Subject:
|
Re: Latest Larger Layout
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.nalug
|
Date:
|
Fri, 27 Oct 2000 02:36:00 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1640 times
|
| |
|
|
"SRC" <LEGOArches@yahoo.com> writes:
> Blast! You're right - I missed the second inversion. I guess there's
> only one solution... http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=18311
> I 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 me is hoping you'll say you can't do the giant mountain, so I
> won't have to make the triple bridge. 8-)
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 at the left end. This provides a passing
siding for conveniently parking a train on.
- do the same with the lower siding on the inner loop
[Makes the sidings shorter, but I think allowing us to keep two full trains
sitting around easily accessible is good.]
- where the horizontal track goes right to the 90-degree crossing,
don't have it join onto the right-hand vertical segment of the
inner loop. Instead, have it turn down just past the crossing,
then turn left and cross over again, and become the center
track in the yard. The previous connection to that track goes
away, and the lower segment of the inner track loop just goes
up, across the vertical half of the 90-degree crossing. (I hope
this is clear enough!) This turns the inner loop into a single
double-length loop. And, having the two halves of it separated
by the monorail and a bunch of buildings etc just below the
center operator hole, will make the run look much longer.
Hmm. You could then make the main yard sidings a bit longer,
by pushing the right-most turnout all the way right until it
hits the new 90-degree crossing track.
- there is likely room for a short one-ended siding coming off of
the inner loop track that goes right to the 90-degree crossing.
It could go under the monorail a bit and dangle a bit towards
the right-hand end of the main yard. Its excuse for being there
could be the train wash, or some industry that needs the siding.
Might even be room for a double tail on it, each being only
2 or 3 straight segments long.
- the mountain can actually be two mountains. Consider the upper
mountain ending just below the monorail spiral (keeping the
spiral inside the upper mountain). A stream separates the
two mountains. The monorail crosses the gap on a bridge
(maybe 18 inches long?) The train tracks could be raised
(shudder!) a block height or so, thus allowing us to use up
a bunch of blue tile and plate to make a stream flow through,
and giving you and others a chance to make 3 different short
bridges (about 12 inches each?).
- after a bit of pondering, here's a suggestion to make the bridge
more feasible. With another small table (or replacing a small
with a large), we could go 30-inches right from the left
upper part. That cuts the length of the bridge in half. Then,
I suggest lowering that new small table a couple inches, and
turning it into a dock area. Then, the tracks could be running
on pylons, pillars or mounds, instead of bridge.
--
Don't design inefficiency in - it'll happen in the implementation.
Chris Gray cg@ami-cg.GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA
http://www.GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA/cg/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 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)
|
116 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
