Subject:
|
Re: Moonbase Monorail: What is the track elevation?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Fri, 19 Sep 2003 23:12:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5100 times
|
| |
|
|
Tony Hafner wrote:
>
> > > Jon Palmer wrote:
> > > > At last year's NWBC we just used the normal monorail stanchions,
> > > > which are 10 high. We had some track at the bottom and then had
> > > > some that was 20 and I think even 30 up. Let me dig up a NWBC
> > > > moonbase folder real quick (gonna add these links to the events
> > > > section)
> > > >
> > > > http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=26578
> > > >
> > > > Anyway you should get an idea of the elevations from some of those
> > > > pics. And to my knowledge we went by David Wegmuller's system
> > > > exactly at the Con. I'll get up a mono elevation pic soon.
>
> > In lugnet.space, Frank Filz wrote:
> > > Basically. Actually, the track was sort of free form. I just laid it out
> > > where it fit. We also had a slight difficulty in getting through Jon's
> > > module, his track position was off by one stud... Fortunately,
> > > clearances still allowed us to run through.
>
> The track was free-form in that the actual path wasn't planned ahead of time.
> But we definitely used David Wegmuller's standard as a starting point. If you
> are going to integrate track into modules, the track lines need to map to those
> standards, or at a minimum they need to map to positions that monorail track can
> get to using those standards as a starting point. Monorail track is very rigid
> (compared to train track) and it is very difficult to integrate modules that
> don't conform.
Mostly true. I laid a ground level line that actually didn't meet the
standard. Of course it also couldn't be run during the big crush because
it ran just a bit close to the edge.
> In lugnet.space, Steven D. Weiser wrote:
> > I do plan on integrating monorail directly into several modules. I will
> > use the 10 brick height as a starting reference point. I can then use
> > the ramps to either raise it or lower it by 10 depending on what it is
> > going through or around.
>
> Perfect- most of the track at NWBrickCon2002 ran at 20 bricks up. One stanchion
> puts the track running dead into almost every module. We just stacked two tall
> stanchions to get the right height, or we stacked bricks on top of modules that
> were in our path. We had various sections at ground level, 10, 20, and 30. I
> built a ton of 10-high stanchion extenders for this year so that we don't have
> to stack the stanchions (I thought that was an unattractive solution).
I'll be bringing my stash of black 2x2x5 lattice columns, they stack
much nicer...
> The new module connector standard leaves enough room to run a monorail
> underneath. It also means that a 10-high track can go under a 20-high
> connector. It sucks to have to retrofit existing modules, but I have to admit
> that it makes sense.
Agreed.
Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Moonbase Monorail: What is the track elevation?
|
| (...) The track was free-form in that the actual path wasn't planned ahead of time. But we definitely used David Wegmuller's standard as a starting point. If you are going to integrate track into modules, the track lines need to map to those (...) (23 years ago, 19-Sep-03, to lugnet.space)
|
12 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
