Subject:
|
Re: GATS size
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.michlug
|
Date:
|
Thu, 17 May 2001 21:34:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
399 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.us.michlug, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.michlug, Chris Leach writes:
> > In lugnet.org.us.michlug, Steve Ringe writes:
> > > In lugnet.org.us.michlug, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > > In lugnet.org.us.michlug, Steve Ringe writes:
> > > >
> > > > > Here is a proposal for a 20x32 layout with a hollow center, the center area • is
> > > > > 7.5x16. The open area on the end is 30" and would be a nice place to put a • few
> > > > > bridges. Each rectangular area = 1 table.
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=45324
> > > >
> > > > I believe we had some issues with depth of the layout at the January GATS.
> > > > It looks like you are suggesting 3 tables deep, and I am wondering if that
> > > > will give rise to some of the same issues or not. What do folks think?
> > > >
> > > > It may be better to have a narrower layout with more space in the center for
> > > > a work area even if we don't use the whole space 100% (off by 2 feet in one
> > > > dimension or whatever...
> > > >
> > > > Do we have an exact table dimension? 2.5' by 8' ??
> > >
> > > I think if we keep the train yard at 2 tables deep that will allow us easy
> > > acces to the switches, etc. I also think that we could use areas at 3 tables
> > > wide for the airport and town. Thats what I was thinking with that proposal.
> > > Comments anyone?
> > Kinda what i was thinking.I wasn't sure until you just posted how big you
> > train yard was and how many tables you would need.I think a mix if we can
> > would work.
As for flyers yes i see that is a long way to reach.That is why we always
will need people on the outside talking to people and keeping our future
AFOLs from grabbing etc.
> 3 is just very wide. You can't hand people stuff like flyers across 3
> tables, and you can't reach the interior, so anything that's 3 tables wide
> would need not to have track in the middle of it in case of a derailment...
> that's my opinion.
Larry of course you are right about not having easy access in the middle.I
beleive we can come up with a track disign running our track about a foot
from edges of table on the outside and as close as we want on the in side
where we are.The thing with these tables is we do have some leway on how we
want to lay them out.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: GATS size
|
| (...) 3 is just very wide. You can't hand people stuff like flyers across 3 tables, and you can't reach the interior, so anything that's 3 tables wide would need not to have track in the middle of it in case of a derailment... that's my opinion. (...) (23 years ago, 17-May-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
23 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
