text:
LEGO Powered Up substitution for Power Functions Motor Set 8293
We have a Volvo EW160E, for which the product description says

Upgrade with the 8293 LEGO Power Functions motor set (not supplied)
  for a fully motorised boom and working lights.

Well, looks like Power Functions is discontinued (and no longer in stock), apparently replaced by Powered UP. What would be the best Powered UP equivalent of the 8293 set?

As with old sets and systems (Power Functions (PF) in this case) are being retired supplementary sets become discontinued as well. There are couple of ways you could handle this situation.
Power Functions
In case you have a set which suggest using 8293 set for motorisation it is advised to source that particular set or elements of that set. While LEGO no longer sell 8293 set directly it is still possible to acquire this as set as New or Used on secondary market, like BrickLink, BrickOwl, Ebay, etc.
Depending on your LEGO collection you may already have some of the individual parts included in 8293 set since they are not unique and have been available in other sets too. Here you can to buy just the parts you need.
Powered UP
LEGO has decided to discontinue PF system to make a way for newer one called Powered UP. Sadly, at this point of time new system doesn't have have a similar supplemental set to motorise sets. This means required parts need to be sourced individually.
Another issue with PU system - it is not 1:1 copy of old system in terms of element dimensions and properties. But let's review contents of 8293 set and see what PU system could offer.
8293 set contains 4 items of PF system (below) used to bring models alive. I'm going to dismiss non-PF items as these would need to be acquired individually anyway if PU parts are going to be used.

Battery Box. PF system use standalone battery box, where power to motors is applied directly by using switch on a box itself compared to 88009 PU Hub (LEGO, Bricklink) (which is both Battery Box and Receiver) which will only provide power once signaled from 88010 Controller (LEGO, Bricklink) or smart device via Bluetooth. Next thing is the different form-factor - PU Hub comes in different shape and size (similar to PF small Battery Box), which means it may not fit the originally intended place within a model designed for 8293 set.
M-motor. Luckily, new 45303 M-Motor (LEGO, Bricklink) is very similar to previously used PF M-motor. Not the same, but most won't be an issue.
Pole Reverser / Polarity Switch. This item does not exist as PU element.
Lights. Similarly to PF Lights, newer 88005 PU Lights (LEGO, Bricklink) should work fine.

As seen above, newer elements have quite a different properties and may not fit sets originally designed for 8293 motorisation without substantial modifications or currently offer nothing as a replacement (like a Pole Reverser / Polarity Switch).
It is also worth mentioning that PU system has new connector, so none of the previously released motors/electric components incorporated into new system.


text:
Help me identify this Batman set
I've tried to look up what I thought were specific bricks without luck, so please help me. I know it's a Batman set, but not much more. The red shield is #17979, its red transparent. There is a hook behind with #24144 and a "bat-rang" #26-01

I did new research on Rebrickable and found out it is #76086 - Knightcrawler Tunnel Attack

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
How is the neck of the green velociraptor 10757 connected?
I found a green velociraptor in a box on the curb, presumably from the "rescue truck" 10757 box. The head is detached from the body and there is no obvious way to attach it.
I found a light sabre handle that fits as a "neck", as would a basic round pin (on one end).
I can't find what the proper connector is. From official images of the box it looks like it must be a type of stick that is virtually invisible.
I'd appreciate any suggestions to connect the head correcttly.
PS. I may not know the right terminology I don't claim to be a lego expert by any stretch.

Looking at inventory for Velociraptor, included in 10757 set you've mentioned, there is a Technic Pin. Since all of the limbs have half of the pin molded into the parts this leaves us with Technic Pin that is used to connect body with a head piece.

Better pictured by this step from LEGO building instruction (thanks Syberion for the tip):

Correct, this can also be seen in the instructions on page 8

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Where to use the dark gray 1x4 flat pieces in Lego Hidden Side Ghost Train Express 70424
I got two out of three pieces left of these after finished the building and I am now asking where they are supposed to be?

The instructions can be viewed here if anyone cares to help and search.
https://lego.brickinstructions.com/en/lego_instructions/set/70424/Ghost_Train_Express

Step 115 needs all three 1 x 4 Plates in Dark Bluish Gray [BL]/Dark Stone Grey [TLG].

You've probably skipped sub-step 7 of step 115, where both parts need to be added:

Very helpful, much obliged!


text:
Arranging claws radially and horizontally
I would like to arrange 3 claws in a horizontal circle (parallel to the ground ), pointing outward from the circle with roughly equal radial distance (120 degrees) between them.  Any ideas on how I can do that?

Your claws will fit in this Technic element:

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=10288

Is there a simple way to convert from axle to claw?

Claws have the usual 3.18mm bar at one end which fits the part mentioned in the answer. So you don't need to convert anything, unless your idea was to attach claws with a pointy end.

@Alex The round peg fits in the cross-shaped hole? Is that a legal construction?

Yes, 3.18mm end (peg) fits the inside of Technic connector. That is totally legal  connection. Check 70001 set, for example, which uses both parts mentioned.

Yes, bars fit nicely in axle holes, its also quite recently (like two years ago) that I learned this.


text:
Does each LEGO set include a unique piece?
If I had 100 lego sets would I be able to fully build a lego set that I didn't have? Or would it always be impossible due to each set having at least one unique piece?
To further clarify, let's say I own every LEGO set except for one. Does the set I don't own always contain at least one brick/piece that can't be found in all the sets I do own? Of course color doesn't matter.

Welcome to Bricks.SE! It is hard to answer your question without more details or exact example of a set you wish to build from your collection. This is because your collection could consist of all small/large sets and you are willing to build huge/tiny set. So the answer can be both No and Yes. Some sets have also unique piece, so you could not build exact copy (or cannot build it at all) if you don't own needed piece. CMF are considered a set, so having 100 of those won't result in Police station. Please make your question more clear and explain what you are trying to understand.

I just want to know if each bonafide LEGO set contains at least one unique piece that cannot be found in any other LEGO set.

Most of sets doesn't contain unique elements, however there are exceptions. This (uniqueness) is especially common with minifigures or limited edition/availability sets.
The easiest set (polybag) to confirm the fact that only some sets have unique parts is to take 624210, which consists of 6 pcs. of iconic 2 x 4 bricks in Red, which were available in numerous sets. Another option, of a boxed set, is to take any set consisting of basic bricks, like 5576. Parts included in 5576 are widely available and can be found in multiple sets.
However if you take something exclusive, like 41999. This set contains some unique parts available in this set only.

Flicking through Sets on BrickLink, sorted by number of parts (and ignoring small-scale items such as "Advent Calendar" models), I identified the 61-part set 4736-1 "Freeing Dobby" from 2010, which included no new parts - and, as such, no unique parts.
The rarest part of the set appears to be Tan Tile 1 x 2 with Groove with HP Sock Pattern, which appears in two other sets
This then proves that not all Lego sets include unique parts.

How did you figure out that Freeing Dobby has no new parts?

I really doubt that every single Lego set on the planet has at least one unique piece, and besides, I think that's up to you to decide which pieces are “unique” and which are not. Every single set that I try thinking of seems to have a unique piece, but I bet the real reason for that is because I have just never seen how many sets have that same piece, therefore I think it's rare when it's really not. One group of sets that is always guaranteed to have rare pieces is the Lego Minifigures series.
So the short answer is most likely no.

My understanding is that it costs Lego quite a bit to create a new mold, so it's in their interest to reuse their pieces a lot.

The question of uniqueness has already a lot of answers, I will concentrate on this question from the text
If I had 100 lego sets would I be able to fully build a lego set that I didn't have?
There is another factor, namely time, to consider. While the basic LEGO bricks remain unchanged over the decades, other items are retired and new ones are introduced. The style of doors, fences, and windows has changed considerably over time, and you need sets covering a certain period to rebuild another period set. 100 sets of the 1980ies will not help you in rebuilding a modern model, and 100 contemporary sets will not be sufficient to rebuild an original Black Seas Barracuda from 1989 because this brick was phased out in 2007 and in yellow, it was last seen in 2002.

Degrees of uniqueness
Unique molds
A special mold is the most expansive form of uniqueness that involves a lot of investment by the LEGO company. Really unique molds are rare, but they occur, e.g., in licenced sets, as minifigure parts or accessories. For a long time, the One Ring from one LoTR LEGO set was unique, until recently revied as a wedding ring in the Brickheads series.
Unique colourings
This kind of uniqueness is somewhat more frequent: You can have known element in a unique or rare colour for some model.
Unique prints
Even more frequent are unique prints on known elements of known colours, including the bodies, legs, and heads of minifigures, or special printings bricks.
Stickers
Stickers from sticker sets are really often unique. It is not unusual for them to contain a sticker with the official set number.

Perhaps it would make more sense to change "Unique colourings" to something like "Color and form/mould combination"?

I think this is understood; I haven't heard yet that LEGO created a unique colour only to use in a single model.


text:
Is this an official Lego minifigure?
I have a spiderman figure, that does fit to Lego bricks and who's hands are the same as a Lego Minifigure, but I can't find out if it is an official (albeit somewhat older) Lego product.  Any ideas?

This looks like Spider-Man (Junior-fig). Although it is not so easy to confirm if your item is LEGO or clone-branded minifigure. You could look inside the legs if there are any LEGO logos.


text:
LDD lacks almost all functionality
I have installed LDD on my Windows 10 today, and after installing the application it automatically opened up. But I realized that when using the Desktop shortcut, the app can't be found. Here's the given error:

So I used the installer again, and it said that LDD was already installed. But I couldn't find the files anywhere, only the shortcut. So I reinstalled anyway and stored them in a directory I recognized, yet after installing when I checked the directory, it wasn't there. Once again I tried this process, but the problem persisted. I also notice that any LXF file I try to open doesn't do anything and LDD doesn't detect the file when I open it from the application itself. So LDD is quite crippled, tbh.
How do I solve this??

If you are on Windows 10 indeed, use Stud.io from Bricklink instead of LDD. LDD is no longer updated (since a few years already) and is missing newer parts. Stud.io is a much better product.

Unfortunately, we can't really help with General Support for these applications, that's something you're better off raising with the supplier themselves. If you're sure you know where the installer was supposed to install the application and it's not there, I'd double check your AntiVirus software, and make sure that hasn't quarantined the executable. But as Phil B notes, Stud.io is probably the way to go now.

Rather than re-installing, you should better go with full uninstall and then install again. This should remove all the associated files first and re-install correct ones, including the shortcut. Optionally, you could simply search for "ldd.exe" on your machine.

I have found a similar question that tells how to fix one of my problems: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/279397/ldd-does-not-find-path-how-to-add

Update as of 12 January 2022
The LEGO Group has announced via a press release they will be closing the LDD site from 31 January 2022, and encourage all users to migrate to Bricklink Studio.

The LEGO Digital Designer (LDD) website will close on January 31st, after which time LDD will no longer be available for download. While downloaded versions of the LDD application will continue to work, people are encouraged to download BrickLink Studio, import their LDD files, and use Studio for 3D LEGO building files, and use Studio for 3D LEGO building.

Original answer
As Phil B commented - you'd probably be better off with Studio now. This was originally developed by a team at BrickLink, and when they were acquired by The LEGO Group made the following statement:

What about Studio and LEGO Digital Designer (LDD) – what will happen with the two digital building experiences since they’re quite similar?
The LEGO Group is planning to support and evolve Studio and will review opportunities for both services following the closing of the deal.

So going forwards, Studio is the supported option. If you feel you really must stick with LDD, please also ensure that you use the last-but-one version, as the very latest version is missing a number of elements.
Finally, ensure that you download the installer from official sources (such as the LEGO CDN as linked in that answer), rather than "free software" sites, which might have tampered with the package.

Does it support LXF files? Might be a dumb question, but just wondering.

And is the studio hyperlink dangerous, or is it just my Antivirus getting confused?

I've fixed download URL. It is also easy to find it by googling "stud.io". It can also import LXF files, but not save them AFAIK.

Cheers Alex, and sorry @mindstormsboi : I assumed their short link was secure, and so shouldn't have linked it as https.

Alright, thanks.

TLG has announced that after 2022-01-31 the LDD website will be full removed and direct downloads from LEGO will no longer be available, nor will there ever be any more official updates to the software or the parts database. https://www.brothers-brick.com/2022/01/12/lego-fully-discontinuing-lego-digital-designer-in-favor-of-bricklink-studio/


text:
2x2 macaroni pieces
I don't own any of the brick, round corner 2 x 2 macaroni  pieces. If you make a circle with them, can you fit a 2x2 round snugly within that circle?

Yes it fits as well as you'd expect. same as any adjacent brick, so there's not much friction if you want to slide it up and down like a piston.


text:
Does anybody know the part number of this tile?
Does anybody know the part number of this tile? The size is 2x14.
It has an unusual height. It's higher than 1 plate, lower than 2, so it's an exact 1/2 of a brick. See the given picture for the bottom:

Are sure this is not 2 plates high? Could you take another picture with plates side by side?

Hi user15123.  Welcome to Bricks.StackExchange.  If Alex's answer is what you were looking for it'd be nice to click the checkbox by the answer to accept it.  https://bricks.stackexchange.com/help/someone-answers

That's Train Level Crossing Center Rail Cap Insert 2 x 14 x 2/3. Although as naming suggests it is 2/3 of a brick, so it must be two plates high.
Picture from Bricklink:

And here is a list of 6 sets it was part of.


text:
Missing instructions and box
My mom bought this set at a garage sale, with no instructions and no box. There are some obvious identifying pieces but I don’t know what set they are from, or if I even have all the pieces I need. I also don’t know if the wheels that came with it are actually part of the set. Any help appreciated! (2011 on the bag)

The loose part are gray and red speeder from: 75012-1: BARC Speeder with Sidecar

based on:
Coupling Plate 2X2 in Medium Stone Grey
Roof Tile 2X1X2 in New Dark Red
Lt Suspension in Dark Stone Grey

Thank you!! My son will be very happy to hear that it’s from Star Wars! Now to get the instructions! :)

@Katie The brickset link Joost included has a tab for "Instructions" that could make this easier to find for you.


text:
Missing instructions
I have the set 6983 Ice Station Odyssey from when my husband was a kid. Anyone have instructions for it? They seem to have been misplaced. I couldn’t find any online anywhere so I thought I would check here.

Unfortunately, LEGO does not offer instructions for this set on their website. Fortunately, there are scanned versions you can find on letsbuilditagain.com or brickinstructions.com

That works! Thank you so much!!


text:
Can you tell me what Star Wars vehicle these are from?

Not sure what those round grey parts are. They have a blue "light" on them. My son has almost exclusively Star Wars sets but we can’t figure out what these are from.

Welcome to Bricks.SE, Laura! These pieces are not very rare, and hence finding the set they come from is going to be pretty hard. With your hint that your son only has Star Wars sets, I think this is from 75166 First Order Transport Speeder Battle Pack, where these parts form the engine outlets of the small vehicle.

I have this set, and my initial thought was this one too. Does he have a few extra gray lightsaber hilts? The rest of the engines in question are the same part as the lightsaber hilt, except in a color not usually used for actual lightsabers. Also look and see if he has the riot shields from this set, as they are pretty uncommon in this print.


text:
Can you identify the set for these two LEGO bags?

Looking to identify the following 2 bags

Bag 6    identifying possible help = 741R7  2015 Lego Group  135149
Bag 8    identifying possible help = 142R7  2015 Lego Group  135149

I am hoping the minifig heads might help.
Let me know what you experts think.  I just randomly found in my stash.

This is set # 70909-1: Batcave Break-In

Based on
Plate, Modified 10 x 10 Octagonal Open Center
and
Hips and Legs with Jacket Tails Pattern

PERFECTION!  I can 100% match up the parts to this set.   You are amazing.  Thank you!


text:
Which pieces were used to make the flexible mesh skin for the life size Lego Bugatti?
In the linked video, around the 1:50 - 1:55 mark, a person can be seen picking up a flexible hexagonal mesh, and bringing it to the side of the vehicle. Also, close ups are visible around 2:03 - 2:37. Last, the are apparently two styles of mesh being used, one light colored one dark colored.
What are the Lego parts used to build these two meshes?

They appear to be Technic lift arms, beams and hinge elements. I wonder if BrickLink has this inventoried yet?

There doesn't seem to be a difference in a shape of triangles (that's how they mention them in the video) seen in Dark Azure as well as Dark Blue colors. However there are two shapes - bigger and smaller triangles. Smaller triangle's edge is half the length of bigger one - you can attach two of these to bigger triangle.
Larger one requires parts listed below. I didn't include half bushes seen in some images (funny thing is that half of same assembly had them, while the other didn't) as they put too much stress into assembly. It is also worth mentioning LEGO used a lot of parts which cannot be found in any of sets.

Smaller one needs these:

Then they are connected together with either of two following parts (both seen in use). First one is made of rubber so it allows some twisting and stretching which is what allows the skin to take shape.

Warning. I've built both versions and some parts here are a bit stressed (definitely illegal connections involved) which means they could deform over time.

Note. I've missed 3 pieces of 3L half thickness Technic beams in smaller triangle in my assembly to cover some axles, however part list has correct amount.

Could you give a bit more detail on what you meant about the comment, "used a lot of parts which cannot be found in any of sets"? Impressive answer, and the sample models you built are very appreciated!

@nijineko LEGO produce, from time to time, parts for various projects in colors not available in any of retail sets. Bugatti in the video is not an exception. If you look closer in the video, you'll notice half width 3L and 7L Technic beams featured in triangles above were used in Dark Azure color in the Bugatti. You won't find them in any of retail sets as of the time of this comment. Same goes for half bushings, some other elements including Dark Blue, Trans-Clear and Trans-Red colors (all Bricklink color names).


text:
Is it okay to put rechargeable AA batteries into the EV3?
Is it really okay to put rechargeable AA batteries into the EV3 and continuously put them in after recharging them each time? Boring old one-use AA batteries are getting too expensive for me, and I know that I should use the rechargeable battery which is intended for EV3. But still, will it work?

According to the posts in this Eurobricks thread, it is indeed possible, even if there are a few caveats to keep in mind (like the maximal current the batteries can supply versus the maximal current the attached motors can draw).

And I see some other guy use them, even though TLG clearly states that they are NOT recommended.

TLG has no other choice than to say they are not recommended, in order to shield themselves from the legal liability in case some faulty rechargeable batteries leak or explode, damaging the EV3 or other property or life. Then all the lawyers have to do is point at the clause that "these are NOT recommended" and a lengthy and costly legal battle is avoided.


text:
Error message when using loop index as an array index to get value in arrays
My program moves an ultrasonic sensor around 260 degrees and the values are recorded down in an array variable every 2 degrees it turns. It moves back and measure it 3 more times, storing each measurement in a different array variable (in total there are 4 array variables).
I want to get the average value from the four array variable thus I use the 'read at index' mode of the array operations.

It uses the loop index to get the index of the arrays. Then it takes the values and calculates the average before putting them in another variable array. However, the brick shows an error message right after the ultrasonic sensor is finished measuring.
I removed some parts of the program in order to find the cause of the error and I found that it might have something to do with the loop index. It might also have been because the array is not found. I tried using another variable that adds one every loop and then uses it to get the index but the message would appear.
I am not sure why there is the error, nothing contradicts the program, there is no math error, it should have worked. I hope you guys can tell me why this happens and how to solve it. Thank you!
Here is the complete program:

Clarifications
 It loops 130 times as the ultrasonic sensor measures every 2 degrees it turns, so if it turns 260 degrees, there will be 130 measurements, 130 values in the arrays.

FYI: You don't need to "remove" parts of the program when you can hold CTRL and left-click certain groups of code, then you can press the "Run Selected" button, which looks like a play button with parentheses. It will do the same thing as removing certain parts of the program: run the selected parts.

Also, I see another code block hiding on the bottom of the first image, does it serve any purpose in your code?

No, that is just the block palette. It is the red block.

Okay, but I hope you know that the arrow on the screen wouldn't show up if it was in the palette. Perhaps delete it and run the program again?

No there is absolutely nothing there, thanks for helping.

I know the error you're talking about, and this might help you: https://bricks.stackexchange.com/a/6387/15028

Yeah that might be the problem but i am nit sure how to rectify it

Could it be that you are trying to read the #0 or the #261 element in the array? That would definitely lead to such errors.

@zovits I don't see such big numbers in the code, but I do see number 130 used in the loops, which is not really much of a problem.

@linzh You might be attempting to read a variable that doesn't exist. For example, You can use the advanced math block and attempt to add a+h. H does not exist. FYI, only A-D exist since they are the motor ports (i think). You can't write a sensor name into the block, however you can write a motor port letter there.

Yeah both @Zovitis and mindstormsboi is right, just figured out the problem and have posted a answer to it. Thank both you so much!

After testing and researching for a while, I found out that the first  lines of code that controls the moving of the ultrasonic sensor is the cause of the error. Previously, the code will make the motor move 2 degrees, then get the measurement of the ultrasonic sensor and put it inside the numerical array. It then loops 130 times so there is 130 measurements and 260 degrees of rotation.

What I am doing is to replace the entire array with that one value. Thus, when I get the value of the array, I am getting an non-existent value. Also, the array starts from zero, not one, so using the loop index for the array will not work as the loop index will not display a zero value index.
Instead, I should use the 'write at index' mode of array operations. This way, it will add values to the array, not replace the entire array with that one value.

Now this is correct. Before that, I thought that the loop index was the cause of error.
First time answering my own question, Im so proud lol.


text:
SPIK3R can't even hold itself
The SPIK3R does not move properly. When I remove the legs and depend on the wheels it works like it should: goes forward when I make it go forward, and turns when I make it go backward. I did not make this mistake and I am certain that it is built correctly. When I try to make it go forward with it's legs on it just wobbles around for a few seconds and then falls on it's rear end, then the legs pop off.
Also, the front and back legs are pointing straight to the ground because of this part and I'm thinking that I should replace it with this part to give it more flexibility.
Should I do that? Or is there something else wrong?

Could it be that the positions of the legs are not synchronised properly? Can you post a picture or a video of your built model or of the malfunctioning behaviour?

Whenever I get the chance, I will.

Did you get a chance? It's quite hard to answer this without seeing it in action.

@Mast No, not yet. For now just let this question sit here and do nothing until I do upload of picture or something. But it is not very likely anyway...


text:
Identify this minifigure
I found this minifigure on the street.
Can anyone help me identify what it is and what set is it from?
The hands were not originally grey, they were in the colour of the head.

Welcome to Bricks.SE.  What sort of street did you find this minifig on?  Was it near a LEGO convention?

@chicks Not that I know of.

The torso for this figure is 973pb0321c02 Torso Town Vest with Pockets and Striped Tie over White Open Collar Shirt Pattern / White Arms / Yellow Hands.

It comes in several minifigures, but none of them are like yours, so I think this is composed of other parts ( a MOC figure) and not directly from a set.

I see. It seem that there is a high chance that it's this one as both the hair and the legs match. Any idea where the head might come from?

The head is  Minifigure, Head Male Black Eyebrows, Chin Dimple and Lopsided Grin Pattern - Hollow Stud , it appears in 50 minfigures

Thanks @Syberion

How is this correct when the question and image show grey hands?

@chicks Again, it's a MOC figure. What do you expect?

I get that it is a MOC and we're not going to find a matching minifig from a set.  I wouldn't expect most people doing MOC's to swap hands to a different color.  The odds seem worse since this was just "found on the street."  I wonder if bricklink doesn't include all of the variants of this part.  It is too bad we can't find the person who made it.

@chicks The hands were replaced by me when playing with my children. That's what I meant by 'the hands were not originally grey'. How would I know it otherwise? I was not able to replace the hands with the yellow ones when doing the picture, do I decided to add this comment to avoid confusion.

Ok, it makes more sense now.  Sorry for adding any doubts to the answer.  I was just confused.


text:
Is there a way to keep large plates together more efficiently?
Whenever I'm building a baseplate for something such as a skyscraper, every time I put larger-scale pieces (such as an 8 by 4) onto the larger bottom piece (i.e. 16 by 16), there is always space under the smaller piece and it never seems to flatten itself completely, no matter how hard I push on it. This results in imbalances in whatever goes on top of the plate. I don't want to damage the plates with a hammer, but is there another technique that I can use to keep it down?

Stacks of plates make wonderful bridges.  https://bricks.stackexchange.com/a/351/6174

This isn't my personal experience, but I have seen and heard people use rubber hammers for fixing larger plates onto baseplates, which shouldn't be all too different from fixing them onto normal plates.
Those are a classic homeworking tool, commonly used pretty much for the "real world" equivalent of what you're doing, fixing floor tiles and cobblestones into place. They should be soft enough when applying force over a flat area as long as you don't hammer away like a madman. For additional protection you could possibly also put a piece of cloth over the plates. It's probably still more effective and lesss straining than using your hands to hammer or your thumbs to press.
In general though, it's also not a bad idea to try and avoid sticking too many big plates onto each other, as even if you get them pressed together really tightly, it can lead to bending of the entire model when done over a larger area, which is especially noticeable when having a flat ground stand that then...isn't flat anymore. Some of the "thicker" Architecture sets like Trafalgar Square or Robie House exhibit this problem. Try to thin it out when you can or use baseplates for the bottom layer, which are a lot more flexible in themselves.


text:
How to prevent my connected axles from falling apart?
In my EV3 robot, I have two rear axles connected to each other using  this part mounted like this:

[

The problem with this construction is that after a while of driving, the axles disconnect like this:

Is there a sensible way to prevent this from happening?

Are you looking for a solution that's made with parts from the ev3 kit only?

Apologies if this is a dumb question but is "Get a longer axle piece" too obvious?  I think they make them that long.

Unfortunately I don't have a longer one :<

Hmm...  Is the disconnect caused by turning?  (i.e. if you make it drive only forwards and backwards, does the axel remain intact for longer?)  It may be down to the difference in size of turning circle for each wheel, in which case the forces could be reduced or removed with the introduction of a differential

@Chronocidal it's likely caused by turning. Could you link to some documents on the said differential?

@d33tah This question can help if you do not already have a differential available in your Lego box.

If you don't have a longer axle, you could order one - they're pretty cheap, though the shipping cost for 1 piece might be not worth it depending on where you live.  Might be more worthwhile if you include it together with a bunch of other pieces you might want.

You can attach couple of half bushes or full bushes on inner side of the axle near Technic beam like on the other side you have done with a gear. If axle is still trying to slide - fill in the entire inner axle part with bushes.

Here is picture of suggested fix. Here you can see extra half bushes added to fix the axle the same way gear fix the other axle from moving outwards.

I filled all of it and it still slides. Thanks for the answer anyway :)

@d33tah perharps I wasn't clear in describing the fix. I've added a picture. I cannot see how axle would slide again in such setup.

@Alex if the yellow half-bushes have subpar clutch power, the left axle could still move, especially given the forces that arise with such a long axle, no differential and rubber tires. However, applying more (half)bushes could increase the gripping, and if the whole length of the axle is filled with them, and the axles still slide out, then other solutions are needed.

@zovits Agree on more is better, but two half bushes are strong enough to keep the axle in place, unless half bushes are cracked. I assumed Technic beams holding the wheels don't move away from each other. If they do - your answer is the right added solution here.

@Alex Agree, it should be enough, and it is quite curious why does OP say that it does not work...

If you want to stick to your current design (despite its obvious flaws), then here's another idea. Let's go!

As you can see, I tried to rebuild the crucial part of your framework.

Alright. Now two things I've noticed. You're using axles with stop. And there's some play between the bush and the wheel.
Okay, firstly on axles with stop.

Here's two pairs of axles. The two axles with stop are on top, the bottom ones are without stop bit. See that the top ones don't touch each other? See the gap? That's because of the stop and the fact that the wheel has no counterbore. Can you spot the inner rim on the liftarm (blue arrow)? That's what the wheel lacks.
So what about it? Well, here's the problem. Let's take a yellow connector and make them one long axle. But, remember the gap between them?

Once you push them into the connector -all the way in till they 'hit the ground'- you will flex the red and yellow liftarms inwards. Maybe just a tad, but still. They will sure flex back, but because of the stop on the axle the wheel can't pop off. So the axle gets pulled out of the connector instead.
Next about the connector. You chose a connector with a pinhole. This piece is three studs long. So your wheel is now off by one stud. And I think you've therefore adjusted the wheel. That's why we can see this play.

You are indeed correct about the connector. Luckily this Lego set includes a smaller one: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=6538c#T=C

If the application of (half)bushes as mentioned in Alex's answer don't cut it, consider building a frame that holds the ends of the grey axles together, like so:

It is better to replace red bushes near wheels with 15100 and liftarm than fixing from outside in such case.

I think the real problem is the design and the way you used the motors.
If you motorize only one of the wheels with the medium motor to get the other one to move, then the one that's closer to the motor may go faster and you'll probably end up with a slight deviation to the left, which also includes the other wheel snapping off.
Also, using the large servo motor just to steer a few degrees is not worth it, as the servo motor goes faster than the medium motor and you have two servo motors, so I recommend that you redesign your car and individually motorize the two back wheels. and since you said that you only have one servo motor, you should put one between the two axles to keep them together and to motorize both. Use the medium motor for steering instead.
See this car for ideas. Building instructions are included.

The problem is that I don't have two small servo motors anymore - one broke. This design is an attempt at working around that. Thanks for point out the problem though. Do you think I could hack around it?

@d33tah Huh... perhaps you can put one large servo motor in between the two axles to motorize both AND to keep them together, or you can get the motor here and build the other car I've suggested: https://www.amazon.com/Lego-Mindstorms-Large-Servo-Motor/dp/B00E1QDP4W/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=ev3+servo+motor&qid=1589377022&sr=8-2 The lego site does not individually sell this motor unfortunately.

Why would my idea not work? Why downvote?

No idea, I think that your point is valid.


text:
How should castle doors be attached?
I'm trying to plan the pieces I'll need for a castle door.
I know I need 2 of these doors.
Based on the part list for Adventurers Tomb set, it looks like I'll need several shutter holders, right?  Is there a way to fill in the curves around the top so the front is solid?

It appears there's some parts that fill in above the door in the dark fortress landing set (#8802-1). But I can't tell which parts they are from the parts list. Any help on that?

Since this is the only arch in the set, it looks like it might go perfectly on top: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3455&idColor=9#T=C&C=9

It looks more like 3307, Brick, Arch 1 x 6 x 2 - Thick Top with Reinforced Underside

Related: https://bricks.stackexchange.com/questions/6265/how-do-you-eliminate-the-gap-between-castle-doors

The Adventures Tomb 2996 set you mentioned uses shutter holders to mount the door and a 1x6x1 arch to cover the space behind the doors:

It is also very common to use a 1x6x2 arch, as was done in Dark Fortress Landing 8802:

As I mentioned in another answer, these clips generally attach to the back of the door, not the side. The geometry is more complicated to completely fill if you want to have the doors hinge from the side.

I have those doors, and you're right about the shutter holder bricks, which are pretty fragile. The doors each cover half the space under a 1x6x2 arch. Besides the shutter snaps, the only connection point is the stud/doorknob.


text:
Is there a duplicate/copy paste function in Lego Mindstorms Ev3 programing?
I remember, when I first started out Lego Mindstorms, there was a copy and paste (duplicate) blocks function. I could highlight and right click the blocks then press on duplicate to make another copy of it. This was extremely useful if I needed the robot to do something almost like another line of code, albeit with some minor changes. Is there something resembling this function now or did it never exist (my mind might be playing tricks on me)?
I am using the Lego Mindstorms Ev3 Student Edition by LabView.

I don't remember any context menu that pops up on right-click, but CTRL+C to copy highlighted blocks and CTRL+V to paste them works.


text:
Please identify this figure/build

I would like to know from what set this figure/build is? It looks like a tiger/human hybrid.

That is Tiger, Standing (Tygurah) from 7411 set


text:
Mindstorms NXT NXC RemoteStopProgram fails compilation
I have two NXT bricks connected and they work together using Bluetooth, sending messages between the two works. The master NXT will start a program on the slave NXT with the RemoteStartProgram function. However, when I try to use RemoteStopProgram the compilation fails with 'Unknown function' in BricxCC and with this error when compiled with nbc:
File "/home/paul/bricks/carjulie_bt.nxc" ; line 124
#   __connectionWrite (1, __DCStopProgramPacket, __D0main)
#----------------------------------------------------------
1 errors during compilation

This is the relevant portion of the code, what am I missing ?
task main() {
  if (BTConnectToNXT("Sarah", SLAVE_CONN)) {
    RemoteStartProgram(SLAVE_CONN, "carsarah_bt.rxe");
    bool result = RemoteConnectionIdle(SLAVE_CONN);
    if (result) {
      Precedes(ListenToSarah,LookAtColours);
    }
    RemoteStopProgram(SLAVE_CONN);  // This line does not compile ?!
  }
}

Edit 2020-05-16: There is a simple workaround for this error, just send a message to all slaves to execute stopalltasks() function.
This bug is now also on Debian bugs: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=960772
EDIT 2020-05-18: SOLVED! This link https://sourceforge.net/p/bricxcc/code/HEAD/tree/x64/ contains a working nbc version for Linux! Thanks!!

According to the [http://bricxcc.sourceforge.net/nbc/nxcdoc/nxcapi/group___comm_module_d_c_functions_gadb8ddf6b9e434b053aac96a304a18f98.html#gadb8ddf6b9e434b053aac96a304a18f98](API reference) this call is perfectly legal. Are you sure your RemoteStopProgram(SLAVE_CONN);  // This line does not compile ?! line is the one referenced in the error message ("/home/paul/bricks/carjulie_bt.nxc" ; line 124)?

Yes I am sure. I have tried moving that line to other tasks, same thing. I have also tried with 1 instead of SLAVE_CONN and with assigning a byte instead of a #define. This one function always fails, no matter how I write it.   I have also copied the line from programs on the internet, same thing, it does not compile...

BricxCC says "Error Unknown or Invalid Statement".

This line compiles in the old version 3388 of BricxCC (but there are other breaking issues with this old version).

What happens if you assign the return value to a variable?
result = RemoteStopProgram(SLAVE_CONN)

Thanks David Lechner, but I have tried that already (just did it again to be sure). The error is the same: `# Error: Unknown or invalid statement
File "/home/paul/NXT/carjulie_bt.nxc" ; line 149
__connectionWrite (1, __DCStopProgramPacket, __D0main)
#----------------------------------------------------------
1 errors during compilation`

The function may not be defined to the EV3 brick. Is the function defined in another place in the program?

I am working with NXT bricks, not EV3. As user zovits mentioned, this is a perfectly legal function call.

Try changing which version of BricxCC you're using to one of the later releases:
http://bricxcc.sourceforge.net/test_releases/?C=M;O=D
What version are you using now?  I duplicated the compile error on v3.3.8.9, but I didn't get the compile error on v3.3.8.11:
http://bricxcc.sourceforge.net/test_releases/test_release20131007.zip
Hope that works!
PS: I didn't test anything, as I'm not using the feature -- I just saw it would compile on a different version.
If you use this, make sure you review compiler settings, as it looks like the newer version has [x] Enhanced Firmware option checked by default (which you may or may not have installed on your NXT brick, if using stock LEGO firmware).
Update #1:
According to https://sourceforge.net/p/bricxcc/code/HEAD/tree/NXT/history.txt, it may be a known issue that was fixed in a newer release:
Version 1.2.1.r5 (2013-02-16)
   :
- Fixed definition for several Remote* API functions which sent direct/system commands
  to other NXT devices via Bluetooth or RS-485

So, it looks like 1.2.1r5 or newer version of NBC command-line tools may be required.
Also, the test release I downloaded (v3.3.8.11 of GUI) has nbc.exe v1.2.1.5, while the other version I have (v3.3.8.9 of GUI) has nbc.exe v1.2.1.4 -- so this may be the issue.
Update #2:
For Linux, see https://sourceforge.net/p/bricxcc/code/HEAD/tree/386/ and https://sourceforge.net/p/bricxcc/code/HEAD/tree/x64/ 32 and 64-bit binaries, respectively.

Thank you bitbob for this valid answer. I just tried it with wine on Debian and it works. I am however addicted to working with vi on Debian Linux, starting a GUI for every compile is not an option.
The nbc tool on Linux does not seem to be included in these test updates; there is Linuxtools.zip file, but it contains .exe files and they fail in wine.
For now I use the following workaround: send a message to the slaves to execute stopalltasks() so I can keep my workflow. Still, it would be nice to have this function on Linux.

What version of command line tools are you using?  I see http://bricxcc.sourceforge.net/nbc/release/index.html has 1.2.1r5 (Oct 18, 2011), but not sure how it compares to the BricxCC GUI releases.

Sorry, I spoke too soon -- it looks like https://sourceforge.net/projects/bricxcc/files/NBC_NXC/ only actually lists through 1.2.1r4 ... and the links at above URL for 1.2.1r5 aren't valid and just redirect you to https://sourceforge.net/projects/bricxcc/files/ which doesn't have 1.21r5 files.

However, I did also find https://sourceforge.net/p/bricxcc/code/HEAD/tree/386/
and https://sourceforge.net/p/bricxcc/code/HEAD/tree/x64/ which might be the right files for Linux binaries?  Sorry, I'm on Windows, so cannot test myself.  If  they work, I'll update my answer to reference these links for new Linux binaries, too.


text:
Attaching a ring-like handle to a castle door
I'd like to attach a round metal looking handle to a castle door such as this one.
I did a search for 'ring' on Bricklink and found the life preserver.
Would this work, or are there better options?
I wonder if I could just thread a key ring through a technic brick.

I agree with Alex. There's no reason to settle for a ring, when you could use the ring.
Here's one way to attach it if you want the ring to look like it is hanging down from the door:

That's awesome. I looked at the one ring, but wasn't sure how it would attach. Thanks

Perhaps Minifigure, Utensil Ring 1 x 1 will be a better fit as it is slightly larger than a stud, while life preserver is 3-4 studs in diameter.

Here how it looks when attached to doors you've mentioned:


text:
Angry birds arms
Is it possible to attach the Angry Birds arms to a regular minifigure, or is the attachment pin different?

I got hold of an Angry Bird, and can confirm the arms are totally interoperable.

I don't have any Angry Birds components, but comparing these pictures:

they look at least similar in construction and scale, so I'd bet they are compatible.


text:
Castle Siege: Flaming arrows
I'm trying to think of ways to defend my LEGO castle. Is there a way I can shoot some flaming arrows into the hearts of the invaders? Maybe some burning oil?

Deciding how to defend your castle admittedly sounds like a subjective question.

Burning oil is the easier of the two, since the basic flame elements

can connect into a realistically looking stream of liquid fire:

Depicting individual arrows is a lot harder due to the absence of a single arrow piece (aside from the proportionally way oversized harpoon piece), and adding a flame piece is even harder. Your best bet would probably be adding a flame piece, any of the several sizes available to a shield:

Or use a flame piece with a shaft as a combined arrow and flame:

But if 3rd party pieces are not out of question, you can get some convincing results, in this case with Brickarms arrows:

It may be worth noting that the current version of that flame element can no longer connect in this way.

I just emailed brickarms and they say they don't sell arrows anymore - too bad.

That flame shaft looks like it could work.  Could I combine one of those with a signal paddle (part #3900) somehow, perhaps with an appolo stud (part #85861). Then attach the paddle to a stoplight to allow for some arbitrary rotation.  Would that work?

@user3794648 Yes, both would work.


text:
Choosing scale for train models: what scale is "L-gauge"?
So, after being a LEGO fan for 40+ years, I'd like to try my luck at building some scale models of train sets (for example, an ICE 2). In planning my build, I ran into some difficulties or doubts determining the proper scale, specifically I was wondering what scale "L-gauge" models typically use.
If you directly relate the LEGO track geometry to a real-life standard gauge track you end up with a scale of 1435mm/37.5mm ~ 1:38.27 - which is somewhat in line with the "1:40" answer to a related question.
Now, per this link, an ICE 2 is 3.07m wide, which would translate to just under 10 studs wide (9.59, to be exact). Alarmingly, this would also mean that each train car model would be over 2 feet long, which is most likely problematic even with third-party R108 or R120 tracks.
On the other hand, when using a smaller scale (e.g., 8 studs wide, roughly 1:48 scale), it becomes basically impossible to create a to-scale interior (e.g., you could only place two seats/minifigs next to each other).
Is there a "standard" scale for LEGO train models or some other best practice to solve this conundrum?

Is there not a model rail club - any kind of model club - near you whose members would be happy to spend hours not just explaining but quite likely demonstrating all you could ever want to know?

It looks like the best practice is to adjust the proportions to the constraints imposed by the media.
For example, the closest LEGO rendition of a modern high-speed train, the 10233 Horizon Express has cars that are built on a 6x28 chassis piece, which gives a very different width-length ratio than the ICE2 (3.02 m : 26.40 m). And it just works and looks fine, even though the math is completely off the charts.
For other examples, see how LEGO manages to translate the iconic Star Wars vehicles into the Microfighters line, or famous cars into the Speed Champions line. So I'd say it is more than possible to keep the design essence (and thus the recognizability) intact, while adjusting the proportions even to ridiculous ratios, as demanded by other constraints.
The radius of the curved track pieces and the speeds attainable by LEGO trains give completely insane results as well, when viewed as real-world engineering solutions, but in this medium, it is fine. Maybe it necessiatates widening the track gauge a bit compared to real trains (LEGO trains have their wheels almost in line with their sides), or lowering the center of gravity, but even if the physics win over the engineering, it is easy to reassemble the pieces after a crash :)

TLDR: Scale for train MOC is a personal preference based on the needs.
Longer version:
There is a lot of personal preferences here. Like, how do you decide if the LEGO track geometry should translate to standard gauge? Why not any other track gauge available in other countries? How do you scale the model if it originally use slightly wider gauge? So there's already some flexibility in how strict you should be considering the scale of your train based on the track gauge.
Next thing is to decide if you want your train to operate within your LEGO city layout or just for the looks? LEGO trains are built in 6-stud wide size. People tend to design their own trains in 6-, 7- and 8-stud width size. They look good in city layouts - not too big and do not cause any serious troubles operating even on LEGO tracks. And somewhat to scale. I've made 48 cm (1.5748 feet) long 8-stud wide scale model of a train loco myself. It could operate on standard LEGO train tracks. And yes, it looks a little ridiculous on curves, but still works. However this scale doesn't let you design detailed interior, so compromises must be made.
Now if you prefer designing your train for the looks and operate it on some train layout (that could be made from LEGO compatible 3rd party elements) only from time to time you can go with whichever scale that fit your needs. It could be wider, longer, so train track geometry is the limit. As you mentioned your initial scaling suggested your train is going to be 2 feet long, which is less than half a foot longer than my model and you are not limiting yourself with just LEGO tracks, there shouldn't be a problem running your model on larger radius 3rd party (LEGO compatible) train tracks.
It is also worth mentioning some people use LEGO tracks as a narrow gauge. In such case train model, is obviously quite wide and it no longer fit into LEGO city (minifigure scale) layout. However there is plenty of space for details.

The new 76405 - Hogwarts Express Collectors Edition breaks from compatibility and goes for a 7 rather than 6 stud gauge, which gives them more room to build out a more accurate scaled carriage with:

enough space for two minifigures to sit side-by-side inside the passenger compartments and the narrow corridor to pass beside them.

More details, including several images can be found in the Brickset detailed review

One thing with real trains is that the rail spacing is surprisingly narrow for the carriage width - and, as you've found, length.
You'll need to run the wheels on bogies to get round any curves if you want anything like a plausible length, but you'd also need about 100 seats per carriage to fit out the inside, and while you could fit the seats, you still wouldn't fit 4 minifigs (and an aisle) across the carriage.  Of course you don't have to put minifigs in at all.
As with all matters of Lego scale, you can't match everything, and you're often better off trying to match the aesthetic at a scale that works for the constraints you have

I'm thinking the Ravenglass & Eskdale railway of narrow 15" = 2 heads of 7•5" each, so like narrow Lego track with 2 studs between as minifigure heads have 1 stud. But then normal 4 studs between is less than normal guage at same scale.

I'm not sure I understanding how this answers the question at hand. Would you be able to flesh it out a bit more? It sounds like you are suggesting a particular narrow gauge scale, but I'm having difficulty envisioning it from your description.

@jncraton I've added a linked (edit pending) to the target railway (which I've been on).  But I'm struggling to comprehend the suggestion as well.  I think Andrew is referring to placing the Lego rails closer together than standard, which will make for an interesting job getting the wheels on there, and the curve radii will be wrong


text:
How to make a street-light style torch
I need to light up my streets so the citizens of my castle can get around at night. I'd like to do something like this:
From Etsy listing:

From https://www.pixtastock.com/illustration/58823117:

(I guess in some places they call this a 'sconce')
I looked around on Bricklink and the closest I found was this lantern below. But it looks like it only attaches to a hand, so I can't put it on the wall.
Any suggestions?

Lantern use so called 3.18 mm "bar" connection, which is used by multiple of other parts than minifigure hands too. You could position it upward as well.

Tree Palm Top was used as lanterns in old pirate sets, for example 6285

Yea, that works. Thanks.  The instructions can be found at https://lego.brickinstructions.com/pdfdrop/6285_1.pdf  step 25

you can even put a flame piecein the middle - if you use the short one, prop it up with a few round 1x1s

1989's Eldorado Fortress from the Pirates universe had torches made from part 3959 with a single transparent stud on the "top", with the entire assembly pushed into an Erling brick.

You can get a similar effect by clipping a lightsaber hilt piece to the wall or putting it onto a post. Just add a suitable flame piece (or simple stud) coming out of one end. For a recent handheld version of this (could be easily adapted to a stationary lamp), see Ninjago set 70671, Lloyd's Journey.


text:
Online link to the LEGO NXT firmware (v1.31) source code or IAR ARM LEGO development tools?
I am looking for the source code to latest NXT firmware (v1.31).  I found the binary image is on LEGO site:
https://www.lego.com/en-us/themes/mindstorms/downloads, but no links to firmware source code that I could find (just the EV3, not the NXT).
Meanwhile, I found copies of LEGO NXT firmware v1.29 and v1.05 at:
https://github.com/dlech/nxt-firmware/releases
I thought it might be based on (or included in):
http://mindboards.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/mindboards/lms_nbcnxc/branches/version_131/, but that link is apparently offline now, and I didn't see equivalent on mindboards' github:
https://github.com/mindboards
Finally, I also found a copy of modified firmware at:
http://nxt-firmware.ni.fr.eu.org/, but I was hoping for LEGO's stock firmware (v1.31) to evaluate as a baseline.
Bonus: does anyone have EWARM-LEGO (the free "LEGO Edition" of IAR's ARM compiler) archived?
Here's an archived view of the product:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110815231532/http://www.iar.com/website1/1.0.1.0/1483/1/
And a press release:
https://www.embedded.com/news-iar-systems-announces-free-development-environment-for-lego-mindstorms/
apparently this is no longer available or supported from the IAR site.
Thank you!

Wdym "binary image"? Can you send the specific link to that, or are you unable to embed it (which means that we have to find it ourselves)?

Sorry, I didn't copy the direct firmware link: https://www.lego.com/cdn/cs/set/assets/blt3502cca1438605b8/Firmware131_Download1.zip  ... as I was afraid LEGO might change the link (it is at the "downloads" page above,  labeled "NXT Firmware Download").  The "binary image" meaning the ZIP download only has LEGO MINDSTORMS NXT Firmware V1.31.rfw and no source code like LEGO has for EV3.

@mindstormsboi "Binary Image" or often just "Binary" is a fairly common term to refer the compiled output of a computer program (i.e. the .lib, .dll or .exe files), as opposed to the source code, which is typically text based.

I have been looking around a bit for the same files. I plan to contact Lego/IAR myself to try to find the official source code and development software, and will update this answer when I do. However, I did find some stuff that might help out.

I was able to find a BitBucket repository that appears to have the
source code to firmware 1.29. It can be found here:
https://bitbucket.student.fiw.fhws.de:8443/projects/IN/repos/hackathon_nxt/browse.
Look in the LEGO_Sources directory.
The MinbBoards SVN repository appears to still be available, but at a slightly different URL (it appears that Sourceforge changed something on their back end). The URL is here: https://sourceforge.net/p/mindboards/code/HEAD/tree/

Between these two, it might be possible to figure out what changes were made in Firmware 1.31.
As for compiling, IAR workbench for ARM has an evaulation tier now that is free, but with a code size restriction of 32kB. There are other options out there though. Segger's Embedded Studio is free without size restrictions as long as you do not use it commercially. Additionally, it appears that the NXTGCC project is a system that allows compiling firmware for the NXT using GCC instead of IAR.
EDIT1: If you are more of a fan of Git than Subversion, I have ported the MindBoards SVN project to GitHub. You can find it here: https://github.com/Marsfan/NXT-Enhanced.
I have a second repository with the 1.07 code, but that will likely go away as I work to merge that in as a separate branch to the above linked repository.
EDIT2:
So I realized that I never updated this after contacting IAR. I got a response saying that the Lego Mindstorms NXT IAR tool set was a combination of their other products

IAR EWARM (Embedded Workbench for ARM)
IAR EWAVR (Embedded Workbench for AVR)
IAR EWVS (Visual State)

When I contacted them, they provided me with a link to download VisualState, and they said that the free tiers of Embedded Workbench should work for development. The free tier's main limitation is on code size, so I don't know if it is possible to compile the full set of software.

Have you been able to get the NXT source for 1.31? I wrote Lego but they refuse to give the source code because the product was discontinued many years ago. I'm really unsure at that point if I just wasn't able to overcome the first level support or if they really lost the code or didn't want to publish it

What you are asking for doesn't exist at this time.  The links you provide to github are not official LEGO products, but the work of an open source project as described on their home page that has chosen to correspond to the versions released by LEGO itself:

This is NXT Improved Firmware, an open source community driven work based on
  the original LEGO Mindstorms NXT firmware.
Online resources are accessible on the NXT Improved Firmware web page,
  including documentation, building guides, and more:
http://nxt-firmware.ni.fr.eu.org/
NXT Improved Firmware combines code covered by the LEGO Open Source License
  with code covered by various other open source licenses.  Any file not covered
  by the LEGO Open Source License includes a notice in its header.  All other
  source files are covered by the LEGO Open Source License.  Please see the
  enclosed "LEGO Open Source License" file for more precision on this license
  conditions.

You could file an issue on github and request that they update their project to track the upstream release, but there's no reason to assume they currently have the time and resources to do so.  You could offer to help, or look into what it would take to make the update you're asking for yourself.  Some github projects appreciate new contributions more than others, so I'd definitely open an issue to discuss it before doing a pull request or coding much myself.

Hi -- thank you for the reply.  My hope is that the v1.31 firmware used to be available, and someone has a copy or knows of another open source project that archived the original as part of their modded project (like the nxt-firmware github site apparently archived v1.29 and 1.05 separately).

For people looking for older versions of the LEGO MINDSTORMS NXT Firmware Open Source you might be interested to know that IAR Systems, suppliers of the IAR Embedded Workbench used by LEGO, hosted a link to v1.04* from 2009 onwards:

Via the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine
Which referenced LEGO_MINDSTORMS_NXT_Firmware_Open_Source.zip on their FTP server.

The IAR Systems FTP service isn't operating any more, but as of today you can still change the method from ftp:// to http:// so to download the 1.6MiB .zip file.
* based on #define   FIRMWAREVERSION               0x0104 //1.04 in the c_loader.iom file.


text:
Can you identify this part? (Lego themselves couldn't)
These pieces (3 shown) predate 1990. I don't know which set they belong to or what they were/can be used for. I asked Lego but they didn't know either.

Looks like these parts belong to a system used in watches, however I couldn't find the exact part as well. Are there any numbers underside these elements?

No numbers underneath.

This is most likely Scala Jewelry Plate, Modified 2 x 2 (Human Bracelet segment).

Quite easy for me to find on Bricklink's search engine. All I did was type "plate 2x2 modified." Bricklink tells it appears in four sets which look like bracelet kits, but as of now it's too late to use them as bracelets because Lego has already invented newer ones. You might as well use these as a bridge or something.

Wouldn't say it is "extremely easy" to find this on Bricklink as I've spent quite some time and couldn't find the piece.

(type) plate. (size) 2x2. (keyword, w/o which you will not find it) modified. Do not include color. (result: second from last out of 25)

"You might as well use these as a bridge or something." If he had more, he might be able to use them as tank treads.

@Mazura the trouble with this piece is that it isn't listed under modified plates on Bricklink, but rather under an obscure Scala group. Which makes some sense to group parts of same functionality like Znap, Bionicle or Hero Factory do. However there is also a separate category of parts used in watches, where similar 1x2 modified piece is listed in this category instead. Not even in Parts catalog. Yeah, searching for "2 x 2 plate" return the result, but otherwise there's no logic unless you know the piece.

Yeah, I tried searching as well. You had more luck it seems. Thanks for figuring it out.
I a not sure about the count but I think I have like 10 of those. Rather disappointed it's from a bracelet. Was hoping for some tracked vehicle.

mindstormsboi solved it. I inherited set 312-2 I recognise the tiles and the 4 by 4 and 4 by 8 clip-ons.


text:
How does the Space Shuttle dock the ISS?
The IDEAS International Space Station (21321) comes with a miniature model of a space shuttle. And while that has its place on the space station's stand, the official LEGO product page literally includes the statement "dock the shuttle" with a picture (that's also on the box) of the space shuttle approaching the front of the ISS model in order to dock. It seems to be a genuine "play feature":

But I have no idea how the shuttle is supposed to actually dock, i.e. how to fixate it onto the docking module in a stable and permanent way, given that it has studs facing each other. Besides this picture there is no hint on how to do that and the instructions don't include guides for that either. I also thought maybe it's the other way around (although that would possibly contradict physical reality), but the bottom of the shuttle is covered in float tiles.
So is there a way to actually dock the space shuttle to the ISS? Is there an official build way that the instruction is just coy of mentioning? Does that possibly involve the hinged parts with the airlock prints on them that are right next to the supposed shuttle dock? Or are there any "inofficial" ideas on how to accomplish it, possibly involving additional parts?

I know there are concerns about the space shuttle being a bit out of scale for the ISS when measured against reality and that a custom bigger shuttle might be more appropriate anyway. However, I still wonder how to dock the officially included shuttle model.

Can you please point out where the dock is?? I don't see it anywhere in the image.

@mindstormsboi I thought it's supposed to be the little black fez piece that's sticking out on the front of the ISS and that the shuttle is approaching. But I guess the exact specification of where it's supposed to dock is ultimately part of the question.

Perhaps you can use a photo editor (such as the built-in snip&sketch software on windows 10) to circle the place you're talking about; I don't understand what you mean by "fez piece."

@mindstormsboi: “Fez piece” is a very common description of the black piece that in the above picture is situated just above the shuttle cargo bay on the ISS itself. Even Bricklink calls it Fez: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=85975&name=Cone%201%201/6%20x%201%201/6%20x%202/3%20(Fez)&category=%5BCone%5D#T=S&O=%7B%22iconly%22:0%7D. I see no reason for the OP to point that out more specifically.

It looks like LEGO did not intend to make Shuttle attachable to ISS despite the statement. At least not with a stud-on-stud connection like the set is designed right now.
As seen in picture below, Shuttle is docked using a connection port inside storage bay with its doors open. Not sure if it is possible to replicate opened doors in scale Shuttle and ISS are built.

However if you neglect the lack of this feature and accept the docking with storage bay doors closed a little modification could solve the issue. Existing Fez piece attached to ISS isn't deep enough to accept Tile, Round 1 x 1 with Bar and Pin Holder (to invert stud to anti-stud) so an addition of Plate, Round 1 x 1 with Open Stud aka "Apollo stud" in between both of them will help modifying the docking port.

This design with its corrugated appeal also fits quite well visually. I just tried it and although it's not the most robust, it seems more stable than I would have expected and sufficient enough to hold the shuttle in place.

I still find it odd that LEGO didn't include an official way to achieve it, given that they explicitly advertize shuttle docking as a play feature and given how the other satelites and modules can be attached to the station somehow.

@ChristianRau This isn't something we could answer I'm afraid. It is advised to share such concern directly with LEGO support services over phone or website

I don't see how this is a question worth asking the LEGO support services or how they could or would give any reasonable insights into the design decisions there.

@ChristianRau Obviously, LEGO Customer Support won't be able to provide details as to why such feature is missing, however same channel is used to collect feedback as well.

It just so happens that I have this set and have come up with a way to attach it without adding pieces:
All this requires is to move the two second-to-back float pads, take off the fez piece from the dock, attach it in the revealed anti stud on the bottom of the shuttle and put the fez piece back on, with the shuttle on top.
I know it's not realistic because it's literally put on backwards to the way it is in real life and intended by NASA, but that's just my little way of docking the shuttle.

I use these pieces. The same size as the docking in the set, but two anti-stud attachments.

I have this set and didn’t need any additional parts to attach the space shuttle.

Was the white piece included in the set as well? It is definitely not shown in the instructions as intended like this - so if yes, it must either be an extra piece or missing from somewhere else.

The part is shown in step 93 and only used once. I think I just got lucky because it was included two times in n my set. Edit: part number is 6177114

You haven't been "lucky" (or at least not just you alone), but @zovits is right in that it's not explicitly included in the set either. According to Rebrickable, the piece is a genuine spare part (in addition to the one used in the set), as these little 1-wide pin connectors tend to be.

In the extra small unused pieces that come with the set. There is a piece 6177114, you can see the reference in back of the instructions were it shows all the pieces, it is a Technic, pin connector round 1L. This piece will connect the space ship to the fez.


text:
Can you identify the large transparent windows in this Ideas submission?
Can anyone identify the large curved transparent windows in this aviary build?

I believe this is Panel 6 x 6 x 9 Curved Top.

I couldn't find the other one that's containing the brown parrots, however.
Correct me if I'm wrong, because there were a few other parts like this which were almost identical.

The other transparent part is
Cylinder Quarter 4 x 4 x 6


text:
Build a narrow archway
Is there a way to make a more narrow v-shaped arch as in picture below? I looked at the arches section on Bricklink and they all look like they're too broad.

I wonder, if I could use the Slope, Curved 6 x 1 Inverted (part #42023). Perhaps I could place 2 of them vertically so they split at the top and then use other similar parts somehow.

This looks like it could be two arch pieces placed at right angles, and then the low camera angle/viewport gives it a more narrow visual effect.

Couple of Brick, Arch 1 x 3 x 3 pieces produce somewhat similar archway.


text:
Can Power Functions components work with the RCX?
I don't have the RCX, and neither do I have any PF stuff, but as they both have wire connectors which are almost identical, I'm thinking that they can both work together and are compatible. Is this true? And can you connect more than one motor to one RCX port (RCX port has 4 studs but PF port has only 2)?

"This question is not useful." I admittedly agree, but it might be useful to some huge nostalgic lego lover out there who manages to get his hands on an RCX.

Sorry, downvote was by mistake, had to edit something minor before I could change it to an upvote.

RCX is compatible with the older 9-V system that came before Power Functions.
However, since PF motors are also 9V and still unregulated as the RCX motors, a simple conversion cable suffices.
The Power Functions extension wires will do (8886 or 8871) as they have on one end an underside that is compatible with the 9V/RCX system (which hence goes onto the RCX port)
With this setup, stacking additional motors is possible as well, you can stack them on both sides of the extension wire (RCX side or side of 1st motor)

The Bricklink page for the extension wire/conversion cable part. The image shows that one end has an RCX-style connector on the bottom and the other is a standard PF connector.

The RCX uses "electric system 9V" style connectors. These are not compatible with power functions connectors. The "electric system 9V" connectors have the connections built into regular lego studs (with the electric part of each stud carefully arranged to allow connections to be made between parts placed at right angles) while the power functions connectors have a special connector section that is not compatible with regular lego studs in any way.
As the other answer mentions the power functions extension cables (8886 for regular length, 8871 for extra-long) can be used as an adapter between "power functions" and "electric system 9V". This cable has two different connectors, one end is a regular power functions connector with "power functions" connections on the top and bottom. The other end is a special connector with "power functions" connections on the top but "electric system 9V" connections on the bottom.
There are a few caveats though.

The power functions only end of the extension cable can be a bit of a pain to mount, because the electrical positions won't stack on top of regular lego studs.
The RCX has a 1-plate high step next to the motor ports. This was not a problem for electric system 9V wires which had the wire exit near the top of the brick but the power functions connectors have a much larger cable exit lump. This means that the power functions adapter cable can't be placed on a RCX in the normal orientation. For the side motor ports you can exit sideways, but for the center motor port you either have to exit over the screen, use an "electric system 9V" cable between the RCX and the adapter cable (so now you have three sections of cable to deal with....) or use a 1x2 electric plate (part 4755) to build-up the connector on the RCX.
"Power functions" is a 4-wire system while "electric system 9" is only two wire. So while you can use basic power functions motors with the adapter cable things like the servo motor will not work and you can't supply power to things like the IR receiver from an "electric system 9V source.
For smaller models actually building your model may be a pain because of the extra wire length from the adapter and because the RCX was designed with old-style technic in mind while power functions was designed with new-style technic in mind.

As for connecting multiple motors you can do so physically but if the motors are under heavy load you may hit the current limits in the motor drivers, heck even a single "RC race buggy motor" can overload the drivers in the RCX.

RC motor is so powerful it, practically, can overload every LEGO unit it is attached to. Except the RC control unit this motor was designed to work with.

This is true, the power functions XL motor isn't that much lower power though.


text:
How can I make church bells with a pull cord?
I would like to allow the viewer to pull on some strings or chains and let that ring my church bells (I know it won't make much sound, that's fine).  I'm thinking I'll need a pulley and some string, right? Then, do I just thread the axle through the pulley and attach the axle to the bell somehow? Are there any other parts I might need? Is there a good tutorial you can recommend for LEGO pulleys?

There's no real need to stick with LEGO strings. Any other, similar thickness, string would work the same way and will be cheaper and easier to obtain. This allows you to go with longer strings too.

Is there something I do to attach the string to the pulley?

I don't quite imagine the model/setup you are looking to implement, so cannot really advise anything reasonable.

It sounds like you're trying to implement a fairly simple bell mechanism such as this one:

You can certainly do this using some string and the pulley element that you mentioned.
I'd recommend tying the string to one of the holes in the pulley. Something like this worked reasonably well for me:

Here it is in action:

You'll likely want to do something to limit the range of motion so that the bell can't flip all the way around when the string is pulled too far. You should obviously make everything a lot prettier, too.

and maybe add a secret latch or something just in case it messes up


text:
Night's watch torsos
Are the torsos in this eBay listing made by LEGO? If so, can anyone identify them?

Bricklink doesn't even know what is "game of thrones" so I think these are from a third-party company. In fact I see that game of thrones sets are actually made by Mega Construct and Lego wouldn't buy this license anyway. Should I post this as answer?

The capes look a little fuzzy, those minifigure heads don't seem to exist, and I'm failing to recognize the hair anyways, which increases the chances of it being from clone-brand.

From the EBay listing you posted:

Precise Molded & Printed Items (MOC-My Own Creations)

Ergo, these are custom minifigs, not made by LEGO.

Indeed. Anyone could've found out whether they were real or not with a few google/BL searches.


text:
What was the first Lego tie-in film or television production?
Nowadays, it's pretty common for TV shows and films to be released by film studios in agreement with The LEGO Group and tying in to current LEGO set themes - famous examples include the recent films (The LEGO Movie and The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part), LEGO Star Wars: The Yoda Chronicles, the Legends of Chima TV series, and Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitsu, all of which were released after 2010.
What is the earliest television or film production that was officially tied in with a LEGO set or theme or with LEGO bricks in general? The earliest that I was able to find was Edward and Friends from 1987 that showcased the Fabuland theme, but LEGO was already decades old by then. Was there anything before that?

I think you already answered your own question: The The earliest Lego television production is Edward and Friends from 1987 that showcased the Fabuland theme.
From the Wikipedia page:

It was Lego's first foray into animation and television in general.


text:
How much energy do LEGO Technic gears lose to friction?
So, I recently watched a video by the Brick Experiment Channel about building a 1 Googol:1 reduction gearbox, which at the time of writing this question, is at #44 on Youtube Trending. At the end of the video, it makes the claim that the final gear will rotate once every 10^93 years. This seems unlikely to me; it seems much more likely that energy losses due to friction along the mass of gears will reduce the amount of energy it's receiving to 0, so it will never spin on it axis, at least as a result of this machine.
However, I'm left wondering where exactly this in the contraption energy is lost, and how much of it is lost to heat and how much is lost to noise. How efficient are LEGO Technic gears, when mounted on their standard X-shaped axles through the holes in standard LEGO Technic bricks?

If the gear at the start is turning, then there are only 2 options:  the gear at the end will turn, or a piece somewhere in the middle will deform / break.

"How efficient are Lego Technic gears, when mounted on their standard X-shaped axles through the holes in standard Lego Technic bricks?" I don't think this question is answerable, as it depends on many factors, like the age and wear of the axle and the hole, the radial load on the axle, the materials of the surfaces (usually ABS, but polycarbonate for the transparent parts), the sizes and shapes of the meshing gears, the forces that push the gears together, etc. Granted, most of these are only small factors, but given there are many, the resulting uncertainty is large enough to be significant.

@Chronocidal First the wheel at the beginning has to turn a lot (since the gears are discreet for a long time even a gear only 30 gears away from the start won't turn for an appreciable amount of time, you can even see it in the video) but second I'm guessing what you will actually get is a broken motor rather than anything else. Once it starts actually moving too many gears it will grind to a halt through friction.

@DRF A broken motor falls under "the gear at the start is not turning" :P  Yes, it may take a (very) long time - but, so long as the first gear keeps turning, eventually one of the two outcomes I gave will occur

Nice find. First of all, it is interesting to see the various techniques they use.
The short answer to your question would be: It doesn't matter. Each gear, axle and all other components bend, stretch and absorb energy. This means that even for normal large LEGO Technic sets, such as the 42055, you have to build carefully and avoid too much pressure to reduce friction.
When it comes to Googol, it will take years to move most of the gears above their tolerance of, say, 0.1 mm. This is why they put the motor to the beginning of each section to show that it works in principle.
So, starting the whole thing will increase tension and some eruptive movements of the gears in the middle will follow. But the gears further down the line will never move.

The slower a gear moves the less power (energy per unit time) is lost.
So while each stage of the gearing does lose some power this is more than made up for by the gear ratio. There should still be plenty left to drive the final stage.
A bigger problem is whether the mechanism will actually survive for 1093 years of continuous turning or whether a combination of natural degradation of the plastic and wear from continuous turning will destroy it first. I would bet on the latter.


text:
Have minifig hands ever appeared "on their own" in an official set?
I am curious whether minifig hands have ever appeared "on their own", i.e., not inserted
into minifig arms, in any official set.  Or if they have ever been sold separately by TLG,
e.g. in Pick-a-Brick or as a replacement part.

When searching for 'hands' on Bricklink, the only result I get is a buncha torsos with their hands attached and I never get the result of individual hands, which I guess could contribute to the answer of this question.

Proving a negative is hard, so disclaimer first:
This answer is neither exhaustive, nor definitive.
My line of reasoning starts from the assumption that if there were ever standalone minifigure hands, they would appear in the set inventory in a way that is not explainable based on the number of minifigures. Of course, this assumption is not 100% waterproof, as it does not consider cases when a minifigure torso has appeared without hands AND a pair of standalone hand parts were also used, but I'd accept this risk.
Analyzing the list of the 16123 sets, books and gear catalogued in Bricklink that contain at least one minifigure hand, there are no sets where the number of included minifigure hand parts would be larger than the expected amount.
This number is the sum of all the following:

twice the number of the included minifigures
four times the number of four-handed minifigures (like Garmadon, General Kozu or Rio Durant)
four times the number of monkeys
twice the number of standalone minifigure torsoes (like the masthead of the Black Seas Barracuda)

Minus one for each pirate captain, Ogel, Baron von Barron or any other one-handed figure of course.

Some sets do appear to have more hands still, but that is because the number of hands is skewed by the inclusion of alternative figures, like in the case of Shoot 'N Save (FC Bayern Promo Edition), which allegedly contains 8 yellow hands, but only two minifigures (one of which is the goalie with black hands!), but the soccer player is included in four different variants. A similar thing is going on with Red Bus, where all possible flag-sticker combinations are listed to arrive at the 50 yellow hands for 5 yellow-handed minifigures.
If there are any omissions, I apologize in advance and congratulate the finder :)

Another idea to support this conclusion is that LEGO ships minifigure torsoes already assembled, thereby granting minifig hands the same status as minifig arms or legs, i.e. parts that can only be used as components in an assembly.

I'm pretty sure the hands and arms (also the legs from the hip piece) are not even officially intended to be removable.  Even though you can do it, doing so repeatedly can result in damaging the pieces, and they tend to have a general "never do anything that could damage a piece" policy.

I don't know of any sets with the standard minifig hand that isn't already attached to a minifig arm and torso, but if you stretch the definition of hand to include say, the robot arm in 8635-1: Mobile Command Center...

Then you could say that a minifig and one of their hands appears separately in the set and needs to be assembled.
Incidentally, that same hand is the ones found in a robot from the Exo-Force line (ie. 7711-1: Sentry), which could also be considered a minifigure.

Their hands (and all their parts really) come separately and need to be assembled. Couldn't tell you why the instructions neglect to show them in the assembly step though.


text:
Looking for a torso piece
I'm looking for this white torso piece here on Aladdin:

I've searched Brickset, Peeron and Bricklink for white torsos and haven't been able to find it anywhere
Does anybody recognize it?

That's Torso LotR Shirt with Ornate Silver Fabric and Gold Clasps Pattern (Saruman) / White Arms / Light Nougat Hands

Thank you thank you thank you!!!!


text:
Can anyone identify this Lego set please?
I have these parts mixed in with other Lego Bricks, but no instructions. I would like to be able to download the instructions, but I don’t know the set number. Any help to identify the set is greatly appreciated!

That's V-19 Torrent (7674). Instructions are available from LEGO to download or from Bricklink to purchase.

Identified by Trans-Clear Technic, Shock Absorber 10L Damped - No Spring, which is available in this set only.

Thank you so much

Hi Roofy!  Welcome to Bricks.StackExchange.  Another great way you can show thanks is to click the checkbox by the answer to "accept" it.  https://bricks.stackexchange.com/help/someone-answers

Since roofy did not bother to click that checkmark, I have upvoted the answer (which I usually wouldn't do, it's just plain old set identifying anyway) to make it as if roofy really accepted it. Obviously my upvoting isn't enough, but at least you get some rep!


text:
Are both of these fences made by Lego?
I have a group of 1 x 4 x 2 fences (Lego part 3633) in black, light bluish gray, and yellow.
However only a few of them say "Lego" on the bottom. These have hollow bottom pins (see picture below, right side).  The others do not say Lego or have a part number. They have solid bottom pins (see picture below, left side).
Normally I can feel the difference between Lego and non-Lego parts. But the parts with the solid pins have a Lego feel. Also the yellow ones are the same shade of yellow as my Legos and not the shade of MegaBloks I have.
Is it possible these solid pin fences are really Lego? Or have I been fooled?

It might just be an older part mold, other plates used to have the solid cylinders. I also have 2 like that (but with 3 numbers on the bottom), although I can't be 100% sure of their authenticity.

I wouldn't worry about the pins on the bottom, as some part's design get a little refresh from time to time. Both cases were present in various LEGO bricks. My concern is about lack of LEGO identification and part number. The oldest fence I have is from 1995 and it is similar to the right one (LEGO logo + part number). However these fences were available since 1977, so there could have been different molds without any designation at the time. It is not possible to confirm the identity without comparing with the same item from very old set.

I've got some of the left-hand side version with the solid pins and no markings in red.
They are most definitely original Lego as I never owned any non-Lego parts.
I'm fairly certain they came with the 1978 firetruck set nr. 620.

Tonny just to confirm you're saying you have fences like this that you know are Lego but do not say Lego on them anywhere?

@Scott Yes. They can't be anything else, because I ONLY have official Lego. And I have double-checked they came with set 620. It is the only set I have with these in red. I took a very close look at them, even with a magnifier. Not a single Lego logo or part-nbr to be seen. And with the closed pins as well.


text:
Who are the Lego Certified Professionals?
So, I was just watching Lego Masters, and it's mentioned that the show's judge, Ryan "Brickman" McNaught, is one of fourteen Lego Certified Professionals in the world. I was wondering who those fourteen people were. I found this article from in the answers one of the other questions on this site; however, it only lists 12 individuals, so it's clearly not an up-to-date list. I also found this post from 2019 on an official Lego website that states that there are currently 20 Lego Certified Professionals, not 14.
Is there a complete, up-to-date list of the identities of the Lego Certified Professionals?

November 2021 update
New LCP in Russia has been announced - Vladimir Golubev.
Number of LCP's is now - 22 (listed below). TLG has details on all of the members, except Vladimir. You can find more information about each member on the LEGO Certified Professionals webpage.
Americas

Robin Sather
Nathan Sawaya
Graeme Dymond

Europe & Middle East

Dirk Denoyelle
Georg Schmitt
Matija Puzar
Rene Hoffmeister
Kevin Hall
Ricardo Zangelmi
Luke Reveruzzi
Caspar Bennedsen
Balazs Doczy
Vladimir Golubev

Asia-Pacific

Prince (Shenghui) Jiang
Jumpei Mitsui
Wani Kim
Jae Won Lee
Wei Wei Shannon Gluckman
Nicholas Foo
Yenchih Huang
Andy Hung
Ryan McNaught

Graeme for sure is an LCP. Source: that LAN link and I know him personally. The official list page must be out of date. The most recent announcements for new LCPs have all been posted on lan.lego.com.

It wasn't specified which region Vladimir Aleksandrovich belongs to, but I assumed it is  going to be, most likely, "Europe & Middle East" where I've listed him.


text:
Recent change in Pearl Gold colour?
I just received a Bricklink delivery with pearl gold pieces (see right-hand side in the image). This colour is less shiny and has less of the pearl effect that I used to expect so far (left-hand side, parts from an older set).
Did I miss anything about a change in the colour? Or is this part of the (nowadays) normal colour variation?

Not voting it as a duplicate, but please see https://bricks.stackexchange.com/questions/12782/pearl-gold-vs-flat-dark-gold

I saw that question, but I ruled out dark flat gold, because these are 4 different pieces that are definitely not available in this colour. The pieces are all new and they look exactly the same. Therefore I guess that this is our new pearl gold.

Yes, I have seen LEGO sets that have both colors mixed together - looks bad.

Metallic plastic is always tricky, especially when dealing with acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS for short). The granules (small plastic pellets) for the metallics are really sensitive to light and time, and the process can alter over time.
The stronger colors (ie. the base chromatics) are easy to get right since the granules are all from the same source and designed for that specific color. Where some of the more "exotic" colors, a mix of granules are being used, and that can be tricky.
So the process that a batch of pieces from 2018 and the same pieces molded in say 2020 might have some coloration differences, and it is a heck of a job to keep track of.
Even without direct changes in the formula, a slight change over time can happen. If this makes the pieces unwanted for you, I would reckon you can argue with Bricklink for a refund, but I would not bet that they can do much for you.
A similar case of this can be seen below, both certified pearl gold bricks, molded two years apart:

"The stronger colors (ie. the base chromatics) are easy to get right since the granules are all from the same source and designed for that specific color." - This sounds easy, but definitely not a trivial task. Even TLG struggle producing consistent color for basic colors. You can check this with almost any large set - different parts of the same color will have noticeable range in shades when assembled side by side.

@Alex absolutely true, I didn't mean to undercut the work put into keeping consistent colors, was only trying to map out how the swirly-mixed ones can be harder than the solid colors ones. But point taken.


text:
Identify LEGO set with caped red minifigure

Hi just wondered if someone can help identify a set for us? The best clue I have is a red minifigure with a red cape, red full face helmet & black head (no face). I also have an orange square with a face on it which may go with this figure. Thanks heaps!

These items are from different sets.
Let's begin with the most obvious - minifigure. It is a Royal Guard from Star Wars and there are couple of versions of them. Yours seems to be with arms and hands in Dark Red. Yet, there are still two version of them (depends on the type of cape you got):
Royal Guard with Dark Red Arms and Hands was part of two sets in 2014-2015.
Or, it can be Royal Guard with Dark Red Arms and Hands (Spongy Cape) that was part of another two sets in 2016 and 2019.
Next comes a tile. Your picture is tiny, however I think I have identified it correctly as Tile 1 x 1 with Groove with Face with Narrowed Eyes, One Eyebrow Raised and Small Frown (Kryptomite) Pattern in Orange. It was available in two sets (non Star Wars).
It is impossible to identify correctly which wedge plate version you got in your picture. It is either Wedge, Plate 4 x 9 without Stud Notches which appeared in 58 sets in White color, or Wedge, Plate 4 x 9 with Stud Notches that was part of 14 sets in White.

Wow thanks so much!! That was incredible!!!

@Tess Welcome to Bricks.SE. If this answers your question site guidelines suggest you click the checkbox by the answer to "accept" it.


text:
Ridable Winged Horse
Is there a horse that a minifigure can ride and you can still put wings on?  I've looked at several sets and they all have pieces in the 'saddle' section to hold the wings.

The Black Horse, Skeletal with White Eyes Pattern (Thestral) from the Harry Potter / Fantastic Beasts set "Grindelwald's Escape" has a "saddle" section which is 2x2, instead of 1x2.
This would allow you to connect use both Wings a MiniFig, each using 1x2.  However, it doesn't exactly look like a regular horse:

(source: bricklink.com)
Or, potentially, you could try combining Horse Saddle with Two Clips with a pair of either Bar 1L with Clip Mechanical Claw or Arm Piece with Tow Ball and Clip, to rotate the connection from Vertical to Horizontal, and connect wings to that.  I am not sure if there is enough clearance at the sides of the saddle to orient these correctly though.

Since you didn't specify how close to reality horse should look like you can build one using bricks. It would look more like a Minecraft animal though (this might be not a disadvantage). Such approach gives freedom of design and looks as well as a plenty of possibilities for wing placement and still have a place for minifigure.
There is an alternative to horse mentioned by Chronocidal with 2x2 stud area for you to use/build saddle and contraption for wings. 19 versions, to be precise.
One as example:

Last suggestion would be to use which ever horse you like and can be used to build wings of choice and then just strap the minifigure with rubber band on top

A far more normal looking horse - good find!

I don't think there are any horses with clips to hold wings on the body, but if you use plates with clip, most of the cutout will still be available for a minifigure's legs.


text:
What set do these pieces belong to?
Black pieces rotate, if it helps?
Thanks

Having checked various different parts (including severely underestimating how widespread Trans-Light Blue Brick, Round 2 x 2 with Axle Hole is) I believe that this may be LEGO Friends: Pop Star Show Stage, based on Bright Light Orange Plate, Round 4 x 4 with Hole, which only appeared in 10 sets


text:
Why stickers instead of printed decoration and vice versa?
I was recently just wondering why LEGO™ would use stickers in some cases and printed decoration in others. I understand it wouldn't be reasonable to put stickers on say, a 1-by-3 brick, but sometimes it appears to be just random. For example, on one of the smooth bricks in set 17101, there is a printed decoration of a code block but I recall seeing in other sets that such pieces related to it have you put stickers instead of printed decoration, such as in this image (with a sticker typo):

Also in set 31313, there are stickers you use on the white technic pieces, which I find quite reasonable unless I don't consider how in the world a factory machine is supposed to print on those curved parts. But now that I've thought about factory machines printing on curved bricks, I'm starting to wonder how they managed to print the decoration on that piece in set 17101.
Long story short, what circumstances cause LEGO™ to print decoration and what circumstances cause them to make stickers instead??

I think it depends on series, if set is licensed as well as targeting audience. Sometime printed parts are used in a place where sticker would be hard to apply.
Architecture series, is a good example where stickers are not used since series are advertised as premium product. Duplo and Juniors use printed parts too as these are targeted for young kids.
Licensed sets usually have stickers though. This may be related to the fact that LEGO treats licensed set a little different, where you cannot buy extra item in B'n'P or get a replacement of specific license related item. So it is better having it unprinted and have an option to replace/acquire a part.
Printed elements also limit their practical use (re-use). Stickers give you choice of applying them or not, while printed parts are there forever1. Good example is 42096 Porsche 911 RSR. It has white wheel arches/fenders with unique print for each of 4 included pieces. Non-printed counter part doesn't exist in this color yet, so these may not fit your MOC. The rest of the Technic Panels have stickers. This leaves a lot of room for using them in other creations (if sticker are not applied). Otherwise panels would be rendered useless if all of them would be printed.

Not really

thanks for making me spend more money on the car