 | | New Aircraft !
|
|
Well it's a "happy LEGO day" for me - I've updated my personal page (URL) to include the new Sopwith Camel. (URL) I still want your 8855 though John. ;-) I'm interested in your comments (though I don't expect ya to be as excited as me). 8-) SRC (...) (25 years ago, 9-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
As everyone knows, I don't have a garage. So, no carpentry party at my place, unfortunately. But I would be able and willing to do all of the painting. Oh, does anyone have brushes I could borrow? :-] John Michel Magnan wrote in message ... (...) (...) (25 years ago, 9-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
The count is 6 large and 6 small, including the large table with the hole for the round house, and the small table with the trench for the elevator and the sunken small table originally for a small port. Half the tables are still in Edmonton at my (...) (25 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (was Constructions for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
The low table I made last year is one of the small 30.5x30.5 inch guys, it is more like a canyon, with vertical walls on three sides and open on only one side. The walls are there to attach to the adjacent tables with the usual bolt holes. I think (...) (25 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
(...) I seem to recall Michel saying at some point that the table count had turned out to be inaccurate?? Six full sets as in six 30x60s and six 30x30s? That would mean then that two additional 30x60s (plus something lower for the mountain/bridge (...) (25 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (was Constructions for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
(...) What low table are you refering to? (...) Ummm - That's what I'm suggesting. (My bridge is _exactly_ 45" in fact.) By lowering "the table" 16 bricks, the bridge deck and track would be level with the other tables, as Kevin pointed out quite (...) (25 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | RE: Bridge status and ideas (was Constructions for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
(...) We can vary the height on more than one table, that's no problem; all it takes is more legs. If we drop two tables, we can fill in some terrain on each side of the lowered area with brick to make it look more "natural", which would give us (...) (25 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (was Constructions for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
John Koob wrote in message ... (...) Clarification - 30" is a bit short, but 60" is too long. How long is the low table? Could we go for something like a 45" bridge and have some box/wood constructed to raise the apparent height of part of the low (...) (25 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Layout possibility
|
|
Chris Gray wrote in message ... (...) I beg to differ. It looks clean and organized, especially the yard. I suggest that we go for a more polished look this time, rather than size or wackyness. (...) Do we have enough room near the yard for stacks (...) (25 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: Bridge status and ideas (was Constructions for GEMTS 2001)
|
|
James Brown wrote in message ... (...) double (...) I'd have enough to do a double track trestle, but 30" is a bit short... Something longer would look better, but would mean borrowing or acquiring some more black beams. More beams ... I like the (...) (25 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
