Steinkopf

I like the progress you have made so far, the sheep van looks challenging but I think you have done a great job in capturing the look of it, I can't wait to see what the rest of the train looks like. With the battery placement it can be a bit tricky, I had the same issues with train weights in my 9v Trains, I think it's a matter of having a relatively balanced load rather than placing more weight above the motor to increase adhesion. I found I was getting better results with one weight instead of two in my tender drive locomotives, this could be inpart that if you apply too much downward pressure that it creates its own issues with gaining traction and engine torque.

That's what I thought looking at side and how it meets up with the cabs.

Given the livery of the new locomotive I don't think there would be an issue incorporating the current battery box into the design.

Well they were able to do it relatively easily with the locomotive in 3677.

Considering what style of locomotive they were trying to emulate it would have been better to disguise the battery box as part of the overall build, they could have easily built detail features such as fans or grilles on top of it, they could of then filled in the rest of the body with plate and tile construction suspended by brackets to add further detail.

I am not overly impressed with this latest train set and I am rather glad that I build a large range of MOC's than rely on sets to be build up my collection of rolling stock. The lack of apparent variety of wagons is a real downer with this set, especially when it contains two flatwagons which happen to be rather lazy builds that require minimal parts, instead of wasting parts on a helicopter how about making a better wagon with functions such as sliding roof or hatches to load cargo. The only semi decent wagon in the set is the hopper but even then I don't particularly like the discharge chute on the side, also I think the designers are a bit optimistic with the 70T on the side which would mean a 35 Ton axle loading for this wagon. The design is loosely based on the UIC FCS wagons which have a tare of around 13.5T and a maximum load of around 27T giving a gross weight of 40T and an axle loading of 20T which is more common in Europe. The locomotive also has a lot to be desired it does not know whether it's supposed to be a dog bone design like a Vossloh G2000 or if it is supposed to be a full carbody design like a Siemens ER20, the area between the carbody and the handrails is way too tight and should have had a full studs clearance. There also seems to be very little in imagination design wise as there is hardly any difference between this locomotive and the one in 7939, with the exception that the later was an electric that had pantographs on the roof as the only real distinguishing feature between the two designs. I apologise to anyone that sees this as being overly critical of the new set but I think at times the designers need a bit of constructive criticism from the community, anyway lets be happy that at the end of the day LEGO is the most versatile construction medium available on the market, if your not happy with the design you can just pull it apart and build something that you want.

They had the RB class open wagons which are very similar. http://wasnmodeller.blogspot.com.au/search/label/RB%20Open%20Wagon

This site may be of interest to you http://wasnmodeller.blogspot.com.au it covers a wide range of WAGR narrow gauge stock, check the links on the right hand side.

I really like the second version of the locomotive, you have captured the style of this unique looking class of locomotive really well especially with the cab. The only suggestion I would make is to change the American style Caboose, only a few Australian railways used guardsvans with a cupola on top and they differed wildly from American style stock, a more typical vehicle that would be seen on this train would be a Z Class Guardsvan, here is an example of one pictured below.

I like the work you have done so far, I would suggest however that you stretch them out a bit more to between 32 to 36 studs in length, that way you will get a bit more space between the bogies where you can add some details to the underframe. With the train base you are probably best off making a plate built version as it gives you a bit more flexibility to where you can fix the bogies as well as how long you want it, the 28 x 6 train bases are great if you are going 32 studs long as you just have to ad a 2 x 6 plate each end to lengthen it, mind you they are far from cheap in black these days.

I never thought I would build a High Speed Passenger Train for my LBB network, I had built a a modified version of 4511 about 10 years ago but was never really keen on the cab, when 7897 came out I toyed with the idea but after seeing the botched job they did on the cab I shelved that idea pretty fast. However when 60051 came out I decided to take the plunge, overall the basic set is alright but to be honest the length of the train and that of the centre coach had much to be desired, mind you once I addressed these issues and modified the design I ended up reasonably happy with the results.

The role of coastguards vary from nation to nation, in a lot of countries their coastguards are tasked with the protection of territorial waters which at times require the use of armed vessels to enforce this, coastguard vessels are used for a variety of tasks such as stopping illegal fishing and smuggling as well as fufilling more humanitarian tasks such as search and rescue. The armament of the Legodtenstein Coast Guard Service vessels is similar to that used by a number of nations and is in no way heavy, the USCGS for example had 127mm 38 Cal guns on some of its cutters which were fitted to WWII destroyers, other nations have vessels fitted with modern 76mm, 57mm Naval Guns and 30mm, 25mm, 23mm and 20mm automatic cannons as part of their armament. The USCGS, Russian Coast Guard and Finnish Coast Guard have vessels that are armed with anti submarine weapons such as Mk 32 Triple 324mm torpedo tubes and RBU 1200 Anti Submarine Rocket Launchers.

Thanks thomas My main goal has always been to build models that look like a more mature take on the City theme sets, I like to push it to the limit of what would City sets look like with a higher level of detail, mind you the designers are doing a good job with the level of detail that they are putting into sets these days. Hello cei I used the large canopy windscreen part for the forward part of the cabin, http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=61484 . I won't be scrapping the Kormoran as it's one of my early LCGS models and I am rather fond of her, she also has a sister vessel the Albatros which is used as a diving tender, both of those vessels have been upgraded with new parts over time so if anything they will be improved in the future rather than scrapped.

Back in 2011 LEGO introduced a new boat hull for small vessels the Boat Hull Unitary 28 x 8, I was excited when it came out as it was a nice design that had plenty of potential for building a wide range of vessels with the ability to cram in a good amount of detail. The first two sets had the hull in white and then later on in red and light bluish grey, this was great but for me I really wanted one in orange to use for a my Legodtenstein Coast Guard Service. In 2010 I had made some small patrol vessels using cockpit pieces and bricks measuring 24 x 6, they are quite nice little vessels but are rather limited with what you can do detail wise given the space available. Luckily for me this year the new 28 x 8 boat hull came out in orange in 60085 4 x 4 with Powerboat, I was also lucky enough that one retailer had a 20% discount on City sets a couple of days after they were released so I snapped one up real quick and got to work. For comparrison I have attached a photo of the earlier model for people to see, anyway enough of my nerd rant and onto the backstory. The LCGSS Gepard is the sole member of its class in the Legodtenstein Coast Guard Service, the vessel is primarily used as an inshore patrol vessel. Due to the limitations of the preceding Kormoran Class, which was based on an adaption of a commercial design, it was decided to purchase a purpose built vessel that was more suited to the role. The LCGSS Gepard provides a leap in capabilities compared to the Kormoran Class vessels, the larger hull provides the ability to carry a heavier armament, as well as having a more spacious cabin area and better seakeeping abilities. The LCGSS Gepard has a top speed of 35knots, it also carries an armament of 1 x 0.50 Cal HMG and 0.50 Cal HMG/40mm AGL combo. LCGS Gepard Class Inshore Patrol Vessel LCGS Komoran Class Inshore Patrol Vessel

True the boxcar from 4512 did use the Slope 33 6 x 6 Double (http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=4509) instead of the Slope 45 6 x 4 Double (http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=32083) plus as you said there are some variations of the colour scheme as well, overall though I feel it was heavily inspired by one in 4512. Mind you I don't really care about the rolling stock in sets as I much prefer to strip them down to make my own, here are a couple examples of mine that I call boxcars in fact the first one was made from the parts from the 4512 Boxcar.

The boxcar in question is actually the one that was in the very last 9v Freight Train set ever to be produced, set 4512 from the World City theme.

Nice work Thomas, you have captured the look and style of the prototype really well, also good job of squeezing in all the PF gear into this model, it's not an easy task with European low hood style shunters.

In all honesty when it comes to new train sets I don't really get that excited unless they have new elements in them, the last set I purchased was the 60051 High Speed Train about 6 months ago, I really liked the nose on that train and wanted to build a modified version of the set. Prior to that the last train set purchase I made was back in 2007 when I bought my second copy of 7898, which coincidentally like all my other train set purchases got turned into a source of parts to build MOC's with, if LEGO won't build the trains you want why not build them yourself.

I wouldn't say that is the case as the locomotive in that set is very much like the MaK G series of locomotives which are used by a large number of railways in Western Europe, I think if anything it was designed to add more stock and playability to the train series. With passenger trains the playability is somewhat limited in that train stops at stations, figs may possibly be moved in or out of the train and train departs station, cargo trains on the other hand have a greater diversity of loads and ways of loading and unloading them which adds in new levels of playability. Also the 3677 train has a number of 4 wheel wagons in it which is more akin to European railways, albeit the numbers of 4 wheel rolling stock in Europe is diminishing as it is moving more towards higher volume bogie stock, US railroads have been using bogie stock for freight cars for over a 100 years.

There has been a long debate regarding this topic with people trying to find the perfect scale, for many it lays somewhere between S Scale and Gauge 1, to be honest it really depends on what you are after as you are building it for your own enjoyment. If you are using standard LEGO track geometry I would suggest using selective compression rather than going for a near scale build, if you want to go for a near scale build you will need to use the straight curve technique to ensure the train runs and operates smoothly. There is nothing more ugly than a near scale piece of rolling stock trying to negotiate a standard LEGO curve, not only do you see most of the track that is supposed to be under the train due to the massive overhang you have a high possibility of taking out the train on the next track if you have two lines next to each other. With selective compression you go for the overall look and feel of the prototype rather than a to scale model, this principle was used by the vast bulk of model railway manufacturers up until the 1980s, the standards then moved more towards a higher level detail and closer to scale models, this was mainly driven by the demands of the hobbyists. Using selective compression gives you the benefit of being able to integrate it more easily with standard sized LEGO buildings, as well as the space that you will save, the builds are also more achievable as they are less parts intensive compared to near scale models. If you do go for a near to scale build for your trains you will also have to apply that principle to the structures and landscape on the layout your trains will be running on, you don't want your trains dwarfing everything else that surrounds them as it would not look right. If you have a look at the people and train clubs who do build near scale trains you will see that they have also applied this to the rest of their layouts, the results are very impressive but the sheer size of these builds means you require a lot more room, they are also very brick intensive and can diminish your supply of parts pretty quick.

Once again thanks everyone for the comments. The coaches are 32 studs in length using the 6 x 28 Train Bases with 2 x 6 plates either end, I generally stick to 32 studs as a maximum length for bogie stock, I have found that when running an average length passenger train of 3 or 4 coaches and locomotive using longer stock the train slows down substantially on standard LEGO curves. A lot of this is due to having to transmit the drawbar pull over multiple pivot points, this observation comes from many years of running trains on exhibition layouts as well as at home. I have built coaches in the past that were 36 studs in length but ended up reducing them in length to 32 studs, I still do have one coach that is 36 Studs in length that is used as part of a 2 Car Push Pull EMU set, given the short length of that train there are no issues with it being pulled through the curves. Another reason why I don't like longer stock is that I don't like the overhang of the centre of the coach when going through standard LEGO curves, it looks rather ugly seeing a lot of track exposed underneath the train as it negotiates the curve, it looks like it is doing a sideways drift rather than being on the track. I don't use the straight curve technique on my layouts and have no intention of doing so, but if you are using longer length rolling stock straight curves are a must as it makes it much more aesthetically pleasing as well as operationally functionable.

Nicely done Aitoruco, you have done an excellent job in capturing the look and style of this class of locomotive.

That is an extremley impressive build, especially since you have been able to make it structurally strong enough to support its own weight as well as that of the trains using it which is extremely difficult with an all brick structure of that length.

Nice looking train you have there Agent Rick57, have you thought about making a Gepackwagen (baggage van with guards compartment) for the rear of the train as I think that would finish it of nicely.

Love your work there LT12V, you have really nailed the look of the nose there which is certainly no easy task when doing it in brick, overall the train is a very impressive build.