LordsofMedieval

So are these only available for shipping in Australia? Even just googling "lego-build-a-minifigure-3-pack," the result I was provided was AU customers only.

I, too, FAR prefer his design to the original. It looks clean and very European.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the QC issues have something to do with the way this set was designed, approved, and then rapidly shifted to being an 'official' project due to Bricklink's acquisition by TLG. One of the nice things about Ideas (although a lot of designers find it reprehensible) is that when Lego approves an idea, they vette the living daylights out of the thing. Are part fits legal? Is this the best use of pieces? "Is this how 'we' (TLG designers) would approach a given problem?" Etc, etc. And the resultant released Ideas set is typically rock-solid in Lego's best traditions (albeit often VERY different from what the designer wanted). That's not how the Bricklink contest went at all. Supposedly, the designs submitted for voting and eventual builds were first examined by... some people... at Bricklink. But when the competition/sale was handed off to Lego, TLG didn't go the extra mile to make sure whatever was being sold was up to their standards - they just treated it as a write-off and completed the contract to the barest legal obligations possible. "Here is your box of parts; here are your online instructions. Have a good day." None of this is excusing Lego. But I was pretty critical of the Bricklink program (before the buyout by Lego) when it launched (I got the forest castle because I figured it would be very difficult to screw that set up. Still haven't built it, though, so maybe it's a wreck, too), and the station just looked... funky... to me. Like, I would prefer a depot on an eventual layout to be more building and less train shed (but that's just me). But I was also struck by how fragile the whole thing appeared just from the teaser photos. So considering the design issues, aesthetic issues, and Lego's introduced culpability... I guess I'm kind of glad I stayed away.

Okie. I will do original blue.

It really kind of depends on what they do with it. I don't much like the original submission. But Lego tends to make major changes to pretty much every Ideas set conceived. So no matter what, it's unlikely to be a close copy. *Edit* And before someone asks why I don't like the original - it mostly has to do with the choice of the locomotive. Unlike a number of other famous steam trains (the 20th Century Limited, Flying Scotsman, Silver Link, etc.), a ton of different locomotives hauled the Orient Express. This was due to the train's nearly 100 year run, and the fact that it switched engines throughout its journey depending on terrain and nationality. In this case, the engine the creator chose to model was the PLM 231 K 8: ... which, IMO, is neither a) a particularly comely locomotive, nor b) the most iconic from the 'roster' of Orient Express engines. But, perhaps most importantly, it is c) an engine that is very difficult to convincingly reproduce in Lego** (this is true for a number of reasons, including the presence of fenders [which Lego never handles well], an extreme amount of small piping, and a highly-unusual and complex cab shape [see for yourself. And, in this case, as far as I can tell, the designer didn't even come close to capturing how bizarre that is. French locomotives, right? They're beautiful, but so unnecessarily contoured.]). I have a feeling that the creator chose the K 8 because it was the engine featured in a classic Bachmann train set: ... but he probably would have been better served by going with something like the SNCF 4-230.G.353 - the locomotive showcased in the Orient Express exposition: ... an engine which, IMO, is both more attractive, more Lego-friendly, and has the advantage of being smaller (which might have reduced the part count and price slightly). I'm not trashing this set entirely. If they do a good job, I'll almost certainly be a buyer. I'm more just saying that there is also a lot of potential for a Hogwarts Express CE-like disaster here, and I await further details. **One potentially good piece of news, though, is that the K 8 had (I believe - it's so damned difficult to find information on French steam locomotives via Google) 79" driving wheels. Which, if Lego actually built the thing to the scale the creator intended, would mean we would finally get suitable official stand-ins for XXL wheels. But... I wouldn't count my chickies before they hatched.

That's very helpful. Thank you. I struggle with colors a lot. Yeah, but there's only so much tapering I can do at this scale. Unfortunately, the nature of sloped parts is that almost none of them are complex double curves. There are a very small number that do this (the relatively-new 76797 being one such example), but none at the scale and with that little 'finesse' that I would need. Ultimately, I had to choose which curve I wanted to emphasize on the nose: those seen from profile, or those seen from the front. I went with side view. That was actually an error on my part when test-fitting wheels. I was really, really tired, and it wasn't until after I had spent the time rendering the images that I noticed that I had gone flangeless-flanged-flangeless. The engine was designed to accommodate flanges on the first and third drivers. There was another error that crept in prior to rendering - that the tender is actually one plate lower than it should be relative to the loco - and, again, that was unintended and was fixed. It just takes a while to do renders, and I didn't feel like having to tax my PC further than was necessary (it's been having a lot of problems recently, and I want to get the most I can out of it before I buy another).

That's actually brilliant. Thanks. The only problem with Spock's is I don't own an XL motor.

Honest question: do you think dark blue or blue are closest? BR blue was different from the blue that Mallard was painted (which is definitely normal blue). Honestly, in terms of shade (but obviously not color), I think purple is closer to BR blue than dark blue is. But then everyone would be like 'why is it purple?'

It definitely does! How do you shave them down while keeping an even profile? Like, do you use an exacto knife + small grain emeryboards and just eyeball it? Thanks for all the help.

There are a handful of pieces missing that need to be force-fit (not egregiously - we're talking like a quarter of a millimeter offset here), as well as 2 custom parts absent (going to use tiny custom triangles to fill in those gaps where the firebox angles down to the frame; will use the glued 2569 antenna technique to get small-diameter handrails). And, obviously, some stickers would be required. The entire pilot assembly is designed to swing, with roughly 11 degrees of play either way. That's not great, but a lot of people have engines that are limited to larger radius curves. I'm most please with the front. The A4s have this weird profile where the nose doesn't just slope inwards as it goes to the rear, but features very delicate up and outwards lateral flare. Obviously, a perfect 1-for-1 isn't achievable in Lego, but I feel like this is pretty close (with minimum gaps). And, finally, neither blue nor dark blue really quite match British Railways Blue, but I think dark blue is the nearer of the two (the real color is slightly more saturated, and probably one shade lighter).

So, obviously the pizza-cutter flanges are pretty necessary on Lego trains due to the combination of relatively low track quality (plastic), relatively low wheel quality (plastic), and the fact that - overall - bogies and wheelsets don't weigh all that much. Because of the way they are typically mounted (technic axles) and sized (wheels - including the custom ones for sale - are generally X.5 tiles tall with 1 tile-deep flanges), this presents a problem - especially (I have noticed) with mounting larger trailing bogie wheels under a steam locomotive cab (since this bogie must swing). Basically, you are often forced to use smaller-than-ideal wheels to accommodate the enormous flanges. Has anyone on here ever attempted to shave down the flanges for these circumstances? I am a) not sure of a half-tile flange depth would be sufficient to hold the wheels to the rail (in theory, even this would be way, WAAAAAY over-sized for a real locomotive... but we're not talking about a real locomotive here), and b) not sure I could actually accomplish this task of milling down the wheels myself. But considering that it comes up nearly EVERY TIME I design a steam locomotive with a trailing truck, I have to imagine that someone else has considered doing just this before. Anyone ever tried it?

I'm waiting on the technology to mature a bit more. I would really like to see home 3D printing achieve something close to injection-mold quality. Some of the professional websites (shapeways, etc.) offer prints that actually attain this level, albeit at insane prices. Another few years and I'm optimistic we'll see it spread to home printing. Then the sky's kind of the limit.

Does the interior slide into the exterior, or are they totally separate builds? The color scheme is very interesting.

So... I mostly build trains. I dabble in other stuff (ships... sometimes castles), but trains are my forte. Lately (and this is in NO WAY being critical of the builders. I admire their work, creativity, and desire to push the boundaries of the hobby. In the very least, it would be massively hypocritical of me to criticize them for something I do myself) I have noticed a trend specifically in trains (but it could be happening elsewhere) to go way, way beyond the use of custom wheels and driving rods (items I think most people would agree these specific items are kind of a necessity, considering how little attention TLG pays to trains overall): people are flexing pieces to the point they are broken; people are actually cutting pieces; people are using glue. I've seen models - models that are revered, have received high praise, and even, in some cases won awards - where a number of parts were 3d printed because shapes simply don't exist in Lego's inventory. Some guy, best I can tell, even 3d printed the entire sides of his tender (not going to name names - the model is really awesome, but it could be construed as calling a person out). I don't personally feel strongly about this subject one way or the other. I do everything conceivable to avoid using third party parts, or defaulting to a 3d printer. But sometimes if you're going to achieve a certain look - especially in smaller scales, where you're attempting to design something to mirror a real life object - that's the only option. But there are clearly people who do feel strongly about it. I have seen comments on these very forums to the effect of "I wasn't even sure that was Lego anymore"... and I don't think they're always intended to be complimentary. There definitely seems to be an underlying 'purist' strain in the AFOL community where people are almost religiously opposed to the inclusion of non-Lego parts. And, while I don't agree with this crowd, I do concede there is a point where creativity starts to spill over into... laziness? Cheating (how can you cheat at something that has no rules)? <Insert participle of your choice here?> I don't know where that line is... but it's out there, and once you go beyond it, no, it can't really be considered Lego anymore because... so much of what you have in that endeavor isn't Lego. Anyway, I'm not trying to start a fight. I was more just working on a model at the moment that was going to require a few... select 'fudged' elements, and was curious to see what other people thought about the issue.

Thank you both. Very, very helpful stuff.

I have another question that is related to this, so I'll just graft it into this thread. Lately, instead of designing the front of locomotives for just the leading bogie to swing (as on prototypes), I've been following @Ts__ example and engineering the entire pilot to swing, as in his fantastic Black Five from a few years back. My question is: ideally, should there be a slight vertical gap left between this 'pilot' section and the frame of the locomotive? Or to put that in more universal terms: is it necessary to leave some space (say, half a plate) between the parts that constitute a bogie, and the parts that constitute a frame, thereby preventing tiles from sliding against the bottom of plates? Do you want to eliminate any perfectly flush fits to account for track undulations (and the fact that we're dealing with a plastic medium)? Or is it okay to have these areas slide against one another? In TS' example, I obviously don't have the engine in front of me, but it looks like there's no gap at all between the part that moves and the rest of the engine... which would seem to imply a gap really isn't needed.

Although I don't use them much, it's very nice to see them walk back the plastic axle thing. We pay too much for this product for them to get cheap on 30 cents worth of steel.

Are they too small? Or accurately sized? Brick Train Depot lists these wheels as 13.5 studs for rim diameter, but the ones in stud.io are, like... a hair above 13 studs even. I know this seems anal, but it matters a lot when you're trying to determine spacing for, say, trailing and leading bogies, etc. Thanks for any help. *Edit* And please don't take this as criticism of whoever designed/implemented them. I am just looking for facts to get models correct - not trying to attack anyone or step on any toes.

I really like that 'slashing' piece. I take it that's a Ninjago part?

Props for the use of Command and Conquer's Act on Instinct. "Move towards more ideas that are going to help, uhhh, bring this thing to an end."

I'm not sure PU is even less expensive right now? PU large motors are going for about 40 bucks. I know you can get a PF large motor for just about the same price on Amazon (because I was looking just yesterday).

Thanks. I really went back and forth on how to accomplish the smoke deflectors. Ultimately, it's one of those things that I think is always going to result in compromise - you can either get the shaping of the deflectors proper, and then they wind up too thick... or you can make them really thin, but the wrong shape (or, I suppose, you could use glue). I went with slender over shape, mostly out of necessity (there's not a lot of space to worth with under smokebox).

Just to simulate the size of custome wheels.

It appears not (not that I've ever let that hold me back. IMO, old canon was a heck of a lot better than Disney canon). And a lot of the shaping from the Starchaser was lifted for this bulkier craft, which is apparently called 'Blue Ace:'