| |
Tony Hafner wrote:
>
> In lugnet.events.brickfest, William R. Ward wrote:
> > Frank Filz <ffilz@mindspring.com> writes:
> > > At NW BrickCon we had monorail track at +0, +10, and +20 (and even a
> > > small amount at +30 I think). +20 was necessary to clear most modules
> > > since it turns out it's easiest to just run the track whereever.
> > > However, if a station is actually built into a module, there also needs
> > > to be an X-Y standard. I think the simple standard is to start with a
> > > basis of a piece of straight monorail has it's centerline along the
> > > boundary between two modules, and starts at one end of the module (so
> > > three straights would exactly cover the boundary between 4 modules).
> > > Then from this, any offset of 8 studs can be accomodated. If several
> > > modules with built in track are intended to be placed close together,
> > > more care must be taken because you won't have the space to put in 8
> > > stud track segments to adjust track positions.
> >
> > David Wegmuller worked out a standard last summer that I think should
> > be adopted. See <http://news.lugnet.com/space/?n=16346> and the
> > ensuing thread.
>
> We used that standard at NWBrickCon and it worked great. The example picture he
> gaved essentially used a 8-stud grid that has track lying along borders between
> bases. But that particular example aimed to keep most straight lines on the
> 16-stud grid, which makes it a little easier to line up arbitrary straights (an
> 8-stud lateral shift on a straightaway is impossible without using a couple of
> 90 degree turns).
>
> Note that the track ends do NOT coincide with baseplate edges. The tracks end 4
> studs from baseplate edges. This does not match Frank's description above. The
> radius of the curve pieces forces this.
Oops, sorry about that, you're right. The point I think I was making
though is that David Wegmuller's standard is actually more strict than
really necessary. The reality is that most of the track we laid was in
different positions. I agree that fixed track will be easiest to
accomodate if it follows David's standard but when laying track over
other people's modules that didn't have track build in, it was easiest
to just start laying out 32 stud straights and curves as looked
interesting, placing 8 stud straights where necessary to get an 8 stud
offset.
> There were only 3 modules that planned to connect to the monorail. Jon Palmer's
> Reacharound module had a hole through the middle at 20 bricks high and worked
> fine. My module had 2 hardpoints to connect at 20 bricks high at positions 12
> studs in from the edge and 8 studs to each side of the centerline. These match
> David Wegmuller's standard. The other module (a station by Terri Landers) had
> the track off the grid in a way that couldn't be modified to get onto the grid.
> But it worked out okay because there is a little give in the track and we just
> made sure that that station wasn't too close to the others. If there had been
> more modules that required the monorail to be on the grid, we might not have
> gotten that module connected.
Actually, Jon Palmer's module originally had the track 1 stud off the
correct position. Fortunately his tunnel was actually large enough to
accomodate the track in the correct position (and fortunately he wasn't
there to see me repositioning the track and having to make minor repairs
after my fumble fingers loosened a few pieces...).
So I think the summary is that if you build track rigidly into your
module, follow David's standard. You will also make it easier to connect
if you put the track at +20 (+20 is the minimum height that can cross
corridor connections, +0 and +10 don't work [+10 goes right through the
corridor, most corridors don't have enough clearance for most ground
level monorails to clear]). Also, if you don't want monorail built over
your module during a gathering, make sure the monorail folks know that,
otherwise, you may come back and find a monorail support column built up
from your roof).
Also, note that a huge tarck collection is not really necessary. We
could have done the whole NWBrickCon monorail with my track which is a
large but not huge collection. Sure we could have put more in, but who
wants a layout where you can barely see the modules for all the monorail
spaghetti draped over them. We also had enough track for 3 or 4 trains
to be running at all times (well, most times, I had one track that ran
right along the edge of the table, during peak traffic hours we didn't
run that one). It's fine for some trains to actually run on pretty short
runs.
Frank
(who layed about half of the NWBrickCon monorail, including almost all
of that which passed over other modules).
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
73 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
|
|
|
|
