pacc

Another description to make switchover points.

Very nice :)

Great collection, bricklink will still tell you what it's worth (expensive?) and for serious train builders 9v track still seems superior (even if those around here probably already have gathered a lot) Sets like the Maersk train probably brought in new people into trains and this summer there ate new train sets so there will always be someone new looking forolder sets...

I tried this variant this weekend : http://www.brickpile.com/track-layout-geometry/ The problem with this and the one in this thread (same basic type) is that the longest stretches are those the trains will run in both directions, i.e there is a fairly big chance of collisions. If possible, I would recommend to minimize these and make the two tracks which are only run in one direction into longer, meandering tracks with natural stations... Better for the kids, eh trains. :)

Just adding a second way to modify points : http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=266214

Oh yeah,

very nice if you want a permanent slipcover. I note that Lego could probably not do this since pf connections are done in the middle of a sleeper. Selling the current points are an ongoing stupidity and they could easily add a smaller curve and straight to the switch pack to have a normal, sensible and usable point backwards compatible....

I guess that if you only want to line up two cut points then a clean 45 degree cut on both could do it (given that the studs line up there) I haven't got any to spare but this guy has done all the experimenting http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=142467

i too find the layout interesting, without the side track all points are at one side and reachable by one person.

If trains is a theme, why won't TLG try some step-in models? There must be some way to fit in a non-powered mini train at a lower price point. The constitution did that just fine...

Feeling safer already! The same line of thought explains why cab-over trucks are not preferred in the US. Recycled locomotive frames are probably costly in their own right once the weight has been lugged around all over.

Shame about the big baseplate, using 4 wings instead would have easily made another flying 2-in-1 model possible. the designer did really not put any effort into this one.

I made the square version so I can give you some instructions on my way to do it. Parts used: 4 flextracks Tools: Hacksaw, vice, sharp knife, 6x1 plate. (I do not have a dremel but a slightly oversized saw at leasts gives long straight cuts) This was my first goal, when put together the 6x1 trackparts at the sides will stabilize the connected 'base' flextracks. Make the cuts: 1. For the 'base' flextracks cut of the 4 inner studs using the side of the track as guide for the saw to make a straight cut. 2. Take one of the other tracks and cut off all 4 studs in the same way, an accurate cut will make it fit in the 6 stud hole on the base. 3. Place the 6x2 plate as a guide and make a cut from below the track prepared in 2) to make the two 6x1 side connections shown above. My plate came out unscratched but it is not a guarantee... 4. You can now put the tracks together to make a stable square. You can also mount it on 8x2 and 6x2 plates to see that it fits the stud grid or needs extra shavings. Use the side tracks as a guide to place the sawcuts at the edge of the holes in the base track, then remove the sidetracks and work yourself down to track level and finish off by carving away the scraps and polishing up with a sharp knife. Since it is flextrack some parts are just cut away with no need to make perfect holes. Now we are missing some tracks to fill in the middle, at least the flextrack is smooth for gluing on but when we are finished with the last flextrack there won't be much left.... 5. First I cut off the protruding PF connecting parts to get straight ends. (It is still too long but this was how I did it...) 6. Place the saw against the inner side of the flextrack to cut off each side cleanly, then the part in a vice with the cut upwards like this: 6. To get tracks that can be placed in our crossing we need to remove 1 baseplate from the thickness, from this point of view you need to place the saw to remove all of the rough plastic from the prevous cut. Even if the part will give away while you cut it you will come almost through and just need some shaving with the knife to finish. If uncertain it will be easier to scratch down a slightly too thick piece than to get ut perfect on the first attempt. 7. The inner tracks are still a bit too long and needs to be cut. I cut away the bit having a small inlet for the PF connection. Note that you might need the gap from a straight flextrack since compressing it might make it flex into a curve... This was my end result today, I have yet to add glue or acetone and try it with real trains. I can't comment on how much work that went into the original crossing in this thread or the 30 degree crossing - but I think that it would have cost me many more flextracks, glue and cursing unless this dremel thing is much better than my tools...

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.redfishlab.samsungs4speedremoteforlegopf As noted samsung uses a special Ir Apiece for S4. In kit-kat there is an Api but still very few devices with ir and no promise that it works with programmable of codes with adress and speed.

As predicted a few flex tracks were were needed to complete the track, perhaps it can be optimized with another able of the right track. Running two trains after each other proved to be a lesson in cooperation for the 2 and 6 year old with a few places were you would need to stop and wait before a point (and of course slowing down if you catch up on the other train)

Which is why Ir should be replaced with bluetooth

Power, remote, ir-controller, motor. All parts pretty much limits use to big sets and even adding a led is pretty much fantasy since it just adds up. Ye olde light and sound would have worked for the airfield fireengine though - not reality. Another fantasy is combining lion battery and radio controller and skipping remote altogether in favor of phone/pad app. (not so far out really)

Interesting, and when I ordered 7938 for £55 it was first cancelled at Dhl Germany then sent (after complaints) from a very Italian adress... Now both are available again, just temporary sold out...

A trinket from the bazaar's of Persia.

I think this is the topic with the pf engine: http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=88006

You're right - it would only work with the plain train wheels. Motors or wheels with technic axle will get stuck on anything sticking above the track... I will plan for doing the mod at the top of this thread instead.

Looking at this conversion I wondered if anyone tried to do it 'cheaper' with flex track? My idea was to place a flextrack inside an unmodified straight and let tracks connect to this section from both sides at an elevation of 1 plate. The middle section and connecting tracks must be cut to remove the PF connecting parts. This would make the crossing track raised by one plate which could be a problem, I can see that the 'plow' used for engines cannot pass and have to be replaced with normal buffers, but normal train wheels should work unless you have placed some extra plate underneath. Any thoughts on this?

My phone has IR, but the API from sony dont support the parameters needed for lego pf, Samsung currently has an edge there. For BT 4.0 the phones are blocked by bad google API's which I hope will get fixed if I get a KLP upgrade since it is not a hardware problem there either - but if you run a motor I guess you can use standard bluetooth.

sure, but skipping ir and xbee would half the things for me initially since any phone with bluetooth could do that part. the add-on boards and master slave radio solutions seems great, but for a specific purpose a complete solution seems competitive. (and you can even hope for some spare io to play with once that is up and running) Eagerly waiting for your article though. any solution that gets a following has an edge.

Cool codex. I've been looking at arduino but more and more leaning towards the ir- receiver and it's integrated motor shield, adding perhaps bluetooth to that. Now if you have a solution.... Do you have a BOM and perhaps a reference design you started out from that has some documentation already?