 | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Writing programs or operating systems requires only three things. Knowledge, creativity, and time. The creativity clearly isn't an issue for the AFOL community, and any true hobbyist will find time when and where possible. Knowledge is the (...) (17 years ago, 2-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| Snip (...) So, what about taking another route and simply approach one of the many model railroad companies to see their interest in making something more like what THEY already make that *could* suit our needs? I'd love to see some unofficial brass (...) (17 years ago, 2-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Funny how we as AFOLs have a hard time thinking "outside the box". We automatically assume that new track geometry necessarily requires large sectional track pieces. The old 4.5-volt/12-volt system had separate ties (sleepers in Europe), track (...) (17 years ago, 2-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Hehe, so I'm not alone on that one :-) (...) A guy in the Netherlands is just trying this, even before this message of discontinuation of the 9V line appeared. (...) About 5 years ago, I even started with Lego trains that were discontinued 23 (...) (17 years ago, 2-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Hm, I wonder if TLG would fight them on a patent/design methodology? That would be the first issue I see. However, on that note, what I would really like to see is some way to get just metal tracks that would fit over the plastic track. That (...) (17 years ago, 2-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) If this were to be done, and the target market was AFOLs, then it would make far more sense to not bother at all with the curved and straight track sections of different sizes, but just produce flextrack. Then you have a single small gang-able (...) (17 years ago, 2-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Now that is kind of what I was advocating in my post. The whole LEGO system is a modular system--why not come up with modular way of creating tracks and motor housings or whatever using perhaps the system as the glue and outside parts as part (...) (17 years ago, 3-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) I can only speak for myself, but part of the fun, for me at least, is the challenge of staying within the confines of the Lego product. If I wanted to build track, etc. from other items, or do my own molding, I'd work in N or HO scale (...) (17 years ago, 3-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) As problematic as it is for long term track maintainence, and modifying track, it's actually a very simple solution to an ugly problem. Have you ever noticed how regular model railroaders link two sections of track together so power will be (...) (17 years ago, 3-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Scott pretty much summed up my concern over this one. Get a commercial entity involved, and you're in danger of crossing the line for patent infringement. I doubt they'd ever go after Ondrew for his hand-modded track (indeed, since he uses (...) (17 years ago, 3-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Well, simple straights and curves could easily be made with flexible rails and individual ties, but many of the specialized track pieces that seem to be of real interest to the hobby are complex crossovers and points. Those would require (...) (17 years ago, 3-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) An AFOL already made some headway on that one, way back in '05.. (URL) (17 years ago, 4-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) 1x8s instead of 2x8s, and spaced every other-- more prototypical that way. In any event, well done, Kenn! JOHN (17 years ago, 4-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Doesn't look like it would work out as nicely. The connectors have two metal tabs on the bottom that appear to line up nicely with the studs that were cut off the 2x8 plate. Switch to a 1x8 plate and you'd have to cut away part of the base and (...) (17 years ago, 4-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) sleeper like Ken's modified 2x8 plate, bundle it with the 3rd party connectors and rail stock, and voila - hobbyist track kits! All things considered, this won't happen, for a lot of reasons. But an AFOL can dream... Steve (17 years ago, 4-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) (SNIP) (...) Hi Steve I even would guess that a special sleeper plate with flat bottom (to float on studs beneath), with 242 studs on top and a kind of retaining clips to fix the metal rail would be an option for any "third-party producer". (...) (17 years ago, 5-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Amen, Bruder! You and I are so in our thinking, Ben; as if only 1 stud apart;-D JOHN (17 years ago, 5-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| In lugnet.lego, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote: <snip> (...) I've looked at this and a few similar options. Wether or not BBB could achieve it at the $0.30 per piece range (preferably less) is a matter of quantity. I'd much prefer to be closer to $0.10 (...) (17 years ago, 5-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) I am sorry to hear the news, but I am not surprised. There are two things Lego can do to help the transition on those of us with a large investment in the 9v system. 1) the most consumable element in the 9v system is the train motor. But in (...) (17 years ago, 7-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Talk to Ondrew Hartigan. He's already tracked down a company that can provide an replacement, even if they're not the company that manufactured the original units. (17 years ago, 7-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Hi Ben, I do not see so much need for a full system: the biggest need is for straight track and possibly new curve radius. The aftermarket will offer used 9V switches for the next 20 years. Some people will switch to the new battery trains. (...) (17 years ago, 7-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| Again I may be missing something, and perhaps the future of LEGO's solution, as yet unknown looms as a possible roadblock--but why for example could not the various train clubs come up with a standard piece--get together--gurantee a certain number (...) (17 years ago, 7-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) I did some research on this several years ago. At the time it was to pursue the idea of wider radii curves. But now it's of even more interest with the 9v track going away. I drew up several different ideas, and even contacted someone in a (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Benn- In my experience keeping SCLTC trains running for the last 6 years (including a 10 week, 6 day a week show every year), what kills the train motors is erosion of metal contacts that pick up electricity from the rails. The contacts wear (...) (17 years ago, 10-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| |
