Hod Carrier

I'll be honest and say that when I posted my opinion that maybe it was going to fall to us as a community to mark this anniversary I hadn't really had a chance to give much thought to what we might do or how we might achieve it. However, I don't think that getting behind any LEGO Ideas submission is likely to succeed because I'm not convinced that we'd even get the number of votes necessary for an idea to be considered. Likewise I'm not sold on the idea of a custom hobby set because of the level of organisation required, although it does at least move us away from the need to convince LEGO of the merit of producing a set. Although I have had only one other (admittedly terrible) idea, I would like to think we could do something that would be accessible to all who want to take part, whether LUGs, clubs, groups or just individuals. I also think that it would be a shame to stifle to huge creativity and technical ability that we have as a community. That said, it would be nice to do something that is different from the usual output of MODs and MOCs otherwise it would be difficult to justify it as some sort of celebration. Or maybe the desire is not there within the community as a whole to mark the anniversary at all and all I'm doing is talking out of my hat and dragging this thread further and further off-topic. My terrible idea was to have a voluntary "Golden Jubilee" building standard for train MOCs just for 2016 which would allow freedom for imagination but within restrictions governing dimensions, brick choice, building techniques and power options. These "Golden Jubilee" MOCs would then capture the retro look and feel of the original sets while allowing the builder the freedom to select their own subject matter and execute their build as they see fit within the restrictions of the standard. Access to original LEGO train components would not be necessary as modern wheelsets and train motors (9V or PF) would be permitted. We could then show them in a dedicated thread. But then, as I said, it's a terrible idea.

Notwithstanding what the market may or may not support, it strikes me that LEGO are either unaware of this anniversary or have no interest in marking it. I'm not sure what their track record in marking anniversaries is with other themes, but I can't recall any other anniversary releases. Either way, it strikes me that WE care more about this anniversary than LEGO do. Maybe it's up to us as a community to come up with something special for the anniversary rather than waiting for LEGO to do it for us.

Indeed. If the train motors are all orientated the same way around there should be no need to reverse the polarity. It's only required if the second motor is reversed relative to the first.

Fantastic line-up. Such a great sight. Reminds me a little of the Class 47 line-up at Derby just before the class was retired from Virgin CrossCountry services. Click.

Happy Christmas all!! I've no LEGO Christmas themed diorama to share with you and Santa failed to bring me any bricks. However, I brought my Doublenook puzzle to my Mum's house and she declared it "interesting". Hoping you all have a great day.

Excellent stuff!! You've captured the shape very well indeed, although I must confess that I also prefer the ScotRail livery. Have you tried any other livery options, such as Network SouthEast? There are plenty to choose from. Are there genuine engineering reasons for the bufferbeam being so prominent? To my eyes is sticks out too far now. The original position looks better. Also, while I understand that you wanted to add contrast, the yellow panels around the bufferbeam should really go back to black to more accurately recreate this livery. I'm sorry if it seems as though I'm being pedantic. Not sure if you're only using LDD to design your bogies or if you're backing it up by experimenting with real bricks too. Sometimes you can achieve things in brick that LDD says is impossible, as I've been discovering for myself. Happy Christmas!!

A house move has interrupted my building for the past few months, but I hope to be back on track in 2016. However, it hasn't stopped me being busy with LDD dreaming up and designing new stuff. Consequently I've also got some work in progress, including my own version of the Bombardier Traxx loco. Both of these locos will have trains. The Traxx has a slightly truncated FYRA rolling stock set. The NS1700 has a DD-AR set. These are all still rough works in progress and need to be completed before they can be bricked.

1966 was a crucial year for British Railways because it was the year that the network underwent a massive corporate rebranding. In came the rail blue livery, the double-arrow logo, the Transport typeface and the InterCity brand. Modernisation was forging ahead with new stations in a bold modernist style at places like Harlow Town and Milton Keynes together with electrification. It would be nice to see this tied-in with the 50th anniversary of LEGO trains with something appropriately British and reflecting the era. A combination of a Class 86 electric loco in BR blue with some blue and grey Mark 2 coaches and a companion Class 310 four car EMU would be ideal. But then LEGO is all about selling units and these would only have a niche appeal, even within the UK. An InterCity 125 might have a better chance if a set was offered, but that came about ten years later so wouldn't be such a good tie-in. Whatever LEGO chooses to offer it will be either something broadly generic or internationally iconic. We've already had steam, American outline freight diesels and European high-speed trains. I fear that LEGO has already exhausted all the possibilities available to them without becoming derivative. Would a Japanese Shinkansen be a good bet? What about a Siemens Velaro, versions of which can be seen operating across Europe and in Asia too? A Metro train might be nice to see, such as the new London Underground S Stock or an American "L Train", but these would suffer from being regionally specific. Thoughts...?

<Pedant> Strictly speaking, none of those are Inglenooks. An Inglenook follows a set of rules regarding space, track layout and so on. </Pedant> However, there's some good ideas in there for compact layouts. I especially like the freight house and compact yard. I'm sure that is eminently buildable in LEGO and would be a great basis for a diorama with a small shunting engine.

Excellent!! Glad to see a working LEGO 'Nook. I look forward to seeing some video of it in operation.

Holy-moly!!! Have you been trapped in your basement with nothing but a laptop? That's one prodigious outpouring of excellence!! I can only assume that you have no need for either paid employment or sleep.

At the risk of introducing topic drift, I do find the discussion surrounding acceptable levels of spending on LEGO very interesting. Like most guys here, I have friends and colleagues with expensive hobbies and pastimes who will happily lavish many hundreds or even thousands of pounds funding them. One chap I work with has a TVR of some description which is emptying his bank account without even turning a wheel, as is the way with TVRs. However, when they talk about spending a three figure sum on some new pedals for their bicycle because they are a few grams lighter we all sit politely, listen and nod at their wisdom. Mention that you've spent 20 quid on a bag of LEGO bricks and you get hoots of derision because "it's a toy". As a consequence, I'm still very much "in the closet" about being an AFOL. Even my girlfriend doesn't know. I don't know why I feel so embarrassed about my hobby when it's no less creative than any other form of railway modelling or engineering and no less financially arduous than golf or motorcycling. But to bring the discussion back on-topic, I don't have a backlog of unbuilt sets but rather a backlog of unbuilt LDD projects. I guess my compulsion is not so tied-in with buying stuff but rather with designing stuff.

Springs for self-centring are not necessary unless you plan to have a large degree of articulation and you're intending to propel (push) the wagon down a siding road ahead of the loco. The neighbouring car will centre the axle through the coupler on a straight in the same way that it will force a steering effect in bends. The trailing axle will take care of itself even if there is no other car coupled to that end thanks to the castoring effect you will naturally get due to the configuration of pivots, just as the wheels on a supermarket shopping cart do.

That's rather excellent. Some great design and even true-to-life operating principles, like chaining the sleigh down to the flat car. It's going to look great making it's way through your festive scene. Maybe I've just bought into the propaganda over the years, but shouldn't your reindeer have a different colour nose...?

I did wonder about the running because it does look a tad top-heavy. However, it's an excellent model and very recognisable. About lengthening the wheelbase. This could be achieved but you would need to force a steering effect onto each axle to prevent binding. You can do this in the same way as model railroad companies do with their long wheelbase cars by adding a pivot slightly inboard of each axle rather than rigidly mounting the axle directly to the car. This gives you something that looks like half a bogie to which to then attach the coupler via a long pivoted bar. As the preceding car enters a bend this forces a steering affect onto the axle through the coupler. Obviously you'd want to limit the amount of steering angle somehow otherwise stability can be compromised, but provided the train keeps moving forward and the couplers remain in tension the car should faithfully follow the car in front. More here.

As a newer AFOL I don't have a stock of parts to call on, so can't go rummaging through parts bins for inspiration. I have to design everything in LDD (supplemented by a bit of experimentation with actual LEGO bricks) and then order precisely what I need for my MOCs. However, I do always have a good look through the weirder parts menus for inspiration whenever I'm stuck with a front end or some other detail. That said, I've yet to find any use for a Bionicle part in a train MOC, whether actual or virtual, but I don't rule it out just yet. The parts you mention as being potentially suitable for constructing an Electroliner do appear to have some merit but, as you say, the real problem is how you work them into a car body. Sometimes the most promising part is actually the least promising part. Sometimes you have to be brave enough to give an idea up and embrace the least worst compromise in pursuit of some kind of verisimilitude. Play lots and try everything that has promise, but bear in mind that if we wanted to create a perfect recreation of a real prototype we wouldn't be modelling in LEGO. At least, that's what I keep trying to remind myself when a design is somehow failing to come together. Ha ha!!

I feel your pain, brother. Compound curves are something that seems to be beyond LEGO, especially at the smaller scales. (Try doing it in 4-wide. Grrr!!!) Even simple curves can be a trial, as there never seems to be a part that curves in quite the right way and smaller scales are not as forgiving to layering. As you have discovered, stepping the curved plates on the front out to one plate rather than a half would probably make it look less like a nice sloping wedge and more like a staircase. I'm not sure that we might be able to come up with anything better, and almost certainly nothing that would satisfy your eye. I did go through the same mental process after happening on some photos of the Pershing Zephyr during one of my online perambulations but elected to leave such a challenging prototype to someone with greater talent and expertise.

Chuffing nora!!!! Well done for an excellent build. If you can ever find a way to increase the angle on the front end it would improve the looks even further, but that doesn't detract from an otherwise faithful reproduction.

I did consider the possibility briefly, but for a shunting puzzle to work convincingly you need a good way of coupling and uncoupling individual cars. The current LEGO system of magnets does not easily permit this, so some other form of coupling would be required. Incidentally, a few words regarding the Doublenook has been added to the shunting puzzles website.

Thanks for the confirmation. So for full utilisation 3 1/3 bricks height should be allowed, or 2 2/3 bricks if only using ports C and D. That's still significantly less tall than the PF IR receiver.

Sorry for resurrecting this topic with such a prosaic question, but can someone confirm the size of the SBrick itself. From the photos it would appear to have a 4x4 stud footprint and a height of 2 bricks (6 plates).

I don't know what I was thinking asking for e-mail addresses when it's possible to post the file directly online. So for all who want it, here it is. Doublenook Final.lxf

Thanks ever so much for that excellent guide. Since PM-ing you I did spend several hours reading and absorbing some of the gathered wisdom on the internet. The outcome of my reading was that I'd decided on a 7.4 volt two cell battery rather than taking the risk of going for the larger 11.1 volt three cell battery and over-stressing the PF components. The capacity will largely be dependent on the size, but the space is very restricted so it's likely to be in the 250mAh range. But you have gone on to answer my next question before I'd even asked it, about how to connect it all together. Thank you so much for the excellent advice.

Sanding is not normally recommended for nickel silver coated bronze due to the risk of damage to the coating. If the build-up of dirt is particularly bad there might be no other option but to use some sort of abrasive cleaner, but for maintenance it would be preferable to give track a good wipe down with IPA. No, not the delicious traditional hopped ale popular here in the UK, but Isopropyl Alcohol.

Just a quick question. Is it possible to use something more compact than the various official LEGO battery boxes to provide power to a PF model? I was thinking something along the lines of a 9V PP3 battery. I appreciate that there's probably going to be a trade-off in terms of power output and battery life, but I simply don't have the space to fit anything bigger.