Subject:
|
Re: If we are changing the Moonbase standards then why not...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Wed, 3 Sep 2003 02:19:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
543 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Bram Lambrecht wrote:
| |
In lugnet.space, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
| |
The only thing I can figure 10 high intervals has going for it is the
ease of numbers. (ie. 10,20,30... as opposed to 12,24,36...) That just
seems a very silly reason to adopt 10 high
as standard to me.
|
What about this?
http://guide.lugnet.com/partsref/search.cgi?q=monorail
Monorail works in intervals of 10 bricks.
--Bram
|
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, right?) would outweigh the limitations of 10 high intervals on
the modules themselves. I see the whole point of 10 high now. That being to make
multi-level monorail layouts line up. Now I am in a right pickle. 12 high is
superior for the module itself but 10 high is better for monorail layouts. I
guess I would have to lean toward 12 high as monorail is no longer made and has
a limited ownership among active builders. (Most of the best modules haven’t had
monorail anyway.) Well now there is at least some logical reason to discuss the
issue.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
10 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
|
|
|
|
