SD100

R104 switches is really not a limit, it's almost a minimum to run trains without derailment. Every Lego train I have goes on the ground if you hit a Lego switch a little too fast. Bricktracks R104 switches have made my layout so pleasant I'd never consider anything else. At a prototypical level I don't know how common double slip switches are in the UK but they're really limited in actual use outside of the major metro areas in the US, and from actual experience, encountering a hand operated double slip switch has cost me enough real life hours with dumb conductors I don't ever want one on my layout, lol. SD

2 motors total, in the head power car. Rear power car has unpowered bogies. Originally I had one motor in each with a power wire running the full length of the train but that caused a lot of derailments so I put both of them on the lead car. SD

My double HE with two motors in only the lead power car can ascend a 2 plate per track section grade no problem. I don't think I'd be able to stop and get going on it again but it's fine in motion. SD

It's generally discouraged on these forums but as he said on the "Train Tech" forum specifically they are more lenient at least as it applies to non-lego parts. SD

If you're using a M, L, or XL, figure on a lot of experimentation, trial and error. Ideally you want to have as few gears as possible as they create a lot of friction, and the whole assembly needs to be tight enough to stop them from slipping. The right angle half gears are nice but sometimes you might have to shove a full bionicle gear in instead to take up slack. SD

It'll work fine. You can also use a PF switch to reverse the polarity if you can get a hold of one. I've got this setup in my double Horizon Express and it hauls. SD

But they do, and it's kind of their business model. They put out a new wedge piece every two years lately and then have to find a way to work it into as many sets as they can... If Brick tracks can do what he does, and Bluebrixx can copy what they do, then LEGO ought to be able to blow all of them out of the water with the scale of their economy. They could reproduce anything, cheaper than anyone else could, they just don't. I'm not even interested in exact duplicates of a lot of old sets, but in this era of tech you can't say it would be too expensive for them to do it. SD

At this point in time how is "They don't have the molds" still an argument? They rip out enough new pieces every year it would be awfully simple for them to just CNC a probably "better" duplicate mold. If they honestly don't have CAD models sitting around somewhere it couldn't be simpler to recreate either. There's my opinion... SD

Could even just seal that in there with a plate, unfortunately it looks like it's $20 for 0.7oz where I can find it. A friend of mine almost has me convinced to cast and then epoxy some lead weights, if that turns out alright it could be a viable option. SD

Yea, my two steam engines have horrific traction and I'd like to improve it. I think I may try cutting some steel up into small bars that will fit in a 1 or two brick cavity. The Lego boat weights only give you 1.85oz for all the space they take up so I just want to beat that. Lead would be easy but my kids play with the trains so I'm not sure how comfortable I am with that. I think Tungsten weights would be the most effective. As expensive as they are, I think I'm going to pick some of those up, they sell 3-4oz sets for derby cars, that would be a big improvement in weight without having to fit a 6x2x2 in there somewhere. SD

I was wondering if anyone has experimented with adding extra weight to locomotives beyond a boat weight or two. I'm debating loading up a couple of my locos with a bunch of fishing or pinewood derby weights or something for some extra pulling power, I'd like to make them as heavy as I can without sacrificing the performance of the motors. I'm all out of boat weights currently or I'd be experimenting myself. SD

I think you probably need an inkjet for fabric but I'm not sure. It might be worth it to try, I don't have a color laserjet. SD

It would be interesting to see that in the real brick, especially moving in a train. I'm partial to the curved bricks, but that might just be the investment I've already put into them... SD

I've bought quite a few sets that I couldn't get my hands on for various reasons when they came out, especially the good City sets I missed from the early 2000s. Unless it's really special though I only buy things up to about 150% of their original value, and if it's not cheaper to just get a few of the parts. My setup is a play setup though with my kids using it daily. I'm with @1974... Lol. SD

That's pretty cool. And man are those some steep grades, it was only a matter of time before something came off the rails! :D SD

@michaelgale I'm that case with the switches, are you going to be selling the switch as a single piece or as a kit with the pieces to do a siding or crossover like @coaster does? SD

Not that LEGO would ever get to this point, but I could see this program enabling a lot more possibility of something like Tube Map Central has been asking for. I'm going on my assumption that smaller sets will do a lot better in this model than $200 & $300+ sets. If you put a $100 locomotive on here it'd probably sell much more than 3000, and quickly. Once the locomotive is out there, put a car or coach or two car set out to match and almost everyone who bought the locomotive is going to be buying multiple copies right away. Of course if it's only things that have filtered through IDEAS this could never happen, but if they see the success of lower dollar value sets on this I think they will, maybe we can have some of our hopes fulfilled. SD

Sounds to me like LEGO, by making the designers build physical models that work, will most likely be expecting the designers to build them out of *mostly* in production or readily obtainable pieces. If most of the parts are in production, a couple extra runs on an existing mold won't hurt LEGO at all, and that's probably where the cost savings will be. The interesting thing here will be seeing how many of the submissions actually get approved for crowdfunding consideration. I'm betting that the larger they are the less likely that is, while one's like the Flight and Fishtank are probably assured success. SD

PU is far from superior, I've got both. The power stepping is a bit more drastic with the PU. I know PF costs are all over the place now but if you can get it cheaper than the crazy expensive PU you'd be better off. Maybe you've already seen, but the general consensus seems to be it's a lot cheaper to build the EN in a different color. SD

I experiment with paper templates until the shape works then I use paper backed fabric sheets that fit in a normal printer. As long as your sails are smaller than the normal 8x11 ish sheet it works great. By the time you figure out what shape/size will look the best you've already done the majority of the work. SD

Sounds like sticking to digital IS the (cheap, space saving) alternative you've been asking for... SD

And then you're pulling out every type of gear and bushing lego has ever made trying to get the clicking to stop, you fix it, and now it clicks in reverse and jams... Finally tighten the drivetrain up enough so there's no issues there, and when you turn the power on the motor blows out the side of the loco... But it looked so good on the computer! I think it's like the rest of the hobby in general though, figure out one model that you really want, and then it may take some time to put the money and then pieces together to build it. It took me about six months to buy the pieces and assemble one 7-wide steamer. I'd place one 20-30 dollar bricklink order every couple weeks. And once an engine is done, then you need cars or coaches to put behind it... SD

The reason the age demographics at a train show are like that is that after 5 no one is interested in something that they can't afford until they're 65... As much as lego trains are a poor substitute compared to actual model trains, I wouldn't want the "museum-ification" that model trains have gone through to happen to Lego. I ditched HO because I didn't want to spend $300 on each engine. Now I can get a an engine and a few cars for that, and if my kids kick it across the room, I can put it back together. On the other hand, with the amount of small and unique pieces that go into each Lego Friends set, I don't think the "It's not worth it for Lego to make more train parts" argument holds up anymore. Even an 11 long (?) technic half width liftarm would be an improvement.

...sitting here hitting refresh on the tracking info over and over again...

Bizarre, but now they use the same lifting axle idea on GE ES44C4s... And it sucks as much now as it probably did then!