Discussion

Viewing 1 to 19 (19 Total)
Discussion
RailBlox Colin Redner
Total Posts: 56

Questions, Comments, or Concerns? Ask them here!

Posted on June 29, 2013 at 2:12 PM
Reply Quote
taltosVT Elroy Davis
Total Posts: 29

re: Discussion

In the past, container swaps have usually taken place at one of the large AFOL conventions.  With so many conventions taking place these days, I'd like to discuss ideas for how to do the actual swap.

There are several ways we could do it:

1) An in-person swap at one or more conventions

2) Via mail by sending all containers to a central person, who will then put together swap packages to send back out to participants

3) Via mail by sending containers from participant to participant

4) Other?

Option 1 has the nice feature of instant gratification and face-to-face interaction.  However, not everyone can make it to a convention.

Option 2 has some expense to it, especially for the point person mailing packages back out.  That might be alleviated if participants are also will to pay return postage.

Option 3 is probably my personal least favorite.  In addition to mailing cost, there is always the change that the package being sent around will get lost or not mailed, breaking the chain and leaving some folks without containers.

What are people's thoughts on how best to approach the exchange?

-Elroy

Posted on July 05, 2013 at 2:13 PM
Reply Quote
Wiebold4449 Johnny Rocket_486
Total Posts: 21

re: re: Discussion

I personally think that option one is the best, for all the reasons provided above. I do agree though that it would put restrictions on participants as far as how many AFOLs (and TFOLs) can make it. Perhaps it could be a regional thing, where instead of there being a single swap, there could be multiple swaps regionally at different times. So the avid traveler could still collect all the containers they wanted, without the press of time, and if you can't travel, you could visit your regional convention and get the containers available there. Just a thought.... Any other ideas?

Posted on July 05, 2013 at 3:59 PM
Reply Quote
Russell844 Russell Clark
Total Posts: 1

re: Discussion

I kind of remember option 2 being done before, with each club paying for the return postage. Maybe during one of the bigger NMRA National Train Show turnouts? I can help with this in Portland in 2015...

Posted on July 06, 2013 at 3:54 AM
Reply Quote
J.P. Manalo
Total Posts: 2

re: Discussion

Option two is the best option from my point of view. As I am located in Australia, it is highly unlikely that i would be able to make it to a convention in the United States. (unless someone is willing to fund such a trip, lol) :-) . I am also happy to utilise option three - but I feel that option three would be particularly unfair on the participants who end up having to ship the package overseas.

To minimise postage costs, perhaps those who are located geographically close to each other (relatively) could join together to allow their packages to be sent to them, and then send their packages out to the other groups. As an example to illustrate my point, say there are five LTCs; A-LTC, B-LTC, C-LTC, D-LTC and E-LTC. A and B are located quite close to each other. D and E are located quite close to each other. A and B group themselves together, D and E do likewise. C sends out 2 containers to the address nominated by A and B. C also sends out two containers to the address nominated by group D and E. A and B send a package containing one A container and one B container to the address nominated by C-LTC. A and B also send a package containing two A containers and two B containers to the address nominated by D-LTC and E-LTC. D and E do likewise - sending one D container and one E container in a single package to C-LTC, and one package containing two D containers and two E containers to the address nominated by A-LTC and B-LTC.

Thoughts? Also, has it been decided on what format the actual containers will be? Are we using the 'newer' container format, or the older format?

 

Posted on July 06, 2013 at 10:35 AM
Reply Quote
RailBlox Colin Redner
Total Posts: 56

re: Discussion

The size of the container is also yet to be decided.

Posted on July 06, 2013 at 2:00 PM
Reply Quote
intermodalman Adam Thompson
Total Posts: 8

re: Discussion

I think #2 provides the best chance of variety among containers and overall community involvement. The size should be updated to 6x16 as there is a rumor of new, more expensive mearsk ship meaning that the 6x16 design could be used in another set, plus the old design is over 2 decades old.

Posted on July 15, 2013 at 10:23 PM
Reply Quote
RailBlox Colin Redner
Total Posts: 56

re: Discussion

Is there proof of this rumor? If so, I think that may be a deciding factor.


Also, I am sorry that I haven't been on much, I will be back on in about a week.

Posted on July 17, 2013 at 6:07 PM
Reply Quote
intermodalman Adam Thompson
Total Posts: 8

re: Discussion

not much more than a brickapedia article:

http://lego.wikia.com/wiki/10241_Maersk_Line_Container_Ship

 

Posted on July 18, 2013 at 4:48 PM
Reply Quote
taltosVT Elroy Davis
Total Posts: 29

re: Discussion

The size of the container may also determine how best to do the swap.  For example, larger containers will be more expensive to build and ship (more parts, more space).

Personally, I like the idea of a swap by mail.

For the container size itself, from all the various people I've talked to in person and online, there's a pretty good 50/50 split between the old standard and a new standard.  I may attempt to set up a survey that folks can use to vote so that we get a more scientific count.

-Elroy

Posted on July 31, 2013 at 12:27 AM
Reply Quote
RailBlox Colin Redner
Total Posts: 56

re: Discussion

We have added a survey to the Swap page! Come tell us what size the containers should be, and see what others think!

http://railbricks.com/container-swap/

For security reasons, you must be a registered user to participate in the survey.

Posted on August 02, 2013 at 7:58 PM
Reply Quote
Cale Cale Leiphart
Total Posts: 8

re: Discussion

My vote on container size is for the 6x16. I think that size covers both 6 and 8 wide clubs pretty well. LEGO has already set the precedent by going to that size in their sets so all the 6 wide guys can be happy their are still using a stock LEGO standard size. For us 8 wide clubs the 6x16 actually scales out pretty well for a 20ft container.  When PennLUG was developing standardized container sizes for use within our own club we settled on 6x16 for 20ft containers. Our are only a plate taller I think than the stock LEGO version due to us tiling the tops.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/steampoweredbricks/4853085611/in/set-72157613266537477

 
Cale

Posted on August 08, 2013 at 11:53 PM
Reply Quote
Peter Ogilvy
Total Posts: 2

re: Discussion

I'd be happy to participate in the container swap, and if it is to be via mail (perhaps the only way Australians can easily get involved) I'd also be happy to deal with this end since Brickvention in Melbourne normally has representatives from MLTC from Melbourne, SydLUG/SLTC/SLGG, CLUG and normally at least someone from Brisbane, which would cover pretty much all the active train guys except Perth.

Another suggestion could be to just swap logos, since we then don't have to ship a whole container (which is a bonus since there's two sizes current, and many variations on door detailing). If the logo was an appropriate size for a 3x7 panel of bricks it could be built into both 4x8 and 16x6 containers as the recipient wished.

Regards Peter

Melbourne L-guage Train Club Treasurer

 

Posted on August 31, 2013 at 10:34 PM
Reply Quote
Wiebold4449 Johnny Rocket_486
Total Posts: 21

re: re: Discussion

Now there's an idea! Instead of shipping large, expensive, and delicate containers about, why not just send logos? Much like Peter said, then every club can decide which size they would like to use! Kudos Peter! This is an amazing Idea! Now, the items can be shipped pre-assembled in an envelope, rather than in a box or in pieces within an envelope...

Also, If you don't run inter-modal traffic, you could use the logos for anything! Billboards, boxcars, buildings! Anything! 

 

Great idea Peter!

Posted on August 31, 2013 at 10:56 PM
Reply Quote
RailBlox Colin Redner
Total Posts: 56

re: Discussion

Very interesting idea. We are putting together another survey, and we will add this to this list of options

Posted on September 01, 2013 at 11:38 PM
Reply Quote
intermodalman Adam Thompson
Total Posts: 8

re: Discussion

im not really a fan of that idea, what makes the swap cool is the uniformity of the containers each club sends out.

Posted on September 07, 2013 at 4:50 PM
Reply Quote
intermodalman Adam Thompson
Total Posts: 8

re: Discussion

well i was sorta right, another, more expensive maersk ship is being released in..... microscalesurprise

Posted on September 29, 2013 at 9:39 AM
Reply Quote
kees Kees van Liere
Total Posts: 15

re: Discussion

I think that we should use the old style containers because they are better for 6 wide. I think that everyone who wants to be involved should be added to a large list. People then look at the list and decide who they want containers from. As an example if I want containers from clubs 1,2, and 3, I contact these clubs and ask if they are willing to swap. If they agree I build three containers and send them to these three clubs (they pay the shipping for the container they get). They make one container each and send it to me (I pay this shipping). This way I get the containers I want and I don't have to make too many, which is good for people with limited budgets like myself.   



Kees van Liere

 

Posted on January 06, 2014 at 10:46 PM
Reply Quote
kees Kees van Liere
Total Posts: 15

re: Discussion

I like this idea as well.



Kees van Liere

 

Posted on January 06, 2014 at 10:47 PM
Reply Quote

 

Subject

 

Message