allanp

Even real life hydraulics will lower over time. But one component I think is missing from pneumatics is a simple, in line one way valve. What happens is, when you raise the boom, then select another function but you still have the valve for the boom raise open, air can flow back out of that valve as the pressure in the whole system drops. You can prevent this by closing one valve before opening another, but a better way would be to have a one way valve on the input port of the valve to prevent air being able to exit from the inlet port.

The title doesn't really match the content, it's click bait. Looks like a fun build though.

The yellow creator pickup had suspension so it's not unheard of. Simple live axle suspension with steering is doable without drive.

So, apparently there IS a classic defender coming it 2023, but no word on if it's Technic. It'll probably be in the same line as the Mustang, DB5 and VW campers I guess. But man I'd love for it to be Technic whenever the current technic defender retires.

It's hard to say based on previous years as it changes year to year. It used to be that we would have seen the first half sets by now and the summer sets would leak just after Christmas. But leaks are getting less and less due to the counterfeiters. The first half sets could leak anytime between now and their release.

Well here's another pie in the sky idea! What about 3x3 or 4x4 studs in size remote input modules. There could be a button module, a d-pad module, a proportional slider module, a 2 axis proportional joystick module, basically physical representations of the powered up inputs that you can click together to build your own remote. This would allow TLG to do a phased introduction of the physical remote (they wouldn't need to release all the different modules at once) and for the next first half smaller PU vehicle they include two proportional slider modules. For the next train they include an unsprung version of the slider and a toggle button module for the lights. Depending on how they communicate this would be as cheap, if not cheaper, than the already existing train remotes yes? And it would allow fans to build up their collection of modules to build anything from simple push button remotes all the way up to giant full size consoles that surround you with buttons and levers and foot pedals (that you build) and so on. Imagine controlling 42100 with a full sized replica of the real life excavators control interface built out of your own Lego collection! Again, I guess it's not possible for whatever reason but why would these simple remote modules be any less possible than the current train remote? It would allow for Lego to do a phased introduction to the physical remote and it would be future proof in the sense that, no matter what model they release, they (or we) will always be able to build a remote for it. It also feels like a very Lego like solution. They provide the elements and we can build it how we want.

@kbalage gearboxes have it twice as bad. Not only do they look ugly, or perhaps I should say incorrect or inauthentic colour wise, but they are (and therefore look) incorrect mechanically. They are basically unrecognisable to the real thing. Maybe I wouldn't be so harsh on the colours if the form was far more accurate .....maybe! Having similarly sized gears called out in the instructions, with a red X over one and a green tick next to another (even better if they can mould the number of teeth onto the gear itself and just call that out in the instructions, like they do with numbered panels) would probably be much more foolproof than the brightest of colour coding, as it directs the builders attention more accurately than a bright piece in a sea of other bright pieces. Having higher numbered bags (less pieces to look through) would also help. I admit I wasn't aware of the example you sited with the dark grey and black gears being mixed up but we do see examples here where people have still made mistakes where the colour coding is much more obvious. We also see TLG gearboxes having numerous issues even when built correctly (not the designers fault but the limited parts they have to work with). So while I do sympathise with TLGs position and why they must make the building process as easy and foolproof as they can, I'm not convinced any amount of colour coding is as fool proof as our intuitions would lead us to believe, or that there isn't better alternatives to overly bright colour coding. There are also many builders that really do hate it, such as Jang bricks who is always complaining about the bright blue pins for example. But regardless if all that, thank you for the civil discussion. While we may disagree I do appreciate your efforts in laying out TLGs position (as well as you own) as fully and helpfully as possible. I hope my own opinions are seen as at least trying to be constructive as opposed to just whining!

@kbalage while I still think a proper TLG controller with TLG smart device would be the absolute best solution, having the powered up app support already existing console controllers would be better than nothing and I agree that most of these controllers have enough inputs for all sets as well as 99% of mocs.

Must ....resist.....urge to.....reply!!!! Ah screw it! I have seen some builds from counterfeit brands and they are all black. This does indeed look boring and not fun to build. I do fully agree with you there. However that doesn't mean I think Legos approach is right either, at least not for Technic. Surely there's a tasteful middle ground between the boring all black of the counterfeiters and TLGs ugly rainbow approach? This might not be as important for other themes but for Technic there is a complication that others themes don't really have. Many sets of other themes don't have internal novelties. When they do have internal novelties (such as seats inside a car or a table inside a house) then obviously those parts are made in colours that look right for those parts. You wouldn't colour the seats of ecto1 in bright and ugly colours "because they are on the inside" would you? Of course not. They are actually entirely black despite being on the inside of the car. Well, for a Technic set the inside mechanics, like a gearbox, is just as much of a detail as the seats of a car or the table of a building. The whole point of Technic is the internal novelties they have. The look of the Ferraris gearbox should be just as important as the look of its body work and the colour coding should reflect that.

Running the program on the Lego hub, like @kbalage also mentioned is an interesting option that I don't really know enough about but it does sound good. Looking at many inexpensive game controllers, they look like they have about the right amount of inputs in a good layout. They tend to have 2 fully proportional, dual axis joysticks (4 proportional inputs ideal for controlling excavators and the like), each joystick also can be pushed (2 push buttons), a d-pad (4 push buttons) , A, B, C, D buttons (4 push buttons) and 4 trigger buttons. That's 18 inputs (including 4 proportional inputs) even on fairly cheap and basic controllers, and some can have more than that.

@kbalage thinking about the motor thing, it could be that the current motors feel too weak because Technic has no real bearings (or good gearbox parts!) so there's too much friction which is where most of the motors power is wasted. So I want more powerful motors due to lack of bearings. However more powerful motors might lead to worn shafts and worn axle holes because....there's no bearings! So maybe it's actually bearings I'm missing more than more powerful motors?! You are correct in that a physical remote with built in touch screen/ble/WiFi and all the stuff needed to replace the need for third party smart device would be expensive. It's certainly the most expensive option. TLG would have to work with a smart device producer to develop it (didn't they consider working with Motorola on a project a while ago?). But my uneducated self perceives a few advantages (maybe because I'm uneducated on such things!) 1) TLG having complete control over the smart device. The smart device is currently the most complex part of the equation, TLG currently have no control over it and it potentially gives TLGs target audience of youngsters access to potentially harmful content on the internet. TLGs smart controller would necessarily have internet access over wi-fi but I imagine it wouldn't need a browser or messenger services. It would only need the ability to download TLG approved content. 2) Control over the future. Who knows what app breaking updates will release in future on Apple, android and whatever which TLG has to keep up with. Who knows what new smart devices will release from entirely new companies which everyone will expect powered up to work with. With a dedicated smart device TLG is the one making only the necessary updates and devices. It's crazy to me that my toys can stop working by upgrading my pocket telephone. I feel like we are so used to our smart devices that we are desensitised to how weird and wrong that actually is. 3) It could be profitable. Okay so what if it wasn't an all in one device, but two separate things. One is a regular TLG made smartphone and the other is a playstation style controller with a dock to plug the phone into. I know parents are not exactly thrilled to be supplying their children with smart phones. What if there was a basic smart phone produced by Lego, a brand that many parents trust, which runs on LEGO-OS and is meant specifically for children. That would be a big gamble for TLG but a potentially profitable one. It would also mean that the physical remote could work with your current smart device, so you wouldn't have to buy that most expensive part of it if you didn't want to. I know I know, it's all pie in the sky wishful thinking. But I can't help feeling like TLGs reliance on there being a highly complex device out there that's totally outside of their control can't be good in the long term, as well as not having a physical remote! And like I say, I am quite uneducated on such things (I know people that are so much more knowledgeable than me about these things). Maybe I have overinflated the issues I see in my own mind when in reality they aren't big issues at all.

You could argue that before PU, PF was good enough, and before PF, 9V was good enough. I don't think "good enough" is a good enough excuse to not want to improve and fix the issues. Not having a physical controller, the need for third party smart devices and a heavy emphasis on coding are all issues that previous systems didn't have. But I understand that including a TLG made physical controller with built in touch screen/smart device in every PU set would be way too cost prohibitive and also kinda pointless, as everyone would only need one of these ultimate PU smart physical controller with built in touchscreen thingies. This is why I advocate for it to be sold as a separate accessory. It would be expensive (cost of a smart device plus cost of controller, maybe £150? 200?) but owning just one would make every PU set vastly better and solve most of its issues. I think the coding thing is probably unavoidable to get the most potential out of the system, but it could hopefully improve in time with more dedicated and intuitive code blocks. Take steering for example. You could have a single code block which automatically deals with calibration. You can assign a button to switch between steering modes. You can also open each steering mode and assign how many steered axles there are and how each axle behaves in this mode relative to the steering slider/wheel position. So this block would let you select what you want it to do without having to code it yourself. You could also have a pneumatic controller block which lets you select how many valves it controls, how they are mixed and with extra output(s) for automatic compressors. Combine these two blocks with a simple motor driver block (for drive) and you can program a very complex machine (like a 6 axle mobile crane or a back hoe) with just 3 code blocks. You could also have a gearbox code block. Say you have a 6 speed gearbox with 3 drive rings controlled by 2 motors via wave selectors. In the gearbox code block you can select how many gears you have (select 6). 6 gears are then displayed on the code block. Select gear one to open it and then select the positions of each motor for that gear, then repeat for all gears. You can also select between sequential shifting a manual shifting. Sequential shifting would give you two buttons to place on the control screen, while manual gives you a H gate type selector with the right amount of gears to place on the control screen (which can also be used for multi function gearboxes). There could also be an option for automatic. Such configurable code blocks could cut down the need for coding quite drastically and intuitively. Of course the existing code blocks can stay for those that do like coding also. For me the only remaining issue is lack of fast and/or more powerful motors. I know the hubs have weak sauce motor driver chips built in, but is it possible for the hubs to supply more power to more powerful motors if those motors have their own built in dedicated driver chips?

I did begin to wonder if mindstorms still had a reason for being when Technic/powered up can basically do all the same things, just needs a couple of sets with sensors included and you're there. I wouldn't be surprised if future powered up Technic sets may include some sensors. Maybe a "control centre 3" style universal set with a big multi-axis robotic arm, a dinosaur, an excavator, self driving forklift etc. Kind of like how the creator sets was a spiritual successor to model team, powered up can make some Technic sets the spiritual successor to mindstorms (only bigger with lots more pieces, like 42100) but only if they come with sensors and multiple, completely different models that can be built. I might not be that excited for it as I'm not a big fan of mindstorms (mainly because I don't find coding all that exciting!) but I think this control center 3 type set would be a big hit with the many mindstorms fans out there while also appealing to a wider audience in general. But this whole business does raise a wider question with the whole powered up system. App support for mindstorms is stopping in 2024? Well then what, is all that hardware that the fans have spent a bunch of money on useless after that? My control centre 1 and 2 sets, my barcode truck set and all my power functions sets are still working just fine. Should I not buy any powered up set knowing that one day they'll just stop working?

Agreed. Personally I've never been excited by just the subject matter of a model, but by the way that subject matter has been recreated, and you can't really tell that from just a name. Pictures help but even then I want to know more about the novelties on the insides more than the outside.

That's really cool even without the GBC aspect, very well done

I've been thinking, the defender has been a very good seller for Lego from what I can tell. When it does retire it would be great to see it replaced with the classic, iconic defender, the one with the ladder frame chassis, drop link steering and live axle suspension. Whilst I get why they went with the new defender, I believe the old one was the defender more people wanted from Lego and doing the classic icon would give them a great opportunity to improve on the previous one. They could do the longer 110 version to give the designer (hopefully Grohl again) a bit more room and introduce the new gearbox parts I suggested, which I still believe is the absolute best way to solve all Lego gearbox issues once and for all. It would be a lot of new parts but I think it would be worth it for such a set that would likely sell very well, and it would make the parts available for future sets/supercars. Maybe they could also introduce new wheel hubs to accept the newer, larger CV joints. These new CV joints combined with the new gearbox parts would really unlock a lot of potential for much more realistic models, as well as being capable of being fully motorised, though the set itself wouldn't need to be motorised out of the box but it would unlock that potential. I really do think that would be a fantastic next step forward for Technic when the current defender retires.

I don't comment on MOCs often as I tend to critique them like it's an official set by a paid designer but this really is fantastic

Thanks @Zerobricks, added those

I wondered about posting this as a separate topic but thought I'd post it here instead. So a good AFOL friend of mine has his birthday fairly close to Christmas (****If you are that friend, you know who you are, don't read any further to avoid spoilers!***)

Mine is also tilted too far forwards. When you push the cyclic all the way forwards the mechanism begins to bind. Is it confirmed that this is an error (either on TLGs part or my own) or a "feature"?

You had to know this was coming, pneumatic patient launcher perhaps? Seriously though, an ambulance or UK police care (in neon and blue) might be cool if they came with some new light elements, like maybe 8 LEDs on individual wires, connected to a single port for the smart hub, and a new programmable light sequencer code block so you can make cool emergency flashing lights, fairground lighting or have 4 pairs that can go into a pair of 2x2 trans yellow round bricks in a way that mimics a rotating beacon. Another set of 8 could be used for front/rear indicators, brake lights and headlight. That's two ports used for 16 lights, leaving the remaining 2 ports for drive and steer. EVEN BETTER (dunno if possible) would be if the place where the port spits into the 8 individual wires for the light would incorporate a speaker making it a light and sound module, so the sounds can come from the model itself instead of weirdly coming from the phone!

And the argument rages on! There's a difference between colour coding and colour vomit. Colour coding: Tasteful use of colours that would be seen in real life (black, dark bley, like bley, metallic greys, even brown might look like oil or some brass colour), and the main colour of the model itself (eg red for the Ferrari) Used sensibly (a brightly coloured part does not stand out in a sea of brightly coloured parts) Makes logical sense in helping to identify the function/type of part (friction pins being black, not friction pins being bley for example) Understands that the inside of a technic model is where the mechanics (the heart) is, and should look as authentic as the outside. Authenticity that's only skin deep is not authentic at all for Technic. Colour vomit: Not tasteful use of colours (gears are bright red, blue, green, yellow, and so on) Not used sensibly Cares not for the authenticity of the mechanical insides of a model Treats sets aimed at older builders like they were aimed at toddlers Isn't even the best answer as mistakes still happen. Having bag numbers go much higher for technic sets (like they do for larger sets in others themes) has been much more effective for me when building those other sets, like the 89 batmobile whose bag numbers went to 22 I think. I also noticed that the new helicopter upper swash plate element has an arrow moulded into the part which is directly called out in the instructions. This is much better than if they had coloured the part purple (which I think puts into perspective how silly the bright colouring of parts actually is in terms of being helpful).

That part reminded me of this for some reason....

So if the crane does come in 2023, will it be an additional flagship or will it replace the original 2023 flagship? Of course we don't know but it's fun to speculate!

I mean, of course the Arocs is perfect in every way! I'm not going to argue with that but there are some that liked every set having their seats and steering wishbones coloured blue as that was the usual Technic tradition. Maybe it'll take a bit of getting used to. But TBF I still miss my studded technic and motors with no internal gearing