Superkalle

OK, I see now. But I'm wondering if not the small assembly with the 2540 etc is supposed to be loose inside the "mouth" of the model. Because I can't see from the instructions how it would otherwise fit.

Another great list of models. Good work Some comments: I seem to be able to connect the friction pin. No conflict with the inverted 45 2x1. What version of LDD are you running? Good job on that scafolding by the way! If you just tilt the 2555 slightly it will fit nicely. (or is there any reason you didn't do that?) Hm, seems I can get it in place Yes, seems to be the case. There is a collision error (or the model uses illegal techniques, I'm not sure yet).

OK, nothing wrong with that. It was just that two such extreme reactions of joy on the same day, got me wondering. And the work is indeed good, but the models are based on original TLG sets (you did know that right?).

Are you pulling our leg or are you just underage?

Well spotted. I have no clue why it does like that Not sure I get this This is not a legal build since the sideays stud edge of the headlight bricks sticks out more then the edge of the brick. That's because they have to manually add the connectivity for each brick. If you compile a list of bricks you think has incorrect connectivity I can pass it on to the LDD team and we can hope it gets fixed. Well spotted issue. It seems the headlight brick allows the bar to be sunk into the stud top, and the collision is only checked when opening the file, and then it gets removed.

Correct. (Or MOCs where you share the LXF.) Oh, and if it shouldn't been moved here, to where should it have been moved? I thought it was a motorcycle.

3rd Eurobricks LDD Relay Community Build It's time for the 3rd Eurobricks LDD Relay Community Build, this time with a Classic Space theme and once again coordinated by hard working member Brickdoctor and assisted by color master Aanchir. If you want to know more, or sign up, head on over here.

Nice work

Excellent work TOA!!!

Aha - a challenge Seriously though - thanks for posting here Catsy and for making your position clear.

I'm not sure I fully understand, but I think I do LDD will rotate very differently depending on which rotation point is selected. Sometimes clicking an element several times will change the rotation point. You have to simply alternate between the rotation points this way to find the one the works. If this didn't answer your question, please provided screenshots of your problem.

Oh, I have told them - belive me. Apperently it is supposed to work so that the rotation is always the same on regarding how the brick is viewed. Personally it's driving me nuts - specially since you can't tell at which angle it changes behavior I don't know what the best method is to bring back the old method. I guess making a petition here in the forum could be a good way. If so creating a separate topic is probably the best, and it shouldn't be started by me because they allready know what I think. Or just calling LEGO customer support filing a complaint could perhaps work too?

Sounds like a good idea

The bike is wonderful. But I'm not a big fan of the custom chrome since I'm a purist. I think the bike would be just as awesome with only LEGO chromed parts (the ones that exist).

Ah, OK - I didn't know that.

Let me rephrase. Contacting the original maker to ask permission serves three purposes: 1) It's polite and good manners between AFOLs. 2) It let's the original maker know that someone wants to make a copy/is making a copy. Just giving credit like you say doesn't necessarily mean that the original maker gets to know about it. Also the original maker might well be interested in a copy of the finished CAD file. 3) It's the way we do it at EB. I also think it's especially important to be respectful about this when you are making a digital model and post/share the LXF. I for one would be pretty pissed if I saw one of my MOCs floating around the net as a LXF, specially since you can't see any credits in an LXF. Please also note that I'm now talking about making a 100% copy (which was what Matanuilover asked for). If you borrow small design ideas, I might too settle for giving credit, but if it's easy to drop an email, I would do that, just to say "hey, I got inspired by one of your MOCs etc etc....".

Just a side note: I think it's important that whomever re-creates a physical MOC contact the original builder and get his approval first.

Strange, because it seems to be 17L long in LDD? Anyone that can figure out where the problem is? Good work LDD can proceed in fewer then 1 degrees if you manualy type in other values in the "increment angle" textbox.

It's so extremely chuncky and massive that it actually works. It would be an awesome sight to see this in real bricks. Heavy.

Hi all I decided to give Brickdoctor a shot again. A few people have PM:ed me, but not anyone with sufficient EB experience. Besides, I think we can all agree that the Doc did an awesome job with the last one. So fire away at will Brickdoctor with RCB3. Oh, and regarding the poll and the shown interest to be able to use any color for any brick. I have to say I'm not to keen on that idea. I really like the LDD forum to maintain a strong relationship to physcial bricks, and that LDD (and other CAD tools) are viewed mainly as tools to help test ideas and aid with the physical designs. I know some of you will think that "hey, if it's all virtual bricks, why not be able to go haywire", and I can understand that, but like I said - I don't want to loose the connection with the real thing. Besides, I haven't given up on the dream that one day we could all get together and build one of our RCB's with physical bricks (hopefully sponsored by TLG ) - and then it's more practical if we've used brick colors we can actually build with.

I've analyzed this, and it seems to be because the liftarm can only snap to different positions on the 2M red x-axle (as is common in LDD), and because of the pre-defined snap-positions, it can not go into the "right" position, and thus it collides with either the 32259 or the 32069 depending on how it snaps. Reported to TLG, as well as the tires. In LDD it look as 32126 collides with the 15M technic beam which prevents it from being rotated further. So it may be that the physical model is using illegal technic and bends the elements slightly. Can anyone who has built this model with physcial bricks confirm this?

It does seem like the studed pin will not connect "stud down", so that is a "bug" in LDD (but trying that connection with physcial bricks I notice the fit is extremely tight - more so then with ordinary technic holes). However, it connects fine in LDD with "stud up" and then you can connect the Technics beam that way (would that solve your problem?) Strangely though, the pins can be placed illegally in LDD as shown by the white pins.

Can you post an LXF and possibly some screenshots? (Cool technique used on that tower )

Reported to TLG!

Joined linkages like this has been working for several versions back, but maybe it works better now? I don't know.