Subject:
|
Re: 5 points<long post>
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Mon, 5 Aug 2002 18:20:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
482 times
|
| |
|
|
"John Gerlach" <john.gerlach@bestbuy.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:H0DKpp.9nt@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.trains, Dan Voelkerding writes:
> > If you could have 5 requests from Lego, what would they be?
>
> Ok, since you asked:
>
> 1: Larger radius curved track. The current track geometry is good for
> small layouts, but difficult to work with for larger trains and larger
> layouts. There are rumors that LEGO is already working on this.
Let's hope so, but let's hope also that the turnout geometry is fixed to
allow a proper crossover between two tracks a standard width apart and for
more realistic siding formations. Tricky, I agree, and the current setup is
better than the 4.5v/12v configuration, I suppose...
Huw
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: 5 points<long post>
|
| (...) Actually, I would argue that the 4.5v/12v turnouts have a better geometry than the 9v. Adjacent tracks touching looks a lot better (and gets more yard into a small space) than adjacent tracks being so far apart. Of course the 4.5v/12v geometry (...) (22 years ago, 5-Aug-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 5 points<long post>
|
| (...) Ok, since you asked: 1: Larger radius curved track. The current track geometry is good for small layouts, but difficult to work with for larger trains and larger layouts. There are rumors that LEGO is already working on this. 2: Larger driver (...) (22 years ago, 5-Aug-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- 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
|
|
|
|
