NQC ("Not Quite C") : 496


Robotics / RCX / NQC / 496

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NCQ and RCX —Reinhard "Ben" Beneke

Hi Ben F.! Maybe all your work is a little needless, since there are rumors going around here in Germany, saying Lego is going to invent new more realistic trains next year, or even late this year around X-mas...... I've heared about it from a (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Ben Fleskes

First, let me apologize for mistyping NQC as NCQ. Hey Ben! Hope those rumors are true. So if they are going to do something with remote switches and such, will it be similar to DCC or radio/infrared control? I'm guessing some form of remote control. (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Ludo Soete

(...) I'm don't agree with this, because you can use it also in buildings to switch lights in /out, controlling windmills, bridges as well, and this all over the same wires, witch are in this case the track ! Of coarce, the used 'modules 'are (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Reinhard "Ben" Beneke

(...) I'm in hope of getting more realistic stuff too. But I have no idea, what Lego will bring out in future. And my fear is: as known by bar code truck, cybermaster and mindstorms nothing fill fit together again.... (Maybe starting a complete new (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Maybe. I doubt it, though. :-) US locos need their tenders attached and I think loco's we've seen posted already may have size issues, for instance Dan's Big Boy. were someone to build an Erie Triplex, that would be even bigger. On the other (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —John Neal

(...) IIRC, the big boy was longer than the triplex despite having fewer drivers <not that you are wrrrrrr, prolly a bad recall on my part> -John (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —James Powell

(...) <not (...) According to: (URL) are _both_ wrong. N&W's Jawn Henry was the longest steam engine, at 161 feet or so :) So, moral of the story is to check the web, because all answers can be found somewhere. :) James P (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Frank Filz

James Powell wrote in message ... (...) 161 (...) found (...) Hmm, you came up with exactly the same web page as I did! How did you find it? I searched on Alta Vista for: "+erie +triplex +longest" Frank (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Larry Pieniazek

(...) In order for me to be wrong in the way you allege, I would have had to have alleged that the Triplex was the longest US steamer. I didn't. So you're wrong about my being wrong. :-) In order for me to be wrong in the way John alleged, a model (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —John Neal

(...) Yeah, but you stretched the bounds of credulity with the "when we model it tripe" :-) But I knew you'd land on your feet somehow;-) All Hail Larry! -John (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —James Powell

(...) Engine: 2. "A machine by which physical powwer is applied to produce a physical effort" Locomotive: a self propelled vehicle used to move rail cars Both from Merriam Webseter Dictionary...so, therefore, Jawn Henry fits into _both_ catagories. (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Didn't say you did! :-) I was just pointing out some trivia. ++Lar (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Stacy J. Bledsoe

(...) Well done Larry. The big boy I built accually is shorter than Dan's big boy, but it is because I scaled the real train schematics to lego grid paper and worked from there, scaling using the diameter of the driver to match the technic medium (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Larry Pieniazek

(...) It's funny to speak of a loco that had a lifetime of what, 4 years from acceptance trials to being scrapped, as having eras (!), but I get what you mean. I'd go with whatever is easiest to model, or if it's a tossup, as built. I think there (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Stacy J. Bledsoe

(...) some (...) coal (...) than (...) Hey Larry, thanks for the reply. I think I'll work it as I did the big boy, having the driver set attached to the body the the loco with sliding translations points to allow some growth in turns. Using a pivot (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Stacy J. Bledsoe

(...) Here is a question for someone to give some thought to. Is there a way to get a third wheel between to two wheels on the 9v train motor. (of course I am talking about one side of the motor, but I would do it to both sides...) There is a hole (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I have seen people put the 12V center wheel from a 12V motor there. Not sure how they did it. If you do, you lose the outer cladding (which simulates the truck sideframe members, spring hangers and other stuff). (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Michel Magnan

The central wheel from the 12V train motors comes off by simply pushing it upward, yo then fit the wider hub into the top of the hole in the middle of the 9V motor, and push it down. It allows a 6 wheel setup. They don't exactly match, but if it is (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Stacy J. Bledsoe

Thanks for the advise Michel, After looking over the Jawn Henry schematics last night I noticed that each six driver wheelset, there being 4 sets of 6, has an offset between the first and second pair of drivers, then the second and third are close (...) (25 years ago, 26-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Jawn Henry construction notes (was Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Larry Pieniazek

(...) If you do this (1) you need to arrange for articulation of some sort. I used a ball and socket(2). Others have used an arrangement to allow the non motor wheelset to slide sideways. (3) But if you make the 6 wheel truck rigid, you won't be (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: Jawn Henry construction notes (was Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Christopher Masi

Lar, When I read your comment I jumped up to check it out. The center slider[1] evolved from an unattached wheelset, which is why it had to be in the center. When you said end slider I thought, "Power for my SD40!" I did not try to make it, but (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: Jawn Henry construction notes (was Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Stacy J. Bledsoe

Wow! Thank for the construction tips! I guess I may be one step ahead then. My Big Boy's tender operates on an end slider of two attached wheelsets. I have noticed a slight uplift going in and coming out of curves, but nothing major. I guess the (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —John Neal

(...) My point was that the big boy was longer than the triplex; never said anything about being the longest, so I think you're wrong for alleging me wrong:-) -John (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I have to go with John on this one. Afer all, he's my acolyte and some of that infallibility was bound to rub off on him. (...) No, the moral is, you're not going to be able to prove me or John wrong about stuff at this point in our (...) (25 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Frank Filz

John Neal wrote in message <38D95EDE.7BFAE53A@u...st.net>... (...) studs (...) think (...) Big (...) <not (...) Here's an interesting page: (URL) you define "steam engine" as powered by steam, then the biggest in many ways is The Norfolk and (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

More Train Thoughts - was remote control —Ralph Hempel

(...) I, for one, would not mind a totally different LEGO train system. My biggest issue with the current one is that it's just too darned big to put a fairly complex layout in a normal person's house. With the number of 4-stud trucks I've been (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

Re: More Train Thoughts - was remote control —Frank Filz

(...) Two thoughts: - way too small for minifigs - 4 wide trains would be too small to be able to be made to look good without a ton of special parts The size issue though is probably one reason we won't see 8 wide trains. (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

roundhouse discussion: was: Re: infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NQC and RCX —Ben Fleskes

(...) Actually, I'm honored by your use of the English language. Like most Ignorant Americans, I'm limited to only one language and I only dream of the worldly exposure/perspective Europeans have. Regarding the turntable, it's long enough to hold my (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)

New LEGO train realism? (was:Re:infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NCQ and RCX) —John Neal

(...) This sounds almost too good to be true, but it would be very fortuitous for the GMLTC because we have just voted at our last show in La Crosse (went well, pics and mpegs to follow, but not soon as I am leaving on vacation for 2 weeks soon) to (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism —John Gerlach

(...) Other than *constant* whining and harping on the subject for as long as he's been in the GMTLC... <grin> (...) Hurricane = lots of blowing air. See also my previous comments... JohnG (the quietest of the three Johns in the GMLTC!) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? (was:Re:infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NCQ and RCX) —Reinhard "Ben" Beneke

(...) next (...) the (...) pics (...) soon) to (...) rolling (...) I have no idea, what Lego will bring out. But I can't imagine it will be 8 wide... (...) based on (...) level, (...) Would someone please give me the size in studs: I have no feeling (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? (was:Re:infrared remote control of LEGO trains using NCQ and RCX) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) non (...) the 32x32 baseplate is a nominal 10 inches square... So that means that a 45 x 60 inch module is essentially 3x4 of the monster 48 stud square baseplates. (or 4.5 x 6 of the more normal sized ones) I dunno about 40 x 65 inch (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Reinhard "Ben" Beneke

(...) (or (...) Thanks Larry for your answer to poor foreigner without knowledge of inches.... Next question: is there already a standard for Lego train modules, accepted by most train clubs? Or is there no compability between any of them? Regards, (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Ben Fleskes

Is there a standard for the size of modules? Good Question. Different clubs use different sizes. In PNLTC we have atleast four different sizes. I think width doesn't matter too much, but length does. In generally I fully support keeping everying in (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

module standards —Christopher Tracey

(...) WAMALUG generally uses 40.25" by 40.25"(4x4 baseplates) square tables. This allows for a complete circle of track to fit on a single table and makes penisulas easy. Our current tables have 2x2 legs that fold into the tables for storage. We (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Short answer: No standard Long answer: There is no standards making body. But there were defacto standards... There WERE two standards, sort of. PNLTC and other "non legomodular" clubs seemed to be working to one module standard. At least (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —James J. Trobaugh

The tables used by the NGLTC where built using the original standards published by the PNLTC. They are a bit narrower (to fit the mini van) but are the same height and use the same basic principle of connecting together. Only one table of the entire (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —John Gerlach

(...) Ropes? Huh?? ;-) The GMLTC lets kids get right up to our layout. Touching is discouraged, but it still happens. Yes, we get the occasional *crash*, but we can always rebuild. We had a great one this weekend, kid got his fingers in front of my (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —James J. Trobaugh

Wow John you are a brave man indeed. I have a hard enough time monitoring the trains, and keeping an eye out for run away toddlers (and if anyone has one they know that a couple of pieces of rope mean nothing), but having to keep an eye on the (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Christopher Masi

Wow, I would love to see that picture. (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Ben Fleskes

The PNLTC standard has been good to us. Transporting the legs, as James brings up, is a drawback, but they can be easily made with a minimal amount of materials beyond the scrap from the table top. And they are very sturdy. I've sat on the tables (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Dean Husby

(...) Our group (The VLC) are about to meet to select a table format. We are leaning towards the PNLTC standard tables. We will be adjusting the width for maximum usage. I'm even thinking of bolt on Plexi glass to 'protect' our layouts. I've been (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) If you're a plywood club, you definitely should go with the PNLTC "standard" (there is more than one) given your geographic proximity. ++Lar (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Ben Fleskes

We use 1/8" thick plexi on the side of our layouts. It has several benefits. -Keeps straying fingers away from the layout. -Helps keep pieces from 'wandering' away. -Keeps the trains, when they derail, from going on the floor. -People can still get (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Mike Walsh

"Dean Husby" <nntp@akasa.bc.ca> wrote in message news:38D99A3F.9ED3C5...a.bc.ca... [ ... snipped ... ] (...) leaning (...) maximum (...) several reasons. 1) We didn't see any reason to re-invent the wheel - I am personally not a big NIH fan. 2) We (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Club Table Standards was Re: New LEGO train realism? —James J. Trobaugh

The NGLTC is also looking at the folding buffet style (or church tables) legs, I don't care what the cost is as long as it keeps me from spending most of my set up bolting tables legs together, and it will make for more room in the van. Currently (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: Club Table Standards was Re: New LEGO train realism? —Christopher Tracey

(...) Tom Cook, WAMALUG's resident builder of cool things, designed and built the folding leg system on our tables. Like I said in an earlier post, the tables are 40.25" to a side. The frame is made out of 1"x3" pine, with a 3/8" plywood top. There (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: Club Table Standards was Re: New LEGO train realism? —James J. Trobaugh

Christopher, I'd defiantly like to see some detail on how all did the hinges with the legs. I'd love to keep the 2x2 legs I already have. So if I can find a way to hinge them and keep the same sturdiness, that would be great. I'm actually using 1" x (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: Club Table Standards was Re: New LEGO train realism? —James J. Trobaugh

That's supposed to be "yall" not "all", dang spell checker! I need the southern version.. ;) (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Kevin Wilson

Ben Fleskes wrote re th efolding buffet-table type legs: (...) Those legs are stronger then you might think (with decent fixings, of course). They are quite happy with a 280lb guy on the table. Mind you, if it's a long table, it tends to sag in the (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —John Gerlach

(...) 14 tables, each 40" x 65" (128 studs x 208 studs). Total layout dimensions should be 672 studs x 1040 studs. Low end will have tracks at 8 (10?) bricks above the baseplate, high end will have tracks at 20 bricks above the baseplate. Tentative (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Reinhard "Ben" Beneke

(...) But that means you cant do any small layout by leaving away some middle sections, right? Or do you have some kind of big plates to be put under the lower modules? Are the points of giving track from one edge of a module to the next always the (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Daniel Siskind

(...) The idea brought forward so far is to have the modules at the high end of the set up to be built on adjustable table legs, where it can be continually raised up a few notches each time a new segment is added to from the low end. Dan (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

GMLTC Storm Watch 2000 —John Kelly

Mayor Quimby Mobilizes Town Guard, Calls Emergency Session of Members Storm Watch 2000 (GMLTC Press, Legopolis) Meteorologists at the national weather service have declared Legopolis to be smack within the predicted landfall of Hurricane Neal, now (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —John Matthews

Somehow, 65" doesn't sound right to me. Whole baseplates would be best, no? If you are going to go that long, why not bump up to 80" so that you can use standard hollow core doors for table tops. It would be an inexpensive solution... Build On! John (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —John Gerlach

(...) If we just use the grey baseplates, 45x60 or 45x75 would make the most sense. But, our trailer is 76 inches wide, with a door 72 inches wide. With the 65 inch length, we can put the racks into the trailer sideways, and still have enough room (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Mike Poindexter

I would venture to say that 45" x 60" would be better. The reason there is that even though you lose 5" on the length, you keep the modules in increments of lg. gray baseplates. That is important if you want to allow another group to slip module (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —John Gerlach

In lugnet.trains, Mike Poindexter writes: <snip> (...) <snip> Serious question: How likely is it that we'll ever be at a show where we need to think of "compatible modules"? The closest other train club (so far) to us is where? Georgia? PNTLC? We (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Charles Eric McCarthy

(...) "ever"? Sooner or later, there will be a big North American Lego train show with lots of clubs attending. I bet it happens in less than ten years. When that happens, everyone who builds to 60" instead of 65" will be happy they did so. /Eric (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Ah, who cares what gauge we make our railroad? No one else is ever going to build a railroad within 100 miles of us, so the fact that we're incompatible with everyone else doesn't matter. - president of a forgotten railroad, ca. 1835... (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Daniel Siskind

(...) The compatability issue is actually a moot point at the moment for the new GMLTC layout for a couple of reasons: 1.) GMLTC is switching to 8x44 stud rolling stock which will most likely be large to fit around corners, tunnels, bridges, towns (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Larry Pieniazek

In lugnet.trains, Daniel Siskind writes: I draw on my 30 years of MR experience in my reply to Dan... (...) GMLTC (...) No it isn't and I will refute your reasons point by point. (...) I've been advocating larger clearances for some time now. Other (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —John Matthews

John Gerlach <john.gerlach@bestbu...ospam.com> wrote in message news:FruKv4.CA0@lugnet.com... <snip> (...) You need a bigger trailer! heehee :) I would seriously consider sticking with modules of standard baseplates, I know it is none of my (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Tom Stangl

Methinks it would be easier in the long run to widen your trailer, or buy a new one, to run 45x60, rather than the totally oddball 40x65. ;-) (...) -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —John Gerlach

(...) Monitary donations will be expected / accepted then... Oh yea, we'll also need a bigger truck to *pull* this trailer - it's almost too much for the vehicle we've got now. So, if anyone wants to come up with $20,000 to $25,000 for our (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Consider 40 by 60 then. That's a nice round module size, it's 2x4 of the big grey 48x48 baseplates with one row of the smaller 32x32 baseplates (in the middle?) I just have to reiterate (and I'll be making the point again on the call) 65 is an (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Mike Poindexter

John Gerlach <john.gerlach@bestbu...ospam.com> wrote in message news:FrvorK.DuA@lugnet.com... (...) a (...) transportation (...) Listen to this one: Rent a U-Haul. You can get them fairly cheap and only need them for the shows. Then you can take as (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Larry Pieniazek

OK, I think we're letting ourselves be worked up more than we should. I know it's true for me, I just had a rather heated offline exchange with John G, which is rather odd, he doesn't usually get excited, I must really be getting under his collar. (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —John Kelly

I don't know that you can strip away the trucks, trailers and paying for stuff. Fact of the matter is that 65" works better for the trailer. I doubt that we will really have more of a problem with people wanting to attach to our layout than we will (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Mike Poindexter

john kelly <jkelly69@skypoint.com> wrote in message news:Frvws2.LtC@lugnet.com... (...) doubt (...) to (...) trailer. Well, you could always secure your rack with either a spacer or lock the wheels. I would suggest that straps could hold it to a (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —John Gerlach

In lugnet.trains, Mike Poindexter writes: <snip> (...) <snip> DVD vs. DIVX was not about 'standards', it was about profits. CC bought the sales pitch from the lawyers that they would make more money on DIVX than they could on DVD. DIVX players could (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Legomodular standards —Larry Pieniazek

(...) (broken out for emphasis) (...) Whew... Fortunately, that's not what's being advocated. Track spacing and height need not be the same for all modules. Only for a few. And you've already said you're picking a standard size in the length/width (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Mike Poindexter

I think we are on the same track here. I am doing that as well. One option that I think all involved would want is that you can have a "section" comprised of X modules where nothing matches the module standards where they break up EXCEPT where the (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I was trying to get people to calm down from throwing out ideas like "well, just buy a new trailer" or "just rent a Ryder, never mind that you use the trailer for storage between shows", which are not particularly helpful suggestions. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —John Gerlach

(...) Again: Trailer is 76 inches wide. Trailer door is 72 inches wide. Between the wheelwells trailer is around 74 inches wide. We need to be able to get the racks into the trailer, and rotate them so they fit in 'cross ways'. This also gives us a (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —John Kelly

(...) I agree with that completely. :-) <Snip> (...) at (...) I agree with this too!!! wow. My thought on this is to incorporate some technic pegs in the wall of the section that can take any bridging strucuture that snaps on. So that if there were (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Mike Poindexter

John Kelly <jkelly69@skypoint.com> wrote in message news:Frw3yx.ELK@lugnet.com... (...) points (...) be (...) else's (...) strucuture (...) time a (...) span (...) Also leave some rows of technic bricks so that the bridge could use longer axles for (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Brian Williams

Well, this is turning-out to be a long thread so I think I'll add my 2 cents. I'm a big supporter of modular standards. But practically speaking, it isn't likely that Conan's GMLTC modules are going to be run with many other-standard modules in the (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Reinhard "Ben" Beneke

Dear all, I'm impressed by the big amount of posts concerning module standards! And all this just because I started a little question in the beginning of this thread.... But to define standards seems to be a serious problem of all train clubs and I (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)

Re: New LEGO train realism? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) My point exactly. But it should be pointed out that the trailer can't practically be widened, it's an enclosed trailer and the walls are part of the structure and tied into the frame. Buying a new one would mean Conan would have bought 3 (...) (25 years ago, 23-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org)