howitzer

I'm still going to watch your reviews on the sets that interest me, because I value your opinion and I've found that I often agree with you on the sets' pros and cons. I imagine that making a proper, high quality review like yours is also far more work than could be justified simply by getting a free set... The photos are taken by amateurs who don't have proper skill to take a good photo. Cameras on phones are nice enough today, but you still have to know how to use it... And maybe sometimes they really are doing it in an illegal manner, going into where they shouldn't and taking photos in a hurry.

That's nice of them. The DBG 3L axle-pin is of course a part that is in production and widely used, same cannot be said for example about black 2L axle-pins...

How about raising the doors (hinges) 1 stud and adding some plates to fill the gap? The cockpit roof would then also need some reshaping, but it's kinda flat as it is, some curvature there would be nice too.

Yes, it's true that lack of a differential is generally not a problem but still it feels somehow wrong to see such a build without them...

What about differentials?

Funny that they use so many black 2L axles here, and in a scant few other Technic sets with heavy focus on aesthetics, while sets from other themes get plenty of them even with no aesthetic reason. I kinda hope that that this is a sign of TLG listening to all the complaints about brightly coloured pins etc. in wrong places, but I'm not holding my breath...

Yes, the edge of the wings is far too thick, it would definitely benefit from some other kind of design to make it thinner. One thing I also don't like that much is the gap between the cargo bay doors and the satellite arm sticking out of it. I know it's kind of accurate to the original, but there it somehow felt less obvious due to the generally more skeletal design of the shuttle. Now it feels like a mix of modern smooth design which minimizes gaps in bodywork, and the old skeletal style which tended to show only outline of the bodywork. Beyond these, awesome work. The nose is especially nice, and I love how it replicates the original functionality (even the fiber optics, even if it's built differently) and if I'm not wrong, it's also very similar in size? That's no small feat, considering the complexity of the original.

You're right of course, though I've heard also that one reason for the needlessly large packaging for small items (like USB sticks) is that they'd be far too easy for shoplifters to steal otherwise, large blister packs and similar make it hard to hide in a pocket. I think another reason for the recent reduction of needlessly large packaging is that with online shopping there's no need to stand out in a shelf as it's hard to get a sense of size from a text description on a website. Then of course I buy mostly large sets, which mean that the weight and size of contents force packaging that's optimized - no need to make it stand out more when the product itself takes up a lot of space. The extra air is probably more of a problem for small and mid-size sets.

I remember being kid and opening Lego sets in the early 90's, where the box had a plastic tray inset with parts sorted in plastic bags. Those boxes surely contained a lot of air, today sets tend to be much more tightly packed. There's variation of course, but at least the larger sets I buy (mostly Technic) seem to be usually about 70-80% full. I'm pretty sure that increasing transportation and storage costs will make the needless air go away (mostly anyway), and it's also fitting for TLG's claims about environmental concerns that boxes aren't needlessly large.

I thought I had already, but apparently hadn't. Anyway, it's there now, thanks for the heads up.

And here's some cleaner photos. The entry box on the left comes with an agitator to make the balls move to the conveyor belt, which raises them to the top. From there they fall down on the waving belt, which in itself moves only up and down while the motion pushes balls forward towards the exit. The exit shows how the sprockets go around the ends, attached to the custom chain made of 1x3 liftarms. Here's the area where most action happens. The motor is connected directly to the axle of the wheels driving the belts, which connect by chain to the ball lifting conveyor belt. There's also a pair of sprung wheels pushing against the belts, to ensure that the driving wheels won't slip too easily. If the mechanism gets jammed however, it will slip, protecting the motor. A photo from the other side, showing the chain drive. Sorry about the glare from my lights. A closer photo of the drive motor. A closer photo of the chains and sprockets which move the belt. The ball lift conveyor belt connects to the entry box agitator by 8T gears. This was the best thing I could come up with as I didn't have time to think of anything more efficient. This works too, even if it lacks elegance. --- All in all, this has been a learning project for me, as I don't really have much experience in this kind of things. One thing I learned was the appreciation of the skill and effort that must be put into making a complex GBC work - even with my relatively simple machine there was a lot of trial and error, building, taking apart and rebuilding. There could've been a lot of more polishing and fine-tuning but I simply didn't have time for that, as I barely was able to make it work within the time constraint of the contest. I hope this inspires someone to build and experiment with their own GBC's!

Now I have also a video.

Knowing the full inventory before buying the instructions would be mandatory for me, otherwise I wouldn't know if I have the parts to build it. It's also a good way to build trust with prospective buyers.

Wave motion GBC More photos at: http://www.jousimo.fi/lego/TC23/ Sorry for the video quality, for some reason Youtube botched the framerate and it's jerky even though original plays smoothly.

So, between working, moving and renovating my new home I have had too little time to build. However, since I got my building area finished a few weeks ago, I have taken all the time I could spare to finish my entry for the contest, and while I'm entirely not satisfied with it, I managed to finish it and it performs the thing I intended it to perform. It's highly unpolished and spills a ball occasionally, but doesn't jam and moves the balls fast enough to qualify for the rules. I just finished the final touches less than half an hour ago, and took some photos, but I didn't manage to get a video yet, so I hope I can add one later (when I'm able to shoot the video in daylight). Anyway, here's some photos of the process. Explanations will follow later. Bigger photos at http://www.jousimo.fi/lego/TC23/

No way it would prevent all the mistakes, but the bigger and clearer the marking/instructions callout is, the less chance there's for mistakes. Still, there's always the bottom of the barrel, where no amount of directions is enough to prevent errors... This would be good, but also slightly limit the usefulness of the part. I also thought of a one-way valve that could be reversed in direction by flipping a switch, that way the user could at least correct it easily, and perhaps such a thing could be functionally useful in some builds. Would make it much larger though.

The XL motor isn't very fast by itself, and you could always use spur gears to reduce the speed, I think equal reduction with them would have less friction than a worm gear. Worm gear is great when you need a lot of reduction in small space or a mechanism which can't be backdriven, but neither appears to be a problem in your build. You can use a simple crankshaft linkage to convert rotary motion into reciprocating motion, and then it's just adding beams connected to axles which drive the pushers under your "water".

Probably, but that's really big part, hard to hide inside a model. A proper one-way valve could be much smaller, probably as small as the hose connector. I don't see TLG creating such a part though.

That's true, but on the other hand, I've had the 42128 on the shelf for many months with the boom up. Load matters a lot.

Since I got into Lego after my years of darkness, I think 2016 has been the best year overall, with many cool models and great new parts. 2017 on the other hand seems to be the overall low point of recent history. 2018 again had some neat models but not much in the way of building techniques or new interesting parts. 2019 introduced PU, which many people don't like, but I still think the Liebherr and few others are pretty cool models from that year. 2020 had the Osprey fiasco, otherwise it would've been a much better year. In 2021 the biggest star is of course 42128, but the Cat dozer is nice and properly Technic set too, with Zetros also breaking some new ground and Buggy offering nice new tyres along with lower entry-cost to PU, in total a fine lineup. 2022 has some good sets but I'd still rank it below 2021. While 2016 is clearly the best and 2017 the worst, other recent years are much harder to rank. Every year had something really good and something bad.

Great job indeed! I especially love that all three builds have a different yet internally consistent colour scheme, it immediately makes it feel more real.

Yep, 8868 B-model is one of the best B-models ever. I should probably dismantle my 8868 A and build it...

There were couple of really good sets (namely, Airbus and ATV) but beyond those, not much going for this year's lineup. Hopefully 2023 will be better. And yeah, 42128 is great.

I admire so much of your work, and even more so for the fact that you provide instructions for free and are always helpful with problems builders may encounter when building your creations. If good karma exists, you have certainly earned a lot of it! Indeed. The most important thing is that you're happy with your own creations and with your hobby. These design thieves are of course annoying, but I doubt they make that much of money from their illicit business and unless you're attempting to make a living from building Lego, then there's no real damage done even your designs are stolen.

I didn't see the photo, but I believe it's a clothes drying rack, on top of which you lay a bedsheet, and then the bricks on top of that. The sheet absorbs the moisture from the underside so it's not trapped there, which is usually the problem when drying bricks after washing.