 | | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout
|
|
(...) OK - Here's the latest. I don't think the play area will be that large, but you get the idea. I was origianlly thinking of a three-sided layout facing the play area, but it leaves a huge empty area behind the layout. If I reverse/mirror (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout
|
|
(...) the layout to be. Also, if we're about equi-distant from our layout and the play area, we may get involuntarily co-opted into some aspect of play area duty. I think I'd prefer the original horseshoe idea you were working with, backed against (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout
|
|
(...) I agree with you on all points, but don't you think 750 sq. ft. with nothing in it but us and our coats will look silly? SRC (24 years ago, 6-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout
|
|
SRC wrote in message ... (...) You lost me. How do you come up with 750 sq ft. if the layout is moved away from a wall by a few feet? Perhaps a diagram would help ... -- John (remove the obvious to reply) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
| |
| | Re: SuperTrain 2001 layout
|
|
(...) Ah, yes. Good idea. Steve, can you do a quick diagram of where you're (theoretically) putting the tables? One for each basic layout that you've done would help a lot, I think. I've been getting confused too. Thanks, James (24 years ago, 6-Jan-01, to lugnet.org.ca.nalug)
|
