Toastie

True. However, it is really pretty much straight forward to convert PF (train motors) to PUP. All you need is a PUP LED to get hold of the PUP connector cut that off from the LEDs and wire that to a PF connector. The wiring was shown here before Works like a charm on the PUP 2I/O hub. Also with the correct wiring the hub thinks it has a PUP train motor attached. But the core problem remains, as you pointed out: The PUP 2I/O hub is just a battery box equipped with BLE. What I simply don't get is TLG's reasoning. If it were for changed postal regulations, how do "battery" powered lawn mowers, cell phones, LiPo batteries themselves, and every other LiPo powered device ever make it across borders? They come into stores and via amazon in unaccountable numbers … Best Thorsten

I am pretty sure that this is the case as the location is within the EU (yeap - just checked - you don't know these days anymore, Netherxit not clearly visible on the horizon ) and thus there are no customs fees, VAT is 21% (standard rate, applies to this type of goods, I believe) and close enough to that of many other EU countries (Luxembourg lowest 17%, Croatia/Sweden hightest 25%); shipping should be a lot less. Best Thorsten

On another thought: The torque created on the train motor at low power levels is next to nothing. It kicks in at about power of 3 or 4. When your tram almost runs freely without much friction or moment of inertia it should run fine. The very moment some sort of additional friction (slight relocation of axles, track curves or bumpy track, whatever), power level 1 may simply not create enough torque to keep up the desired speed. This is the very reason I added some PID code to the program operating the train motor. Best Thorsten

@Duq thanks for the flowers I am controlling some of my trains with RCX' as well. And it was a pain in the butt to get it right with the LEGO firmware, which has these 8 power levels. If I were you I would not write my own PWM code, I'd get RobotC for RCX. It is freely available at the RobotC website. I assume you are using NQC to get your programs do what the should do, right? If so, the transition to RobotC is easy. Much easier than writing your own PWM. RobotC gives you power settings in steps from 1 to 100 in increments of 1. Plus: I can surely send you my RobotC train control program - which you need to modify - it comes along with PID control of the output power, provided you put a LEGO rotation sensor on one of your trains axles. in that case a train for sure runs with a speed corresponding to power=10 when you set power=10. Best, Thorsten

Hi Gerhard, two things: First, I did purchase the electronic version of your encyclopedia - and it is a fantastic resource of depth and width I have neve seen before. In addition it is not only documenting but partly also interpretation; I believe one cannot go without the other. Your work is beyond believe and unbelievable valuable. Second: Is it really the case that one era ends and another one begins - more or less seamlessly? We work with a number of rather large companies having a range categorized in their portfolio of things they sell. I could try and do the same thing you are trying: A temporal evolution. But: Although some instruments are not even listed on their websites anymore they do still sell these. No more research and development, just getting the stuff out. Eventually that also fades out. However, many other products became available much earlier. It it thus tough or better not feasible to have clear borderlines. In contrast: these lines overlap; sometimes for many, many years. Could this be applicable here as well? At least for a couple of years? Maybe one or two, as some sort of temporal uncertainty? Best, Thorsten (Whoa, look at the post number … no harm meant)

And I take the freedom (no offense please - in too many EB forums way too much heat is created because people have different perspectives - and this is >no< reason to heat) to "counter" that. Or much better: To view this from my perspective. Much better. My "counter" is stupid. I believe that one pivotal point is: Where does the power come from?. Batteries? For me, no way. As far as I am concerned, it does not make much sense. For one, no real train runs off from batteries, much more importantly though, a powered track is a means of power delivery to any devices present on the setup. You mentioned really nifty devices and solutions, but they need power. Sure we can wire unlimited meters/yards of wires through the layout, but it is so much easier to pull-off 9V/12V/15V (whatever) directly from the track in close vicinity to the device needing power, e.g. the intelligent switch drives you proposed. I am doing exactly that on my layout. There is power everywhere due to the metal track system. Now, another thing, which is very closely tied to the metal track, is the power pickup. The moment you have that installed in an "intelligent" (oh my ... big word for "bridge rectifier") way on your engine, things become entirely in line with all past (I don't like using the word "old" - it always implies "out of order" or "not being compatible with 'now' ") and current devices, be that PF, PuP or even 9V. The 9V system is not old; it is an alternative. Plus, there should be no worries about insulating track segments (e.g., reversing loops as a measure of freedom to lay track) - look at what @coaster has announced, these pieces are perfectly suited for that purpose when you don't want to take the invasive route. So, IMHO and only in that, I believe what Michael is trying to create (and pull off) makes not only sense, but is a big step forward. What you are proposing is in full accord with that. All the best Thorsten

@Grover That was such a nice read - the whole thread, but particularly your replies/analyses. Really, really nice. As a physical/theoretical chemist myself, I happen to have I'd say rather well equipped MS laboratories with all sorts of machines and methods - and this at a public university. So the $$ aspect becomes much less of an issue, once we find a good approach and research plan for a BSc or MSc thesis. We do ion/molecule chemistry as one research focus and thus need mass specs to investigate such reactions, i.e. we do basic research. A lot has also to be done "in" the computer as many of these reactions are way to fast and complex to follow them step by step experimentally. As "fall out", we also do develop ionization methods etc. pp. and we work with Bruker, SCIEX, Thermo as well as many other companies. Lets us assume I like LEGO very much. Let us further assume I may find a student interested in such work: What do we want to accomplish? Identify the "yellowing" compound for the white bricks would be a good start; would it be a bromine containing compound surviving some sort of ionization (at atmospheric pressure w/ or w/o LC or GC pre-separation using ESI, APCI, APPI or APLI or in vacuum using EI/CI) am sure we'll find it as the isotopic pattern of Bromine almost always tells you if and if how many bromine atoms are present in the compound. I may also ask one of my colleagues/friends in safety engineering - he is a former chief fire officer and now professor for chemical safety and fire defense. I don't know whether he likes LEGO but he does like to research cool things. In one collaboration, we blew up various types of rechargeable batteries - in a controlled fashion of course - and tried to identify gaseous combustion products. Was fun. However, how do we choose the raw material? From the 1990? 2000? 2010? And how do we find such temporally well categorized raw material? My bricks are all in boxes with certain schemes of categorizing them (e.g. color for the simple x by z bricks), but certainly not according to "year of production". That may thus render such an analysis less interesting, right? Also, do you think there is any chance to get such information from TLG? For a research project I mean? Anyway - I would do it as soon as I see a good chance that something meaningful will come out of such an effort. Anyway here is a link to the MS institute I have founded back in 2011, which is now directed by one of my group co-workers. All the best, Thorsten

The "historical interpretation" (and it will hardly be any more than that) of LEGO history will always be a matter of discussion. The moment one puts any kind of any "personal" aspect into that - and >missing a thing< or >pointing to a thing< is such a personal thing, among so many other things - the entire discussion may skip into a battle. In other words: Any kind of historical assessment of any temporal evolution is - inherently personal. There is no absolute truth. I bet: Even TLG does not know, what - on an absolute scale - is going on. No way. Particularly with regard to this thread, whatever TLG prints on boxes, whatever they push, whatever they do see fit is - essentially meaningless. For the best, it is a marketing thing. Or: A best guess or best try. What does the label "Expert Set" mean? I am not an expert, but I could build these sets. Somebody over there decided to call it "expert". Honestly? Good guess. So what. Modular? Who is defining modular? Because they stick to each other, have the same scale (sort of) they are defined as modular? That is crap. They do fit. That is all. Put it anywhere you want, but don't hunt it down to some sort of "truth". As in: I know better than "X". LEGO is no absolute measure. Nor is TLG. No higher authorities power. They are a company. As Amazon is. Or Microsoft. All of these believe they make the world a better place. And all they try to achieve is: Making more money. We may want to pull up the graphs shown before. No one here knows things. There are interpretations. And with that: Pipe down. This discussion has reached a temperature absolutely not worth it. All the best Thorsten

Very nice discussion you have going here! Question: Is it really necessary to use bold face, italics, underline, larger font to … what … point out things? Or emphasize things? When entire paragraphs are phrased in this way, it becomes … at least to me … less … pointed out. I am always irritated by that. Just discussing the matter is way enough for me. But this is just me. Hope the discussion continues! All the best Thorsten

>Fully< agreed on! Quite honestly: It sounds like TLG is venturing into the circle of "big companies life" where the people pushing and knowing "it" either retired or simply died. And these people took all that unaccountable knowledge with them. Plus: The world is changing. BIG TIME. Plus: Going from simple ABS bricks to current BLE device technology - encased in ABS plastic molds - is - "different". I really fully agree: Why on earth don't they hire like crazy? Why don't they contract out like crazy? Why don't they alley - in a "you have ideas, I give you a share" way? Vigorously? Instead they suggest the "Your are so super smart - tell us how to do it" way - for what? For free? For honorable mention? With China on their back? Oh my. This is … crazy. When you want to push through in a highly competitive market - act like that. TLG has long lost the charisma of being a "Toy Company". They are a fully blown world-wide operating power player. So get the best people on board, give them a living and cut the crap. Or voice it differently. Man. Just my 2 cents. Best Thorsten

I fully agree with your thoughts and your approach. TLG is "inventing" parts as >they do see fit for their projects< - uhmm - products. I don't see any reason (at all!) why a skilled individual as you are should not take the exact same route. This is creative. It is the core of the matter. TLG tells us how creative their approach is. Well, you are as well! Best Thorsten

Phew - I don't know. Just look at what LiPo's cost - today. You may find differences, but not this kind not in the +10 € sector. None-what-so-ever. Plus: They almost always come from … China. It would be thus interesting to find out, what TLG used - well what they ordered, back then - as they don't do electronics (right?). Chances are: They came from China anyways … So what is decent and what is junk with regard to LiPo's becomes … at least - interesting. BTW, the last LiPo blow-up is history; at least in the media. Time progresses, as technology and production does. And they do learn fast and efficient in China. They are homo sapiens sapiens as well … Looking forward to your review! All the best, Thorsten (Emanuele … I will never take offense from what you feel and write!)

+1!!! I fully agree with what you and @coinoperatorhave voiced. Best, Thorsten

Hmmm. My HE consisting of two sets has two motors (one 9V w/ power pickup and one PF motor) + PF light all in one engine. The other engine is not motorized. At least when the motorized engine is pulling the entire consists it never derails. Some people are worried about the different characteristics of the two motors - but: Never had problems at all. I don't know about having the engine pushing the other cars - never tried. Sometimes I have issues on other trains (= derailing) when the wires from the PF motors cannot move freely enough upon negotiating curves or particularly switches. The motors need to pivot without much resetting forces coming from the (rather stiff as compared to 9V) PF wires. I believe that this issue may even be more severe, when a motor in the back is pushing the front section with a motor already loosing some contact with the track. But I am just guessing. Good luck with your HE! Thorsten

@Lowa I am really deeply impressed. You guys have so many brilliant ideas (just take the curved switches alone). What I like so much about your software is the "cleanliness". It is very intuitive - and at the same time very powerful. I mean, you can run your own python scripts, operate BLE and 4DBrix WiFi devices … and all that is tile oriented and highly modular. And: It is a track designer on the side … Wow. This is so well thought out! Plus: Help from your side comes fast and efficient. Really nice. Best regards, Thorsten

As others have said - a beautiful steam engine - one of the most beautiful steamers I have seen. What I really really like though is the entire train. She pulls it so nicely and smoothly - and everything is "in harmony". Wow. Congratulations! Best regards, Thorsten

Wow. That is really really nice. I am all 9V; nevertheless I do share all the excitement! Moving the switches into curved track segments even with perfect half cross overs is an extremely nice solution. Thanks for the note! Best Thorsten

These are really nice! Particularly the single cross is really attractive. Would electrification still work in that case? This would call for a very compact switch mechanism for the drive between the two tracks, right? In that case it would be of benefit to move the throwing mechanism to the other (straight) side, right? @Haddock51 wanted to do a similar modification - however due to other reasons. Best, Thorsten

Too bad there is no handheld ABS detector thingy. I live about an hour or two from the Netherland's shores away. Vacation time would be LEGO skimming time for me Best Thorsten

Oh, from an ecological point of view TLG should stop making LEGO bricks at all. (ABS is not necessarily that environmentally friendly to make nor does it biodegrade over decades and decades - this is why we can still use the bricks from the early days of TLG. However, no one in the world will throw LEGO bricks into the garbage - and this is why the latter is not an issue at all, of course) Plus: A chemical plant is not intrinsically "polluting". Plus: No chemical plants = no nothing other than what nature provides us with. And: No LEGO bricks at all; wooden bricks won't clutch as nicely … nor would the have any other color as "wooden" and biodegrade rather rapidly - particularly as the usage of any long-lived precious wood is not environmentally tolerable as well, of course. From that perspective, TLG should really release the set as it is the reason of existence of TLG. Which adds an even existential philosophy dimension to the set All the best, Thorsten

Oh that would be really nice. I bought them in even smaller sizes back then … but all had one color. The good'ol days

Same here, Emanuele and @Ymarilego. And more than pity. Question Ymarilego: Do you plan on/have already/want to sell/want to share building instructions? I love to have this my office (there is more LEGO already) - this would really stand out and make my point: Having fun and doing hard work go very well with each other - when you want that. All the best, Thorsten

Same here - as do the "bulk" brick boxes - so many colors, but so few bricks of the same "size" Best Thorsten

@Haddock51, @Duq (Experiments done, spent hours in the lab the past days with a bunch of my group and we got it to work: We have temperature and electron energy resolved mass spectra of an "interesting" MOCVD compound to be presented next Tuesday in Atlanta - I am happy. "Interesting" as in: These compounds see air - and start to burn - and see water and they explode. Now if this is not off-topic then I don't know) OK, back on topic. I feel like an idiot showing some screen shots of my simple MLCAD file for the switch drive - which is the work of Duq and others, but so be it. And: No renders, simple snipping tool screen shots. Sorry. Here we go: 1 is the entire drive with PF motor attached that you don't want anyway. In 2 all decorative stuff is removed. 3 is the actual brilliant idea. On the left, only the driving mechanism is shown. On the right the end points that prevent any uplifting forces (as all three axles are on one sturdy technic brick) are shown; the arrows mark the stop on either side. The travel path of the #42003 Technic cross block 1x3 is just right to throw the switch, as Duq pointed out above. The entire brick-work in 2 above is just to snap the entire mechanism onto the switch with minimal brick count. It does not have to withstand any shear forces; these are even less of concern, when manually throwing the switch as you won't bang it as hard as the PF motor does. You can also see that the axles easily allow a gearing that will reverse the motion of the throw - it will then point into the way of travel, when invasively modifying the switch, as you are planning. Hope that helps. Once again: This is the work of others! Duq may want to comment on this, as he was deeply involved in designing this mechanism. All the best, Thorsten

@Haddock51 I am very sorry! I thought the images provided above from @Duq were making that useless. Give me time until Wednesday as we are preparing our annual research group "trip" to the US tomorrow and on Tuesday. Best, Thorsten