|
|
 | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Funny how we as AFOLs have a hard time thinking "outside the box". We automatically assume that new track geometry necessarily requires large sectional track pieces. The old 4.5-volt/12-volt system had separate ties (sleepers in Europe), track (...) (17 years ago, 2-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Hey Adam, Will you sell me you 9v stuff? Todd (17 years ago, 2-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Two-pole contact is needed. But most of the electrified railways use only one overhead wire (like the ex-Soviet loco in the photo). The only examples of more-wire systems I know about, are deep in the history: --Siemens' experimental (...) (17 years ago, 2-Oct-07, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) Also, Add Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) rules that anything using AC power means minimum age 7 on the box, and with Duplo going around age 5, that means a gap in trains from age 5 to 7. The new battery train has a lower age range (...) (17 years ago, 2-Oct-07, to lugnet.lego)
| | | | | Re: The Future of Trains
|
| (...) The only issue with this is that standard catenary has a single wire to deliver current, and metal rails act as the "ground" for the circuit. One could instead adopt a setup like that used for electric buses in cities such as San Francisco, (...) (17 years ago, 2-Oct-07, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
|
