 | | Re: Stacked connection points on moonbase standard? —Leonard Hoffman
|
| | | (...) Hey Scott, as far as I understand it - leveled connection points follow a similiar rule to the monorail: first floor at 10, 2nd at 20, 3rd at 30, etc (of course, 10bricks + 1 plate). I think jon is working on updating the official moonbase (...) (21 years ago, 4-Mar-04, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Stacked connection points on moonbase standard? —David Laswell
|
| | | | (...) The floors do all sit at 10-brick intervals according to the revision discussion from last year. That does mean that two stacked layers would need 4 bricks and 1 plate spacing if they maintain the same interior dimensions as the hallway (...) (21 years ago, 5-Mar-04, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Stacked connection points on moonbase standard? —Scott Lyttle
|
| | | | (...) I think the monorail platform had a lot to do with the 10, 20, 30 etc standard. I agree that by doing that standard, there is a big step up for the monorail sled. Hmm...wonder if there's any way to recess that rail... but you could always (...) (21 years ago, 5-Mar-04, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Stacked connection points on moonbase standard? —David Laswell
|
| | | | (...) Not if you want to be able to run ground-level track on Moonbase-compliant baseplates. If you don't mind running elevated Monorail, there's no reason why you can't just drop the tracks to 7/17/27/etc. off the ground. (...) That would be the (...) (21 years ago, 5-Mar-04, to lugnet.space)
|
| | | | |
