 | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | (...) Well I am not a real serious train guy, but I do like them in addition to space so... I think using the exsisting pathways would create all sorts of logistics problems. A train could not be more than 7 wide because we wouldn't want them (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Jason S. Mantor
|
| | | | Mike brings up some good points about clearances etc., but I think we can avoid these problems all together with two simple rules : 1. Moonbase trains = six studs wide max. We can make "soft seal" airlocks to allow un-suited moonbase personel to (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Jason S. Mantor
|
| | | | | As promised here's a picture of a simple L-shaped Moonbase layout with 4 train lines in the "road" spaces that can accomodate 36 standard moonbase modules and would fit on 2 3'x6' folding tables : (URL) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Bram Lambrecht
|
| | | | (...) This is kind of limiting, especially when designing trains that are supposed to look squat and futuristic. I think train tracks will be fine...people will just need to work out a layout for the Moonbase and all the monorail/trains (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Tim Courtney
|
| | | | (...) The NILTC has noted that 6-wide trains are technically 8 with grab bars and protrusions, and 8-wides are technically 10. We adjust our layout clearances accordingly. I think the soft-seal airlocks should be on rack gears, and be able to move (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Jason S. Mantor
|
| | | | Yeah. I'll retract those two rules. They are too limiting. I tried to build a sample train/corridor model and it just doesn't fit : ( I think if we're going to do trains we need to revisit the corridor height/setback again. Even the new 10 brick (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Jon Palmer
|
| | | | | "Xanthra47" <jmantor@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message news:HLBF8K.800@lugnet.com... (...) Now that I disagree with. I don't think the standard should bend because we need tall trains. Just make em short. Like Larry said, even some mining carts are (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Bram Lambrecht
|
| | | | | | | (...) Agreed...I have a couple sets of train wheels...(but no motors or modern track) maybe I'll make a sample train car. --Bram (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Jason S. Mantor
|
| | | | | | | (...) That's great and all but most people don't commute to work in mining carts : P We can live with the height, I guess, but what about the width ? An eight stud wide road isn't even wide enough to get realistic cargo containers through : ( 10 (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Nick Kappatos
|
| | | | | | | | (...) This is going to be impossible to nail down until an actual layout is done at NWBrickCon (hope I spelled that right). Some modules don't have connectors on all sides. I think that someone should take track at NWBC and use it to eyeball trouble (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) This I have to agree with. If you've got a train that doesn't meet specs, well, you build space (SPACE!) for it to run. I have a 6-wide monorail (8-wide with protrusions) with a lot of overhang at the ends. There was no way it was going to run (...) (21 years ago, 17-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Tony Hafner
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Yeah, I'll do that. And I'll experiment with reasonably-constructed trains to see what can fit under the new connectors. Being a spacehead also heavily invested in trains, I have experience using both. (...) The NWBC layout should be huge, so (...) (21 years ago, 19-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Jason S. Mantor
|
| | | | | | OK, I guess I'll just have to live with "dwarf" space trains. I've been playing with some ideas in MLCAD and it does work out with the current specs if you use articulated truck cars like this one that I designed to ride as low as possible, but be (...) (21 years ago, 21-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard —Markham Carroll
|
| | | | "Xanthra47" <jmantor@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message news:HLBF8K.800@lugnet.com... (...) The platforms don't need to be on top of the wheels, you know. For example: (URL) You could park a standard corridor on yor train that way, and still easily (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
