Rijkvv

My previous design was flawed and was likely unable to take inclines, but here I have a few designs that should be able to: Monorail space train thingy v2 by Rijk van Voorst, on Flickr Mostly an attempt for a Classic Space monorail. Due to the limited available pieces in trans yellow, and partly because I like it, I went with the 6931 scheme instead. I have the feeling this train is too heavy, but I'm not able to test it yet. Vintage monorail design by Rijk van Voorst, on Flickr An attempt to a vintage monorail. I think this should be not as heavy. Both trains use the same setup as Masao Hidaka's original Airport Shuttle rebuild, except that I went with PF instead of Powered Up.

More than a year ago, I made a flat car. These cars are often used for Maintenance of Way. I needed a locomotive to pull them, and decided to go with the Deutz dieselhydraulic locomotive that's in use by Strukton, one of the three main Dutch railroad constructors. I visited the locomotive in real life to make pictures of it. The weather was meh and so were the pictures, but still decent enough to be useful for the build, and to spot details that I couldn't really find on the internet, like the top of the hood. Just like the flat car, this locomotive is built in scale 1:45. Deutz DG1200BBM by Rijk van Voorst, on Flickr Deutz DG1200BBM by Rijk van Voorst, on Flickr

There are quite a number of people selling instructions actually. See the links in supertruper's signature for example. Not me though. It takes time to make instructions, time that I rather spend on trying to build something new. And I haven't made instructions ever before. Perhaps I could ask somebody else to do it for me, but I think instructions for this particular locomotive won't be very popular. It's a rare, not well-known industrial diesel shunter. I wouldn't be surprised if most of these locomotives barely drove on main lines at all. I doubt that will be appealing to many. Then there's the structural integrity. I had realism in mind when I built this, but that means it's very fragile. If I would release instructions, I would like people to enjoy my model, not being frustrated by the fragility. Besides, the PF cables tend to push the top of the hood off. I already had to improvise to make it somewhat okay, but if you look closely you can see the gaps. Oh, and I haven't even put this to a long duration test, so I have no clue if she'll be reliable. I would suggest to just try. My first train design as an AFOL was a fantasy locomotive with less detail than an official LEGO set, but by trying again and again I came to this. It's also much more satisfying than if I had just used instructions. If you're building and you face an issue which you can't solve (e.g. "how do I make bogies like that") there are always people willing to help you.

Thanks again. And yes, getting on the front page was a pleasant surprise. :)

Thanks guys! Yes, it is.

Nice how you kept the 1980s feel, and especially on the 7740 a nice addition (for some reason it looks a bit strange on a train set - I feel the same about the Metroliner). And an impressive amount of remote controlled stuff! I have plans/wishes for a 12v layout, but it'll be dwarfed by this one for sure. But with four new train systems released since, a good thing to see 12v still alive.

Nice work so far, but I'm not convinced the middle section is exactly 6 studs wide. Looking at this I can't ignore what seems to be a 1/2 offset right in front of the door: Also the windows on the side don't convince me. Just wondering, could there be just tiles put on the sides? That would explain the deep laying windows ánd the offset.

If you don't have money, then why would you this set to be far more expensive by adding a coach? Unless you want them to cut corners, but then many people would keep their money.

If you don't have money, then why would you this set to be far more expensive by adding a coach? Unless you want them to cut corners, but then many people would keep their money.

I'm surprised to see a seperate locomotive, but I'm surprised in a positive way. It seems LEGO expects (as do I) most people are interested in the locomotive anyway. I don't see them making a coach that even comes close to a realistic length, so I rather see a less expensive set with just a locomotive, where I can add something realistic to, than a more expensive set with a 6x28 coach or something ugly like that.

I actually think they use this part. And that would make the locomotive 7-wide. (partially in Dutch, but you'll get the idea)

I would like to see a side-by-side comparison between this one, the one made by Holger and the one from HABricks. Anyway, look at the wheel arrangement. Three sets of two drive axles each, while the real prototype (and most MOC's) has two sets of three drive axles. I think the only reason why LEGO would choose for that setup, is if they want it to be able to manage curves. Besides, why would you add the standard buffer beam if you're not going to drive with it? Brick-built you can get a more realistic look, maybe cheaper as well. So I won't be surprised if this will be more than just display only.

I wasn't happy with my original inclines. They started too abrupt. Many much better designs, but the one by MonsieurCaron stood out for me. Clean track design. However, the big support structures were not my cup of tea. The new centered bracket I mentioned before made me think if I could implement one of those. It took a while, since I felt it would disconnect if I just placed it on top. But I found a solution by letting the horizontal track overlap these brackets. It makes for a clean design and feels reasonably sturdy. Obviously this is only a test model: the final one will contain less colour vomit, and will be tiled off (with inverted tiles on the other side). I have yet to test with a train, I might need to adjust the angle if this turns out to be too steep. This might clarify it a bit: Monorail incline connection by Rijk van Voorst, on Flickr

Why would you change one single subforum (the rest of Eurobricks seem unaffected), and add a banner totally irrelevant to the theme?

Please delete

Yes. Here is the topic. Even if they changed their opinion about James Bond afterwards (the designer thought it was perhaps too violent): by that time they already released Indiana Jones and Star Wars, including a planet-destroying space station. Sometimes for the better. I think Steamboat Willie would never have been approved if they had to stick close to the original design. Don't get me wrong, I do see the appeal of those dino skeletons in the last set. I do like some space ideas. The Apollo is a great set and I did support a Soyuz idea (which failed the deadline) and the Gemini which has yet to be reviewed. But if they do want to live up to their own guidelines, then the chances for the latter are slim, as are the chances for yet another sitcom room currently in review. I just don't hope Ideas becomes an "Help us to decide which licence to pick next". There are great ideas that were overlooked because of the licence saturation and thus didn't make the deadline, and I still haven't forgiven Lego about the refusal of the western town. Pirates is one of those themes that I always liked, but never really gotten into that much (certainly not in terms of making MOC's). In fact I hadn't visited this subforum in years, but I see that I should come here more often. Supported your fortress

I guess it depends on what mood they are. So far we had multiple sitcom rooms, multiple submarines, multiple sets containing dinosaur skeletons and at least four real-life space-related sets of which three were NASA. What I still wonder is why they actively removed a James Bond Aston Martin DB5 project while years later they suddenly din't have any issue to release one anyway.

It seems you placed the same link twice. Here's the 20th Century book: link And thanks, I've bookmarked them. A bit too many orders for my liking in the last few weeks, but maybe I'll order them later or ask them for my birthday. A suspended monorail is a cool concept, but I do wonder if it's plausible. For a technical point, but also from a financial point. LEGO only lost money with the original system, so I doubt they'll invest in anything similar if it contains too many specialized pieces. And as far as available pieces go: barely any monorail MOC I've seen is a suspended one. That being said they could develop rollercoaster track as well. Besides, production technology has improved in the last 33 years.

I had a chat with @raised just a moment ago about using a 9V block. He has some experience with it, and I now ordered a charger and some 9V 780 mAh batteries. The benefit for me is that I can just use the LEGO 9V battery holder which I'll connect to an Sbrick. I'd be willing to sell you my PF LiPo for a decent price.

Thanks for the review. While it seems a nice set, I had to vote "poor" based on the horrible price per piece ratio, €8,- per piece is just too much for me.

I'm thinking about using these parts: And then inverted tiles on one of the sides. But I have no idea if it'll be rigid at all. Have you tried those by any chance?

While I wasn't a fan of the looks to begin with, realizing how scarce the functions are make me feel miserable for not buying 42009 when I had the chance. Speaking about looks I do think the well-praised 8460 also has strange dimensions. But that set made up for it by having everything engineered as you could wish for: gear-driven turntable, functional outriggers et cetera. As for the modding argument: if you put on enough time and/or parts you can make any set perfect. But there's a difference between adding a few flex hoses to the Volvo excavator to get rid of the ugly pneumatic hoses (for example) or having to basically redesign a set to make it decent.

Is this self-supporting, or does it rely on baseplates? That was the main reason for me to come up with my idea, but yours look way better. Definitely something to keep in mind if my own idea isn't what I want it to be.

Going totally 8-wide would be a bad move. While it looks more realistic, it also means everything has to be stretched to have decent dimensions. So I think it'll be much more than a 25% increase. IIRC I once read in Railbricks that it was close to 100%, so double the parts. I rather see they keep the sets affordable, we can build something realistic in any scale anyway.

As I stated previously I do want to build the track first, so that I can see if my train designs can negotiate everything and be stable as well. There were fine examples in this topic about curves and switches, but I couldn't really find anything about inclines. So I decided to try something myself, and if that wouldn't work to ask advice. That being said, I am curious what other designs you came up with. Maybe nothing too special, just a diagonal piece of track, but it was a bit puzzling because of the geometry. It still may not be 100% "in system" but I'm pretty sure if it can work in LDD, then the tolerances in real life are big enough to properly align everything. One wish I have for my future layout is that it'll be easy to set up or to take apart to store it away, and thus I tried (as far as that goes with digital designing without physically be able to test it) to create an incline that didn't need baseplates or big structures, I only used the baseplates as a measuring tool. The yellow incline takes 80 studs to rise 10 bricks, the blue one takes 64 studs. I use three mixel joints at the hinge points, with a plate 2 x 2 with towbar at the bottom. That towbar is slightly longer, thus creating the angle. I hope that'll give a good result, as in keeping its shape when a train moves along the track.. It does create large gaps between the sections though, and I have yet to find a way to fill them with the blue incline.