KMO

Thanks for the info - it does look the same as the 42009 in pictures, which would make sense. This TechnicBRICKs review agrees: LEGO's replacement part website shows the 42009 string as currently out of stock, but that's better than for the 41999, where it didn't exist. Maybe the fact that it wasn't in the system prompted the "we can't help for old parts from old sets" auto-response - I've referenced the 42009 part in my request this time... I think this is actually the first time I've ever had a totally missing part - bit unfortunate for it to happen in a limited-edition set. (Although I have had a few faulty ones).

My 41999 is missing it's winch rope. My first attempt to get a replacement was fobbed off with a "we don't always hold stock for old sets, try Bricklink" standard response. Before I proceed with another grumble to Lego and check out Bricklink, was the 41999 rope actually a standard part that I could get an accurate substitute for from another set? Or was it unique to this set?

I think "price" is acceptable here. It's just a slightly archaic usage, meaning "reward". ("To have a price on one's head").

Just thought I'd add this link, as it's hard to find with Google. Instructions for the 4559 steam locomotive alternate model.

I was having a go at making a Monorail layout, but struggling a bit to get odd connections (point->point, small curve->small curve) to line up. Had a poke around in the XML files, and it appears the point geometry's wrong. The XML files are written on the assumption that the 45-degree connections lie at 45-degree point on a 28-stud circle (and hence have non-whole-stud positions) but they don't. The 3 connections on the points should be at (0,0), (32,0) and (20,8) studs. (This makes monorail layout a lot easier than normal track layout). I've twiddled the XML files to correct this, and they all connect properly now. Unfortunately, the GIFs don't line up at all well, so it doesn't look pretty - they weren't brilliant before, and now they're even worse. They need their drawings corrected, and I don't fancy attempting that. I think it would help if all the track GIFs were a whole number of studs in size (multiple of 8 pixels). I have a feeling part of the problem is that the program's maths get some rounding errors when dealing with odd-sized GIFs, and the resulting ".5625" stuff in the XML. Example for 2889.7.xml (with current GIF):

I just got a dispatch notification for the 8848 rechargeable battery box I ordered in January - so they're back in stock in the UK shop at long last.

Can you even get the 8878? Ordered mine in January - backordered until August.

The question of which is better is looking increasingly moot. I ordered an 8878 from the UK shop in January for my Emerald Night. It was backordered to March when I placed the order, a few weeks ago that slipped to May, and this morning I got an e-mail saying it was now due mid-August. So that's out of production/stock for over six months. Wondering if I'm ever going to get it...

Currently building this, and just came across one big "yuck" - it came with the wrong type of 1x6 arch brick. Some sort of ugly new design (92950) that doesn't extend the arch all the way to the bottom of the brick like the traditional one (3455) we've had since the 70s. They're clearly not what the set was designed with - the box photos, instructions, and part list all show the original arch design, and the model needs that part to hold the 2nd-floor windows in place. With this new arch, their top studs are unsupported and they can just be pushed into the model. You can see that in the pictures above. What's the story with this new arch? Is it replacing the old design? What's it for - I can't see any obvious advantage to the new style. Is there some other new part it's designed to fit against? Hmm, having written that, and having a closer look, maybe the new arch is actually better for this purpose. Perhaps if the window was raised up a plate from its sunken position, it would lock, and possibly better than the original design, and it would line up with the adjacent windows. (Update - nah, just tried it in LDD - the new arch is raised enough to not lock properly, but doesn't add enough clearance for an extra plate.)