@MCLegoboy said:
"Diana got pillaged by a Viking!"

Huh. And here I thought this was long before the emergence of the first Viking.

@gearwheel:
From yesterday, in my LEGO Store MOC, I've got a tiny little version of Bag-End. It's got a 2x3 base, and stands five plates tall, is comprised of a mere 11pcs, and is instantly recognizable (in spite of the lack of tree on top). SWAC has focused mostly on vehicles, but still managed to slip in in a few locations, like the Ewok Village, or Jabba's Palace. While I was thinking more along the lines of 8x8 bases for that pipe dream project of mine, I could easily see them being able to reduce many locations down to a 4x4 base or smaller. The HPAC has done quite a bit more, even producing one location build from each of the eight films one year. And having seen the tiny Rhino from the Marvel calendar, I think many of the large creatures wouldn't be a problem, either. I'm not saying they'd be perfect, but nobody really expects a masterpiece build to come out of an Advent Calendar. And if they did make this a one-off calendar, that would eliminate any "but what are we going to do next year" problems.

I'm glad we got a very similar set last year. It was long overdue. However, I would have preferred a larger ship without the non industrial seaside building. This set is more focused on the industrial port.

@MCLegoboy said:
"Diana got pillaged by a Viking!"

Made my day.

Awesome set. Never got it (but have a few of those baseplates, if I find the crane parts oneday, I might piece it together...).

Funny how this was the first appearance of a Lego fishing rod with a real string (Fabuland had one before with molded string).

@ShinyBidoof said:
"Umm, thanks. Certainly adds to the set of the day conversation."

Certainly does, if you bothered to read through all the comments from yesterday’s. Did you?

A beauty! There's something so special about the Nautica subtheme. Everytime I see a crane with this four-legged configuration my mind goed to these sets. Those supports were specialized, but the vibe they helpd create was so beautifully special!

They were from before my time, but they're still just so nostalgic!

The crane on Diana looks a bit weak compared to a strong Viking crane, but curious to know if you could still lift the cargo out using this crane? Strange needing to remove tractor steering wheel, when they could have just used 3 brick high panel.

The four yellow crane legs 2641 only appeared in this set, with two grey ones appearing as a grandstand roof support 7 years later. Which is a shame as lots of potential in say a futuristic city monorail station.

What does Intercoastal mean here? It ought to mean "between the coasts," implying that this seaport is not on a coast itself! Therefore, I'm pretty sure this is a man-made structure in the middle of the Atlantic, for moving cargo from one ship to another

I always wanted this set, and its sister set 6542. They remain two of my white whale sets!

Although 6542 is majestik, this one is more inline with my current Town set up. I wish I had it.

@Lego_Lord_Mayorca said:
"This was the Nautica "consolation" set if your parents couldn't afford you the flagship Launch and Load Seaport ( 6542 ). I was too young and hadn't discovered LEGO yet, but I bet if I had been born just 3 years earlier, this almost certainly would have been my Christmas gift in 1991; my parents' plan to placate me because I loved the Launch and Load Seaport from first sight.

Of course, I eventually got 6542 many, many years later, and as a result, I really never gave this set a second look. It has now been many years since I acquired 6542, and the completionist in me knows that if I found this in really good condition for a fair price, I might pick it up as well. But I'm not going out of my way for it. The smaller, more simplistically-built "Diana", the fixed position crane, and the 1980s LEGO truck design pale in comparison to the glories present in 6542. It will be interesting to read what other people who grew up with this set think about it."

I'm so glad to read this comment, literally my exact same experience! Still had endless fun with this set as a kid, but did always want 6542. Eventually got it of course with the adult money :)

@PurpleDave said:
" @MCLegoboy said:
"Diana got pillaged by a Viking!"

Huh. And here I thought this was long before the emergence of the first Viking."

6049 came out four years before this set did.

@pazza_inter said:
"I think 4645 was a remake of this

the best was connect this with 6542, 6540 and 6543 to make a very very very huge town dock!"

It really was, such great sets.

@ambr said:
"The crane on Diana looks a bit weak compared to a strong Viking crane, but curious to know if you could still lift the cargo out using this crane? Strange needing to remove tractor steering wheel, when they could have just used 3 brick high panel.

You could, you just had to support it more. The steering wheel didn't fit while attached to the tractor because of the cross beam on top for the crane hook to attach to.

"

man I always dreamed about having this set as a kid. Good vibes at those times!

@ambr:
I don’t know if they were used outside of the Great Lakes region, but I once watched footage of a type of manually-operated ore unloading system where the operator was stationed in a cabin at the top of the scoop, and the entice assembly would plunge down through a hatch on the deck. As many batches as the freighter had open, they’d have a scoop with an operator repeatedly diving down into the hold to pull ore out.

@2GodBDGlory:
Intercoastal basically means international via sea. What you cited would be a crossdock, where freight is just transferred from one conveyance to another.

@TheOtherMike:
And yet there’s really nothing about that set that backs up any claim to being Vikings. Not really a Viking vessel, not Viking shields, and not crewed by Vikings.

Really great set. totally nostalgic!
@Maxbricks14 is right! everything about it is excellent!
I later got 7994 , which is also a good set... but I still want this and the others @pazza_inter mentioned: 6542 , 6540 and 6543 . Maybe we should also add 6338 to that list though. My brother had 6540 and the playvalue was incredible.

I have never owned it, but this is one of my defining marks of what LEGO really is!

@tne328 said:
" @2GodBDGlory said:
"What does Intercoastal mean here? It ought to mean "between the coasts," implying that this seaport is not on a coast itself! Therefore, I'm pretty sure this is a man-made structure in the middle of the Atlantic, for moving cargo from one ship to another"

By that interpretation, an international airport must be an airport that sits between nations, for moving people from one airplane to another. If an international airport sends and receives airplanes to and from other nations, surely an intercoastal seaport sends and receives ships to and from another coast, whether on the other side of an ocean or the other side of a continent."
A seaport is not necessarily coastal. It just means it serves sea-going vessels. There are river/estuary ports that serve ocean ships, e.g. the London Docks in times past. The fact that this one is intercoastal indicates that it isn’t riparian; it must be maritime or lacustrine. The ports it serves must also be maritime or lacustrine and not all along the same coast, otherwise it would be intracoastal.

@Zander said:
" @tne328 said:
" @2GodBDGlory said:
"What does Intercoastal mean here? It ought to mean "between the coasts," implying that this seaport is not on a coast itself! Therefore, I'm pretty sure this is a man-made structure in the middle of the Atlantic, for moving cargo from one ship to another"

By that interpretation, an international airport must be an airport that sits between nations, for moving people from one airplane to another. If an international airport sends and receives airplanes to and from other nations, surely an intercoastal seaport sends and receives ships to and from another coast, whether on the other side of an ocean or the other side of a continent."
A seaport is not necessarily coastal. It just means it serves sea-going vessels. There are river/estuary ports that serve ocean ships, e.g. the London Docks in times past. The fact that this one is intercoastal indicates that it isn’t riparian; it must be maritime or lacustrine. The ports it serves must also be maritime or lacustrine and not all along the same coast, otherwise it would be intracoastal."

I was today years old when I learned what "lacustrine" meant.
I did think about mentioning the opposite coast of a lake, such as from the Michigan coast to the Wisconsin coast of Lake Michigan.

LEGO is at least trying the Cargo Harbour setting again with 60422 Seaside Harbour with Cargo Ship , I mean, the last set before that 4645 Harbour was out of production since 2013 so that's almost a 12 year gap, which is basicly an entire new generation of City kids (seeing how the big City sets generally used to be 6-12

I suppose with 60304 Road Plates could still make elevated road / docks like those older town sets, as it can be put on bricks/supports (and previously 7994 LEGO City Harbour used some big 16x32 pieces for the road)

@Zander said:
"A seaport is not necessarily coastal. It just means it serves sea-going vessels. There are river/estuary ports that serve ocean ships, e.g. the London Docks in times past. The fact that this one is intercoastal indicates that it isn’t riparian; it must be maritime or lacustrine. The ports it serves must also be maritime or lacustrine and not all along the same coast, otherwise it would be intracoastal."

Okay, bunch of big questions for you, then (and let’s “sea” if there’s still time to get them all answered before the next RSotD kicks in, so people don’t whinge about comments being “off-topic”):

1. If a port located on the Great Lakes only serves the huge “lakers”, is it still a seaport?
2. How far from the coast would a seaport need to be to no longer qualify as “coastal”?
3. If traveling between two different Great Lakes, but staying within the same country, would that count as intercoastal?
4. If traveling across one of the Great Lakes, but crossing an international border, would that count as intercoastal?
5. If traveling across Lake Michigan, between two different states (so west coast vs east coast), would that count as intercoastal?
6. Is there some snobbish definition that it has to be salt water to count as “coastal”, even though we let the little salties come in and play on the bigger lakers’ turf?

@PurpleDave said:
" @Zander said:
"A seaport is not necessarily coastal. It just means it serves sea-going vessels. There are river/estuary ports that serve ocean ships, e.g. the London Docks in times past. The fact that this one is intercoastal indicates that it isn’t riparian; it must be maritime or lacustrine. The ports it serves must also be maritime or lacustrine and not all along the same coast, otherwise it would be intracoastal."

Okay, bunch of big questions for you, then (and let’s “sea” if there’s still time to get them all answered before the next RSotD kicks in, so people don’t whinge about comments being “off-topic”):

1. If a port located on the Great Lakes only serves the huge “lakers”, is it still a seaport?
2. How far from the coast would a seaport need to be to no longer qualify as “coastal”?
3. If traveling between two different Great Lakes, but staying within the same country, would that count as intercoastal?
4. If traveling across one of the Great Lakes, but crossing an international border, would that count as intercoastal?
5. If traveling across Lake Michigan, between two different states (so west coast vs east coast), would that count as intercoastal?
6. Is there some snobbish definition that it has to be salt water to count as “coastal”, even though we let the little salties come in and play on the bigger lakers’ turf?"
1. Yes. Despite its name, a ‘seaport’ can be on a lake. It has more to do with the maximum size of vessels - especially their hull depth - than the location of the port.
2. Any distance from the coast disqualifies it as coastal. Note, however, that some lakes are considered to have coasts, not just banks. The Dead Sea, for example, which is a lake, not a sea, has coasts.
3. A coast has more to do with geography than politics.
4. See (3).
5. See (3).
6. No. Freshwater lakes can have coasts.

Well...it's seaport; that 'first part' though...sounds like a made-up wreslin' title (yes, yes, "that ALL are":)): YOU'RE WINNER AND INTERCOASTAL CHAAAAMPION...CLUTCH POWERS:D

Worth pointing out that this set features dock 1, while Launch Load Seaport has docks 2 and 3, though they don't explicitly connect in any way.

@Zander said:
"1. Yes. Despite its name, a ‘seaport’ can be on a lake. It has more to do with the maximum size of vessels - especially their hull depth - than the location of the port."

Okay, from all the other questions I got that anything going up one side of Lake Michigan would be intracoastal, but crossing Lake Michigan, or transiting to any of the other four (or three, for those who count Lake Michigan-Huron as one body of water...like NOAA does), would be intercoastal. Not that it really matters at that point, since any proper port on the Great Lakes is unlikely to exclusively trade goods with other ports along the same coast.

But to this question, lakers are a bit..weird. They're longer than any of the salties that can make it through the St. Lawrence Seaway, but they're flat-bottomed, and rather blunt at both ends. The salties that do travel the Great Lakes are rather small compared to the ones that stay close to the oceans, so I don't know how much of a difference there is in depth vs what might pull into New York City.

"2. Any distance from the coast disqualifies it as coastal. Note, however, that some lakes are considered to have coasts, not just banks. The Dead Sea, for example, which is a lake, not a sea, has coasts."

And this one gets real tricky, since ports are almost never right _on_ the coast, but rather located at the mouths of large rivers. When I was growing up, there was a dock located just inside the mouth of the river my hometown was built around. It was just big enough for a small freighter to pull up and unload ore, and it wasn't more than a few hundred yards from the coast (most of the distance from open water was between two piers), but it was still technically on the river. So, again, how far inland? Obviously St. Louis is not a coastal port, being hundreds of miles from either the Gulf or Lake Michigan, but how many ports are situated right down on the beach?

@brick_r:
Champeen. The word you're looking for is champeen.

@pazza_inter said:
"I think 4645 was a remake of this

the best was connect this with 6542, 6540 and 6543 to make a very very very huge town dock!"

EL primero fue el muelle de 2007