 | | Re: Train tables —Larry Pieniazek
| | | | (...) Naa. Neither approach is **better**. They are just different. (...) Sure. To do a PNLTC module base takes some wood, some paint, some hardware. 100 bucks at most, and that's no doubt high. Then there is the track itself, as well as the (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jun-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.loc.us.mn.msp)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Train tables —Paul Foster
| | | | | (...) But you still have to have an even number of modules, right? So "A" module under construction will only replace one of Conan's modules until another module can be paired with it? (25 years ago, 7-Jun-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.loc.us.mn.msp)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Train tables —Larry Pieniazek
| | | | | Paul Foster wrote: > (...) Yes, unless one built some sort of "wye" module, all the modules in use must form a single closed loop (in the meta sense) to allow continuous running. (25 years ago, 7-Jun-99, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.loc.us.mn.msp)
| | | | | | |
