valkyrie/thunderbolt fighter

ina few days i will be buying another valkyire for my airborne division of guard. I've seen a similar conversion, but not into a thunderbolt, online. The transport is not part of it at all.
Basically, i am going to put the two tails(that link to form the tail motor) will be stuck together. I will stick the nose and cockpits on the end of that (near the front) to form the general stem fo the aircraft. The engines will go on either side of the tail. The spine (normally goes between the engines ona valkyrie) will be either put on top or beneath the tail, to create the bulk. Then the wings shall be attached in their normal positions. As i want a unique fighter/bomber, which will probably come under the 'counts as' rules, the wings will not be straight, and the cockpit will be completely different.

I found a similar picture online

The difference between this and mine is that there is no seperation from the two tails parts, and the engines are on top, not below.

That is an exceptional kitsplosion, it looks awsome!
However. Something like this isn't going to be easy, if there is a guide with pictures find it. Use the best tools you have at your disposal and don't rush anything.
Good luck.

the way to make this picture was on the website, i decided to follow them slightly, but i want mine to be unique, and look nothing like a forge world model, or this picture, because it looks too much like a super fast fighter. I will keep my bent wings, to make mine more of a hover/fast gunship.

Which website would this be? It's caught my intrest to say the least.

the all-famous

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_-iqZMUFh2iQ/Syz6FDXn3AI/AAAAAAAAARo/wBb84YeFNvo/s1600/jetconversion.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/273505.page&usg=__Me1I0dibVeuI-MiYdHsTFwORScg=&h=610&w=616&sz=46&hl=en&start=14&sig2=OIsoLEZsj9MfbFRgoX2siA&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=IeN6DcTWykZUfM:&tbnh=135&tbnw=136&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dvalkyrie%2Bconversion%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1T4GFRE_enGB362GB363%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=7x76S7K7CafQmgOi-p3fCA

Excelent thanks!

okay just a quick update I have followed these guidlines, and i have found some better solutions whihc i prefe,r i will say that the image is bretrayin,g it is much smaller than it looks, also, the model is not as big as a valkyrie, let alone thunderbolt, but can CERTAINLY be used as one, just a smaller version(big isn't always best) I may also decide to call this new model(as mine is noticeablly different) a name. I was thinking along the lines as dragonfly, hornet, wasp, Tempest, Banshee(i know this is getting into Halo terms)

How about Spacebug?

What, I'm a Dwarfer

Dwarfer?

I watch Red Dwarf. It's the sex!

Yay for Red Dwarf!
If I ever attack a Valkree like that me thinks I'll call it a Blitzafire.

okay so we all saw the thunderbolt i made on friday, any tips/thoughts? Also tom, my thunderbolt does not look like the jet fighter i posted, it actually looks like a thunderbolt rather than a jet. Wrow somehow thought i'd bought it off forgeworld LOL

It looked good apart from the breakage- it's nice to play against- i just couldnt help that you didn't do that much with it...

well it is designed for apocalypse, where you have 3 of them. if it was apocalypse you'd be concentrating more on the baneblades rather than a little dot in the sky.

Wrong. I concetrate on air superiority and heavy armour. Vultures are much better than Thunderbolts due to the fact that they can go into hover mode and use more weapon combinations. I have the Apache conversion with twin lascannons and 6 hunter killers for maximum anti tank.

firenze wrote:Wrong. I concetrate on air superiority and heavy armour. Vultures are much better than Thunderbolts due to the fact that they can go into hover mode and use more weapon combinations. I have the Apache conversion with twin lascannons and 6 hunter killers for maximum anti tank.

exactly my point *facepalm*

Ben, a recurring theme on your posts is that you tend to be a little rude. Can you be slightly more polite please?

Skirax wrote:Ben, a recurring theme on your posts is that you tend to be a little rude. Can you be slightly more polite please?

I don't mean to be. Im just stating that I play differently to the generalisation made by Wills.