Toastie

Hi aprendiendo, wow, I remember seeing this, and I guess I asked you about the control (I found the NXT and the control super exciting) but I completely missed that you have built your mechanism in a way to easily push the point blades against the soft spring loaded mechanism. And 100% LEGO. This is brilliant!!! I guess I need to get this going ... Regards, Thorsten

dejay, he was asking a couple of questions ... Hi Rob, for me it would be #1: NOT modifying the switch #2: Using standard LEGO "power" (regardless of battery (9V), rechargeable (7.something), LEGO AC wall warts ("10" V AC), LEGO DC wall warts (10 V DC) or power from a PBrick (NXT/RCX/Scout) - which just translates to bridge rectifier, matching capacitor, voltage regulator and that's it. But this way you can use virtually all LEGO power systems. If you'd run on low voltage drives (3 V) you could include 4.5 V battery boxes as well (... my maniac building across multiple themes idea). #3: Small size but preferentially with all LEGO parts #4: All LEGO parts and then: You can cut down the costs NXT/RCX wise considerably when you multiplex the outputs of the PBricks. Which means you need third party electronics ... the benefit though is very smart operation of the switches; the NXT/RCX could do some additional calculations just for fun when idling ... Regards, Thorsten

Hi Lobo723, shit happens. Never came down on me (LEGO wise) but ... This as a very unique thing which very rarely happens - you're lucky! Put the misprinted piece into a nice transparent box. Chances are it won't come across again. Regards, Thorsten

That is true, but the dial hardware on the remote may not allow this. This one just says: I was turned clockwise/counter clockwise and the electronics has to detect that. For a dedicated setting (speed X) it needs to know the absolute position of the dial, which is more elaborate to realize. And kids cannot go nuts on the dial because there are two end points ... Well I am guessing, maybe wrong. With respect to RF: I don't know but I could live with plain vanilla 1:1 IR to RF mapping with just a little checking on pulse length maybe to minimize RF noise issues - that would be a simple RF receiver and maybe an 8-bit super low cost PIC or something. Best regards, Thorsten

And ... what is really new with this train? That one is plain vanilla stuff put together, or what did I miss? Might be a red battery box (well I am not convinced, used black stickers on the box before and oh my they stick well) - yeah - what else is the kick? All pieces that I see are readily available and might be in you collection already. Did anybody try to build this train from scratch with existing pieces? Regards, Thorsten

Hi Mirandir, WOW! Your MOC is wonderful to look at from the outside; just great. BUT: The interior is like "falling in love". Nobody builds such a structure without "hidden" secrets. Three years? I can see that. It takes years to come up with this detailing - mostly on the inside. The outer appearance is just beautiful, inviting to explore. Wonderful. I like your MOC very much. It says: Look inside! And when you look ... Congratulations! Regards, Thorsten

Hi 22kane and welcome to the club! Yeah it was and is an issue for me, not so much the PF stuff, in contrast, but I can't adjust to batteries. Whatever. Completely agreed. I guess this is your rocket problem: The IR signal. Maybe there is some additional noise in the room you were playing; I had some issues in this regard with energy saving lamps. They can severely limit the IR range. Upon turning them off it worked much better; classic heat balls don't do that. Range extension by stronger signal strength: Well line of sight would remain an issue. I have built some custom IR/RF transceivers for my RCX powered loco's and some other RCX fun stuff. Even with the very low RF power I am using on these (the RCX does not have that much power on the active inputs, 5V/10mA max., and I am using a back channel for handshake operation), I have much longer range than with IR. I am entertaining the idea of making a 1x4 footprint, 4 bricks high RF receiver only. This one should attach directly to the PF receiver and would be PF powered. On the transmit side one could use rather strong 38kHz range extender thingies or the like. Would that work for you as well? Regards, Thorsten

Hi Eric, some quick feedback on ME track: Had two super-tough train testers in the house today, the kids had the whole set-up under full steam. My BR23 (after 3 hours of full power fwd/bwd operation [ben Beneke can even be more proud of his model] suffers from a coupling rod failure ... but other than that: No problems ) ME track was present on long stretches of straight track. No failure here. I noticed some initial connection problems between the pieces. Again, easily taken care of: Just bend the recessed bit at the end a >little< and off we go. Now, when I was preparing for the invasion last night, I noticed: 1) The flexi track does not readily attach to the ME track (easily taken care of with a file, for amateurs like me, aluminum is nice to work with ...). Now who does want to ... me. My set-up is odd in every regard, and flexi track simply saves me. (I don't hate that stuff anymore, you can even make high speed HoMa curves ) 2) The 9V power connection wires (#5305) don't attach to the track readily; you need to use a file again to reduce the "thickness" of the rails on the "outside" (wow, very well phrased, huh Just as a heads-up - in case some folks want to go all-ME, you may consider giving instructions on "how to" or notch them during manufacturing. Regards, Thorsten

Hoeij, the cheese slopes - yes, I can see that. With the swítch points you are absolutely right. See, this happens when coming from theory - I never had any 12V stuff (which is too bad). Did you ever try to "force" the 12V pick-up over a 9V/RC switch point? What happens? Generally I believe we need a proper 9V pickup in the long run. Maybe also a modified 12V pickup. "I" (well, it is "my" group mechanical engineer in "my" university machine shop) am almost done with the semi-professional grooving of BBB wheels, so we all will be able to purchase M, L, and XL wheels with groove and O-ring from Ben anytime sooner or later. After that we may want to entertain the idea of smarter power pickups, what do you think? All the best, Thorsten

Hoeij, that is true, but if you'd use the PF LiPo (with additional bridge rectifier in the "charging" line) you should do fine. On electrified stretches you'd charge, on non-powered track, you won't, but get power off from the LiPo. Assuming you have more 12V electrified track, that should work rather well, right? Regards, Thorsten

Hi Stefanwest, when clicking on the flickr links, weird things happen on my computer. Could be me, could be the links, mind checking? Best, Thorsten

Hehe :thumb up: Yeap, that's about it! Should they come out though, a little soap and water is all you need. ABS is pretty tough with respect to the human digestive system ... Well, lets be serious, kids, don't eat the bricks. Regards, Thorsten

I could not agree more - this weekend we will have (among others ...) a 10 years old train head over at our house. He is also a LGEO maniac, so that will seriously affect my stuff I guess. But nothing will break. That is the good thing about this quite expensive toy: "It" hardly breaks, if at all. Bricks may fall apart, that is the whole idea, otherwise they would not stick. So when the kids invade my office, I keep telling them to use whatever they want, because they can't break anything. Regards, Thorsten

Hoeij, the ones I have do only work when the polarity is correct. There was a schematics of the receiver posted in this forum, as far as I remember (I have copied the photograph of the hand written electronic circuit diagram, guess the signature is "Jeb" or something and dated 2/2010). It appears as if there is just one 1N4001 diode which simply shortens the input voltage when the polarity is wrong. All my PF receivers do behave like that. Best regards, Thorsten

Hi Eric, got my ME rails in the mail today and - simply wonderful. I haven't tested them yet but just looking at the quality is telling me, they'll perfectly replace this all plastic crap. Now, I agree with many others: Since you are pushing the L-Gauge electrified system (this is the LEGO train future, if you'd ask me), there should be some sort of power pickup system as well. The very moment we have that, we can run 4.5V, 9V, and 12V trains on this type of track. All what is really needed is a decent power pickup system and maybe something comparable to TLC's LiPo (should they discontinue that - they have done fairly stupid things in the past ...). Oh well, has been said before, ... All the best and thanks for making these wonderful metal rails! Thorsten

Hi LT12V, what a wonderful steam engine! Well since you kept me updated on your progress I saw that one comin ... fantastic. Congratulations! What I find even more exciting is that you have already put together a first "electronic" version of the 01 in LDraw format. That will eventually be the basis for the instructions you were mentioning, so you have done all the hard work. Now that crew picture is incredible ... I am proud to be part of the crew Thank you very much again - we will be in touch soon! All the best and have great fun with your wonderful steamers! Thorsten

Very nice topic, TheBrickster! Well, very high influence I guess for me. When I was 8 years old, steam engines made my life. They were roaring by and left me - paralyzed. That was back then "at home" in Northern Germany. So Ben's 23 is one of my favorites, as Teddy's 01 is. We moved to the US for some reason some 30 years down the road. And had the chance to room around at Long Beach, LA. Man. American diesels. Five of them piled up to pull container cargo through nearby deserts. SD40's, GP38's, ... you guys know how to make them strong and pretty. Yes. It is about Geography. The more you come about, the more ideas you have ... All the best, Thorsten

Hi legotrainfan, sin? Hey, come on. You are having fun, you are excited about what your are doing. Sin? Sorry. Having fun simply cannot be a sin. Lego's are bulky, limited, and hey, never come really that close to the original; as H0 scale models do (or whatever scale you name). They do, it is fascinating what they have in the shelves. Sin? No. Definitely not. It is fabulous. I myself admire the detailing on these models, the things they have accomplished. But: LEGO is not about piling the stuff up, it is about creating things. I really admire when people create models that are breath taking close to the original. But is this the purpose? Yes and No. Yes, if you feel a thrill when the LEGO model you are looking at is just saying: Hey, I am a BR01. And the audience says: True enough, you are a BR01. No, if you feel some sort of limitation when the radius of a LEGO track is - well - ridiculously tight. Which is entirely true. And it needs space. Well, I can only conclude: Do what you are doing right now, it is RIGHT, because you LIKE it. I really appreciate that you are sharing your thoughts here in this forum. Thank you very much! All the best, Thorsten

Hi Elroy, this is something I'd consider as "best suited for the RB team" as leaders. You guys have generated a track of inspirational, fun, and most importantly, serious and peer-reviewed type of publications. The issues of the RB journal really deserve this title. The RB Journal is reference, I have said that before, I am saying this again and again. A "book" though should not just be a book or collection. It should be an evaluated summary of the state of the art. It should have many, many references. It does not need to go to the details (e.g., building instructions). Some people claim that a book is outdated the day it comes out. Well, maybe true. But certainly not for a peer reviewed compendium. It will be instead a reference covering the most relevant things to date. In science (forgive me to be nerdy here), good review articles or even good books (sometimes called encyclopedias) are the most valuable resources, if you'd ask me. I truly believe that "we" (as in: This community) have the expertise and also the skills at hand to come up with such a comprehensive collection. This is going to be a major effort, I could not agree more. But with a couple of people on board willing to take on this challenge, "we" could really put a landmark. The RB team is - in my view - really qualified to go ahead with this project. Best regards, Thorsten

Eric, thanks for all the info! I would not go with 2, since that stuff is really made for turning "rust", which is a more or less porous iron oxide layer not protecting the iron metal below (that is why rust keeps on working its way into the metal ... ) into a stable "closed" iron phosphate layer (which is protective). Aluminum is best treated with 1 + 3, as far as I am concerned. AussieJimbo has given all the references. And: I too would like to thank you for sharing all this information on your new product! This is true customer service and once I have tried the tracks and they work for me (I am convinced they will) I'll may want to order considerable amounts! Thanks again an best regards, Thorsten

Hi Eric, that is one nice measurement! I have ordered my ME track already, waiting for it to arrive. One thing that I'd like to know or find out (either way is fine for me): The track is made from aluminum, right? Aluminum as bulk metal conducts electricity very well, close to copper at much lesser weight. In lab however, we have frequently issues with surface oxidation - aluminum readily builds a rather stable oxide/hydroxide layer on a previously polished area. There are some aluminum boxes housing home-built electronics. Making a decent electrical contact to the housing sometimes requires some surface "scratching", particularly on older boxes. Have you ever seen some sort of "aging" of the track with respect to surface conductivity? Or do the motor wheels easily grind off the surface edges "on the fly"? Or is it advisable to do some polishing before running trains after the track was unused for lets say a couple of weeks? Thanks in advance + greetings Thorsten

Hi Fred, see this thread or an even more elaborate article on the same topic in RailBrick Journal issue 7. You can securely use a plain vanilla 12 V DC power supply with > 500 mA output current. Just make sure the polarity is right - the pin in the middle of the plug is "+". I am using a 15 V DC power supply for almost a year now - no problems at all. Regards, Thorsten

Hmmm, great that so many folks have that many trains. Lets have even more fun: How many MOCs do you own? Buying trains from TLC is one thing. Creating them is another. Run down Sava's list - if you'd ask me: The MOCs count x10. At least. Running them (and then: At the same time ...) is another very fun thing. So with 20 at hand: Do you run them? Controlling them (go speed 3 and the machine goes speed 3, regardless of external "challenges") is another fun thing. Oh well, don't count them, give them a LEGO touch ... But once again, I am very impressed with the numbers. Congrats to all and have fun with all these beauties!!! Best wishes, Thorsten

Never ever heard of those, any more info? The RCX is a quite large "brick" Regards, Thorsten

Hi Snipe, if you want to go with an NXT solution, you could control a number of PF receivers quasi-simultaneously (4 in standard code = 8 individual channels). You'd need a HiTechnic IR "sensor" generating the appropriate PF signals form NXT programs. And then NXT code that is capable of responding to you input of course. The HT sensor is not that powerful with respect to range. If you want to extend the range, you could use a cheap "IR range extender" (non LEGO solution) available for remotes and what not. Done that, works well. Regards, Thorsten