Subject:
|
Re: Progress on Ore Dock
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.michlug
|
Date:
|
Sun, 16 Sep 2001 19:32:58 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
512 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.us.michlug, Kai Brodersen writes:
> I can stick with 2 tracks since that is what the one in Marquette has *I >think*
> I also think one track won't look as good as two tracks.
I would say make a larger test segment before you draw that conclusion...
> Now is 22 the height of the track or the total structure itself? Because
> the track is going to be imbeded a little in the dock so I can have a cat
> walk around it.
That's a good question and I would defer to the folks talking about the
dropped section for the authoritative answer. IIRC when they said "22
bricks" they were saying that as a distance from baseplate to baseplate.
Rails are higher than the baseplate but would *also* be higher "in the
valley". by the same amount.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Progress on Ore Dock
|
| More ore dock thoughts. If this goes forward, we will need a lot of essentially identical small ore jennies (slang for what the small hoppers are called). Although the prototype hoppers are 4 axle, they are very short and a 2 axle design may be the (...) (23 years ago, 17-Sep-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Progress on Ore Dock
|
| (...) I can stick with 2 tracks since that is what the one in Marquette has *I think* I also think one track won't look as good as two tracks. As for the grade, I wanted the track to come down to the ore dock from a hill like the one in Marquette, (...) (23 years ago, 16-Sep-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
19 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
|
|
|
|
