky (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That is exactly what they did. It is a scaled up model of Lego set 9493. Too bad it wasn't the UCS that came out this year....
Re: (Score:3)
I was disappointed by this as well. It's more like a replica of a replica. I was hoping they made something more detailed.
How much did Disney pay? (Score:3, Funny)
How much did Disney pay for this blatant slashvertisement?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
How much did Disney pay for this blatant slashvertisement?
Disney paid $0.00
Lego X-Wing models are nerdy enough to warrant mention on Slashdot.
Sorry if this doesnt fit into your conspiracy theory way of thinking, but thems the breaks.
Re: (Score:2)
It was the plug for the new show that had me thinking "slashvertisement".
Re: (Score:1)
They built an X-Wing (model) out of Legos. Shut your fucking face and let the rest of us enjoy it.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't this "news for nerds?"
Don't nerds like legos AND Star Wars?
Wouldn't nerds want to know about the world's largest lego replica?
Why does everything have to be a "slashvertisement?"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't nerds like legos AND Star Wars?
I *DON'T* like star wars. It's not SF, it's barely fantasy. it has a paper-thin plot. The only thing it's got going for it is the FX.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you are on the wrong website.
You know, THEY say that there is an exception to every rule (Except rule 34 obviously), perhaps you are that exception.
Link to a real website. (Score:1)
This is quite possibly the most pointless blogspam ever. At least provide a link to a reputable outlet [wired.com].
What a waste except to those who built it (Score:2)
As mentioned it's been glued or a metal substructure. At 23 tons it's no easy piece
to move; displaying it will always be an effort and great expense. I see it being
very easy to break (not being involved in it's construction) as it has a large
unsupported extension.
Not wishing to offend those who enjoyed building it I'm sure, but what's to become of it.
Only place it could go would be to a Lego museum and LO I find there's one in the planning
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/24/danish_architecture_firm_tapped_to_de [salon.com]
This pathetic blog link got greenlit? (Score:5, Informative)
Seems the editors couldn't figure out submitter "awaisoft" is a pissant blogger on the awaisoft.com domain
There have been many articles about this around the Net today, and o fall of them, this one is by far the worst.
For fuck sake, the entire blog posting was copied and pasted verbatim into the summary.
Here's a real article over at PopSci with many pictures, a video and a good many more words about the project and what went into it.
http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2013-05/world%E2%80%99s-largest-lego-model-life-size-x-wing-video [popsci.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now that's an article that doesn't slashvertise Disney's new show. It's informative, focuses on the Lego company instead of Disney, and was an enjoyable read.
Scaled up, not full sized (Score:2)
It's actually not a full-sized X-wing, but a scaled up Lego X-wing, with the little bumps of the Lego blocks and all.
Frankly, I think it's actually more fun this way than if it were a full-scale replica out of Lego. There's something "meta" about building a big Lego piece out of smaller Lego pieces.
Re: (Score:3)
It's actually not a full-sized X-wing, but a scaled up Lego X-wing, with the little bumps of the Lego blocks and all.
Frankly, I think it's actually more fun this way than if it were a full-scale replica out of Lego. There's something "meta" about building a big Lego piece out of smaller Lego pieces.
Yeah, except I can't find a white 4 block anywhere. Someone's used them all.
Re: (Score:2)
'twas ever thus.
Pictures (Score:2)
Is there a source of pictures of it that actually show some detail and aren't messed up by a filter?
Biggest LEGO model, nah. (Score:3)
This is pretty awesome, but Largest LEGO model, no way
LEGO House [flickr.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Actual sense of scale here: House Built From LEGO [thecontaminated.com] Helps that it had a flat roof and mostly bare walls on its breadbox shape. But still that's a heckuva lot of bricks that went into the thing.
Re: (Score:2)
It's been knocked down now - there was no planning permission for the house, and they could not find someone who would pay 50,000 pounds to get it anywhere.
Seems a shame, really... you'd have thought some rich bastard would have taken it.
Two records in one: (Score:4, Funny)
The strongest girlfriend repellant ever made.
Crappy photo (Score:2)
Flying colors (Score:1)
Must be nice to have an infinite supply of the right colors.
Re: (Score:2)
Well they used them all for this model.
Crappy Antialiasing (Score:5, Funny)
Lego Ship (Score:1)