| |
I was going to be building several tables for my Lego collection in my hobby
room and was wondering how I should go about it. I was originally going to
make the tables 45"x45", since it was a good, large table. I happened to see
the Modular train table windows meta files made by Ben Fleskes that have the
30.25"x30.25" tables. Does everyone run these style of table at the Lego Tran
Clubs? If so, I feel that I, too, should run this style or something
compatible with them just in case I go to one. If not, I would just use it
for ideas on my own system.
Do many people use these tables and do they like them? My main complaint is
the lack of depth for making a large town. This is of course offset by the
fact that one can reach to other side without stretching a lot.
I will be making these tables in early July. I have all my Lego packed away
for in-laws coming over for the week of my wedding. After I return from the
honeymoon, I get my Lego room back and want to do it up right! Any feedback
and/or suggestions would be greatly welcome.
Also, is there a standardized height for split level systems? I will be
elevating at least one table and I was planning on 20 bricks high, as this
will allow an elevated monorail to climb one more time and be perfectly
positioned to ride along the ground. I just have to make sure there is enough
clearance underneath for a train to pass through on the main level. I believe
Ben's table would leave 13 bricks high of clearance, as it is just under seven
studs thick. I may even need a diffenent table for an elevated platform.
I also plan to build some kind of shelving storage system in the closet for my
pieces and possibly a building/work table so that my work in progress won't
cause traffic jams in the Lego town (still un-named), but that is a different
matter, unless there are great ideas you want to share.
Mike
|
|
| |
Yep, that's my design.
At a minimum, I suggest 30.25" x 60.5" for long linear runs. When I need extra
depth, I stack them two deep. We (PNLTC) also have a few tables that are ~40"
x ~80. The larger size gives you a pretty good amount of space for a
standalone layout, but is not as easy to transport. I like the 30x60 since
they are easy enough to move around, yet big enough to get a layout on. We've
also started putting standard metal folddown legs on each table to cut down on
our setup time at shows.
Hope this helps.
Ben Fleskes
PNLTC
In lugnet.trains, Mike Poindexter writes:
> I was going to be building several tables for my Lego collection in my hobby
> room and was wondering how I should go about it. I was originally going to
> make the tables 45"x45", since it was a good, large table. I happened to see
> the Modular train table windows meta files made by Ben Fleskes that have the
> 30.25"x30.25" tables. Does everyone run these style of table at the Lego Tran
> Clubs? If so, I feel that I, too, should run this style or something
> compatible with them just in case I go to one. If not, I would just use it
> for ideas on my own system.
>
> Do many people use these tables and do they like them? My main complaint is
> the lack of depth for making a large town. This is of course offset by the
> fact that one can reach to other side without stretching a lot.
>
> I will be making these tables in early July. I have all my Lego packed away
> for in-laws coming over for the week of my wedding. After I return from the
> honeymoon, I get my Lego room back and want to do it up right! Any feedback
> and/or suggestions would be greatly welcome.
>
> Also, is there a standardized height for split level systems? I will be
> elevating at least one table and I was planning on 20 bricks high, as this
> will allow an elevated monorail to climb one more time and be perfectly
> positioned to ride along the ground. I just have to make sure there is enough
> clearance underneath for a train to pass through on the main level. I believe
> Ben's table would leave 13 bricks high of clearance, as it is just under seven
> studs thick. I may even need a diffenent table for an elevated platform.
>
> I also plan to build some kind of shelving storage system in the closet for my
> pieces and possibly a building/work table so that my work in progress won't
> cause traffic jams in the Lego town (still un-named), but that is a different
> matter, unless there are great ideas you want to share.
>
> Mike
|
|
| |
Mike-
At the GMLTC, we use about a 30 x45" table (= to exactly 6 large gray baseplates)
with metal folding legs. Our newest tables flare out to give us more room (6"
IIRC):
_________________________________________
l l l l l l l l l l
l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l
l l l l l l l l l l
l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l
\____l____l____l____l____l____l
So here we'd see (I hope-- not good at ascii) a normal table, the new, slanted
transition table, and a new larger table (36 x 45) The squares are large gray
baseplates.
I personally use 30 x 45 in my home layout as well, although I line them up 3-by
to gain more depth.
Now, if you wanted to build a section that would be compatable with the GMLTC's,
you'd have to build up 20 bricks high to get to ground level-- takes 1000s of
bricks for just one section:-p
HTH,
John
Ben Fleskes wrote:
> Yep, that's my design.
>
> At a minimum, I suggest 30.25" x 60.5" for long linear runs. When I need extra
> depth, I stack them two deep. We (PNLTC) also have a few tables that are ~40"
> x ~80. The larger size gives you a pretty good amount of space for a
> standalone layout, but is not as easy to transport. I like the 30x60 since
> they are easy enough to move around, yet big enough to get a layout on. We've
> also started putting standard metal folddown legs on each table to cut down on
> our setup time at shows.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Ben Fleskes
> PNLTC
>
> In lugnet.trains, Mike Poindexter writes:
> > I was going to be building several tables for my Lego collection in my hobby
> > room and was wondering how I should go about it. I was originally going to
> > make the tables 45"x45", since it was a good, large table. I happened to see
> > the Modular train table windows meta files made by Ben Fleskes that have the
> > 30.25"x30.25" tables. Does everyone run these style of table at the Lego Tran
> > Clubs? If so, I feel that I, too, should run this style or something
> > compatible with them just in case I go to one. If not, I would just use it
> > for ideas on my own system.
> >
> > Do many people use these tables and do they like them? My main complaint is
> > the lack of depth for making a large town. This is of course offset by the
> > fact that one can reach to other side without stretching a lot.
> >
> > I will be making these tables in early July. I have all my Lego packed away
> > for in-laws coming over for the week of my wedding. After I return from the
> > honeymoon, I get my Lego room back and want to do it up right! Any feedback
> > and/or suggestions would be greatly welcome.
> >
> > Also, is there a standardized height for split level systems? I will be
> > elevating at least one table and I was planning on 20 bricks high, as this
> > will allow an elevated monorail to climb one more time and be perfectly
> > positioned to ride along the ground. I just have to make sure there is enough
> > clearance underneath for a train to pass through on the main level. I believe
> > Ben's table would leave 13 bricks high of clearance, as it is just under seven
> > studs thick. I may even need a diffenent table for an elevated platform.
> >
> > I also plan to build some kind of shelving storage system in the closet for my
> > pieces and possibly a building/work table so that my work in progress won't
> > cause traffic jams in the Lego town (still un-named), but that is a different
> > matter, unless there are great ideas you want to share.
> >
> > Mike
|
|
| |
I have given some thought to the tables as well.
I think Ben's design is a winner! However, in planning some train layouts
(never built) I have found (and others suggested to me) that 3 baseplates
deep leaves a lot to be desired, especially if the train is incorporated in
a town plan when level crossings are desired and two deep tables are not.
I think I have a solution, although it has not been tried or tested, but hey
it ought to work! Attach additional ~10" shelves to the table units where
extra track laying space is needed to accomodate crossings and such. This
keeps Ben's modular approach intact, which I believe is important for
flexibility and transportation, and if done correctly allows additional
layout space.
I have been planning to build Ben's tables with my attachments, but I have
no space to put them yet! Look for my layout (with included instructions
for my idea) in the future. No, not soon, but sometime! :)
John Matthews
(the 'still waiting to build his own house' architect)
Ben Fleskes <benfleskes@msn.com> wrote in message
news:FCs4Ao.7HM@lugnet.com...
> Yep, that's my design.
>
> At a minimum, I suggest 30.25" x 60.5" for long linear runs. When I need • extra
> depth, I stack them two deep. We (PNLTC) also have a few tables that are • ~40"
> x ~80. The larger size gives you a pretty good amount of space for a
> standalone layout, but is not as easy to transport. I like the 30x60 • since
> they are easy enough to move around, yet big enough to get a layout on. • We've
> also started putting standard metal folddown legs on each table to cut • down on
> our setup time at shows.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Ben Fleskes
> PNLTC
>
> In lugnet.trains, Mike Poindexter writes:
> > I was going to be building several tables for my Lego collection in my • hobby
> > room and was wondering how I should go about it. I was originally going • to
> > make the tables 45"x45", since it was a good, large table. I happened to • see
> > the Modular train table windows meta files made by Ben Fleskes that have • the
> > 30.25"x30.25" tables. Does everyone run these style of table at the Lego • Tran
> > Clubs? If so, I feel that I, too, should run this style or something
> > compatible with them just in case I go to one. If not, I would just use • it
> > for ideas on my own system.
> >
> > Do many people use these tables and do they like them? My main complaint • is
> > the lack of depth for making a large town. This is of course offset by • the
> > fact that one can reach to other side without stretching a lot.
> >
> > I will be making these tables in early July. I have all my Lego packed • away
> > for in-laws coming over for the week of my wedding. After I return from • the
> > honeymoon, I get my Lego room back and want to do it up right! Any • feedback
> > and/or suggestions would be greatly welcome.
> >
> > Also, is there a standardized height for split level systems? I will be
> > elevating at least one table and I was planning on 20 bricks high, as • this
> > will allow an elevated monorail to climb one more time and be perfectly
> > positioned to ride along the ground. I just have to make sure there is • enough
> > clearance underneath for a train to pass through on the main level. I • believe
> > Ben's table would leave 13 bricks high of clearance, as it is just under • seven
> > studs thick. I may even need a diffenent table for an elevated platform.
> >
> > I also plan to build some kind of shelving storage system in the closet • for my
> > pieces and possibly a building/work table so that my work in progress • won't
> > cause traffic jams in the Lego town (still un-named), but that is a • different
> > matter, unless there are great ideas you want to share.
> >
> > Mike
|
|
| |
lol I just saw my beautiful ascii art-- Is there a secret to keeping stuff straight?
-John
John Neal wrote:
> Mike-
>
> At the GMLTC, we use about a 30 x45" table (= to exactly 6 large gray baseplates)
> with metal folding legs. Our newest tables flare out to give us more room (6"
> IIRC):
> _________________________________________
> l l l l l l l l l l
>
> l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l
> l l l l l l l l l l
>
> l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l
> \____l____l____l____l____l____l
>
> So here we'd see (I hope-- not good at ascii) a normal table, the new, slanted
> transition table, and a new larger table (36 x 45) The squares are large gray
> baseplates.
>
> I personally use 30 x 45 in my home layout as well, although I line them up 3-by
> to gain more depth.
> Now, if you wanted to build a section that would be compatable with the GMLTC's,
> you'd have to build up 20 bricks high to get to ground level-- takes 1000s of
> bricks for just one section:-p
>
> HTH,
> John
>
> Ben Fleskes wrote:
>
> > Yep, that's my design.
> >
> > At a minimum, I suggest 30.25" x 60.5" for long linear runs. When I need extra
> > depth, I stack them two deep. We (PNLTC) also have a few tables that are ~40"
> > x ~80. The larger size gives you a pretty good amount of space for a
> > standalone layout, but is not as easy to transport. I like the 30x60 since
> > they are easy enough to move around, yet big enough to get a layout on. We've
> > also started putting standard metal folddown legs on each table to cut down on
> > our setup time at shows.
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Ben Fleskes
> > PNLTC
> >
> > In lugnet.trains, Mike Poindexter writes:
> > > I was going to be building several tables for my Lego collection in my hobby
> > > room and was wondering how I should go about it. I was originally going to
> > > make the tables 45"x45", since it was a good, large table. I happened to see
> > > the Modular train table windows meta files made by Ben Fleskes that have the
> > > 30.25"x30.25" tables. Does everyone run these style of table at the Lego Tran
> > > Clubs? If so, I feel that I, too, should run this style or something
> > > compatible with them just in case I go to one. If not, I would just use it
> > > for ideas on my own system.
> > >
> > > Do many people use these tables and do they like them? My main complaint is
> > > the lack of depth for making a large town. This is of course offset by the
> > > fact that one can reach to other side without stretching a lot.
> > >
> > > I will be making these tables in early July. I have all my Lego packed away
> > > for in-laws coming over for the week of my wedding. After I return from the
> > > honeymoon, I get my Lego room back and want to do it up right! Any feedback
> > > and/or suggestions would be greatly welcome.
> > >
> > > Also, is there a standardized height for split level systems? I will be
> > > elevating at least one table and I was planning on 20 bricks high, as this
> > > will allow an elevated monorail to climb one more time and be perfectly
> > > positioned to ride along the ground. I just have to make sure there is enough
> > > clearance underneath for a train to pass through on the main level. I believe
> > > Ben's table would leave 13 bricks high of clearance, as it is just under seven
> > > studs thick. I may even need a diffenent table for an elevated platform.
> > >
> > > I also plan to build some kind of shelving storage system in the closet for my
> > > pieces and possibly a building/work table so that my work in progress won't
> > > cause traffic jams in the Lego town (still un-named), but that is a different
> > > matter, unless there are great ideas you want to share.
> > >
> > > Mike
|
|
| |
john,
the secret to ascii art is to use a fixed width font (such as courier)
of course, those of us who use ie5 might have trouble viewing this ascii art
done with the 'correct' fixed width font because the #@$%&* program refuses
to display it in this font even though we have it set in our preferences.
I suppose I could cut and paste into my favorite text editor....
John Matthews
P.S. Die Microsoft! My next box will run Linux! I promise..
John Neal <johnneal@uswest.net> wrote in message
news:37574D6E.62FA25E2@uswest.net...
> lol I just saw my beautiful ascii art-- Is there a secret to keeping • stuff straight?
>
> -John
>
> John Neal wrote:
>
> > Mike-
> >
> > At the GMLTC, we use about a 30 x45" table (= to exactly 6 large gray • baseplates)
> > with metal folding legs. Our newest tables flare out to give us more • room (6"
> > IIRC):
> > _________________________________________
> > l l l l l l l l • l l
> >
> > l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l
> > l l l l l l l l • l l
> >
> > l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l
> > \____l____l____l____l____l____l
> >
> > So here we'd see (I hope-- not good at ascii) a normal table, the new, • slanted
> > transition table, and a new larger table (36 x 45) The squares are large • gray
> > baseplates.
> >
> > I personally use 30 x 45 in my home layout as well, although I line them • up 3-by
> > to gain more depth.
> > Now, if you wanted to build a section that would be compatable with the • GMLTC's,
> > you'd have to build up 20 bricks high to get to ground level-- takes • 1000s of
> > bricks for just one section:-p
> >
> > HTH,
> > John
> >
> > Ben Fleskes wrote:
> >
> > > Yep, that's my design.
> > >
> > > At a minimum, I suggest 30.25" x 60.5" for long linear runs. When I • need extra
> > > depth, I stack them two deep. We (PNLTC) also have a few tables that • are ~40"
> > > x ~80. The larger size gives you a pretty good amount of space for a
> > > standalone layout, but is not as easy to transport. I like the 30x60 • since
> > > they are easy enough to move around, yet big enough to get a layout • on. We've
> > > also started putting standard metal folddown legs on each table to cut • down on
> > > our setup time at shows.
> > >
> > > Hope this helps.
> > >
> > > Ben Fleskes
> > > PNLTC
> > >
> > > In lugnet.trains, Mike Poindexter writes:
> > > > I was going to be building several tables for my Lego collection in • my hobby
> > > > room and was wondering how I should go about it. I was originally • going to
> > > > make the tables 45"x45", since it was a good, large table. I • happened to see
> > > > the Modular train table windows meta files made by Ben Fleskes that • have the
> > > > 30.25"x30.25" tables. Does everyone run these style of table at the • Lego Tran
> > > > Clubs? If so, I feel that I, too, should run this style or something
> > > > compatible with them just in case I go to one. If not, I would just • use it
> > > > for ideas on my own system.
> > > >
> > > > Do many people use these tables and do they like them? My main • complaint is
> > > > the lack of depth for making a large town. This is of course offset • by the
> > > > fact that one can reach to other side without stretching a lot.
> > > >
> > > > I will be making these tables in early July. I have all my Lego • packed away
> > > > for in-laws coming over for the week of my wedding. After I return • from the
> > > > honeymoon, I get my Lego room back and want to do it up right! Any • feedback
> > > > and/or suggestions would be greatly welcome.
> > > >
> > > > Also, is there a standardized height for split level systems? I will • be
> > > > elevating at least one table and I was planning on 20 bricks high, as • this
> > > > will allow an elevated monorail to climb one more time and be • perfectly
> > > > positioned to ride along the ground. I just have to make sure there • is enough
> > > > clearance underneath for a train to pass through on the main level. • I believe
> > > > Ben's table would leave 13 bricks high of clearance, as it is just • under seven
> > > > studs thick. I may even need a diffenent table for an elevated • platform.
> > > >
> > > > I also plan to build some kind of shelving storage system in the • closet for my
> > > > pieces and possibly a building/work table so that my work in progress • won't
> > > > cause traffic jams in the Lego town (still un-named), but that is a • different
> > > > matter, unless there are great ideas you want to share.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
>
|
|
| |
John,
Is there some reason to put 20 levels of bricks other than to use up all those
bricks in colors nobody likes? The only thing I can think of is so that you
can drop down 20 layers to make a subway, but it seems cheaper to just build a
platform up higher - sort of like I am planning to do.
I do like Ben Fleskes system. I just don't know if that is the size I want to
do. what is the standard height? This will be even more important than the
width and length, as trains don't handle sudden drops very well.
Mike
In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> Mike-
>
> At the GMLTC, we use about a 30 x45" table (= to exactly 6 large gray • baseplates)
> with metal folding legs. Our newest tables flare out to give us more room • (6"
> IIRC):
> _________________________________________
> l l l l l l l l • l l
>
> l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l
> l l l l l l l l • l l
>
> l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l
> \____l____l____l____l____l____l
>
> So here we'd see (I hope-- not good at ascii) a normal table, the new, slanted
> transition table, and a new larger table (36 x 45) The squares are large gray
> baseplates.
>
> I personally use 30 x 45 in my home layout as well, although I line them up 3- • by
> to gain more depth.
> Now, if you wanted to build a section that would be compatable with the • GMLTC's,
> you'd have to build up 20 bricks high to get to ground level-- takes 1000s of
> bricks for just one section:-p
>
> HTH,
> John
>
> Ben Fleskes wrote:
>
> > Yep, that's my design.
> >
> > At a minimum, I suggest 30.25" x 60.5" for long linear runs. When I need • extra
> > depth, I stack them two deep. We (PNLTC) also have a few tables that are • ~40"
> > x ~80. The larger size gives you a pretty good amount of space for a
> > standalone layout, but is not as easy to transport. I like the 30x60 since
> > they are easy enough to move around, yet big enough to get a layout on. • We've
> > also started putting standard metal folddown legs on each table to cut down • on
> > our setup time at shows.
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Ben Fleskes
> > PNLTC
> >
> > In lugnet.trains, Mike Poindexter writes:
> > > I was going to be building several tables for my Lego collection in my • hobby
> > > room and was wondering how I should go about it. I was originally going to
> > > make the tables 45"x45", since it was a good, large table. I happened to • see
> > > the Modular train table windows meta files made by Ben Fleskes that have • the
> > > 30.25"x30.25" tables. Does everyone run these style of table at the Lego • Tran
> > > Clubs? If so, I feel that I, too, should run this style or something
> > > compatible with them just in case I go to one. If not, I would just use it
> > > for ideas on my own system.
> > >
> > > Do many people use these tables and do they like them? My main complaint • is
> > > the lack of depth for making a large town. This is of course offset by the
> > > fact that one can reach to other side without stretching a lot.
> > >
> > > I will be making these tables in early July. I have all my Lego packed • away
> > > for in-laws coming over for the week of my wedding. After I return from • the
> > > honeymoon, I get my Lego room back and want to do it up right! Any • feedback
> > > and/or suggestions would be greatly welcome.
> > >
> > > Also, is there a standardized height for split level systems? I will be
> > > elevating at least one table and I was planning on 20 bricks high, as this
> > > will allow an elevated monorail to climb one more time and be perfectly
> > > positioned to ride along the ground. I just have to make sure there is • enough
> > > clearance underneath for a train to pass through on the main level. I • believe
> > > Ben's table would leave 13 bricks high of clearance, as it is just under • seven
> > > studs thick. I may even need a diffenent table for an elevated platform.
> > >
> > > I also plan to build some kind of shelving storage system in the closet • for my
> > > pieces and possibly a building/work table so that my work in progress won't
> > > cause traffic jams in the Lego town (still un-named), but that is a • different
> > > matter, unless there are great ideas you want to share.
> > >
> > > Mike
|
|
| |
Mike Poindexter wrote:
> John,
>
> Is there some reason to put 20 levels of bricks other than to use up all those
> bricks in colors nobody likes?
More like using up all those *sizes* nobody likes. Our outer walls are always
red; inner yellow. The inside is basically 2x2 towers fortifies every 5-6 rows
with a layer of 2x4s. It's very sturdy:-) We *only* use 2x4s on the outer walls,
but will use 2x3 on an inner walls. Very hard to explain; once our web site is
up, you will see what I'm talking about.
> The only thing I can think of is so that you
> can drop down 20 layers to make a subway, but it seems cheaper to just build a
> platform up higher - sort of like I am planning to do.
Yes, dropping down, cool executing of tunnels and bridges, the ability to vary the
terrain to add interest, and putting the layout at height which is eye level to
small wide-eyed onlookers;-) Plus it gives us room to hide motors, wires,
transformers, etc. I don't mean to sound like a Purist or anything [1], but
building platforms, etc. is not really building with Lego. A layout is really
just a big model; I'm sure no one else would include non Lego parts in their
MOCs. But, of course, we are talking about *massive* cash outlays for a set-up
like this, so it's the exception, not the rule;-) Maybe only build up 5 rows...?
> I do like Ben Fleskes system. I just don't know if that is the size I want to
> do. what is the standard height?
Standard height of the table will simply be the height of the metal folding legs
that are screwed into a sheet of 3/4" plywood table. Whatever *that* is:-) For
ease of maneuvering and for maximum flexibility, I would recommend going with 30 x
45 size (plus you get 3 tables with little waste out of one 4' x 8' sheet of
plywood).
-John
[1] Not that there is anything wrong with that;-)
> This will be even more important than the
> width and length, as trains don't handle sudden drops very well.
>
> Mike
>
> In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> > Mike-
> >
> > At the GMLTC, we use about a 30 x45" table (= to exactly 6 large gray • baseplates)
> > with metal folding legs. Our newest tables flare out to give us more room • (6"
> > IIRC):
> > _________________________________________
> > l l l l l l l l • l l
> >
> > l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l
> > l l l l l l l l • l l
> >
> > l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l____l
> > \____l____l____l____l____l____l
> >
> > So here we'd see (I hope-- not good at ascii) a normal table, the new, slanted
> > transition table, and a new larger table (36 x 45) The squares are large gray
> > baseplates.
> >
> > I personally use 30 x 45 in my home layout as well, although I line them up 3- • by
> > to gain more depth.
> > Now, if you wanted to build a section that would be compatable with the • GMLTC's,
> > you'd have to build up 20 bricks high to get to ground level-- takes 1000s of
> > bricks for just one section:-p
> >
> > HTH,
> > John
> >
> > Ben Fleskes wrote:
> >
> > > Yep, that's my design.
> > >
> > > At a minimum, I suggest 30.25" x 60.5" for long linear runs. When I need • extra
> > > depth, I stack them two deep. We (PNLTC) also have a few tables that are • ~40"
> > > x ~80. The larger size gives you a pretty good amount of space for a
> > > standalone layout, but is not as easy to transport. I like the 30x60 since
> > > they are easy enough to move around, yet big enough to get a layout on. • We've
> > > also started putting standard metal folddown legs on each table to cut down • on
> > > our setup time at shows.
> > >
> > > Hope this helps.
> > >
> > > Ben Fleskes
> > > PNLTC
> > >
> > > In lugnet.trains, Mike Poindexter writes:
> > > > I was going to be building several tables for my Lego collection in my • hobby
> > > > room and was wondering how I should go about it. I was originally going to
> > > > make the tables 45"x45", since it was a good, large table. I happened to • see
> > > > the Modular train table windows meta files made by Ben Fleskes that have • the
> > > > 30.25"x30.25" tables. Does everyone run these style of table at the Lego • Tran
> > > > Clubs? If so, I feel that I, too, should run this style or something
> > > > compatible with them just in case I go to one. If not, I would just use it
> > > > for ideas on my own system.
> > > >
> > > > Do many people use these tables and do they like them? My main complaint • is
> > > > the lack of depth for making a large town. This is of course offset by the
> > > > fact that one can reach to other side without stretching a lot.
> > > >
> > > > I will be making these tables in early July. I have all my Lego packed • away
> > > > for in-laws coming over for the week of my wedding. After I return from • the
> > > > honeymoon, I get my Lego room back and want to do it up right! Any • feedback
> > > > and/or suggestions would be greatly welcome.
> > > >
> > > > Also, is there a standardized height for split level systems? I will be
> > > > elevating at least one table and I was planning on 20 bricks high, as this
> > > > will allow an elevated monorail to climb one more time and be perfectly
> > > > positioned to ride along the ground. I just have to make sure there is • enough
> > > > clearance underneath for a train to pass through on the main level. I • believe
> > > > Ben's table would leave 13 bricks high of clearance, as it is just under • seven
> > > > studs thick. I may even need a diffenent table for an elevated platform.
> > > >
> > > > I also plan to build some kind of shelving storage system in the closet • for my
> > > > pieces and possibly a building/work table so that my work in progress won't
> > > > cause traffic jams in the Lego town (still un-named), but that is a • different
> > > > matter, unless there are great ideas you want to share.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
|
|
| |
Mike Poindexter wrote:
>
> John,
>
> Is there some reason to put 20 levels of bricks other than to use up all those
> bricks in colors nobody likes?
There are two competing philosophies here...
PNLTC has tables. They put their tables together and they build the
layout "from scratch" each time, putting track together and buildings
down, etc. onto a brown or green colored table. At least that is what I
understand (especially since I have seen a video of them setting up).
This makes for a highly flexible, but long time to set up, layout. Every
show is different! It can take all day to set up and 1/2 day to tear
down
GMLTC has modules. Each module is a completely scenicked environment and
the track is permanently affixed to the lego below. Only the very large
buildings that otherwise would make the module too tall to transport
effectively are removed, and they always go back in the same place.
GMLTC modules are more like model railroad modules in that they are
pre-built.
This makes for a fairly rigid (you can vary the number of modules you
bring, and the order in which you arrange them, but a module has what it
has on it unless you tear down and build again, something that N-trak
can't do as easily, LOL) but fast to set up. Modules are brought in on
wheeled racks, out of the custom trailer, deployed onto the folddown
tables, and you're up and running in 1/2 hour, and you can tear down in
about the same time.
Now, you COULD make modules out of something else than Lego and just
affix the track via nails or whatever.
But given that they are Lego, and given that they are 30 to 50 or so
inches wide, you NEED to be 15 bricks high. Think about what a 30 inch
wide, 45 inch long 5 brick high module would be like. It would be too
fragile to live without a sheet of plywood always underneath it. These
modules can be lifted up, flipped over, stacked on top of each other,
etc.
Now, as it turns out, the modules DO live in wooden carriers that have
power strips on them etc. once they are done, but during construction
they do not.
Given that they have to mostly be 15 bricks high for structural
integrity, that has been taken advantage of. There IS a subway in one
module, and the features such as the Ore Dock and some of the bridges
are built in at track level instead of elevated.
PNLTC approach is much much cheaper. GMLTC is much much more purist.
GMLTC is lucky to have a fanatic such as Conan who has millions of
bricks to build modules with. He is the entire reason the club exists.
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
FDIC Know your Customer is wounded, thanks to you, but not dead...
See http://www.defendyourprivacy.com for details
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
|
|
| |
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Mike Poindexter wrote:
> >
> > John,
> >
> > Is there some reason to put 20 levels of bricks other than to use up all those
> > bricks in colors nobody likes?
>
> There are two competing philosophies here...
>
> PNLTC has tables. They put their tables together and they build the
> layout "from scratch" each time, putting track together and buildings
> down, etc. onto a brown or green colored table. At least that is what I
> understand (especially since I have seen a video of them setting up).
> This makes for a highly flexible, but long time to set up, layout. Every
> show is different! It can take all day to set up and 1/2 day to tear
> down
>
> GMLTC has modules. Each module is a completely scenicked environment and
> the track is permanently affixed to the lego below. Only the very large
> buildings that otherwise would make the module too tall to transport
> effectively are removed, and they always go back in the same place.
> GMLTC modules are more like model railroad modules in that they are
> pre-built.
>
> This makes for a fairly rigid (you can vary the number of modules you
> bring, and the order in which you arrange them, but a module has what it
> has on it unless you tear down and build again, something that N-trak
> can't do as easily, LOL) but fast to set up. Modules are brought in on
> wheeled racks, out of the custom trailer, deployed onto the folddown
One nit of clarification-- the module is designed to *remain* on the plywood table,
and it is transported as one unit. You *could* pick up a module free of support,
but that's dicey business, given how long it takes to put them together in the
first place. So the modules and the tables remain as one. A piece of trim is put
around the edging just high enough to prevent the module from slipping off the
table.
>
> tables, and you're up and running in 1/2 hour, and you can tear down in
> about the same time.
>
> Now, you COULD make modules out of something else than Lego and just
> affix the track via nails or whatever.
>
> But given that they are Lego, and given that they are 30 to 50 or so
> inches wide, you NEED to be 15 bricks high. Think about what a 30 inch
> wide, 45 inch long 5 brick high module would be like. It would be too
> fragile to live without a sheet of plywood always underneath it. These
> modules can be lifted up, flipped over, stacked on top of each other,
> etc.
But <gasp> never are:-)
> Now, as it turns out, the modules DO live in wooden carriers that have
> power strips on them etc. once they are done, but during construction
> they do not.
>
> Given that they have to mostly be 15 bricks high for structural
> integrity, that has been taken advantage of. There IS a subway in one
> module, and the features such as the Ore Dock and some of the bridges
> are built in at track level instead of elevated.
>
> PNLTC approach is much much cheaper. GMLTC is much much more purist.
> GMLTC is lucky to have a fanatic such as Conan who has millions of
> bricks to build modules with. He is the entire reason the club exists.
>
> --
> Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
> FDIC Know your Customer is wounded, thanks to you, but not dead...
> See http://www.defendyourprivacy.com for details
> For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
> - Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
> - Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
> - This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
|
|
| |
Mike,
My system is different than all the other. For my main tables I use 36 in deep
x 48 in long. I use 36 in deep table because it allows for 3 base plates and
track plus a extra 1 in of slack. Also it make for easy cuts and it just makes
the math easier for my display cabinet, witch is another story. Last year I
use 48 x 48 table but they were just to big.
See a crude drawing of my table top:
http://home1.gte.net/robstorm/train-5.htm
I hope to have a full set of drawing on my web site one day.
Good luck with your table
Robin W.
My Lego Site:
http://members.xoom.com/robstorm
Updates coming soon...
In lugnet.trains, Mike Poindexter writes:
> I was going to be building several tables for my Lego collection in my hobby
> room and was wondering how I should go about it. I was originally going to
> make the tables 45"x45", since it was a good, large table. I happened to see
> the Modular train table windows meta files made by Ben Fleskes that have the
> 30.25"x30.25" tables. Does everyone run these style of table at the Lego Tran
> Clubs? If so, I feel that I, too, should run this style or something
> compatible with them just in case I go to one. If not, I would just use it
> for ideas on my own system.
>
> Do many people use these tables and do they like them? My main complaint is
> the lack of depth for making a large town. This is of course offset by the
> fact that one can reach to other side without stretching a lot.
>
> I will be making these tables in early July. I have all my Lego packed away
> for in-laws coming over for the week of my wedding. After I return from the
> honeymoon, I get my Lego room back and want to do it up right! Any feedback
> and/or suggestions would be greatly welcome.
>
> Also, is there a standardized height for split level systems? I will be
> elevating at least one table and I was planning on 20 bricks high, as this
> will allow an elevated monorail to climb one more time and be perfectly
> positioned to ride along the ground. I just have to make sure there is enough
> clearance underneath for a train to pass through on the main level. I believe
> Ben's table would leave 13 bricks high of clearance, as it is just under seven
> studs thick. I may even need a diffenent table for an elevated platform.
>
> I also plan to build some kind of shelving storage system in the closet for my
> pieces and possibly a building/work table so that my work in progress won't
> cause traffic jams in the Lego town (still un-named), but that is a different
> matter, unless there are great ideas you want to share.
>
> Mike
|
|
| |
Maybe I'm taking this the wrong way.
See comments below
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Mike Poindexter wrote:
> >
> > John,
> >
> > Is there some reason to put 20 levels of bricks other than to use up all those
> > bricks in colors nobody likes?
>
> There are two competing philosophies here...
>
> PNLTC has tables. They put their tables together and they build the
> layout "from scratch" each time, putting track together and buildings
> down, etc. onto a brown or green colored table. At least that is what I
> understand (especially since I have seen a video of them setting up).
> This makes for a highly flexible, but long time to set up, layout. Every
> show is different! It can take all day to set up and 1/2 day to tear
> down
Well, it's almost from scratch. We work on a table arrangement and a track plan for
each show so we have a "schematic" to work from to ease on setup. Some of us have
pre-built modules, not a set number of bricks deep. We just make sure the track
height is going to line up at the height that is needed. We've trimmed our setup
time down tremendously. We've been able to do most setups in under 5 hours, and
that's at a leisurely pace because we're chatting the whole time. Now tear down has
improved dramatically, an hour to two.
Last night we had a show at my kids school carnival. Dan Parker and myself set up a
little on Thursday night, 1 1/2 hours on Friday by myself, then Dan P. and Dave
VinZant showed up and an hour and half later we were fully up and running. So it
was roughly 3 people 3 hours set-up.
Now it wasn't one of our biggest layouts, but it was complex to a certain extent.
We had to design the layout for the stage, and because we didn't want kids to stand
to the steps, we built part of it over the steps. It was a two level layout, one
at a 36" height (covering the steps), the other on the stage at a 30" height (18"
above the first), 2 lower loops 2 upper loops and 4 kids loops (500 to 600 sections
of track). There was 5 bridges: 60", 45", two 30", and a new 25". For tables we
had 13 30x60's, 1 30x45, 1 30x30, and 2 15x30.
There was 5 people for tear down, we were on our way home in less than an hour and a
half.
> GMLTC has modules. Each module is a completely scenicked environment and
> the track is permanently affixed to the lego below. Only the very large
> buildings that otherwise would make the module too tall to transport
> effectively are removed, and they always go back in the same place.
> GMLTC modules are more like model railroad modules in that they are
> pre-built.
I'll admit GMLTC's modules look nice, lots of nice scenery.
> This makes for a fairly rigid (you can vary the number of modules you
> bring, and the order in which you arrange them, but a module has what it
> has on it unless you tear down and build again, something that N-trak
> can't do as easily, LOL) but fast to set up. Modules are brought in on
> wheeled racks, out of the custom trailer, deployed onto the folddown
> tables, and you're up and running in 1/2 hour, and you can tear down in
> about the same time.
I was wondering how may ways you could arrange those modules. As I understand the
tables are 30x45 (or larger), does the track come out in the same place on *each*
module? It didn't look that way but just wondering.
> Now, you COULD make modules out of something else than Lego and just
> affix the track via nails or whatever.
>
> But given that they are Lego, and given that they are 30 to 50 or so
> inches wide, you NEED to be 15 bricks high. Think about what a 30 inch
> wide, 45 inch long 5 brick high module would be like. It would be too
> fragile to live without a sheet of plywood always underneath it. These
> modules can be lifted up, flipped over, stacked on top of each other,
> etc.
>
> Now, as it turns out, the modules DO live in wooden carriers that have
> power strips on them etc. once they are done, but during construction
> they do not.
As I saw in another post by John N. that stated modules have to stay on plywood. So
yes there is quite a bit of lego there, but it still has to sit on wooden tables
maybe similar to the ones we use.
> Given that they have to mostly be 15 bricks high for structural
> integrity, that has been taken advantage of. There IS a subway in one
> module, and the features such as the Ore Dock and some of the bridges
> are built in at track level instead of elevated.
>
> PNLTC approach is much much cheaper. GMLTC is much much more purist.
> GMLTC is lucky to have a fanatic such as Conan who has millions of
> bricks to build modules with. He is the entire reason the club exists.
Cheaper? Huh? Not-as-pure? I'm sorry but I don't understand, maybe I'm just taking
this wrong. I know you have alot of bricks, probably far more than me, but we both
know their cost. At PNLTC we have some members with very small collections that do
want they can with what they've got, and some with collections that make the others
short circuit. :-)
If Conan has millions of bricks to build modules with, is there much cost to other
members? Sounds like a really great person to share Lego like that.
Now mind you this is all coming from the guy that uses burps for mountains and Duplo
for backing support, all from Lego. I wish I had a million gray, brown, green, and
tan bricks and plates to make my scenery in, but hey I do what I can with what I've
got. :-)
Well I've got some new sets to go get that a friend brought from Norway.
I think I'm going to go build, later.
Tom
--
Thomas's & Kristin's Home Page
http://home1.gte.net/trafert1/
PNLTC Member
http://www.pnltc.org/
|
|
| |
It seems to me that there are two fundamental differences
between the PNLTC and the GMLTC. Even though I live
within I hour of the GMLTC, it would be almost impossible
for me to build my own module and just show up at some
of the GMLTC train shows where I could build a "module"
for the PNLTC and show up for only some shows. The main
reason the GMLTC does it the way they do is Conan just
so happens to have one heck of a lot of bricks.
--
Paul Foster
http://reality.sgi.com/foster_stco/lego.html
|
|
| |
"Thomas P. Rafert" wrote:
> Maybe I'm taking this the wrong way.
> See comments below
>
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> > Mike Poindexter wrote:
> > >
> > > John,
> > >
> > > Is there some reason to put 20 levels of bricks other than to use up all those
> > > bricks in colors nobody likes?
> >
> > There are two competing philosophies here...
> >
> > PNLTC has tables. They put their tables together and they build the
> > layout "from scratch" each time, putting track together and buildings
> > down, etc. onto a brown or green colored table. At least that is what I
> > understand (especially since I have seen a video of them setting up).
> > This makes for a highly flexible, but long time to set up, layout. Every
> > show is different! It can take all day to set up and 1/2 day to tear
> > down
>
> Well, it's almost from scratch. We work on a table arrangement and a track plan for
> each show so we have a "schematic" to work from to ease on setup. Some of us have
> pre-built modules, not a set number of bricks deep. We just make sure the track
> height is going to line up at the height that is needed. We've trimmed our setup
> time down tremendously. We've been able to do most setups in under 5 hours, and
> that's at a leisurely pace because we're chatting the whole time. Now tear down has
> improved dramatically, an hour to two.
>
> Last night we had a show at my kids school carnival. Dan Parker and myself set up a
> little on Thursday night, 1 1/2 hours on Friday by myself, then Dan P. and Dave
> VinZant showed up and an hour and half later we were fully up and running. So it
> was roughly 3 people 3 hours set-up.
> Now it wasn't one of our biggest layouts, but it was complex to a certain extent.
> We had to design the layout for the stage, and because we didn't want kids to stand
> to the steps, we built part of it over the steps. It was a two level layout, one
> at a 36" height (covering the steps), the other on the stage at a 30" height (18"
> above the first), 2 lower loops 2 upper loops and 4 kids loops (500 to 600 sections
> of track). There was 5 bridges: 60", 45", two 30", and a new 25". For tables we
> had 13 30x60's, 1 30x45, 1 30x30, and 2 15x30.
>
> There was 5 people for tear down, we were on our way home in less than an hour and a
> half.
>
> > GMLTC has modules. Each module is a completely scenicked environment and
> > the track is permanently affixed to the lego below. Only the very large
> > buildings that otherwise would make the module too tall to transport
> > effectively are removed, and they always go back in the same place.
> > GMLTC modules are more like model railroad modules in that they are
> > pre-built.
>
> I'll admit GMLTC's modules look nice, lots of nice scenery.
>
> > This makes for a fairly rigid (you can vary the number of modules you
> > bring, and the order in which you arrange them, but a module has what it
> > has on it unless you tear down and build again, something that N-trak
> > can't do as easily, LOL) but fast to set up. Modules are brought in on
> > wheeled racks, out of the custom trailer, deployed onto the folddown
> > tables, and you're up and running in 1/2 hour, and you can tear down in
> > about the same time.
>
> I was wondering how may ways you could arrange those modules. As I understand the
> tables are 30x45 (or larger), does the track come out in the same place on *each*
> module? It didn't look that way but just wondering.
Actually, yes the track pops out at exactly the same place on every module, 2 studs in
for the outside loop, and another 4 studs in after that for the second loop.
> > Now, you COULD make modules out of something else than Lego and just
> > affix the track via nails or whatever.
> >
> > But given that they are Lego, and given that they are 30 to 50 or so
> > inches wide, you NEED to be 15 bricks high. Think about what a 30 inch
> > wide, 45 inch long 5 brick high module would be like. It would be too
> > fragile to live without a sheet of plywood always underneath it. These
> > modules can be lifted up, flipped over, stacked on top of each other,
> > etc.
> >
> > Now, as it turns out, the modules DO live in wooden carriers that have
> > power strips on them etc. once they are done, but during construction
> > they do not.
>
> As I saw in another post by John N. that stated modules have to stay on plywood. So
> yes there is quite a bit of lego there, but it still has to sit on wooden tables
> maybe similar to the ones we use.
Well, they don't *have* to, it's just much easier that way. If y'all are switching
over to metal folding legs, then I would say our tables are very similar. We do brace
the tables with an inset rim of 2x4s on end to give the table itself extra rigidity.
> > Given that they have to mostly be 15 bricks high for structural
> > integrity, that has been taken advantage of. There IS a subway in one
> > module, and the features such as the Ore Dock and some of the bridges
> > are built in at track level instead of elevated.
> >
> > PNLTC approach is much much cheaper. GMLTC is much much more purist.
> > GMLTC is lucky to have a fanatic such as Conan who has millions of
> > bricks to build modules with. He is the entire reason the club exists.
>
> Cheaper? Huh? Not-as-pure? I'm sorry but I don't understand, maybe I'm just taking
> this wrong. I know you have alot of bricks, probably far more than me, but we both
> know their cost. At PNLTC we have some members with very small collections that do
> want they can with what they've got, and some with collections that make the others
> short circuit. :-)
> If Conan has millions of bricks to build modules with, is there much cost to other
> members? Sounds like a really great person to share Lego like that.
Yes, he is. Others members collections aren't too shabby, either. Most of these folk
are *well-seasoned* (read: spend $1000s each year on Lego) Lego veterans who have
enough bricks to provide a module or two for the cause. We pay our dues... to TLG;-)
> Now mind you this is all coming from the guy that uses burps for mountains and Duplo
> for backing support, all from Lego.
<gasp>
> I wish I had a million gray, brown, green, and
> tan bricks and plates to make my scenery in, but hey I do what I can with what I've
> got. :-)
And, Tom, so do we all:-) Even Conan doesn't have the luxury to build in exotic
colors. We were scraping Conan's proverbial barrel to finish our latest modules. But
to Conan's credit-- he and his uncle went out and *bought* retail 1000's of buckets and
sets over the years, and put the bricks to good use. He and his uncle were showing 12
volt trains 12 years ago on a tabletop layout, but it grew from there. Instead of
blowing $600 on an Airport shuttle or some such exotic set, he's spending that $600 on
buckets. And believe me, he is *not* a rich guy (monetarily)! Just a Legomaniac with
his priorities straight;-)
-John
> Well I've got some new sets to go get that a friend brought from Norway.
> I think I'm going to go build, later.
>
> Tom
>
> --
> Thomas's & Kristin's Home Page
> http://home1.gte.net/trafert1/
> PNLTC Member
> http://www.pnltc.org/
|
|
| |
"Thomas P. Rafert" wrote:
>
> Maybe I'm taking this the wrong way.
Naa. Neither approach is **better**. They are just different.
> > PNLTC approach is much much cheaper. GMLTC is much much more purist.
> > GMLTC is lucky to have a fanatic such as Conan who has millions of
> > bricks to build modules with. He is the entire reason the club exists.
>
> Cheaper? Huh?
Sure. To do a PNLTC module base takes some wood, some paint, some
hardware. 100 bucks at most, and that's no doubt high. Then there is the
track itself, as well as the structures that go on the module.
To do a GMLTC module, almost the same investment in underlayment is
required for hardware and wood. Then there are GAWD knows how many
bricks. PLUS the structures and track, just the same as a PNLTC. The
cost of a GMLTC module before you put track or buildings on it is almost
certainly over 500 dollars worth of bricks, even considering that most
of the bricks are from heavily discounted basic buckets.
So GMLTC modules cost more. Not better, not worse, just different.
> Not-as-pure?
Yes. The "scenery" in a GMLTC module is made from Lego. Even things like
canyons. The PNLTC canyons are done with cloth, just the bridge is Lego.
Therefore GMLTC is more "pure".
Not better, not worse, just different.
> At PNLTC we have some members with very small collections that do
> want they can with what they've got, and some with collections that make the others
> short circuit. :-)
Same with GMLTC. People do what they can. Part of the contribution is to
build something unique using Conan's parts. While I've been there (which
unfortunately is coming to an end... I have resigned from CTP and won't
be in minneapolis much longer) I was priviledged to build, using Conan's
parts, 2 sanding towers, a coal tower, a water tank, a gas-electric
doodlebug and some other misc stuff, as well as helping work on several
modules, and on the roof of the engine house. I am building a transfer
table which I hope to finish before I leave.
John G has built a LOT of rolling stock. He's their best rolling stock
builder, or was till I got there and showed them all a few tricks. :-)
> If Conan has millions of bricks to build modules with, is there much cost to other
> members? Sounds like a really great person to share Lego like that.
Yes, he is truly a unique human being. One of the kindest, gentlest,
most laid back dudes I have ever been privileged to know. Other people
do contribute significantly, though not to the same scale. I think John
Gerlach has well north of 2000 invested in just filling in gaps that
needed to be filled when Conan was short of something, and several
members, as John N said, have *A* module under construction for use in
shows. But Conan has 16!
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
FDIC Know your Customer is wounded, thanks to you, but not dead...
See http://www.defendyourprivacy.com for details
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.loc.us.mn.msp, John Neal writes:
> "Thomas P. Rafert" wrote:
> <much snipped>
> >
> > I was wondering how may ways you could arrange those modules. As I • understand the
> > tables are 30x45 (or larger), does the track come out in the same place on • *each*
> > module? It didn't look that way but just wondering.
>
> Actually, yes the track pops out at exactly the same place on every module, 2 • studs in
> for the outside loop, and another 4 studs in after that for the second loop.
John, you've got that backwards. 4 studs to the outside track, 2 studs
between the tracks. (And 20 bricks + 1 plate above the baseplates! <grin>)
<much more snipped>
J1
|
|
| |
John Gerlach wrote:
>
Oops. Yeah, well, waddya expect-- I'm just a rookie...d:-)
-J2
> John, you've got that backwards. 4 studs to the outside track, 2 studs
> between the tracks. (And 20 bricks + 1 plate above the baseplates! <grin>)
>
> <much more snipped>
>
> J1
|
|
| |
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> Yes, he is truly a unique human being. One of the kindest, gentlest,
> most laid back dudes I have ever been privileged to know. Other people
> do contribute significantly, though not to the same scale. I think John
> Gerlach has well north of 2000 invested in just filling in gaps that
> needed to be filled when Conan was short of something, and several
> members, as John N said, have *A* module under construction for use in
> shows. But Conan has 16!
But you still have to have an even number of modules, right? So "A"
module
under construction will only replace one of Conan's modules until
another
module can be paired with it?
--
Paul Foster
http://reality.sgi.com/foster_stco/lego.html
|
|
| |
Paul Foster wrote:
>
> But you still have to have an even number of modules, right? So "A"
> module
> under construction will only replace one of Conan's modules until
> another
> module can be paired with it?
Yes, unless one built some sort of "wye" module, all the modules in use
must form a single closed loop (in the meta sense) to allow continuous
running.
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
FDIC Know your Customer is wounded, thanks to you, but not dead...
See http://www.defendyourprivacy.com for details
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
|
|
|
