Brickthus

I have also found a liking for white. The panels have become a significant part of the cost of the sets so it's good to find a use for most of them. Having bought quite a few Cargo Planes 42025 and Fire Planes 42040, I have been building a jet engine fan system, some Space structures in the Futuron theme for my monorail layout and also a moving BB-8 droid. Mark

Dear Ambassadors, This topic explains that people have been receiving Power Functions polarity reverser switches 8869 without the reverse switch on the back. The function of the reverse switch is to enable the switch to be used in a control panel e.g. for railway points. The reverse switch allows each switch to be set up so that the "down" position always moves the points to the curved track. Without the extra reverse switch, this would not be possible. It is a feature I insisted on for the control panel purpose when the switch was designed in 2007. Please would you investigate. We need TLG to listen to the needs of AFOLs. Thanks, Mark

This is terrible news. When the switch was created, I insisted they put the reverser in so that they could be used in control panels e.g. for railway points, so that "down" would always mean the point was switched to the curved track. This is an essential feature for LEGO train enthusiasts. The reason for the change is just cost-cutting - removing features and keeping the same price. It means there will be no reversing facility on the PF2 switch because the change has been made before PF2 has been rolled out to the domestic market. This is one for the ambassadors. I have passed it on and also posted in the LEGO Train Fan Club on Facebook. Could someone reply to the post on Techlug - in French? They should also get their ambassador to raise the issue. Mark

Post #8 above has a link to the first test video. Mark

With Updates 7, 8 and 9, the holes in the shell are starting to close. The latest changes have added quite a few deployable tools as the minor functions. - The flame tool for "Thumbs Up" - Some arms, which I have speculated might be similar to R2D2's arms. - Working on the map drawer. So far the panel opens. - Cables. Whilst the real BB-8 apparently has compressed liquid cables, I have found room in the shell for 3 reels of tubing. There are more tools we haven't seen yet, like a possible circular saw. I would make all the tools deployable from within the shell; no add-ons. I've started testing the steering function. At its best, the sphere will turn with a radius of 0.5 metre. This is as good as an RC car of comparable size and can be achieved without a perfectly smooth sphere, unlike full holonomic motion. I will have to update the internal mechanism when some more parts arrive. I could add the basic head-control arm at the same time. This is on course to have similar functionality to Volvo Loader 42030, with 4 motorized functions and some minor functions, for a similar price point. Pictures now in my Brickshelf gallery (when moderated again). Mark

I agree. I bought 5 Exo-suits. I would like to see a Classic Space revival. Several of Benny's SPACESHIP too! I also have 1x Birds, which would make good ornaments, and 1x Ecto1, which had good wheels for a potential Futuron monorail train, reviving monorail for the Space theme. I'm hoping a Technic BB-8 droid might make a good Ideas set, and again add something to an existing theme. It would help the Technic theme to branch out into different types of model, beyond the usual vehicles. It would have similar functionality and price point to Volvo Loader 42030 i.e. 4 motorized functions and several minor functions. For BB-8 the motorized functions will be drive, steering and hopefully head control, and minor functions will be the deployable tools. Mark

TLG have made so many of our wish list parts already, that one is bound to exist somewhere in Billund! What I would do instead is have an open-ended 1.5M offset plate where two would make your 1x3 jumper. That would be more versatile for statue greeblies. Mark

I think BB-8 is a difficult concept to for TLG to produce as a product, firstly because Sphero already had a sphere product and were able to add a head to it and provide full control from a phone for £130. A static model can look OK, and some of those I've seen look great, but the dynamics are part of the deal with BB-8. The rolling one has now achieved 10,000 votes so good luck passing the review with a licence-based product! I decided that BB-8 could be an opportunity for TLG to show off the technical capability of their products and promote their values by making a controllable one with Power Functions. This means the user can build the droid, operate it remotely (even if not programmable) and get the play value out of the tools. I started at 40% scale and increased to about half scale. When finished, it should have a similar level of functionality to Volvo Loader 42030 for a similar price point of £170. There is always the possibility that replacing the internal mechanism with an EV3 kit could make it programmable, but I'll leave that to the EV3 experts. It's not easy to get the tools right; even getting the faces in the right order has meant trawling through the videos of the real BB-8. There are a couple of helpful diagrams available but they need to be checked before use. I found only the flame tool and the cables in photos. The only one of the map drawer seems to be someone else's interpretation for their 3D-printed full-size droid. If anyone has found pictures of other tools deployed (lightning zapper, perhaps circular saw?) then please reply here as I would like to have a look and reproduce the functionality. Since we have not seen all the tools deployed in Ep7, there is still some mystery and speculation; I suppose some of the arms may deploy like those of R2D2. In the movie there can be multiple BB-8 droids, some for chase scenes and others for deploying tools. I have to do both with a single model. There will be no external additions! Here is the flame tool for "Thumbs Up", which fits in the shell and stays out of the way of the internal drive mechanism. This is how it folds away: Today I have developed a solution to deploy the cables that BB-8 uses to maintain position in the barrel-rolling Millennium Falcon. The cables are also stored within the shell and out of the way of the drive mechanism. Will post more pics of that in my Brickshelf Gallery soon. There is also a link to the project if you would like to support it. Mark

I wondered if the less-frequently-ordered or more-technical items might have issues if the picking staff were less familiar with their locations. I've been OK with ordering PF Train Motors 88002 alongside sets, and also previous PF orders have been fine, but a recent parts order that included some weight blocks for my LEGO Technic BB-8 droid had the blocks missing. Customer Services were great at fixing the problem and sending the missing parts on as usual but it was the first time I've had an order sent incorrectly. Mark

I've spent about 160 hours on my LEGO Technic BB-8 droid up to now, with perhaps as much again to do. If I were being an engineer like my day job, that would have a minimum salary rate of £20/hour, probably £50/hour as a contract, so the time spent so far is worth at least £3200, possibly £8000 (OK so maybe model building pay rates are rather lower). According to the reward rules of LEGO Ideas, 5 kits at a price point of £170 = £850 plus 1% royalty on 4,000 kits at £170 = £6800, total £7650, so it would need quite a few thousand kits to be sold for any "profit" to be made. How many Technic BB-8 droids at £170 do you think TLG could sell? The price per piece of LEGO Ideas kits is higher than most, probably because of the shorter production runs; in any case they have to use existing parts and very few colour changes from available pieces in order to meet cost targets. I built BB-8 for the benefit of the community and to give TLG an opportunity to take pride in the technical capability of their products and to help people get more educational value from BB-8, not thinking of any potential profit; I think there is actually more profit in the educational value of the LEGO product, especially one that teaches something other sets don't. It has also been a really good challenge, like I haven't had for a long time. I can see why Disney, as the licence-holder, would need to approve any new SW product, which is why I have sought to make BB-8 as good as possible. I had the same desire to maximise accuracy when building for display at model railway shows - build LEGO trains to scale, with best functionality, and operate them properly; I won a prize at one show . I've trawled the videos of the real BB-8 to make sure I have the tool faces in the right order. I've started on the deployable tools and today developed a solution for deploying the cables, from the Millennium Falcon scene where BB-8 deploys 3 cables to hold position whilst the ship is barrel-rolling. When I raise a patent application in the course of my work, my employer has the rights to that intellectual property so I sign over the rights to the company in return for a reward that acknowledges the value of the IP to the company. There is a signing-over of rights to TLG as part of the submission of a LEGO Ideas project, so surely any reward offered in return could operate on a similar basis without breaching a licence? The fact that it is calculated as a proportion of sales is voluntary to TLG just like any reward I might get from a patent at work may have tiers in proportion to its profitability if it is a really good one. The retail mark-up on sets is at least 20% so a 1% reward is small compared to the profit, especially where an Ideas set is sold as much online as from shops, giving TLG more of the retail profit directly. After all, there is enough profit from Shop at Home to give us free postage when we order over £50 of sets. Longing to find out for real, but it needs all your support first! Mark

I was disappointed to find no LEGO controllable BB-8 droid for Christmas 2015, albeit the Sphero product was a logical development of their previous sphere product so this cornered the market. I decided that since the LEGO Technic theme and Power Functions system has the capability, I ought to have a go. Project Blog here. Picture gallery here. If the LEGO company prides itself in the technical capability of its products then this is one challenge it should nail. BB-8 is a particular challenge when it comes to scale. There is a minifig with 2 pieces so the only function is to turn the head manually, so a non-minifig-scale model would definitely be better. A few people have made BB-8 droids between Miniland scale and 1/4 scale and there is one rolling one that uses a 2-piece sphere like the casing of a few previous sets and should make the cut for review within a week. A larger scale allows me to put in the technical functionality but full-size would not be feasible for a set. I chose about 40% scale initially but increased to half-size to improve the ability to roll. A larger scale also brings the responsibility to have the tools integral to the shell rather than any being added on from outside by the user. So far I have the main drive function tested ( ) and I have started testing the steering function; it can turn with about 0.5 metre radius. The magnetic head attachment and head control functions are to follow.In terms of how this fits with LEGO Ideas: - Technic projects may struggle to get support, partly because the user-base is smaller and the model themes are not usually as familiar as movie or TV themes. The Maze might be about as good as it gets. - A project in an existing franchise theme (in this case Star Wars) may struggle if it clashes with TLG's plans within that theme. I guess TLG did not have plans to release a large controllable BB-8 droid yet, though I suppose someone at TLG has probably had a go at making one; it's a great challenge after all. - The need to avoid modifying parts has been a good part of the challenge. It means there is no large sphere piece, nor even a segment, so it needed a composite modular arrangement that is not quite spherical. This in turn means allowance has to be made for the head to run on an uneven surface; it has a self-levelling mechanism with large pads for now. The magnets are more difficult because the traditional train and M-Tron magnets are no longer produced for safety reasons. Magnets must be encased in a piece too large to swallow, so I will do that. I consider that if I have accounted for the safety needs of the product then TLG would honour my effort. I know TLG make a fair few changes to the projects they approve so I expect this to be one such area. We need a new magnetic functionality anyway. - I considered the business case. When finished, the model will have similar functionality and price point to Volvo Loader set 42030 i.e. £170 with 4 motorized functions and some minor functions, so it would be feasible as a retail set. The minor functions will be the opening of doors and the deployment of tools from the shell. So far I have done the flame tool for the "Thumbs Up" scene but others are on the way (map drawer, cables etc.). - I realise that quite a few people have been put off voting for projects that TLG would not take beyond the review stage but for the BB-8 project I really need those votes. It is a huge struggle to generate interest; whilst a growing project gives me something new to say each week with the updates, a level of functionality and video evidence is needed for some people to be convinced - LEGO fans can be a sceptical lot! I have already posted on some Star Wars groups to appeal to a wider audience beyond the LEGO community. I want TLG to have a good look at my Technic BB-8 and decide to actively discard a project that demonstrates the technical capability of their product. A ready-made BB-8 droid just wouldn't satisfy me. I wanted to make a functional BB-8 droid that would be a feasible set and would meet the LEGO company's values to teach the builder about how it works as well as providing play value. The Technic theme has generally stuck to the standard vehicle themes of car, truck, aircraft, farm machinery and construction plant, with the odd robot thrown in. I hope BB-8 would be an item of interest alongside those, branching out into a more unusual territory ans perhaps appealing to a wider audience. Perhaps more animal-motion sets might also be produced in future and I would like to encourage that. Please would you support the project here. Thanks, Mark

Let me rephrase the question: "The PF light brick LEDs always turn on, in both directions of power, even with low battery voltage. Would it be possible to have the lights flash, either both together, alternately or individually, or to emulate the functions of the 9V Light and Sound lights, or for the lights to dim or do other functions with a control device? Would it be possible with different bricks in the middle, replacing the 2x2 black brick?" I can answer some of it too: This circuit for a light brick would have them turn on alternately with power direction. If there were no power control device then changing direction could be achieved with a motor, crank and polarity reverser switch, as was done in set 8082 years ago. This circuit would turn the head and tail lights on with the direction of a train, keep them on when the train stops and only change them when the train reverses, with another option to flash them alternately for a police car. Anything is possible; most things would fit in a 2x2 brick and more complex ones in a 2x4 brick or larger block, but I want to hear what the designers think. I would be happy to help them Mark

I guess the tender will be filled by a motor an a few mini compressors? If you add two of these pneumatic reverser circuits then you can make it change direction and go in reverse: In each case the two hoses bottom left connect to the valve on the side of the boiler and the two on the right to the cylinder it drives. Actuate all 8 valves with a PF motor and some Linear Actuators instead of the cylinders in the picture above and you can make it hands-free. Mark

Sounds like the 4 motors are exceeding the current capability of the S-Brick. I would get a second S-Brick and run 2 motors from each one on the same communication channel. It is also possible you are going over 800mA LiPo battery current trip, so a second LiPo for the second S-Brick would be best. I have found that the LiPo attempts to restart a load of 1300mA (4 train motors + gearmotors + lights). If it is shutting off without restart then maybe it is the S-Brick tripping. 4 train motors would definitely exceed the design intent of an IR Receiver and LiPo battery; I don't remember the S-Brick's current limit. Mark

This monorail system was started by Masao Hidaka; I developed the engineering to recreate all the functions of the 1990s monorail and push out the limits. No more track obsolescence, faster trains, multiple curve radii, more reliable points, 90-degree crossing possible, 8-point station-throat junctions on a single servo, longer hills, helical tracks. So far I've done a Space theme with Classic Space and Blacktron trains. I plan to add Futuron and maybe M-Tron or Ice Planet later. Anyone struggling to get the previous monorail pieces should have a go! Mark

What scale are you building? It can be 6, 7, 8-wide or larger. It can also be 8mm:1ft scale (or 1 stud = 1ft because 7.9375mm:1ft is a mouthful!) As I build to 8mm scale, 52" drivers (4'4") would be 34.4mm diameter as LEGO pieces. This is closer to the large BBB driver than the medium but oversize wheels might make the wheel centres larger by at least 0.5 stud increment, which would stretch the model. Therefore I might go for medium drivers depending on the wheelbase because I know the wheel limitations would not stretch the chassis dimensions. Where possible, find a 4mm scale drawing and multiply up if you're building to scale. For some main line locos I have needed wheels larger than the largest BBB ones so I have suspended some Technic wheels off the rails. This works OK with a bogie of 4 up front and a tender for the motors. Examples: - Class 9F 2-10-0 I added a tiny pair of wheels under the pivot of the pony truck. This has 2 train motors under the tender. - Hall Class 4-6-0 for Hogwarts Express. Easy enough with 4-wheel bogie up front and 2 train motors under the tender. - Idea for LNER Green Arrow 2-6-2 or A3 Pacific 4-6-2 using turned wheel hubs to get 3 cylinders with cranks at 120 degrees. This would follow the others for drive by train motors but uses smoother wheels. Mark

I did a Summer Sun with pictures and .Also an ongoing BB-8 droid with project, pictures and . I would value your support for this as a potential Technic kit with similar price point and level of functionality as the Volvo Loader 42030.Mark

There will be some current drawn from the supply rails all the time for the control circuit. The high consumption will only be when it is moving to a new target. Mark

I guess a few of these might break Jim's guidelines but all are genuine questions: 1) Now that we have a new pneumatic system with set 42043, will there be a revised 48mm 2/6 pneumatic cylinder (the old one was used in 8110 Unimog) to complete the range? That size is better for actuating other pneumatic valves, to make pneumatic automata. Good job on the longer ones and the full 2M throw on the 1/5 cylinder BTW 2) Will another Technic set ever do what 8868 did in the alternative model (refuse truck) and make a pneumatic automaton? This is a key learning point for the 11+ age group and adults and started me off in that direction - LEGO values 3) Technic sets are still short of pneumatic compression. I have to use a professional compressor at home, which has a fridge motor. What will be done to increase pneumatic compression in Technic sets? I am looking for more than just adding a second 1/6 mini compressor. 4) Will Technic branch out of the usual car, truck, aircraft, farm machinery and construction plant and have sets with more natural things like animal movements? I have tried an octopus arm with pneumatics, a hedgehog skeleton to curl up, a pneumatic swan neck, and also a cuttlefish with propulsion fronds that could move with a crankshaft driven from a wheel underneath. Could at least one animal or less-industrial Technic set in the range each year have more appeal to a wider section of the population (stereotypically more girls but such sets should have a broad appeal)? How could an animal set have enough functions for the money? 5) In terms of unusual Technic kit ideas, there is also the BB-8 droid from Star Wars The Force Awakens; I had to make my own with Power Functions since there was no LEGO kit of it; the result should end up with similar functionality and price point to 42030 Volvo Loader. I used some of the smaller panels but the largest ones are 5x11; would a smooth sphere section at a larger size be feasible? 6) Do Technic kit designers work to a £10 per function rule? I have noticed that sort of function-to-price comparison over the years. 7) Can Technic now hold its own business case without support from Bionicle or another theme? 8) In the part colours debate, the use of red and yellow axles, and some bright colours for pins, risks moving too far towards the K-Nex philosophy of having each piece in its own colour and making a model look silly if it uses a variety of parts. Please reassure us that for every Technic piece in a bright colour, there will always be a black or grey version available. 9) What can be done to make a wider selection of existing Technic parts available from Customer Services? I am finding that I can only get about half the current part types I want from there because too many are out of stock in the long term. Also the belts are never available so we don't get to do enough belt drives, which are a great alternative to gears. 10) What can be done to improve the steering rake (lock-to-lock angle) of Technic kits? The rake is poor on most kits because it is a toy function for children. Ironically set 42000 F1 Car had a better steering rake when its real-life counterpart has a poorer rake than road cars! I remember 8479 Bar Code Truck had a very good steering rake. Please return to the goodness so we can turn round in a smaller space. 11) I miss the Flex system. I understand it broke too easily and we need parts to be reliable. Could we have a new one, say 2mm diameter flexible rods in 4mm rigid tubing? 12) Why was the decision made to avoid using sections of rigid 3.2mm tubing for pneumatics in 8110 Unimog and 42043 Mercedes Benz truck? This worked well in 8868 and is a "legal move" for building. It reduces the balloon effect and can help pneumatic control to be more precise. 13) For motors, a lot of people want a new Micro Motor but can we also have an F-motor, a fast one for propellers? We used to have a 4000rpm no-load, 2000rpm loaded motor (47154, 4x5) so could we have an ungeared L-motor as a new fast one with good torque? At the moment the only motor combination able to launch a Ninjago Airjitzu spinner (even without the minifig or pod) is 2x PF train motors geared up 5:1 with a freshly-charged LiPo. Surely an F-motor from an ungeared L-motor would be feasible financially as it would use the same metal motor unit inside a revised casing? This would also replace the much-missed 5292 motor. 14) Will there be capability to stack the plugs of Power Functions Mk2? The pictures of WeDo2 appeared to show that this was not possible. How would we drive two motors from one output? 15) The PF Light Brick is great but we need an alternate one for a police car or railway signal. To cut one up and change the circuit would be messy and I wouldn't want to do that for many railway signals. I understand that it might be confusing to consumers to have only one LED light at a time; I thought that a different colour of 2x2 brick in the middle (e.g. grey rather than black) could make the distinction from the existing both-on light brick. How would the distinction be made for a production product? ...pause... Now that you have a solution, please let me see it, and buy lots of them! A couple of pieces I would like include a 1x2 half beam with a round hole and a cross hole, and a 40mm pulley like the 24mm pulley, with 3 of the 6-hole ring being cross holes and 12 holes in the outer ring; potential for use as train wheels. I realise a lot of my other wishes might be unfeasible for sets aimed at children; we can't have shortened pins but I'm OK to turn them myself. Mark

Having seen this post a while ago, I decided to see how it would develop. The ideas are not without merit but need tempering with science in order to optimise safety and reliability. It is quite possible to run any motor at a higher voltage than its rating, but you will shorten its life. If you want to exceed the ratings to win a rally contest but replace your motors every so often then that's fine. In such contests, most of the parts are deemed expendable in pursuit of victory! If you want to run the motors close to the fuse setting so that they trip occasionally then that's OK for you. However, a motor whose fuse has tripped will be more prone to tripping again because the fuse has a finite life. For each motor that you intend to run beyond 9.15 Volts (the voltage of a set of fresh AA cells), do your research and find the industrial rating of the internal motor. If that says 12 volts then that particular motor type would be OK at 12 volts for a longer period. For most of the LEGO motors, provided the industrial rating is more than 9 Volts, I would recommend a maximum of 12 volts; I doubt very much whether the industrial rating is any higher than that for any LEGO motor type. You could achieve 12 volts by using 2x 1.5V cells and 4 dummy batteries in a second battery box. 4 cells and 2 dummies for rechargeable AAs whose full voltage is 1.2V. At a higher voltage you will get more speed out of the motor because the speed is proportional to the voltage for a dc motor. If you have moderate duty cycle and make sure the motor does not get hot then you should be OK for a while. For a dc motor with a commutator there are sparks generated as the contacts are made and broken. The higher the voltage, the stronger those sparks and the quicker the motor's life is used up. The most efficient use of a dc motor is for it to run at half its no-load speed. The IR Receivers contain motor drivers that are H-bridges with flywheel diodes. If you understand what's going on in the circuit as you use them then that's OK. You need to pass on the learning with the suggestion so that everyone understands what they are doing. Exceeding ratings without understanding just leads to product failure when you have invalidated the warranty. TLG are good at replacing faulty parts but it's experiments like these that drive them to change the plug system. The backward compatibility of PF to 9V always left the system open to uses that TLG did not intend and could not possibly recommend for safety reasons. I still hope for some backward compatibility from the new plug system but it may be less likely because TLG need to meet the toy safety regulations and discourage connections outside their design intent. I've done some electrical hacking myself and have burnt out a few motors in my time but these days I aim to maintain reliability with the results. When I use a bench power supply I tend to stick to 9.15 Volts as the maximum. I have found the limit of PF train motors, which are currently the best source of power at high speed (except for obsolete 5292 motors). The experiment seeks to launch a Ninjago Airjitzu spinner from pure-LEGO electrical power. It could not quite launch with 2x PF M motors at 15:1 gearing up. 2x PF train motors and a freshly-charged LiPo battery did achieve a launch. A 5:1 gear-up ratio was good but a higher ratio than that did trip the motor fuses. As someone who is prepared to experiment, you have potential as an engineer. LEGO and electronics kits are what guided me in that direction. Despite the limitations on what a professional engineer can recommend, engineers know more and do get to over-rate things occasionally! Mark

TLG has embraced the general idea of listening to the AFOL community. For legal reasons they cannot just take every idea suggested by an AFOL on a public forum and use it. Therefore the ambassadors are asked to listen and feed back in response to the channels and questions that TLG opens. The LEGO Ideas site is the accepted forum to suggest ideas for sets, though the main rules of "no new parts" can seem restrictive. In reality TLG has made prototypes of many of the pieces we would want. Each new piece has to go through rigorous safety checks and suitability-for-manufacture tests. Certainly those who work for TLG are also AFOLs to varying degrees, so they listen when they visit various forums. As centres for Technic expertise, this forum and TechnicBricks will be viewed by TLG employees. I am glad TLG has listened to more than 10 years of pleas for more powerful motors. We have done well with the Power Functions selection, though an updated version of the obsolete 5292 motor would be welcome. The most influence I have had was when I visited Billund for a workshop, to help with the development of Power Functions parts. This is an experience I treasure. It followed my term as an ambassador and also needed my professional skills as an engineer. So many things have to line up at once that such experiences are rare treat for AFOLs. One thing I would like to see is Technic sets branching out a bit from the standard car / truck / aircraft / farm and construction plant machinery sets. I would like to see more Technic models emulate animal movements. I have tried making an octopus arm and also experimented with cuttlefish propulsion fronds. This sort of thing might widen the appeal of Technic to a broader section of the population. I don't mean "friendify Technic"; universal colours with just a few rarer-coloured highlights would do. My latest project, a moving BB-8 Droid with Power Functions, also fits the bill as an out-of-the-ordinary Technic set, with potential for popularity. It would fit the £170 price point. The longer pneumatics are welcome but we need the cylinder bracket from set 8421 to be updated so that the 2/11 cylinders can be placed end-to-end for crane jib raising. We need the new pneumatic pieces to be available to order from Customer Services. The 2/11 cylinder is not listed yet and the others are out of stock. We also need a new 2/6 cylinder as that is a better size to push the valves that control other cylinders and hence make pneumatic automata such as a pick-and-place robot. After all, pneumatic automation is something TLG started in 1991 with the alternative model to 8868. Mark

Technic creatures would be something a bit different. I've had a go at a pneumatic octopus arm and also a cuttlefish with its propulsive fronds. A Star Wars BB-8 droid kit in the £170 price bracket with Power Functions would be great - my project for this year, please add your support! Mark

Updates 4, 5 and 6 posted! I have recessed the 8x8 radar dishes in preparation for adding tools. I have substituted some new parts to improve the colour scheme and close some of the gaps in the shell. I've started on another mechanism update, working towards steering. Pictures now in my Brickshelf gallery (when moderated). Mark

I use points without the yellow levers but the next question is how to motorize them without the trains hitting the mechanism. Techniques to motorize them with LEGO motors here. Techniques to motorize them with pneumatics here and here. Mark

Not too difficult with 9V or 12V track, if you isolate a section of track. For the public interface, I would use a doorbell button from a DIY/hardware store. Much longer life than LEGO parts under public hammering! Mark