Eurobricks Counts
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About andythenorth

Spam Prevention

  • What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)
    this is a silly question

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Plastic and pixels, and pictures of big stuff :)


  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. andythenorth

    Blast furnace with torpedo wagon and slag cart

    I saw these a couple of weeks ago. They're really nice Like how they reference HO kits from Faller. I draw similar style stuff in pixels
  2. andythenorth

    Technic 2019 Set Discussion

    Found a few pics on reddit by searching 'lego technic 2019 leaks'. I guess I'll find the others in due time. For those wondering about the weird tracked loader, I reckon the designer has a picture of a Cat 527 printed out. Tracked skidder, hi-drive tracks, lengthened at rear for slope stability. RL edition has rear log grapple, front blade. Lego version swaps that to a front loader arm with log tongs.
  3. andythenorth

    Technic 2019 Set Discussion

    It's likely that they'll use Powered Up, but I haven't seen any confirmation of that yet. Trains has switched in 2018, it would be weird if Technic doesn't switch in 2019.
  4. andythenorth

    NEW LEGO Powered Up motor test

    We Do 2.0 BB is similar to what you describe Bublehead, and I would guess we get a Technic SKU similar to that The Boost form factor alternative: I don't want to be a broken record, but the Boost form factor would also suck for changing batteries. All the Boost models have to be designed to facilitate battery changing, including undoing the screw. Technic PF has a long track record of removable battery boxes. That's just not possible when the BB also has integrated motors, they would have to be disassembled from the mechanism. So a Boost-type Technic hub just makes no sense, it would be a silly SKU to produce: higher cost, more QA failures, less flexibility, negligible inventory benefit. It makes sense in Boost, or for brick-built System RC models, but not in Technic. I just don't see it. Time will tell eh?
  5. andythenorth

    NEW LEGO Powered Up motor test

    Anyone know yet if the PU protocol supports daisy chaining? I might ask JopieK if there are any breadcrumbs about that yet. My assumption was that the Technic PU BB will be identical to the Train AAA battery box, except larger, with pinholes and AA batteries. I kind of assumed that there would be no PU receiver separate from BB. Now Ivan_M has me wondering if there will be a separate receiver, and if so, whether it would daisy-chain, which would reduce (doesn't eliminate) the stacking problem. 2 outputs on the receiver, with daisy chaining, would mean the number of motors = number of receivers - 1. I kind of doubt it though. For clarity, I haven't drunk the koolaid about PU yet: the stacking problem is a problem. I'm just waiting to see what we get in Technic before declaring doom. For Trains, PU is a net gain over PF. For Technic we don't guessing games
  6. andythenorth

    NEW LEGO Powered Up motor test

    Ok, forum can witness that bet Boost brick (I have actually got one) doesn't fit any recognisable strategy for PF-equipped Technic models, except for the tracked racer. The internet will make this seem more argumentative than I intend it, so read it with smilies eh? The PF strategy has been: one motor, demonstrating multiple functions via a switching gearbox multiple motors for a highly playable RC-style model There are a few exceptions, but they're outliers (e.g. motor for a single function). These two approaches are highly marketable, and require either a single motor SKU to be included (not two motors in one SKU) multiple motor SKUs to be be included (which can be featured on the box art and in marketing as 'includes xyz') The idea of forcing Technic to use exclusively the Boost hub literally makes no sense as a product strategy. there is already a separate motor SKU equivalent to PF M Trains already has a battery box and receiver SKU with no integrated motors all product design and marketing would be tied to the very fixed locations of the Boost motor BI points the Boost hub uses System studs BI points, which is very limited for current Technic studless meta So if you win the bet and all future Technic sets use the Boost hub, I will buy you the most expensive and get it shipped to you. Your stake can remain at $1
  7. andythenorth

    NEW LEGO Powered Up motor test

    Bet you money it's not. Internal motors would seriously restrict model integrations, it's not going to happen. Boost is Boost, Technic is Technic. You can't run more than 4 motors simultaneously off a PF battery box anyway, if you value performance All my big 4+ motor PF MOCs have had 2 or 3 battery boxes. The train-style PU battery box actually saves space, by ditching the IR controller, which also eliminates a poorly performing (power limited) component in PF. So PU is probably a win, but as usual, some AFOLs fear change. I don't mean that as a criticism, just 'it is what it is'.
  8. Decent Jimmy, decent
  9. andythenorth

    Washing in Dishwasher

    Generally, don't wash electrical parts. It lets the magic smoke out (There are exceptions, but eh).
  10. andythenorth

    [MOD] 42078 Flatbed Trailer

    How about an end-dump or side-dump? Using the linear actuators
  11. andythenorth

    Technic 2019 Set Discussion

    For supercars? Via TLG collaboration, Bugatti get extra coverage from people like Tim Schmee (Schmee150). We used to work with Audi and Mercedes. Getting coverage from people like Schmee was a key goal of the video work we did (along with entertaining people, a lot). I doubt TLG pay a license fee.
  12. andythenorth

    Technic 2019 Set Discussion

    I wonder what the licensing costs. It's not going to be known, because it will be contractually confidential. But. I doubt TLG pay anything at all for Volvo, Mercedes, Porsche, Bugatti licensing. This isn't Star Wars or Iron Man. Movie franchise licensing is very different to trucks. I spent an earlier part of my life in brand marketing. Getting TLG to make a Lego set featuring the product is the kind of thing a brand like Volvo or Mercedes would kill for. There is probably no money transferred, but a contractual agreement about contributions in kind. TLG will commit something like: "we are the world's #1 toy brand, with undisputed quality, and unprecedented access to current and future consumers with an interest in your product" we will commit our designers' time to a (reasonably) faithful replication of your product we will commit to feature your brand prominently in promotion and box art we will take care of all your intellectual property we will make €x worth of videos and other marketing material, and do one or more international launch events we will achieve €x worth of PR coverage The brand will commit similarly to: access to intellectual property a defined review and sign-off process €x worth of marketing and PR coverage This will increase the cost TLG overhead, vs. an original model. But you're not paying extra sticker price specifically for the license fee. The extra cost is the extra time spent by TLG. I could be wrong. We'll never know. But that's my guess.
  13. andythenorth

    Powered UP AFOL Community Answers

    It's a good question. The only answer I can think of: the bluetooth receiver is tiny. So a separate receiver would be a needless SKU for a part that can just be in the battery box. Changing the wire protocol - they already explained that
  14. andythenorth

    Powered UP AFOL Community Answers

    Sometimes. 4 L motors won't trip the thermal protection on the AA box, but it won't perform well if performance is a concern. If motors are only run intermittently, then it's much less of a concern. Also, some (wild) guesses based on actually reading the TLG official answers and not just 'omg it's all awful posts :) 1. Nowhere in the TLG official answers does it say that the final form factor for all time is 2 outputs. It just says no daisy chaining / stacking in the official plugs. TLG have a track record of multi- motor sets like 8043 (excavator) or 42030 (Volvo loader) or 9398 (crawler). There'll be nothing in the electronics that prevents TLG doing a 4 output control hub. There's also no promise of course that they will. It's a definite 'wait and see'. 2. Power Functions is dead for any future development. The official answers are quite clear about that. But the official answers are a nothing-burger about when PF parts will be discontinued. I can't see them keeping the SKUs around for a long time though. It's likely they'll want a big back-inventory for providing replacements on recent sets, but how long for sale on, anyone's guess right now. 3. I'm with M_longer that soldering is daft. It's just interesting that TLG are aware of the issue and provide the hint. The undertone seems to be an interesting open-ness to modding outside the official system. PF and 9v were very closed complete systems compared to the 4.5v/12v system where you could literally unscrew the wires. My school had Lego Education and Dacta sets where this was directly encouraged, to integrate Lego with primitive robotics systems like the Deltronics buffer box. The bold move would be opening up the connector design for third parties, but sadly I doubt TLG will do this. 4. Every time Lego changes an electrical system (Technic or Trains), the sky falls in Lego communities. Search for the "OMG Power Functions is the plague" thread. There is a certain type of AFOL who likes posting on the internet and dislikes change. Takes all sorts to make the world eh. I'm on the fence about PU being awful or awesome until I've got my hands on some. "On the fence" literally means holding judgement until I have experience. Maybe TLG got it right, maybe they got it wrong. I know that the Boost component is solid though, my kids have it. And the PU education stuff is also solid, I've worked with it.
  15. andythenorth

    Powered UP AFOL Community Answers

    My £0.02 on 'power functions let me have lots of motors'. I've built MOCs with 4 motors for drive, 1 for steering, and 1 or 2 more for additional functions. These need multiple IR receivers, as 4 motors overload a single channel on an IR receiver (thermal protection kicks in) multiple battery boxes, as one battery box can't deliver enough power for 6 or 7 motors So I'm not traumatised by the idea of using multiple PU hubs with batteries included. Also, don't miss the bit where they say that there are 2 power lines in the PU cable, and they perform the same as the 2 power lines in the PF cable. This is blatant hint for people who can work a soldering iron So I'll wait and see on PU. The automated train layout video in the train forum is pretty impressive imho.