Blakbird

Sure, gliders and RATO count. The energy to take off comes from somewhere else, but once airborne the model supports and controls itself. LEGO will still be a problem with lift/weight ratio though. The model will be VERY heavy compared to wing area, so the glide slope will be approximately -1. ;-) Does falling straight down count as flying? If so a couple of my models have flown when I knocked them off the table!

I ordered from many different sellers. Probably 10+. Yes, I said $400 would be the "average" price of parts if you didn't have to pay shipping. The sellers with the most parts tend to charge more, so with shipping I would bet you could spend twice this much. Luckily, I had most of the parts already. OK, OK, you talked me into it. Doesn't really belong in this thread, but I can't deny the requests. One picture is below. High res versions of many others at Brickshelf once moderated. See how many MOCs you can identify!

I took some parts from my spares and ordered the rest from Bricklink. According to the parts list I made in Brickstore, at average prices this model's parts would cost about $400. The "truck wall" you saw in that picture is only the small back wall of my LEGO room. It represents somewhat less than 10% of my Technic collection.

Yep. Scroll down to Feb 10. http://technic.lego.com/en-us/Designers/Blog/Default.aspx?date=10/1/2011

Thanks! I will re-PDF these and then archive them so I never lose them again.

No, that is just an artifact of some SNOT. The slopes above it are attached sideways.

I guess you need to build it and find out. I don't know what you think is interesting, but to most of us 8880 is it. It was also the very first time a lot of things were done that we take for granted now.

Wanted to mention that I have just finished building this model. As always, the instructions are top notch. The model is even better though. I expected to be great because that's what we have come to expect from Han. The suspension is really amazing and I just had to mess with it and stare at its motion for hours. The motorization works amazingly well. Finally, the model looks incredible. You can tell that from the pictures of course, but you can't tell just how massive it is. I've included a couple of pictures for scale. This thing dwarfs any of the official LEGO haulers, and even looks huge on my "truck wall". (That is one ugly minifig.....)

I got all the new 1H2012 sets. All are now built except for the tow truck, which will be remedied shortly. I can take some pictures is anyone is interested.

Not really, no. The only reason we have them at all is that I happened to have printed out copies that I scanned back in. Some quality was lost in the process, however remember that these photos came from LEGO almost 2 decades ago and Internet bandwidth was small at the time. I don't think any of the images were over 600 pixels.

If you won't take the word of an aerospace engineer, then I guess there is not much more to say. Google and Wikipedia are very nice, but they are not technical references. For anyone really wishing to learn about Flight, I recommend the following. Anderson: Introduction to Flight Raymer: Aircraft Design, a Conceptual Approach Oates: Aerothermodynamics of Gas Turbine and Rocket Propulsion Filippone: Flight Performance of Fixed and Rotary Wing Aircraft Anderson: Hypersonic and High Temperature Gas Dynamics Pamadi: Performance, Stability, Dynamics, and Control of Airplanes Meyer: Introduction to Mathematical Fluid Dynamics No one who studies these reference materials will still say this model is flying, and these are legitimate references. It is really cool though! Getting back to the so-called "official definition" quoted, generating ANY lift or propulsive thrust can obviously not be considered flying or airboats (and even regular boats) could be said to fly. They both produce lift and thrust aero (or hydro) dynamically. But they don't fly because the lift needed to overcome the weight is not provided by the boat, but rather by buoyancy. In this case, the lift is principally provided by the counterweight. There is a distinction between heavier than air flight (airplanes and helicopters) and lighter than air flight (balloons and dirigibles), but in both cases the craft is lifted without assistance. The Wright brothers knew the definition of flight well enough. If what is shown in this video could be considered flight, someone would have beat them to it by at least a hundred years.

I'm sorry, but as an aerospace engineer I can say unequivocally that this model is in no way whatsoever "flying". Yes, the props do produce a certain amount of lift, but they are not lifting the weight of the model; they are only lifting the delta between the model weight and the counterweight. Neither is there any effective control system. The model is only stable because of the wire which adds a force to retain directional stability. Without the wire, it could not lift off and even if it could, it could not fly in any direction because it has no control surfaces and no way to control counter-rotating torque. If I was hanging from a wire and blew really hard to make myself spin, that wouldn't be flying either, but it would be completely analogous to what this model is doing. The actor hanging from a wire in a stage show of "Peter Pan" isn't really flying either, even if he/she happens to be using a fire extinguisher for thrust. Don't get me wrong, the model is cool and this is the best that can be expected from a LEGO model. Although, the props are not LEGO so even in that respect the model is not an example of LEGO flight. If I was allowed to use R/C motors and props, I actually could make a LEGO model fly. It would take a lot of power but it could be done. It would be cheating though.

Except that the PDFs released by LEGO are terrible quality (I think intentionally). If this were to be the only form of instructions, they would need to be good quality vector files. Some of the older sets have this kind of PDF instructions.

I don't think there is any change coming, although I've noticed the same thing in the instructions. If you look back at the preliminary box art from previous years, many pictures looked the same way. I think it is a "low detail" setting in their rendering software, and they wait to do final detail until they have a final design approved. Note that the actual box art now does have the proper beams on it (it didn't earlier). I think they are just making the instructions easier to produce. Personally, I find the new instructions distracting because now they don't look like the real parts. To a new builder not familiar with all the parts, it could be confusing because you won't find any parts that look like the picture.

I think it is one of the greats. First of all, the build is incredibly clever. Everything is modular and so major assemblies just pop together at the end. The system which pays out cable as the boom is telescoping is fantastic. And of course, this thing is huge. It is certainly my favorite crane. I also love that you get both studded and studless beams for the ultimate in strength.

That topic was discussed extensively when the set was new. There's no need for any hoses on the retract ports for the reason you mention, but they can be added easily enough and routed to the switch. It won't change anything functionally except that you will be able to preload the boom down if you really want to.

LEGO already did this decades ago with sets like 8432 so it is nothing new. Personally, I found the electronic instructions really annoying. I've done plenty of electronic instructions in LPub and have built many large models using a computer screen, but using a printed book is FAR more easy and enjoyable. Granted, as computers get smaller it gets easier. I don't have an iPad, but I can imagine that it would make a much better mobile instruction viewer than my laptop. Still, sometimes I even print out my own instructions because I like the experience so much better. One advantage to future electronic instructions would be if they were interactive. For example, if I am building a model from a CAD file I can always rotate that model in 3D space and zoom in on it to make any feature easier to understand. I can see that being a real advantage.

I used my second 8110 to make the plow and the crane at the same time. There will be a lot of extra parts, but there are always more implements to make.

Sadly, there is not enough detail information available on this model to recreate it and CAD and make instructions. Jurgen and I were considering it at one point, but we can't reverse engineer it from the few photos available. In order for such a project to be completed, Sheepo would have to involved and/or I would have to have access to the original model.

Yes, I have made that B-model trailer. I didn't really like it because the crane on the back doesn't work for anything (it is the wrong size to fit the trailer). If you want to forget the crane and use it as a lowboy, I guess you could. It is very large and I think 8043 would physically fit on it, although I don't think it would support the weight. It only has 1 pneumatic cylinder to adjust the gooseneck. Contrast that with Han's which uses 3.

He does post here from time to time. All of his trucks are unreasonably spectacular in the sort of way that makes me feel inferior about myself. The looks as well as the functions are top notch. His use of colors and attention to realistic detail are unmatched. I have built one of his trucks, the US Truck 2.

I didn't forget about it, I just couldn't remember where to find it. I knew there was another great R8 out there that I had seen! This one certainly belongs on the list of great MOC supercars.

Sorry, the R8 has already been done very well also (twice). So has the Zonda. Other modern supercars like the Porsche Carrera GT and the Mercedes SLS are covered. Ford GT? Done. Shelby Cobra? Done. Muscle cars? The Mustang, Camaro, and Charger are already done. You'll have to think of something even more obscure if you really want to do something new. How about a Lancia Stratos or a Reliant Robin? How about an AMC Javelin?

I do have an engineering degree, but I still suck at designing models. Most of the great designers you'll find on this forum have no special technical background. If you want to do an R/C snowmobile, start by downloading the instructions for Han's snow groomer. It is a masterpiece and has many related features. Build it and you will know everything you need to.

I would not call them shiny. There are some real chrome LEGO parts, but these are not it. More metallic than gray, but not reflective. From a distance, they actually look like regular gray.