zephyr1934

"I think we're gonna need a bigger basement..." that is crazy impressive

Interesting. There were several US steam locomotives where they extended the jacketing over the smokebox for a smooth appearance too (e.g., the Milwaukee Road 261), but I think on those engines the actual smokebox was no wider than the actual boiler.

Very well done! Great update that brings a lot of improvements

Oh, that's nice! On many American steam engines the boiler had an insulating jacket (typically asbestos) that was then covered with sheet metal while the firebox was not insulated, resulting in a slight decrease in diameter from the black sheet metal over the boiler area to the uncovered smokebox that was often simply painted with a mixture of graphite and oil to give it a gray look. If your prototype similarly has a non-insulated smokebox you might be able to step down to a narrower smokebox to hide some of the gaps

It's good to have BBB wheels back

As someone who rarely ventures outside of Train Tech I'm glad that something was posted here. But maybe a "FYI, see this thread" with a single tantalizing photo. Especially since that would keep the discussion in a single location. Ah, after searching I see it was a single post n a large thread These new gear racks are probably worth their own thread

I agree about the ugly gaps and the final version looks great!

Good to see you back out of hibernation and back at work making the future now out of lego trains.

That's cool... and now you've got me thinking about it <several minutes of quiet contemplation later> a couple of alternate approaches come to mind, but hard to explain with words alone. If I remember, next time I'm near my CAD I'll put them together. ... I went and played. So "5 studs wide" = "12.5 plates tall" on its side. One needs to get a core of 8.5 plates, where a pair of cheese bricks to bring it to 12.5. I came up with the idea to use a 3x3x1.67 core with brackets on all four sides (use "up" brackets for one pair of opposing sides and "down" brackets for the other pair of sides). The 3x3 + two brackets = 7.5 plates from the core + 2*0.5 plates from the brackets = 8.5 plates. However, this design results in a larger void in the corners due to the height of the bracket and height of the lip on the cheese brick (each 1/2 plate tall). In contrast, your build provides a smoother curve. By using the neck brackets, your design fills this void in, only leaving the 1/2 plate of the cheese brick lip.

Looks great and congratulations It might be moving to your building background, but a lego train build is rarely ever "complete". There will be a new part or a new technique at some point that you'll want to jump back in.

Michael, thank you for the detailed response! I do think having this info in an FAQ or similar will be benefit to your customers. Perhaps even including a recommendation on the speed controller listing, "for larger layouts it is recommended that you use a second power drop" Most excellent! Does that include the overlaod protection mentioned earlier in your post where the controller cuts off track supply when an overload is detected? Lego might claim only the best is good enough, but you are going better than best

I was using a RCX to do a back and forth on an open ended track. It was a stock motor so the thermistor was still in place Okay, if the termistors are known to be flaky with PWM and if Fx is using PWM they probably should warn customers about that with their controllers. If I didn't know and I burned out a vintage 9v motor because it has a weak link I'd be upset. With all of the effort to make the new Fx backward compatible it is inviting folks to use the old motors. If the Lego motors are deficient it seems perfectly reasonable for Fx to say that the new controllers are only compatible with the new motors, but it is better to have a warning of that on the sales page than to apologize to customers after the fact. For some users it is no problem to crack open a 9v motor shell and fix the problem, for others, it might be out of their wheelhouse. So the warning could even include a link to a more length explination. Excellent to hear. I bet the double length straights help a lot (half as many joints). My home loop is about 12ft x 12ft with two power drops on opposite sides and I still have slowing problems due to power drop. Only about half of my straight track are Fx though and I have a small s-curve. So a 15 ft train can be in 4 curves at once, creating a lot of drag (true for PF trains too). So I have roughly 24 ft between drops and that's probably at my limit because of my curves while you have 35+ ft. Lighter trains with few curves could probably go farther than that. I'm just playing the devil's advocate, someone could purchase one controller with one lead and then discover they are under-powered. Last time I ordered from Fx the shipping to the US was around $20. Knowing that I might need the extra power connector at the time of placing my first order I might be inclined to add an extra power drop and connector wires rather than risk needing another shipment with expensive postage. I'm just trying to anticipate realistic negative scenarios

Hi Michael, Did I thank you for all you are doing for the hobby? I think we all appreciate your perfectionist work. But in that regard, I'm not sure if all of my thinking in my last note was clear. Someone who does not have experience with 9v might not even realize the importance of having multiple drops. And even if they do know it is important to have more than one power connection, having that guidance at the time of placing an order will help them get everything they need in one shot. You might want to provide a recommended number of track joints, and maybe quantify that with, "for heavy trains have a connector after every 20 joints, for light trains you can go to 30 or higher". I would think a customer would be much happier if they were able to purchase all the items needed in one order, not having to pay extra shipping or wait a few more weeks to get additional parts they did not know they needed. I had a bad experience with Lego brand 9v motors and PWM, that might have been purely coincidence, but it might not have been. It is possible that the Lego motors would benefit from a capacitor to level out the voltage. If I'm off base, no problem, but it would be piece of mind to see, "tested for NNN hours with Lego brand 9v motor." Or if there are any issues, perhaps another product to keep it plug and play for numskulls like myself that would be a capacitor unit that one can add on at the output of your controller to do the smoothing on the "land side". Meanwhile, it isn't so much Lego brand track but more specifically, doing loops on R40 (presumably a part that you will never have a need to produce) and possibly the tight Lego switches. These tests just seem like a small extension of what you are already doing. You are putting TLC to shame with your quality control

Simply amazing

Looking good! Please include a few shots of the E44 too