 | | Re: Not LEGO, but trains( $$$ for 2200 foot loop of track) —Mike Poindexter
|
| | | Will Middelaer <betamale@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote in message news:Fr0x87.Cu1@lugnet.com... (...) best (...) his (...) yard, (...) Actually, track was very recently (and still possibly) $13.25 per box, so that would cut the cost down to $8745, which is (...) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Not LEGO, but trains( $$$ for 2200 foot loop of track) —Oliver Giesen
|
| | | | | G'Day The rather ambitious project below would be a fantastic way for LegoDirect to provide support. And when it is over they can cover their costs by selling the used track as used track at a discount and recover some of their promotional costs and (...) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Not LEGO, but trains( $$$ for 2200 foot loop of track) —John Gerlach
|
| | | | (...) <snip> (...) But by having electrically isolated lengths of track, you could start one train, and once it had moved onto the next section of track you could start another one. We could easily have ten trains running at once. JohnG, GMLTC (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Not LEGO, but trains( $$$ for 2200 foot loop of track) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Or more. We would just need to make some of the blocks shorter so people could slow down trains that were gaining on the one in front of them while they were in the short block... but each regular block could have 2 trains on it at once, (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Not LEGO, but trains( $$$ for 2200 foot loop of track) —Jeff Elliott
|
| | | | It's a long trek, but I think I'd come to Minneapolis to see a 2200' train layout. And if I came, I'd certainly bring my 60' of straight track. Y'know, I think there's enough people out there with 10' or more of straight track, that this *could* be (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
| | | | |
