I'm in. Pledged. Can someone please wipe the drool from my iPad keypad ;)

David

If this maintains the trend of the first 5 days, it would cap out at 90,000. If it maintains the pace of days 3-5, it will sail past all the stretch goals.

Of course, the normal Kickstarter drive has a big surge at the beginning and another at the end with a much slower middle period...

So if we want this to succeed, spread the word!

This is obviously a great development. I'm wondering if the Lego Company is interested as well in participating,

developing their own BT receivers or leave it to third parties to fill this void ?

backed it.

Im in too, and have made my pledge. I see a lot of great potential in the project, so don't hesitate, go on and back it up.

Since I don't have a smartphone, will you release the message protocol used? Then I could use a bluetooth USB stick or transmitter on an FPGA or PI to control it.

Alternatively an i2c bus or something, but that would require running a cable to the brick.

Hi, we will add opensource client for desktop pc. It will support linux so you can run in raspberry.

This is obviously a great development. I'm wondering if the Lego Company is interested as well in participating,

developing their own BT receivers or leave it to third parties to fill this void ?

Our biggest dream is to work together with the LEGO on SBrick.

Backed. I wish it was already november :)

Approved and Backed by Zimix.

I hope that most of the guests reading this topic will also back it.

Only thing that worries me, I will have to move to LDraw, as LDD will not provide this part. Or LDD users will have to use some assembled parts solution, like for newer PF motors.

Approved and Backed by Zimix.

I hope that most of the guests reading this topic will also back it.

Only thing that worries me, I will have to move to LDraw, as LDD will not provide this part. Or LDD users will have to use some assembled parts solution, like for newer PF motors.

Thank you very much for your support!

I have 3D model file of the SBrick. Maybe it is easily importable to LDraw.

Please spread the world about this project!

Pleged.

An awesome project for sure, pledged for 2 ;)

I have 3D model file of the SBrick. Maybe it is easily importable to LDraw.

Probably, yes. Though it probably needs some tuning to reduce facet count... If/when you can share the definitive version of the 3D model, I'll be happy to make the LDraw conversion!

Having a 42009 still MISB, I just pledged for the 2 bricks and crane instructions. I will probably keep the set MISB until November, so I can turn in into the Ultimate 42009S

An awesome project for sure, pledged for 2 ;)

Probably, yes. Though it probably needs some tuning to reduce facet count... If/when you can share the definitive version of the 3D model, I'll be happy to make the LDraw conversion!

Cool, thanks for your help!

Please write me an email address, I will send you the 3D file.

Probably, yes. Though it probably needs some tuning to reduce facet count... If/when you can share the definitive version of the 3D model, I'll be happy to make the LDraw conversion!

I see the right people get involved. We will get the Sbrick in LDraw. That's GOOD news.

and we might get it before the Sbrick.

So now, I really need to get used to use MLcad or other tools with the LDraw library.

Thanks to Philo we have an LDraw object for SBrick now.

You can download here.

To use it with LDraw you need to uncompress the zip in your parts folder (subparts in s folder must go to parts/s folder).

Edited July 22, 201410 yr by pasztorl

A little correction...

(subparts in s folder must go to parts folder).

they must go to parts/s folder!

A little correction...

they must go to parts/s folder!

Thanks, corrected it.

That was quick.

Un grand MERCI Philo

So... for each SBrick, we need to buy an extension cable to be able to use it -- to connect the lego battery packs to the SBrick.

Seems like a bit of an oversight, doesn't it? Shouldn't you guys provide one?

EDIT: Just to clarify: IR receivers have a cable to connect to the battery pack, these don't.

Edited July 23, 201410 yr by ratmatix

So... for each SBrick, we need to buy an extension cable to be able to use it -- to connect the lego battery packs to the SBrick.

Seems like a bit of an oversight, doesn't it? Shouldn't you guys provide one?

EDIT: Just to clarify: IR receivers have a cable to connect to the battery pack, these don't.

There you have a point...

There you have a point...

Maybe, the designer of SBrick thinks that this SBrick is to replace the IR receiver which the user already have. This means the user who is going to use SBrick should already have a spare cable to connect the module to the battery pack. And also considering that most of the target users who are going to use the SBrick will be Technic MOCers, it's not unusual that the users already have enough spare cables, motors and battery packs. Also the cable itself is sold by LEGO and is not that cheap, I wonder the designer whether want include this cost into the initial KickStart estimation.

Just giving my two cents here.

While you raise a valid point, I believe the option made by SBrick team also have several logic reasons behind and yes you will need an extension wire for each SBrick.

- Inclusion of the extension cord built in with SBrick will definitely increase the production costs, will require more materials, additional molds and tools for the contacts in the plug. This should increase the product costs quite substantially and almost certainly should have pushed the KS first monetary goal much further, making this also more unlikely to happen.

- Inclusion of the cable and respective PF plug could significantly increase the risk of IP conflicts with LEGO. Realize how the plug patterns design in SBrick was made different as possible from the original PF connector.

- This way you can also choose between two different LEGO extension cable lengths available, according to your specific needs, although you could always extend the original cable if there was one.

All in all the decison taken seems very clever to my eyes, and not an oversight at all.

I just believe that it needs to be clear, or there's going to be some unhappy people when they receive their SBricks and not able use them until they buy another cable.

I disagree that most technic users will have extension cables. They aren't included in any retail sets whatsoever, other than specialised power function sets.

Edit: apologies, you said technic MOCers. I suppose that's a bit more valid. Still would be interested to see who doesn't have any extension cables.:)

I bricklinked some cables as soon as I realised, so I've got some, but that's beside the point. It should be clearer, right from the offset. :)

Edited July 23, 201410 yr by ratmatix

The cables will be an issue for a lot of people I think. I have a pile because I build bigger MOCs that need them (and I have some that have been opened and re-wired to make them even longer...) It is probably worth putting on the KickStarter page, IMO, and in an update. I wonder if they could buy a few hundred off TLG at a discount and offer those as an add-on?