Ralph_S

Thanks guys. Orange simply seemed to be the right colour for this one. Cheers, Ralph

It was very nice to meet you too and to see the detail of your wonderful adventurers themed models. Congrats on your awards for the microscale space category / best little thing. Well deserved too. It was awesome. I had such a blast this year that if I can, I will come again next year. I've already been thinking about what to bring. The fire theme offers some nice possibilities for my existing fire fighting vehicles. Add one or two of my military MOCs and my suitcase will be full. Cheers, Ralph

I got back home this morning, after spending a few more days in the DC area. What an amazing event! It was nice to put faces to people that I've come to know on-line, both through flickr and EB, and to see the awesome models on display. I'm also well chuffed that I won an award. BrickFair 2011 by Legosim, on Flickr. Since I flew in and there wasn't all that much space in my suitcase to start with, I had to restrain myself from buying too much. I want to Tyson's corner on Wednesday and bought a Mearsk container ship, Maersk train, a large PAB cup and an issue of Brickjournal. Minus the discount and minus $20 I had on my VIP card it cost about $170, which was a very good deal IMO. Cheers, Ralph

Thanks for all the comments guys. I'm about to leave for a trip in an hour or so, but am glad I checked into eurbricks before shutting down my computer :-) Cheers, Ralph

Thank you. I saw something similar on a picture of figure 'driving' a VW convertible in one of the LEGOLand parks and liked the idea, obviously. Cheers, Ralph

Thanks Christopher. The difficulty with the headlights on the Gallardo is that they sit very close to the edges of the body-work. I've seen other people use wedge plates mounted vertically to create the sides, but I didn't want to do that because it would interfere with the front mudguards. The panels provided a way out. I'm probably not the first person to come up with something like this, although I don't remember seeing it anywhere else and haven't previously done it myself either. Getting it all to fit was a bit of a fiddle, but I too am happy with how it turned out. Thanks guys. Even before I started building the Golf, which then discarded, I'd looked at my growing collection of orange parts and figured it would make a nice colour for a supercar. I am glad you like the end result. Cheers, Ralph

This month's challenge on LUGNuts -the group for LEGO car lovers on flickr- is called Everything under the sun]. This was aimed at building a convertible car. I used to have a LEGO model of a Lamborghini Gallardo until a few years ago and for this challenge I decided to rebuild it as a convertible, or Spyder as Lamborghini call it. Lamborghini Gallardo Spyder (1) by Mad physicist, on Flickr I had a few false starts building this one. At first I decided to build a VW Golf convertible, but halfway through the build I realised that it wasn't going to come out right. Then I decided to go for the Gallardo. The first version I built was very close to my original version. I actually finished it yesterday, but it suffered from a few issues that the original had, and they bugged me. It was 10 studs wide, the wheelbase was too large, the front overhang to short and the front and back didn't taper properly. Today I rebuilt it almost from scratch, 11 studs wide and improving it a great deal. Lamborghini Gallardo Spyder (2) by Mad physicist, on Flickr This picture shows the real trickery and one major improvement over my original Gallardo: the luggage compartment in the front can actually open. On the regular Gallardo the engine cover opens towards the front. On the Spyder it opens towards the rear and even when open, much of the engine is covered by the folded roof. I briefly considered adding a working folding roof to mine, but there simply isn't enough space. Lamborghini Gallardo Spyder (7) by Mad physicist, on Flickr Cheers, Ralph

I'm for MOCs all the way. A big part of the fun of this hobby for me is building my own stuff and I get very little satisfaction out of building a set and then looking at it, no matter how nicely designed it may be. Sets to me are parts packs. As for cars, I'm one of those people who swear by 5-wides, but I reckon they're not particularly suitable for builders with small collections or a tight budget. They eat small parts like crazy. Upwards of 100 parts for a single car is no exception. Many of the cars that LEGO put out in sets are quite good and I think they're a good starting point. As the pictures by AlanSmith show, it's also very well possible to build your own in a similar style. You could start with sets, build a few of your own in a similar style and gradually go towards all MOCs Cheers, Ralph

It's a solo-trip indeed, although I'm meeting up with Magnus and with Aleksander Stein (from Norway). I too am looking forward to meeting you and seeing those intricate Technic models up close. Cheers, Ralph

I'm not one of the organisers, but from their website it's my understanding that you need to be registered as an exhibitor in order to exhibit MOCs. Cheers, Ralph

Nice truck, wildchild. I'm with you on the scale. Building an odd-wide structure isn't the easiest thing to pull off, but the scale is just about perfect. Cheers, Ralph

Thanks. Same here. I've never been to a LEGO event in the US and am curious to see what they are like. I'm really looking forward to it. It'll also be good to meet builders from across the pond. I've made a few changes to the Flanker for the event (it's got a purist cockpit canopy now). I'll be on the plane a week from now :-) Let's hope my MOCs survive the journey in a sufficiently low number of parts that I'll still be able to put them back together. Last time I took models on a plane trip it took me a few hours to rebuild them! Cheers, Ralph

I'm not sure whether LDD can do decent instructions, but I find the combination of LDRAW/MLCAD and LPUB to work reasonably well. You need to think about the order in which you want to add parts in every step, and the biggest difficulty IMO is generating an LDRAW with that information in it. If left to its own devices, MLCAD makes a hash of this. Even if you add parts in the right order and tell it to add STEP commands, the order gets muddled. There's some manual hacking involved However, once that is done, using LPUB to turn your file into a proper instruction booklet is a breeze, including arrows and submodels and callouts and everything. I made instructions for a roughly 100-part model yesterday. Making the LDRAW file took about two hours. Making the booklet took about half an hour. The learning curve is pretty steep, but once you've got the hang of it it's definitely worthwhile. Cheers, Ralph

That's an impressive looking model, as is the An-225 that you posted a while ago. the shaping of the rear fuselage in particular turned out well. I don't like the wings all that much because their upper surfaces aren't curved enough, but given the difficulty of doing something like this in LDD, you've done an admirable job. The difficulty of building something like this in real life is giving it sufficient structural strength. Wings this long will bend. Did you give any thought to that in your LDD design or was the external shape your priority? I did take a slight trip there and was decidedly underwhelmed. The only aircraft is a little modified set. The only reason I can think of why you think it is better and felt the need to share it here is if it is your own website... Cheers, Ralph

It might be more interesting and fun for you, but it comes down to personal preference. There are things you can do using studded parts that you can't do with your studless bits and vice versa. I'm not a Technic builder and am not particularly interested in pure Technic builds. I like combining some Technic bits with other system elements. That's what I find interesting and fun. Cheers, Ralph

Whenever this topic pops up in this forum, Lego Technic, Mindstorms & Model Team, we always seem to have two different discussions at the same time. Studless technic vs. studded Technic is a very different discussion from studless models vs. studded models, IMO. The latter seems primarily an aesthetic choice, whereas the former is a choice about functionality and structural strength. I'm not a keen Technic builder, but I grew up with the old school studded Technic beams. They're something I can easily wrap my head around using and are very suitable for being combined with normal system elements, which is something I tend to do in my models. However, I've built some sub-structures (for the drivetrains of a few Power Functions RC models I've built in the last few years) and it does seem easier to build very compact structures. When it comes to the look of my models, I prefer to show some studs. I couldn't build certain shapes if I'd insist on studless building (thin wings, carious types of curved surfaces etc), but I also like how the studs emphasise that my models are LEGO, so even when I make elements of a model that I could build studless without too much effort, I don't. So, how do you learn building studless? I believe that the best way to properly learn any technique is simply trying it yourself, and not giving up if you're not happy with the end result. If you keep practicing, it will get easier. Cheers, Ralph

I know what they look like. PSNI TANGI LANDROVER by NW54 LONDON, on Flickr Yes, the roof is a bit taller and the space between the bottom of the vehicle and the ground is covered in one way or another, but the proportions aren't all that different from a regular Land Rover. I guess I'm just more critical than you are. I wouldn't have guessed that these were supposed to be Land Rover Tangis if that hadn't been in the title of the thread. Cheers, Ralph

This doesn't should out Land Rover to me at all. I understand that there are limits to how accurate you can build a four-wide, but the proportions are off. The Nissan Cube is the first car that springs to mind when seeing the shape! The wheels aren't chunky enough and the nose looks too short. The colour scheme is pretty neat, as is the grille over the windscreen. Clever parts use (although not without precedence). Cheers, Ralph

I've booked my flights! It took me a long time to decide on what to bring, as I'm a bit limited in by stuff having to go into my suitcase. I was also informed that there will likely be a fair few minifig scale military models on display and that something built to a larger scale might stand out. Taking that into consideration, I have registered the following MOCs. M1A1 Abrams by Mad physicist, on Flickr HMMWV revamped (2) by Mad physicist, on Flickr Su-27 Flanker (1) by Mad physicist, on Flickr I've made a few small changes to the Abrams and the HumVee for the event, and will probably add a crew and equipment to the latter. I also intend to replace the stickers on the Su-27, as the ones that are on the model now look a bit delapidated. I'm looking forward to it Cheers, Ralph

I switched to the blueish greys almost immediately. For many of the things I do -aircraft and cars, for instance- they look better than the old colours. I keep them separate. I also keep reddish brown separate from old brown. I still do use old dark grey quite a lot because it's just about the perfect colour for US Army Helicopters and I've used it for the roads in my town. I have also tried using old and new grey together to recreate the subtle differences in shade in the camouflage colours of the US Navy, with the following result. Tophatters F-14A Tomcat (3) by Mad physicist, on Flickr I wasn't happy with the change at first, but old and new colours all have their use. Cheers, Ralph

Thank you. I quite like the red accents on the toy, and while I wasn't able to put them in the exact same places, I did want to put a bit of red into mine as well. I'm glad you like it. Thank you. It is one of the most complicated MOCs I've built in a while. I've started on something new that is considerably simpler Cheers, Ralph

Well, you're obviously a train enthusiast, so perhaps the question wasn't really directed at you Still, perhaps you and I have something in common. I don't have it sitting assembled on a shelf, although I did for about two months, after which all of it went into the parts bin. I'm pretty sure I've already used most of the parts on MOCs -including on my first train MOC in about two decades, which coincidentally is a model of a real train. I didn't bend over backwards either; I got it at a discount Cheers, Ralph

I'm no train lover myself, but I did buy one and it is one of the few sets in the last few years that I actually built rather than parting it out straight away. It is very pretty and looks good just as a display piece. It also has a very nice parts selection -even if you're not interested in the train bits- which is the main reason why I bought it. I recently even put some of the train bits to good use! Cheers, Ralph

Thanks everyone. Probably not, but it will kick its butt in a half-mile drag race Cheers, Ralph

I did look at making the flame, but felt that it would look crude if I'd do it with red and yellow plate and can't use a sticker because the plates are stepped. Tracks was also released without the flame job, I decided to leave it. Well, thank you. I think it loks a bit short in robot mode, to be honest, but I couldn't see any way of making it taller. Cheers, Ralph