 | | | | | |
<snip>
Everything sounds great. I WILL NOT be attending the show due to events
scheduled 4 years ago :). I will send my track up and the road plates that
I have with who ever. I will have some buildings to put in. Do you guys
want the water tower again? I could make it taller, and bigger.
At this show I will not send up everything like I did last time. Maybe some
boats for the water scene and everything else I mentioned earlier. I dont
think Scott, Chris or any one else wants to haul all my stuff up.
Some thing I want to talk about is the electrical layout. We did not have a
very effecient electrical system last time. I think we should have block
controling again but have all the blocks controlled from a single point.
That will mean bringing even more long wires and extension cords. And maybe
Mindstorms controlled layout? So many times around for a train and the
switches bring the train in and let another train out? DCC even?
kai
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Kai,
> Everything sounds great. I WILL NOT be attending the show due to events
> scheduled 4 years ago :).
Pah, what could be more important than a LEGO train show for GATS? ; )
> I will send my track up and the road plates that
> I have with who ever. I will have some buildings to put in. Do you guys
> want the water tower again? I could make it taller, and bigger.
Anything and everything would be fine, Kai.
> At this show I will not send up everything like I did last time. Maybe • some
> boats for the water scene and everything else I mentioned earlier. I dont
> think Scott, Chris or any one else wants to haul all my stuff up.
Well, I think Chris or Steve could arrange to pick up your stuff, I will be
in Indiana by April 14th, so I don't want to drive here, then there if I can
avoid it.
> Some thing I want to talk about is the electrical layout. We did not have • a
> very effecient electrical system last time. I think we should have block
> controling again but have all the blocks controlled from a single point.
> That will mean bringing even more long wires and extension cords.
Indeed. Any thoughts on this? Chris, Larry, etc? We might need some
controllers on each of the holes, that should take care of a lot of the
problems I think.
> And maybe
> Mindstorms controlled layout? So many times around for a train and the
> switches bring the train in and let another train out? DCC even?
Whoa, whoa, hold on Kai! We nee dto see the feasibility of that before we go
and make it into a train show. Is it feasible to have Mindstorms control it?
Did anyone ever do it? Probably one of our future things we want to look at,
not this showe, though.
Scott S.
--
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.michlug, Scott Edward Sanburn writes:
> Kai said:
> > Some thing I want to talk about is the electrical layout. We did not
> > have a
> > very effecient electrical system last time. I think we should have block
> > controling again but have all the blocks controlled from a single point.
> > That will mean bringing even more long wires and extension cords.
>
> Indeed. Any thoughts on this? Chris, Larry, etc? We might need some
> controllers on each of the holes, that should take care of a lot of the
> problems I think.
I think the appropriate thing to do is what has been learned by hard
experience by GMLTC. Use blocks. Make them electrically separated using
either tape between both rails at a joint or by attaching straight track to
a plate with a one stud gap between two adjacent rails.
But then put the controllers NEAR the blocks on the inside of the square,
not all in one place. Putting them all in one place adds confusion (which
controller controls which block) and causes voltage drops, the whole reason
you are using multiple controllers in the first place is to avoid those.
> > And maybe
> > Mindstorms controlled layout? So many times around for a train and the
> > switches bring the train in and let another train out? DCC even?
>
> Whoa, whoa, hold on Kai! We nee dto see the feasibility of that before we go
> and make it into a train show. Is it feasible to have Mindstorms control it?
> Did anyone ever do it? Probably one of our future things we want to look at,
> not this showe, though.
Agreed. Too ambitious to control mainline operations and switches cannot
reliably done with current technology... Make a Mindstorms controlled
accessory that is independent of mainline operation if you like, though.
++Lar
> --
| | | | | | |
