Subject:
|
Re: First draft of the Lego-Modular Train layout standards posted..
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains, lugnet.trains.org
|
Date:
|
Fri, 31 Mar 2000 00:40:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2513 times
|
| |
|
|
I knew that there was something I forgot to include! I think 16 was what we
mentioned for tunnel clearances. I LOVED Brian Williams' suggestion of
having the entrance to the tunnel removable so that a smaller or larger
"mouth" could be added to look more in scale with different rolling stock.
This would allow a tunnel that was just right for an 8 wide, 15.3 high car
to go through to be quickly converted to look just right for 6 wide 13 high
cars to enter.
14 high might sound good, but if you build an 8 wide with a pantograph, I
think you will run into problems. I am personally putting 15 2/3 bricks
from the top of the ballast (that is where the track sits) to the lowest
clearance point in the tunnel. That should allow a 15 high train to pass
with no problems and a 15.3 to be relatively safe (but might hit if the
track comes up a bit and the tunnel sags, or hits a bump where some track
join kind of rough).
Is 44 long enough for 8 wide stock? That translates to a 55 foot long car.
I would have though 64 studs (80 feet), or at the minimum 56 studs (70
feet). What is the longest train car that could be considered very common?
You would have to worry about both the interior of the curve where the car
hangs over and also the outside of the curve where the nose might stick out
if the trucks are set back a bit, like they are on many locomotives.
When this is agreed on for length between wheel sets and length in front of
the front wheelset and behind the rear one, I will add the clearance
requirements to the standards.
Mike Poindexter
John Kelly <jkelly69@skypoint.com> wrote in message
news:Fs9FKz.AMK@lugnet.com...
> I'm not sure that we've really set a hard top yet. By guess is that 14 • will
> be probably the high end, mostly because the tunnels start to look really
> silly if they need to let through cars that are taller than that. A lot • of
> that will depend on how poor the tunnels look at higher clearances.
>
> -john
>
>
>
>
> In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In lugnet.trains, Robert Green writes:
> > > Is there going to be a standard size car/rolling stock standard?
> > > i.e.,clearance on all tracks for something 8x44x14 (or whatever)
> >
> > 8x44 but I am not sure about the height. John Kelly?
> >
> > Note that 8x44 allows 7xM and 6xN (where N>M>44) due to curve effects, • although
> > I am not quite sure what the values of M and N are. That's why I • personally am
> > pleased to see layouts switching to 8 wide standards, it gives more room • for
> my
> > longerish 6 wide creations.
> >
> > ++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
24 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
|
|
|
|
