Subject:
|
Re: Moonbase: Nailing down Moonway and Rail Standard
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space, lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Tue, 18 May 2004 04:56:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
383 times
|
| |
|
|
You got me thinking and, they *can* work alongside each other : )
Check it out :
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/xanthra47/moonbase/tracks.jpg
And just to prove that I really spend way too much time in front of a
computer screen, I made some low polygon, mockup, moonbase elements in
MLcad to try out ideas for layouts:
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/xanthra47/moonbase/layout.m.jpg
I was trying to re-create last year's moonbase setup at Brickfest. I'm
not sure if I used the right number of tables (6 ?) or if the size of
the tables is correct (3'x 6' ?)
PLMKWYT
-JSM
Purple Dave wrote:
> The advantage to that design is that the area between modules should already
> have 8-stud/9-brick clearance, so as long as the train isn't too high, it should
> be able to pass through safely without any major modifications to existing
> modules. The advantage to the path detailed with the official Moonbase standard
> is that it can run adjacent to a module, rather than below it, allowing for
> cargo to be offloaded into a warehouse, or attached to a standard Moonbase
> corridor. Unfortunately, since the straights are 16-studs long instead of
> 8-studs, you can't do both with unmodified track.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
18 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
|
|
|
|
