Blakbird

Well, that's exactly the intellectual exercise I have to go through when I make instructions. If you already have a CAD file, all the data is there to replicate the model, but discovering the build sequence can be challenging. It's like a puzzle. I have to solve this puzzle to make instructions. So I wouldn't say a stepped file is a must, it just means that you have a lot more thinking to do to replicate the model. This is part of what makes instruction creation such a significant endeavor.

I find that it is easy enough to control the rate of motion by careful control of the valve. Instead of moving it all the way to one position, I move it very gradually until I hear the air starting to hiss through, then stop.

There is no connection between brushless motors and lithium batteries. They are just both "good". There really isn't a good way to "power-up" Lego motors. The motors, controller, and batteries were all made with imposed limitations to prevent just such a thing. If you really want more power, you'll have to go to R/C batteries and motors, but be prepared for lots of broken Lego bits. I don't recommend doing any of that until you have a good understanding of motors and batteries. Best place to learn is mess around with R/C for a while. You'll learn everything you need to know and you'll already have the components you need when you want to add them to Lego.

It can be very difficult to predict rarity in advance. The problem is that the entire worldwide availability of Technic parts isn't all that big, so it only takes one popular model to change the balance. For example, #3 red connectors were actually common and cheap prior to Sheepo's Mustang. The popularity of his model actually caused the shortage. So even if the builder tries hard to avoid rare parts, a popular model can still create new scarcity. The only way to avoid this is to use only parts that are currently available in sets on the shelves, because then parts are always available directly from LEGO.

Nice Beaver!

Here is what the old carrier should look like with Efferman's superstructure: Of course it would not travel with the counterweight attached, so in travel mode it would look like this: I think it looks a little odd without the counterweight. I also had not previously noticed that Efferman increased the length of the boom from 5 panels to 6. I don't have anything like that yet, but I will probably create such a file if I choose to do a conversion.

I'm pretty sure they use Maya.

Efferman has already created a CAD file. I think it is LDD. Are you asking for an MPD file?

I've never seen a consistent pattern to the colors. I think the color differentiation is mostly to make the model easier to build, but the colors don't really have a universal meaning. That's too bad, because such color coding could actually be useful. I've certainly seen MOCs which color code consistently (blue = supply, black = extend, gray = retract).

Thanks again for all your work on this. You will probably be the first person to have built both versions of the carrier. I am very interested to hear someone who has built both compare them. I have built the suspended version and would like to know if it is worth converting it. How much better (or worse) is the solid axle version? Eventually, I still want to convert the superstructure to use Efferman's giant linear actuator.

Lucio Switch's Iveco truck has air suspension and he has instructions for it.

Go to the rebrickable parts list, select "Import/Export Options", then pick "Export to Brickstore (BSX)". This will give you a file that you can open, and then you can subtract 42009.

I don't think any copies of 8860 actually had springs on the axles, it is just the picture which made it to the cover of the box. Apparently it was a preliminary image and they never updated it when they changed the design.

What kind of file are you trying to post? As far as I know, *.gif, *.jpg, and *.png images work fine.

Very rarely. But the OP spoke of problems with parts cracking on the shelf.

You need to download a piece of software called Brickstock. It is for making parts lists. Once you have it, you can extract the parts list from Rebrickable in Brickstock format, then you can subtract the 42009 parts list and see what's left. That's how I did it.

But I already said that: I stand by my statement. High development costs mean that you need to use them in a large number of sets or in sets which sell at high volume to recoup your money. This should certainly have been considered before the development effort was undertaken and it is likely this is the source of the loss. In any case, just because someone says something doesn't make it true, even if it is in an interview. He could have been misquoted, or the information he was presented could have been misleading. In any case, questioning the statements made by others that don't add up is a good thing in my opinion. Were Technic fiber optics unprofitable? Almost certainly. But "it cost LEGO more to source these parts then the whole set was being sold for" does not pass my engineering sanity test. It is my guess that this is a bad quote. It is more likely that the procurement cost of the fiber optic elements exceeded the cost of all the other parts of the set put together. That's believable. But the retail price includes a whole lot of other stuff rolled in. It is therefore likely that he was referring to LEGO's cost, not the retail price. The cost of parts in a $60 set is probably only a few dollars.

Yes. If there was a business case for it, you can bet they would make such a set. Nothing is preventing them except money. For an obvious way to see how much more popular Star Wars is and how different the business case is, look how common it is to get rare parts in odd colors for a Star Wars set. For a Technic set, we typically get whatever color they have (like gray #3 connectors).

The A model has the boom raised to 80 degrees and the B model has the boom at 45 degrees. I think the 8288 still had more string, but this is a lot. There are 3 winches on 8288.

Despite my vast collection, I have very, very little problem with parts cracking. The only that I can think of are the 4L white liftarms on the shuttle payload bay doors and an occasional half bushing. Perhaps climate has something to do with it if it is not UV related.

I'm going to lock this one. Threads just to get people to look in other forums are typically not allowed. Thanks for directing over there though; the topic is interesting!

I call BS on the notion that the fiber optic elements cost more than the whole set. There is just no way. It's not like they are real glass fiber; they are just flexible acrylic. The fiber optic module was just an incandescent light bulb. No way it cost $60-$100 to produce, at least not in recurring cost. It could be that the non-recurring cost to set up the tooling and production facilities was amortized over too small a number of sets to make their money back. In that case, the solution would be to use them in more sets!

This certainly confirms longer pneumatic cylinders in both the large and small diameters. I wonder if they will be exactly twice the length of the old ones? If so, that would allow me to go back and replace my old back-to-back cylinders with the expensive brackets with the new longer cylinders.

I recommend stacking them like this. The bottom wire is an old 9V wire and goes to the fiber optics. Length is not very important, just get one you can find 20 studs or longer. The upper wire is a short PF extension cable to the M motor. That should be all you need.

The max size allowed by EB is 1000 pixels. I have replaced the oversized images with links. I highly recommend Bricksafe which will scale the images for you automatically.