 | | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
Ah. (...) Right. Make that square opening thing into a separate brick. If you widen the nose you can leave it centered. (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
(...) I think Mike has gotten to the crux of the problem. All the issues brought up are merely technical puzzles to solve. Personally, my investment in my 5 trains and assorted train items wouldn't hold me back from 8 wide. Again, I think if TLC is (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
Christopher Masi <cmasi@cmasi.chem.tulane.edu> wrote in message news:38B42AE5.D23FB9...ane.edu... (...) anyone recall (...) weight a lot (...) to hit the (...) both current (...) pushed (...) high enough (...) the technology (...) it another (...) (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
Christopher Masi wrote: Yes, Mr Horshack? ;-) (...) No, they be heavy;-D But it's all relative. They are feathers compared to my 14 wides{:^D (...) I use 2 motors in my 8 wide engines. To tell the truth, I'd use 2 motors in 6 wides, too, because (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | what do these MOW vehicles do?
|
|
Hello, I was stopped at a crossing today and I saw four Union Pacific MOW vehicles go by. Two of them were Pandrol Jackson model 6700s and the other two didn't have any obvious markings. They all looked weird to my untrained eye. Does anyone know (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
Tom Stangl <toms@netscape.com> wrote in message news:38B41F69.3A1A53...ape.com... (...) pieces;-) (...) with. Then (...) to make (...) 6/8/10/12 wide (...) <shudder> (...) With the extra size, it is much easier to make to nose look proper with (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Surging, yep I saw it too.
|
|
Just wanted to say that I have seen the periodic surging Larry was talking about. There were two short cars in the train, and there were 4 long cars, long red train baseplate length, in the train. Sure enough the caboose slowed down and sped up (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
Oh oh oh...another problem with 8 wide (main reason I am avoiding it): anyone recall how many engines John uses for his 8 wide stuff? Eight wide is going to weight a lot (unless there is exstensive use of thinwalls). Eight wide trains are going to (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: 4,5v / 12v Train Offers
|
|
Todd Lehman ha scritto: (...) Sorry, I want to apologize for it. However, I have to say that I'm a bit confused about this kind of things. I always thought that a market post outside the lugnet.market newsgroups was inappropriate, but I recently (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
The lower half of the nose piece has two square openings. To my knowledge only the special trans-yellow "Y" will fit into these square openings and allow a single bulb to illuminate the right and left side simultaneously. If you increase the spacing (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
(...) Technic brick with a lens in the center? I'm not sure I follow what the problem is, exactly... can you elaborate? (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
By making the nose split however you would run into an issue with the trans-yellow headlamp piece. The only solution I can think of would be to use two light bulbs to light-up both sides. -Nick Tom Stangl wrote in message (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
(...) I've NEVER understood why Lego didn't make nose pieces split to begin with. Then they could make each half 2-wide, and you could insert slopes between them to make them any width you want. Then they'd only have to worry about making 6/8/10/12 (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: 4,5v / 12v Train Offers
|
|
(...) Reminder: Auction announcements belong in .market.auction only (pointing to an auction in .market.auction from .trains constitutes announcing it to .trains)! --Todd (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains?
|
|
(...) And I suppose you'll want it weatherproof, so you can have a garden railroad, right? I'll be happy if they come out with some decent looking 6 (or 8) wide trains that actually look like trains... The 4559 was a joke, the 4561 isn't much (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, John Neal (<38B40110.28868009@...west.net>) wrote at 15:47:29 (...) That's where I was going as well. If it was compatible with the existing 9V stuff (in terms of usable parts), it would be monstrously good. (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
(...) Agreed. (...) I could live with larger pieces, as long as they are the *right* pieces;-) Train fronts (split), nose shells, specialty items (fans), railings, new trucks. Let them accent play, give us the tools and we will accent the (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Future of LEGO Trains ? was Re: Model Railroad Scenery
|
|
On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, Mike Poindexter (<FqD42y.7FB@lugnet.com>) wrote at 02:54:34 (...) This could be *very* good news, because they'll have to introduce a larger radius curve for longer stock. (...) It's unlikely they'll just add more bricks. To (...) (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: My EMD SD40-2
|
|
"Christopher Masi" <cmasi@cmasi.chem.tulane.edu> wrote in message news:38B33319.7EF155...ane.edu... (...) Studs Not On Top. Thanks to Shiri's Acronym Guide: (URL) A. Swanberg CPT, SC Commander, 229th Signal Company (TACSAT) swanberg@msn.com (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: Frank, nice 7760 Mark II
|
|
(...) Thanks :-) The 7760 is a really nice locomotive, too bad it's too expensive (for me, that is) to get one. So I've build one myself using some 12V stuff I have. -Frank (25 years ago, 23-Feb-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
