Subject:
|
Re: cramming details into 6 studs
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Tue, 15 May 2001 17:02:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
503 times
|
| |
![Post a public reply to this message](/news/icon-reply.gif) | |
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> But to Bryan's original point, he's asking about how to get windows 3
> across. I guess I'd just advise that he went with the same approach I used
> in my SW.... Use 3 2 wide windows. I stagger them by one plate in height, he
> could stagger them by 1/2 brick in position to get the indented door effect
>
> The downside is that you get a 1 stud wide visible blockage (in my case,
> blockage with another window frame). But I'd argue that for a subway car,
> the windows make up most of the width. Having a 1 stud wide outside edge
> (which you'd get if you went with 3 2 wide windows on an 8 wide body) would
> to me anyway look funny. Maybe not quite as funny as having half the window
> filled with the view of a window frame, though.
You could mostly avoid this (seeing the side wall through the back window)
by using a thin wall immediately behind the window. That would mean that to
see the wall through the window you'd need to be straight on to the car,
*and* squinting. ;)
Another possibility is to use 1x2 clear bricks, although that means you've
got a frame-less window, which might look odd.
Try using a pair of 1x2x2 thin walls sideways to the back to form a window
(as so --> [] ). No glass, but you've opened up your color options.
Just some brainstorming...
James
|
|
Message has 1 Reply: ![](/news/x.gif) | | Re: cramming details into 6 studs
|
| (...) That's a good option. I bet there are some SNOT methods also - in fact, how about a 1x2 clear brick on end, studs out. Cap it with a tile and attach it with to a 1x plate on the bottom (against the door). The 1x plate and the tile form the (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
![](/news/x.gif) | | Re: cramming details into 6 studs
|
| (...) Again, I disagree. The body to truck proportions are wrong, yes. But, at least in my models, the LxWxH proportions are more or less correct. Sometimes the height is a bit too high for the width (maybe in the 'bug, for example) but not always. (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
13 Messages in This Thread: ![cramming details into 6 studs -Bryan Kinkel (15-May-01 to lugnet.trains)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: cramming details into 6 studs -John Neal (15-May-01 to lugnet.trains)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: cramming details into 6 studs -Larry Pieniazek (15-May-01 to lugnet.trains)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: cramming details into 6 studs -John Neal (15-May-01 to lugnet.trains)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: cramming details into 6 studs -Larry Pieniazek (15-May-01 to lugnet.trains)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![You are here](/news/here.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: cramming details into 6 studs -Frank Filz (15-May-01 to lugnet.trains)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: cramming details into 6 studs -Bryan Kinkel (15-May-01 to lugnet.trains)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: cramming details into 6 studs -Sonnich Jensen (16-May-01 to lugnet.trains)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: cramming details into 6 studs -Harvey Henkelman (17-May-01 to lugnet.trains)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/268.gif) ![Re: cramming details into 6 studs -John Gerlach (15-May-01 to lugnet.trains)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/268.gif) ![Re: cramming details into 6 studs -Jake McKee (15-May-01 to lugnet.trains)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: cramming details into 6 studs -Bryan Kinkel (16-May-01 to lugnet.trains)](/news/x.gif)
- 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
|
|
|
|