Erik Leppen

Same here. I think you should startg thinking about the actual crane part - the turntable and boom. Those will be the biggest challenges. If you have those, you have some idea of the size of it all, and what outriggers could fit with them. But, that's the thing if you build a six-axle trailer. The "small models small problems, big models big problems" adage is probably even truer for cranes ;) (And, to be honest, I don't really understand why you don't just build the model from the original image with the three-axle trailer.)

Good post, about an interesting topic. Looking back at previous flagships and trying to compare them tocurrent ones as objectively as one can, is a nice thought experiment. I remember that when I bought that set, I was delighed. I haven't been so happy with a Lego set ever since, I believe. This had several reasons. - It was probably the first flagship set that I bought myself, rather than got from my parents. - Probably because it was the first real (and realistic) mobile crane after 8460, which is a long-time favorite set of mine. - The studless system was relatively new, and this set meant a tremendous increase of useful parts But looking back just at the instructions, there are a few things that spring to mind when comparing to current sets. - Studded pieces! I really think 8421 has a much more "impressive", "strong" and "agressive" look than for example 42009, because it uses the square studded pieces in the crane and the wheel arches. Also, the very "square" side-view also increases that look. 42009 looks more "gentle" in a way. - Compared with current sets, I can't help but think the chassis was quite messy. Lots and lots of beams and connectors everywhere that look like a random mess from a distance. The chassis doesn't seem to have a design behind it - they just did what worked. Maybe if the 5x7 and 5x11 baems had existed then it would have been better. - I do think the outriggers are kind of lame. They just don't look realistic. I always found the system of 8460 look much better. It might be because 8421's outriggers are so flat and close to the ground when folded out, while 8460's are higher off the ground, more similar to those of real cranes. Of course, 42009's outriggers look even better, but they went all-out with that one. It was a great set, and it still is. But, indeed, it has been surpassed. Shows what leaps LEGO Technic has made, with sets like 8043 and 42042.

I hate stickers. I think it shows a weakness from the designer's perspective if one needs many stickers to sell a model. Also, most stickers are model-specific. If you look at sticker-rich models, almost none of the large panel-filling stickers can be used in another configuration meaningfully. It heavily restricts a part's usage options. Sure, I can understand a 1x4 tile with a licence plate sticker, or a 2x2 tile with some emblem. These are totally fine. They can add to a model while at the same time adding an interesting part to the collection that can be used anywhere. However, the stickers like the ones a set like 42039 is plastered with, I'd really like to see LEGO stop using those, and just use proper parts to create a multicolor scheme.

Are the custom stickers even allowed? I'd rather see them not be.

There are two versions of pins with slots that MLCad doesn't differentiate. The thinner ones are the newest. I like them better, because bars (and therefore, soft axle ends) fit into them. I don't know if they're weaker. Probably. But it's not like it's a rare part :)

You are way too easily impressed. All we can see is a printed drawing and a curved bumper section - arguably the easiest parts of the whole build. We have no idea yet about how Milan is going to tackle the actual crane with all its functionalities, and, whether the reality can live up to the ideas presented in the start post. I'm not so sure yet.

You don't want it at the front either. But I think multi-axle trailers are hard anyway, because the steering depends on the angle between trailer and truck. In reality this is probably done electronically, and, I think, this has a reason, because it's not as simple as with a fixed-body truck.

I toyed around with MLCAD a bit and here's what I came up with. Let me explain what I have done. First I used studded beams for the main beams because you can use them head-to-head and connect them with both the studs (red plates) and the holes (blue rotors), and thus create something that acts like a continuous beam over the whole length. Four of those continuous beams can then form the base of the structure. Then I used Pythagoras's 6/8/10 triangle to add diagonals in the form of the dark-gray 11L liftarms. This is basically as rigid as it gets in the vertical direction. Then I used 5x7 beams to connect two of those structures with blue 3L pins. I think you could stop there and have a great structure. I decided to add diagonals to the horizontal sections too (in brown), to make sure these are rigid as well. I think you could leave (and the red connectors) these out. I also added the body diagonals (in yellow) to keep the cross-section square (although you sacrifice inner space with this. Maybe if you replace the yellow diagonals by 5x9 beams you can do the same thing and keep the inner space free for your elevator).

They look rather weak to me. There is no continuous long beam without gaps. It's some kind of a zigzag pattern, which, I would imagine, would add a lot of play to the structure. Use triangles. Triangles are always rigid. Doesn't matter if you use the X or not, but if you have a rectangle, add a diagonal. Another approach is to go studded. Studded bricks are much more rigid if used in tandem with plates. Just check the main boom of 8421. If you just do plate-brick-plate-plate-brick-plate, and connect the bricks with some 3L beams vertically, and you have a very strong beam that can extend over 100 studs. Will do some MLCAD sketches when I have more time :)

I think you picked a difficult set to build alts for. Part-wise. It's a lot of beams, and more beams. So your MOC of this set is also a bit much "just beams" (just few panels in the set, probably). So yeah, I can see it's a challenge. I agree that the cab is quite angular, but I don't know if much better can be done with the set. Maybe it's also because the model feels a bit large for the wheels. Would it be possible to shorten things a bit? Maybe a bit less room between the steering pivot and the rear wheels (there's much empty space behind the turntable, shortening it may even help the steering?), and make the cabin a little bit lower as well, and the nose a bit shorter. Not sure its possible with the parts, but playing around with the proportions might help. Also, maybe, to save a bit on gears, you might be able to use some sort of a linkage system for the steering (similar to 42030 maybe?). The set has a few of the ball joint links for deploying the outriggers, maybe you could use those. Then you have some more gears left for the mechanisms of the crane. Good luck anyway :)

I was thinking the same thing, actually. Maybe we should post updates on our progress. If it's just text, I can't imagine it will harm anybody :)

The extra friction of fast-spinning axles is only a problem if you gear up by huge factors. But you don't have to. Gear up 5:3 and the torque on your U-joint is already almost halved. Gear up 3:1 and torque is reduced 67%. In many situations this is enough to not damage those parts. Also, gearing up doesn't have to take extra gears. A drive train already needs gears, so if you need them, just use different sizes (20/12 instead of 16/16) to gently incraese/decrease the rotation speed every step, without having to add more gears.

Probably not allowed in first two weeks :)

Does it have to be exactly 45 degrees? This one is about 44.0 degrees.

Good question. I think it's good that there's variety. To be really honest I think I like the limited ones a bit better, because they require me to build something I usually don't build. The enforcer/bandit compo is a perfect example. Very much is possible, but still, everyone has to really come up with something new. They can't just grab their first talent and use their experience. So, if the rules are strict, to me it feels more like a competition of ingenuity, rather than a competition of experience. But I like all competitions so far. It widens my building horizon, and it pushes me to strive for the best :)

What's the reason behind this rule, precisely? Anyhow. I have started building, after having disassembled my WIP version, but the thing is... so far, it has been 99% identical. It looks like my previous solutions were already good. Also it looks like the color I previously used is the only one in which I have the right parts. That said, now the real challenge starts. Setting up the superstructure and boom, putting the cable drums in, lifting the boom and getting it to actually lift stuff. (And, designing a nice cabin).

I hope bright green will make a return. That would make sense with 42039 still in production.

I'm not so sure about extending the deadline. The deadline is set, and known to everyone. Everyone can make some sort of a guess how much time they have over the coming two months. People should adjust their model and scale to that time frame. You can start building a 1:8 scale LTM1500, but it won't be done in time. So if you want to win, don't build a 1:8 LTM1500.

I think that one of the big goals for competitions is to inspire builders to better themselves and learn from each other. WIP topics allow that to happen. So I think they are a good thing. For one, I think that "someone going to take an idea and try to make it better" is key to this community. Why hide how you did things? That seems counter-productive to me.

I think the unfair advantage issue cannot be fully eliminated. What if I had the same WIP but not taken it anywhere, and wouldn't have told? ;) But also, as you (nerdsforprez) already say, there's more factors that weigh in into advantages. You mention time, which is a biggie. Anyone who has built several cranes before, has an experience advantage. And, many people have. The more tech-savvy people have a CAD software advantage. Those with bigger collections or a bigger budget, have a parts advantage. Those with good photography skills have a presentation advantage. You can question any advantage. Is it fair, or is it unfair? I think this question has no easy answer, or, at least, has a big gray area. And, in the end, every advantage is only going to be an issue for the person who wins (the prize, but also the honour). I think, what matters most in the end, is that people are having fun and are pushed to really try to build the best crane they can. The competition is very much about the challenge it offers :) That's what I'm looking forward to the most: all those cool great-quality LEGO Technic cranes. Just imagine :)

You know what? I'll disassemble what I have and just start over. I think I should also tuck away the photos and digital files I had and just not look at those. That sounds fairest to me. However these are all things you can't check...

Cool contest theme! :D I will be sure to enter, cranes being a favorite topic of interest of mine :) But I have a question. I happen to have been working on a pretty nice crane-in-progress over the last time, and I have once showed a WIP version on a meeting. It hasn't seen the forums yet. Could I continue building it and enter that when it's done? Or should I start on another model? Or could I use the work, and start on a new version of the same model in the same scale? Thing is, I will rework it to improve it, but as there's no part or size limit, and it won't get any more crane than this, there's no real need to change the sections that are already there. Point is, I often try out ideas and then not finish them. Is there any difference between an idea previously tested and taken apart, or an idea previously tested that's still assembled? (I have one of each, haven't decided yet which one would be best for the compo.) In fact, both of them are just a type of knowledge, and knowledge can be used, right? :)

Congratulations to all the winners. It was really a great contest. So much creativity. Also, Desert752 has proven that bigger can be better :D Also, 23 entries really isn't bad! :)

Are there any wheels you could use? I don't know, motorcycle wheels that could work? Otherwise you might need a brick-built solution.

11: 10 10: 6 9: 4 16: 3 18: 2 4: 1