Hod Carrier

Never mind that. Just let the train brake off and give it the beans. Whoosh!!!! @XG BC That’s a great prototype. I’m looking forward to seeing your progress. When you mentioned jet engines in the other thread I thought I knew what you were going to choose, but I guessed wrong.

Well done, budd. I look forward to seeing your shiny new train.

Thanks for the input, but it’s OK. I only said it really as a joke. If the contest calls for something new then that’s fine with me.

Er, what...? Didn't I already do this two years ago? Well, half of it anyway. This year's theme might take a bit of thinking about but I'm sure I'll find something to enter.

Thanks for the reply. I think that makes good sense. Best of luck with the contest.

Just a quick question. There appears to be a small inconsistency in some of the info. Electric multiple units (EMUs) are included with electric locos but there is no mention of other multiple unit types. Would it be correct to infer that a diesel multiple unit (DMU) would be included in the diesel loco category or should all MUs be caught by the consist/full train category? I appreciate that there is some variation in railway parlance depending on where in the world you are which may cause some confusion, and that the term "multiple unit" has different connotations in the US and elsewhere than it does in the UK and Europe. For the avoidance of doubt and to be entirely clear, what I'm referring to are railcars or self-propelled passenger trains without a separate locomotive formed of one or more vehicles together in a permanent or semi-permanent formation. I've been working on a couple of things for a while now but there's no way either will be ready before the deadline, so I may have to enter something older.

For the Hub. OK. Well given that it works OK with the Technic Hub can we assume that the app is fine and that the issue lies somewhere in the City Hub's firmware? This is presumably something that TLG could address via a software release if they wanted to. Alternatively, I would be content for TLG to simply admit that some functionality is not supported by certain items and make that information freely available. The lack of documentation is ridiculous and if it wasn't for @kbalage's website I would never have even dared to venture into the world of PUp coding.

Forgive my ignorance, but are you describing the "stock" set-up or a modification? This is not an area of strength for me.

Was having a little thumb through the site earlier when a thought occurred to me. Given the level of building we see here, would not at least some of the MOCs be suitable for the LEGO Technic, Mindstorms, Model Team and Scale Modeling - Advanced LEGO Construction area? And if not, why not? Is there anything to preclude duplicate threads for the same topic in different areas?

Yup, but I just wanted an update given that my initial contact with TLG was 12 months ago.

I did update and (briefly) try it. It didn't suggest that it was updating the firmware on the Hub when I connected to it, so I presume it's just alterations to the app.

Totally agree. I'm starting to think that, for some applications at least, Powered Up is a wash-out. My suspicion is that it is the 2 I/O Hub that's at the root of the issue rather than the motor or the app. Can anyone confirm whether it's possible to successfully use the Tacho motor functions using the 4 I/O Hub?

Max, Sorry you feel that way, and I wish you well for the future. But I do feel you're being a bit harsh and unrealistic about the forum. Folk come and go all the time, and for whatever reasons. Some go back into a "dark age" or develop other interests that take them elsewhere, while others may have personal reasons for curtailing their involvement in the hobby. To balance that new members will come fresh to the forum as their interests bring them into our orbit and they, like you, I and everyone else here, are always welcome to stay for as long as they wish. There is also the fact that a railway MOC, whether it's a loco, rolling stock, building or other structure, is often a very large and complex project. I've been stuck working on something for several months and, as a consequence, haven't had anything to share for quite some time, and I'm sure others will be in the same boat. When others post up their projects it's frequently based on a prototype that I'm unfamiliar with, and so I feel unqualified to pass feedback. However, that doesn't mean that I don't visit the forum regularly to check on the latest topics. When you understand that LEGO trains is a niche within a niche you see that there are not vast numbers of people following this hobby, and I feel the forum reflects that. I'm sorry that you feel the forum is in decline but, taking the long view, really it's just going through one of it's quieter periods. If you feel that it is right for you to move on then I wish you well in your endeavours, but if the issue is that you feel the forum is getting quieter because people are leaving then I'm not sure how you leaving helps to address that concern. Wouldn't it be better to stay and help drive the forum forward? Best Wishes.

I finally got a reply out of LEGO in response to the issue. After a year of waiting the answer I got was short and succinct. Basically the Large Technic Motor (PN:88013) is only compatible with the Control+ app and not the Powered Up app, or so they say. So I went and downloaded the Control+ app to see what's what, but it appears that it only comes pre-loaded with control profiles for existing large Technic sets and doesn't have any facility for creating your own custom profiles. Brilliant!! When morning comes around I shall be sending LEGO a long and distressing missive asking them just what the heck they were thinking releasing a line of products branded as Powered Up that are not fully compatible with the app; an app that, I shall be reminding them, includes programming blocks that take advantage of the tacho motor functions. I will want to drill down more into this issue and see what the truth of it is, because frankly it smells fishier than a Grimsby trawler. More later...

I finally got a reply out of LEGO in response to the issue. After a year of waiting the answer I got was short and succinct. Basically the Large Technic Motor (PN:88013) is only compatible with the Control+ app and not the Powered Up app, or so they say. So I went and downloaded the Control+ app to see what's what, but it appears that it only comes pre-loaded with control profiles for existing large Technic sets and doesn't have any facility for creating your own custom profiles. Brilliant!! When morning comes around I shall be sending LEGO a long and distressing missive asking them just what the heck they were thinking releasing a line of products branded as Powered Up that are not fully compatible with the app; an app that, I shall be reminding them, includes programming blocks that take advantage of the tacho motor functions. I will want to drill down more into this issue and see what the truth of it is, because frankly it smells fishier than a Grimsby trawler. More later...

It sounds like a similar problem to one I found about a year ago. There was some in depth discussion and investigation over on this thread which you might find helpful and illustrative. The problem seems to be that there’s a bug in the City Hub which LEGO have yet to deal with. I did raise the issue with them and never heard anything back.

OK, it’s available again now. It’s still the original file with the error because I can’t replace it without deleting the entire page and setting up a new one, so you’ll need to remember to rotate the loading tower as described to make sure it works. Enjoy!!

Thanks. I'll post an update here once I know that the amendments have been approved. I'm unsure if I can upload the corrected file as an amendment without having to delete the original page and set up a whole new one, so I have given the correction in the text description instead as it's quite simple. Basically all that's needed is to rotate the main body of the loading tower through 180 degrees relative to the slide mechanism and that will correct the fault. Yes of course, but there are other advantages to having it on the Stud.io Gallery such as being able to quickly compile a wanted list as well as being able to reach other users who might not otherwise be aware of it.

Sorry Phil. That was my mistake. I made an amendment to the text and it got pulled for approval again even though the file itself is still the same (incorrect) one. Hopefully BL will make it available for download again soon. It's a bit of a pain but it seems to be a feature of the Stud.io Gallery that any and all amendments have to be approved.

You're really most welcome. I'm pleased to hear that you're enjoying the build and am looking forward to seeing your version of it. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. You are correct, I have made a small mistake there. As you say, you can easily correct the operation of the loading tower by turning the section under the slider by 180 degrees. I have updated the file and will get it uploaded later today. That's absolutely fine. As long as all the wagons can be easily identified and still match with the tokens it doesn't matter what colours you choose. I expected there to be more flex in the board which would require additional strengthening, but I have found mine to be surprisingly robust once fully built. Because I had envisaged the game would be played on a tabletop I hadn't expected any problems except perhaps when carrying the board, but I am always happy for folk to make alterations and changes to my designs according to their own thoughts. Can I just ask how you found the description on the download page? It's hard to try and convey complex information without confusing the reader. Did you find it all clear and easy to understand? If anyone else has any feedback they'd like to leave I shall be very happy to receive it.

Well done everyone. Congratulations to all the winners and to everyone else who entered. Thanks go to the chaps over at BMR for coming up with a really good theme which got us all excited and inspired. I'm looking forward to finding out what they come up with for next year.

Great news!! The file has finally completed the approval process and is ready to be downloaded. Just head on over to the Bricklink Gallery to get your copy and for more information. Any problems give me a shout.

That's extremely generous of you. Thank you. I'm not anticipating any problems with Bricklink but it's good to know that there's a back-up just in case. Thanks chaps. Yes, I'm very pleased indeed with how much better it is to operate compared to the original version, and the new features of functional points/switches and wagon couplings work just as I'd hoped. I really couldn't have allowed the original version out the door, especially if it was intended for a child to use. It frustrated me because of how difficult the pieces were to move around the board and so it's spent the intervening years sat on a shelf not getting used. I've really got to thank @garmsey for giving me the motivation to come up with this much improved version that is now a pleasure to operate. LOL!! I knew you'd like that. It's the closest thing we Brits have to a road switcher, so I had to include it. However, the Stud.io file includes three possible loco designs to try and satisfy different areas of the world, although you only need one loco for the puzzle. As well as the Class 20 there are generic European and American locos, but you could just as easily design your own as long as you don't change the size (the size of the loco and wagons and the length of the sidings are all determined by the puzzle itself, so changing any of them would affect whether the puzzle could even be completed). There's actually not a lot to see with that. You push the slide (the bit with the red tile) in and pull it out again and it drops a single 1x1 round tile to represent a load.

Thanks again to everyone for your patience. The Doublenook rebuild is done!! I am just waiting for the excellent folk at Bricklink to approve it, but once it has been given the all-clear you will be able to download the Stud.io file from here. In the meantime, as a little teaser, here is a short video of it in action.

I haven't attempted to replicate what you've done, but I have noticed that sometimes Stud.io allows a bit of flexibility in the connections between bricks that can result in a misalignment. It might be worth going back and checking your rail joints under a higher zoom magnification to make sure that the alignments are correct.