Hod Carrier

<-- Deperdussin Monocoque Coupe Schneider (Monaco 1913) Having won in 1913, France chose to run the 1914 Schneider Trophy contest in Monaco over exactly the same course as before. With the previous year’s success in mind, the entry list was swelled with entries from France, Germany, Switzerland, Britain and the USA. However, in spite of the increasingly international nature of the entry list, the aircraft entered were still predominantly of French origin. One notable exception to this was the Sopwith Tabloid Schneider. Originally flown in 1913, the Sopwith Tabloid was a small two-seat biplane powered by an 80hp Gnome 9-cylinder rotary engine. Seeing the potential of racing for publicity as well as technical development, T. O. M. Sopwith sought permission to remove one airframe from the production line to modify into a single seat seaplane racer. This aircraft would be powered by a 100hp Gnome “Monosoupape” 9-cylinder rotary engine that Sopwith himself brought back from Paris on the train as part of his personal luggage. The development of this aircraft did not go smoothly. Initially it was equipped with a large central float but, while being tested on the River Hamble, the nose of the float dug in when the throttle was opened and the aircraft capsized and sank. It wasn’t until the following morning that the aircraft could be recovered from the river and returned to the factory for repair. With time running short the solution was to simply saw the central float in half lengthways to create a pair of floats. Testing of the new arrangements were limited due to the interference of the Thames Conservancy Board, but the new floats mounted further forward under the aircraft were found to be satisfactory. When the British team arrived at Monaco they were initially dismissed by their rivals. The small biplane design was not considered as advanced as the French monoplanes, and the measly 100hp produced by the 9-cylinder engine, already showing signs of rust following its dip in the Hamble, was around half that produced by the 18-cylinder dual-row engines they used. However, they were soon to be disabused of their opinions. With Sopwith test pilot Howard Pixton at the controls, the Tabloid Schneider took off fourth behind the Nieuports of Gabriel Espanet and Pierre Levasseur, and Swiss pilot Ernest Burri in an FBA flying boat. Pixton carried out the two mandated alightings and take-offs on the first lap without reducing speed and got round in half the time of his nearest competitor, going on to build up a commanding lead. The pursuing Nieuports were pushed hard to try to keep up, but both were forced to drop out when their engines overheated resulting in seized pistons. Having seen the speed of the Sopwith, Charles Weymann and Roland Garros delayed their starts, opting to wait and see if Pixton would fail to complete the distance. In the end, Weymann and Garros waited in vain. Although the Sopwith’s engine developed a misfire on one cylinder and the speed dropped, lap times improved again and it could not prevent the little biplane from completing the course. Pixton went on to fly an additional two laps to secure a new world seaplane speed record over 300km. Although the French had been soundly beaten there was magnanimity in victory, as Sopwith reasoned that the win would not have been possible without the use of the French engine. The Sopwith Tabloid Schneider became the pattern for the Sopwith Schneider scout (fighter) of the First World War. This seaplane was used by the Royal Navy Air Service (RNAS) in defence of Britain against Zeppelin raids. The Sopwith company went on to produce some of the Royal Flying Corps (RFC) best known fighters, such as the Pup and Camel. After the First World War it was taken over and formed the basis of the Hawker Aircraft company, going on to produce the Hurricane, Typhoon, Tempest, Hunter and Harrier. Image from Wikimedia. Savoia S.12bis (Venice 1920) -->

I had a little dabble with trains and EV3. Maybe this will be of some help...?

<-- Introduction The first ever Schneider Trophy meeting was held in 1913 at Monaco. Given France’s pre-eminent position in the field of aviation at this point in history, it is perhaps not surprising that the majority of entries for the first ever Schneider Trophy were French. The only exception to this was Charles Weymann who, although educated in France and flying a French Nieuport aircraft, was representing the USA. As might be expected, this first meeting was to be a test of endurance rather than out-and-out speed. First away was Maurice Prévost in a Deperdussin Monocoque design. Although slower than Weymann and Gabriel Espanet in their Nieuports, Prévost was able to build a lead thanks to his superior technique in taking the turns on the course. One by one, the challenge of the Nieuports faded as each in turn dropped out with engine trouble. Having completed the race distance, Prévost alighted and taxi-ed across the finish line. This was a mistake as the rules called for competitors to fly over the finish line, and so he was disqualified. He initially refused advice to go back up and comply with the rule, but when he saw that his final competitor, Roland Garros at the controls of a Morane-Saulnier, had managed to overcome some initial engine troubles and enter the race, he saw sense. He quickly took off and flew over the finish line to be declared the winner. The Deperdussin Monocoque Coupe Schneider flown by Prévost was an enlarged version of the landplane design that had proven so adept at winning races in the Gordon Bennett Trophy series as well as netting a number of performance records. The Monocoque name referred to the method of construction, whereby the fuselage was constructed in two halves using wood laminations glued together over formers and then joined, giving the fuselage it’s strength. Designed by Louis Bécherau, it was powered by a 160hp 14-cylinder dual-row Gnome rotary engine and equipped with pontoon-style floats. In spite of the many successes that came the way of Bécherau’s designs under the Deperdussin banner, the company was not to survive the discovery that Armand Deperdussin had built his success on money that was not his own. Arrested and convicted of fraud in 1913, Deperdussin was to take his own life eleven years later. The company was taken over by Louis Blériot the name was changed from Société pour les Appariels Deperdussin (SPAD) to Société Anonyme pour l’Aviation et ses Dérivés (SPAD), under which banner Bécherau designed the famous Spad fighters of the First World War. Image from Wikimedia. Sopwith Tabloid Schneider (Monaco 1914) -->

As a small plane-obsessed boy I was obviously aware of the Schneider Trophy. I knew that Britain won the Trophy three times in a row in order to retain it permanently, and that the aircraft that finally achieved this success went on to inspire the design of the Spitfire. It was only relatively recently, when I was designing a model of the Supermarine Baby seaplane fighter, that I learned that it formed the basis of the Supermarine Sea Lion, the company’s first foray into the Schneider Trophy, something that I had previously been unaware of. Clearly there was a lot that I did not know about this important race series, and so I set out to find out more. This lead on to a desire to build a model of each of the winning aircraft designs, and in doing so to tell the story of the Schneider Trophy. The idea for a Trophy for seaplanes came from Jacques Schneider, heir to a French arms manufacturer. He was a keen hydroplane racer and had become an avid aviation enthusiast after meeting Wilbur Wright in 1908. He had seen how air racing had helped to develop land-based aviation and was keen to generate the same benefits for marine aviation. The idea was that competition would help to improve technology and in turn to foster a global transport revolution based on marine aviation. Any aero club affiliated to the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale (FAI) could challenge the trophy-holding club. Organised along national lines, each team would comprise a maximum of three entries and the club that fielded the winning entry would host the following contest. Although the Schneider Trophy is best known today as a race, it was a little more complicated than that. Entries were tested not only for airworthiness, but also for seaworthiness. While the winning entry would be the one that completed the race distance (not less than 150 nautical miles over open sea) in the fastest time, it could not do so unless it had already passed a number of trials to prove its design. Navigability (the ability of the aircraft to make progress on the water) and seaworthiness (how well the aircraft could cope with sea conditions) were as important as speed through the air. The rules were tweaked from time to time, but the aims remained the same even if the long-terms goals were somewhat lost. What resulted from this contest was perhaps the greatest outpouring of technical development in aviation during peacetime. Aircraft and engine design, materials science and pilot skills were all hugely advanced during the course of the Schneider Trophy, creating aircraft that could fly at speeds far in excess of the military designs of the day. Air speed records would tumble and pilots taking part in the contest would be the fastest human beings of their age. Here, then, is the story of the Schneider Trophy and the winning designs. I will be adding further models over the coming days to illustrate the extraordinary story of the Trophy Series, so keep checking back for updates. (Note: I will be presenting the models as a mixture of photos and decorated renders. The reason for doing this is that it is easier to show the details of each build using renders than it is by photographing the real models.) Deperdussin Monocoque Coupe Schneider (Monaco 1913) -->

I have a question. I have a series of fourteen MOCs that tell the story of an historic event and am unsure about how/where to publish them. A single thread for all these MOCs would be enormous, potentially containing thousands of words and a huge number of images, but a single thread for each MOC feels like I would be spamming the site. What is the best way to approach this? Should I release them one at at time over a period of time, say weekly, or just drop them all together in one hit? Also, I'm a little unclear where they should go. Is "Special Themes" really the catch-all place for everything that doesn't fit any other heading or, because they are based on historic events, should I head for "Historic Themes" (even though it's 20th Century history and not quite in keeping with the other content there)? Maybe, as the models are @1:32 scale, I should post in the "Town" forum...? Any guidance would be most appreciated.

Thank you, everyone. Your feedback is most generous. The shaping was a bit tricky to achieve and meant that the body has been built-up in sections which will probably make it structurally weak. I've tried my best to address any weak points but it will need to be test built to check how well it would hold up. I'll be keeping my eyes open for any innovations in the power and control arena to see if anything comes along that might fit this model.

All sorted now. I wasn't aware that BBCode had been disabled as I haven't posted for a while.

Here's a design I've been tinkering with for a while in the hope it might become something, but I think it's probably reached the end of the road. It's the 1973 Tube Stock (1973TS) used by London Underground on the Piccadilly Line. If you've ever landed at Heathrow Airport and caught the Tube into town you will have travelled on one of these trains. They are now coming towards the end of their lives as the new 2024TS that will replace them is currently under test, so catch them while you can. I've designed two versions of the train; the original "as built" condition and the later refurbished train in the corporate red/white/blue colours of London Underground. There is a motor and drive to potentially make the model move, but the small size and construction methods used means that fitting some sort of power and control has proved to be a much harder nut to crack. As a consequence, I probably won't end up building it.

Referencing the render of the interior of the power car that you posted in July 2023, I would have to disagree and say that you have more than enough space. The train motor turned on it's side is only 10 plates high and I estimate that you have you have a space 13 plates high over the rear bogie, assuming that you've not made big changes to the design in the last couple of years. You could easily clear the interior of the support pillars and have the roof supported by the sides instead, or even integrate the motor and battery into the structure of the car. I just think that it's worth looking at again and seeing what you can do because a high speed train needs to be fast, and Technic motors will not give you that speed.

Couldn't it go over the rear bogie?

This would be my recommended solution for power.

Aww, shucks. You guys say the nicest things.

Thanks for the lovely feedback, fellas. I'm glad that there's been something in here for everyone. We do tend to build an idealised version of reality, don't we.

I'm conscious that I haven't posted anything for a while, primarily because I haven't really been building much of any particular quality that's been worth sharing. However, I thought I would just do a quick round-up of some rail-related stuff that I've been happy to enter into the Brick Train Awards. As is my way, I have chosen to model some slightly unusual prototypes. First up is a New York Subway garbage train. These are generally formed up with two or three R58 garbage flat wagons between motor cars of some sort. The city did buy some specific refuse motors but these lack air-conditioning and are understandably unpopular with crews and are frequently swapped for passenger cars instead. I have reflected this by having a refuse motor at one end and a pair of R62 passenger cars at the other. I did also try to create a subway scene to give the train context and illustrate the garbage collection process, but it made finding an angle for rendering as the picture below shows. I have also submitted a couple of entries for the Build Challenge, which requires the finished model to fit inside a 16 stud cube. The first is a country scene based around a Feldbahn and an old AEG electric loco. The second Build Challenge entry is of a training and assessment simulator. This build is divided down the middle to allow for two scenes to be included; the simulator itself with projector screen and the office area used by the assessor. I have re-used the design for the Stadler Flirt UK train cab rather than designing something from scratch which has allowed me to test build the design and check for any clearance issues. I hope you like my efforts. More photos are available on Flickr.

Awesome!!

I've never heard of the film so can't comment on the likeness to the original, but I can appreciate the time and effort put into the research and design to come up with a faithful replica of a real train. Congratulations, Glenn. All that hard work has really paid off.

Welcome to the list and congratulations on your lovely LE5100. If you wanted to make smaller round windows and have space for all five, you could maybe use Technic bricks. Admittedly with this technique you can't really represent the glass in the windows, but I don't think that anyone would notice too much.

That's some great progress you've made there. I also like the subtle way that you've shaped the cars to get the shape of the real thing and so that they are not too boxy. I'm relieved that the rodales are working well. I'm not sure how you couple the engine to the rest of the train. If you're using magnets you will need to be careful about how many hinge points there are, as too many hinge points will cause the first axle to be pushed out of alignment relative to the track and cause friction and, potentially, a derailment if the engine is ever at the rear and pushing the train.

That is a lot of fun. And the loco drives purely by adhesion from the standard train wheels...? Other builders have clipped their trains onto the tracks in the same manner as the official roller coaster train or driven the train using horizontal wheels gripping the side of the track, but I'm impressed that your loco manages the whole circuit, including gradients, without this.

These are just so cute. I really like the way you've taken LEGO City train proportions and made something very recognisable with it. While we all love to see huge scale attempts at real trains, the reality is that very few people have enough space to run such enormous trains. Going back to the roots of LEGO trains and creating something of more modest proportions brings realism and play opportunities to the home hobbyist, which I find quite inspiring. Thanks for sharing.

I have to agree with the folks on Reddit that it does have a real GT3-vibe about it, but then it was a very handsome loco and more really should have been made of it. I like your freelance loco very much and approve of the colour choice. Powering it with a train motor and large wheels will give you a very fast train (perhaps dangerously so), so I might go for a Technic motor and gearing. A 3-wide void inside the loco body will be enough for M or L motors, so you have options.

The truth is that I don't know. I've never experienced this myself and I can see nothing wrong with the images you've posted.

I can't imagine that it is a consequence of your design. The 1x3 brick you highlighted is held at the bottom by three layers of plates, two of which cover the entire length of the brick. OK, so I would normally try and support everything from underneath rather than from the top, but that's really just so that the action of gravity pushes the parts together rather than pulling them apart, but the clutch power of LEGO parts should be sufficient that it shouldn't really make such a big difference. It would be a major redesign, but if it worries you you could have the bogie attachments linked to a sturdy chassis using Technic L-shape liftarms and then build the bodies on top of those. This is what I did with the railcar, but that was forced onto me because of the way that the body sections were attached which meant that there would have been no other supporting structure.

Another vertical crack...? Where on the brick does it occur? From what I can see from the outside I can see no reason why the crack would have appeared, but it's hard to see if there's any structural weakness inside. Does the completed car flex? Does the car look straight when you look along the side? If the answer is "no" I would say that it's not a structural problem but that you've just been unlucky with the parts you've had.

But clearly the law makes a distinction. It doesn't matter if you are running a business on the side "as a hobby", you are still running a business and are, therefore, subject to all the rules, regulations and legislation that applies to business dealings. What you choose to do with the proceeds of that business really has no bearing on it. While I understand @UltraViolet and @dtomsen's view on the matter, I feel that it is based on a point of semantics rather than of law. As customers of HA Bricks, we are the "individual hobbyists", but HA Bricks is not. HA Bricks is a business that just happens to be run by a hobbyist.