Helloooo Dakka!

It's been a while since we've gotten a Black Box worth the money (sorry Skaven, the Hellpit just didn't ring any bells! ), but the Stormraven definitely makes the grade! I will say that the model has a boatload of parts and would not have been buildable without a handy set of instructions emailed to me by my superhero GW guy, to whom I owe many thanks. It's another of the new breed of multi-part models with numbered components and detailed instructions. In some cases, the numbers on the pieces matter significantly, some times they don't, but it's definitely in your best interest to go through the frames and instructions first to make sure you have a general idea where things are.

Yammer aside, here's some pics of the finished bird on the deck and in flight, and alongside some models of various sizes for reference.

















Now that I have it in-hand, it's a lot more impressive. As usual, the pictures out there don't do the actual model justice. Though, I will admit it looks kinda clunky, especially on the flying stand. At least the Valkyrie has a little angle when it's on the stand, which helps it look like it's actually flying instead of just squatting in the air. I suppose that's one extra step, to shave down the top of the stand so that the bird sits on it with a little motion.

Anyway, I wrote up a complete step-by-step of the build process with additional pictures if you're interested, which you can find here:

http://captureandcontrol.blogspot.com/

Enjoy!

-Dis.

NICE!!!

Thats good, the ramair hood scoop is a separate piece. Now I just need to figure out what to put in place of the ridiculous intake and turret.

Thanks for sharing, conversion ideas are already bubbling up in me head.

chaos0xomega wrote:Thats good, the ramair hood scoop is a separate piece. Now I just need to figure out what to put in place of the ridiculous intake and turret.

How about a Razorback turret? It'd be closer to the overall Space Marine aesthetic, and might even be lower in profile, too

So I guess this is the magna grapple gubbins that's meant to be holding the dread on?

Can you model it with landing gears up if it's to be placed on the flight stand?

I would have thought it would have been easier to undercoat the cockpit frame before attaching the window bit?

You can avoid smudging from glue fumes on see through plastic with blue tack (or low tack tape).

also you dont glue the thrusters in place so you can move them around

Great step-by-step on your blog! Thanks!

So its a heli design which has wings instead of rotor blades?
The grapple seems to weak to secure a senex antiquii and I value my dreads too much to lose them "on the move".

This needs a redesign badly and I am sure those using a "out of the box" StormRaven won't get the kit at its full potential.

We should have a StormRaven conversions Thread next month.

After seeing that, I'm definitely considering getting one. One thing I'm considering is simply removing the turret and that ridiculous air intake. I pictured it like that in my head and it seems to be much more streamlined and better. I'll just have to find an alternate mounting for the turret weapons, and that then leaves me with a free unique Razorback turret.

Since when was any IoM equipment a sensible design? In my eyes it fits the IoM aesthetic very well.

If you want the Thunder Raven to look more realistic, it shouldn't be difficult to extend the fuselage with plasticard, move the wings into a more sensible position and make it look like a square transport aeroplane with guns welded on.

The top turret and air intake, that everyone hates, could be used and make sense with a redesign. I think it would look pretty good.

looks alot better when its not painted red.

Kilkrazy wrote:If you want the Thunder Raven to look more realistic, it shouldn't be difficult to extend the fuselage with plasticard, move the wings into a more sensible position and make it look like a square transport aeroplane with guns welded on.

But that's assuming I have any skill at all with plasticard.

Nice pictures.

And just to clarify... Is the stormraven the first vehicle in Warhammer 40k that utilize a front ramp, two side hatches AND a rear gate?

ryanstartalker wrote:Nice pictures.

And just to clarify... Is the stormraven the first vehicle in Warhammer 40k that utilize a front ramp, two side hatches AND a rear gate?

No there are others Thunder Hawk normal and transporter and the predecessor to the thunder hawk

Valkyrie wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:If you want the Thunder Raven to look more realistic, it shouldn't be difficult to extend the fuselage with plasticard, move the wings into a more sensible position and make it look like a square transport aeroplane with guns welded on.

But that's assuming I have any skill at all with plasticard.

You don't need any skill with plasticard to mod IoM vehicles. You only have to cut and cement flat plates.

Because I can't avoid these quotes in any discussion involving intraatmospheric troop transports:

"We're in the pipe, 5x5."
"Hold on, we're in for some chop."
"We're on an express elevator to Hell. Going down!"
"WOOOOOOHOOOOOOO!!!"
"Check it out: Independently targeting particle beam phalanx. Fwap! Fry half a city with this puppy. We got tactical smart missiles, phase-plasma pulse rifles, RPGs, we got sonic electronic ball breakers! We got nukes, we got knives, sharp sticks..."

:30 seconds to LZ: "Somebody wake up Hicks..."

First, thanks a ton for the pics!

Questions:
1. can you show whether a Razorback turret fits on top?

2. how about a Rhino for comparison?

3. how about a Valk for comparison?

4. are the twin AssCans Razor-compatibie?

Still looks goofy.

Wonder if two or more could make a thunderhawk.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Questions:
1. can you show whether a Razorback turret fits on top?

I have not seen for myself, but heard its not compatible. "Its kinda like the turret fitting of the newer chimeras."... whatever that vagueness means.

1hadhq wrote:

We should have a StormRaven conversions Thread next month.

This.

JohnHwangDD wrote:First, thanks a ton for the pics!

Questions:
1. can you show whether a Razorback turret fits on top?

They were building one in my FLGS today. the Predator turret ring does not match the Stormraven turret ring, a Predator turret will not fit. Make of that what you will.

chaos0xomega wrote:Thats good, the ramair hood scoop is a separate piece. Now I just need to figure out what to put in place of the ridiculous intake and turret.

Those are both separate pieces; there's a lot of rough join lines up there from the various pieces of the hull and wings going together and a big hole where the turret goes, so you'll need to get some gubbinz to cover those areas.

Prophecy07 wrote:Can you model it with landing gears up if it's to be placed on the flight stand?

Yeah, landing gear can be modeled in the up position. I put it down for the ste-by-step, which actually worked out better, but either way is an option.

Grimstonefire wrote:I would have thought it would have been easier to undercoat the cockpit frame before attaching the window bit?

You can avoid smudging from glue fumes on see through plastic with blue tack (or low tack tape).

Yeah, that's true. The sacrifice was made for the walkthrough. I'll just have to tape the clear areas before I prime.

All the articulation on the bird was left mobile, which I rarely do, but I wanted to build it "right" the first time. Even though, looking back at it in the cold, harsh light of the morning I realize that the tailfin is on backwards! . It's weird, I remember it not being flush the other way. Oh well!

I have all the requested models for size comparisons; I've got a tournament today but once that's in the books I'll try and get some more pics. I'll also have the new Furioso dread kit built and reviewed this weekend.

-Dis.

chaos0xomega wrote:

1hadhq wrote:

We should have a StormRaven conversions Thread next month.

This.

yes, And I hope people are as willing to have their own designs scrutinized as closely as all the nit-picky bashing on the stock model in thread after thread...

George Spiggott wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:First, thanks a ton for the pics!

Questions:
1. can you show whether a Razorback turret fits on top?

They were building one in my FLGS today. the Predator turret ring does not match the Stormraven turret ring, a Predator turret will not fit. Make of that what you will.

Thats bad news...

Personally, I dig it. It looks like typical Imperial aviation design; It's not aerodynamic enough to fly, strap more engines to it until it does. I like it!

I say again that the engines must be dropped and that the wings must be extended some how Thx for doing the tut btw!

Out of curiosity,

does the Stormraven have any GK specific upgrades with it?

like Psycannon casings for the HBs.

Khorne Flakes wrote:
I say again that the engines must be dropped and that the wings must be extended some how Thx for doing the tut btw!

This I agree with.

Are the front/rear ramps and side doors compatible with the Rhino rear ramp and Rhino side doors?

Land Raider doors and ramp I guess, as the Storm Raven is basically a Land Raider without tracks but with wings.

It only comes with GK symbols not weapon upgrades. also the back of the box has one painted in a GK color scheme.

Yeah, i knew about the back of the box.


Symbols? Like Inquisitorial I's and the Book with a Sword through it?

Where are the Hurricane bolters?

Also, for modeling purposes are the side doors the same size as land raider doors? Could you put any chapter specfic forge world LR doors on the sides? That'd be great.

Grey Templar wrote:Yeah, i knew about the back of the box.


Symbols? Like Inquisitorial I's and the Book with a Sword through it?

Look on the doors and wings. There are the symbols.

I still don't think it looks like a SM vehicle.

But I've decided with the right modifications it would make a really bad-ass garbage scow. I like to imagine a rag-tag crew of misfits in carapace armour crewing the thing, as it flies over battlefields of the 41st millennium and uses a chunkier magna grapple to steal other people's wrecks for salvage.

I just looks so ungainly on a flying base.

JOHIRA wrote:I still don't think it looks like a SM vehicle.

I think it does, a bit.

They went for "Mini-Thunderhawk" - and missed!

But, it was at least a foul tip...

Ckilleen wrote:It only comes with GK symbols not weapon upgrades. also the back of the box has one painted in a GK color scheme.

We don't know that the Grey Knight variant actually has "unique" weapon upgrades.

Psycannon is likely, but at the same time...You can get bolter rounds for the standard Heavy Bolters that would have the same effect.

I built a Stormraven last Friday night. Front drop ramp is from the Land Raider. Side doors are Rhino sized I believe. Hurricane bolters are a replacement option for the side doors. There are 4 BA badges and 4 GK badges on the sprue for decorating the model.

It's a beautiful model of a terrible vehicle design.

BrassScorpion wrote:I built a Stormraven last Friday night. Front drop ramp is from the Land Raider. Side doors are Rhino sized I believe. Hurricane bolters are a replacement option for the side doors. There are 4 BA badges and 4 GK badges on the sprue for decorating the model.

another thing that surprised me is that the hurricane bolters have a VERY limited arc of fire for sponsons. they can only turn about 30 degrees from the midline which surprised me when i saw the model firsthand this weekend.

At first I hated the stormraven, but now I really like it

Alpharius wrote:
They went for "Mini-Thunderhawk" - and missed!

But, it was at least a foul tip...

I've just had a thought. Could this be the plastic Thunderhawk that has oft been rumoured? Early sketches/designs could easily have been misleading.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I just looks so ungainly on a flying base.

Silly Billy, when you sit on a flying base you are both ungainly and in dire need of some help.





Bleh, I have a conversion all planned out and an alternative name, but I can't remember it. It had a fat insectoid name to it, something starting with CA but I can't remember the rest.

i know that there is inquisitor parts for it like the sword and book to put on to replace the blood angels symbols

OMG it looks really squashed but at the same time kinda cool

I think it looks cool,despite what people say.

My memory is a bit hazy but can this be used by normal SM armies?

On the one I saw this weekend it looked like you CANNOT remove the wings for storage/transport. Can anyone confirm?

If true that would be really annoying and drive me towards a backwards valk.

I actually saw the model in my FLGS yesterday, it's a lot chunkier in the flesh, which helps a lot ( I really didn't like it based on the early pics), plus I don't think the red paint job is helping it.

I think modelling the landing gear closed would also sharpen it up. Either that or forget the flying stand and model it at a 45 degree angle about to crash into the deck (a la Aliens).

And that modelling blog says that the spigot is the same size as a Leman Russ. Now I'm tempted to make a true mini-thunderhawk with a bloody big cannon on top...

Thanks for all the great photos. I was one of the individuals who really liked the first few leaked pictures of the model....but since then, the more I see the less I like about it. There is no doubt they still are a greast acquisition for any BA player and I plan to have at least 2 in my army. The firepower and transport capacity are incredible for Space Marines!

Can't wait to use this to help make my Deathwatch ultra-killy

What's wrong with the Skaven Hell Pit Abomination? It's awesome....In a very grotesque, fleshy sort of way.....

Kid_Kyoto wrote:On the one I saw this weekend it looked like you CANNOT remove the wings for storage/transport. Can anyone confirm?

If true that would be really annoying and drive me towards a backwards valk.

Yeah that was my impression as well. It seemed the wings and engine assembly glue down to the top of the hull and end up with other pieces, like the intake, gluing down over them. I do think with some simple modifications and leaving off some of the silly bits from the top you could have a magnetized setup. The interlocking between the top hull and the wings and the components onto the top of the wings are little raised edges that fit to the underside of the component that gets glued down.

aka_mythos wrote:

Kid_Kyoto wrote:On the one I saw this weekend it looked like you CANNOT remove the wings for storage/transport. Can anyone confirm?

If true that would be really annoying and drive me towards a backwards valk.

Yeah that was my impression as well. It seemed the wings and engine assembly glue down to the top of the hull and end up with other pieces, like the intake, gluing down over them. I do think with some simple modifications and leaving off some of the silly bits from the top you could have a magnetized setup. The interlocking between the top hull and the wings and the components onto the top of the wings are little raised edges that fit to the underside of the component that gets glued down.

Cripes, it's like GW learned absolutely nothing from the Valk.

aka_mythos wrote:

Kid_Kyoto wrote:On the one I saw this weekend it looked like you CANNOT remove the wings for storage/transport. Can anyone confirm?

If true that would be really annoying and drive me towards a backwards valk.

Yeah that was my impression as well. It seemed the wings and engine assembly glue down to the top of the hull and end up with other pieces, like the intake, gluing down over them. I do think with some simple modifications and leaving off some of the silly bits from the top you could have a magnetized setup. The interlocking between the top hull and the wings and the components onto the top of the wings are little raised edges that fit to the underside of the component that gets glued down.

the closest you can come to this is to not glue the top of the hull to the bottom but that doesn't save you any storage space unfortunately. the wings are glued on top of the top hull as opposed to the valk where they get slotted into holes.

why is it all the blood angels that get the cool stuff why is it never ultramarines


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrassScorpion wrote:I built a Stormraven last Friday night. Front drop ramp is from the Land Raider. Side doors are Rhino sized I believe. Hurricane bolters are a replacement option for the side doors. There are 4 BA badges and 4 GK badges on the sprue for decorating the model.

do you know what transport capacity it is

Read the Codex?

I saw the turret ring, it is not compatible, though you could make it so. It has the leman russ style thing where there is a little lip so it stays on and grips the underside of the turret ring, it doesn't just spin in place like an old chimera turret or a razorback. Easy enough to modify that particular aspect but maybe not so easy to have it spin smoothly? Other point is that I wasn't able to compare the diameter of the turret ring as compared to the razorback/predator though so it may not fit at all without some mods. Perhaps just mounting it on top of a razorback turret ring would be the simplest fix.

Eh, I sort of like it.

ryanstartalker wrote:Nice pictures.

And just to clarify... Is the stormraven the first vehicle in Warhammer 40k that utilize a front ramp, two side hatches AND a rear gate?

I guess you have never looked at a Thunderhawk in person then....

I have come to the conclusion that the way to cure the whole Thunderrobin problem is to buy one of these instead, in 1/48 scale, and mod it.

Orinoco wrote:I saw the turret ring, it is not compatible, though you could make it so. It has the leman russ style thing where there is a little lip so it stays on and grips the underside of the turret ring, it doesn't just spin in place like an old chimera turret or a razorback. Easy enough to modify that particular aspect but maybe not so easy to have it spin smoothly? Other point is that I wasn't able to compare the diameter of the turret ring as compared to the razorback/predator though so it may not fit at all without some mods. Perhaps just mounting it on top of a razorback turret ring would be the simplest fix.

I had a Razorback turret on hand its not compatible. The hole is the same exact diameter as the turret collar, so it won't fit without opening up the hole a bit.

Kilkrazy wrote:I have come to the conclusion that the way to cure the whole Thunderrobin problem is to buy one of these instead, in 1/48 scale, and mod it.

It's cooler looking, although helicopters in space are a whole other problem... And I'm still not sure where it would carry a Dreadnought...

Balance wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:I have come to the conclusion that the way to cure the whole Thunderrobin problem is to buy one of these instead, in 1/48 scale, and mod it.

It's cooler looking, although helicopters in space are a whole other problem... And I'm still not sure where it would carry a Dreadnought...

Tip it over, push it up the ramp, when it needs to be deployed, simply push it out.

chaos0xomega wrote:Thats good, the ramair hood scoop is a separate piece. Now I just need to figure out what to put in place of the ridiculous intake and turret.

BrookM wrote:Thanks for sharing, conversion ideas are already bubbling up in me head.

e vent and turret (RB one instead) and it looks decent.
I saw a photoshop mockup w/o th

1hadhq wrote:The grapple seems to weak to secure a senex antiquii and I value my dreads too much to lose them "on the move".

We should have a StormRaven conversions Thread next month.

I'll post my arcade claw dread-holder on there.
I agree- no way can that thing hold a dread.

I have pics up on my blog of the Storm Raven with the turret removed and opening covered over as well as a cut down intake. I think it gives a much better look to the kit.

http://theadeptsforge.blogspot.com

^ Courtesy of ^

see? It actuall looks a hack of a lot better.

Its still a flying brick.....

But now at flying-coke-can level- more aerodynamic and such.

JHall wrote:I have pics up on my blog of the Storm Raven with the turret removed and opening covered over as well as a cut down intake. I think it gives a much better look to the kit.

http://theadeptsforge.blogspot.com

looks pretty cool mate

BTW:
PICS WITH A DREAD ON PLEASE!!!

So where does the dreadnought go?

Kirika wrote:So where does the dreadnought go?

A magnet "magna-grapple" with winch to pick up and drop off a Dread is modeled under the tail right behind the fuselage.

From earlier in this thread:

jhall wrote:I have pics up on my blog of the Storm Raven with the turret removed and opening covered over as well as a cut down intake. I think it gives a much better look to the kit.

Lookin' good, sir!

1hadhq wrote:So its a heli design which has wings instead of rotor blades?

That gives me a conversion idea or two already!

1hadhq wrote:So its a heli design which has wings instead of rotor blades?

Just like the Valkyrie. The tiered tandem cockpit is very much like a helicopter gunship. After having built my local store's Stormraven I actually quite like it very much and the gunner's enclosed turret is pretty cool looking, plus it rotates and the guns articulate as well.

I also really like the conversion shown above by JHall, it makes the Stormraven visually more directly related to the Thunderhawk.

shrike wrote:^ Courtesy of ^

see? It actuall looks a hack of a lot better.

wow that looks so much better.

Asherian Command wrote:

shrike wrote:^ Courtesy of ^

see? It actually looks a heck of a lot better.

wow that looks so much better.

indeed. I intend to do the same, but with uber-awesome rappelling marines coming down either side firing one-handed as they go. And the dread is held on by a big arcade-style claw.

shrike wrote:

Asherian Command wrote:

shrike wrote:^ Courtesy of ^

see? It actually looks a heck of a lot better.

wow that looks so much better.

indeed. I intend to do the same, but with uber-awesome rappelling marines coming down either side firing one-handed as they go. And the dread is held on by a big arcade-style claw.

That's what I wanted to see. A large claw holding the Dread, not some "grapple" shtick.

JHall wrote:I have pics up on my blog of the Storm Raven with the turret removed and opening covered over as well as a cut down intake. I think it gives a much better look to the kit.

It looks much better on top, but the stepped belly is still very poor. And the weapons don't integrate well, either.

I'm still thinking the kit will need major reconstructive surgery to fix it.

Looking at those side doors- what are they from?

shrike wrote:Looking at those side doors- what are they from?

Forge World.

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Space_Marines/Space_Marine-Vehicle-Accessories/RAPTORS-RHINO-DOORS.html

Looks good

I can't wait to see one in the livery of the Imperial Fists.

/shortbus

Alright, so if the vent is lowed, and the guns re positioned, then it might be a fix. I am still going to try and under mount a razorback turret, IF I get one.

JohnHwangDD wrote:It looks much better on top, but the stepped belly is still very poor. And the weapons don't integrate well, either.

I'm still thinking the kit will need major reconstructive surgery to fix it.

For ****'s sake - does everyone have to include the photo in their post?

This conversion has some potential (although there are some pretty savage chunks carved out of the plastic - a bit more care needed when removing the pieces from the sprues). I agree with you on the weapons not being well integrated. That may ultimately be the biggest issue with this model. The nose-mounted weapons are especially poor - surely they'd want them in a rotating mount? I'd still like to see what it looks like with something more like a Razorback turret on top.

shrike wrote:BTW:
PICS WITH A DREAD ON PLEASE!!!

+1. Im not going to judge it until i see a dread on it.

ChocolateGork wrote:

shrike wrote:BTW:
PICS WITH A DREAD ON PLEASE!!!

+1. Im not going to judge it until i see a dread on it.

Don't hold your breath, there's no actual way(sans converting) for the kit to hold one. The pictures of that molded on grapple prove this.

i guess it would create some rules issues but f i did play BA and buy one i might convert it to using magnets

Looking at it i really dont mind it, but I do agree with somthing to fill out that rear end it would look better. what im considering is using sentinal legs placed possibly around the area indicated, and have them bend back and have the feet gripping a dread on the side of the arms. I will probaly use one of the spare black reach ones i have, cut the legs so they fold up a bit. with a little flat peice of airduck on the bottoms of the feet i can drill and place a few magnets into the dread. then when ive deployed one of my actual dread models ill just pluck the folded one off. got it mostly figured out in my head, if I decided to get one thats most likaly what ill do so ill toss up some pics.

So much sexier, can't wait to try my own!

I think this is ugly. This is something Orks would have come with. This looks very Orky. I guess it would be great for them.

Kanluwen wrote:

Ckilleen wrote:It only comes with GK symbols not weapon upgrades. also the back of the box has one painted in a GK color scheme.

We don't know that the Grey Knight variant actually has "unique" weapon upgrades.

Psycannon is likely, but at the same time...You can get bolter rounds for the standard Heavy Bolters that would have the same effect.

Psybolts won't have the same effect.

the New Psycannons will be AP3.

Grey Templar wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Ckilleen wrote:It only comes with GK symbols not weapon upgrades. also the back of the box has one painted in a GK color scheme.

We don't know that the Grey Knight variant actually has "unique" weapon upgrades.

Psycannon is likely, but at the same time...You can get bolter rounds for the standard Heavy Bolters that would have the same effect.

Psybolts won't have the same effect.

the New Psycannons will be AP3.

But we don't know that new Psycannons will be mounted on Stormravens.

I think it will depend on if we see a "Ravenwing Bike Squadron" styled box for a Rhino/Land Raider, where they give a pair of frames that upgrade other vehicles too.

The one feature that really makes it look un-Astartes is the canopy over the cockpit. It makes the Stormraven look weak. I think the designer should've looked at how the canopy on the Thunderhawk is designed, and implemented it on the Stormraven.

I'll hate myself for a long time for saying this, but I think I can make this into something I don't hate.

I still have a lot of work to do, but I will forgo the cringe factor and share a WIP. I still have to figure out how to hide the magnet on the dread. I think I am definitely leaving the top flat with some fiddly bits and hard mounting a razorback lascannon to each wing between the engine and missles. I'm liking it more and more and I can't wait to build a version with those new gatling guns from the bitspudio place that I ordered...











Automatically Appended Next Post:
A few more, sorry if this is too many pics

cool a proper magnetized brick

The more I look at that model, the more I realize that the designer knows nothing about how real aircraft wings work or why they attach to aircraft the way they do.

I'm getting the feeling that I will be required to weigh down the forward section a bit lest it tips backwards.

I'm trying to like it but I've seen nicer looking modified valkyries. Disappointing...

BrookM wrote:I'm getting the feeling that I will be required to weigh down the forward section a bit lest it tips backwards.

the stormraven that i examined in hand on saturday definitely needed that. granted it was still technically not fully assembled (the front gun bits were NOT on and the turret and pilot canopies were not either... but it did have the hurricane bolters)... but it definitely tipped backwards when it was off the flight base. the front landing gear didn't touch the table at all.

I want someone to do a version where the Dread isn't attached but is actually holding onto an extended tow-cable, his feet attached to some sort of repulser-board.

In other words, hover-board surfing off the back of a Chibi-Hawk, holding into the cable with both his Bloodfists.

I'm getting the feeling that I will be required to weigh down the forward section a bit lest it tips backwards.

The model can be assembled with the landing gear extended or retracted. With the gear down it sits fine on a flat surface without the flying stand. With the gear retracted it will tip backwards if you set it down without the flying stand, but what pilot lands their aircraft with the gear retracted? If you glue the gear in the retracted position, you will want to keep it on the stand.

BrassScorpion wrote:

I'm getting the feeling that I will be required to weigh down the forward section a bit lest it tips backwards.

The model can be assembled with the landing gear extended or retracted. With the gear down it sits fine on a flat surface without the flying stand. With the gear retracted it will tip backwards if you set it down without the flying stand, but what pilot lands their aircraft with the gear retracted? If you glue the gear in the retracted position, you will want to keep it on the stand.

unless the guy that assembled the stormraven i looked at skipped some heavy interior part, that was NOT the case with the model i saw. the front landing gear lifted off the table about a millimeter or so and that was withe the hurricane bolters attached (but minus the front meltas and turret/pilot canopies).

that's wierd.

the whole model seems to be front heavy.

Seeing as I'm going to convert it and leave all weapons off, I'll probably put some weight in the cockpit, no harm there as I'm going to paint the canopy black anyway.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I want someone to do a version where the Dread isn't attached but is actually holding onto an extended tow-cable, his feet attached to some sort of repulser-board.

In other words, hover-board surfing off the back of a Chibi-Hawk, holding into the cable with both his Bloodfists.

Y'mean like this?

Breotan wrote:The more I look at that model, the more I realize that the designer knows nothing about how real aircraft wings work or why they attach to aircraft the way they do.

Admittedly, and this is coming from someone that doesn't like the model anyway, the wings are pretty much just to get some additional angle for the thrusters that presumably make it maneuverable. Imperial flyers seem to be based on the principle of the 'Strap enough engines on a brick and it will fly.'

JHall, thanks for sharing your cool build. That somewhat redeems the ChibiHawk for me !! BTW, were those LR or Rhino Raptor Doors ?

As far as transporting a Dreadnought ... I can't get the image of the old Krazy Glue commercial where the construction worker glued his hard hat to a steel beam and held on for dear life !!! Not really how a revered Chapter Relic should be transported ... not inspiring to the troops at all !!

Dropping down in the middle of the enemy to wreck face seems fitting enough.

Miss Dee wrote:Its still a flying brick.....

Could we at leat go five minutes without an oh so clever "flying brick" quip or similar?

We get it: it's boxy.

CT GAMER wrote:

Miss Dee wrote:Its still a flying brick.....

Could we at leat go five minutes without an oh so clever "flying brick" quip or similar? We get it: it's boxy.

And while we're at it, we could also do without the other stupid trendy nickname that has the same number of syllables and characters to type out as just calling it by it's actual release name, Stormraven. It's amazing what passes for "cool" sometimes in some gamer circles. Double and unsubscribe from this path to nowhere.

How about attached by its own magnits "dont forget me!!!"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And i'll call it a space shuttle as that is a flying brick.

BrassScorpion wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Miss Dee wrote:Its still a flying brick.....

Could we at leat go five minutes without an oh so clever "flying brick" quip or similar? We get it: it's boxy.

And while we're at it, we could also do without the other stupid trendy nickname that has the same number of syllables and characters to type out as just calling it by it's actual release name, Stormraven. It's amazing what passes for "cool" sometimes in some gamer circles. Double and unsubscribe from this path to nowhere.

Could we also do without loudly proclaiming to unscribe from threads as a threat of something silly because they lose their interest to you?

H.B.M.C. wrote:I want someone to do a version where the Dread isn't attached but is actually holding onto an extended tow-cable, his feet attached to some sort of repulser-board.

Marty McFly or Griff Tannon?

McFly of course! Pink goes so much better with red than black.

My claw idea will be held on by magnets, just to say.

BrassScorpion wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Miss Dee wrote:Its still a flying brick.....

Could we at leat go five minutes without an oh so clever "flying brick" quip or similar? We get it: it's boxy.

And while we're at it, we could also do without the other stupid trendy nickname that has the same number of syllables and characters to type out as just calling it by it's actual release name, Stormraven. It's amazing what passes for "cool" sometimes in some gamer circles. Double and unsubscribe from this path to nowhere.

OK, henceforth, I go with "shortbus" as the nickname

JohnHwangDD wrote:

BrassScorpion wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Miss Dee wrote:Its still a flying brick.....

Could we at leat go five minutes without an oh so clever "flying brick" quip or similar? We get it: it's boxy.

And while we're at it, we could also do without the other stupid trendy nickname that has the same number of syllables and characters to type out as just calling it by it's actual release name, Stormraven. It's amazing what passes for "cool" sometimes in some gamer circles. Double and unsubscribe from this path to nowhere.

OK, henceforth, I go with "shortbus" as the nickname

No. Just no.

I knew a local band that used that name for a while.

BrassScorpion wrote:

I'm getting the feeling that I will be required to weigh down the forward section a bit lest it tips backwards.

The model can be assembled with the landing gear extended or retracted. With the gear down it sits fine on a flat surface without the flying stand. With the gear retracted it will tip backwards if you set it down without the flying stand, but what pilot lands their aircraft with the gear retracted? ... .

It was a common problem in the late 1930s and early 40s, since many pilots were transitioning to retractable carriage planes for the first time, and the on-board pilot assistance was almost non-existent.

To be honest, seeing one at the local store has completely changed my mind, I now like the Stormraven in the flesh but I dislike the new Librarian Dread. Preferring my own with the FW GK NFW.

can you fit a leman russ turret orpredator turrent on it and would it look good? I think it would be more thunderhawk esque

I like the 2 magnits on the top of the BA Dreadnaught.

OK now I'm actually excited about getting mine!

Thanks JHall, I am totally doing this, and I don't even care about losing the Assault cannons firing arch!

Also who ever mentioned earlier about the rappelling marines? Genius! Robbing that idea too!

Plus the good thing about getting rid of the servitor is now the BS will be correct!

Saw it live in the shop today, it looks good. Needs some converting, but plenty of potential!

I was thinking a long time ago about scouts repelling out of a Valk...

The Storm Raven sure as hell looked significantly better when I held it in my hand yesterday. The pictures on the internet don't do it justice.

I don't minds the turret and vent either, but I hope that when I get one and build it for the upcoming Grey Knights, that GW doesn't suddenly change the weapons options...

Looking good.

Thanks for the comments guys. I started painting it last night and I hope to have it done by the end of the week.

For whoever asked, the doors are FW Rhino doors.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

BrassScorpion wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Miss Dee wrote:Its still a flying brick.....

Could we at leat go five minutes without an oh so clever "flying brick" quip or similar? We get it: it's boxy.

And while we're at it, we could also do without the other stupid trendy nickname that has the same number of syllables and characters to type out as just calling it by it's actual release name, Stormraven. It's amazing what passes for "cool" sometimes in some gamer circles. Double and unsubscribe from this path to nowhere.

OK, henceforth, I go with "shortbus" as the nickname

Go with what you know I guess...

How did you get your hands on one of them this early?

We need a new Dakka Challenge for February. Build and convert a Stormraven in such a way that it doesn't look slowed. Winner is the conversion that makes the model look the best. Final model pics must include front oblique and rear oblique in addition to side, top, and bottom shots.

The FLGS has one.

I'm gonna get so flamed for this, but I can't help it.

That might very well be the ugliest vehicle model GW has ever created. The proportions are wonky. Its as aerodynamic as a lumpy sack of bricks. It reminds me of a hydroencephalic tadpoal.

Yes, I understand that the design is in keeping with the other blocky, slab-sided Imperial vehicles. Unfortunately, the Stormraven seems to take everything that was visually unappealing about every other Imperial vehicle and combined it on a single model.

Feel free, flame away. I apologize for not seeing the awesome that is the Stormraven.

I think I just figured out the inspiration for this pile. Anyone ever see that awful movie, Battlefield Earth? Remeber the ship that Travolta's character flew around in?

Breotan wrote:We need a new Dakka Challenge for February. Build and convert a Stormraven in such a way that it doesn't look slowed. Winner is the conversion that makes the model look the best. Final model pics must include front oblique and rear oblique in addition to side, top, and bottom shots.

I'll do one. definitely not gonna win, but it sure as hell will look funny.

Saldiven wrote:The FLGS has one.

I'm gonna get so flamed for this, but I can't help it.

That might very well be the ugliest vehicle model GW has ever created. The proportions are wonky. Its as aerodynamic as a lumpy sack of bricks. It reminds me of a hydroencephalic tadpoal.

Yes, I understand that the design is in keeping with the other blocky, slab-sided Imperial vehicles. Unfortunately, the Stormraven seems to take everything that was visually unappealing about every other Imperial vehicle and combined it on a single model.

Feel free, flame away. I apologize for not seeing the awesome that is the Stormraven.

I agree, though not as strongly. look at 90% of the RT tanks.
All it needs are a razorback turret and no vent and it'll look half decent.

I'm fine with the design. It's pretty much what I was expecting. Very close to what I had designed for a conversion I wanted to make, but figured GW would have the kit before too long.

I don't understand everyone's problem with the design. It's a smaller Thunderhawk. It's boxy. That's the Imperial design philosophy, and always has been. I would be very curious to see a thread containing designs other folks had in their minds.

It wasn't a simple task, designing this. It had to have a front access ramp and a space for a dread. It's naturally going to be front heavy. It can't be all that aerodynamic. Repulsor and gravity manipulation technologies make aerodynamics not as necessary.

I'm not whoo-hoo-ga-ga over the design and think that several of the conversions seen here are an improvement to the basic design, but overall I think it's fine and I suspect I'll like it more in person.

Well aerodynamics is still important. Though you may be able to float around, there is still such thing as air resistance. An aerodynamic shape would make this thing fly a lot faster, and furthermore missiles do less damage, similar to roman shields. The may just deflect off. Try stabbing a citadel paint pot (on it's side) with a metal skewer. Now try stabbing it with the pot standing up. Which was easier?

shrike wrote:Well aerodynamics is still important. Though you may be able to float around, there is still such thing as air resistance. An aerodynamic shape would make this thing fly a lot faster, and furthermore missiles do less damage, similar to roman shields. The may just deflect off. Try stabbing a citadel paint pot (on it's side) with a metal skewer. Now try stabbing it with the pot standing up. Which was easier?

You don't want a gunship to be "flying faster". Flying faster means less time on station delivering its ordnance.

Why do you think they used the C-130 Hercules and the C-47 Skytrain to make gunships rather than jets?
Or why the AH-64 emphasized armor and weaponry over sheer speed?

So maybe there is a sci-fi force field over the nose that creates an aerodynamic bubble around the ship?

I don't see that as a thing that would have to be explicitly spelled out for us, for it to exist.

But it would help me suspend my disbelief in its ability to fly. Or hover

It's still meant to "swiftly" deploy infrantry and a dread to the battle, and being a "fast" skimmer and all that...

Fast compared to ground vehicles does not mean it is not slow compared to other aircraft.

It would still benefit more being faster. It will be able to divert more power to weapons, faster insertion and be more manoeuvrable. (sp?)

shrike wrote:It would still benefit more being faster. It will be able to divert more power to weapons, faster insertion and be more maneuverable.

It doesn't need to "divert more power to weapons". Just like real weapons, they do have self-contained power sources that function separately.

And it also doesn't need "faster insertion" capabilities(really. it operates in what amounts to powered freefall from low orbit, it doesn't get much faster than that ) or maneuverability. It's not meant to jink incoming fire, it takes it head on with the armor it's got.

Diverting power to weapons is a Star Trek thing that just sounds cool.

I highly doubt many real weapons are developed with the capability to do that.

BrookM wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

BrassScorpion wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Miss Dee wrote:Its still a flying brick.....

Could we at leat go five minutes without an oh so clever "flying brick" quip or similar? We get it: it's boxy.

And while we're at it, we could also do without the other stupid trendy nickname that has the same number of syllables and characters to type out as just calling it by it's actual release name, Stormraven. It's amazing what passes for "cool" sometimes in some gamer circles. Double and unsubscribe from this path to nowhere.

OK, henceforth, I go with "shortbus" as the nickname

No. Just no.

What about FLYING METAL BOXES!!!!

skrulnik wrote:Diverting power to weapons is a Star Trek thing that just sounds cool.

I highly doubt many real weapons are developed with the capability to do that.

"She Canna take it Captain."

vaatbak wrote:

BrookM wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

BrassScorpion wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Miss Dee wrote:Its still a flying brick.....

Could we at leat go five minutes without an oh so clever "flying brick" quip or similar? We get it: it's boxy.

And while we're at it, we could also do without the other stupid trendy nickname that has the same number of syllables and characters to type out as just calling it by it's actual release name, Stormraven. It's amazing what passes for "cool" sometimes in some gamer circles. Double and unsubscribe from this path to nowhere.

OK, henceforth, I go with "shortbus" as the nickname

No. Just no.

What about FLYING METAL BOXES!!!!

Now that's just silly. Everyone knows it's a plastic kit.

Donut!

Must resist urge to paint stormraven like a school bus for foaming at the mouth death company:p

DO IT!!!
If I hadn't come up with a good idea for converting this, I would have painted it grey with a yellow troop holder and called it the stormpelican.

Has anyone thought about putting putting an IG Leman Russ turret or a Preadator turret instead of the intake and turret?

jspyd3rx wrote:Must resist urge to paint stormraven like a school bus for foaming at the mouth death company:p

On a related note, even if this monstrosity is ever made available for the vanilla codex it will never be possible for any Imperial Fist player with the barest shred of self-respect to field one.

Anyone know why GW is telling people to take down their SR build tutorials and blogs from the internet? Seems counter-productive...

Probably because part of the "agreement" a store is supposed to have made with GW for the Black Boxes is that you don't show it off outside of to people who came in person?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and they sure as hell aren't supposed to be selling the contents of the Black Boxes to people.

Arn't most of these "Turtorials" being posted by recipiants of Black Boxs?


I do find it curious how the local Hobbytown was able to get a Stormraven in hand 2 weeks before release.

Grey Templar wrote:Arn't most of these "Turtorials" being posted by recipiants of Black Boxs?


I do find it curious how the local Hobbytown was able to get a Stormraven in hand 2 weeks before release.

I dunno, but quite a few of them are seemingly by people who just bought them off their FLGS or have no real affiliation with a FLGS.

Mikhaila knows how things work better, but according to my FLGS if they ever sell anything from the Black Boxes or even do anything more than a few photos to get us interested to come down there then GW will discontinue sending them the Black Boxes.

I wish my local store would sell the Black BOx items, to me.


i almost got an Iclad dreadnought a week ahead of release. i was going to preorder it and the clerk saw that they had the item in stock and was about to give it to me. the Manager was there and stopped him before he did it, but it was really close.

Just noticed that the Chibi-hawk was designed by Dale Stringer and JES GOODWIN.

Heh.

WHERE IS YOUR GODWIN NOW, GOODWINATICS!

Just means he likely handed Mr. Stringer drawings who modeled them in 3D digitally. Often enough WD has some sketches of new plastic vehicles... it will be interesting to see what this could have looked like.

What did Dale do and what did Jes do though?

Until we know that (and we probably never will), it doesn't matter!

Jes FOREVER!

In all seriousness... so?

Clearly, Dale did the Servitor and Jes did the rest.

So we have Jes to blame for the Stormraven.

Clearly!

Some interesting picts in the new uk WD, only avalable in one shop in my town.

Isn't Jes the head of plastics design production or something like that? Of course he had a hand in it, even if he didn't design the thing.

BrookM wrote:Thanks for sharing, conversion ideas are already bubbling up in me head.

might use for orks


Automatically Appended Next Post:

1hadhq wrote:So its a heli design which has wings instead of rotor blades?
The grapple seems to weak to secure a senex antiquii and I value my dreads too much to lose them "on the move".

This needs a redesign badly and I am sure those using a "out of the box" StormRaven won't get the kit at its full potential.

We should have a StormRaven conversions Thread next month.

i agree totally

I am building and painting mine for my local FLGS. I have been painting all their preview stuff for the past few months for them to display in the shop.

I have pre-ordered mine and am trying out a few paint schemes. I like the 2 in the middle.

Nice template for paint-schemes..

Where to get?

The "med-evac" just needs a set of lights on top and a siren...

1hadhq wrote:Nice template for paint-schemes..

Where to get?

The "med-evac" just needs a set of lights on top and a siren...

I just printed out the photo traced and put in Paintbrush. Nothing high tech. I do not have the skills that many of Dakka's Own have.

I have a hard time visualizing the bottom left one as Blood Angels, same with the middle left actually.

Middle right is definitely makin' me think Blood Angels though

Kanluwen wrote:I have a hard time visualizing the bottom left one as Blood Angels, same with the middle left actually.

Middle right is definitely makin' me think Blood Angels though

Blood Angels use blue on the helmets of Heavy Support models. I agree, not the best choice.
The red and white was my attempt at making the Stormraven into the chapter symbol.

I'm aware of the Devastator Company helmet, but it just makes me think Crimson Fists, not Blood Angels

shrike wrote:DO IT!!!
If I hadn't come up with a good idea for converting this, I would have painted it grey with a yellow troop holder and called it the stormpelican.

Like so...

pretty much, yes.
maybe some eyes painted on it...
But yeah.

Do one Space Sharks colours please.

Imperial Fists recolor, please.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:Blood Angels use blue on the helmets of Heavy Support models. I agree, not the best choice.
The red and white was my attempt at making the Stormraven into the chapter symbol.

For Devs, etc. How about painting just the central cockpit & servitor turret in the helmet color, with the rest being red? Except the DC - their SRG would be black with red trim.

Deathwatch colours please.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Deathwatch colours please.

do we know the DW vehicle scheme yet? i didn't see anything posted about it in my LR DW thread or in the DW/RT/DH thread. i'd assume its a black/gold/silver thing but i haven't seen the rites of battle book in person yet to see exactly how the scheme is supposed to go officially.

Flat black, with a few details picked out in silver and the -=I=- in gold.

And here I was thinking that The Kan was about to tell us we couldn't have Storm Ravens in our Deathwatch forces.

I guess that means we kan... I mean can have the Storm Raven.

Hooray!

It says in the Deathwatch book they utilize Stormravens.

Thus, Deathwatch can have Stormravens. It makes sense, fluffwise, for the Inquisition to outfit their minions with some of the newest and best toys out there.

Kanluwen wrote:Flat black, with a few details picked out in silver and the -=I=- in gold.

naked machine spirit thanks you for your kindness.

It's just me.. or i'm disappointed about this model !?!

... and is nick is; Flying brick

in red is horrible ... it's unpleasant. For the schemes proposed, I'd like to point out the middle right one, fits better than everything else.

And God... that electric blue is horrible! With red inserts! Oh my eyes!! MY EYES!

I don't know if the requests were serious or not. I an naive that way. But here we go.

it doesn't look too bad.

Thanks for those mock ups - very nice!

And it really does look better in other color schemes - too bad I'll have to wait (maybe) until 6th edition to try them out (again, maybe).

Looted ones or given as gifts for helping out the BA's

Thanks for the mock ups.


The IF one in yellow looks exactly as I expected it would. Definitely a no-go.

The =I= one in black looks good.

Why did I do Sons of Medusa? when i could of gone for The Carcharodons.

So the side doors are rhino size, correct? I was thinking of just putting the predator side sponsons there to avoid the ugly top turret. That way the guns won't just looked glued on, it'll keep with Marine looks and it'll also look more in line with it's big brother the thunderhawk which has the heavy bolter sponsons on the sides by the ramp.

Would love to see that with the assault cannons

A word of advice- don't go and glue the guns on without first attaching the turret to the hull. My FLGS glued the assault cannons on first, and now can't fix it to the hull.

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:I don't know if the requests were serious or not. I an naive that way. But here we go.

The Imperial Fist one looks like it needs some Black Stripes to make it look like a backward bumblebee

Yes, Bumble Bees shouldn't be able to fly either, but they can.

Okay, here's a question. What is the purpose of that scoop (air intake) behind the gunner's cockpit? The engines aren't connected to it in any way. It serves no purpose in space. The thrusters under the wing won't get any air from it when it's hovering to land. So... what is it doing, other than scooping up air and farting it out someplace else?

It could be cooling for the weapons systems, ventilation, additional air intake for the engines(they could be channeling through the wings)

Breotan wrote:Okay, here's a question. What is the purpose of that scoop (air intake) behind the gunner's cockpit? The engines aren't connected to it in any way. It serves no purpose in space. The thrusters under the wing won't get any air from it when it's hovering to land. So... what is it doing, other than scooping up air and farting it out someplace else?

It's there to be another bullet point on the list of things that make the Chibi-Hawk such a terrible kit.

And to create drag, 'cause that turret clearly wasn't creating enough.

Breotan wrote:Okay, here's a question. What is the purpose of that scoop (air intake) behind the gunner's cockpit? The engines aren't connected to it in any way. It serves no purpose in space. The thrusters under the wing won't get any air from it when it's hovering to land. So... what is it doing, other than scooping up air and farting it out someplace else?

It's the air intake for the nose and wing thrusters.

Duh.

Breotan wrote:Okay, here's a question. What is the purpose of that scoop (air intake) behind the gunner's cockpit? The engines aren't connected to it in any way. It serves no purpose in space. The thrusters under the wing won't get any air from it when it's hovering to land. So... what is it doing, other than scooping up air and farting it out someplace else?

It's not an air intake, it's a deflector array for the force field that actually gives that thing some sort of aerodynamics.

Ok,
so the BloodRaven can be taken by BA, DW and most likely GK armies. Is the thing allowed to be fielded in any other SM based army. I know you could of course use BA codex rules and run a successor chapter, but can normal SM armies take them? A while back a GW store employee I ran into said any SM army could take them but I have not seen any proof of that being true at all. Can anyone fill me in?

Currently, the only army that can take a Stormraven are the Blood Angels (I don't have any FW books, so can't comment about that). The Grey Knights coming in April are heavily rumored to have the Stormraven as well (plus, there is a painted GK version on the back of the Stormraven boxset which tells me this rumor is most likely true).

The latest WD did not have any indication the SR can be taken for any other marine army.

Personally, I think GW missed a huge opportunity to sell a lot of these kits. Folks may think they are ugly, but they'd still snatch them up if they were legal in any SM army.

Sarigar wrote:
The latest WD did not have any indication the SR can be taken for any other marine army.

Personally, I think GW missed a huge opportunity to sell a lot of these kits. Folks may think they are ugly, but they'd still snatch them up if they were legal in any SM army.

Not to attribute cunning with likely incompetence....but not releasing it to all marine armies initially might be bright. Players that alter their marine armies into counts as BA to play the Stormraven might buy additional kits (New Dread, Death Company, etc) to flesh out their army. I suspect after 6ish months of BA exclusive status and new BA players plunge in....they'll release it to all chapters to get secondary sales.

The blackshirt at my local GW says they (and a lot of others stores) say you can field them in any SM army if you own and bring the rules (BA codex or WD).

Take that for what you will...

I like the above idea of using predator sponsons to replace the side doors.

Am I the only one who fluffwise dislike the 'glass' pilot's canopy? I mean, if a Land Raider doesn't need windows, why does a StormRaven? Personally I'd replace the pilot's canopy with a hi-tech sensor array and armoured visor. (At the same time that I get rid of that ugly turret.) Sadly, given the price, i may not be getting one at all... :(

Frankly, the thing could look just a little more...I don't know...less like a brick...But, it's still not bad compared to the horrible things I imagined. I was picturing a Thunderhawk that had hit a cliff nose first in a cartoonish sort of way.

The issue I have with the ship is that it can't carry 2 squads of SM infantry, be they tac squads or terminators. I have drop pods, my Dreds get where they need to go just fine, so why add another Dred transport. Rules are what they are, but the ability to move 2 SM squads would really make my life easier. I suppose I'll just use the SRaven for a dred and send a Tac or Terminator squad in via drop pod. But that is still a hassle.

Overall, I am glad they brought out the thing though.

the reason to carry dreadnoughts is several fold.

1) greater accuracy. the Dred can be delivered without scattering.

2) you can assault after arriving. a Dred with a 20" assault range is terrifying for many armies. the Dred also has a squad of infantry backing him up too.

Grey Templar wrote:

2) you can assault after arriving. a Dred with a 20" assault range is terrifying for many armies. the Dred also has a squad of infantry backing him up too.

Err, I need to reread the StormRaven rules. I didn't know the Dread could still assault if the Raven moved > 12"....err now I'm thinking about it, can it move and assault too? I don't have my rulebook here at work.

stormraven moves 12"

Disembark 2" from Base

Assault 6"

the Stormraven has the Assault Vehicle rule.

Grey Templar wrote:stormraven moves 12"

Disembark 2" from Base

Assault 6"

the Stormraven has the Assault Vehicle rule.

Oh yeah, for some reason I wasn't getting that in my head. Actually more than 20 isn't, considering the size of a Dreads base? I'll have to play around with that when my Ravens arrive.

Was in GW today, they had a sign saying it could be fielded as Heavy Support in any SM army.

It's a matter of time... likely weeks lol

stormraven moves 12"

Disembark 2" from Base

Assault 6"

But it cant.
The dread moves up fron the rear of the vehicle and not the front where the infantry disembark from.
So either you move 12 forward then rotate the thing 180 to get the dread the assault range and let the infantry lag behind or you let the infantry get the 20 assault range but let the dread lag behind.

Pyriel- wrote:

stormraven moves 12"

Disembark 2" from Base

Assault 6"

But it cant.
The dread moves up fron the rear of the vehicle and not the front where the infantry disembark from.
So either you move 12 forward then rotate the thing 180 to get the dread the assault range and let the infantry lag behind or you let the infantry get the 20 assault range but let the dread lag behind.

Actually I'm home now and they cleared this up in the book;

"For the purposes of claiming/contesting objectives and embarking/disembarking from a Stormraven, measure to and from it's base"

Ah, thats good to hear.

Mind you, you want to lower that craft as much as possible. Valkyries and the like are valued with the oddly low points value that they have because they tend to completely lack the option of cover.

Can you just do that? I mean say cut the stand height in half? or is there a 'must be this tall to take this ride' rule?

Presumably you have to make to with the standard stem in tournaments. But it makes the old Imperial Shortbus one heck of a target.

Thanks for the pics mate. Now I definitely know I won't be getting that model.

No offense to you, I was just hoping it was a case of bad paint / photos on GWs part (As with other models). However I now know it looks like complete gak no matter who makes it / photographs it. (Again no personal offense meant I just think GW made a really y model.

Having just built a SR, I've noticed something interesting. On the wing piece, directly above the engines, there are 4 small 'tabs' (for lack of better word) - it looks like they could be there as a guide for an 'expansion' kit, ala Ork Battlewagon. Could tis be for the GK Psycannons?

UltraPrime wrote:Having just built a SR, I've noticed something interesting. On the wing piece, directly above the engines, there are 4 small 'tabs' (for lack of better word) - it looks like they could be there as a guide for an 'expansion' kit, ala Ork Battlewagon. Could tis be for the GK Psycannons?

are you talking about the area where the bloodstrike missles go?

warboss wrote:

UltraPrime wrote:Having just built a SR, I've noticed something interesting. On the wing piece, directly above the engines, there are 4 small 'tabs' (for lack of better word) - it looks like they could be there as a guide for an 'expansion' kit, ala Ork Battlewagon. Could tis be for the GK Psycannons?

are you talking about the area where the bloodstrike missles go?

Here. And there are similar 'tabs' around cockpit.

Edit - not seeing pic myself, here is direct link - http://flic.kr/p/9fTeNe

I think those 'tabs' are just a feature common on imperial vehicles

lunarman wrote:I think those 'tabs' are just a feature common on imperial vehicles

Nah, they're common feature on Space Marine vehicles.

niallkissick wrote:Was in GW today, they had a sign saying it could be fielded as Heavy Support in any SM army.

probably house rules, methinks...

Pyriel- wrote:

stormraven moves 12"

Disembark 2" from Base

Assault 6"

But it cant.
The dread moves up fron the rear of the vehicle and not the front where the infantry disembark from.
So either you move 12 forward then rotate the thing 180 to get the dread the assault range and let the infantry lag behind or you let the infantry get the 20 assault range but let the dread lag behind.

or turn 90 degrees, and get both in 20" assault range...
the ultimate BA tank hunter:
dread w/ MM and DCCW (HF to get rear armour- you never know)
stormraven w/ TL MM and TL LC
honour guard w/ meltaguns and TH's
captain w/ combi-melta and PF
libby w/ sanguine sword and blood lance
honour guard w/meltaguns and TH's

ouch.

A GW shop having a sign saying any SM army can take it sounds a bit like trying to drum up sales and not being very honest about it.

I still think GW missed the mark. Sure, there are Marine players who will buy it so they can play a 'counts as' Blood Angels army. But, I firmly believe if the latest WD came out and allowed all Marine armies to use this army as, say a Heavy Support choice, then a LOT more Marine players would be out buying at least 1 immediately, possibly more as they play it in the months to come. Additionally, every player who starts any type of Marine army would have another option for there army. Basically, sales won't be as good as they could have been immediately as well as the long term.

I get my Raven today. Excited to start the building process. Thanks for the tutorial!

Still waiting for mine.

When disembarking, just measure from the base. Codex rules. It doesn't have access doors/points like other transports. So those six termies and dread are right up there in front.

Yeh, i thought it was a sales ploy by the store to drum up more sales! i have been building mine bit by bit all weekend!! cant bear to put the top turret on it!!! may have to plasticard up the hole, and mount the LC/PC/AC elsewhere

niallkissick wrote:Yeh, i thought it was a sales ploy by the store to drum up more sales! i have been building mine bit by bit all weekend!! cant bear to put the top turret on it!!! may have to plasticard up the hole, and mount the LC/PC/AC elsewhere

put a RB turret on it. If you want it to turn, plasticard it so it fits. I'm gonna be cutting up a razorback mount and gluing it in place of the stormraven mount.

i urge everyone to see the storm raven in person before hammering it .i saw it in my local gw they had done one up as a crimson fists and one as a grey knight flyer.the model looked a lot better than i thought from the pics.

Sarigar wrote:A GW shop having a sign saying any SM army can take it sounds a bit like trying to drum up sales and not being very honest about it.

I still think GW missed the mark. Sure, there are Marine players who will buy it so they can play a 'counts as' Blood Angels army. But, I firmly believe if the latest WD came out and allowed all Marine armies to use this army as, say a Heavy Support choice, then a LOT more Marine players would be out buying at least 1 immediately, possibly more as they play it in the months to come. Additionally, every player who starts any type of Marine army would have another option for there army. Basically, sales won't be as good as they could have been immediately as well as the long term.

There is absolutely no way whatsoever, period, that this will stay a BA\GK only vehicle, any more then the Land Raider Crusader stayed a Black Templar only vehicle. I suspect it will be open to all marine chapters within, at most, one year, and probably within 6 months.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nurglitch wrote:Mind you, you want to lower that craft as much as possible. Valkyries and the like are valued with the oddly low points value that they have because they tend to completely lack the option of cover.

How would doing this not be considered the very definition of "modeling for advantage"? I sure wouldn't allow it, tournament or not.

Ouze wrote:

Sarigar wrote:A GW shop having a sign saying any SM army can take it sounds a bit like trying to drum up sales and not being very honest about it.

I still think GW missed the mark. Sure, there are Marine players who will buy it so they can play a 'counts as' Blood Angels army. But, I firmly believe if the latest WD came out and allowed all Marine armies to use this army as, say a Heavy Support choice, then a LOT more Marine players would be out buying at least 1 immediately, possibly more as they play it in the months to come. Additionally, every player who starts any type of Marine army would have another option for there army. Basically, sales won't be as good as they could have been immediately as well as the long term.

There is absolutely no way whatsoever, period, that this will stay a BA\GK only vehicle, any more then the Land Raider Crusader stayed a Black Templar only vehicle. I suspect it will be open to all marine chapters within, at most, one year, and probably within 6 months.

I hope it'll be GK & BA exclusive at least until 6th ed.
OT- anyone got any ideas about when 6th ed. will hit us?

Keep forgetting to say this since the first glimpes of the SR were floating around. The SR really looks like a gunship I saw on another game. Was something like starcraft but not 100% sure. Was on a youtube music fan vid and saw about 1.5 seconds of it, yeah I know vague as hell right.

But keep thinking GW may of ripped it off another company, one of those they take to the cleaners.

On a non rant subject, got mine yesterday and very cool. Saw it built in shop during the week. Someone else said it but wait till you see it in your hands before you really hate it. Agreed the turret is so out of place but nothing a RB turret won't fix.

Mine will be for my BT army, I already got the green light to use it in friendly games. But you never know, as the baal pred is still BA only as far as I'm aware.

Ouze wrote:There is absolutely no way whatsoever, period, that this will stay a BA\GK only vehicle, any more then the Land Raider Crusader stayed a Black Templar only vehicle. I suspect it will be open to all marine chapters within, at most, one year, and probably within 6 months.

I believe the same thing, but right now it isn't available to all chapters, so putting up such a sign at one store is just odd and smells like false advertising.

Eberious wrote:Mine will be for my BT army, I already got the green light to use it in friendly games. But you never know, as the baal pred is still BA only as far as I'm aware.

I've got the green to use it in friendlies in my raven guard army (counts-as blood angels)

@shrike, cool. mine counts as black templars

and heres that vid I was on about. Came across it by chance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VrRwHtIGMw&NR=1

Skip to 2 min 12 secs and watch for the quick flash. Move the engines to the back where the are on the SR and presto copyright avoided. I don't really care just thought the two were very very alike.

shrike wrote:

niallkissick wrote:Yeh, i thought it was a sales ploy by the store to drum up more sales! i have been building mine bit by bit all weekend!! cant bear to put the top turret on it!!! may have to plasticard up the hole, and mount the LC/PC/AC elsewhere

put a RB turret on it. If you want it to turn, plasticard it so it fits. I'm gonna be cutting up a razorback mount and gluing it in place of the stormraven mount.

the current turret is alot more aerodynamic then a Razorback turret. why does everyone say the opposite?

i like it's turret.

Grey Templar wrote:

shrike wrote:

niallkissick wrote:Yeh, i thought it was a sales ploy by the store to drum up more sales! i have been building mine bit by bit all weekend!! cant bear to put the top turret on it!!! may have to plasticard up the hole, and mount the LC/PC/AC elsewhere

put a RB turret on it. If you want it to turn, plasticard it so it fits. I'm gonna be cutting up a razorback mount and gluing it in place of the stormraven mount.

the current turret is alot more aerodynamic then a Razorback turret. why does everyone say the opposite?

i like it's turret.

It's just the proper turret doesn't suit space marines...looks more eldar-like to me...

ok, so the one part of the SR that doesn't look like a brick is one that everyone wants gone?


i will say that it would look sweet on a Razorback.

BTW has anyone stuck the hurricane bolters on the side of rhino just to see if it looks cool??? I did earlier before the girlfriend arrived, i have to say it looked alright!!!

Have also noticed it is rear heavy, with the front of the front landing gear sitting up about 2mm from the table it currently rests on!

Yeah, the thing looks like a bits box waiting to happen. Loads of good gubbinz!

shrike wrote:

Eberious wrote:Mine will be for my BT army, I already got the green light to use it in friendly games. But you never know, as the baal pred is still BA only as far as I'm aware.

I've got the green to use it in friendlies in my raven guard army (counts-as blood angels)

If your Raven Guard are 'counts as' Blood Angels, you really don't need anyone's permission, do you?

Ouze wrote:There is absolutely no way whatsoever, period, that this will stay a BA\GK only vehicle, any more then the Land Raider Crusader stayed a Black Templar only vehicle. I suspect it will be open to all marine chapters within, at most, one year, and probably within 6 months.

while i agree that it will eventually become open to all marine chapters (probably right around the time the next vanilla marine codex comes out), you're wrong about the crusader. the crusader was NEVER a templar only vehicle. from the very beginning, all marine chapters could take a single crusader (while the templars could take 0-3). I used one with my 3rd edition blood angels from the week it came out onward.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I just looks so ungainly on a flying base.

Then yous should gets off the flying base then and leaves it to the models eh!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grey Templar wrote:ok, so the one part of the SR that doesn't look like a brick is one that everyone wants gone?


i will say that it would look sweet on a Razorback.

That's what I was thinking, I assume the parts are compatible?

how the heck is this thing rear heavy?

it should be wanting to nose dive on you.

I imagine it's rear heavy because the tail, wings, engine pods and air intake are all on the rear half of the model...

Does anyone else think it strange that the Stormraven is heavy support instead of dedicated transport or fast attack?
Or am I just looking at it the wrong way.

I do see the modding potential, but I'm still not comfortable paying $110 for it

Yeh, all the weight is in the back of the model, i took some photos this morning, i'll try and post them after work.

Followed instructions to the letter, currently i had no turret on the top so this may be causing the unbalancing issues.

I've not got any balancing issues. Model fit together perfectly, and sits firm on table. You sure you haven't put something in wrong place?

I've seen in it this saturday on the gaming table and friday from a friend that painted it in Ultramarines colors.

Boy that thing is a gigantic chicken.

It is a "nice" model but it depends from the angles you're looking at it, also in Ultra blue it's a lot nicer than the red BA counterpart. The only thing I like of this model is the way it's meant to be built... and please... PLEASE tell me what they had in mind when they made the elevators on the opposite direction.

Personally, in the end I don't like it. A Valkyrie has more dignity and is more badass than this flying chicken. :(

Eberious wrote:Keep forgetting to say this since the first glimpes of the SR were floating around. The SR really looks like a gunship I saw on another game. Was something like starcraft but not 100% sure. Was on a youtube music fan vid and saw about 1.5 seconds of it, yeah I know vague as hell right.

But keep thinking GW may of ripped it off another company, one of those they take to the cleaners.

Well, that's kind of how Games Workshop runs it's business. Half of 40K is totally a ripoff of Starcraft, just as nearly all of Warhammer Fantasy is a shameless ripoff of World of Warcraft. Blizzard should totes sue them.

Mine arrived this morning, Sons of Medusa here we go.!!!

Ouze wrote:

Eberious wrote:Keep forgetting to say this since the first glimpes of the SR were floating around. The SR really looks like a gunship I saw on another game. Was something like starcraft but not 100% sure. Was on a youtube music fan vid and saw about 1.5 seconds of it, yeah I know vague as hell right.

But keep thinking GW may of ripped it off another company, one of those they take to the cleaners.

Well, that's kind of how Games Workshop runs it's business. Half of 40K is totally a ripoff of Starcraft, just as nearly all of Warhammer Fantasy is a shameless ripoff of World of Warcraft. Blizzard should totes sue them.

The sarcasm... It burns...

ok, so the one part of the SR that doesn't look like a brick is one that everyone wants gone?

Strangely enough yes. I for one like the turret finally being something that doesnt look like a non functioning brick.

But keep thinking GW may of ripped it off another company, one of those they take to the cleaners.

Well, that's kind of how Games Workshop runs it's business. Half of 40K is totally a ripoff of Starcraft, just as nearly all of Warhammer Fantasy is a shameless ripoff of World of Warcraft. Blizzard should totes sue them.

Heh, the whiners whine the loudest themselves. I find that kind of funny. Very funny in fact.

Ouze wrote:

Eberious wrote:Keep forgetting to say this since the first glimpes of the SR were floating around. The SR really looks like a gunship I saw on another game. Was something like starcraft but not 100% sure. Was on a youtube music fan vid and saw about 1.5 seconds of it, yeah I know vague as hell right.

But keep thinking GW may of ripped it off another company, one of those they take to the cleaners.

Well, that's kind of how Games Workshop runs it's business. Half of 40K is totally a ripoff of Starcraft, just as nearly all of Warhammer Fantasy is a shameless ripoff of World of Warcraft. Blizzard should totes sue them.

you actually got it backwards.

GW was going to make 40k games with Blizzard, but backed out of the deal. Blizzard then took some of the basic ideas and Starcraft was born.

Fantesy isn't a rip off of WoW, simply because just about every Fantesy game/book is a rip off of Lord of the Rings. you can't rip off a rip off. and GW has the rights to the spelling of Ork with a K.

Grey Templar wrote:

Ouze wrote:

Eberious wrote:Keep forgetting to say this since the first glimpes of the SR were floating around. The SR really looks like a gunship I saw on another game. Was something like starcraft but not 100% sure. Was on a youtube music fan vid and saw about 1.5 seconds of it, yeah I know vague as hell right.

But keep thinking GW may of ripped it off another company, one of those they take to the cleaners.

Well, that's kind of how Games Workshop runs it's business. Half of 40K is totally a ripoff of Starcraft, just as nearly all of Warhammer Fantasy is a shameless ripoff of World of Warcraft. Blizzard should totes sue them.

you actually got it backwards.

GW was going to make 40k games with Blizzard, but backed out of the deal. Blizzard then took some of the basic ideas and Starcraft was born.

Fantesy isn't a rip off of WoW, simply because just about every Fantesy game/book is a rip off of Lord of the Rings. you can't rip off a rip off. and GW has the rights to the spelling of Ork with a K.

You need to check the batteries in your sarcasm-meter. Althhough, technically I think he was being facetious.

sorry, sarcasm meter doesn't have E-app yet

that, and i have to deal with Starcraft fans who actually think 40k IS a rip off

nearly all of Warhammer Fantasy is a shameless ripoff of World of Warcraft.

That completely ridiculous and fallacious statement has come up many times over the years. Warhammer was created in the mid-1980's, long before MMORPG or even the original Warcraft computer game. Warcraft from its beginning was a blatant rip-off of Warhammer, albeit a really well-done one, that is, if you liked chopping wood. A friend let me try the original Warcraft once, I was not into chopping and collecting wood and didn't buy it. I still buy Warhammer models though.

All fantasy games owe a debt to Lord of the Rings, including the first popular one, Dungeons & Dragons. All games after D&D owe a debt to it, it was highly influential on every fantasy game to come after it, including Warhammer.

Lowering the flying stand for the Stormraven may lower it's visibility to others, but the reverse is also true, thereby reducing it's ability to see and target enemy models. Funny how that usually gets overlooked. The laws of physics are out the window in most of 40K, but not so much in the line of sight rules.

Grey Templar wrote:sorry, sarcasm meter doesn't have E-app yet

that, and i have to deal with Starcraft fans who actually think 40k IS a rip off

Reminds me of a kid i hit accross the back of the head in a nightclub, Dj puts on sweet dreams by Eurythmics, some little dipstick goes "Who's this b*tch ripping of marilyn manson?"
he's lucky i stopped with a quick clip!

As for the stormraven...meh i got to see it first hand on saturday and i'm not impressed. its boxy, its ugly and its poorly conceived. i've seen better scratch builds.

Melonfish wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:sorry, sarcasm meter doesn't have E-app yet

that, and i have to deal with Starcraft fans who actually think 40k IS a rip off

Reminds me of a kid i hit accross the back of the head in a nightclub, Dj puts on sweet dreams by Eurythmics, some little dipstick goes "Who's this b*tch ripping of marilyn manson?"
he's lucky i stopped with a quick clip!

As for the stormraven...meh i got to see it first hand on saturday and i'm not impressed. its boxy, its ugly and its poorly conceived. i've seen better scratch builds.

Shouldn't of stopped

Personally, I dig it. It looks like typical Imperial aviation design; It's not aerodynamic enough to fly, strap more engines to it until it does. I like it!

I agree, when you look at pics of the thunderhawk it looks just as clunky and impossible to get off the ground as this does, but then a bumblebee is not supposed to be able to fly either. At any rate, I can't wait to LOOT one for the boyz, i can just picture a squished grot in the landing gear, and a boy with a big shoota standing at the side doors popping off shots at any errant guardsman who stick their heads up.

niallkissick wrote:Yeh, all the weight is in the back of the model, i took some photos this morning, i'll try and post them after work.

Followed instructions to the letter, currently i had no turret on the top so this may be causing the unbalancing issues.

You've got the piece that attachs to the hull upside down!

Eberious wrote:and heres that vid I was on about. Came across it by chance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VrRwHtIGMw&NR=1

Skip to 2 min 12 secs and watch for the quick flash. Move the engines to the back where the are on the SR and presto copyright avoided. I don't really care just thought the two were very very alike.

Emperors_Champion wrote:

niallkissick wrote:Yeh, all the weight is in the back of the model, i took some photos this morning, i'll try and post them after work.

Followed instructions to the letter, currently i had no turret on the top so this may be causing the unbalancing issues.

You've got the piece that attachs to the hull upside down!

Noooooooooooooooooo!!!!!

BrassScorpion wrote:

nearly all of Warhammer Fantasy is a shameless ripoff of World of Warcraft.

That completely ridiculous and fallacious statement has come up many times over the years. Warhammer was created in the mid-1980's, long before MMORPG or even the original Warcraft computer game. Warcraft from its beginning was a blatant rip-off of Warhammer, albeit a really well-done one, that is, if you liked chopping wood. A friend let me try the original Warcraft once, I was not into chopping and collecting wood and didn't buy it. I still buy Warhammer models though.

All fantasy games owe a debt to Lord of the Rings, including the first popular one, Dungeons & Dragons. All games after D&D owe a debt to it, it was highly influential on every fantasy game to come after it, including Warhammer.

Lowering the flying stand for the Stormraven may lower it's visibility to others, but the reverse is also true, thereby reducing it's ability to see and target enemy models. Funny how that usually gets overlooked. The laws of physics are out the window in most of 40K, but not so much in the line of sight rules.

1.) Successful troll is successful, with regards to GWS ripping off wow

2.) Altering the flying stand to lower the profile of a model is modelling for advantage. Period. it's cheating. The fact that it also has some drawbacks don't change the fact, at all, that as-altered, it will be able to gain cover that it is not entitled to. The fact that it can't target as well it irrelevant in it's transport role.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SebastionSynn wrote:

Personally, I dig it. It looks like typical Imperial aviation design; It's not aerodynamic enough to fly, strap more engines to it until it does. I like it!

I agree, when you look at pics of the thunderhawk it looks just as clunky and impossible to get off the ground as this does, but then a bumblebee is not supposed to be able to fly either.

A little OT, but that quote is an incomplete myth. At the time it was made, it was the 30s, and the actual quote was more along the lines of, we don't understand how they fly. Which would make sense in the 30s, as they fly like a helicopter, and we had not yet understood that technology.

shrike wrote:Try stabbing a citadel paint pot (on it's side) with a metal skewer. Now try stabbing it with the pot standing up. Which was easier?

I'm not sure what this was meant to prove. I stabbed the one on it's side and got paint all over my desk and my shirt, and now my paint pot has a hole in it.

Redbeard wrote:

shrike wrote:Try stabbing a citadel paint pot (on it's side) with a metal skewer. Now try stabbing it with the pot standing up. Which was easier?

I'm not sure what this was meant to prove. I stabbed the one on it's side and got paint all over my desk and my shirt, and now my paint pot has a hole in it.

UR not doin' it rite.

Try again.

Redbeard wrote:

shrike wrote:Try stabbing a citadel paint pot (on it's side) with a metal skewer. Now try stabbing it with the pot standing up. Which was easier?

I'm not sure what this was meant to prove. I stabbed the one on it's side and got paint all over my desk and my shirt, and now my paint pot has a hole in it.

I can't remember, and I can't find the page I posted that on. If you find that page and tell me, I'll remember.

Redbeard wrote:

shrike wrote:Try stabbing a citadel paint pot (on it's side) with a metal skewer. Now try stabbing it with the pot standing up. Which was easier?

I'm not sure what this was meant to prove. I stabbed the one on it's side and got paint all over my desk and my shirt, and now my paint pot has a hole in it.

dude, you should totally sue him! sue him in england!

I personally love the Stormraven. It reminds me of my favorite movie spaceship.

I've seen the Cibihawk myself, painted in a very talented weathered green. The paint job looked much better than the model did.

I personally will not be getting one even if the SW actually get access to it at some point. The model is just firmly meh, however, it is better than than the original pictures made it out to be, but it is in no way a must get for me.

It does look silly on the flight stand though. Its just kinda squatting there.

Quote from Jes in WD this month concerning the 'look' of the Stormraven:

'I wanted it to look extremely brutal ... It's no coincidence that if you clench your fist and hold it horizontally, you'll have a very similar silhouette to the Stormraven'.

Necroagogo wrote:Quote from Jes in WD this month concerning the 'look' of the Stormraven:

'I wanted it to look extremely brutal ... It's no coincidence that if you clench your fist and hold it horizontally, you'll have a very similar silhouette to the Stormraven'.

'The designers wanted it to look extremely brutal ... It's no coincidence that if you clench your fist and hold it horizontally, you'll have a very similar silhouette to what the designers used to sculpt the stormraven'.

^ what he said before the editor got to him. ^

Necroagogo wrote:Quote from Jes in WD this month concerning the 'look' of the Stormraven:

'I wanted it to look extremely brutal ... It's no coincidence that if you clench your fist and hold it horizontally, you'll have a very similar silhouette to the Stormraven'.

I find Jes to generally be a talented sculptor, and now wonder how he does the job with his clearly mangled hands.

Ouze wrote:

Necroagogo wrote:Quote from Jes in WD this month concerning the 'look' of the Stormraven:

'I wanted it to look extremely brutal ... It's no coincidence that if you clench your fist and hold it horizontally, you'll have a very similar silhouette to the Stormraven'.

I find Jes to generally be a talented sculptor, and now wonder how he does the job with his clearly mangled hands.

Apparently, it's now worse than the Perry guy who blew his hand off...

This kit would be great for, well, kit bashing and combining with some other stuff like a Valkyrie...



And no its not my conversion...

I love how the wings and top look, less so for reviving the "exit doors right in front of the weapons" paradigm.

Prophecy07 wrote:Can you model it with landing gears up if it's to be placed on the flight stand?

Even if you couldn't, it would be a ridiculously easy conversion. Just cut off the bottom of the gear piece, and glue it on the ship.

yes, you can model the landing gear up.

So, mine came a little bit ago, and I cut some bits off to see how they go together. No serious assembly yet, just screwing around.

What's up with the rear hatch? Is there really nothing to hold it into the frame other then that open hinge? It falls off every time it's opened.

Yeah, the rear hatch tends to fall off. I'm planning to probably just glue it on, which is what I did for my local GW store when I built their Stormraven to prevent that door from being lost.

Ouze wrote:So, mine came a little bit ago, and I cut some bits off to see how they go together. No serious assembly yet, just screwing around.

What's up with the rear hatch? Is there really nothing to hold it into the frame other then that open hinge? It falls off every time it's opened.

Oh, god yes. The one thing that actually ruins an otherwise perfect model*

*by perfect, I mean construction-wise. Looks are in the eye of the beholder.

BrassScorpion wrote:Yeah, the rear hatch tends to fall off. I'm planning to probably just glue it on, which is what I did for my local GW store when I built their Stormraven to prevent that door from being lost.

Grrr, that sucks. I don't want to choose between either gluing it on or having it call off. Will hack something together. That's a problem that they could have easily solved with no effort. LAZY.

A small r.e magnet to hold it on but still be able to open perhaps?

Carpediem833 wrote:This kit would be great for, well, kit bashing and combining with some other stuff like a Valkyrie...



And no its not my conversion...

That is a much better model then GW's. What were they thinking?

MajorTom11 wrote:A small r.e magnet to hold it on but still be able to open perhaps?

It's not staying on thats the problem. It's when you open it, it just comes off. Not very movable.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Ouze wrote:

Necroagogo wrote:Quote from Jes in WD this month concerning the 'look' of the Stormraven:

'I wanted it to look extremely brutal ... It's no coincidence that if you clench your fist and hold it horizontally, you'll have a very similar silhouette to the Stormraven'.

I find Jes to generally be a talented sculptor, and now wonder how he does the job with his clearly mangled hands.

Apparently, it's now worse than the Perry guy who blew his hand off...

I saw him at GD, he's still sculpting really well IMO.
I want someone to photoshop together a silhouette of a horizontal fist, then over it silhouette of a stormraven. They look nothing alike.

veritechc wrote:That is a much better model then GW's. What were they thinking?

that they have your money regardless of what they phsycially put out as long as the rules are cool? that's my guess...

Can it be modeled with a dred attached?

cadbren wrote:Can it be modeled with a dred attached?

Not really. Possible, but I think it may fall over...

cadbren wrote:Can it be modeled with a dred attached?

well, if you magnetise the top of the dread and winch of the SR, and move the DCCW to be "holding" it, then yes. Without any magnetising or conversions? No.

I would love to see one painted up in Lamenters colours.
Probably help it look better too

I already want another one! I'm thinking a dual stormraven list for badness!

Re. The back hatch, i just glued it shut, i prefer the idea of my assault marines/death company charging out the front hatch into the melee instead of sneaking out the back hatch!