To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.org.us.nelugOpen lugnet.org.us.nelug in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Organizations / United States / NELUG / 2440
2439  |  2441
Subject: 
Re: My attempt at designing a layout for Greenberg
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.org.us.nelug
Date: 
Tue, 10 Sep 2002 17:45:09 GMT
Viewed: 
1111 times
  
Well I've been reluctant to comment, because I didn't want it to look like
mud throwing, but I just feel I have to say something though.

In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Eric Kingsley writes:
<snip>
http://www.nelug.org/layout/3x6layout5.GIF
<snip>

3.  Lots more MOC space.

There actually might be too much space.  I see the layout looking sparse in
the middle.  Kinda patchy feeling.  Granted we could add more sidings, but
then the layout just looks like a large railyard.

4.  Lots more space for the Amusement Park in the "Fair Grounds".

Again sparsity, but this should be a lot easier to fill with booths and
small rides.

5.  The Fair Grounds include a passing siding (Switches at both ends).  This
makes it easy to either have a Circus/Zoo/Amusement Park support train there >or to use it as a station for droping off and picking up passangers visiting
the Fair Grounds.  Picture a passenger train with passangers getting on and >off with lots of commotion and excitement.

This idea I like.  It has a really cool story line aspect.

6.  The large Main Street sections are at opposite ends of the layout in order
to help balance things.

As much as I understand the reasons for seperating them, The layout now
feels too heavy at the ends.  There isn't enough between them.

8.  There are a couple sidings that are easily accessable from the inside of
the layouts which makes switching out trains easier that it was in the past.

This should make the layout more interesting as well, because we can change
trains more often.

For my tastes I don't see much in the way of downsides to this layout but I
can think of a couple things that some might mention.

Is that my nickname 'some'.  ;-)

1.  The roads don't connect.  This is a model railroading thing, you need to
use more imagination about what is off the layout.  Townies would probably
prefer that all the roads connect.

Ick, as a townie and an architect could you just extend the road between the
factory and your main st.  All you have to do is shift two switches and
build a bridge across the gorge.  It really isn't that hard to do.  As an
added bonus the road should help pull the layout together, instead of having
these small pockets.

2.  The smallest of the 3 loops is a little small but my view is that we don't
need three massive trains running all at once.  This can be used for a smaller
short-line train or even for a trolly if we choose.  It's still 1 more
operational loop than we have had in the past.

Do we have any short trains?  I guess we could take a few cars off, but
Shaun's train, Tom's two trains, and your's are all fairly large.

Ooh Ooh, I thought of another one. :-)
3. Too many S-curves.  Didn't we have problems with decoupling in the first
few shows, because of an annoying S-curve.

Jonathan.



Message has 3 Replies:
  Re: My attempt at designing a layout for Greenberg
 
(...) Speaking from our experience, people like bridges. Bridges are cool. Especially if they look like they're too fragile to support a train -- but of course we know that they're plenty strong, because we built 'em! And moving (drawbridge, (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)
  Re: My attempt at designing a layout for Greenberg
 
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes: Fair enough on all points, I probably won't have time to relook this before the meeting. I think some of our differences are obvious and I would like to see what other people think. I have to see if (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)
  Re: My attempt at designing a layout for Greenberg
 
(...) I just read this again and wanted to comment of a couple of things before our meeting next week. (...) Well I am not going to rehash me reasoning for not connecting the roads I did want to pose a question. Is Chris or anyone else planning on (...) (22 years ago, 11-Sep-02, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)

Message is in Reply To:
  My attempt at designing a layout for Greenberg
 
I decided to start a new thread to detail my vision of what our next layout could look like. (That nasty reversing loop has been successfully eliminated). Layout (URL) let me say I am supprised how much more flexibility 3 tables gives us. Here is a (...) (22 years ago, 5-Sep-02, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)

7 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR