New Stormraven pic! 11/11

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**BrookM**

reds8n wrote:
BrookM wrote:Plastic Furioso?!

..could be... rumour has it the kit has parts to make one or two variants.. if that is the placcy dreadnought of course.

But that is the 100% genuine Stormraven model.

Libby and Furioso, I can see that happening. Let the despairing over the look of the magna-grapnel commence.

A red February it is then.

**wolfshadow**

Its ugly, but in that Space Marine kind of way.

Whomever posted that it looked like a baby thunderhawk kinda got it right.

I like it.

**warboss**

the other thing that bothers me about the stormraven is it throws out the asthetic that they've been going with for marines since the great vehicle redesign of 3rd edition in which IG kept the old manned sponson WWI-WWII look and marines got updated looking vehicles with vision slits and remote turrets. the storm raven has, instead of a remote turret like the razorback, a b-17esque ball turret on the top. i still see myself getting one but i'll be taking a saw to it in no time.

**MajorTom11**

This is what I woulda done/will do myself -

**Asherian Command**

MajorTom11 wrote:This is what I woulda done/will do myself -

I'll try and do that! The Wanderers Shall be appeased!

**aka_mythos**

While I think it looks better, that I think makes it much larger than its suppose to be, and doesn't represent the lascannons as a turret as its rules, I'm pretty sure, state. I also think it loses that connection to the Thunderhawk without the tail, and the front nacels make it look like its on the verge of being Tau.

oni wrote:
shrike wrote:I've seen sooo much better conversions.
I'll go check out the stormraven leak and... WHAT THE FETH?! WHAT'S UP WITH THE FRONT?! how the hell could that many guys, the pilots, the engines, and all the equipment fit in that?!

The engines are under the wings and thrusters at the wing tips. No internal engines.

Having played around with the picture the way I did, and comparing the marines bases to establish a sense of scale, the "crew compartment" appears to be larger than a rhino, with roughly the same width and much more head room inside.

**warboss**

MajorTom11 wrote:This is what I woulda done/will do myself -

oh snap! creative nerd fight! the guantlet is thrown and majortom has just served you, mythos!

kidding, also very cool design.

**Jayden63**

Its super ugly. BA can keep it. My wolves wont be missing it on the battlefield.

Here is the worst part. They show the thing landed, it doesn't land in game. Ever. Its supposed to be on a Valk flying stand. Thats going to make it even look worse since you can't hide anything by putting your guys around it. Its just going to be stuck up on a 3" tall stick

**Machinator**

Wow, it's kind of sad that the photoshops looks so much better then the actual model.

I'll still buy one...for parts

**Brother Paen**

Well flying LR it is . Similar to my scratchbuild, Turret on top, weapons above ramp... gotta angle my wings now, so I'm happy. I Like Major Toms idea though.. would look better. And ...Now does it look like the thing in the Space Wolf Codex?

**MechaEmperor7000**

It looks about right for a chopped down Thunderhawk. However I still prefer the Valk-raider conversions to that (even if it's costlier).

**MajorTom11**

Mythos - too big? It's the exact same size, just a bit more ass in the under carriage but the dimensions don't change? Turrets rules I have no idea, don't actually play 40k, just build models... are sponsons and turrets treated that differently? For the VTOL engines in the front, I just felt it needed some excuse to say it could remain hovering without looking like it would instantly start flipping end over end if you turned on the vertical thrusters lol.

**Jayden63**

Brother Paen wrote:Well flying LR it is . Similar to my scratchbuild, Turret on top, weapons above ramp... gotta angle my wings now, so I'm happy. I Like Major Toms idea though.. would look better. And ...Now does it look like the thing in the Space Wolf Codex?

Since you can only see the bottom and a little bit of the front of it, who knows. Defiantly couldn't make out a top turret or tail design from the SW codex pic.

**Hulksmash**

I'll be putting a razorback turret on the top but otherwise I think it'll work out just fine. I might convert up some forward thrusters but that'll depend on my mood really. I'm still stoked for GK's!

**Flachzange**

MajorTom11 wrote:This is what I woulda done/will do myself -

Now this, I actually like. The proportions look a lot better.

**bryan40kman2000**

Has anyone besides the guys over at Capture and Control and a guy on the BoLS thread seen the Dread in the background!? FURIOSO PLASTIC KIT!?

**Morathi's Darkest Sin**

Aye, if it looked like that, I'd be thinking on how many I can fit into my force, not I hope it grows on me.

**aka_mythos**

MajorTom11 wrote:Mythos - too big? It's the exact same size, just a bit more ass in the under carriage but the dimensions don't change?

The reason its rear is short relative to the tail is because thats the it carries the dreadnought. If you extend the crew cabin the way you have it wouldn't have a place to hold it. It holds a decent amount but for the length you make the transport space it would hold much more troops and no dreadnought.

MajorTom11 wrote:Turrets rules I have no idea, don't actually play 40k, just build models... are sponsons and turrets treated that differently? For the VTOL engines in the front, I just felt it needed some excuse to say it could remain hovering without looking like it would instantly start flipping end over end if you turned on the vertical thrusters lol.

Well you haven't made them sponsons either. Turrets can fire in all directions, sponsons upto three but possibly only two. Space Marines rely less on engine power and make larger use of suspensor plating, like what makes a landspeeder stay up in the air.

**Flachzange**

bryan40kman2000 wrote:Has anyone besides the guys over at Capture and Control and a guy on the BoLS thread seen the Dread in the background!? FURIOSO PLASTIC KIT!?

No. Read the entire thread

And if thats true, Id buy one.

**ceorron**

MajorTom11 wrote:Figured better post this in case they try to yank it -

Gotta say, I am not sure if it is a kit-bash or not. A good one mind you, but certain parts still look all too familiar. Pretty cool, but not as cool as it could have been if it is the real deal. It look a hell of a lot like the conversions done by hobbyists, almost like they copied the conversions for the design lol.

Actually while everyone is gawping at the cute and zippy flying machine. Has anyone spotted in the background ... Is that the potentially new plastic Furioso dread(if thats how it is spelt)???

**MajorTom11**

ah, but that is still a space for a dread, I just enclosed it for the sake of the sillouette. Imaging 2 panels on the sides, but the back and bottom still open -

If the turret/sponsons thing is an issue, then I would probably put a turret on top but more snugg and razorback style, i dont think the gunner chair is required at least! I may not play, but I like to keep my models table-legal too for some reason lol!

Thanks for the input though!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Good catch on the Furioso Ceoron, that def looks like a new plastic dready too!

**Morathi's Darkest Sin**

If it is, it better come with the Librarian upgrades, and those insane Claws that let it keep hitting when it wounds (kills?) an opponent.

**TyraelVladinhurst**

Absolutionis wrote:
Therion wrote:
BrassScorpion wrote:
Aerodynamics are heresy.
Hilarious. I enjoyed that.

In a game with a galaxy spanning empire, magic weapons, daemons and altered humans that can spit acid, it amazes me what some fellow enthusiasts consider too implausible to be fun.

Magical weapons, daemons, or galaxy spanning empires haven't been encountered in real life. Space shuttles and aeroplanes however have. If GW designs a daemon that looks like Popey the Sailor Man I don't have any evidence to call it unrealistic or even lame, just a strange concept that my imagination finds hard to believe even on an imaginary world. If GW makes a plane that supposedly can "jink effortlessly through the interceptor fire and maneouvre at full speed through the cluttered spires of a hive city" but makes it look like a hundred ton brick with two steel plates glued on the sides of it, I can provide real world evidence about the stupidity of the concept. It amazes me that you can't see the difference. Your fellow enthusiasts can.

However, the Imperial Tech is based on normal dry technology. There's no explanation as to why the thing that looks like a brick should fly. We're not given any explanation. It's not realistic, but then again nothing in the 40k fluff is. Every time something isn't realistic there is an explanation as to why it is so. So long as there's some sill explanation, it's believable.

The American Space Shuttle IS a flying brick and it manages to fly, so i could see this thing being able to fly as well

**aka_mythos**

MajorTom11 wrote:ah, but that is still a space for a dread, I just enclosed it for the sake of the sillouette. Imaging 2 panels on the sides, but the back and bottom still open

Like an upside down pickup truck bed... gotcha. I'd just maybe raise up those sides a little higher.

One thing about the kit I think looks silly is the large flat glass section of the cockpit (haha pit). This area I thought would have needed more creativity. In the least they could have incorporated more of the angles and lines from the landspeeder, to make the cockpit broader but more flat.

**2500kgm3**

If I ever get it, this will be my top priority

It does not look that ridiculous when you get rid of the manned turret and the "stupid tiny vents". It is not a good kit, but I find it salvageable. What do you think?

**aka_mythos**

I think they could have gotten rid of that intake "tower" if they had made the cockpit less tall.
Like this:

**shrike**

MajorTom11 wrote:This is what I woulda done/will do myself -

How?! where is that pic from?! I NEED ANSWERS!!!

**MajorTom11**

Um... my hands and brain? lol

**AspireToGlory**

Wow that's hideous.

**AlexHolker**

aka_mythos wrote:I think they could have gotten rid of that intake "tower" if they had made the cockpit less tall.

They don't need the intake tower at all, because it's already got two big intakes for the engines.