Subject:
|
Re: Moonbase: Nailing down Moonway and Rail Standard
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space, lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Mon, 10 May 2004 06:55:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1321 times
|
| |
|
|
Jon Palmer wrote:
> What this also shows is that for this layout to work, space trains and moonway
> vehicles should not be wider than 6 studs. (moon truck/tram width is a little
> more complex than that, but you get the idea...and I'll get into how to make one
> a little later).
Ouch. Please take into account that any train-like construction over a
certain (very short) length needs to be put on svivel (SP?) bases in
order to be kept on track. So even if then train car stays within 6
studs, a car of 24-32 studs length will propably cut into the racer roads.
I'm no trainhead, but there are diagrams showing how much clearence is
needed for the trains e.g. in curved tunnels or to place buildings, and
this side-by-side layout will not allow for sufficient space.
Besides, 6-wide just means that the cars body is 6 studs wide, handles,
clips, bars and other decorative stuff may still extend over this width
upto half a stud on each side.
And, there was a thread about space containers recently - most of which
are 8wide, anyway, and therefor would not fit.
I think that placing those kinds of tracks nearly on top of each other
is not a very good idea...
Yours, Christian
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Moonbase: Nailing down Moonway and Rail Standard
|
| Let's hammer this out for good this week. I'd like to put it on the Moonbase site soon. We'll work on width first. Look at this bad pic: (URL) Lenny has proposed that the train track also be moved to the seam between baseplates. I see pros and cons (...) (20 years ago, 10-May-04, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains, FTX) !
|
18 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
|
|
|
|
