Subject:
|
Re: New RC Trains Are Posted on LEGO.COM
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Fri, 30 Jun 2006 13:35:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2109 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
> > In lugnet.trains, Clifton D. Chambers wrote:
> > > The new RC trains have been released on LEGO.com.
> >
> >
> > Okay wait... the description says "Remote control requires 9 AA (1.5v)
> > batteries, not included."
> >
> > AND the train takes?? 6???
> >
> > That must be a typo (could it be 3 for the remote, and 6 for the train???)
> >
> > Is it just me, or does 15 AA batteries sound like a nightmare come Christmas or
> > Birthday morn???
> >
> > We always have a ton of AAA hanging around, but we would be hard pressed to come
> > up with 15, heck even 9 AA... hope the box is marked pretty clearly.
> I think you're reading too much into what's probably a translation from the
> original.
Yes, that could be... that's why I was asking, since I know some of the people
that frequent this list have had a test run with the new trains.
> It says 'remote control', not 'controller' anyway. 6 for the train,
> yes.
Hmmm, that might even be a translation issue between US english and CAN english.
As far as I know, I have always used this definition of remote control...
n : a device that can be used to control a machine or apparatus from a distance;
"he lost the remote for his TV" [syn: remote]
I never would have made the "leap in faith" that the battery requirements as
listed on the S&H page, were pertaining to both the remote and the apparatus,
but I am glad that the general consensus (here and my inbox) so far seems to
agree its for the entire set.
> I didn't see inside the remote of David's preview one, but 3 AAs giving
> you 4.5V sounds more likely than 13.5V. It certainly didn't weigh enough to
> have had 9 AAs in it.
Well the math and the conversion of batteries to output was beyond me.
Although in your explanation, it makes sense, and sounds promising.
> As a thought, the IR is pretty weak, but I'm sure a decent learning remote could
> deliver a brighter signal.
Hmmmm, a learning remote?
Janey "Answers often bring more questions, Red Brick"
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: New RC Trains Are Posted on LEGO.COM
|
| (...) I think you're reading too much into what's probably a translation from the original. It says 'remote control', not 'controller' anyway. 6 for the train, yes. I didn't see inside the remote of David's preview one, but 3 AAs giving you 4.5V (...) (18 years ago, 30-Jun-06, to lugnet.trains)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
