nerdsforprez

No problem. Fair questions. I will know more once the chassis is actually done.

Lol..... yes. Good eye here. Looks like it should work. Funny.... I think 10212 is a template for how a lot of these newer ships can work. I applied the mechanism, or at least much of the parts list from the 10212 to a WIP for a UCS-type Technic version of the U-Wing. Here the mechanism is being applied, and much of the parts, from 10212 to this build, AND.... I have been thinking, if TLG wanted to do a UCS version of Krennic's Imperial shuttle I am sure it would be very close to the same parts list of the 10212...... just in black. Would be an easy set for TLG to produce. 10212 is appearing more and more versatile as the Star Wars Series line continues on......

No rudeness implied...... it is a fair question. When weight is mentioned, I think what you mean is torque. The gear will be handling no weight, but torque - yes - which are different things. The torque needed to deploy the wings really wont have be be that much.... because the mechanism is geared down so much. In fact, an easy way to apply more torque would be to exchange the two 24 tooth gears (center of picture) with one 8 tooth gear followed by a 40 tooth gear. That way also the manual turning for the wings to deploy can be relatively fast while the desired deploying wings will be slow, and the torque on the manually turning end will be much less then later down the mechanism on the end actually deploying the wings. Both gears in question will be strong enough for this application. Any discussion of breaking the gears likely has to do with using XL motors which can break them, yet at the same time if adequately braced, should be just fine. I am more concerned about the gears slipping than breaking. As mentioned, the chassis is not complete...... when it is, I will definitely be bracing the opposite end of the small bevel gear's axle that passes through it.

So I played with things more this weekend. I don't anticipate having much time now that the holidays are over... and therefore I won't make a separate WIP thread until I make some real headway on this project. Also, perhaps better to eventially post in the Technic subforum but because I may not make further additions for a while just wanted to give an update on what I have done. As a reminder, I have the same idea as the OP but just kinda a Technic version. Like I Technic version of a UCS U-wing. I want to use mostly technic elements.... but not exclusively, and would like to focus on the functional elements that Technic offer. The idea for the mechanism for sweeping the wings back is done. It works without problem now, but I have not tried it bearing the weight of both wings. Before I do that I need to now focus on building an interior chassis to the build just to be able to test the mechanism against all the weight the wings will contribute to the model. I also re-did the thrusters. I did not like all the greebling on the white part of the thrusters and therefore made them sleek and the lower, LBG portion of the thrusters with all the greebling. They are large, but I am pleased with them. May have to scale up my overall model. First I will make sure that the sweeping mechanism works though at the size the wings currently are..... no sense making them larger if they cannot turn as they are now.......

I second the comments above. Great submission. Thanks for sharing. I will also add that I appreciate the photos you submitted. Seems like more and more people are understanding, from the get-go, the value of good pics. Ones outdoors are especially nice. I wish I had understood this the first time I submitted something long time ago......

As a neuropsychologist....I can vouch for the information provided by your wife (not that she needs vouching for ) -- If fact..... some have hypothesized that the information provided by your wife is the biological structure of "maturity" -- Not sure I agree with it (perhaps much too abstract a concept to reduce the simple association of age and frontal lobe development) but the theory is out there! Frustration is indeed always a danger, therefore, care needs to be taken. HOwever, in children that excel, more executive demands may provide the answer. Prior to my current assignment, I worked in the area of pediatric neuropsychology an a fairly affluent community. My job was just as much involved in helping advanced children excel as it was helping those with ADHD, Asperger's etc. If the OP's son, at age six, is completing the BWE I can well venture a guess that he is more gifted than most children his age. Perhaps not just increasing visuo-spatial demands is the answer (especially because in that area, the BWE is one of the more advanced sets TLG offers in Technic) but also engaging a whole different area of the brain altogether. Then again.... perhaps not . This is actually an area of high interest for me. Musings about what Lego does in terms of brain function and development is fun..... speculative, but fun. Don't even get me started and the muscle coordination, strength, fine motor skills that it requires. Not to mention the understanding of physical laws needed, tactile comprehension and feedback....... etc... I would love a call from TLG with the funds to do some research in this area. Gimme a PET scanner (the one that produces those pretty colorful images) and tons of participants willing to play with Lego while being scanned and doing many different things (artistic building, technic building, plain organizing, stepping on Lego ) and I would be in heaven. I would venture that although there would likely be a lot of commonalities in areas involved I also think there would be many differences.

The above are some great comments......and here are just my two cents. Answers to these questions are usually focused on visuo-spatial reasoning.... and rightly so. That is primarily to target area in the brain when one builds with Lego. However, Lego is so versatile there are so many other areas to target, I think even TLG misses some opportunities in terms of their marketing. When completing a set from instructions, visuo-spatial reasoning is typically at play, and pretty much the only thing at play. The decision process of how to accumulate pieces, coloring, instructions, etc is all done for you. When doing a MOC, however, or even a MOC from someone else, you get to exercise a totally different part of the brain. Called executive functioning. If not familiar with what that is or means, look it up. Essentially, it allows you to be more like a CEO than a regular employee like in a business. Instead of just carrying out the demands of others, you get to make demands yourself. You get to choose the MOC, the coloring, etc. Instructions might be harder, but with assistance, perhaps he can figure things out. When he is stuck, talk him through his thoughts. This again gets a whole new area of the brain activated. As mentioned, Lego building is typically a non-verbal activity (visuo-spatial reasoning) - but, in working with kids, if you can get them to talk about what they are thinking then you also work their verbal centers (which is, again, a whole new are of the brain). Lastly, when doing a MOC you can teach skills that are totally outside of the realm of Lego, yet totally inside the realm of MOCing. What I mean by this is that not only do you get to plan the build itself, but you get to plan how that build will come to fruition (like I mentioned, when building a set that is already done for you..... just go the store, online, wherever to pick the set up. When MOCing you have to figure out all the logistics). Shopping for pieces, colors, etc. might sound like a bore, and for some, myself included.....it is because we do Lego building for a hobby. We don't necessarily want to engage in building for "real-life" experiences - we get enough of that at work. We build to perhaps lose the constraints of real life. But for children, not only do you want fun at play, but if you are in the business of building skills as well then you want at least some of the building to emulate real-life experiences. I remember years ago when my son really really wanted to brickink the UCS MF together as a father-son project. We financially could do that .... so, great I said lets get to work. As we did, however, we set a budget, and I told my son that we would not be exceeding that budget. For anyone that knows the UCS MF well, you understand that one can save a lot of money by supplementing the original parts with other parts that look very much like them. Also, as we got working my son was googling things himself and he found several sets with interiors, and he was adamant that he wanted an interior. But as I educated him on all the pieces required to do an interior, and their cost it became apparent to him that he would not be able to have original parts. Although I didn't financially really have to place restrictions on him I thought it would be good for him because that is just like in real life. Even if you are asked to design something massive, like a building, bridge, whatever, there will always be budget constraints. weighing how much you want a thing, and comparing that with your resources is a life-skill, translating to an infinite number of scenarios in life. When my son came to a decision.... he decided to go with using non-original parts. As we worked we spent much time on the internet shopping for parts. Inevitably, he came across more pictures and came up with more ideas of what he wanted to do. He wanted lights and landing gear. Was adamant, once again that he wanted these things on his ship. Some education was needed, and I told him this was not possible with the budget we had. He had a choice, he could either lose the demands of the PF lights and landing gear or some up with another solution altogether. He stewed about it for about a week and then came to me with a question. "Dad, can you combine two sets into one for one big MF, maybe not as big as the UCS but still bigger that other sets, and then add everything I want?" -- And that is exactly what we did. He needed help doing it all - but it was his idea. We bought two 7965s (actually, it was more like three), blew up the dimensions, added pneumatic landing gear and lights (although no PF). Not a jaw-dropping result, but it looked good when it was done and both of us had fun doing it. Had it hanging in my office at one time. Details can be found here: http://www.moc-pages.com/moc.php/369901 It is nothing special and was when I, myself was just getting back into MOCing, so I was unpracticed in taking good photos, video, etc. The end result took much more time that I wanted it to and much more involvement on my end. My little guy was around 10 when we did it so much older than your son, but I think the experience can apply to younger kids as well. Just perhaps choose smaller projects but apply the same principles. Even BL now has a little online MOC store with some decent MOC for kids...... I am sure there is something there he might like. It may take more of your time but if you can make it happen I think it will get your son involved in so many other aspects other than the right-brained visuo-spatial reasoning of just building Lego itself......

Very helpful. Thanks.

Great build, wonderful that there is now instructions.... and I was happy to see it also posted on mocpages. Sorry if this has been addressed already, but there is obviously a lot of the body work parts from the Porsche. If one would like to build this car, how close to the Porsche is the parts list? I get is not a "B" model, but if one already has the Porsche, and they want to do this build in orange, do they share 50, 60, 70% etc... of the same parts? Even if you are not sure exactly, do you have a good estimate Paul?

I think of Vader's iconic labored breathing, and then think of how bad it is as he is sweating away on this great build of yours. Makes me laugh. Great post.... thanks for sharing.....

Thank you..... Once the holidays are over and I have more time to build and this project actually gains a little traction then I will probably make a WIP and begin posting updates.

Holy crap. Seriously one of the best views I have seen in a while. No joke, I am actually taking a break from building to read the series, and am about 3/4 the way through the first book. Then I stumble on this this morning. Great job!

Great thread. After seeing the movie this weekend..... I also delved straight into Lego to look into re-creating this ship. My ideal would be to create a very large, 2-3,000 piece Technic version of the set, with functional aspects like manually operated wings and cargo bay doors, etc. I don't think the aesthetics would match anything like system bricks.... but Technic is my preferred genre of bricks to use. Below you will find the most basic of starts. The wings are slightly different shape than the original ship. This was done on purpose. I love the ship, don't get me wrong, but I am curious what a wide-body version of this ship would be like. Additionally, for a large, 2-3000 piece set, when the wings sweep into their backwards position they will need a little more beef so as to not bend. The idea for the thrusters is also at the very beginning stages.... I think I have too much greebles as the pic is now.... but I like the overall look of the overall white area just a little smoother with less greebles. Last point is that... because I have family over for the holidays I have been relegated to my dining room table...aka kicked out of my Lego room. That means I don't have access to my collection. So.... I have taken one set to create with. The UCS Imperial Shuttle. So far, what you see below is more or less only pieces from the UCS Imperial Shuttle set. If I continue with this build, I will not be trying to create a B model for the set (although that would be cool) but I do anticipate that the end result of my Technic UCS U-Wing will be mostly built out of the UCS Imperial Shuttle set. If others were to re-create it... a goal would be that most of the pieces would already be available in this set. Below: Idea for large thrusters. Gray area not done.... but imagine covered with greebles. Wing idea. Not complete.... as mentioned, wider than original for purposes already explained.

There have been a lot of functional santa sleigh posts lately.... but they continue to entertain. This one is no different. Glad to see everyone having so much fun with different interpretations of nostalgia.....

And now front paged. Congratulations! I also love these builds, quirky, mechanical.....AND festive

I think it might be possible, but u would have to change the scale of it. A 13000 is such a large beast. Also, don't know if the tracks in 42042 would be the correct size given the scale.

Lol.......even at micro size it's still like 800 pieces.....

Yes, in fact, if I could change on thing, that would have been it. I also did not like how the axles holding the connectors to the distant gears (sprockets) were bent. If things would have affects the drive of the model, then I would have, but thankfully, the drive was unaffected. Thanks everyone else for the kind comments.....in fact this was a lot more fun of a build than I would have thought.....

Hey everyone--- A look through my other submissions will reveal that I love cranes. Incredible machines… functional, but, at least in my opinion, they can be aesthetic also. Perhaps not in beauty, but in almost a complex, physical, Rube-Goldberg type of way. Last year I completed a large crane, a scaled copy of the Liebherr 1750. This time around I wanted to something bigger, yet smaller at the same time. Encouraged by our "tiny mocs" thread, I had fun looking at other micro builds others have done. Although the crane below is not all that small in an absolute-value kind of way, given that I sought to replicate an immense crane, at least in scale it is. In fact, although I did not plan this, when it was all said and done the model below was very close to scale of official Lego Micro Figures. Not perfect, but close. Introducing my Micro version of the Liebherr 13000. My build is a little different.. Did not replicate all the winches and the engine is seated in a different spot than the real crane. But other than that it is more or less a replica of the crane. Functions and features include: - Modular - Four fully-functioning winches Engine compartment with diesel engine - Manual forward and backward drive - Manual rotating superstructure - Movable cab Not a ton of functions – but at least some for a micro model. Video and pics below: More pics and information at: http://www.moc-pages.com/moc.php/435307 Higher quality photos here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/92955936@N04/albums

Don't worry about the looks.......they aren't everyone's cup of tea. besides...perhaps all viewers need to consider that your model has minds storm in it, which is very umcommon. add to the clunkiness. I love this model and have committed to study more closely it's mechanics this weekend. don't have the time while at work but the vector chart is just to tempting . ...

I think we all would also benefit from a video. especially would love to see your brushless motor in this build. ..

Very well built truck. love all the details. a video would also help out a lot. two XL motors at this scale is quite powerful.....would love to see it pulling something

Indeed.....good news to hear of the job, Jerry. I didn't think it would take long. And GREAT news to hear you r back building

With their outriggers..... yes. But that is the whole point of the post. I think that is what you are referring to. If not..... I would assume not equally matched cranes. Perhaps like a huge a Liebherr 11200 versus a small crawler..... but certainly not an equally matched (lifting capacity) crawler crane versus mobile crane...... Also, the of the sets in question, 42042 is much wider than 42009 and 8043 is much wider than 42053

Others have mostly given you your answers. I will also add. look at the bases of the tracked versus wheeled machines your are speaking of. The tracked vehicles, along with the inherent benefits of the tracks (no compression like tires) are much wider at their base.......