 | | | | | |
!!!
Currently showing Not Available / no picture / no price, but the names have
now been uploaded:
KT103 Large Train Engine Blue
KT104 Large Train Engine Green
KT105 Large Train Engine Black
KT106 Large Train Engine Brown
KT107 Large Train Engine Grey
KT203 Large Train Engine with Tender Blue
KT204 Large Train Engine with Tender Green
KT205 Large Train Engine with Tender Black
KT206 Large Train Engine with Tender Brown
KT207 Large Train Engine with Tender Grey
KT303 Small Train Engine Blue
KT304 Small Train Engine Green
KT305 Small Train Engine Black
KT306 Small Train Engine Brown
KT307 Small Train Engine Grey
KT403 Small Train Engine with Tender Blue
KT404 Small Train Engine with Tender Green
KT405 Small Train Engine with Tender Black
KT406 Small Train Engine with Tender Brown
KT407 Small Train Engine with Tender Grey
GET THERE NOW!!!
Just Jono .oO
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
"Jon D Hayward" <JonDHayward@Yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:GC8nBp.DK8@lugnet.com...
> !!!
>
> Currently showing Not Available / no picture / no price, but the names • have
> now been uploaded:
bit of a disappointment really
2 trains (one large, one small), 1 tender, choice of 5 colours
Motor and Battery extra
Hardly 'customized', and nothing you cant build yourself - doesnt look like
any special pieces - though I dont know if they are stickers on the bricks
or ready painted.
(wonder if they all have the same 317 number?)
I suppose it depends on the price, which hasnt been shown yet
regards
lawrence
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
"Lawrence Wilkes" <lawrence@thewilkesfamily.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in >
> 2 trains (one large, one small), 1 tender, choice of 5 colours
> Motor and Battery extra
Sorry, I meant 'motor and light extra'
regards
lawrence
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.loc.uk, Jon D. Hayward writes:
> !!!
>
> Currently showing Not Available / no picture / no price, but the names have
> now been uploaded:
>
>
<snip>
With no pictures, and no prices, I'd say that they have missed their own
deadline again. People may buy what they can't see, but you can't buy
something with out a price.
Frankly, as a customer, I'm dissapointed but only marginally so. It's as
much as I expected from TLC, the stick is out there, but they forgot the
carrot once again.
Rich
--
Have Fun! C-Ya!
Legoman34
*****
Legoman34 (Richard W. Schamus)... (My views do not necessarily express the
views of my employer...)
BRICKFEST 2001 IS JUST AROUND THE CORNER... START MAKING PLANS TODAY.
Card carrying LUGNET MEMBER: #70
Visit http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Castle/1334
...(the wait is over...)
..."The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself." ...
*****
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.loc.uk, Richard W. Schamus writes:
> With no pictures, and no prices, I'd say that they have missed their own
> deadline again. People may buy what they can't see, but you can't buy
> something with out a price.
> Frankly, as a customer, I'm dissapointed but only marginally so.
Same here. I'm disappointed but only marginally so. I'm just happy that we are
getting more train stuff! Would I like to be able to see everything, right
now? Well of course I would, but I don't mind waiting a bit longer as long as
the stuff gets here.
Katie
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.loc.uk, Jon D. Hayward writes:
> !!!
>
> Currently showing Not Available / no picture / no price, but the names have
> now been uploaded:
Sorry but this just emphasizes TLC's lack of sophistication in developing their
web site. It's extremely unprofesional to put something like this up. All the
broken links to pictures makes the site look worse than it already is.
If something isn't ready for prime-time then it shouldn't be rolled out.
It's quite sad that they can't seem to learn from their mistakes in web design.
Eric Kingsley
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Eric Kingsley writes:
> > Currently showing Not Available / no picture / no price, but the names have
> > now been uploaded:
>
> Sorry but this just emphasizes TLC's lack of sophistication in developing
> their web site. It's extremely unprofesional to put something like this up.
> All the broken links to pictures makes the site look worse than it already is.
> If something isn't ready for prime-time then it shouldn't be rolled out.
> It's quite sad that they can't seem to learn from their mistakes in web
> design.
True enough, but I'm able to view at least most of the new products
(haven't yet checked them all, and some of the alternate images aren't
"available").
Dave!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Now that the pictures can be seen, one can notice a difference between the
small engine with tender and the small engine without tender. If you
notice, the small engine without tender does NOT have the numer 317 on the
side. Instead of the 317 number it has the traditional lego train emblem.
The engines look great!
-John-
In lugnet.trains, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Eric Kingsley writes:
>
> > > Currently showing Not Available / no picture / no price, but the names have
> > > now been uploaded:
> >
> > Sorry but this just emphasizes TLC's lack of sophistication in developing
> > their web site. It's extremely unprofesional to put something like this up.
> > All the broken links to pictures makes the site look worse than it already is.
> > If something isn't ready for prime-time then it shouldn't be rolled out.
> > It's quite sad that they can't seem to learn from their mistakes in web
> > design.
>
> True enough, but I'm able to view at least most of the new products
> (haven't yet checked them all, and some of the alternate images aren't
> "available").
>
> Dave!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, John Musil writes:
>
> Now that the pictures can be seen, one can notice a difference between the
> small engine with tender and the small engine without tender. If you
> notice, the small engine without tender does NOT have the numer 317 on the
> side. Instead of the 317 number it has the traditional lego train emblem.
> The engines look great!
> -John-
They look great indeed, I like the small ones with tender.
I am though disapointed that there are no special train parts like doors or
windows, which would make them great sets for parts.
They also added the electric set, so - please give us something more like
coaches!
Sonnich
>
>
> In lugnet.trains, Dave Schuler writes:
> > In lugnet.trains, Eric Kingsley writes:
> >
> > > > Currently showing Not Available / no picture / no price, but the names have
> > > > now been uploaded:
> > >
> > > Sorry but this just emphasizes TLC's lack of sophistication in developing
> > > their web site. It's extremely unprofesional to put something like this up.
> > > All the broken links to pictures makes the site look worse than it already is.
> > > If something isn't ready for prime-time then it shouldn't be rolled out.
> > > It's quite sad that they can't seem to learn from their mistakes in web
> > > design.
> >
> > True enough, but I'm able to view at least most of the new products
> > (haven't yet checked them all, and some of the alternate images aren't
> > "available").
> >
> > Dave!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Sonnich Jensen writes:
> In lugnet.trains, John Musil writes:
> >
> > Now that the pictures can be seen, one can notice a difference between the
> > small engine with tender and the small engine without tender. If you
> > notice, the small engine without tender does NOT have the numer 317 on the
> > side. Instead of the 317 number it has the traditional lego train emblem.
> > The engines look great!
> > -John-
>
> They look great indeed, I like the small ones with tender.
> I am though disapointed that there are no special train parts like doors or
> windows, which would make them great sets for parts.
>
> They also added the electric set, so - please give us something more like
> coaches!
>
> Sonnich
Well they do have the small black "train" windows on the cab (kind of hard
to see in the pictures) so there are some "special" pieces...but of course
they don't have the glass in the windows.
jt
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
"James J. Trobaugh" wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, Sonnich Jensen writes:
> > I am though disapointed that there are no special train parts like doors or
> > windows, which would make them great sets for parts.
>
> >
> > Sonnich
>
> Well they do have the small black "train" windows on the cab (kind of hard
> to see in the pictures) so there are some "special" pieces...but of course
> they don't have the glass in the windows.
Yes, the airplane windows are great! And don't forget the black 2x2 domes--
that is a new color for that element and a *great* part for creating Steam
engines:-)
-John
>
>
> jt
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Also new color parts includes the 1x1 brick with handle in green and brown,
inverse brown slope (another source for green, also).
Looks like another source for black door rails and low slope train roofs.
In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
>
>
> "James J. Trobaugh" wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.trains, Sonnich Jensen writes:
> > > I am though disapointed that there are no special train parts like doors or
> > > windows, which would make them great sets for parts.
> >
> > >
> > > Sonnich
> >
> > Well they do have the small black "train" windows on the cab (kind of hard
> > to see in the pictures) so there are some "special" pieces...but of course
> > they don't have the glass in the windows.
>
> Yes, the airplane windows are great! And don't forget the black 2x2 domes--
> that is a new color for that element and a *great* part for creating Steam
> engines:-)
>
> -John
>
> >
> >
> > jt
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, James Trobaugh writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Sonnich Jensen writes:
> > In lugnet.trains, John Musil writes:
> > >
> > > Now that the pictures can be seen, one can notice a difference between the
> > > small engine with tender and the small engine without tender. If you
> > > notice, the small engine without tender does NOT have the numer 317 on the
> > > side. Instead of the 317 number it has the traditional lego train emblem.
> > > The engines look great!
> > > -John-
> > They look great indeed, I like the small ones with tender.
> > I am though disapointed that there are no special train parts like doors or
> > windows, which would make them great sets for parts.
> >
> > They also added the electric set, so - please give us something more like
> > coaches!
> >
> > Sonnich
>
>
> Well they do have the small black "train" windows on the cab (kind of hard
> to see in the pictures) so there are some "special" pieces...but of course
> they don't have the glass in the windows.
That's the most interesting question in the whole discussion: is there a
classic window in 2x2 (that would be great!!)? Or is it a airplane window (the
window area looks to big for that..)?
The pictures are modified, so you cannot guess if there is a glass inside or
not. The background looks a little darker through the windows, which could be a
hint for glass...
In general the pictures look quite good and the prices very fair. TLC has
heared our wishes at last as it seems now....
Leg Godt!
Ben
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke writes:
> In lugnet.trains, James Trobaugh writes:
> > In lugnet.trains, Sonnich Jensen writes:
> > > In lugnet.trains, John Musil writes:
> > > >
> > > > Now that the pictures can be seen, one can notice a difference between the
> > > > small engine with tender and the small engine without tender. If you
> > > > notice, the small engine without tender does NOT have the numer 317 on the
> > > > side. Instead of the 317 number it has the traditional lego train emblem.
> > > > The engines look great!
> > > > -John-
> > > They look great indeed, I like the small ones with tender.
> > > I am though disapointed that there are no special train parts like doors or
> > > windows, which would make them great sets for parts.
> > >
> > > They also added the electric set, so - please give us something more like
> > > coaches!
> > >
> > > Sonnich
> >
> >
> > Well they do have the small black "train" windows on the cab (kind of hard
> > to see in the pictures) so there are some "special" pieces...but of course
> > they don't have the glass in the windows.
>
> That's the most interesting question in the whole discussion: is there a
> classic window in 2x2 (that would be great!!)? Or is it a airplane window (the
> window area looks to big for that..)?
>
> The pictures are modified, so you cannot guess if there is a glass inside or
> not. The background looks a little darker through the windows, which could be a
> hint for glass...
>
> In general the pictures look quite good and the prices very fair. TLC has
> heared our wishes at last as it seems now....
>
> Leg Godt!
>
> Ben
I don't know if they modified the design since the the S@H catalogs came
out, but you can see the window(s) very clearly in this picture:
http://www.mhader.com/lego/lego/april23/medium.jpg
I guess some would call them "airplane" windows, but to me all windows are
"train" windows :)
It would be nice if they added glass to the design, but from what I've seen
there is no glass.
jt
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> They look great indeed, I like the small ones with tender.
> I am though disapointed that there are no special train parts like doors or
> windows, which would make them great sets for parts.
>
> They also added the electric set, so - please give us something more like
> coaches!
You could get coaches from BricWorx.
Dwayne Towell
www.bricworx.com
FUT: lugnet.shopping
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
What's all the fuss about? They don't look great to me. They look like those
kiddy rides you find in theme parks to me. A steam train should have
cilinders, pushrods etcetera. These are on bogey's from a Diesel. Also, they
lack detail; half the piping is on stickers....
The engine in 7730 looks more like a steam engine to me, and that's 20 years
ago!
Maybe it's childhood memories, maybe it's because I'm just after buying the
old Thatcher Perkins, but it looks like trains have only gone downhill since
the early eighties....
Duq, the grumpy one...
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> What's all the fuss about? They don't look great to me. They look like those
> kiddy rides you find in theme parks to me.
I'm sorry you feel that way. To me, anything new in the train line is worth a
fuss.
JMHO
Katie
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Katie Dokken writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> > What's all the fuss about? They don't look great to me. They look like those
> > kiddy rides you find in theme parks to me.
>
> I'm sorry you feel that way. To me, anything new in the train line is worth a
> fuss.
Hear, hear! If it's a choice between the new sets and the Prefab Jr.
Express, I'll take the new sets. No, they're not perfect, but they look
considerably better than what we've seen lately.
Dave!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> wrote in message
news:GC9C5G.H4v@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.trains, Katie Dokken writes:
> > In lugnet.trains, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> > > What's all the fuss about? They don't look great to me. They look like • those
> > > kiddy rides you find in theme parks to me.
> >
> > I'm sorry you feel that way. To me, anything new in the train line is • worth a
> > fuss.
>
> Hear, hear! If it's a choice between the new sets and the Prefab Jr.
> Express, I'll take the new sets. No, they're not perfect, but they look
> considerably better than what we've seen lately.
>
> Dave!
I agree - new stuff is always good news.
FWIW - you can order one from S@H - they are back ordered and expected into
their wharehouse in about a week or so with shipments to follow sometime
after that.
USD Prices:
Small - $19.99
Small w/ Tender - $24.99
Large - $29.99
Large w/ Tender - $34.99
I tacked a small green on the end of a bulk order I placed this morning.
Also, FWIW, I was the first one to place an order for one with the rep I
spoke with.
Mike
--
Mike Walsh - mike_walsh at mindspring dot com
http://www.nclug.net - North Carolina LEGO Users Group
http://www.nclug.net/ctb - Carolina Train Builders
http://www.brickbay.com/store.asp?u=mpw - Brick Depot
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Mike Walsh writes:
> I tacked a small green on the end of a bulk order I placed this morning.
> Also, FWIW, I was the first one to place an order for one with the rep I
> spoke with.
>
> Mike
Drats! I can't make up my mind which ones I want to start with. Otherwise I
would have been #2 right behind you.
Katie
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, John Musil writes:
>
> Now that the pictures can be seen, one can notice a difference between the
> small engine with tender and the small engine without tender. If you
> notice, the small engine without tender does NOT have the numer 317 on the
> side. Instead of the 317 number it has the traditional lego train emblem.
> The engines look great!
> -John-
Do not know if anybody else noticed or not, but all 4 engines are different.
The ones without tender are open cab and the ones with tender are enclosed
cab.
Also, the placement of the 317 is slightly different
Thanx,
Mark Millère
LUGnet # 525
Visit Milissa's LEGO store, Millère's Spares
<http://www.brickbay.com/store.asp?i=MMillere>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, Mark & Milissa Millère writes:
> Do not know if anybody else noticed or not, but all 4 engines are different.
> The ones without tender are open cab and the ones with tender are enclosed
> cab. Also, the placement of the 317 is slightly different
I saw that. The ones with tenders are open at the rear, whereas the others
have an inverted sloping coal scuttle on the back, and redesigned open
sides. Whilst this is an interesting design (particularly on the large
one), I think the bigger you go the more value-for-money you get.
In fact, if you add up the price of a wagon pack, plus wheels and buffers,
and compare that to the price of the large set with a tender - well, it
makes very good value for parts, particularly with the rarer green, brown
and dark grey colours.
What isn't so great is the smallest engine of all doesn't even have a front
buffer bar - take a closer look at the pictures.
Odd also that the colours look like they're painted on in many of the
photographs. Look at the black engines; the black in place of the coloured
bricks is not the same as the black the rest of the train is made from. Did
someone foul up in the photography department?
And, sorry Larry, but I reckon they look early American. The desert
background suggests that TLC think so too.
Jason J Railton
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Jason J. Railton" wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, Mark & Milissa Millère writes:
> > Do not know if anybody else noticed or not, but all 4 engines are different.
> > The ones without tender are open cab and the ones with tender are enclosed
> > cab. Also, the placement of the 317 is slightly different
>
> I saw that. The ones with tenders are open at the rear, whereas the others
> have an inverted sloping coal scuttle on the back, and redesigned open
> sides. Whilst this is an interesting design (particularly on the large
> one), I think the bigger you go the more value-for-money you get.
>
> In fact, if you add up the price of a wagon pack, plus wheels and buffers,
> and compare that to the price of the large set with a tender - well, it
> makes very good value for parts, particularly with the rarer green, brown
> and dark grey colours.
I agree. And to get the airplane windows, you must get the largest version.
> What isn't so great is the smallest engine of all doesn't even have a front
> buffer bar - take a closer look at the pictures.
That's good-- more American that way:-)
> Odd also that the colours look like they're painted on in many of the
> photographs. Look at the black engines; the black in place of the coloured
> bricks is not the same as the black the rest of the train is made from. Did
> someone foul up in the photography department?
I think that they are all the exact same photograph with the colors actually
altered in Photoshop or something. The gray looked almost like the new green to
me! (Perhaps the original photo had the color *white*)
> And, sorry Larry, but I reckon they look early American. The desert
> background suggests that TLC think so too.
I think they are rather neutral. A little modification either way will make
them more Euro or more American-- you chose. After all, they are *custom*
trains;-)
I applaud LD for these latest offerings-- let the buying frenzy begin{:^D
-John
>
>
> Jason J Railton
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
>
>
> "Jason J. Railton" wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.trains, Mark & Milissa Millère writes:
> > > Do not know if anybody else noticed or not, but all 4 engines are different.
> > > The ones without tender are open cab and the ones with tender are enclosed
> > > cab. Also, the placement of the 317 is slightly different
> >
> > I saw that. The ones with tenders are open at the rear, whereas the others
> > have an inverted sloping coal scuttle on the back, and redesigned open
> > sides. Whilst this is an interesting design (particularly on the large
> > one), I think the bigger you go the more value-for-money you get.
> >
> > In fact, if you add up the price of a wagon pack, plus wheels and buffers,
> > and compare that to the price of the large set with a tender - well, it
> > makes very good value for parts, particularly with the rarer green, brown
> > and dark grey colours.
>
> I agree. And to get the airplane windows, you must get the largest version.
>
> > What isn't so great is the smallest engine of all doesn't even have a front
> > buffer bar - take a closer look at the pictures.
>
> That's good-- more American that way:-)
>
> > Odd also that the colours look like they're painted on in many of the
> > photographs. Look at the black engines; the black in place of the coloured
> > bricks is not the same as the black the rest of the train is made from. Did
> > someone foul up in the photography department?
>
> I think that they are all the exact same photograph with the colors actually
> altered in Photoshop or something. The gray looked almost like the new green to
> me! (Perhaps the original photo had the color *white*)
>
> > And, sorry Larry, but I reckon they look early American. The desert
> > background suggests that TLC think so too.
>
> I think they are rather neutral. A little modification either way will make
> them more Euro or more American-- you chose. After all, they are *custom*
> trains;-)
>
> I applaud LD for these latest offerings-- let the buying frenzy begin{:^D
yeah! I'm looking at only the ones with tenders, the non-tender ones look
cheep. BTW where's RED, Yellow, & Orange? I'd like a red one for the
tender i have sitting here.
Josh
>
> -John
>
> >
> >
> > Jason J Railton
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton writes:
> And, sorry Larry, but I reckon they look early American. The desert
> background suggests that TLC think so too.
Feel free to provide a cite.
The two truck (larger) one looks a bit like a Shay (in which case the
background ought to be a forest, with logging going on) but other than that, no.
++Lar
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton writes:
>
> > And, sorry Larry, but I reckon they look early American. The desert
> > background suggests that TLC think so too.
>
> Feel free to provide a cite.
>
> The two truck (larger) one looks a bit like a Shay (in which case the
> background ought to be a forest, with logging going on) but other than that, no.
>
> ++Lar
hey with a dummy technic drive, it could be one!
Josh
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Josh Baakko writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton writes:
> >
> > > And, sorry Larry, but I reckon they look early American. The desert
> > > background suggests that TLC think so too.
> >
> > Feel free to provide a cite.
> >
> > The two truck (larger) one looks a bit like a Shay (in which case the
> > background ought to be a forest, with logging going on) but other than that, no.
> >
> > ++Lar
>
> hey with a dummy technic drive, it could be one!
Move the boiler offcenter to make it more authentic, but yes, that is what
struck me about it when I first saw it.
++Lar
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> Move the boiler offcenter to make it more authentic
Not much room when you're..... uh, nevermind;-)
{:^D John
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
John Neal wrote:
>
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> >
> > Move the boiler offcenter to make it more authentic
>
> Not much room when you're..... uh, nevermind;-)
>
> {:^D John
LOL
Chris
--
See some of my LEGO creations at http://cmasi.chem.tulane.edu/~lego/
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
John Neal wrote:
>
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> >
> > Move the boiler offcenter to make it more authentic
>
> Not much room when you're..... uh, nevermind;-)
>
> {:^D John
LOL
Chris
--
See some of my LEGO creations at http://cmasi.chem.tulane.edu/~lego/
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton writes:
>
> > And, sorry Larry, but I reckon they look early American. The desert
> > background suggests that TLC think so too.
>
> Feel free to provide a cite.
>
> The two truck (larger) one looks a bit like a Shay (in which case the
> background ought to be a forest, with logging going on) but other than that, no.
Well, Shays, Heislers, and Climaxes have been used for mining also.
Certainly the bulk of Shays served in the woods, but I think at least
some served in the South West.
I must admit that "geared loco" jumped into my mind quickly when I saw
the two truck loco. But it still looks too European, and definitely
really doesn't look like a Shay or a Climax, it might almost pass as a
Heisler. One of these days I need to make my attempt at a Shay. I know
I've seen one or two, it will be interesting to see what I come up with.
Of course at some point I also need to get back to the project which
drove me initially to get 6 8250/8299s, which is a pneumatic Shay drive,
with sequencing cheated by having a motor drive a hidden set of 3
cylinders (if someone has a brilliant idea for how to sequence a 3
cylinder drive using pneumatics without a hidden motor driving 3 hidden
cylinders, I'd love to hear it).
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton writes:
>
> > And, sorry Larry, but I reckon they look early American. The desert
> > background suggests that TLC think so too.
>
> Feel free to provide a cite.
>
> ++Lar
It's not so much the design as the colour scheme. The configuration of the
ones without tenders is pretty European, but the large cabs on the tender
engines and the panelled style is typically American - European engines
tended to be more uniform in colour and have smaller cabs compared to the
rest of the engine - shorter journeys after all.
Jason J Railton
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton writes:
> >
> > > And, sorry Larry, but I reckon they look early American. The desert
> > > background suggests that TLC think so too.
> >
> > Feel free to provide a cite.
> >
> > ++Lar
>
> It's not so much the design as the colour scheme. The configuration of the
> ones without tenders is pretty European, but the large cabs on the tender
> engines and the panelled style is typically American - European engines
> tended to be more uniform in colour and have smaller cabs compared to the
> rest of the engine - shorter journeys after all.
We're not arguing about anything important. They are what they are. I think
we could agree that they're not representative of anything in particular.
That said, you're wrong. :-)
Let's put it this way. To this American, they don't look American. Too many
jarring features. So I pigeonhole them as european (call me first world
centric if you like, there's NA, EU and the ROW) and construct a *good*
argument for that viewpoint. :-)
To you, they don't look european, too many jarring features. So you
pigeonhole them as european and construct an *entirely spurious* argument
for that viewpoint. :-)
See the difference? :-)
I'm done, as long as I get last word. :-)
++Lar
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> We're not arguing about anything important. They are what they are. I think
> we could agree that they're not representative of anything in particular.
>
> That said, you're wrong. :-)
Oh no I'm not. Oh yes you are. That's the way to do it! etc. They're just
too mixed, so they look foreign to everyone instead of familiar.
> Let's put it this way. To this American, they don't look American. Too many
> jarring features. So I pigeonhole them as european (call me first world
> centric if you like, there's NA, EU and the ROW) and construct a *good*
> argument for that viewpoint. :-)
Too right you're - hang on - No, forget it. Well, you don't even give
Europe a capital 'E'. Sulk. :-(
> To you, they don't look european, too many jarring features. So you
> pigeonhole them as european and construct an *entirely spurious* argument
> for that viewpoint. :-)
I'm overdosing on smileys now. You missed out a 'non-' too.
> See the difference? :-)
Big difference. I'm still right and you're wrong :-P [Argh!]
> I'm done, as long as I get last word. :-)
But!
> ++Lar
[Mmph!]
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > We're not arguing about anything important. They are what they are. I think
> > we could agree that they're not representative of anything in particular.
> >
> > That said, you're wrong. :-)
>
> Oh no I'm not. Oh yes you are. That's the way to do it! etc. They're just
> too mixed, so they look foreign to everyone instead of familiar.
IMO they are representative of "Lego".
Josh
>
> > Let's put it this way. To this American, they don't look American. Too many
> > jarring features. So I pigeonhole them as european (call me first world
> > centric if you like, there's NA, EU and the ROW) and construct a *good*
> > argument for that viewpoint. :-)
>
> Too right you're - hang on - No, forget it. Well, you don't even give
> Europe a capital 'E'. Sulk. :-(
>
> > To you, they don't look european, too many jarring features. So you
> > pigeonhole them as european and construct an *entirely spurious* argument
> > for that viewpoint. :-)
>
> I'm overdosing on smileys now. You missed out a 'non-' too.
>
> > See the difference? :-)
>
> Big difference. I'm still right and you're wrong :-P [Argh!]
>
> > I'm done, as long as I get last word. :-)
>
> But!
>
> > ++Lar
>
> [Mmph!]
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > We're not arguing about anything important. They are what they are. I think
> > we could agree that they're not representative of anything in particular.
> >
> > That said, you're wrong. :-)
>
> Oh no I'm not. Oh yes you are. That's the way to do it! etc.
Have not, will too, didn't either!
> > I'm done, as long as I get last word. :-)
Should have let me have last word. Siggy doesn't count. :-)
++Lar
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> The two truck (larger) one looks a bit like a Shay (in which case the
> background ought to be a forest, with logging going on) but other than that,
no.
The two truck one looks more like a Mallet. Never mind a shay, which Ron
Kittle (?) built _ages_ ago :)
James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
James Powell wrote:
> > The two truck (larger) one looks a bit like a Shay (in which case the
> > background ought to be a forest, with logging going on) but other than that,
> no.
>
> The two truck one looks more like a Mallet. Never mind a shay, which Ron
> Kittle (?) built _ages_ ago :)
Hey, speaking of Ron and his awesome Shay, it was a pleasure for me to meet him
and see his MOC in person at the Kidvention last summer. His Shay has working
pistons and all. Are there pics of it on the web somewhere?
-John
>
>
> James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, Mike Walsh writes:
>
> "Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> wrote in message
> news:GC9C5G.H4v@lugnet.com...
> > In lugnet.trains, Katie Dokken writes:
> > > In lugnet.trains, Ronald Vallenduuk writes:
> > > > What's all the fuss about? They don't look great to me. They look like • those
> > > > kiddy rides you find in theme parks to me.
> > >
> > > I'm sorry you feel that way. To me, anything new in the train line is • worth a
> > > fuss.
> >
> > Hear, hear! If it's a choice between the new sets and the Prefab Jr.
> > Express, I'll take the new sets. No, they're not perfect, but they look
> > considerably better than what we've seen lately.
> >
> > Dave!
>
> I agree - new stuff is always good news.
>
> FWIW - you can order one from S@H - they are back ordered and expected into
> their wharehouse in about a week or so with shipments to follow sometime
> after that.
It says May 23rd! How Come everything I'm gonna order is back ordered?
When i last ordered i decided not to add the black wagon plate, theni found
out it was back ordered, i'm glad, cause then i would have had to wait for it.
Is it just me or do the front wheelsets look like they're dark grey? I also
think that the larger ones could have been built better, but WHERE ARE THE
DIESELS?
Josh
>
> USD Prices:
>
> Small - $19.99
> Small w/ Tender - $24.99
> Large - $29.99
> Large w/ Tender - $34.99
>
> I tacked a small green on the end of a bulk order I placed this morning.
> Also, FWIW, I was the first one to place an order for one with the rep I
> spoke with.
>
> Mike
>
> --
>
> Mike Walsh - mike_walsh at mindspring dot com
> http://www.nclug.net - North Carolina LEGO Users Group
> http://www.nclug.net/ctb - Carolina Train Builders
> http://www.brickbay.com/store.asp?u=mpw - Brick Depot
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Josh Baakko wrote:
>
>
> Is it just me or do the front wheelsets look like they're dark grey?
It's just you;-)
> I also
> think that the larger ones could have been built better, but WHERE ARE THE
> DIESELS?
To which diesels are you referring?
-John
>
> Josh
>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
>
>
> Josh Baakko wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Is it just me or do the front wheelsets look like they're dark grey?
>
> It's just you;-)
>
> > I also
> > think that the larger ones could have been built better, but WHERE ARE THE
> > DIESELS?
>
> To which diesels are you referring?
I'm waiting for some.
Josh
>
> -John
>
> >
> > Josh
> >
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Josh Baakko at shi_web@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > I also
> > > think that the larger ones could have been built better, but WHERE ARE THE
> > > DIESELS?
> >
> > To which diesels are you referring?
>
> I'm waiting for some.
> Josh
Well, perhaps you should look at it from a sales perspective.
Diesel engines (IMO) look like a shoebox with wheels. The trains currently
on shop.lego.com are far more interesting to look at (IMO) than a diesel
engine would be.
Things that aren't interesting to the consumer generally don't sell very
well. TLC is probably counting on more than just the die-hard train nuts to
drive sales, so they probably are trying to make the trains as interesting
as possible to people like me who aren't train nuts.
Of course, I could be completely off-base, but that's kind of what it looks
like from here.
$.02
~Grand Admiral Muffin Head
--
Mark's Lego(R) Creations
http://www.nwlink.com/~sandlin/lego
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Mark Sandlin wrote:
> Josh Baakko at shi_web@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > I also
> > > > think that the larger ones could have been built better, but WHERE ARE THE
> > > > DIESELS?
> > >
> > > To which diesels are you referring?
> >
> > I'm waiting for some.
> > Josh
>
> Well, perhaps you should look at it from a sales perspective.
>
> Diesel engines (IMO) look like a shoebox with wheels. The trains currently
> on shop.lego.com are far more interesting to look at (IMO) than a diesel
> engine would be.
LOL You are SOOOOO wrong! (IMNSHO;-)
> Things that aren't interesting to the consumer generally don't sell very
> well. TLC is probably counting on more than just the die-hard train nuts to
> drive sales, so they probably are trying to make the trains as interesting
> as possible to people like me who aren't train nuts.
>
> Of course, I could be completely off-base, but that's kind of what it looks
> like from here.
You are between 1st and 2nd and the throw to home has been cut off. This is what
happens when muffinheads start talking trains;-)
-John
>
>
> $.02
>
> ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head
> --
> Mark's Lego(R) Creations
> http://www.nwlink.com/~sandlin/lego
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> > Diesel engines (IMO) look like a shoebox with wheels. The trains currently
> > on shop.lego.com are far more interesting to look at (IMO) than a diesel
> > engine would be.
>
> LOL You are SOOOOO wrong! (IMNSHO;-)
Yeah, yeah, we know. They're not eight-wide. 8^)
> > Things that aren't interesting to the consumer generally don't sell very
> > well. TLC is probably counting on more than just the die-hard train nuts to
> > drive sales, so they probably are trying to make the trains as interesting
> > as possible to people like me who aren't train nuts.
> >
> > Of course, I could be completely off-base, but that's kind of what it looks
> > like from here.
>
> You are between 1st and 2nd and the throw to home has been cut off. This is
> what happens when muffinheads start talking trains;-)
If I may make a guess, though, Muffinhead isn't speaking about the
scrupulous LEGO representation of detailed trains as they appear in the real
world; he's saying that the average purchaser is likely to be sufficiently
interested in the models TLC is presenting because they look nice. If they
don't have the Harfnarf Flammostat in proper alignment with the Gubtweedle
Valve, so what? If they look cool, people will buy them.
TLC has never put out a low-price model that fastidiously reproduced the
real-world equivalent; why should Trains be afforded some special "they're
not accurate so they suck" status? The models can be cool without being
true to the real things.
Dave!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
>
> > > Diesel engines (IMO) look like a shoebox with wheels. The trains currently
> > > on shop.lego.com are far more interesting to look at (IMO) than a diesel
> > > engine would be.
> >
> > LOL You are SOOOOO wrong! (IMNSHO;-)
>
> Yeah, yeah, we know. They're not eight-wide. 8^)
>
> > > Things that aren't interesting to the consumer generally don't sell very
> > > well. TLC is probably counting on more than just the die-hard train nuts to
> > > drive sales, so they probably are trying to make the trains as interesting
> > > as possible to people like me who aren't train nuts.
> > >
> > > Of course, I could be completely off-base, but that's kind of what it looks
> > > like from here.
> >
> > You are between 1st and 2nd and the throw to home has been cut off. This is
> > what happens when muffinheads start talking trains;-)
>
> If I may make a guess, though, Muffinhead isn't speaking about the
> scrupulous LEGO representation of detailed trains as they appear in the real
> world; he's saying that the average purchaser is likely to be sufficiently
> interested in the models TLC is presenting because they look nice. If they
> don't have the Harfnarf Flammostat in proper alignment with the Gubtweedle
> Valve, so what? If they look cool, people will buy them.
> TLC has never put out a low-price model that fastidiously reproduced the
> real-world equivalent; why should Trains be afforded some special "they're
> not accurate so they suck" status? The models can be cool without being
> true to the real things.
Thats true, and they could do that with diesels too. Look at a SD40-2F
(http://members.nbci.com/baakkorail/pnr.html), thats interesting, and i know
i'd but one!
Josh
>
> Dave!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> I also
> think that the larger ones could have been built better, but WHERE ARE THE
> DIESELS?
The simple answer is- WHO CARES? I don't :)
Mind you, some have said that I have steam in my blood...
Coughs and Sneezles Spread Disezles :)
Some nice Co-Bo or similer oddball diesels, along with a SD 9 would be nice (Or
a SD7, anything with 6 wheels :)
Or a boxcab, like the CNR engines, or the Hunslets (lets not go to the Kitson
things!-they look like steamers anyway!)
James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
James Powell wrote:
> > I also
> > think that the larger ones could have been built better, but WHERE ARE THE
> > DIESELS?
>
> The simple answer is- WHO CARES? I don't :)
You're still bitter because diesels marked the end of steam-- get over it! ;-)
> Mind you, some have said that I have steam in my blood...
>
> Coughs and Sneezles Spread Disezles :)
Thank you, Ben. Or was it Bill? Those two can be very aggravating-- just ask
Boco...
> Some nice Co-Bo or similer oddball diesels, along with a SD 9 would be nice (Or
> a SD7, anything with 6 wheels :)
Why 6? A B truck is a natural, given the 9 volt motor...
> Or a boxcab, like the CNR engines, or the Hunslets (lets not go to the Kitson
> things!-they look like steamers anyway!)
And what is all this blathering on about *non-American* diesels? America *is*
diesels... <donning flame suit>
-John
>
>
> James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> And what is all this blathering on about *non-American* diesels? America *is*
> diesels... <donning flame suit>
>
> -John
Quite simple: The UK were there first. The diesel engines for the CN loco's
came from Hunslet, and Hunslet built the first really successful DE's in the
world, for some of the South American railways.
I don't argue the impossible, nothing is going to touch a DD40x, (or a Class
59!), but GM does not have a monopoly on the origins of diesels...they just had
bigger pockets than most!
(1/5th on delivery, rest on useage=death to ALCo and so on, who did not have
the pocketbooks to manage that financial trick...otherwise, steam would have
held out a lot longer, that and a few coal miners strikes)
James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
>
>
> James Powell wrote:
>
> > > I also
> > > think that the larger ones could have been built better, but WHERE ARE THE
> > > DIESELS?
> >
> > The simple answer is- WHO CARES? I don't :)
>
> You're still bitter because diesels marked the end of steam-- get over it! ;-)
>
> > Mind you, some have said that I have steam in my blood...
> >
> > Coughs and Sneezles Spread Disezles :)
>
> Thank you, Ben. Or was it Bill? Those two can be very aggravating-- just ask
> Boco...
>
> > Some nice Co-Bo or similer oddball diesels, along with a SD 9 would be nice (Or
> > a SD7, anything with 6 wheels :)
>
> Why 6? A B truck is a natural, given the 9 volt motor...
>
> > Or a boxcab, like the CNR engines, or the Hunslets (lets not go to the Kitson
> > things!-they look like steamers anyway!)
>
> And what is all this blathering on about *non-American* diesels? America *is*
> diesels... <donning flame suit>
Yeah, you got it! North America (including Mexico) has alot of huge locos,
and there are some intersting ones they could build too.
Josh
>
> -John
>
> >
> >
> > James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, James Powell writes:
>
> > I also
> > think that the larger ones could have been built better, but WHERE ARE THE
> > DIESELS?
>
> The simple answer is- WHO CARES? I don't :)
>
> Mind you, some have said that I have steam in my blood...
>
> Coughs and Sneezles Spread Disezles :)
>
> Some nice Co-Bo or similer oddball diesels, along with a SD 9 would be nice (Or
> a SD7, anything with 6 wheels :)
>
> Or a boxcab, like the CNR engines, or the Hunslets (lets not go to the Kitson
> things!-they look like steamers anyway!)
>
> James
IMO A true trainman lieks how a Diesel looks and how a Steam Engine looks,
he/she can apreciate both.
Josh
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Josh Baakko writes:
> In lugnet.trains, James Powell writes:
> >
> > > I also
> > > think that the larger ones could have been built better, but WHERE ARE THE
> > > DIESELS?
> >
> > The simple answer is- WHO CARES? I don't :)
> >
> > Mind you, some have said that I have steam in my blood...
> >
> > Coughs and Sneezles Spread Disezles :)
> >
> > Some nice Co-Bo or similer oddball diesels, along with a SD 9 would be nice (Or
> > a SD7, anything with 6 wheels :)
> >
> > Or a boxcab, like the CNR engines, or the Hunslets (lets not go to the Kitson
> > things!-they look like steamers anyway!)
> >
> > James
>
> IMO A true trainman lieks how a Diesel looks and how a Steam Engine looks,
> he/she can apreciate both.
> Josh
Don't mess with Big Diesel! -Harvey
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, Mark Sandlin writes:
> Josh Baakko at shi_web@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > I also
> > > > think that the larger ones could have been built better, but WHERE ARE THE
> > > > DIESELS?
> > >
> > > To which diesels are you referring?
> >
> > I'm waiting for some.
> > Josh
>
> Well, perhaps you should look at it from a sales perspective.
>
> Diesel engines (IMO) look like a shoebox with wheels. The trains currently
> on shop.lego.com are far more interesting to look at (IMO) than a diesel
> engine would be.
>
> Things that aren't interesting to the consumer generally don't sell very
> well. TLC is probably counting on more than just the die-hard train nuts to
> drive sales, so they probably are trying to make the trains as interesting
> as possible to people like me who aren't train nuts.
You are so right. Mundanes want cute. They think trains are cute things that
puff. Think Little Engine that Could. Think Thomas!!! (every show should
have a Thomas...) In fact, in this month's TRAINS, REAL railroad museums
were talking about how much of a draw a Thomas is.
They are mundanes. They don't get why getting the details exactly right or
at least close gets us jazzed. If they did, they wouldn't be mundanes.
But TLC *has* to market to mundanes. I don't like these locos. They are too
cute. That is a GOOD SIGN. I am not a mundane so I don't know if they are
the right kind of cute or not to sell well... we shall see.
> Of course, I could be completely off-base, but that's kind of what it looks
> like from here.
Spot on. Star Wars isn't technically accurate either.
++Lar
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Mark Sandlin writes:
> > Well, perhaps you should look at it from a sales perspective.
> >
> > Diesel engines (IMO) look like a shoebox with wheels. The trains currently
> > on shop.lego.com are far more interesting to look at (IMO) than a diesel
> > engine would be.
> >
> > Things that aren't interesting to the consumer generally don't sell very
> > well. TLC is probably counting on more than just the die-hard train nuts to
> > drive sales, so they probably are trying to make the trains as interesting
> > as possible to people like me who aren't train nuts.
>
> You are so right. Mundanes want cute. They think trains are cute things that
> puff. Think Little Engine that Could. Think Thomas!!! (every show should
> have a Thomas...) In fact, in this month's TRAINS, REAL railroad museums
> were talking about how much of a draw a Thomas is.
>
> They are mundanes. They don't get why getting the details exactly right or
> at least close gets us jazzed. If they did, they wouldn't be mundanes.
>
> But TLC *has* to market to mundanes. I don't like these locos. They are too
> cute. That is a GOOD SIGN. I am not a mundane so I don't know if they are
> the right kind of cute or not to sell well... we shall see.
Agreed. Don't forget that in the process of helping to promote LTC's at
train shows, LEGO gets to send a postcard with a picture of one of these
cute trains to lots and lots of people.
I don't think that's an accident, neh?
FWIW, I'm not a train guy, and I think they're cute, and may buy one just
for that. Heck, I may buy one with blue trim, just so people can come to a
NALUG show and say "Hey, that's the train on the postcard!"
Also consider that this is "step 2" in LD's experiment with 'build your own
stuff'. The first step was being able to order different colors of 1 part
(Mosaic), and now they're trying different colors of several parts. I think
it's a step forward, and *will* sink some money into it, just so that it's
that much closer to a viable step 3. (Just like I sunk some money into
Mosaic, despite the hellish interface.)
James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> You are so right. Mundanes want cute.
Mundanes? Er --wha? Oh... for a moment there, I thought this newsgroup had
accidentally got cross-posted to lugnet.off-topic.sca
;^D
~Grand Admiral Muffin Head
--
Mark's Lego(R) Creations
http://www.nwlink.com/~sandlin/lego
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
[snip]
> USD Prices:
>
> Small - $19.99
> Small w/ Tender - $24.99
> Large - $29.99
> Large w/ Tender - $34.99
Wow! Those are the price ranges I was hoping for but I did not expect them.
Guess I will be ear marking money for several of those just for parts. Woo Hoo!
-Mike Petrucelli aka Lord Insanity
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
"Duq" <Duq@nlgateway.net> writes:
> Maybe it's childhood memories, maybe it's because I'm just after
> buying the old Thatcher Perkins, but it looks like trains have only
> gone downhill since the early eighties....
But the Thatcher Perkins is, like, more than twice as large as today's
trains. And it still doesn't implement the correct kind of
pushrod/cylinder movement.
If a LEGO set was perfect to the degree that there wasn't any room to
improve it, would you still like it? What I like about LEGO sets is
the possibility to improve and rebuild the original design.
Fredrik
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
...and now that they're available, I've received an e-mail from S@H Europe
(in reply to my "where are they?" e-mail this morning):
<snip>
There are lots more to come too, so keep checking the website!
<un-snip>
Just Imagine .oO
;-)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.loc.uk, Jon D. Hayward writes:
> ...and now that they're available, I've received an e-mail from S@H Europe
> (in reply to my "where are they?" e-mail this morning):
>
> <snip>
> There are lots more to come too, so keep checking the website!
> <un-snip>
Cheek. They did that to me when I asked about train parts and other Service
Packs, except that took over a fortnight.
Jason J Railton
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Mark Sandlin writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
>
> > You are so right. Mundanes want cute.
>
> Mundanes? Er --wha? Oh... for a moment there, I thought this newsgroup had
> accidentally got cross-posted to lugnet.off-topic.sca
>
> ;^D
Hey, are you a SCAdian?
I wonder how many cross-overs there are between the two hobbies? I know
that several of the local SCAdians (8 or 9, just off the top of my head) are
also AFOLs to one degree or another (none online)... How many AFOL's around
here are also SCAdians?
Guilty. :D
James
aka Iolar
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
James Brown at galliard@shades-of-night.com wrote:
> Hey, are you a SCAdian?
>
> I wonder how many cross-overs there are between the two hobbies? I know
> that several of the local SCAdians (8 or 9, just off the top of my head) are
> also AFOLs to one degree or another (none online)... How many AFOL's around
> here are also SCAdians?
>
> Guilty. :D
>
> James
> aka Iolar
I am not, but one of my friends is. :^)
~Grand Admiral Muffin Head
--
Mark's Lego(R) Creations
http://www.nwlink.com/~sandlin/lego
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, James Brown writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Mark Sandlin writes:
> > In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> >
> > > You are so right. Mundanes want cute.
> >
> > Mundanes? Er --wha? Oh... for a moment there, I thought this newsgroup had
> > accidentally got cross-posted to lugnet.off-topic.sca
> >
> > ;^D
>
> Hey, are you a SCAdian?
I got to ask, whats that?
Josh
>
> I wonder how many cross-overs there are between the two hobbies? I know
> that several of the local SCAdians (8 or 9, just off the top of my head) are
> also AFOLs to one degree or another (none online)... How many AFOL's around
> here are also SCAdians?
>
> Guilty. :D
>
> James
> aka Iolar
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Josh Baakko writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, James Brown writes:
> > In lugnet.trains, Mark Sandlin writes:
> > > In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > >
> > > > You are so right. Mundanes want cute.
> > >
> > > Mundanes? Er --wha? Oh... for a moment there, I thought this newsgroup had
> > > accidentally got cross-posted to lugnet.off-topic.sca
> > >
> > > ;^D
> >
> > Hey, are you a SCAdian?
>
> I got to ask, whats that?
A member (or just participant) in the Society for Creative Anachronism. We
go out and do all things medieval except the bad parts. (unless you count
politics as one of the bad parts, 'cause we do that in spades...)
James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, James Brown writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Josh Baakko writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, James Brown writes:
> > > In lugnet.trains, Mark Sandlin writes:
> > > > In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > >
> > > > > You are so right. Mundanes want cute.
> > > >
> > > > Mundanes? Er --wha? Oh... for a moment there, I thought this newsgroup had
> > > > accidentally got cross-posted to lugnet.off-topic.sca
> > > >
> > > > ;^D
> > >
> > > Hey, are you a SCAdian?
> >
> > I got to ask, whats that?
>
> A member (or just participant) in the Society for Creative Anachronism. We
> go out and do all things medieval except the bad parts. (unless you count
> politics as one of the bad parts, 'cause we do that in spades...)
Ah i get it now, thanks!
Josh
>
> James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In article <GCBqo0.CGL@lugnet.com>,
James Brown <galliard@shades-of-night.com> wrote:
> A member (or just participant) in the Society for Creative Anachronism. We
> go out and do all things medieval except the bad parts. (unless you count
> politics as one of the bad parts, 'cause we do that in spades...)
And when he says _all things_, he means all things. They're planning on
killing off 1/3-1/2 of their members with the plague and then switching
to all things Renaissance... :)
-JDF
--
J.D. Forinash ,-.
foxtrot@cc.gatech.edu ( <
The more you learn, the better your luck gets. `-'
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, John D. Forinash writes:
> In article <GCBqo0.CGL@lugnet.com>,
> James Brown <galliard@shades-of-night.com> wrote:
> > A member (or just participant) in the Society for Creative Anachronism. We
> > go out and do all things medieval except the bad parts. (unless you count
> > politics as one of the bad parts, 'cause we do that in spades...)
>
> And when he says _all things_, he means all things. They're planning on
> killing off 1/3-1/2 of their members with the plague and then switching
> to all things Renaissance... :)
I think plague counts as one of the "bad parts", so we ignore that. And I'd
never switch to all things Renaissance... you'll never catch me waving
around one of those silly pokey swords, and wearing fruffly clothing.
<grin, duck>
James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In article <GCCv0u.GIA@lugnet.com>,
James Brown <galliard@shades-of-night.com> wrote:
> I think plague counts as one of the "bad parts", so we ignore that. And I'd
Only if you don't target the people making things political. :)
> never switch to all things Renaissance... you'll never catch me waving
> around one of those silly pokey swords, and wearing fruffly clothing.
But in the Renaissance, armor and weapons got so much more elegant.
Of course, this was largely because the cannon of the king and the
arquebus of the common foot soldier made nobility and their armor
a) irrelevant and b) captured. So they made their armor pretty to at least
not _look_ useless, even if they were. After all, if you looked like you
had money, you got captured for ransom instead of getting dead. :)
On the other hand, were I an SCA type, I'd just as soon have the nice
ugly brigandine anyhow.
-JDF
--
J.D. Forinash ,-.
foxtrot@cc.gatech.edu ( <
The more you learn, the better your luck gets. `-'
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, John D. Forinash writes:
> In article <GCCv0u.GIA@lugnet.com>,
> James Brown <galliard@shades-of-night.com> wrote:
> > I think plague counts as one of the "bad parts", so we ignore that. And I'd
>
> Only if you don't target the people making things political. :)
>
> > never switch to all things Renaissance... you'll never catch me waving
> > around one of those silly pokey swords, and wearing fruffly clothing.
>
> But in the Renaissance, armor and weapons got so much more elegant.
I see people like that at all the time in the SCA; I think the preferred
term is "fop" or "dandy." 8^)
> On the other hand, were I an SCA type, I'd just as soon have the nice
> ugly brigandine anyhow.
I have several suits of chain, and SCA people ask if I fight in it. I
say, why would I? It offers no impact protection, coupled with the added
benefit of 60 extra pounds!
Dave!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler writes:
> > > never switch to all things Renaissance... you'll never catch me waving
> > > around one of those silly pokey swords, and wearing fruffly clothing.
> >
> > But in the Renaissance, armor and weapons got so much more elegant.
>
> I see people like that at all the time in the SCA; I think the preferred
> term is "fop" or "dandy." 8^)
Around here, we call them "swishy-poke". They call us a variety of more
stylish insults, but we heavy fighters are simple folk, with simple insults. ;)
> > On the other hand, were I an SCA type, I'd just as soon have the nice
> > ugly brigandine anyhow.
>
> I have several suits of chain, and SCA people ask if I fight in it. I
> say, why would I? It offers no impact protection, coupled with the added
> benefit of 60 extra pounds!
That's why I fight in a moving blanket (technical term: gambeson). It's a
little toasty, but I rarely get a significant bruise. Chain looks pretty,
but ain't exactly comfortable.
James
(for the curious, this is me on the right:
http://www.shades-of-night.com/random/00quadwar/iolarmalcolm1.jpg )
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
James Brown wrote:
>
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, John D. Forinash writes:
> > In article <GCBqo0.CGL@lugnet.com>,
> > James Brown <galliard@shades-of-night.com> wrote:
> > > A member (or just participant) in the Society for Creative Anachronism. We
> > > go out and do all things medieval except the bad parts. (unless you count
> > > politics as one of the bad parts, 'cause we do that in spades...)
> >
> > And when he says _all things_, he means all things. They're planning on
> > killing off 1/3-1/2 of their members with the plague and then switching
> > to all things Renaissance... :)
>
> I think plague counts as one of the "bad parts", so we ignore that. And I'd
> never switch to all things Renaissance... you'll never catch me waving
> around one of those silly pokey swords, and wearing fruffly clothing.
> <grin, duck>
Thinking of various sorts of weapons and dress reminded me of the group
which performed at the SF con we had back in October. They are a group
who do staged combats using close to real weapons (I don't think they're
sharp). They were quite interesting to watch and looked like they were
having way too much fun (though plenty of sweat with it). The group
leader got started when she was doing some work on her house and
discovered a Japanese sword.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
James Brown wrote:
>
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Josh Baakko writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.fun, James Brown writes:
> > > In lugnet.trains, Mark Sandlin writes:
> > > > In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > >
> > > > > You are so right. Mundanes want cute.
> > > >
> > > > Mundanes? Er --wha? Oh... for a moment there, I thought this newsgroup had
> > > > accidentally got cross-posted to lugnet.off-topic.sca
Note that mundanes is a term also used by SF Fans (interesting question,
where was it first used? There's a large crossover between SCA and SF
fandom, but SF fandom is definitely older).
> > > Hey, are you a SCAdian?
> >
> > I got to ask, whats that?
>
> A member (or just participant) in the Society for Creative Anachronism. We
> go out and do all things medieval except the bad parts. (unless you count
> politics as one of the bad parts, 'cause we do that in spades...)
I was at one time, but I got better... Actually, the politics destroyed
it for me. I was involved in college and after a fairly fun year, a grad
student came in and brought the politics of his hometown group.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Frank Filz writes:
> Actually, the [SCA] politics destroyed it for me. I was involved in college
> and after a fairly fun year, a grad student came in and brought the politics
> of his hometown group.
I agree with you--one bad apple. The absolute limit of my tolerance
anymore is four days at Pennsic; beyond that, I can't be bothered with the
in-fighting, pettiness, and back-stabbing rampant in the SCA.
It cracks me up that the SCA is by nature a haven for perceived nerds and
geeks (not making a judgment; just a point), and those nerds and geeks form
the same social stratifications that they nominally reject.
Dave!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Frank Filz writes:
>
> > Actually, the [SCA] politics destroyed it for me. I was involved in college
> > and after a fairly fun year, a grad student came in and brought the politics
> > of his hometown group.
>
> I agree with you--one bad apple. The absolute limit of my tolerance
> anymore is four days at Pennsic; beyond that, I can't be bothered with the
> in-fighting, pettiness, and back-stabbing rampant in the SCA.
> It cracks me up that the SCA is by nature a haven for perceived nerds and
> geeks (not making a judgment; just a point), and those nerds and geeks form
> the same social stratifications that they nominally reject.
I come from a more laid-back area; up here in Avacal our political
infighting is pretty minimal, and it rarely spills over past the people
involved, so I don't see it (much) - but that's the advantage of living in
the hinterlands.
Less people, less politics.
And besides, I'm only in it for the head-bashing and the food. :D
James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
James Brown wrote in message ...
>
> I come from a more laid-back area; up here in Avacal our political
> infighting is pretty minimal, and it rarely spills over past the • people
> involved, so I don't see it (much) - but that's the advantage of • living in
> the hinterlands.
> Less people, less politics.
Same here in Lions Gate - there is politics, of course (get more than
2 people together in any kind of organisation and there will be
politics!) but it's ignorable if you're not interested. The fact that
we've had the same Baron and Baroness for the last 25 years may have
something to do with it, too.
Our household is mostly in it for the camping and the music, although
my daughter fights rapier and carries the honor of the household for
us (pics here: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=2215
and especially this one
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=22273 ). My hands and
arms are so screwed up from the computer that even rapier is too much
of a risk.
Kevin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Craftsman Lego Kits & Custom models: http://www.lionsgatemodels.com
Brickbay Lego parts store: http://www.brickbay.com/store.asp?p=Kevinw1
eBay Lego auctions: http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/kevinw1/
The Guild of Bricksmiths: http://www.bricksmiths.com
Personal Lego Web page:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/kwilson_tccs/lego.html
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
James Brown wrote in message ...
> also AFOLs to one degree or another (none online)... How many AFOL's • around
> here are also SCAdians?
Guilty as charged (but you knew that :-) ).
We are definitely going to Clinton this year, plan is to go up the
weekend before and be there the whole work week (which is in many ways
more fun that the war weekend itself). Maybe this time we can get
together!
Kevin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Kevin Wilson writes:
> James Brown wrote in message ...
> > also AFOLs to one degree or another (none online)... How many AFOL's • around
> > here are also SCAdians?
>
> Guilty as charged (but you knew that :-) ).
>
> We are definitely going to Clinton this year, plan is to go up the
> weekend before and be there the whole work week (which is in many ways
> more fun that the war weekend itself). Maybe this time we can get
> together!
Here's hoping! Although our situations are reversed... this year, *I'm* the
guy who's not sure he can make it... I don't have a lot of holiday time
available this year, and I'm not likely to be popular if I grab yet another
long weekend.
That and the 20 hour+ round trip with a 10 month old baby...
:/
James
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
James Brown wrote in message ...
> That and the 20 hour+ round trip with a 10 month old baby...
Yikes! And camping in those conditions with the baby... not fun.
Kevin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Craftsman Lego Kits & Custom models: http://www.lionsgatemodels.com
Brickbay Lego parts store: http://www.brickbay.com/store.asp?p=Kevinw1
eBay Lego auctions: http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/kevinw1/
The Guild of Bricksmiths: http://www.bricksmiths.com
Personal Lego Web page:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/kwilson_tccs/lego.html
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Mark Sandlin wrote in message ...
> In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
>
> > You are so right. Mundanes want cute.
>
> Mundanes? Er --wha? Oh... for a moment there, I thought this • newsgroup had
> accidentally got cross-posted to lugnet.off-topic.sca
Hey, our Baron uses Lego when he gives classes on castle building and
forification. Lego from his own collection :-) I take sets for parting
out, to rapier practice when I chauffeur my daughter there, and sit
there sorting them while the swishing and poking goes on. Lego and the
SCA go very well together (but I don't take Lego to wars).
Kevin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Craftsman Lego Kits & Custom models: http://www.lionsgatemodels.com
Brickbay Lego parts store: http://www.brickbay.com/store.asp?p=Kevinw1
eBay Lego auctions: http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/kevinw1/
The Guild of Bricksmiths: http://www.bricksmiths.com
Personal Lego Web page:
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/kwilson_tccs/lego.html
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, James Brown writes:
> Agreed. Don't forget that in the process of helping to promote
> LTC's at train shows, LEGO gets to send a postcard with a picture
> of one of these cute trains to lots and lots of people.
>
> I don't think that's an accident, neh?
>
> FWIW, I'm not a train guy, and I think they're cute, and may buy one just
> for that. Heck, I may buy one with blue trim, just so people can come
> to a NALUG show and say "Hey, that's the train on the postcard!"
I agree - We absolutely should have a train there that matches
the postcard. People will be _expecting_ it. Probably not as
part of the actual layout though IMO.
SRC
| | | | | | |
