 | | Re: Latest Larger Layout
|
|
SRC wrote in message ... (...) I like this one better than the previous iteration. A smaller mountain gives us more room for structures. Another plus is that it has a crossover on the inner loop. The monorail supports at the corners of the layout (...) (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout
|
|
(...) Chill guys - I'm just throwing out ideas. :-) I don't remember any vote, but whatever amount of monorail is the concensus is fine by me. I don't think we have to vote on anything/everything. We're not that formal of a club are we? (...) Here's (...) (24 years ago, 31-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout
|
|
Hello Guys, Please NO more layouts with 61x61 mountains. James, Kevin, and I are against the idea. Steve is for it. Chris' idea of two interconnected mountains could be explored another year if the first mountain works out. After all we are (...) (24 years ago, 29-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout (was Re: Get-together last Sunday)
|
|
(...) Don't panic. :-) I just included you as one who would like to help but can't commit to being there for sure. (John and Kevin are in a similar situation.) SRC (24 years ago, 28-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout
|
|
(...) How would you have tunneled tracks *and* a table-level loop? They would be trying to occupy the same space. A raised loop works. Or are you suggesting the tables the mountain is on be lowered the required 11 bricks (14?), so that "table level" (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout
|
|
(...) to (...) Hear Hear! Well said. The mountain in the above linked image is way too ambitious. Something smaller, positioned toward the inside of the table sloping down and outward, would be much more appropriate. One, maybe two tunneled tracks, (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout (was Re: Get-together last Sunday)
|
|
Adam Murtha wrote in message ... (...) Not by me. Maybe Steve was referring to another Adam... (...) Although I would like to go, I also can't make any guarantees, as I know I'll be busy during the time of the next show. Nevertheless, you would be (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout
|
|
(...) No comment on the mountain or bridge! I like this design, although I share concerns about both the mountain and the bridge. Some suggestions for it, however: - have the big siding on the outer loop (at the bottom) join back on to the main line (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout (was Re: Get-together last Sunday)
|
|
Whoa. Hold on a minute. I'm assuming that I'm 'Adam in Calgary' right? Did I just get volunteered for something? I had replied on the mailing list ( I think ) that I didn't want to commit to anything, as I can't make plans one week ahead, never mind (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout (was Re: Get-together last Sunday)
|
|
James Brown wrote in message ... (...) (URL) the obvious to reply) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout
|
|
(...) Ok. I can't do the giant mountain. ;] Well... I probably could, but I'm dubious about transportation issues and modularity and access. 61 inches across won't fit in a van, or through a door, so it has to come apart at least once, which makes (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout (was Re: Get-together last Sunday)
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.nalug, Steve Chapple writes: <snip> (...) <snip> Wha? Who? Have I missed something? James (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout
|
|
(...) Blast! You're right - I missed the second inversion. I guess there's only one solution... (URL) guess I can't saddle you with a 61"x61" mountain and not be willing to up the ante on my own bridge by making it triple instead of double. Part of (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout
|
|
(...) Looks good. The only problem I see is that it short-circuits the loop. (And I'm still being silent about a 61x61 mountain with 4 tunnels & a spiral) :) James James Brown's Parts Sale: (URL) parts, averaging $0.10 per piece. (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout
|
|
OK - Here's an update using 7 large and 7 small. (URL) has all the things we're after, plus it has a feature that till now we have been missing - a section that reverses the trains! The trains stop in front of the station, so that segment switching (...) (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout
|
|
(...) That's what I was wondering. I notice James and Chris were silent about being able to make a 60" x 60" mountain with four tunnels, one of them with a spiral chamber, and all of them curved. 8-) With enough time and bricks it would be "doable", (...) (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug, lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout (was Re: Get-together last Sunday)
|
|
(...) The tables are all there, you just have to imagine them while following the outline, since putting the green plates tends to hide other aspects (like buildings and mountains). :-) Chris wrote: (...) Well, by my count, James' layout Ver.2 uses (...) (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest Larger Layout (was Re: Get-together last Sunday)
|
|
SRC wrote in message ... (...) a table. Interesting... However, it lacks a crossover for the inner loop. This makes the inner loop nearly twice as long regardless of the layout. If you don't know what I'm referring to, check out the layout James (...) (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Layout with large yard (was Re: Get-together last Sunday)
|
|
James Brown wrote in message ... (...) IMO, the one you made yesterday was great, but this is even better. It met the specs, including a large realistic yard, the mountain in an inside corner, and the cross-over. Also, it looks less crowded than (...) (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Get-together last Sunday
|
|
(...) <snip> Yikes! Well, I have an inherent dislike of starting over, so I played around with the things I was doing yesterday, keeping those criteria in mind, and came up with this: (URL) think it qualifies for most of those. :) Only problem - it (...) (24 years ago, 25-Oct-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
