 | | If we are changing the Moonbase standards then why not...
|
|
Ok the 8 high corridors has been my biggest "problem" with the moonbase standard. I am definately in favor of making them higher, if nothing else so larger things can roll under the corridors. I would like to ask why 10 high though? Why not just go (...) (21 years ago, 2-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: If we are changing the Moonbase standards then why not...
|
|
(...) I really like this idea. TLC does do everything in multiples of 6 & 12, so it would make for some really cool possibilities as far as ceilings and floors are concerned. Count me in for one vote in favor of this. Captain Krotzer, The Unknown (...) (21 years ago, 2-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: If we are changing the Moonbase standards then why not...
|
|
(...) I guess I'm missing the point. How would this be easier to deal with than 10 high corridors (and subsequent floors at 10, 20, 30, etc)? I get the part about larger things underneath, but that's it. Something else to it? -Chris (21 years ago, 2-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: If we are changing the Moonbase standards then why not...
|
|
(...) Sorry I wasn't more clear. 10 high corridors would allow a module to have only one tall (internally 8 high) floor for every corridor level. 12 high corridors would allow a module to have two normal (internally 5 high) floors for every corridor (...) (21 years ago, 2-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: If we are changing the Moonbase standards then why not...
|
|
(...) Yep. 2 floors to every corridor for those who wish to do it. From an engineering standpoint, this wouldn't be possible for 10 high floors if you wanted minifigs to stand in them. I'm in agreement with you Mike. Lego tends to make things easier (...) (21 years ago, 2-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: If we are changing the Moonbase standards then why not...
|
|
(...) Mike, I think I see what you are getting at, but I think you are mistaken. You are refering to Minifigs required 5 bricks height for clearance, right? But if we raise the corridor height (that means the corridor floor) to 10 bricks high, that (...) (21 years ago, 2-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: If we are changing the Moonbase standards then why not...
|
|
(...) A single plate thickness for a floor won't even come close to cutting it for the moonbase I plan on building. (URL) Really, I think 10 high intervals would be too limiting for people that want to make 2 levels in between corridor levels. Isn't (...) (21 years ago, 2-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: If we are changing the Moonbase standards then why not...
|
|
(...) What about this? (URL) works in intervals of 10 bricks. --Bram (21 years ago, 2-Sep-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: If we are changing the Moonbase standards then why not...
|
|
(...) Ah... So that is where the idea came from. Well I have to wonder if the potential benefits of making 12 high intervals and simply adding the neccesary bricks to the monorail stanchions (given most of the track would be on the modules anyways, (...) (21 years ago, 3-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Monorail (was: If we are changing the Moonbase standards then why not...)
|
|
(...) Exactly. I think the main reason there aren't more modules with connections for monorail is because there is no standard for adding it yet. A monorail adds a great deal of motion and interest for kids at a public display, Even though monorails (...) (21 years ago, 3-Sep-03, to lugnet.space)
|
