Subject:
|
Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space, lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:36:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3982 times
|
| |
|
|
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 board pressurized train
cars.
2. Don't use curves on small layouts. Since a layout is likely to be
U,L,T, or I shaped, a few intersecting straight lines with trains that
reverse takes care of things with out wasting valuable moonbase real estate.
I'm working on some pics to show what I mean...
Mike Petrucelli wrote:
> 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
> scraping along the sides of modules. (I think it is generally wise to have a 10
> stud width between any section of track and it would only be 8 on the existing
> pathways) The first (and second if its a long car) straight track after a curve
> would have to be kept clear to allow the cars to straighten out on the track
> before going through such close quaters. On the flip side it would allow us to
> not have to monkey with the "4 studs to the edge" rule. That would prevent a
> whole mess of trouble with the modules themselves but would make it hard to
> build stations and impossible to build enclosed stations. I don't know if that
> helps or just adds to the confusion. :-)
>
> -Mike Petrucelli
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
25 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
|
|
|
|
