Complete your bookshelf of DK Star Wars masterworks with the hardcover collection of all four Incredible Cross-Sections titles. The "exploded view" guides of the starships and vehicles from Episodes I, II, III and the original trilogy are gathered here into a single volume, offering readers a peek beneath the hoods, canopies, and armored plate of such essential Star Wars vehicles as the Millennium Falcon, the Naboo N-1 starfighter, the Slave I, and the latest clone trooper armored vehicles.
The detailed artwork by Hans Jenssen and Richard Chasemore complements the authoritative text by David West Reynolds, Curtis Saxton and Kerrie Dougherty. This collection is enhanced with brand-new illustrations, including cutaway views of the TIE bomber, Imperial shuttle, and the A-wing and B-wing fighters, along with revised technical information and behind-the-scenes pages. This new edition also features a foreward by Visual Effects Supervisor John Knoll.
Star Wars: Complete Cross-Sections is scheduled for release in April 2007.
I wonder what?
Hopefully the A-Wing, B-Wing, TIE Bomber and Lambda-class Shuttle are not the only things included, but the "revised technical information" worries me. There's no need to revise anything in the existing work, as far as I can remember. The TIE Bomber cross-section looks really nice though.
IIRC the original trilogy ICS lacked cutouts of Mon Calamari Cruisers. So theres a good possibility right there for the new ones. Hopefully the Executor will be there as well.
darthkommandant wrote:IIRC the original trilogy ICS lacked cutouts of Mon Calamari Cruisers. So theres a good possibility right there for the new ones. Hopefully the Executor will be there as well.
I think if they were planning Executor, they would've put it in the First Look, surely- it'd be a huge draw for customers. It'd be nice though, but only if they go look at the model, check the OT:ITW, and keep things consistent.
Quick research indicates that Kerrie Dougherty is a currator at the Space Technology Powerhouse Museum in Australia.
I am cautiously optomistic. I would note that her contributions to the complete locations were more symbolic (read the text about the Mustafar duel) then technical.
The revised bit, I dunno. As I understand it Dr S left a lot of notes behind. Maybe they are being included? Maybe we will get the original runs for the ROTS ICS?
My guess though, is that the AOTC ICS infoboxes will get edited to ditch most of the technical info like the ROTS ICS was.
بيرني كان سيفوز
*
Nuclear Navy Warwolf
*
in omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro
*
ipsa scientia potestas est
including cutaway views of the TIE bomber, Imperial shuttle, and the A-wing and B-wing fighters
I'd like to see how they're going to explain how the B-wing magically fits in its huge torpedo load.
"They're not triangular, but they are more or less blade-shaped"- Thrawn McEwok on the shape of Bakura destroyers
"Lovely. It's known as impugning character regarding statement of professional qualifications' in the legal world"- Karen Traviss, crying libel because I said that no soldier she interviewed would claim that he can take on billion-to-one odds
"I've already laid out rules for this thread that we're not going to make these evidential demands"- Dark Moose on supporting your claims
Elheru Aran wrote:Said torpedo load was never stated canonically except by WEG as far as I know, so they're probably going to flush it.
That would be the best case scenario. Hopefully it will happen.
They're going to have their work cut out for them in that case, since they'll have to completely redefine the B-wing and reconcile it with all the WEG-influenced C-canon about it. Although I wouldn't be opposed to it if they just threw all of that away.
"They're not triangular, but they are more or less blade-shaped"- Thrawn McEwok on the shape of Bakura destroyers
"Lovely. It's known as impugning character regarding statement of professional qualifications' in the legal world"- Karen Traviss, crying libel because I said that no soldier she interviewed would claim that he can take on billion-to-one odds
"I've already laid out rules for this thread that we're not going to make these evidential demands"- Dark Moose on supporting your claims
Jim Raynor wrote:That would be the best case scenario. Hopefully it will happen.
They're going to have their work cut out for them in that case, since they'll have to completely redefine the B-wing and reconcile it with all the WEG-influenced C-canon about it. Although I wouldn't be opposed to it if they just threw all of that away.
It'd be awesome, but it wouldn't be very in-character for them. I'm interested to see if they even mention the bombload, actually: maybe the B-wing's engines really are two inches thick and the rest is torpedoes, all he way down.
Possibly the revisions are meant to update the older (Pre-Saxton) ICSes to bring them more "in line" with the previous sources. That doesn't mean I am not concerned about some sort of "editing" though... given what happened with the ROTS:ICS.
Stark wrote:
It'd be awesome, but it wouldn't be very in-character for them. I'm interested to see if they even mention the bombload, actually: maybe the B-wing's engines really are two inches thick and the rest is torpedoes, all he way down.
I don't know, the ICS has always had a high-standard for problem solving, even when it's seemingly impossible. The Naboo N1 R2D2 gaffe, for example.
I think "revised technical information" will most likely relate to the OT:ICS material.
The TPM, AotC and RotS ICS all had data boxes. The OT:ICS had no such data boxes at all. They'll at the very least add manufacturer, class, dimensions, etc. If we're lucky, acceleration.
April 2007? Oh good, I was hoping this wasn't something that'd be released within a couple of months. My money management is a little tight until the end of the year.
Vympel wrote:Hopefully the A-Wing, B-Wing, TIE Bomber and Lambda-class Shuttle are not the only things included
Well, considering that when the Complete VD was announced all they mentioned for new material was a new view of Artoo and the Sarlacc and in the end that was all we got, I think that'll be the case here, too.
Count me as another who hopes they don't end up dumbing the whole thing down, but also that they don't just do a lazy and just merge the existing material all together as is without revision (like with the CVD and CITW). But I'd rather have the latter than the former.
I believe in a sign of Zeta.
[BOTM|WG|JL|Mecha Maniacs|Pax Cybertronia|Veteran of the Psychic Wars|Eva Expert]
"And besides, who cares if a monster destroys Australia?"
They'll probably just snip the weapons/reactors/etc. numbers from the AOTC databoxes. It would be weird for only a handful of the ships in the book to feature that data.
Vympel wrote:I think "revised technical information" will most likely relate to the OT:ICS material.
Here's to hoping they change the TIE panel nonsense and publish explicit- larger- sizes for the Death Stars. I'd also really like to see inside the Executor.
Vympel wrote:I wonder what the Behind the Scenes pages will be.
Nothing close to truthful, that's for sure. I won't be getting this. The fact that Dougherty is involved brings up warning bells.
(Edited for clarity.) -WPoe
Last edited by Lord Poe on 2006-10-20 06:10pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Brian, if I parked a supertanker in Central Park, painted it neon orange, and set it on fire, it would be less obvious than your stupidity." --RedImperator
Vympel wrote:I wonder what the Behind the Scenes pages will be.
Nothing close to truthful, that's for sure. I won't be getting this. The fact that Dougherty is involved brings up warning bells, especially when it concerns ROTS:ICS.
I'm not familiar with Dougherty, but I do look forward to this compilation (as I don't own all the ICS books). What has she contributed with earlier?
Mange wrote:I'm not familiar with Dougherty, but I do look forward to this compilation (as I don't own all the ICS books). What has she contributed with earlier?
Complete locations, I think. I'm just hoping she won't re-edit anything to the way she would have written it.
"Brian, if I parked a supertanker in Central Park, painted it neon orange, and set it on fire, it would be less obvious than your stupidity." --RedImperator
She was slated to author one of the books, but didn't get the gig. I'm just hoping she doesn't take this opportunity to change things the author that DID get the gig has done.
"Brian, if I parked a supertanker in Central Park, painted it neon orange, and set it on fire, it would be less obvious than your stupidity." --RedImperator
VT-16 wrote:Surely, she wouldn't harbor a grudge against a random fellow author for being picked? Would she?
After the "Travissty" crap that was allowed to go on, nothing will surprise me. People like Dr. David West Reynolds and Dr. Curtis Saxton that do actual detailed research for which the ICS' are known for, weren't contacted for this project. Draw your own conclusions.
"Brian, if I parked a supertanker in Central Park, painted it neon orange, and set it on fire, it would be less obvious than your stupidity." --RedImperator
