 | | Re: Moonbase and monorail
|
|
"David Wegmuller" <david@wegmuller.org> wrote in message news:H0sHMM.Eur@lugnet.com... (...) connection. Sounds great. This was just what we had in mind. I had *no* idea that there were 8 stud lengths of monorail track. I'm a real monorail newbie. I (...) (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Moonbase and monorail
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) Well, I think that I have no monorail. Everything here sounds fine though. The only thing that I could ask for is that there be a provision for those of us who are monorail-less. I'm not against using standard train track, even (...) (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Moonbase and monorail
|
|
"Duane Hess" <LEGOZILLA@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote in message news:H0sLDA.2xF@lugnet.com... (...) be (...) bricks (...) the (...) corridor (...) corridors... (...) to (...) regarding (...) future (...) I'll (...) I have successfully created an elevation (...) (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Moonbase and monorail
|
|
(...) I was thinking more along the lines of required train motor/track friction than physical part limitations. I've read some of the discussions in .Trains on the subject, but I know that those Train Guys are intent on pulling as many cars as (...) (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Moonbase and monorail
|
|
(...) The Monorail's hill climbing ability does make it more suitable for elevation changes, especially large ones to get up and over an obstruction. (...) I don't think it has to be an either/or. We can have both. Frank (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Moonbase and monorail
|
|
"Duane Hess" <LEGOZILLA@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote in message news:H0sq4w.I6z@lugnet.com... (...) though. (...) those (...) track, (...) I'm (...) .Trains (...) My train could make a 30 degree climb at the third or fourth notch on the regulator, though it (...) (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Trains and moonbase (Was: Moonbase and monorail)
|
|
Hi, First, thanks to all for the positive feedback! Space Trains :-) sounds like an interesting idea! I wonder if we could define a "low rider" kind of train that could run under the corridors... I think this was part of the idea behind the (...) (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Moonbase and monorail
|
|
(...) You can design your Moonbase with monorail in mind, and if you are planning on coming to the NWBrickCon there will be enough monorail where it can be added to your Moonbase design. It's a way for you to create a cool Moonbase/monorail system (...) (22 years ago, 14-Aug-02, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Trains and moonbase (Was: Moonbase and monorail)
|
|
Hi, As I stated earlier, I've played around with Track Designer to see how things would fit... I've drawn a few layouts, all based on the idea that train tracks would be installed on the edges of the modules. (URL) : this one is very simple and does (...) (22 years ago, 15-Aug-02, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Moonbase and monorail
|
|
<snip> (...) my 2 cents: 1) use 'train' track only at ground level and ONLY for hauling moon rocks and other such debris, i.e. its TRAIN track and should stay the h*** out of .space 2) use monorails for everything 'up high'. Use a std of 10 in (...) (22 years ago, 18-Aug-02, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Moonbase and monorail
|
|
(...) 2 plates per track section is a more typical elevation change for 9V train. At that gentle elevation change, it becomes difficult to develop a standard for tracks. Hence I think that's why some people were suggesting that all train track be at (...) (22 years ago, 18-Aug-02, to lugnet.space)
|
