Subject:
|
Re: GBC Train crossing
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.laflrc
|
Date:
|
Thu, 15 Sep 2005 19:58:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
638 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.us.laflrc, Steve Hassenplug wrote:
> maybe we could run them on separate loops that
> cross over each other. Then, at each intersection,
> we could have the same type of "Transfer Segment"
> sensors we currently have.
Even better, make the transfer sensors and waiting points as far away as
possible while still preserving train-non-crashingness. That way we could run it
so the two trains are often (always?) headed for the crossing at the same time,
but never *quite* collide. Hopefully (evil grin...)
> It could make things interesting, adding the
> possibility of a train-wreck... :)
Yes, and testing such a system might end up looking like rtl19.
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: GBC Train crossing, IndyLUG & Chibots
|
| (...) Hmm. A very interesting idea just came up. Given that we want to integrate a GBC into a train layout, I just had a cool idea that we could run a non-GBC train THROUGH the GBC. All I need is a sensor to detect where the other train is (or know (...) (19 years ago, 16-Sep-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | GBC Train crossing
|
| Well, when I started to type this e-mail, I had a question, but I think I've already answered it. I was thinking about our GBC trains. If we don't want to run them on the same loop, maybe we could run them on separate loops that cross over each (...) (19 years ago, 15-Sep-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- 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
|
|
|
|
