Subject:
|
Re: SuperTrain 2001 - I'll be there
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.nalug
|
Date:
|
Thu, 21 Dec 2000 20:02:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1963 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.nalug, Steve Chapple writes:
> > The tables are 2'x8', so $40 would give us a good chuck more space
> > than we have with the existing tables. The cost shouldn't be an
> > issue due to the "gate-share" cheque - the better our display, the
> > more votes, the bigger the cheque. The tables are what take most of
> > the room in the van and are the main pain with setup and tear-down.
> > I'd rather spend several hours setting up a van full of LEGO, than
> > half the time and half the LEGO with all the extra table hassle.
> > Besides, the tables there would probably be lower to the ground,
> > and that's going to make all those "shorter viewers" happier, not
> > to mention easing the strain on parents shoulders. :-)
>
> I was just talking to the chairman of Supertrain2001 by phone, and
> I'm thinking that perhaps it would be best to use both the existing
> tables AND some rentals. With James Powell's large contribution,
> we have enough track and trains to make a layout far larger than we
> could fit on Michel's tables. The track could incline up from the
> lower tables to the higher ones - I'd only need incline supports on
> one side of my bridge instead of both. Perhaps we could even
> incorporate the mountain into the differential, resulting in an even
> larger mountain. This is just me throwing around some ideas - All
> things considered, I'd probably still go with a bunch of rental tables.
Just as a note, we can only rely on two people all weekend to keep an eye on
this layout, and interact with the people outside. If the layout is much
bigger than our GETS show was, you and I aren't going to be able to keep an
eye on everything. We're going to be pretty busy fielding questions as it is.
Something to keep in mind.
> I told the chairman that we can basically fit anywhere. All the other
> layouts need particular dimensions and can only show on certain sides.
> We can have any shape and/or display sides - corners and building
> support pillars don't bother us a bit. I used the analogy of propeller
> planes and supersonic jets - still flying airplanes, but a whole new
> scenario. That's the kind of shift we're talking about when it comes to
> flexibility between LEGO trains and conventional model trains. :-)
>
> We discussed the kid's play area - he's going to look into getting tables,
> volunteers to supervise the kids, etc., and I've heard back from TLC...
> " We are very happy to support you with this. Please let me know where
> you would like the K8's sent. "
Excellent. That confirms that the only thing we need to supply is the
specific train parts, and that cost can be covered out of GETS funds.
James
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: SuperTrain 2001 - I'll be there
|
| (...) I was just talking to the chairman of Supertrain2001 by phone, and I'm thinking that perhaps it would be best to use both the existing tables AND some rentals. With James Powell's large contribution, we have enough track and trains to make a (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug, lugnet.trains.org)
|
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
|
|
|
|
