icm

Hi, nice to meet you. I had an uncle whose Air Force career, I'm told, had something to do with satellite tracking, but he wasn't very close to my mom and dad so I really don't know what he did. There's another uncle whose Air Force career, I'm told, has something to do with teaching courses somehow related to satellites on base somewhere in Mississippi, but I don't know him either. I'm a grad student studying astrodynamics and space navigation, but that's not likely to lead to an Air Force career in satcom. Do you mind saying a little bit more about your career path - what you do every day, what kinds of math and software you use regularly, how you came to be a satellite communications operator? It sounds fascinating. PS - the Lego collection looks pretty good too. That Black Seas Barracuda is still the best Lego pirate ship ever made, and I want one too!

All this talk of blue (but different shades of blue!) and white, with transparent canopies, reminds me of Galaxy Squad. In a previous thread I said I didn't like that theme and I never would, but I ended up buying two of the smaller Galaxy Squad sets a few months ago and I liked them a lot. Like x105Black, I prefer trans-clear, trans-black, or trans-light blue canopies, as they're more versatile in settings outside Space or Sci-Fi. I guess I'm really not too particular about the color scheme for future Space themes, just the content. Let's have a straight exploration theme without a lot of guns and bad guys, with nice sturdy builds that don't fall apart when you sneeze like those from Exploriens and Life on Mars, which were the last straight exploration themes without guns and bad guys.

I get nervous around messes, so I always build sets in one sitting as fast as I can. Then I'm stiff by the end and sorry that I didn't take the time to enjoy the clever parts of the build and learn how the mechanisms work. What I need is a dedicated building table on which to safely leave incomplete models between building sessions. I agree that one's skill as a builder is probably not correlated with how long one takes to build a new set for the first time.

This is a really cool rover! I like the use of the X-wing canopy and the slopes you've put around it, the headlights and intake on the front, the greebling on the back, the equipment on the top of the rear half, the big red wheels and red tires, the way the suspension looks - just about everything except the fact that the wheels don't spin freely. If you modify them to spin freely, I just might have to give this build a try in Studio. By the way, the whole thing looks ten times better than the source material.

Hi, Modeltrainman - Is this the result of the thread you posted on Bricklink a couple of months ago, asking for advice in neo Classic Space builds and whether or not to just build your own thing? If so, thanks for posting. If not, thanks for posting anyway. This is a fun idea and I can tell you've worked hard on it, but you haven't posted enough pictures to Ideas to let anyone really get a good look at it. Could you post some pictures showing the ship from different angles, such as the side, top, front, back, and various three-quarter views? Maybe someone else on this forum can give you better feedback based on this single picture.

This is a good-looking build. I like the colors and the overall shape, and I agree that it looks more like a luxury yacht than a research vessel. I think it needs some work before you think about uploading it to Ideas, though. First, it uses obsolete parts, particularly hinges. Those would be replaced by modern hinges in the Ideas design process, but it's probably a good idea to use modern parts now so that it looks like you've thought a bit more about what this would be like as a retail set. Second, it has virtually no interior furnishings. I would expect a production set with that much interior volume to be absolutely packed with furnishings and play features, especially one derived from such an AFOL-centric source as Ideas. Third, I don't see any techniques for structural stability, such as Technic frames or braces. The glazed center section looks especially fragile. Rebuilding this around a sturdy Technic frame would also help you get ideas for what furnishings and play features can fit in the interior, and how best to incorporate them. Take all these comments with a grain of salt, since I certainly haven't built anything this large and complex in Studio, so I don't really know what I'm talking about. Good work, and good luck.

That's a fun little build, thanks for posting. The usual thing to do is to open a free account on Flickr, upload your images there, and post them here simply by copy-pasting the URL into the post window. The forum software will automatically convert the URL into a picture that, if clicked, takes you back to the Flickr source.

The idea that a revival of "classic theme X" would sell well "if done properly" is a typical "no true Scotsman" argument: No Scotsman fails to wear his kilt on Wednesdays. My uncle Angus, born and bred in Edinburgh, never wears his kilt. No true Scotsman fails to wear his kilt on Wednesdays. A Space/Castle/Pirates revival would be very successful if done properly. The last Space/Castle/Pirates revival was pretty short-lived and didn't sell very well. The last Space/Castle/Pirates revival wasn't handled well because of this and this and this....

^^ I thought my post was pretty clear. None of the major competitors (Mega, Cobi, Hasbro) has an original Space theme. They compete with Star Wars by getting licenses of their own. I infer that they consider those more likely to profitably compete against Star Wars than an original Space theme. I imagine that Lego will have another little Space renaissance after Episode 9 and before the Rian Johnson trilogy, like it did after Episode 3 and before the trilogy in progress today.

Exactly. The company has nothing to gain and everything to lose by dropping the license, even if we concede the presence of an enormous pent up demand for original Space sets. If the license allows the line to take a break, I'm not opposed to the idea of a year or two without Star Wars, but it would be a really bad idea for Lego to take a year off from it without such a condition in the license. Despite my familiarity with the AFOL forums, I'm not convinced such Space demands exist in the general audience for Lego and other brick brands. If they did, Mega Construx would have a competing line of original Space sets. Instead, Mega and Hasbro/Kre-O compete with licensed Halo and Star Trek lines, apart from an occasional one off model like Mega's Mars rover. Perhaps the best evidence right now that an in-house Space theme wouldn't sell well against Star Wars is the fact that nobody else is doing it.

Uh-oh. How did the bot get past the registration captcha? Hope this doesn't mean there's a wave of spam on the way.

Yes, the transparent yellow window panel is real. I restrict my digital builds to real part/color combinations and try to use modern parts wherever possible. Unfortunately, this panel hasn't been released in that color since the 1980s. I'd rather use 1x2x2 panels in transparent yellow, but they don't exist.

That's what I thought until I tried to Bricklink the parts for a MOC myself - the individual parts are usually cheap enough (unless they're rare), but you have to buy parts from so many different sellers that the shipping fees add up fast! I still haven't figured out how to make Bricklink affordable. That's another reason why people buy sets as parts packs - it's a whole lot easier than Bricklinking only the parts they want, and is actually pretty comparable in price. Plus, someone has to buy those sets with the idea of using them as parts packs in order for the parts to make it onto Bricklink in the first place.

Hmm ... so the rocket that comes with the surface base uses the Millennium Falcon cockpit part. I wonder what the space shuttle will use? I hope it uses the top and bottom nose pieces introduced in Jungle Exploration Site 60161. When reviewing that set, the Brothers Brick showed that they would work really well for a Space Shuttle. Unfortunately, until now the top part has been virtually impossible to use in a MOC because it's not compatible with any existing aircraft glass elements and 60161 didn't include any glass for it.

1 - 2015, actually. 2 - This. 1 - That was already part of the analogy; no need to extend the analogy. 2, 3 - A very real possibility.

It's often said on this forum at Lego and Playmobil are direct competitors, but I've never quite believed it until now. The upcoming City space "Mars Mission" line is obviously meant to directly compete with the Playmobil line. Thanks for bringing that up! My guess is that the Lego sets will look very similar.... I don't expect that the City rocket will look much like 7315, because the Millennium Falcon cockpit part used since 2004 has a very different shape and attachment method than the Millennium Falcon cockpit part used in 2000 (and in 7315). It's much better suited to a tail-sitting cylindrical rocket than to a belly-landing space plane. Then again, the Resistance Bomber integrated that part with an airplane-style fuselage pretty well.

If the City rocket uses the Falcon cockpit element, I wonder how much it'll resemble this MOC by @Murdoch17:

It means that the rocket uses the same cockpit element as the System-scale Millennium Falcon. Google Translate renders "Falke," i.e., "Falcon" as "hawk" when it translates the Zusammengebaut article about the sets which produced the most revenue in 2018, one of which was the UCS Millennium Falcon. The same word "Falke" is used in the article about the City space sets.

Tonight's build is an updated 924 Space Transporter. It's built around two of the spaceship bases in 70821 Emmett and Benny's Build and Fix Workshop. Those aren't in Studio yet, so I had to approximate them as subassemblies, but that's easy to fix if and when I ever Bricklink the parts for the ship. The cockpit is mostly copied straight from my Galaxy Explorer, just like the cockpit of 924 is mostly copied straight from 928. The forklift is recolored and slightly modified from 60036 Cargo Train. More pictures on Flickr. Comments and criticism welcomed.

Yup, that's the problem, isn't it? So that's a good reason why Star Wars should go, if we understand that "should" varies subjectively between individuals. I totally understand your point of view and agree, from your point of view. "If I Ran the Zoo" I would have a rhinoceros exhibit and "If You Ran the Zoo" you would have a hippopotamus. The zoo doesn't have the resources to keep rhinoceri and hippopotami at the same time, so we could argue ourselves blue in the face about which animal is more deserving of a place at the zoo, considering populations in the wild, poaching, climate change, ease of captive breeding, popularity with the youngsters, and so forth, but there wouldn't be any point in arguing because neither of us runs the zoo. Drat, now I want a zoo instead of Star Wars.

Not to get to deeply into an internet argument, but the frequent repeats of subject material (especially material from the original trilogy) are what I like about Star Wars and are, in my view, exactly why it should continue! I remember when the first LSW waves came out. My brother got the X-wing for his birthday and I got the Naboo Fighter for mine. I was so jealous! My parents wouldn't buy me the X-wing because my brother already had it, so I saved my pennies ... and then, before I had enough money in that slowly-filling childhood piggy bank, it was gone! I was overjoyed when the second-generation X-wing (4502) came out in the first wave of LSW remakes, and I made every effort to get that kit as quickly as I possibly could. Now imagine if 7140 was the only Lego X-wing ever released! Wouldn't kids (and adults) today want an X-wing? Wouldn't AFOLs today complain just as loudly about the lack of repeated material in the Star Wars line if there was none as they do with the abundance of repeated material that there is? I think they would! So, even if the 20th anniversary sets are all remakes, there's been plenty of time between versions for kids (and adults!) to have missed the last version and begin to despair of getting another version. Six years between standalone AT-RT sets, 8 between podracers, five between standalone ESB snowspeeders, 9 between standalone System-scale Slave Ones - that's a long time! I understand the reasons why so many adults are so tired of Lego Star Wars. I really do. Sometimes I get tired of it from an adult perspective, when I've been following Lego ever since the Star Wars line began, so I'm familiar with all the remakes and re-releases of the same tired designs over and over. But then I remember how glad I was to get that X-wing after waiting so long, and I say: yeah, it's about time for a remake of [insert vehicle here], isn't it?

If you look through the Brickset database, especially in Space, you will see MANY sets from the pre-licensed era and early licensed sets that, to my eyes, look like trashy builds that are nothing but minifigure delivery systems - and even a lot of sets that are just minifigure packs, without any scenery or auxiliary build of any kind. This is nothing new. Edit: back then and today a kid who gets a set with a boring, bland build and good minifigures is likely to dismantle the set and use it for parts. (I did). Even many or most boring old adults will do that too. In that case, the trashy sets are the ones that stimulate creativity the most, because they're the ones that prompt us to build our own creations instead of just keeping together the car or airplane or spaceship that we wanted. That's what you call caring more about the minifigures than the thing used for play. Edit: In the adult fan community, it's true that the spectacular display sets prompt more modding and companion builds than the bland thirty dollar sets, but that's because adults have resources to create alternate versions or accompanying creations that look just as good or better than the set, and kids don't.

I'm not sure whether this fits best in Sci-Fi, Creator, or even City, but here's tonight's build. I look at 31066 and say: Spaceship! Moonbase! Rover! If Lego released as separate sets a space shuttle similar to the 31066 A model, a Moonbase similar to the 31066 B model, and a rover similar to the 31066 C model, I would buy one copy of each. Since 31066 is a 3-in-1 set and its base and rover are clearly sub-optimal alt builds of the shuttle, I've only bought the one copy. Another reason to stick with only one copy of 31066 is possible overlap with this summer's City space sets, which have a Moonbase and rover. But what if I combined two copies of 31066? If one copy is only good for a Moonbase of B-model quality, would two copies let me build a Moonbase of A-model quality? After a few hours on Studio, I'd say no - the result is maybe a B+. Here's a picture anyway; again, there are more pictures on Flickr. Has anyone reading this post managed to build a good Moonbase from two or three copies of 31066 without using any parts from other kits?

Thanks for posting this. I see that the back is completely open, and I'll take you at your word that it's easy to spin, but to me it still looks a little tricky to get fingers in there, because there's not much clearance between the disk and the plate above it. Regardless, it's quite a nice build.

@danth I agree, the curved roof of the last version looks better from some angles. It also raises the height of the rear fuselage by one plate, which makes it easier to fit things like loaded trailers into the cargo bay. @Digger of Bricks The previous version had a nice smooth cockpit hatch, but the top hatch over the cargo bay was messy despite my attempts to give it a smooth surface. Moving the front of the cockpit forward two studs let me lengthen the cargo bay, which in turn made the hatch a lot simpler and improved the studded/smooth balance.