 | | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard
|
|
(...) 1) This requires the coordination and cooperation of the neighboring module. A road requires little infrastructure when compared to rail. (at least when you are looking at moonbase construction) 2) I'm assuming that there is less clearance (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard
|
|
(...) The NILTC has noted that 6-wide trains are technically 8 with grab bars and protrusions, and 8-wides are technically 10. We adjust our layout clearances accordingly. I think the soft-seal airlocks should be on rack gears, and be able to move (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard
|
|
(...) This is kind of limiting, especially when designing trains that are supposed to look squat and futuristic. I think train tracks will be fine...people will just need to work out a layout for the Moonbase and all the monorail/trains (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard
|
|
As promised here's a picture of a simple L-shaped Moonbase layout with 4 train lines in the "road" spaces that can accomodate 36 standard moonbase modules and would fit on 2 3'x6' folding tables : (URL) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Moonbase: Starting to put up the rail standard
|
|
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 (...) (21 years ago, 16-Sep-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.trains)
|
