Subject:
|
Re: Space Cargo Container Standard?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 Mar 2004 19:46:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
617 times
|
| |
|
|
Snippage
>
> Drawing on the above thread, I'd guess that you'd want both ends of the cargo
> container to conform to the existing standard for a Moonbase Corridor connection
> (i.e. 8 studs wide with the 2 1x2 bricks with hole in the proper place).
> Furthermore, it seems that 8 studs wide works for trains.
>
> I'm not sure about the height. The ends of the Moonbase Corridor are 7 bricks
> and two plates high. It might be nice to extend this a bit both up and down so
> that a standard can be made for the top and bottom that will allow stacking of
> containers. Perhaps there is a technique to be borrowed from Trains?
>
> As for the length, Moonbase Modules are 48x48 studs. If you choose to make them
> 16 studs long, three containers in length is exactly the length of a Moonbase
> Module. This allows containers to be used as expansion modules on a moonbase.
> It's also exactly twice the standard width of the Moonbase Corridor, which will
> make the containers the same width vs. length ratio as the classic 2x4 brick.
> What do others think about a standard length?
>
>
> Comments, suggestions, flames?
>
> Jeff
I'm not very active in .space but I'll throw in my $0.02.
I like the idea of the 8 x 16 studs for width and length. If height of a
moonbase corridor is 7 bricks and two plates adding corner plates to the bottom
corners would bring the height to a nice neat 8 bricks. And 8x8x16 is pretty
easy to remember.
The corner plates would allow the containers to be stacked without sticking
together too badly. They also allow for positioning on train cars and warehouses
ect. The corner plates would have to be in the same location on all containers
so a standard of only a square bottom or only a sloped bottom (inverse slopes)
would need to be decided on. Or I guess the corner plates could be set back 1
stud in each direction. This puts them in the same place regardless of a sloped
bottom but does not look as good on a square bottomed container.
Anyway, that's what I was thinking/babbling.
Mike
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Space Cargo Container Standard?
|
| Even though I rarely start threads on Lugnet, I thought this topic is ripe for discussion. We've seen from the recent thread, (URL) gives space a whirl, that there seems to be some interest in a Space Cargo Container Standard. Drawing on the above (...) (20 years ago, 25-Mar-04, to lugnet.space)
|
44 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
