General Discussion : 14387


General / 14387

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —James Simpson

(...) An important part of my Pre-Dark Ages Lego experience was enjoying the box. I remember fondly those substantial boxes from the 70's with the deep trays and wonderful Alternate designs on the back and inside lid. I loved the way classic space (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Mike Poindexter

James Simpson <jsimpson@rice.edu> wrote in message news:Fp9xAJ.J47@lugnet.com... [snip] (...) box. I (...) and (...) classic (...) were (...) long- (...) dark-ages (...) was my (...) Dark (...) the (...) said (...) hearty, (...) grew up (...) whole (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Gary R. Istok

(...) I too liked the 70's boxes. But they were no match for some of the very heavy early boxes from 1957-68. The European Town Plan sets (700, 810) were heavy wooden boxes. The USA/Canada Samsonite Town Plan (725) and Junior Constructor (717) were (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Tony Priestman

On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, James Simpson (<Fp9xAJ.J47@lugnet.com>) wrote at 23:01:31 (...) Too true. I really have to steel myself to open some of the old stuff that I've got. But I bought it to build it, as well as enjoying the packaging :-) Last year, I (...) (24 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —John Robert Blaze Kanehl

(...) I am envious, I remember my excitement over an LL 924 on my Birthday (geez was that the 70's-oh my = ) I always wanted the Galaxy Explorer (LL 928) .....One of the Holy Grails I dream of.....more so than a BSB or Yellow castle..... (24 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Paul Baulch

John Robert Blaze Kanehl wrote in message ... (...) Yeah, I felt like that, EXACTLY like that, for nigh on twenty years... then late last year I bought a used one in an auction. It was complete and in mint condition, just perfect. I built it, and (...) (24 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Tony Priestman

On Sun, 6 Feb 2000, Paul Baulch (<FpGL9E.GrL@lugnet.com>) wrote at 01:21:47 (...) Yeah, I know exactly what you mean. There isn't anything special about it, it's just a bigger version of 924. It's very nostalgic to build with just the original Space (...) (24 years ago, 5-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Paul Baulch

Tony Priestman wrote in message ... (...) Yes, that's right. In fact, looking at the picture of 924 (I don't own the set), it looks like one might actually be able to construct the 924 only using parts from 928. Now, more than ever, I can see why (...) (24 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Tony Priestman

On Mon, 7 Feb 2000, Paul Baulch (<FpIGtJ.FvA@lugnet.com>) wrote at 01:41:06 (...) I don't own 924 either. Wish I did, though. (...) Sounds a bit mathematical/philosophical to me. Not at all baroque :-) (...) Absolutely. But 928 just doesn't have any (...) (24 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Dunno, but it's a great saying. Paraphrasing a famous CS type: "Inside every large, clunky program there is a small, elegant one struggling to escape..." (...) Hmm, I thought this posting of member numbers was something Todd kinda was trying (...) (24 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Tony Priestman

On Sun, 6 Feb 2000, Larry Pieniazek (<389D9C09.F2F4CF16@...ager.net>) wrote at 16:06:33 (...) Call me a tired old cynic, but no, sometimes there isn't :-) (it's already five years old, and frolicking on a mountain pasture somewhere) Does anyone know (...) (24 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Nothing new (was Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC )) —Richard Parsons

Tony Priestman wrote in message ... (...) Wasn't it Solomon (Nihil novi sub sola)? And wasn't he a bit not Ancient Greek ;-) Then again, perhaps you shouldn't listen to me at all - let's not forget that I'm the guy who spells river with an f from (...) (24 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.pirates)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Steve Bliss

(...) Hebrew. The author of the biblical book of Ecclesiastes. Generally attributed to Solomon, but that's not for sure certain. Of course, someone probably said it before him. Steve (24 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Paul Mison

x-post added to .space (...) Hey, what's wrong with 918? It's the only one I had of the original trinity of spaceships, and it's great, although I've just noticed that if you put too much in the storage space at the back and swoosh too much it (...) (24 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Damian Garcia

"Paul Mison" <lego@songtwo.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:389EC63C.ED9860...n.co.uk... (...) spaceships. Those "open air" space craft *really* bug me too. -- ---D M Garcia (URL) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Jeffrey Baldwin

How do you feel about the 928? I think it is kinda plain. (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Gene C. Weissinger

I love these 'type' space LEGO. they always seem to remind me of what sci fi was like in the fifties... :) EC (24 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Jeffrey, (...) (Oh No! Scott is getting on his Space Soapbox!) I can appreciate sentiments of this type. However, since Space is probably my favorite theme, and have been collecting it since I was 4, and I have most of the sets since 1984. I think (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Mark Sandlin

In lugnet.general, Scott Edward Sanburn writes: <snip> (...) I like the clunky, non-aerodynamic "outer space" utilitarian look you have going there. I think a lot of us have a tendency to make our spaceships look like airplanes. The smooth, sleek (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Mark, (...) Thank you, Mark. When I built my ADF-800, I was trying to figure out how to have some kind of wing, and I just built the sides on it. These ships can go through atmospheres, but only because of the shields they run. A lot of ships look (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Steve Bliss

(...) I'm with Jeffrey. I think a lot of people get very nostalgic for Classic Space, and rate it higher because of their history with the line. Personally, I get nostalgic for the Explorien Starship, because it was the first big set I bought (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —John J. Ladasky, Jr.

Hi there, My two cents... followups set to lugnet.space only. (...) I never thought of the 928 (in the U.S., 497) as plain. Actually, it's a rather busy model, what with those big engines hanging out over the wings. (...) I have to agree with Scott. (...) (24 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Damian Garcia

"Jeffrey Baldwin" <Heatwaaave@aol.com> wrote in message news:FpLxK9.IDp@lugnet.com... (...) I think its pretty cool. I like the simple, utilitarian design of the whole thing. As was mentioned in another post on this thread, it seems more functional (...) (24 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Steve Bliss

(...) We all have our prefered pet peeves. I personally don't care that many LEGO space ships are not (physically) fully enclosed. But I know that annoys many spaceheads. Steve (24 years ago, 10-Feb-00, to lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Duane Hess

(...) It doesn't bother me too much either, but I imagine an open cockpit would make atmospheric re-entry a little dicy :-) -Duane (24 years ago, 10-Feb-00, to lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Steve Bliss

(...) :) That's assuming re-entry is achieved using the historic method of falling until the atmosphere is thick enough to support wings or parachutes. In fantastic settings, ships could use some more-controlled method of descent. Or have some (...) (24 years ago, 10-Feb-00, to lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Mark Sandlin

(...) Actually, it's because LEGO people have really, really thick spacesuits. They're actually normally proportioned people, it's just the thick suits that make them look that way. The thick helmet visor distorts their features into the smileys you (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-00, to lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —John J. Ladasky, Jr.

(...) In the interest of providing a sense of realism, I always build fully-enclosed spacecraft. Even in a spacecraft the never enters the atmosphere, the crew needs to be protected from radiation. Our atmosphere, and Earth's electromagnetic field, (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-00, to lugnet.space)

Re: Galaxy Explorer (Was Re: Poor packaging by TLC ) —Paul Baulch

Paul Mison wrote in message <389EC63C.ED98601D@s....co.uk>... (...) [...] (...) spaceships. (...) Hey Paul, I love 918!!! It and 462 Rocket Launcher were my very first ever Space sets, way back when I was about seven. I can still remember whooshing (...) (24 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —James Simpson

(...) You know the phrase "You can never go home again" ? This is how I feel about the idea that has been kicked around regarding Lego reissuing Classic sets. I'm afraid that I would be disappointed. They might not be as exciting, as interesting, as (...) (24 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.general)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Alan Gerber

(...) I found about half of one in my grandma's attic(along with about half of a set 400) Alan This message's random set is: 6554, www.lugnet.com/pause...query=6554 (24 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —John Robert Blaze Kanehl

(...) The new packaging is a far cry from my "compartmentalized geeK (24 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —John Robert Blaze Kanehl

(...) I apoligize for the last post.....cat on keyboard..... The new packaging is a far cry from the "compartmentalized geek" boxes I loved as a kid.....To this day I still have the boxes to Universal Building sets 745 (1976?) and 733 (1979?). They (...) (24 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —John DiRienzo

"John Robert Blaze Kanehl" <johnNYblaze44@webtv.net> wrote in message news:FpCLvJ.K12@lugnet.com... (...) the whole (...) Building (...) storage (...) frames.....an (...) I think the styroofoam is OK as long as you don't throw it away! Who could (...) (24 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Christopher Tracey

(...) speaking of... My sister got me that new big ~800 piece basic set for Christmas. It's the one with six or seven smaller boxes of lego held together by a cardboard frame. It seems like a waste of packaging to me, especially the raised baseplate (...) (24 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Jeff Stembel

(...) Was this the K-Mart exclusive? The one with the 32x32 light green baseplate like 5978's? I didn't have any trouble getting the boxes out of the two copies I got... :) Jeff (URL) (24 years ago, 4-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Re: Poor packaging by TLC (was: Has any one else noticed...) —Frank Filz

(...) No, I got my first copy at Zany Brainy. I think I've seen it at Wal-Mart, and perhaps TRU also. (24 years ago, 4-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)