Subject:
|
Re: LL Trains (was Re:8 wide and bigger(was Re: 8 Wide)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Mon, 24 Jan 2000 23:34:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1929 times
|
| |
|
|
> Absolutely. 16 wide is ridiculously wide for LEGO track gauge;
Not really true. If you accept that the track gauge is 5 studs, then 3x5=15,
which is the maxiumum proportion one should use (3x the track gauge is how wide
the maximum normal load should be)
For example, the SRRL #9 (2-4-4T was 7'3" wide, on a track gauge of 2', fairly
close to 3:1). Most of the standard gauge stuff I peard at was aroudn 10'6"
wide, so around 10 studs on the lego track would be right for standard gauge
proportions.
Its funny just how the proportions change from narrow gauge to NA loading
gauge. I'm not quite sure _how_ big a 7' 1/4" engine would go outside the
frames, but I suspect not all that far (Brunel's Broad Gauge, GWR UK if you are
wondering)
James Powell
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LL Trains (was Re:8 wide and bigger(was Re: 8 Wide)
|
| (...) wide (...) are (...) I checked out the smaller (UK) prototype train models at LL Windsor - they are 18 studs wide and were a job to count whilst the trains were on the move. This translates to 144mm wide - about right for an 8'6" to 9' wide (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LL Trains (was Re:8 wide and bigger(was Re: 8 Wide)
|
| (...) Absolutely. 16 wide is ridiculously wide for LEGO track gauge; it would have to be on G scale gauge. Now Frank, there is no law (yet;) that says one only must build in one scale-- I build a little in minifig (for the GMLTC layout), mostly in (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
32 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
|
|
|
|
