| |
In lugnet.org.ca.nalug, Steve Chapple writes:
> In lugnet.org.ca.nalug, Michel Magnan writes:
> It can still be a great non-functioning building. I certainly want to
> show your grain elevator model even if "John's guts" can't be included. ;-)
I also think we should put our time towards more buildings and worry less
about function at this point. Function is cool & a bonus, but I'd rather
have two static display pieces instead of 1 functional.
> > I have concerns with the size of the layout, I won't be there to
> > install or take down, but it seems pretty ambitious for just 3 guys.
>
> Who's the third guy? Even if it was still just me, I don't see what
> the problem is. If the tables are already setup, (yes - this is important)
> even at 15 seconds per track segment, we're only talking two or at the
> most three hours to lay the track. If I'm there early afternoon like
> I plan to be, I've got seven or even eight hours...
Hmm. Setup/takedown isn't my big worry, actually. My concern is that we've
only got 2 guys keeping an eye on things for a layout that's approximately
the size of my house. I would really prefer something smaller, but if
20'x60' is what we've committed to, then I guess that's what we're working
with. :/
We're gonna run our butts ragged.
> > It will be pretty bare since we don't have the structures to fill in
> > that much space. Larger isn't necessarily better.
>
> IMO - generally speaking - it is. When a train is crossing our prairies
> or mountains, how many buildings does it pass? I think by the time we
> add your container station, (and James Powells containers) fuel station,
> grain elevator and other buildings, a bunch of buildings and a mountain
> from James, not to mention my bridge and incline towers, I think we'll
> have a very nice layout indeed. Sure a few thousand trees and some
> more baseplates and buildings could be added, but this is after all a
> train show not a building show.
I've been thinking about our options here, and I think that with things a
bit less cramped, we can make it a bit more realistic. Our "town" at GETS
was 2 houses, a store and a park, and *very* cramped. Given a little room
to add stuff like yards & the like, that 4 baseplates could easily be 8 or
10 without looking sparse. And that's without even adding any buildings.
No, like I mention above, my concern isn't space, or setup, it's manning the
layout. Just did some quick math, and if only 1 in 10 people there asks a
single question, we're still fielding about a question a minute each. Add
on top of that layout maintenance tasks, and the necessity to move 50 feet
to get from one end to the other... Well, it's going to be a busy weekend.
James
(sorry about the long silence, but I've been fighting off illness the last
while)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Preparation for SuperTrain 2001
|
| (...) With the much improved rope barrier and the huge play area to distract grabbing/touching, not to mention the elongated "three-sided shape" meaning we're mostly facing one direction, I think we should be OK. Of course any AFOL from NALug and/or (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug, lugnet.trains.org)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Preparation for SuperTrain 2001
|
| (...) Secret surprise?? If you mean the "future of LEGO trains", you'll have to wait for Mr. Justus to make his announcement. AFAIK he won't be in Calgary, but it would be cool if he were to visit. :-) (...) It can still be a great non-functioning (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-01, 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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
