 | | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout latest
|
|
(...) From what I've seen, they want fairly large isles - a good idea IMO. (...) "The optimist" doesn't want to get us in over our heads either. ;-) I heard back this morning, and it appears we may be able to get the "best of both worlds". The (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout - Mountain
|
|
(...) Hmm. I musta been out of the room at the time... If we're dispensing with the idea of the bridge going over anything, why not just run 3 continuous loops? (or in the case of an 'open C', 2 loops?) James (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout - Mountain
|
|
(...) That's where the four tracks come from. The way Steve drew it the other night, the main loop crossed over itself on the bridge, which of course implies that it can't be "water" under the bridge. (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout - Mountain
|
|
(...) I ran across another problem if we have an 'open C' style of layout - we need another bridge. The loop containing your arch can't come back around if our layout is open behind. James (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout - Mountain layout
|
|
(...) Hmm. Well, two and a half, but yeah, it's not a 4-sided layout location. There's an easy solution, but it depends on what requirements they have for clearances. If we do a 36x12 layout, that gives us a walkway (4' wide) behind - but the show (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
