Subject:
|
Re: Track? MOC or New?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:07:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
393 times
|
| |
|
|
I've toyed with the idea of modifying the points (switches):
By removing a section of the turnout, two points can be placed
turnout-to-turnout while keeping standard track centres and maintaining an
overall length of 3 straights ;-)
...have a play with Track Designer, and get in a situation where two tracks
are at standard centres. Then put two points turnout-to-turnout - they'll
overlap, but it looks like you've got a really tidy junction...
That in turn suggests that specialist curves would be necessary when the
modified points are used stand-alone. The geometry then starts to get
interesting, and could even lead to daimond crossings to match!
On a different track (sorry), doesn't everyone want large radius curves?!?
Just Jono .oO
"Guido Heunen" <heunen@esrf.fr> wrote in message
news:GoI9nL.IsE@lugnet.com...
> I am waiting for ten years now to get automated points, stops and
> decouplers, as well as new track parts.
>
> I am wondering what the train community would like to see as new track • parts
> or automation.
>
> I have some examples on brickshelf:
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=9156
>
> Did anyone try to make their own track of existing pieces. I am pondering
> if I am going to start....
>
> Guido
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Track? MOC or New?
|
| I am waiting for ten years now to get automated points, stops and decouplers, as well as new track parts. I am wondering what the train community would like to see as new track parts or automation. I have some examples on brickshelf: (URL) anyone (...) (23 years ago, 17-Dec-01, to lugnet.trains)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
