 | | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout latest
|
|
(...) Cool. (...) Cool. Even if the blue isn't too high to see over, I think it's OK. As long as it's too high to "accidently" walk over, or push closer, I'm OK. :) James (24 years ago, 17-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout latest
|
|
(...) Yes I've got the over-all plan much the way I want it, (I'm going to incorporate Michel's idea's as possible) and plan to leave the town area entirely up to you - I'll have something more specific soon. I also just heard back - As I suspected, (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout - Bridges
|
|
(...) I must have been low on coffee to miss this opportunity the other day... Isn't it all just water under the bridge? <GD&R> (...) Keep in mind that if we want to run absolutely everything, we need 16 height clearance on the car loader, and (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout latest
|
|
(...) Looks like a plan to me. Do you want me to work on some track plans, or have you already got a good idea of the layout? It would be very cool if the town area doesn't need to have 4 tracks in front of it... it doesn't seem like much, but that (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout - Bridges
|
|
(...) Quite right - I've got it "covered". ;-) (...) I think you were actually. :-) My original premise was that the bridge was crossing over the cross-over tracks in a larger scale update of my favorite train LEGO train cover photo from the 60's. (...) (24 years ago, 17-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
