Subject:
|
Re: New mod to double decker passenger train
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Mon, 24 Jan 2000 18:44:26 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
(johnneal@uswest.)spamless(net)
|
Viewed:
|
4850 times
|
| |
|
|
Tony Priestman wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2000, John Neal (<388BA775.B41630A@uswest.net>) wrote at
> 01:15:05
>
> >
> >
> > Tony Priestman wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I seem to recall 70' as a coach length in the UK, for older stock,
> > > anyway. The newer coaches are probably longer (I'm not a train spotter
> > > any more :-). How long are the prototypes of the stuff you've modelled?
>
> Actually, on thinking again, it's probably 57-60' for older stuff, and
> 70' for newer.
>
> I might have a go at a Mk I BR coach, just to see what it looks like :-)
> >
> > These coaches were about 80 feet (25 m), so they were *long*. When I build 8
> > wide, I figure 1 stud to 1 ft, and still my coaches are only 60 studs long.
> > I'd love to make them 80, but they wouldn't be able to handle the LEGO track
> > curves very well.
>
> A bigger radius would be *so* useful. Or even a half length straight to
> insert between the curves.
>
> > I build them upon 2 in line wagon plates, which ends up being
> > a nice size.
>
> Do you always use the wagon plates, or will ordinary plates and long 1xn
> beams do the job?
Oh sure, but using the wagon plates is IMO just more efficient, uses less bricks
and is lighter (they are heavy enough as it is;-)
-John
>
> >
>
> --
> Tony Priestman
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: New mod to double decker passenger train
|
| On Mon, 24 Jan 2000, John Neal (<388BA775.B41630A@uswest.net>) wrote at 01:15:05 (...) Actually, on thinking again, it's probably 57-60' for older stuff, and 70' for newer. I might have a go at a Mk I BR coach, just to see what it looks like :-) (...) (27 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
26 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
