To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.trainsOpen lugnet.trains in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Trains / 28271
    New TLC standard for containers? —Tim David
   6 wide but only 8 long (URL) (Click for bigger) (URL) Rest of catalogue> Tim (18 years ago, 23-Dec-06, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
   
        Re: New TLC standard for containers? —Tim David
     (...) doh, 10 studs long (18 years ago, 23-Dec-06, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
   
        Re: New TLC standard for containers? —John Neal
     (...) Yawn. What took them so long? (URL) :-) JOHN (18 years ago, 23-Dec-06, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
   
        Re: New TLC standard for containers? —Timothy Gould
   (...) It's such an unappealling aspect ratio. 6x12 would match the old ones better but I'd be more inclined to 6x14 or 6x16. 6x10 just looks nothing like a real container (half or full). Tim (18 years ago, 23-Dec-06, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
   
        Re: New TLC standard for containers? —John Neal
   (...) Could be because it is just off of the golden mean: 3:2 (...) Speaking of the containers-- is that a new element on them; a 1x5x6 thin wall-type thing? JOHN (18 years ago, 23-Dec-06, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
   
        Re: New TLC standard for containers? —Timothy Gould
     (...) actually 10:6 = 5:3 = 1.66 is closer to the golden mean (1.618...) than 3:2 = 1.5 ;) (...) Moved to .o-t.geek (18 years ago, 23-Dec-06, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
    
         Re: New TLC standard for containers? —John Neal
     (...) I don't know what I was thinking when I wrote 3:2. I meant that 6:10 is just off the golden ratio of 6:9.7... Though I was confused there, you make the case that the aspect ratio is actually a pleasant one, as opposed to your initial (...) (18 years ago, 23-Dec-06, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
    
         Re: New TLC standard for containers? —Timothy Gould
     (...) No doubt it's pleasant but it's a shipping container so it should be practical and is this unappealling ;) Tim (18 years ago, 23-Dec-06, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
   
        Re: New TLC standard for containers? —Ross Crawford
     (...) Could well be. Also looks like a new bigger boat hull - AFAIK the largest to date is (URL) this> (besides the (URL) Belville one>), and this looks considerably larger than that - at least 16 wide, and by my count at least 70 long. ROSCO (18 years ago, 23-Dec-06, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
    
         Re: New TLC standard for containers? —Steve Lane
     (...) That's very interesting I've had the genus of a boat idea for a while now, which could now amount to something. Would require two hulls though. Steve (18 years ago, 24-Dec-06, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
   
        Re: New TLC standard for containers? —Adrian Egli
     In lugnet.trains, John Neal wrote: -snipped- (...) (URL) This> picture makes me think so. Adr. (18 years ago, 24-Dec-06, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
    
         Re: New TLC standard for containers? —Rich Stehnach
     It makes a lot of sense - give the KIDS a container large enough to actually have room for placing things inside. AFOLs can always use their own/old "standard". (18 years ago, 24-Dec-06, to lugnet.trains)
   
        Re: New TLC standard for containers? —Ondrew Hartigan
     (...) Welll yes and no. Indeed it's a new element from Lego however megablox has had that element for a while. In the megajunk version they used it as a translucent window. This new "now Lego" element opens doors too much lighter models especially (...) (18 years ago, 24-Dec-06, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
   
        Re: New TLC standard for containers? —Jan-Albert van Ree
   (...) Here's to hoping they'll soon do a trans-white version! (18 years ago, 24-Dec-06, to lugnet.trains)
 

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR