Subject:
|
Re: LEGO® Train Philosophy
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:06:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
933 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Eric Kingsley writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Harvey Henkelman writes:
> > During my first year of being a LUGNET member, I have noticed that people
> > usually take one of two approaches when building their train MOC's. Either
> > they are as realistic as possible, or they are representational. Realising
> > that you can only include so much detail in LEGO®, I am approximate when it
> > comes to fitting all the pipes, levers, ect. on my models. I figure that
> > exacting detail is the domain of the NMRA, NEM, and similar organizations.
>
> I tend to be like you. I just approximate and include the details I can/want
> to include. That doesn't mean I havn't fallen into the trap of trying to be to
> precise. For example I have a model that I call a Boston and Maine GP40-2:
>
> http://www.nelug.org/members/kingsley/train/bmgp40/
>
> I think the only reason I called it that is because that is what was in the
> pictures I was working from. In reality you couldn't tell the difference
> between this model and a GP38 or 4 or 5 other models.
>
>
> Eric Kingsley
That's an excellent model of a GP38-2. Looks good with OR without the decals
to me. I personally use only official LEGO® stickers on my stuff, but to
each his own.-Harvey
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LEGO® Train Philosophy
|
| (...) I tend to be like you. I just approximate and include the details I can/want to include. That doesn't mean I havn't fallen into the trap of trying to be to precise. For example I have a model that I call a Boston and Maine GP40-2: (URL) think (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
