 | | Re: Liebherr 954 tracked excavator
|
|
(...) is a cool feature too, is that how you make yours Dennis? Best regards, /Tobbe (URL) SPAM when e-mailing) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.modelteam, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Where did this 2x1 brick come from?
|
|
There are 6 of these coming with the racing car 695. Eric. (...) (22 years ago, 10-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Where did this 2x1 brick come from?
|
|
I've quite a few. They're in: 456/661 Spirit of St. Louis (2) (URL) Norton motorcycle (4) (URL) Harley-Davidson 1000cc (4) (URL) probably some more sets... Duq "Sonnich Jensen" <sonnich@hot.ee> wrote in message news:HA1tD4.Ay4@lugnet.com... (...) (22 years ago, 9-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Where did this 2x1 brick come from?
|
|
Øyvind Steinnes <senniets@online.no> wrote in message news:HA1xsB.4r@lugnet.com... (...) beam - (...) from... (...) (URL) is the one. I tought is was some kind of new brick. (...) on 3700b (...) dot) (...) no marking in mine (...) Sonnich (...) (22 years ago, 9-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Where did this 2x1 brick come from?
|
|
This might be the one... Avi Parvin <parvin@netvision.net.il> wrote in message news:HA1xIL.MDK@lugnet.com... (...) (22 years ago, 9-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Where did this 2x1 brick come from?
|
|
"Sonnich Jensen" <sonnich@hot.ee> wrote in message news:HA1tD4.Ay4@lugnet.com... (...) Does it look like this? (URL) have no idea which set it comes with other than it is very old. I have 5 of this brick and I cant find any partnumber for this. Some (...) (22 years ago, 9-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Where did this 2x1 brick come from?
|
|
Could be this set (pre-technic): (URL) can also look at the instructions: (URL) Parvin (...) (22 years ago, 9-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Where did this 2x1 brick come from?
|
|
I have 3 black 1x2 bricks with hole just like a normal 1x2 technic beam - but this one is different: the stud do not have holes there is no "tube" inside the brick, it is hollow it does not have the sunken outside it is sunken somehow, the top over (...) (22 years ago, 9-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) I really like this model. Well done lego, the legendary technic is back. The rear wheels do not appear to be those from the 8466 off-roader. They seem to be smaller like the RC car, which means it has new bubble tyres. I wonder why the (...) (22 years ago, 9-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Liebherr 954 tracked excavator
|
|
Recently I visited Evert van Wichen’s site and there I saw his latest creation: a Liebherr R954B tracked excavator: (URL) scale is 1:13 and the machine really looks like his big brother, just like all models of Evert. But this excavator reminds me (...) (22 years ago, 9-Feb-03, to lugnet.modelteam, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
Here are photos of my most effective props until now. (URL) Steinnes (URL) (22 years ago, 9-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Technic set 8466 4x4 Off Roader available again in North America!
|
|
Hi all, I was surprised tonight to see that the 8466 set was available again at shop at home, it has been "sold out" for a quite long while now in Canada and USA. Enjoy! (22 years ago, 9-Feb-03, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Dear lego, please make technic accessory packs.
|
|
(...) I know that Dacta sells some technic parts packs. But not everyone does. Also, Dacta can be/is more expensive than regular retail. I myself dont want any of those Service Packs, I have enough technic already (although I would probobly buy 1 (...) (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
"Mark Haye" <markhaye@netzero.net> wrote in message news:HA05tr.EJx@lugnet.com... (...) Offcourse, we dont give up before we have succeeded :) I'm just been bitten of this LEGO-flying machine virus .... (...) old (...) hit (...) Whatever speed you (...) (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
You guys are bound and determined to spend my whole weekend tinkering on this, aren't you? ;-) I reproduced Ross's setup using a gray peg, a black friction peg, and an old black friction peg. I still get what I consider pretty poor performance (with (...) (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Dear lego, please make technic accessory packs.
|
|
(...) Well, I have looked there, but they only ship to the US and tell the others to contact their local office (miraculously there is one in Colombia)... but I've got a question: does the "Spare Parts" belong to Dacta "Early Childhood and School"? (...) (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
(...) Nice design. Oh man, the design of the 24t gear at the back of this propeler is realy lame. That whole part is very un-legoish. 1) Perhaps you could use the old friction connector instead of the new one: i.e. part 4459 instead of part 2780. (...) (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Dear lego, please make technic accessory packs.
|
|
The need for accessory packs is certainly justified. I'd be happy if we could just get the 4wd steering parts from the 8880. I think this would be a good start (and packs of studded beams of course). Steve (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Dear lego, please make technic accessory packs.
|
|
(...) Have you looked at (URL) ? Some of your wanted items are available already. Ask them for a catalog. Gary (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Dear lego, please make technic accessory packs.
|
|
I hereby assign all rights in the pack ideas contained herein to LEGO to use as they see fit :) I wont mention quantities because I dont know how much would make a good service pack but here is what I think should be in the ideal set of technic (...) (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | JoyBricx is updated
|
|
Hi, all, I release new version of the JoyBricx. (URL) I make the program named JoyBricx for remote control (...) The new version support RCX/SCOUT, too. It can export the NQC program. Enjoy ! -- mac (22 years ago, 8-Feb-03, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.spybotics, lugnet.technic.bionicle)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
(...) Well I did a little test, heres the pics: (URL) that the propeller shaft is cylindrical, not "x" axle-shape, so friction is much greater than standard axle. It worked reasonably well, even with no lubrication and old batteries. I reckon with (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
How about inserting the 24T gear into half a large turntable, and securing the other end of the turntable using axles. I know this gets very large where you don't want to get large, but it might provide stability in ways the other solutions do not. (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
(...) Have you considered using lubricant between the 1x 4 beam and axle? I know I did, many times, but never got around to do it. Do you think it might reduce the friction enough? (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
Yes, I had tried that. I was unable to prevent all the rotation at the friction pin, and even a small amount of movement there caused significant wobble/binding. Mark Haye "Ross Crawford" <rcrawford@csi.com> wrote in message (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Hoverfan (was: Re: Props for Hovercraft)
|
|
"Tobbe Arnesson" <StPnAtM@lotek.nu> wrote in message news:H9y1Ay.8Br@lugnet.com... all your designs tobbe are very inspiring with the same major problem as my propeller :( the like to explode because the are not locked that's why i used a rubber (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Hoverfan (was: Re: Props for Hovercraft)
|
|
(...) my lunch hour, this was my best attempt: (URL) you can see it only has four blades but I could not make any more easily, I'm thinking about solutions though... I connected an old 9V motor underneath it and it holdes up just fine and blows a (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Just an idea for an prop for a hovercraft
|
|
"Øyvind Steinnes" <senniets@online.no> wrote in message news:H9wKLu.F5y@lugnet.com... (...) I (...) dont (...) the (...) hold (...) it seems i didn't read your post carefully enough sorry (...) oh G!!! so you should try to build the lifting (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Just an idea for an prop for a hovercraft
|
|
"pixel" <pixsrv@poczta.onet.pl> wrote in message news:H9vM7J.4ut@lugnet.com... (...) As I wrote I used the #20 / #21 panels. That is the panels that comes with the Williams F1, the other has a big hole in the midle and are too bulky. I testet both (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
(...) No, it only has one pin hole, and no axle holes. Why LEGO decided to do it that way I can't imagine - all previous sets (AFAIK) used the offset axle holes (present in the old 24t gears) to connect pistons, not the pin holes. IMO that part is a (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
"Tobbe Arnesson" <StPnAtM@lotek.nu> wrote in message news:H9xp7B.4AL@lugnet.com... (...) perhaps I (...) ppl do hovercrafts so you can do it also :) personally i don't like to do things which are dirty once i built a buggy (with my friend) so i (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
(...) In fact I thought about drum fans before I got to that page but afterwards I'm even more interested in building one in LEGO... But what's worse is I got thinking about making a "real" hovercraft, perhaps I should try one in LEGO first :) (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
"Tobbe Arnesson" <StPnAtM@lotek.nu> wrote in message news:H9xL37.JzI@lugnet.com... (...) hard to confess but i didn't know they are different :( thx tobbe pixel (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
(...) This gives me an idea, it's not only servos I've aquired from the model airplane times... (...) There should be tons of info on the web, howstuffworks.com is the primary source I'd consider: (URL) good page: (URL) Tobbe good luck, I hope you (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) As I wrote here: (URL) between the leaked Marz photo and this photo: 1) A lot more dark grey in the new (my sp-check suggested darker grey :) ). 2) Pneumatic pump has been moved down into the cab and doubled, there were only one 3) The (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
"Tobbe Arnesson" <StPnAtM@lotek.nu> wrote in message news:H9xI82.E49@lugnet.com... (...) i know it would not to keep the line of lego elements but maybe new pistons have one half of hole as pin and the second half as alxe hole it would solve much, (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
"Eric Sophie" <mylegomaster@aol.com> wrote in message news:H9wyr6.9qz@lugnet.com... (...) looks like lego want to be sure that nobody will build really flying machine cause all other propellor have a pin hole instead axle hole :( so we are probably (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) What I meant as impossible is the two solutions found abouve since you no longer can attach studs on the bottom of the piston. I'm sure the pistons still can be attached back-to-back in another manner, hence more difiicult. But who knows? (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
Question: Since I don't know what the z24 exactly looks like on the prop, is it just like the regular gear? Reason I say, I'm curious, because you could use the holes on the gear to pin another z24 to it and then you'd have a place to mount another (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
(...) What about attaching another 24t along the same axis with a friction pin, then having an axle in that? You'd probably need to drive both to stop rotation at the friction pin. ROSCO (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
You inspired me to tinker a bit, but I am still unsuccessful. Putting gears around the z24 to help stabilize it is problematic because, at standard LEGO distances, there is sufficient space between the gears to allow the z24 (and the prop axle) to (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
(...) I agree, it even causes a problem when used in the actual set! IMO this is one of the worst LEGO parts ever. ROSCO (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
Ho Mark, This presents a significant problem. I always engineer my gear-trains to include a double "axle grab" on both sides of a gear so the gears flow smoothly. Without that extra stud worth to help anchor the Airscrew, yep could be a problem. But (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
I have this part (from <set:8855>) and I have been unsuccessful in my attempts to power it to any significant speed. The problem is that the prop and z24 gear are permanently molded to a 3L axle which goes through a 1x4 Technic beam. Having only one (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
Tobbe, ya only one set and service pack ever. :( I don't have one either. I know of serveral ways to get some high RPM gear configs. Looking at the Airscrew I be it can push a good volume of air. As Pixel said the trick is creating a good duct to (...) (22 years ago, 7-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
By the way, did anyone notice that those two versions of 8455 ar not the same? (URL) I guess you saw the second one. Avi Parvin (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) order (...) a (...) I know. Actually you said it was more difficult. I doubt it is impossible. When I get 8455 I'll have to see what I can do. I've not had a chance to work on back to back small pistons, but I will when I get to the project (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
(...) That's the problem with this part, it only came in <set:8855>, although it was availible as a service pack once. A friend of mine had this set when he was a youngster, perhaps he's willing to sell it to me, I've been meaning to ask him but (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) (URL) point was all of these solutions is impossible with the new cylinder since it lacks the 2 x 2 "brick" in the bottom. /Tobbe (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Props for Hovercraft
|
|
it's cool but i think there should be used few of them and probably we couldn't buid tunnel small and smooth enough but if enyone has this part plz check it pixel "Eric Sophie" <mylegomaster@aol.com> wrote in message news:H9vt9E.Gzv@lugnet.com... (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Props for Hovercraft
|
|
I havn't followed as closely as I would have liked, so I don't know if this has already been mentioned. But this part is the "Ticket" !!! (URL) we get some dialog going on this Prop? e (URL) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Just an idea for an prop for a hovercraft
|
|
"Øyvind Steinnes" <senniets@online.no> wrote in message news:H9us2z.K4r@lugnet.com... <cut> (...) I've (...) got (...) good idea oyvind i'll show you my new fixed propellor soon so probably it could be incorporated with your idea i've got some (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | 2003 sets that looks like good part sources for us gearheads!
|
|
Hi! Just browsing the Brickset site and found some interesting sets: z40 gears in grey, two of them: (URL) what looks like 1 x 2 Technic Brick with cross axle hole in yellow (attches the feet). As seen before, another motor: (URL) motor: (URL) (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Just an idea for an prop for a hovercraft
|
|
Some hoover crafts use a tunnel/prop design facing backwards and direct about 1/3-rd of the air downwards to create lift, the rest is used to push the craft forward (with rudders to steer). Perhaps this can be made with LEGO? The main benefit is (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
(...) I don't agree that the last layout would be impossible in LEGO, it's just hard to achieve. I won't prove you wrong though but the photo clearly show the controls for the swash plate goes on the outside and that must be possible with LEGO as (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: My 8002 Destroyer Droid didn't come with errata sheet!
|
|
(...) I've read that the extra sheet came in later in the production so it's probably one of the first in the series that you got. Call LEGO and ask them to send it to you. Best regards, /Tobbe (URL) SPAM when e-mailing) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Just an idea for an prop for a hovercraft
|
|
(...) Yes. It directs the air flow that would normaly be thrown outward from the spinning prop. and forces it down. This makes more lift. (...) Only helps the prop push air in the right direction. (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
(...) I am working on a couter rotating design using axels and a non lego covering as rotor blades. I don't think it's cheating if the "works" are solidly lego based. Paul (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: My 8002 Destroyer Droid didn't come with errata sheet!
|
|
Stephane, I bought a couple when they first came out, neither came with the additional pages (corrections?) However, a couple that I picked up recently did. I had no problems building from either set of instructions and they worked the same as (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | My 8002 Destroyer Droid didn't come with errata sheet!
|
|
Hello all, I read countless times on Lugnet that the 8002 set Destroyer Droid is supposed to come with a sheet that corrects errors made in the manual. I got mine MISB, but have no such sheet. I didn't have time to try to build the droid yet. Is it (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Just an idea for an prop for a hovercraft
|
|
Hello I've seen the marvelous creation of hovercrafts by Paul Kleniewski ( (URL) ) and that gave me some ideas. Here can you see a simpel construction of an propell that I made. I've not taken any photos yet, but here is one image made in Ldraw: (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
(...) There is a military helicopter with this shaft arrangement in the Russian armed forces. IIRC, the Kirov carrier had some of these choppers at some point in time. Pedro (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
(...) There's a small angle between the two rotor shafts, that's the solution. A clever one, indeed. Fredrik (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
(...) Ohh, thanks! Now I see it. I didn't notice the rotors themselves were tilted, I just thought that was the style of the covering around the shaft. I think now I've caught the bug -- I wanna build a Technic helicopter too! But alas, I don't have (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) I had a few minutes free time while attending the show, so I took the chance ... Just the time to realize that is a very nice model but that without airtank, even with the two pump, you pump , make a movement, had to pump again before making a (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) Yes, I agree. However, I'd rather see them with axle holes instead of smooth holes. Regardless, I'm amazed and very happy to see this new set! -TJ (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
(...) The shafts of the rotors are angled outwards. Look at the pictures on the general layout page. There's one of the machine looking from the front- you'll notice the shafts are angled. TJ (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
I'm envious that you got to play with this already Marco. I'm certainly buying it. It will be interesting to see what else I can make with that list of parts. 10 pistons is a lot! Kevin (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) Thanks. It is strong also. (...) Be my guest. (...) Kevin (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
(...) Hi Luis - Checked out that page, and the experimental helicopter you have shown seems like an impossible setup. How do the two rotors, the way they are mounted, keep from chopping each other's drive shaft to bits? Even if they're at different (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
(...) Or why not using this setup? (URL) then click in "General Layouts" It also uses 2 counter-rotating rotors as the Chinook , but very close one to another Luis (comments, instructions, death threats, etc. please remove all the X's) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) but it's smart solution i'll use it in next ver of my hoist if you don't mind regards pixel (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
<snip> (...) I found an easy solution to piston stacking: (URL) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
(...) That's not actually right. The chinook has a shaft connecting the rotors keeping them in sync. It has to have one as rotor blades are very flexible. Otherwise their would be a danger of the front rotors bending upwards and hitting the rear (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) Yeah, you're right! There seems to be a ball joint towards the chassis which don't make sence if it don't have suspension. (...) The old photo is of no help other then to verify the front wheel steering. /Tobbe (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) There could still be a springless tilting suspension, the kind which always keeps all four wheels on the ground, even with some uneven surface. This is the kind you would typically see on the front wheels of a real vehicle like this. I don't (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) I notice that the new valves and cylinders are more "technicified", i.e., they no longer have stud connection, but rather a connection via technic pins/axles. I think that this appears to be a good idea, it makes them easier to incorporate in (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) It could, but I don't think so. Suspension and a pneumatic pump on top does not seem like a very good mix, but who knows? /Tobbe (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
"Tobbe Arnesson" <StPnAtM@lotek.nu> wrote in message news:H9u01y.Fpr@lugnet.com... <cut> (...) imo there is a part (URL) it mean the front wheels are suspensioned? :))) (...) in older pictures there was no engine (...) the (...) for me its about (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets
|
|
(...) Ahhh! That 7471 Mars rover is just screaming for me to add my RCX:s to it! I want it NOW! (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.space, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) I had the chance to play with it at the Nurnberg Toy Fair, 10 piston, 2 pumps , no air tank :( It has new pistons and new valve. marco (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
(...) Indeed it seems like your right! Zoomes in some more on the photo... (...) I think as follow, front to aft pneumatics only: 1) Two pistons to tilt bucket, clearly showing, and new type of piston w/o bottom 2x2, I dislike it 'cause it will be (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets: 8455
|
|
take a closer look at 8455 IMHO it has more than 9 pistons near the right rear stake there is one valve positioned in other way i think its valve to control rotation of arm so is has to have 10 or even 11 pistons (and there is 2 pumps) what do you (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets
|
|
(...) Indead. Some parts are special and very expensive on Bricklink (e.g. the 75 inverted slopes and 4 studs long pieces with round top). Very usefull! Dennis (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.modelteam)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
"Ross Crawford" <rcrawford@csi.com> wrote in message news:H9tAp0.A1n@lugnet.com... (...) challenge 8?) i'm working on it i developed new fixed 3 blade rotor in a week or two i should be prepared to show you the results of my work regards pixel (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets
|
|
<<snip>> (...) I think the boat is part of the new creator line where you buy a box of LEGO and get suggestions for several models, one box focus on animals <set:4101> while others go towards robots, mecha, fishes etc.. That line is due in April. (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.modelteam)
|
| |
| | Re: 2003's gonna ruin my savings account...
|
|
(...) Yeah, as I thought earlier. I'm just happy I didn't go crazy standing there in the store aisle when I discoveed the new sets. :) The fourth series of adventurers sets definitely hits the mark here! (...) And the main reason I went to the store (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.general, lugnet.modelteam, lugnet.adventurers, lugnet.reviews, lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space, lugnet.technic, lugnet.town, lugnet.year.2003)
|
| |
| | 2003's gonna ruin my savings account...
|
|
After seeing my Jan-Feb SAH Catalog and these three posts (and wiping the drool off my keyboard): (URL) I can say is... ...wait for it... WOW! COOL! SWEET! SUPERB! AWESOME! TERRIFIC! GREAT! YEAH! WHOOPEE! ALRIGHT! UH-HUH! YES! SUPER! *pant, pant* (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.general, lugnet.modelteam, lugnet.adventurers, lugnet.reviews, lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space, lugnet.technic, lugnet.town, lugnet.year.2003)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
(...) The chinook gets around this by having the rotors on different levels - the rear one is sufficiently high to ensure it can't hit the front. (...) Yes, enough power to lift a LEGO helicopter would definitely be a challenge 8?) ROSCO (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
(...) Ross - The challenge I'd run into would be coordinating the blades so they don't chop each other to pieces. Or I'd have to space them out quite a bit - the rotor I used in my last try had a radius of about 16L. Another problem I'd face is (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets
|
|
(...) I don't mind the helo and boat being a little plane-looking. And I am also sure they are intended to compete with MegaBloks. But I don't buy MB and have been waiting for this stuff from Lego for about three years now! MB is too laden with 2x4 (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.modelteam)
|
| |
| | Re: flying helicopter? (was: orrery update)
|
|
(...) Just browsed your site fully and wow cool! A suggestion for your helicopter - if you can build a single rotor with enough lift, why not just build 2 and connect them, like the chinook (URL) way the extra weight is offset by the extra lift 8?) (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets
|
|
(...) All the spacecraft are brilliant - I particularly like the Arianne 5 and the shuttle. The truck is amazing, though I think the helicopter and boat are a little too plain. They're clearly intended to compete with the MegaBloks models of this (...) (22 years ago, 4-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.modelteam)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic Roll call, who are you folks anyway?
|
|
BEGIN Instructions (leave intact) -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+...+-+-+-+-+- Always reply at the end of the thread! Delete all '<':s, replace the data in the filled in form, leave the empty form in case something goes wrong along the thread. This way there (...) (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets
|
|
(...) No, they'd never be able to pull it off without a lot of negative publicity. It only takes one complaint to scupper everything. As it is, I suspect there'll be several delays and serious reviews before they finally decide to release it. Even (...) (22 years ago, 4-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.modelteam)
|
| |
| | Re: new electrics
|
|
in fact i thought that the axle will be the only electric part i mean the axle should be connected to wire the axles on the ends of wire should replace electric bricks it will allow us to put the axle into a hole and then move along so we would put (...) (22 years ago, 4-Feb-03, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets
|
|
(...) I am delighted with the lack of mini-figs. Lack of mini-figs means the Lego designers are entirely free to choose the scale to suit the subject (and I guess the parts budget for the set). I have noticed this year that there are many more sets (...) (22 years ago, 4-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic Roll call, who are you folks anyway?
|
|
(...) :))) (...) it's absolutelly off-topic but here lies the crux of the matter old polish song "love will forget you everything, cause love is me" (is it understanable? :) pixel (22 years ago, 4-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: new 2003 sets
|
|
(...) once more (as found in <set:8446>) and in the correct number too! (...) <<snip>> (...) So why is there not an absolute ton of them OnLine yet? Don't get me wrong, I am very thankful for what we get and it seems we'll get bits and pieces (...) (22 years ago, 4-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic Roll call, who are you folks anyway?
|
|
(...) I don't mind at all. (...) I'm not. (...) Isn't that very unpractial? Especially when it comes to Technic with motors, pins etc.? (...) "Romance is when you can't stand to be apart, love is when you allow it." Another freely translated Swedish (...) (22 years ago, 4-Feb-03, to lugnet.technic)
|
