Subject:
|
Re: Tower Building Trial
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.loc.uk
|
Date:
|
Fri, 8 Oct 1999 17:53:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
457 times
|
| |
|
|
On Fri, 8 Oct 1999, Scott-A (<FJAAsw.Fr3@lugnet.com>) wrote at 12:31:31
> I think this is an interesting concept. Obviolsy the bigger the tower the
> better.
>
> However, as an engineer (of sorts), I'd likle to see towers also rated by:
> 1) Height to weight ratio.
> and/or
> 2) Height to brick count ratio.
>
> This would mean builders would have to put a little more thought into their
> respective creations.
>
>
I think first time round I'm more interested in impressiveness. We don't
want to push the envelope when we'd have to sort out whose was what if
it collapses.
If we can do something impressive and quick, the next step might be to
try and get some sponsorship :-)
But most important, we just want to have fun. If an individual thinks
they can build a solo tower which is of the order of 15' high to compete
with the co-operative effort, then bring it along :-)
(hmmm. Technic 16 long beams. There's a thought :-)
--
Tony Priestman
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Tower Building Trial
|
| I think this is an interesting concept. Obviolsy the bigger the tower the better. However, as an engineer (of sorts), I'd likle to see towers also rated by: 1) Height to weight ratio. and/or 2) Height to brick count ratio. This would mean builders (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.loc.uk)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
