howitzer

I think the "stealing ideas" is actually one purpose of these contests, as they offer an opportunity to learn from other people. And even in this contest, nothing prevented multiple people choosing the same source model and we did see some very nice but distinct interpretations of the same sets. So I'd really like to see some form of enforcement of showing the WIP material, perhaps an "entry period" where all entrants must start their topic and show progress, and then closing the contest for new entries but allowing some more time for the rest to perfect their entries. Or would this create more problems than it would solve? I don't know. It would be nice if each of the information, entry and voting topics would all be at the front page for the duration of the contest, as that apparently increases their visibility. This way everyone with the slightest interest would have the opportunity to see them and perhaps participate (in the voting if not in the contest). As I understand it, the GBC contest will be made to happen as soon as people willing to moderate that contest are found, as Jim has stated that he feels not qualified to make up the rules and guidelines.

Now that the contest is over, there's couple of things that I'd like to discuss about: Firstly, there were 47 entries (incl. 1 disqualified one) and 57 voters (incl. I think 2 discounted ones), and as the entrant can't vote their own entry, it means that a significant number of entries were left completely without votes. Currently it appears that it's mostly the contestants who vote and only a few others, so I wonder if there's anything that could be done to encourage more people to participate in voting? Secondly, as the deadline got nearer, I noticed a number of entries which were presented as complete or almost complete models, with no WIP photos or any feedback from other people. This, to me, feels like going against the spirit of having contest, which is (in my opinion) to exchange of ideas and discussion of concepts so that everyone could learn from each other and have fun. Just presenting a finished model (regardless of quality of the build) feels like skipping this important aspect of having a contest in the first place. So I wonder if others feel like I do, and if there's anything that could be done to fix this?

The gripper is indeed a very nice one, I might steal the idea for my own purposes at some point!

I guess I'll have to, at some point. But I'm still unsure what to put there so I guess I'll have to make an effort to think of something... Exactly my thoughts. But I already have so many WIP projects...

Congrats to the winners! What an awesome contest! --- 13. 8824 Hovercraft studless remake by howitzer - 40 Points (14 votes, entry 16) It appears that I scored pretty well too, thanks to everyone who voted my entry!

Congrats to the top ten, all of them deserved their place at the top! I'd be curious to see also the rest of the contestants, how many points did each get.

Oh, do tell more, please?

I don't think TLG will add an official support of third party game controllers, as they would then have to answer all of the inevitable problems that will arise, or at least they'd have to establish a partnership with a certain manufacturer and create together the interface in such a way that it's really easy to set up. I'd sooner see them produce their own gamepad-like controller but even that is unlikely. Another possibility is an extension or upgrade for the train remote, so that it would enable more controls and perhaps a proportional control.

Wow, this is so cool! I have dreamed of doing something similar, but I guess I won't have to, not anymore. You've done everything I had dreamed of and more.

I was referring to the first part of @M_longer's comment, about the new molds.

So you have seen the parts list?

I'd be surprised if there were no new molds in here other than the track piece. I'm expecting at least the new alternating pinhole beam in different lengths and/or in yellow or lbg. Recolours matter too, as they require a different production line from the earlier versions, and I understand the same molds can't be reused for different colours (as the plastic behaves slightly differently), or at least the old colour would have to be discontinued in order to replace it with new one. Beside the linear actuators, I'm expecting other recolours too, perhaps a frame piece or 63869 in yellow, or 14720 in black. Still overpriced set though, no matter what.

I don't think a single controller can handle that, so you'd need two. But considering the functions of 42100, you're probably better off with a smartphone control anyway.

Yes, that's the important thing. Now if only TLG added an official out-of-the-box solution...

Either way, having a physical remote for your PU MOCs is now available quite easily. As I see it, the biggest flaw of the PU ecosystem has now been fixed - though I could see how you might want to have also a remote with proportional control and more controls for complex operations. Thanks @kbalage for the explanation on how to get this to work!

Apparently there is now a physical PU remote that can be used with all of the modern hubs:

I think the one I photographed is actually a Deere, though with a blade which has much more functions than the one in your picture.

Today I spotted a most curious vehicle parked in the street nearby: I counted 9 hydraulic cylinders, 1 for steering and 4*2 for various controls of the blade. Those along with the rubber tracks, would make this great material for a flagship set.

That must be one epic gearbox to justify the price, if it really has only one hub and four motors.

You can still use PU motors with Buwizz with their own app.

Yeah, but TLG doesn't have to follow those expectations. I'm not saying there will be more sets, but leaving numbers vacant is a strange choice and there's always room for surprises.

Assuming their info is correct.

I know, but it's still not a brick. Also note that practically every set even today has those.

On the other hand, we've had 2x4 liftarm for ages and it has been very common since its introduction. 4x6 is also similarly asymmetric, so I see no reason why such part couldn't be introduced. Would be pretty useful even in certain places. Anyway, the blade would be a pretty strange place for a new liftarm, as 6629 would serve there very well, so probably it's just the photo being distorted enough to make it appear like it's 90°.

Yep. I also think they are 90°, as something just a bit more than that would be pretty strange angle to make. Either way, yay for new beams!