Plumber

test post and again for gif www.simonwillett.co.uk/exhauster mk4.gif

Yes, it might have helped TLG transition us 'stick in the muds' to have released a few smaller sets with this dumb hub and the remote (and adaptor cables like they did for 9V/PF) to show that the future was not exclusively tied to smartphones! Perhaps you can clear something up for me? Lego have two 'medium linear' motors shown in the PU range. Simple and regular. I am guessing the Simple has no rotary encoder and cannot be used as a servo? The regular having the encoder? So what is the 'Linear' bit all about? Are they linear actuators with the motor built in? They don't look like it and I would have expected more fuss if they were! Not sure I agree that studless is harder to build with, different certainly, enables much more ridgid frames/chassis etc and many possibilities that could never be realised in studded bricks. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a stud purist, I buy,build and enjoy studless generation sets/parts as much as the next person :-) Solved with new parts, that opens the can of worms, who decides what is a new part? TLG? Efferman and his 3D printer? Lego Technic Embodiment with his scapel,drill and glue? A recent change in my circumstances has left me with much more time on my hands and I find myself at the lathe making ABS swarf! :-) Here's to happy Christmas building wherever you draw the line!! Simon

I have to say that I fall into the camp of disappointed Technic fan wrt PU introduction. It could, indeed should, have been so much more and need not have made left existing PF parts behind. Batteries not included is now expanded to 'Smartphone not included'. I think that the defacto necessity to own a smartphone in order to motorise lego models is a serious block to enjoyment, it represents a serious expenditure that will be unaffordable or unsuitable for many. I just bought my young nephew (age 4) his first lego trainset, he doesn't have a smartphone, neither does his mother, the inevitable result is that he is unlikely to be gifted any more lego trains as PU becomes the only available means of motorisation so I would strongly disagree that this is aimed predominately at kids/sets sales, if it is then I think it will backfire on TLG. TLG are just so far behind the curve here, how many years has S-Brick been around? Third parties have managed to provide better executed control systems of greater capability for years, not only this they are backwards compatible because as I understand them they use the existing PF motors. Programability? If this was what I wanted from my Lego experience then I would own Mindstorms or some of the other similar Lego systems, I build lego technic for the same thrill of working mechanical mechanisms that I got when I opened my, just released, 850 forklift on my eight birthday, 4.5v train was relegated to my little brother! Encoders and Tilt sensors could have been added as discrete elements, that would have added far more flexibility to the system. I believe such things are/were available in the robotics themes, I would suggest the lack of routine penetration into the Technic MOC scene is indication enough that such functionallity is not important to the majority. As I've already given away my age it will be no surprise that I will always be a studded builder at heart and that I think TLG produce too many complex multi functional parts that dumb down the ingenuity of builders, who remembers the programmable crane and coloured trace drawing machine from the Technic ideas booklet 8888 in the late seventies or early eighties, programmed with 'rack' cards? now my mind is spinning back in time - working suspension on the truck tractor unit (the rot was set though as it used a lego differential and new fangled Z16 gears if I remember correctly) :-) I have recently borrowed a 42099 pickup set to see what PU was all about, while the system worked very nicely it does nothing that PF with train controllers doesn't do in this context. It was no more responsive, to the controls and why would I be trying to drive it out of sight? As some here say I can (and will) continue to exercise my perogative to continue using PF however that is not without finacial penalty - price of a PF servo is in excess of £40 on lego markets now, Even TLG list is almost a quarter of that, At those prices even AFOL's are going to think twice about purchasing and will be driven to the 'compatible' market. In my dayjob (Central heating) we have seen many controls featuring integration with phones and tablets. Most have problems with interoperability across the huge range of devices and operating system versions, builds and updates, not show stopping, niggly stuff that stops auto installs and buggers up interface element positions and the like. I don't think any of the manufacturers (we are talking about multinationals the like of Honeywell here, many times the hitting power of TLG) reckoned on the sheer scale of the task in supporting and fixing these incredibly difficult to diagnose/ deal issues. Imagine on the first day of business next year when fifty percent of the purchasers of PU sets this Christmas are on the phone with an issue! TLG have every right to consolidate their offering across themes (and are doing so, after all Technic and Mindstorms etc must be a tiny part of the business) but it is my opinion that PU is a poorly thought through system architecture, the lack of backwards compatibility (has) will alienate many AFOL's that don't need or want its complexity and is far to late to market for those that have found it elsewhere many years ago. I would not be surprised to see it withdrawn or massively reworked on the next development cycle My opinion FWIW Simon