Carl Billen wrote:
> Actually, I 'think' I meant the Flying Brick. When I recently obtained some
> miniatures, there were 6 Thunderhawk models with them. They looked exactly
> like the picture on the army cards. However, I also had an army card with a
> silhouette of the Thunderhawk of the more recent model. Does this mean that
> the "Flying Brick" is the THawk Mk1 and that there is a small version (Mk2)
> of the current model (Mk3) ? I had the flying castle in mind, and because
> it looks like a brick I thought it was not so maneuvrable (hence its
> intercept value of 1), and with is missiles (for the Barrage effect) and the
> turret which would be nice for track assaulting planes. It was to small to
> jam 6 stands in it, so I reduced it to 2, in order to justify an armour
> rating of 6+ on such a small model. Furthermore, as the Imperial Guard
> would be 'less disciplined' as the marines, it would be logical that they
> would use the 'Flying Brick' nickname. Because bricks do not fly elegantly,
> I avoided birdlike names like Hawk and Eagle; because of its barrage it
> wanted to call it Dragon, but it was too small for such a name. I then
> thought of Dragonfly, which sounded nice, but the commanders and it
> passengers would always keep calling it 'the Flying Brick'.
Ah. Yes, there are 3 THawk models, the brick, the
same-as-now-but-smaller
one, and the current big one, we'll call 'em Mk1, Mk2, and Mk3, as you
suggest. I've got three of the Mk2. They do not look big enough to
carry 6 stands. I've thought of using them for a smaller version of
the THawk, carrying a squad (two stands) instead of 6 stands.
(Actually,
it doesn't look like it could carry two stands, either.) But I
never designed it further. I'm sure GW wouldn't mind, as long as I
bought enough replacement Mk 3's. :-) I'd like to have one of the
lastest, but so far, not enough to pay the price.
andy
--
Andy Skinner
askinner_at_...
Received on Mon Jan 26 1998 - 16:24:59 UTC