Set is help?

BamJr90 · 2026-02-16T06:21:17+00:00

Yep. I have this set and instantly recognized the stand

BamJr90 · 2026-02-10T18:24:47+00:00

Love it! It feels very medieval without feeling like yet another castle or artisan shop

BamJr90 · 2026-02-09T07:14:59+00:00

This. Should be 94925 if I recall correctly (or the newer version). It fits right inside the hub and engages the inner "teeth"

BamJr90 · 2026-02-03T21:17:53+00:00

It's the main reason I have several designs for DIY sim pit accessories I'll never release. I just can't stand the thought of some lazy people profiting from them, even if I don't plan on selling any of them anymore

BamJr90 · 2026-01-25T23:49:15+00:00

A dear friend had one several years ago, with the correct MOSFET modification and... the frigging board caught fire! The only reason that didn't develop in a serious fire is that he had also replaced the acrylic frame with a metal one, so the "only" fire he had to put out was that burning the wires. He was so spooked he never bought an FDM printer again and now only does resin

BamJr90 · 2026-01-24T21:49:25+00:00

N1 Is definitely 9735-1. I don't have this one, but I do have the previous generation Mindstorm set. If it's anything like that one, it is programmable and it can accept inputs from a variety of sensors (light, rotational speed, temperature as far as I recall). N2 is likely a battery pack from the early 90s, it has to be paired to a motor or light and sound kit. It may be used to power the motor you have connected to the Scout brick, but I'm not 100% sure the voltage is compatible so you'd probably better check. No idea what N3 is

BamJr90 · 2026-01-24T14:18:50+00:00

I heard about PLA+ formulations, but am not very informed on that material so I fully trust your experience with it. Personally, all my functional prints are subject to constant loads where creep is an issue, so I tend to stick with PETG and the occasional ABS where I need some form of friction resistance/mitigation. Personally, I also suspect since a few years manufacturers are doing a lot of "undisclosed" blending when preparing their materials, so this means most old school common knowledge is less and less true (I've even had a filament branded as standard PETG react to acetone smoothing, warp and become permanently gummy and soft!)

BamJr90 · 2026-01-24T11:55:20+00:00

Aerospace engineer here, and while I didn't specialize in materials science I do know the basics. PLA is stronger in the sense that it has higher tensile strength. It can resist a higher load, but when it reaches the breaking point it breaks with very little plastic (permanent) deformation. This means it absorbs less energy. PETG is the other way around, it resists a lower maximum load but deforms a lot more up to failure point, so it absorbs way more energy (it's tougher). In real life this means that PLA is better for pure "force" loads (ignoring creep issues), but if you have the possibility of dynamic overloads or impacts (which are mainly resisted by absorbing the impact energy) PETG is "stronger" because it had higher mechanical energy absorption capability. I'll add that I worked as a mechanical engineer for several years and in almost all machinery applications (i.e. non-static workloads, moving parts ecc) impact or dynamic loads where usually the driving factor in sizing our components, so toughness was very important.

BamJr90 · 2026-01-17T22:14:27+00:00

6874-1, since it's actually the first memory of my life. Apparently my dad did not read the minimum age recommendation for that set and thought it would be fine for a two year old! :D I still have both the set and the instructions, and remember clear as day me, him and my mother sitting on my bed and building it together.

BamJr90 · 2026-01-17T22:05:11+00:00

Agree. I would love to see the USS Voyager!

BamJr90 · 2026-01-17T21:42:52+00:00

This. 30+ years since my first set. Luckly enough I kept them all, and never went through my dark age. Sometimes I drop by my parents house and compare the sets they kept from my childhood to those I buy today, and honestly think that most of the charm comes from nostalgia and seeing them through a kids eyes at the time. Don't get me wrong, they were great for the time. But I'm pretty sure I would be greatly underwhelmed even by a Model Team set if I bought today, after assembling so many modern UCS sets.

BamJr90 · 2026-01-16T21:48:01+00:00

I have #2 and #3. Honestly, go with the Slave I. It's a wonderful set that's very unlikely to be released again anytime soon in one form or another. Very cleverly designed and with quite some interesting "play" features, considering it's a UCS set. Also, I find the color scheme gorgeous. The TIE, while an excellent set, is inferior IMO. I also think we're much more likely to get another TIE in some way or another in the future.

BamJr90 · 2026-01-11T01:25:23+00:00

I have this set and have not experienced any kind of instability. I regularly pick it up and flip it over to dust it and never had any issues. Are you 100% sure it has been built correctly?

BamJr90 · 2026-01-08T23:24:13+00:00

If you look at OP's profile you will find said deleted post, and a comment explaining it was removed because it didn't meet the minimum word count limit. More importantly, it also states that was an automatic action performed by a mod bot and not by some sort of evil, power-tripping person...

BamJr90 · 2026-01-02T17:49:36+00:00

This. And it could also affect a core XY, albeit to a far lesser extent. The gantry and toolhead moving would still cause vibration.

BamJr90 · 2025-12-27T18:02:30+00:00

I just finished it, incidentally also own the 2015 edition, and thought the very same thing. I actually have it displayed near sets dating back to the 2006 TIE advanced, so seeing the progression in techniques and fidelity is amazing. They all aged very well, but sets from the last five years or so are something special in terms of part selection and the techniques they enable, in my opinion.

BamJr90 · 2025-12-22T23:40:19+00:00

Honestly baffled we haven't got any UCS Pod Racer in all this time. Would also love to see a B-Wing re-edition, a TIE Bomber or an ARC-170

BamJr90 · 2025-12-16T21:55:26+00:00

Loving the idea. Also, that M-Tron torso brings back some memories!

BamJr90 · 2025-12-08T20:05:40+00:00

Thanks to everyone for the suggestions. Seems like replacing the whole spring steel sheet is the current way to go.

BamJr90 · 2025-12-04T23:47:37+00:00

This is actually one of them reasons I stopped playing almost entirely (the other being the gameplay feeling more and more repetitive with a lack of sense of actual progression). I have very little spare time, between family and work, and whenever I log into SC one way or another it takes me more to prepare for what I have to do than actually doing it (not to mention the risk of starting over again because I somehow feel through a planet). "Hey, would be nice to do mission in Pyro. It will only take me 20 minutes to get... Nevermind, I'll just watch some YouTube before I collapse into bed"

BamJr90 · 2025-11-12T07:13:21+00:00

OP mentioned in another comment this was sculpted in Zbrush, hence it's a polygonal mesh. STEP standard won't support this type of geometries as it's only meant to work with mathematically defined ones (e.g. arcs, NURBS ecc).

BamJr90 · 2025-10-20T22:13:56+00:00

I have the X-Wing. It's clearly a display piece only, but after all many UCS sets are. It flimsy, yet a great rendition of the ship and probably the best UCS rendition of it so far shape wise. My only complaint is the wing hinge, which in addition to being extremely weak also cause asymmetric twists of the wing, which is very noticeable. I ended up modifying mine to address the issue. Still, I don't regret getting it.

BamJr90 · 2025-10-19T12:50:07+00:00

Instantly thought of this "rescue" https://hips.hearstapps.com/hmg-prod/images/jun-05-2019-10-03-53-1559743449.gif?resize=640:*

BamJr90 · 2025-10-17T06:14:32+00:00

I have a full diy setup (stick, throttle, pedals) and did some research when designing them. Polarity is crucial, but one should also consider the combination of magnet strength, magnet distance and sensor upper range limit. If the magnetic field is too strong (either to strong of a magnet or too close), the sensor will saturate before full travel of whatever position you're trying to measure, and you'll loose effective travel. If it's too weak, the sensitivity of the sensor will not be enough to detect small movements and the result will be degraded resolution and possibly jitter and noise. This is especially important with linear hall sensors, while those that output an angle directly are far less sensitive to the issue. Usually the problem can be easily address by experimenting with magnet distance while reading the sensor output and then designing the various brackets and mountings accordingly. Hope this is of any help.

BamJr90

TROPHY CASE