| |
Hi there,
With a load of thanks to Terry. My plane is finally publicly viewable. The
address is:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9500/jeroen/f-14.html
Just to remind you what I am rambling about:
This plane helped me to get my job as Lego technic designer.
Happy building, and let me know what you think of it (the plane that is),
Jeroen Ottens (private mail)
|
|
| |
Whoa! So, when do we get to see this released as a set, Jeroen? :)
--
Mark Koesel
koesel@umich.edu
Jeroen Ottens <ottens@get2net.dk> wrote in message
01be6743$de1d8960$28c68e81@ottens...
> Hi there,
>
> With a load of thanks to Terry. My plane is finally publicly viewable. The
> address is:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9500/jeroen/f-14.html
>
> Just to remind you what I am rambling about:
>
> This plane helped me to get my job as Lego technic designer.
>
> Happy building, and let me know what you think of it (the plane that is),
>
> Jeroen Ottens (private mail)
|
|
| |
Jeroen Ottens writes:
> Hi there,
>
> With a load of thanks to Terry. My plane is finally publicly viewable. The
> address is:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9500/jeroen/f-14.html
>
> Just to remind you what I am rambling about:
>
> This plane helped me to get my job as Lego technic designer.
>
> Happy building, and let me know what you think of it (the plane that is),
>
> Jeroen Ottens (private mail)
Sonofa-!
I'd have hired you too! I hope that that sort of creativity will be reflected
in kits TLG releases later. If they can do it with a SuperCar, why not a
jet? Wow.
........
don't mind me, just staring. (wiping drool).
Ben V.
|
|
| |
holy sh.....that is about all i can say right now...im too stunned!!!
Jeroen Ottens wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> With a load of thanks to Terry. My plane is finally publicly viewable. The
> address is:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9500/jeroen/f-14.html
>
> Just to remind you what I am rambling about:
>
> This plane helped me to get my job as Lego technic designer.
>
> Happy building, and let me know what you think of it (the plane that is),
>
> Jeroen Ottens (private mail)
|
|
| |
Jeroen,
Awesome!
Scott Sanburn
Jeroen Ottens wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> With a load of thanks to Terry. My plane is finally publicly viewable. The
> address is:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9500/jeroen/f-14.html
>
> Just to remind you what I am rambling about:
>
> This plane helped me to get my job as Lego technic designer.
>
> Happy building, and let me know what you think of it (the plane that is),
>
> Jeroen Ottens (private mail)
|
|
| |
Jeroen Ottens writes:
> Hi there,
>
> With a load of thanks to Terry. My plane is finally publicly viewable. The
> address is:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9500/jeroen/f-14.html
>
> Just to remind you what I am rambling about:
>
> This plane helped me to get my job as Lego technic designer.
>
> Happy building, and let me know what you think of it (the plane that is),
*sigh* ;') *sniff* *tear dab*
After seeing that, my faith in TLG has been refreshed. Simply a wonderful
model.
I need to build a spaceship like that sometime. Then I could call myself a
builder.
Two questions to you Jeroen, that you can certainly feel free not to answer:
1) do your fellow Technic designers at Lego come up and submit stuff like that
too? Have they come up with anything like that lately? I'm not asking for
pictures or details, just for some reassurance that some folks inside the
great Lego machine are still true great builders before the model experiences
management's "selective compression" as the model undergoes the long journey
to the shelf.
2) what's the average age of your fellow designers?
-Tom McD.
|
|
| |
To answer your questions partially:
My Tomcat helped me to get the job, so people in here do look at that.
The advertisement I answered to asked for young people...
Jeroen Ottens (private mail)
Tom McDonald <radiotitan@yanospamhoo.com> wrote in article
<F86zJz.97t@lugnet.com>...
<snip>
> Two questions to you Jeroen, that you can certainly feel free not to • answer:
>
> 1) do your fellow Technic designers at Lego come up and submit stuff like • that
> too? Have they come up with anything like that lately? I'm not asking for
> pictures or details, just for some reassurance that some folks inside the
> great Lego machine are still true great builders before the model • experiences
> management's "selective compression" as the model undergoes the long • journey
> to the shelf.
>
> 2) what's the average age of your fellow designers?
>
>
> -Tom McD.
>
|
|
| |
"Jeroen Ottens" <ottens@get2net.dk> writes:
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9500/jeroen/f-14.html
I'm happy to finally see these images. It's a great model.
I think it's interesting to see that the model is built in the LEGO
Technic style, meaning that the body is not "full", but rather outlined
by beams and so on. Making a full body would be cool, but would
undoubtedly weight too much and also take far too many parts to make.
And besides, with a full body, one couldn't see the internals!
The front wheel suspension looks interesting. It would be nice to see
some more images, though.
I don't know too much about the real plane, but for some reasons, I
think that the wheels look a tad bit small. Are they in fact the proper
size for a plane like that?
> This plane helped me to get my job as Lego technic designer.
I realize that you may not be able to answer these questions due to
company policy, but I try anyway:
Do LEGO Technic designers work in team when making models, or do they
make the individual models independently?
Are the other LEGO Technic designers AFOL's as well?
Fredrik
|
|
| |
Even if I had the pieces I still wouldn't make a closed surface model. It
simply doesn't look good. This plane has been build on a scale of 1:24 but
to get the round curves right in Lego I should build it much larger.
The other problem is that I wanted all the functionality in the plane I
could get. Making an outer hull would take away invaluable space. In real
the plane is already stuffed to the max and it uses only a few millimeters
thick skin. Image that in Lego, to get the same dimensions I should build
it actually bigger than the real thing! (Which is over 25 meters)
Then of course there is the weight problem. Lego has only one dimension of
axles. The rear landingwheels turn in two directions when retracted. That
is the wheel comes to the front, but also turns so that it can lay flat in
the wing area. It took me some time to get the mechanics working allright,
but then I use a special support in the back of the landinggear so that not
all the weight comes on the axles. As you can see are the suspensions
totally pressed because of the weight. When I drive around with the model I
have to be very carefull that I don't make a wrong move, otherwise the
plane will just crash through the landinggears. The bigger the model, the
bigger this problem becomes.
Anyway I enjoyed building it (actually I still enjoy building it) and I'm
glad you enjoy looking at it.
Happy building (and looking),
Jeroen Ottens
|
|
| |
Jeroen Ottens <ottens@get2net.dk> wrote in article
<01be68a1$7908dd40$ecca52c3@ottens>...
> Even if I had the pieces I still wouldn't make a closed surface model. It
> simply doesn't look good. This plane has been build on a scale of 1:24 • but
> to get the round curves right in Lego I should build it much larger.
> The other problem is that I wanted all the functionality in the plane I
> could get. Making an outer hull would take away invaluable space. In real
^^^^^^^^^^
That is valuable space of course;)
|
|
| |
As a technic freak and a mechanical engineering geek, lemme' say POST IT TO
DEAR LEGO!!! I would stand in line waiting to buy this model, if released by
Lego!
Thanks for the photos (more! more!)
Eric
Jeroen Ottens wrote in message <01be6743$de1d8960$28c68e81@ottens>...
> Hi there,
>
> With a load of thanks to Terry. My plane is finally publicly viewable. The
> address is:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9500/jeroen/f-14.html
>
> Just to remind you what I am rambling about:
>
> This plane helped me to get my job as Lego technic designer.
>
> Happy building, and let me know what you think of it (the plane that is),
>
> Jeroen Ottens (private mail)
|
|
| |
Jeroen wrote:
> take away invaluable space. In real
> ^^^^^^^^^^
> That is valuable space of course;)
It's OK Jeroen, in English "Invaluable" means so Valuable it's beyond
value: so you were right in the first place <g>.
Kevin
|
|
| |
I'm the little one...I'm the poor one..(1)
WOWWWW!..(2)
Selçuk
(1) I felt that beofre, the first time in my lego building life, when I saw
Erector's minifig scale, 18000-pieces Titanic, but even it is not worth talking
about now, comparing this mechanical miracle.
(2) I sounded like this more than fifteen, one after te other, and with an
increasing loudness each time, esopeecially wahile reading those specs.
Jeroen Ottens wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> With a load of thanks to Terry. My plane is finally publicly viewable. The
> address is:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9500/jeroen/f-14.html
>
> Just to remind you what I am rambling about:
>
> This plane helped me to get my job as Lego technic designer.
>
> Happy building, and let me know what you think of it (the plane that is),
>
> Jeroen Ottens (private mail)
|
|
| |
SPECTACULAR!
An incredible work of art. I'm completely blown away. Has this model ever
been considered by TLG as a possible commercial release? I've always wanted
to see more jets and spacecraft in the Technic line. TLG could start a new
line of Deluxe Edition Technic sets. Can you say whether or not there will
be Star Wars Technic? We (AFOL) would starting saving our pennies now. :-)
BTW, will Star Wars replace Space or will there be new sub-themes after
Insectiods? I'd like to recommend two new theme ideas. First, Prismatron,
a theme with all transparent parts (I'm seeing trans-dark blue or
trans-green monorail track). Secondly, Chromatron, a theme with all chrome
pieces (in different colors of course).
David Simmons
alienbuz@concentric.net
|
|
| |
"Selçuk " wrote:
>
> I'm the little one...I'm the poor one..(1)
>
> WOWWWW!..(2)
>
> Selçuk
>
> (1) I felt that beofre, the first time in my lego building life, when I saw
> Erector's minifig scale, 18000-pieces Titanic, but even it is not worth talking
> about now, comparing this mechanical miracle.
>
> (2) I sounded like this more than fifteen, one after te other, and with an
> increasing loudness each time, esopeecially wahile reading those specs.
You just can't write off the Titanic model. The F-14 and the Titanic
are both
great models, just on two completely different levels. The F-14 is a
mechanical
wonder and the Titanic is more of a WOW factor. IMHO.
--
Paul Foster
http://reality.sgi.com/foster_stco/lego.html
|
|
| |
On Sun, 7 Mar 1999 13:49:17 GMT, "Jeroen Ottens" <ottens@get2net.dk> wrote:
> Then of course there is the weight problem. Lego has only one dimension of
> axles. The rear landingwheels turn in two directions when retracted. That
> is the wheel comes to the front, but also turns so that it can lay flat in
> the wing area. It took me some time to get the mechanics working allright,
> but then I use a special support in the back of the landinggear so that not
> all the weight comes on the axles. As you can see are the suspensions
> totally pressed because of the weight. When I drive around with the model I
> have to be very carefull that I don't make a wrong move, otherwise the
> plane will just crash through the landinggears. The bigger the model, the
> bigger this problem becomes.
I would like to see a detail of how you did the main landing gear. When I
started my (aborted) attempt at an F-14, that is what I started with. Mine
worked very well, rotating 90 degrees as it moved up into the wing root, but it
was not suspended. Mine works very similar to the real thing, as I tried to
copy the actual thing using a type of draglink to perform the rotation.
I still have it together, on the off chance that I may someday get inspired to
continue with the project. :-)
My idea was to go for looks, rather than function as you did. So
mechanically, all I was going to do was the main and nose gear, and the wing
retraction. My idea was to have the landing gears and the wing sweep to be
manually operated by rotating the engine tail cones. I figured they would make
good crank handles. :-)
I suppose I should LDraw the gear assembly (if the pieces are available)
-- Terry K --
|
|
| |
Two (not so) different opinions of course, but I'll stick with mine...:-)
There is always a difference between "technical elegance" and "brute force",
IMHO as being an engineer. But you are absolutely right about greatness of
both models. Titanic was as great as not being mentioned using the words
that I used in my previous opinion, I was just too excited..:-)
Selçuk
Paul Foster wrote in message <36E3670A.7D42426E@execpc.com>...
> "Selçuk " wrote:
> >
> > I'm the little one...I'm the poor one..(1)
> >
> > WOWWWW!..(2)
> >
> > Selçuk
> >
> > (1) I felt that beofre, the first time in my lego building life, when I • saw
> > Erector's minifig scale, 18000-pieces Titanic, but even it is not worth • talking
> > about now, comparing this mechanical miracle.
> >
> > (2) I sounded like this more than fifteen, one after te other, and with • an
> > increasing loudness each time, esopeecially wahile reading those specs.
>
> You just can't write off the Titanic model. The F-14 and the Titanic
> are both
> great models, just on two completely different levels. The F-14 is a
> mechanical
> wonder and the Titanic is more of a WOW factor. IMHO.
>
> --
> Paul Foster
> http://reality.sgi.com/foster_stco/lego.html
|
|
| |
--
Mark Koesel
koesel@umich.edu
David Simmons <alienbuz@concentric.net> wrote in message
F89Hw1.M27@lugnet.com...
[snip]
> Can you say whether or not there will be Star Wars Technic?
Pictures of Star Wars Technic (well, not strictly Technic,
since it is not 8XXX) have already been released.
See http://194.131.104.225/~huw/lego/reference/1999/9478-1.jpg
|
|
| |
On Mon, 8 Mar 1999 08:52:12 GMT, "Selçuk <teyyareci>"
<sgore@nospam.superonline.com> wrote:
> Two (not so) different opinions of course, but I'll stick with mine...:-)
>
> There is always a difference between "technical elegance" and "brute force",
> IMHO as being an engineer. But you are absolutely right about greatness of
> both models. Titanic was as great as not being mentioned using the words
> that I used in my previous opinion, I was just too excited..:-)
Plus, don't forget about models which may not have technical/engineering
elegance, but are design marvels and are visually beautiful and elegant.
I'm thinking of most of Ed Boxer's creations; wonderful architectural
models.
Steve
|
|
| |
The main landinggear movement is controlled by three gears, 2 24 tooth
normal gears and 1 24 tooth cam-gear (if that's the name of it). One of the
24 tooth gears is locked, the other is the driving one. They are placed
opposite of each other with 2 studs space between them. The cam gear is
positioned to connect both gears. If you still understand this:
The axle of the cam gear is used to orientate the landinggear (confusing
that gearing stuff). I have used some little technic pieces to make a 360
degree ball-joint in between the two normal gears and voila, when you turn
the driving wheel, the cam wheel will roll itself up and rotate at the same
time.
Now you still have to work out the problem of making it turn so that the
wheel is on top of the landinggear when retracted, and you have got to fix
the axle of the fixed gear to make sure that the landinggear is pointed
straight to the front when in standing position, but that's even more
details.
I hope you understand it, otherwise I should get myself some time to reload
(I accidently plugged the drain on my harddisc lately) all the LDRAW stuff
and draw it.
This configuration works well, but it doesn't look like the real thing. So
Terry can you explain or show me how you did it?
Happy building
Jeroen Ottens (private mail)
PS This (private mail) message doesn't appear all the time. This doesn't
mean the message is suddenly approved of by my superiors. It mainly means I
forgot to enter it. I think more official messages can be recognized when
they do appear.
Terry K <legoverse@geocities.com> wrote in article
<36e370ae.575290@lugnet.com>...
<snip>
> I would like to see a detail of how you did the main landing gear. When • I
> started my (aborted) attempt at an F-14, that is what I started with. • Mine
> worked very well, rotating 90 degrees as it moved up into the wing root, • but it
> was not suspended. Mine works very similar to the real thing, as I • tried to
> copy the actual thing using a type of draglink to perform the rotation.
> I still have it together, on the off chance that I may someday get • inspired to
> continue with the project. :-)
> My idea was to go for looks, rather than function as you did. So
> mechanically, all I was going to do was the main and nose gear, and the • wing
> retraction. My idea was to have the landing gears and the wing sweep to • be
> manually operated by rotating the engine tail cones. I figured they • would make
> good crank handles. :-)
>
> I suppose I should LDraw the gear assembly (if the pieces are available)
>
> -- Terry K --
>
>
|
|
| |
Op een zekere dag, te weten Fri, 5 Mar 1999 20:05:57 GMT, klom "Jeroen
Ottens" <ottens@get2net.dk> in het toetsenbord en schreef ons:
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9500/jeroen/f-14.html
>
> Happy building, and let me know what you think of it (the plane that is),
Jeroen (1), this is one of the best models I've ever seen, a truly
'desighn'....
Any chances of LDraw? 8-)))
Ardjan
(1) My brother is also called Jeroen......
-----
Ardjan's YALP (Yet Another Lego Page) at
http://unet.univie.ac.at/~a8705125/ardjan
|
|
| |
On Mon, 8 Mar 1999 19:02:39 GMT, "Jeroen Ottens" <ottens@get2net.dk> wrote:
I think I have a hazy idea of what you described.
Or perhaps a "foggy" idea. :-)
It sounds simple, anyway.
My version is really quite simple, and I will try to do a mostly complete ldraw
version and post it. Better than trying to explain it verbally, which I really
suck at. :-)
Off the top of my head, I can only think of one piece that is missing from
ldraw, and I can fake that. Oh, and there is a Lego rubber-band required to
ensure the drag-link folds in the correct direction when retracting.
The whole assembly is primarily for "looks" though. It would hold a model up
just fine, but would not work well for rolling, as the wheel is not firmly
positioned, and would tend to swing around like a caster wheel.
-- Terry K --
> The main landinggear movement is controlled by three gears, 2 24 tooth
> normal gears and 1 24 tooth cam-gear (if that's the name of it). One of the
> 24 tooth gears is locked, the other is the driving one. They are placed
> opposite of each other with 2 studs space between them. The cam gear is
> positioned to connect both gears. If you still understand this:
> The axle of the cam gear is used to orientate the landinggear (confusing
> that gearing stuff). I have used some little technic pieces to make a 360
> degree ball-joint in between the two normal gears and voila, when you turn
> the driving wheel, the cam wheel will roll itself up and rotate at the same
> time.
> Now you still have to work out the problem of making it turn so that the
> wheel is on top of the landinggear when retracted, and you have got to fix
> the axle of the fixed gear to make sure that the landinggear is pointed
> straight to the front when in standing position, but that's even more
> details.
> I hope you understand it, otherwise I should get myself some time to reload
> (I accidently plugged the drain on my harddisc lately) all the LDRAW stuff
> and draw it.
> This configuration works well, but it doesn't look like the real thing. So
> Terry can you explain or show me how you did it?
>
> Happy building
>
> Jeroen Ottens (private mail)
>
> PS This (private mail) message doesn't appear all the time. This doesn't
> mean the message is suddenly approved of by my superiors. It mainly means I
> forgot to enter it. I think more official messages can be recognized when
> they do appear.
>
> Terry K <legoverse@geocities.com> wrote in article
> <36e370ae.575290@lugnet.com>...
> <snip>
>
> > I would like to see a detail of how you did the main landing gear. When • I
> > started my (aborted) attempt at an F-14, that is what I started with. • Mine
> > worked very well, rotating 90 degrees as it moved up into the wing root, • but it
> > was not suspended. Mine works very similar to the real thing, as I • tried to
> > copy the actual thing using a type of draglink to perform the rotation.
> > I still have it together, on the off chance that I may someday get • inspired to
> > continue with the project. :-)
> > My idea was to go for looks, rather than function as you did. So
> > mechanically, all I was going to do was the main and nose gear, and the • wing
> > retraction. My idea was to have the landing gears and the wing sweep to • be
> > manually operated by rotating the engine tail cones. I figured they • would make
> > good crank handles. :-)
> >
> > I suppose I should LDraw the gear assembly (if the pieces are available)
> >
> > -- Terry K --
> >
> >
|
|
| |
On Mon, 8 Mar 1999 19:43:06 GMT, ardjan.besse@telekabel.at (Ardjan Besse)
wrote:
> Op een zekere dag, te weten Fri, 5 Mar 1999 20:05:57 GMT, klom "Jeroen
> Ottens" <ottens@get2net.dk> in het toetsenbord en schreef ons:
>
> > http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9500/jeroen/f-14.html
> >
> > Happy building, and let me know what you think of it (the plane that is),
>
> Jeroen (1), this is one of the best models I've ever seen, a truly
> 'desighn'....
>
> Any chances of LDraw? 8-)))
Trying to do such a model in LDraw would be _extremely_ difficult. Especially
since many of the pieces are not available.
But if he did, I would have to bow to the master. :-)
-- Terry K --
|
|
| |
On Mon, 8 Mar 1999 19:02:39 GMT, "Jeroen Ottens" <ottens@get2net.dk>
wrote:
> PS This (private mail) message doesn't appear all the time. This doesn't
> mean the message is suddenly approved of by my superiors. It mainly means I
> forgot to enter it. I think more official messages can be recognized when
> they do appear.
I nsee you're using MS Internet News. Doesn't that have a facility to
automatically incorporate a ".sig" after your post? You could just
have the usual disclaimers: "all opinions expressed herein my own view
not those of my employer blah blah.."
Jasper
|
|
| |
Unfortunately I already destroyed the model to begin on number two :(
Terry K <legoverse@geocities.com> wrote in article
<36e4d770.6380036@lugnet.com>...
<snip>
> But if he did, I would have to bow to the master. :-)
>
> -- Terry K --
Jeroen
|
|
| |
On Tue, 9 Mar 1999 18:09:28 GMT, "Jeroen Ottens" <ottens@get2net.dk> wrote:
> Unfortunately I already destroyed the model to begin on number two :(
Well, you're lucky you took pictures of it.
I would have been really bummed if you hadn't had any photos.
For the number two model, please take _more_ pictures, OK? :-)
> Terry K <legoverse@geocities.com> wrote in article
> <36e4d770.6380036@lugnet.com>...
> <snip>
> > But if he did, I would have to bow to the master. :-)
> >
> > -- Terry K --
>
> Jeroen
|
|
| |
Jeroen Ottens writes:
> Hi there,
>
> With a load of thanks to Terry. My plane is finally publicly viewable. The
> address is:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9500/jeroen/f-14.html
>
> Just to remind you what I am rambling about:
>
> This plane helped me to get my job as Lego technic designer.
>
> Happy building, and let me know what you think of it (the plane that is),
>
> Jeroen Ottens (private mail)
Way Awesome !! thanks for sharing the picts. I like the "engine" cylinders.
Reminds me of using the gray hubs from the old auto chassis wheels as outboard
jet engines. Really neat Model, Jeroen and Good luck with the new one!
John
|
|
| |
On Mon, 8 Mar 1999 19:02:39 GMT, "Jeroen Ottens" <ottens@get2net.dk> wrote:
> This configuration works well, but it doesn't look like the real thing. So
> Terry can you explain or show me how you did it?
Jeroen,
I have posted an LDraw file to lugnet.cad.dat - "Design study - F14 Main Gear".
It shows it pretty well. You do have LDraw and LDLite installed and
configured to view .DAT files from the server, right? :-)
If you don't, I can toss a bitmap up on a page somewhere. But instruction
files using LDraw are much clearer.
-- Terry K --
|
|
|
