i think its pretty stupid to cancel the set on such a technicality, how does it promote weapons of war. a kid sees that they see a cool plane, as its presented.
Osprey only used in combat zones? Its famous for its use delivering humanitarian supplies. It was used by the military, but the military doesn't exclusively operate in combat zones. The British Army famously used a Chinook helicopter to repair a British dam a few years ago.
@@newmotionbricks You said "ignoring the fact that it was ONLY used in combat zones". Which is untrue. Your statement would put it as an inarguable violation of their policy. Reality isn't so clear. It has been used for operations entirely unrelated to combat. Quite extensively in fact. Delivering humanitarian air after earthquakes in Haiti and Nepal being clear examples of how lego could justify it as in keeping with their policy. If a coastguard (other than the US coast guard because thats part of the military) ever bought one then nobody would object.
I still don’t understand why it was canceled tho, if you give it a search and rescue livery and don’t associate it at all with the military in the set then there is no problem
Lego needs to chill. Seriously the idea of a modern military vehicle is subject to change. And even then the literally made an F-35 in one of the creator kits and no one bats an eye. Plus I guarantee most kids built custom armies or war machines. People need to just let kids have a little fun.
Tiltrotors are cool as hecc, but there aren't many of them, and having only been seriously employed by militarys makes them off limits. An exeptionally painful moment for lego aviation.
Lego would also have to pay royalties to Boeing for the use of the osprey in lego sets. Meaning consumer money goes to funding a active military vehicles.
Im really baffled why you are saying lego is violating its policy of not depicting MODERN military equipment when they model HISTORICAL military equipment? Unless you think the Fokker Dr1 is a modern military aircraft, when it was considered outdated 80 years before the set was released?
many people consider the first world war (and even earlier) a part of modern history/warfare, hence why it was a talking point when the osprey was cancelled
@@newmotionbricks Lego describes their own definition of "modern" to be "currently in use". They also specify that it has to be real military vehicles, so the flying wing from Indiana Jones couldn't possibly count. The entire point of the policy is to prevent kids from having toys of things involved in war they see on the news. An aircraft that was retired from combat in 1918 very doesn't violate those principles. Theres actually a lot of cold war equipment they could make, and a lot of WW2 kit they can't because its still in use by third world countries.
In regards to the policy, I believe it only really applies to 1:1 accurate depictions of weapons and vehicles. Lego has released _dozens_ of sets over the years that are generally based off of real military vehicles (i.e. Blue Power Jet and Police Heavy Helicopter), but they get through fine because their designs are altered enough to not be considered 1:1 replicas. Whereas with the V-22, it was flat out just a V-22. Vehicles like the Sopwith Camel and DR.1 are primarily historical (very few surviving models irl) and made with displaying in mind (I had one and they're _pretty_ big), and also come with functional ailerons & elevators. They're really meant for being put onto a shelf and brought down to educate when needed. They're really not for playing, which is likely why Lego let them pass. Had Lego altered the design of the Osprey and called it something like "Heavy Search-and-Rescue Helicopter", it probably would've released without issue.
honestly if they bend thier own rules on what the release, so what? greed you say? i think that its a bit of a stretch condeming them for realising stuff that resembles the military so loosly when i mean they have no obligation to avoid doing such, kids have been playing with explicitly mitlitary themes toys for decades. these groups antagonising lego for the osprey need to find a better target cuz imo its pathetic to target lego considering how they are making a moral choice which again, they have no obligation to make, and lets be fr thats just a fuckin plane dawg. its like being mad at a homeless shelter for improperly seasoning the soup once in a blue moon
The Lego V-22 Osprey is so realistic that it shears of gears in the same location the real one does aswell.
i think its pretty stupid to cancel the set on such a technicality, how does it promote weapons of war. a kid sees that they see a cool plane, as its presented.
Lego Afrika Korps (Indiana Jones) ✅
Lego Uh-60 Blackhawk ❌
The V-22 cases is just pure stupid...
This is why I hate this LEGO policies
Osprey only used in combat zones? Its famous for its use delivering humanitarian supplies. It was used by the military, but the military doesn't exclusively operate in combat zones.
The British Army famously used a Chinook helicopter to repair a British dam a few years ago.
osprey is classified as a combat aircraft and is predominantly used in combat zones, that’s why it was cancelled
@@newmotionbricks You said "ignoring the fact that it was ONLY used in combat zones".
Which is untrue.
Your statement would put it as an inarguable violation of their policy. Reality isn't so clear. It has been used for operations entirely unrelated to combat. Quite extensively in fact.
Delivering humanitarian air after earthquakes in Haiti and Nepal being clear examples of how lego could justify it as in keeping with their policy.
If a coastguard (other than the US coast guard because thats part of the military) ever bought one then nobody would object.
my apologies, the set was cancelled because it’s a “real military vehicle”. there is no workaround to that
I still don’t understand why it was canceled tho, if you give it a search and rescue livery and don’t associate it at all with the military in the set then there is no problem
I mean, just buy COBI or Sluban, they make good military sets with almost as good quality
Cobi exists
a great alternative
Lego needs to chill. Seriously the idea of a modern military vehicle is subject to change. And even then the literally made an F-35 in one of the creator kits and no one bats an eye. Plus I guarantee most kids built custom armies or war machines. People need to just let kids have a little fun.
Tiltrotors are cool as hecc, but there aren't many of them, and having only been seriously employed by militarys makes them off limits.
An exeptionally painful moment for lego aviation.
It would be cool to have set's of influential planes like the Black bird
so, techically we could make a helldivers 2 set on lego ideas?
Lego would also have to pay royalties to Boeing for the use of the osprey in lego sets. Meaning consumer money goes to funding a active military vehicles.
Lego: we no like war
Also Lego: Star WARS!
Non fictional. IT IS FICTION YOU CLOWN
who said it’s non fictional?
Im really baffled why you are saying lego is violating its policy of not depicting MODERN military equipment when they model HISTORICAL military equipment?
Unless you think the Fokker Dr1 is a modern military aircraft, when it was considered outdated 80 years before the set was released?
many people consider the first world war (and even earlier) a part of modern history/warfare, hence why it was a talking point when the osprey was cancelled
@@newmotionbricks Lego describes their own definition of "modern" to be "currently in use".
They also specify that it has to be real military vehicles, so the flying wing from Indiana Jones couldn't possibly count.
The entire point of the policy is to prevent kids from having toys of things involved in war they see on the news. An aircraft that was retired from combat in 1918 very doesn't violate those principles. Theres actually a lot of cold war equipment they could make, and a lot of WW2 kit they can't because its still in use by third world countries.
In regards to the policy, I believe it only really applies to 1:1 accurate depictions of weapons and vehicles. Lego has released _dozens_ of sets over the years that are generally based off of real military vehicles (i.e. Blue Power Jet and Police Heavy Helicopter), but they get through fine because their designs are altered enough to not be considered 1:1 replicas. Whereas with the V-22, it was flat out just a V-22.
Vehicles like the Sopwith Camel and DR.1 are primarily historical (very few surviving models irl) and made with displaying in mind (I had one and they're _pretty_ big), and also come with functional ailerons & elevators. They're really meant for being put onto a shelf and brought down to educate when needed. They're really not for playing, which is likely why Lego let them pass.
Had Lego altered the design of the Osprey and called it something like "Heavy Search-and-Rescue Helicopter", it probably would've released without issue.
thank for your comment!
this is why i stick to cobi
Sorry Lego, but kids love war machines, its juts the facts.
honestly if they bend thier own rules on what the release, so what? greed you say? i think that its a bit of a stretch condeming them for realising stuff that resembles the military so loosly when i mean they have no obligation to avoid doing such, kids have been playing with explicitly mitlitary themes toys for decades. these groups antagonising lego for the osprey need to find a better target cuz imo its pathetic to target lego considering how they are making a moral choice which again, they have no obligation to make, and lets be fr thats just a fuckin plane dawg. its like being mad at a homeless shelter for improperly seasoning the soup once in a blue moon
What’s your personal opinion?
Germans, it always has to be the germans to be wet blankets. Like where is my cool lego military vehicles and planes and ships.
Wow!!!!! This shit so awesome bro🧐. Lowkey got questions? Can i hit your dms for upcoming videos???😅
of course!