Toastie

Well ... the PUp version renders the trolley a driver's only trolley, doesn't it? I'd say screw the driver and let the robots take over - no, I meant let the PF IR receiver take over, of course. With a 9V train motor, certainly the axles are moving closer but - there will be all the space for the driver and the folks to be hauled ... Best, Thorsten

Well, could be partly due to the costs of having that done by a designer - it appears as if you have secured such funds. It could also be that some AFOLs - at least those in the MOC corner - are MOCing their AFOL room as well (provided they have access to one/want to dedicate one). Some folks (like me ) simply merge the functionality of a room, let's say a home-office, with that of a LEGO room. And then it also depends much on what that room is going to be: More of a showroom or a LEGO construction frenzy laboratory type room, or both. With regard to the latter, entropy usually takes over after some undefined time and the design/arrangement of such a room relaxes a bit into lower energy states. I guess with the former, a designed room will stay as designed much longer. If you have already a large collection of LEGO, you'll have probably thought all this through - here is just what happened to me: LEGO simply attracts more LEGO. And in a highly non-linear fashion, particularly when you took all the "becoming-an-AFOL-with-enough-funding" obstacles: In that case, it appears as if the inflow of new LEGO is steeply exponential. And with all exponential functions, they really like to mess with fixed geometries like rooms, bins (size and number) or shelf-area. I believe in the Technic Forum, there is also a thread about LEGO rooms. But these folks appear to be even more inclined to just do it their way. Good luck and much fun with the actual realization of your AFOL room! You will certainly spend many, many wonderful hours in that space! Best regards, Thorsten

Brilliant - as expected - solution. What else ... With regard to the rubber bands: The LEGO varieties (red/blue/yellow/white) "live" much, much longer than the household-type bands. Do you see any chance to use e.g. the red one? It will expand the service interval significantly. I experienced that on the "Technic" Star Wars series droids. They came with the cheap black bands - upon replacing those with the mentioned bands, they still stand tall on their shelf ;) Thanks for sharing and all the best, Thorsten

I do this as well with larger plates (square, angled etc.). Not flat on, but only on the "sides". Never had any damage (talking 2 decades :D) but these are usually in basic colors. And with all non-basic color bricks - you know why - no problems here as well. Damage wise. Color wise I have to check-in from time to time with my wife and daughters. All 1xX, 2xX plates and everything else are all on their own in the bins. Best, Thorsten

Thanks for testing! Appreciate that as I was just guessing. Best, Thorsten

Just looked it up - the "TVG of the future" (CNN reporting, wasn't it?) - did they borrow from the Japanese TGVs ??? I believe no "real" collaboration - if so, TLG would have plastered the new high speed train with SNCF all over the hood All the best, Thorsten Well, a tram. Why not. There is the new gigantic HP - uhm - thing. A tram is OK. Better than a hoop of bricks not able to train along Best, Thorsten

Or 250 or even more! What's the point of recreating all these vehicles with LEGO beams, bricks, and pieces, anyway? I'd say there is none, other than the fun of it. So going larger may actually be fun. TLG does it all the time, look at the latest HP "train". Personally, anything at this scale would not be pretty easy for me - I believe there need to be some technical Technic bricks solutions. Or maybe not. I like the just do it and have fun part. Best, Thorsten

Seems to e quite some work on each LED - but it works, as you said! And this is the most important thing. I am a bit puzzled about the parallel resistors bit - these are in series with the LED as current limiters, right? So one resistor for one LED, correct? Sounds like a lot of fun, what you are doing! All the best, Thorsten

... from TLG. It is from the dark side of the bricks. Best wishes, Thorsten

Reply: Yes. Sure. Of course. Yes: Knowing the absolute position after power down is an issue, when the actuator (or motor/sensor or whatever active device) is - by design - detachable from the power source (the hub) it needs to a) store the position information internally (doable, but ...) and b) needs to track any changes to this position when disconnected from the power source (doable, but ...) as someone may turn the axle manually. This is far less straight forward as compared to a device that is "powering down" with the actuator/sensor always attached, e.g., an electronic dial caliper (= sleep mode). There is always some remaining power available that does hold the position information in some sort of memory. And as said, there are also hardware solutions to that problem. But I guess this all does not make the devices any cheaper ... Sure: See above, this is always doable when there is some minute power left to track and store data without having the device "fully turned on", i.e., with all the current hungry things. Of course: Everything is more expensive from TLG. (This phrase generally does not make any sense, but in case of TLG it fully applies ) Best, Thorsten

There is no need, whatsoever, for stickers. Just let the bricks and plates play out their capabilities and creating imagination. Man. 4 wide - and then this beautiful engine materializes - created by you. In credible - and for me - incomprehensible. Just a glimpse on the brick-built model (as interpreted by Kraftwerk: "Sie ist ein Modell - und sie sieht schön aus ...") just beams you to the locations, where E.550 was on duty - as you said "A small wonder that allowed to pull trains on the terrible Giovi line, which was a real pain for steam locomotives." Wonderful. Thank you very much for sharing. All the best, Thorsten

Oh, absolutely, these are very valuable for TLG! First of, they are part of their Patent Wall that others clearly tells: Don't even think about crossing this border, we will come down hard on you. Second, (now happened so-and-so often, it even seems on a regular basis, when wandering about in forbidden territories and watching out for alternatives) when competitors simply can't use a certain essential piece for certain essential functions - that usually exists for long in the real world - then holding that patent simply means advantage. Not because the patent holder makes the better models, no, because competition can't use it. Well, that is part of the entire game of building a company in a market economy, and thus part of the basis of our current industrial world. And the reason why law schools are always completely booked out, each and every quarter/semester. And chemistry is not - in contrast . Best, Thorsten

Or they deliberately took the other route: Just make a piece/solution openly public - an instruction is perfectly well suited for that. Have these available in EU and US. At that point, it will be tough for competitors to do anything about it - other than making better models with these pieces than the competition. It is a good strategy for companies that may not have the money nor want to spend any money on stupid patents. We are talking several tens of thousands of dollars per patent, should you want to take the several countries' localization route of a PTC application - which comes after/parallel to the patent application in the country of origin. This is about a construction toy - a piece alone does nothing. It has to be part of a much larger build. Which brings me back to my view on patents regarding this particular toy world of bricks and pieces: Just make the better models. Whenever a new part surfaces, make it boldly public. And save a lot of money and legal bulls*it. Best, Thorsten

Hmmm - that is too boldly stated for me - had many different experiences, particularly with their Star Trek series. As well as with their trains. And with their MK sets. And their parts packs. All non-Technic, as I believe there are many issues, but I have not purchased any of their Technic line sets. This is also discussed within the CaDA thread in the Technic forum. to the US, I guess - as it is blistering fast and rather cheap within Germany. Well . That is a bad thing for you, of course - but others may find the choices they have now very appealing. I just picked one set - and I am very happy having it. Best, Thorsten

Nice!!! Since I purchased the #8226 Mud Masher "back then", I was thinking about making this tilting steering mechanism come alive with remote control. Very nice indeed! Thanks for sharing! Best, Thorsten

So ... I waited a bit. Wow. Wow. Man. This is such a nice rendition of what you were "planning" in your first post. 6-wide ... articulated ... negotiating R40's ... I thought: Good luck on this one. Saw the progress - and even with "just" the wheel sets - the thinking about certain articulations not allowing for details - I had no clue what you were talking about. And then I closely followed your progress - and just waited for "I'm done". Incredible. 6 wide with this detailing. Congratulations on this fine work - on an iconic model - and most importantly on a fantastic rendition!!! This needs to be built in bricks. All the best, Thorsten

Finally ... (Holger allowed me to see a "preview" of this breathtaking layout, when I was thinking about the physics of LEGO train decoupling ) I was so waiting for this - and since then wanting to shout out: "FOLKS, THIS WILL BE INGENIOUS!!!" OK, calming down ... This is really, really nice, Holger. Wonderful. True "LEGO". The idea. The whole world of what you can (could ...) accomplish. I believe, folks over at TLG just plainly blush. You know the - yeah back then, but now we need to ... compromise ... make money ... sue ... and more money folks. This simply showcases "LEGO" as it is (was) meant to be. Fantastic. And may I add: As expected - from you. Good to be always pointed to, what LEGO is (was) about - and what can (could) be accomplished with it. Tipping hat - and a slight bow, Sir. Thank you very much, Holger! All the best, Thorsten

That is certainly true! But when you want to take advantage of the Technic bricks "hole functionality" (other than connecting them), then bracing them (two Technic beams separated by two plates + bracing part, e.g. diverse Technic 0.5 beams or even full beams) makes the "structure" vertically really stiff. At least this is what I have experienced. Best, Thorsten

So true. I find the entire patent world - at best - bizarre. Recently submitted five further "ideas" [with two actually used by us by now (and no one else in the world is interested in that stuff)] to our industrial partner - who gives us quite good money for what we do. They really like patenting stuff. Years earlier, I told their patent attorney (they have myriads of them, we just always communicate with one very nice person who understands why we are doing what we do and how - which is really great!) that this and that will never ever fly, as it has been reported decades ago in research papers, and it has been "sort of" mentioned in other patents, as far as I read these patents. BTW, I don't do that anymore, reading other patents - it is a pure waste of time. He said to me: Don't worry, we'll take care of it. My "ideas" are usually one page of text max. and two drawings. What usually comes back is a 30++ page document - with history and claims and whatnot. And you can bet on it: It will fly. A couple of years later these are either world-wide patents or localized in about 30 countries. I have no clue how they do it. I was once told that it is about the world, the patent is existing in. OK. Apparently there are many worlds in Patent Universe. Or Multiverse ... I believe what is required to patent stuff that is known since decades: a) Have enough money at hand, that makes someone write-up 30++ pages on a matter that is worth maybe half a page with a footnote that says: Has been done already. b) Have that person removing that footnote. c) Have a company name that is well-known as a world-wide power player in some area. d) Have a person, that defines worlds. e) Have contacts at patent granting agencies that are ... friendly. f) Don't step on the toes of other world-wide power players playing in the same world. That's about it. So TLG patenting that thing: No problem: Archimedes is dead since long, he lived in another world + a) to f) all apply CaDA dancing around that patent - hmmmm - we'll see, I believe. I bet some of the myriads of lawyers at TLG are already bending their heads and thought around this piece and think: Damned. Damned! How can we sue them - there >must< be a way. Well, without giving away the secret about the since long dead original inventor who just did not happen to have a patent lawyer, nor a patent granting agency. Patents. Holy cow. All the best, Thorsten

Is this really a FW issue? I don't have any BW products, so I better don't join in on any of the issues people are having. It is my understanding from this thread (and much has been said!) that the BW controllers do have a power drop out issue when - for example - two outputs are operating two BW motors under some load. If this is correct, then it can even be a HW issue. To me, the BW controllers (version 2 or 3) don't look like thermally optimized super-power devices. As they have the rather delicate BLE HW along with some micro-controller brain, they also have electronics on board that - according to the BW website, the BW3.0 can deliver a sustained current of 4A per PF terminal (6A peak). The same is reported for the 4 BW2.0 PF outputs (max. current is even 6.5 A). And that is only one of several other numbers that have to be taken into consideration - the LiPo capacity, max. current it can deliver, etc. but that is not the point here - these can usually fry every electronic circuity of the BW controller size. The thing is that a stalled 5292 LEGO motor (which is about the same as the BW motor regarding the electrical characteristics - it even has, according to the BW website, 20% higher power than 5292) draws about 3.2 A current (Philo's motor comparison page). As the BW motor is not up/down geared internally (according to the BW website), it even may get earlier to the stalled current limit (model under some heavy electrical load, either caused by weight or grade or whatever). Now it may very well be that the power electronics can handle that current as per data sheets. It also may be that the LiPo can easily handle these currents (I am almost sure it can). However, when there is a rather nervous temperature sensor inside, just to make sure the BW doesn't cause any trouble due to overheating, which may cause trouble with the LiPo pack, which may get it up in flames, then this one will certainly cause power interruption. I am pretty sure that this needs to implemented in EU made electronic devices. If 2 BW motors almost stall and draw 6 - 8 A of total current, there will be also some heat generated internally, which has to be efficiently dissipated. The "sealed" BW ABS enclosures appear to the least efficient way of doing that. So it may also be that the temperature rises internally to the point that power is cut off. It may even be a HW issue in the motor, as these have "Increased current protection" according to the BW website. For what exactly? Maybe this protection is too nervous - or they just want to make sure that the motor does not burn out when stalled/almost stalled for a longer time. The BW website doesn't explicitly say anything wrong; the individual numbers may all be correct. Nowhere "sustained" is defined. Nowhere they say what kind of motors/lights are attached, when operating all 4/6 outputs. However, some of the pictures suggest (1BW controller + 2BW motors in one photograph, for example) it may work. I agree that making everything much clearer on their website would certainly help here. As it stands, something is largely off. I doubt though that this is a SW issue. Which renders things much more difficult for them to resolve. This is all just pure speculation. I simply do not understand why the do not communicate these issues clearly. Just my 2 cents. All the best, Thorsten

I believe the "everybody" bit is the issue. It is not that straight forward (but surely not only doable, but out there) to having a device that precisely tells you where "0" is when powered up. The electronics is always fuzzy at that point; the hardware is somewhere, i.e. where you left it operating it the last time. One solution would be to "calibrate" for the HW position each time upon powering up. Customers need to know that though, as it would take time. Any interference would screw up the calibration over again. We are talking devices for playing, from TLG or other brands. Essentially for kids. That's where the market is. These folks usually don't care about absolute "0" and don't want to wait for the electronics to figure that out. I believe that this is the main reason why this is "not done": Not worth the effort in this context. Because "everybody" is possibly a comparably rather low number. But who knows ... Best Thorsten

I believe for this: http://sp9010.ncry.org/sp8799.htm Best, Thorsten

Would be good to know what exactly wasn't great: The rolling resistance of the wheel set or the clutch (or whatever else) of the printed pieces? That would leave only a tiny - if any - material left on the studded side of the beam, wouldn't it? Another question: When working with these bearings, they are usually rather intolerant when the axle is not aligned more or less exactly at 90° with regard to the face/open part of the bearing - at least this is what we see in the lab: Rolling friction goes up significantly. When there are two bearings sitting in two individual holders connected to one (stiff) axle, then any lateral/height tolerances of the bearings regarding their hole alignment across the wheel set would lead to deviations from 90° - could that lead to a performance issue as well? Best, Thorsten

There is only one word that comes to my mind: Fidelity. Of the finest - artwork. This "shot" tells it all: What you can do with TLG's bricks and plates. It also tells what TLG is missing - and it will always be like that: Finest fidelity. They have to go with - how many sets can we possibly sell at the highest price possible, using the least parts count possible. Too bad for them. They came up with all the pieces - and have to watch, in awe, what can be accomplished with them. You seem to go with: How do I capture, realize this curvature - and when you solved it - show it to us - with utmost clarity. This is true LEGO artwork. And at the same time, it is the most accurate rendition of a wonderful train you chose. Highest Fidelity. Tipping hat and a slight bow. With very best regards, Thorsten

Mine does not have a name - but "Stone'd Hedge" could work. Trains go in circles (or just back and forth) - some are ancient - and well here is to the stones: Best, Thorsten