To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.legoOpen lugnet.lego in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 LEGO Company / 1868
1867  |  1869
Subject: 
Re: A little math cioncerning ships, containers and Minifigs
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.lego, lugnet.boats, lugnet.trains
Followup-To: 
lugnet.boats, lugnet.trains
Date: 
Wed, 19 May 2004 21:55:50 GMT
Viewed: 
15498 times
  
In lugnet.lego, Mark Bellis wrote:
   Compare with my 40ft container 40’ x 8’ x 9’6” high:

(snip)

   Apart from it needing the Maersk blue bits for the star, I’d ideally like to make a ship to 8mm:1ft scale with these containers onboard, multiplying all dimensions by 4! The ship would be 2.8m long and would have to be transported in sections, probably modules on 48x48 plates! I like the thought though, especially if I had a warehouse full of railway to go with it!

Well, that’s sharp and all, but I think building to scale really misses the point.

That container’s 8 wide! I prefer my scenes more packed with detail rather than doing one 10 foot long ship so that I can fit my to scale containers on. (and, arguably, 10 foot is too short if you want 6000 TEU worth of containers on it).

Absolute to scale realism is for scale models. This is a toy. I want to evoke a scene, not get the rivet count right. Think tinplate, not scale.

Where on earth are you going to get space to show a 10 foot long ship, in context with several others, and with containre cranes busily unloading, as just PART of an overall layout? In the space you’d spend JUST on your ship, I can do several, then fit in an engine yard, a farm and maybe a mountain.

Selective compresssion is clearly the way to go here. I’m just myself not sure if I switch to 6 wide containers or stick with the LEGO standard (1) 4 wide containers... I’ll ooh and aah at your models as interesting academic exercises, but I won’t be building 8 wide containers.

That’s not to say that your way is wrong. I’ll grant you it’s not wrong, if you’ll grant me that I’m not wrong either.

If you have fun with it, go ahead, have fun. It’s just that when people post about stuff and leave the implication that if you don’t do things to scale you’re all wrong, it rather gets up my nose a bit. Ask J2.

Sorry, off soapbox now.

1 - yes, there are older 6 wide containers, but if you consider the number of different LEGO sets that use each standard, it’s clear to me 4 is the predominant one.



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: A little math cioncerning ships, containers and Minifigs
 
(...) Compare with my 40ft container 40' x 8' x 9'6" high: (URL) Apart from it needing the Maersk blue bits for the star, I'd ideally like to make a ship to 8mm:1ft scale with these containers onboard, multiplying all dimensions by 4! The ship would (...) (21 years ago, 19-May-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)

81 Messages in This Thread:









































Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR