Freddie

Having worked in a toy store, I can confirm this. There is a steady pattern in the box dimensions, primairily optimized for EPAL-dimensions, but LEGO's has tapped into their brilliance used for LEGO-bricks, when they decided on the dimensions for these boxes. Thing is, this works best with boxes of mixed dimensions. Boxes of similar dimensions won't work at all. There is a staggering amount of space you can save just by optimising your storage and using the boxes' dimensions to their fullest.

Thank you! *y* No need for me to redesign my container-carrier then. Not that would be a major redesign anyway. edit; snipped the pictures.

If you've seen the real ones, you know they're a staggering sight to behold. There really isn't much that can compare when it comes to weird looks, proportions and width. Anyway, I've been designing train cars to hold this type of containers. What does the underside of the containers look like?

You'll want to build on a 32 stud deep baseplate, width is variable and up to you. If built on a 16 x 32 baseplate, a basic building would have a footprint of 16 x 16 studs, the backyard and pavement are both eight studs deep. Where the walls meet up with the next building, there are two 1 x 2 technic bricks, spaced twelve studs apart. The technic bricks you'll want placed directly on the baseplate. The resulting standard sidewall should be 2 x 1 studs (the front and back walls) + 2 x 2 studs (the technic bricks) + 12 studs (the space between the technic bricks) = 16 studs. That's the standard connecting sidewall for modular buildings.

Have you tried downloading the thumbnails and zoom in on them on your computer? I like the stairs leading up to the entrance of the first floor. Curved stairs FTW! I also like how the building looks worn and aged, as in variation of the colors used (a few grey bricks amongst all those blue) gives it a slightly older and not fully-maintained look, unlike the CC. It's nice with some variation, I think.

I own three, and can confirm both Hobbes' and UB's statements. It fits well within the general silhouette of LEGO trains, and stands no taller than Metroliner/Euro Express or the Santa Fe train. It's just happens to be built on a 24-stud base rather than a 28-stud base, which sort of gives it weird proportions when looked at a certain angle. But "in the flesh", it's *y*.

I think he means points/switches operated by remotely controlled servo-mechanisms. There are many kinds. People essentially build the kind that fits them and/or have parts for. I'm guessing the most popular kind is the one with the motors. This uses a variation of gears and levers to connect to the point and operate it. Some of these are simple mechanisms with the internals exposed, and there are variations that are disguised as sheds or other track-side buildings. With the exception of the micro-motor (without painfully high reduction, if that is even usable), all motors can be used. There are also pneumatic variants, with a compressor (most likely electric) and the valves located centrally, and plenty of tubing. A single cylinder at each point provides the necessary motion for switching tracks. These are also very strong, and need plenty of support to not break loose when moving. The upside to these is the mechanic simplicity, as pressure is generated centrally by the compressor, which it provides to centrally placed valves. The downside is the sheer amount of tubes necessary for bringing all this air to the cylinders. Both has its ups and downs, pneumatic controls allows for a compact control-panel, with the associated and very cool-sounding hisses as valves are opened and closed. Electric allows computer-controll, such as the RCX, and can automatically directs trains into an empty track if the means for such is implemented. Electric also allows control from a command-center (an old technic device for controlling electric motors) or through the use of polarity switches. Also, pneumatic has the advantage that it stops at automatically when the cylinder reaches full lock. Motors on the other hand will not stop until power is cut; and as such also need clutchgears to prevent damage.

Got to love the japanese; there's no parallell to how they put the bricks together! God knows how fast that engine will go; he's put the large BBB wheels directly to the motor! On the other hand, there can't be much grip (no tires). Wheelspin, anyone?

May I add that 7898, the RC Freight Train, is a recommendation. It's a fantastically huge set, and in my opinion the best freight train since LEGO switched away from 12v/4.5v. Great engine, cars with variation and three road-vehicles; and it's getting good ratings and reviews/comments at Brickset and LUGNET. Plus seeing as you already have a controller, you don't need batteries for the extra one as you only need to change channel to operate a different train. I should probably add that the cars' long wheelbases (with the exception of bogied cars), causes a lot of friction in corners, and slows down the train a lot, so you might want to shorten that with two studs. The old standard was six studs between each set of wheels (eight studs between the axles), whereas 7898's cars have eight studs between the wheelsets (ten studs between axles). The Hobby Train Set is; despite color inconsistensies with the red bricks, is a thumbs up, and in multiples, double and probably also tripple so depending on how many of it you buy. There's no motors or rails in it, but seeing as you are still fresh on the train scene, it's probably an advantage. Some of the locomotives in it doesn't even seem to sport motorization possibilities without completely ruining their design.

The RC Train base is two studs longer than the longest regular base, the latter being extensively used for the rail-powered locomotives. There's also a 24 stud base, more commonly used for shorter bogied train cars but no less usuable for locomotives (and used as such on two occasions). The RC Train base is however less flexible in its use, as the battery box severly limits the body styles possible to use on it. There is however nothing stopping you to use it as an unmotorized tender (disguised as a box-car, maybe), running first in the train supplying power to the locomotive a head; this will also let you build small locomotives with unarticulated motors. This method is usable for the 10173, as the passenger car can, at the sacrifice of passenger space, be converted to a tender and provide the power to the motorized tender car (in a 9V conversion 10173's tender is actually motorized rather than the locomotive itself). The Santa Fe locomotive is easily converted to RC-drive thanks to its 6-stud wide body, the BNSF locomotive however boasts a 4-stud wide body and as such can only be converted at the sacrifice of its overall looks, or will need a tender if you wish to keep the design intact. Also, 9V motors can easily be powered by the RC-platform, but probably at the expense of battery-life (untested) - performance stays the same however (tested). The 9V rails also provide a better grip surface for both 9V and RC train motors. Edit; Ooh, forgot to mention. The engine shed has more then large enough openings for the RC-trains to enter and commiunication inside it is not a problem.

That's a tough one, as apparently LEGO themselves cannot decide which shade of red they consider as red (anybody who's bought multiple 10183's know what I mean, and I'm not talking about the dark red pieces)! Criticism aside, colors and contrast differ from monitor to monitor, so there really isn't any correct answer. Not any that I can come up with, anyhow.

My absolute favourite so far is this fully interiorized Caf

Love this picture; http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/0937Comm...07/dscf0153.jpg It just captures the essence of the waterfall! Very nice! *y*

The norwegian catalog states that the remaining City-sets (7990, 7991, 7992, 7993 and 7998) but excluding the port (7994), are planned released in June. The port will be released in August. No dates on the new trackpiece and station. LEGO does not give Norway any special treatment (other than the lack of S@H, but we're not alone on that), so the release date is probably the same in the rest of Europe.

This really is a great song! Not having heard the Bionicle-songs before, I expected something aimed at 8-year olds; I pleasantly surprised at how wrong I was. It's not just a great theme, it's a great song in its own right!

Here, found in this blog by the very same guy who designed the Caf

I've just played around with it a bit, and I must say, this new version is far better than the last version! I will still remain loyal to MLCad, but LDD2 is easy to learn and use. Brick placement is, while not perfect, at least far easier then in last version. As a matter of fact, I just uploaded a model to LEGO Factory (and my first MOC, mind you!), a half schnabel-car (Schnabel_Half by Duesey), meaning you need to buy two get a full car. It got priced at 410.57 SEK for each half, so it's not cheap, and I must admit, it's a bit basic, plus I don't know how well it'll corner, but there's plenty of articulation so it shouldn't really be a problem. Used about and hour and a half putting it together.

Absolute favourite is trains, but despite being marketed under the City-theme (take a look at the boxes, you'll see "City" written in big, bold characters in the upper corner), do not appear in the poll. The runner-up is seaport, which also does not appear in the poll. Yes, they haven't released this year's seaport sets yet, but I'm basing my opinion from my ownership of one of the older seaports, 6541. I loved that one, and have intentions of rebuilding it, along with purchasing the new one. A distant third would be the "Firefighters" sub-theme, of which I have quite a lot of the new stuff. This does appear in the poll, so I'll vote for this.

If you've read the new Brickjournal, it says that more buildings connectable to this one are planned, if it sells well. It's not stated what kind of buildings, but some of the prototypes pictured where buildings designed to fit in between other buildings. So, if you like this one, order (at least) one (I already have) and we'll probably see more of these!

Here are two. Alright, Brick Star, a.ka. Kristi Klein is a Legoland Model Builder in California, and not one of those who designs sets. Nonetheless, it's a very interesting blog which is more regularily updated than Jamie's, but Jamie is probably one of the better known designers (the only one?). He created several of this year's early Creator sets, and even reveals who designed the alternitves for each of them.

I think he's speaking of what essentially are the roadsigns of the sea. They are used for marking dangerous spots in the water where a boat may run aground, or to tell the skipper to keep left or right, and sometimes also used as an anchorpoint. I think. I know it's called a "boy" up here, but that's in scandinavian, and I have no idea of what they are called/spelled in english. PS: To all you boat folks out there reading this, you probably must be laughing hard right now - I have no idea of what most things are called in the world of boats.

It is this year's calendar. ;-) Not too early either, work on this one started early last year I guess. Nonetheless, seems like harbour will be a theme this year, I can see at least two minis with a harbor-theme.

The new battery-train bases work the same way. It adjusts the voltage between preset levels. The higher the voltage is, the faster the motor goes, and the brighter the lamp shines. Mind you, the lamp will still shine at full brightness independent of the motor. Mashing the accelerator will see a heavy train smoothly accelerate up to top speed with the lamps at full blaze. The new IR components used in the new Creator and Technic sets will work in the same fashion I guess, but will use an independent power source, instead of the built-in battery box the new trains use.

If the motors are connected to each other then that should work perfectly, just as long as each motor has a power-supply, either from the track or from another motor picking up power for it. You could even lay down the 12V third-rails in the tracks, connect them where the power-rails would not fit, and have trains with interconnected motors run on the same track as the 9Vs. Each motor would provide power for those not picking it up from the rails, and that way it would run (relatively) smoothly.

Ooh, I can't wait to get that bulldozer. I mean, four motors and remote control for a vehicle designed for utter destruction? It can hardly getter better than this.