Subject:
|
Re: New Track radius question
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Fri, 20 Sep 2002 16:49:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1633 times
|
| |
|
|
> > > Questions:
> > > 1) How far a part should the tracks be around a curve?
> In lugnet.trains, Matthew Bates writes:
> > I think the radius of a larger curve should be 56 studs, i.e. 16 larger than
> > the current radius of 40 (not 20). This would put parallel tracks 16 studs
> > apart just like they are with the current points. I haven't thought about
> > clearance but I'm sure this would be more than sufficient. I think any other
> > geometry would be messy.
In lugnet.trains, James Mathis writes:
> Steve, Mike, and Matt: Thanks for thinking and posting about this larger
> radius of curvature...and so long ago! I'm playing catch-up!
>
> I did a little sketching of the current track geometry and a few circles of
> radius = 56 studs (56 studs to center of track curve). Once, again, thanks
> to Matt Bates, for you (his) Track Designer application...
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=24729
I think this is spot on - I think the loop with the two points adding an
outer half-circle illustrates it best.
What you want to be able to do is to take a quarter circle with a straight
added to each end, and have your new curvature fit that.
Anything else is just asking to complicate the geometry even further. 16
studs between centres should be enough passing room (Nazi gun trains
notwithstanding :-).
Jason J Railton
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: New Track radius question
|
| (...) Steve, Mike, and Matt: Thanks for thinking and posting about this larger radius of curvature...and so long ago! I'm playing catch-up! I did a little sketching of the current track geometry and a few circles of radius = 56 studs (56 studs to (...) (22 years ago, 6-Sep-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
