Subject:
|
Re: New train MOCs
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Thu, 3 Aug 2000 16:39:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1095 times
|
| |
|
|
I was thinking of using the "spring" to center the coupler when it was not
coupled. This way you could back up to the car and couple without having to
manually align the coupler. When negotiating turns the spring would allow
the coupler to swing, and hopefully when pushing, the spring would provide
enough force to keep the coupler fairly straight. I haven't tried this, and
I'm pessimistic that the spring will be strong enough.
"Christopher Masi" <cmasi@cmasi.chem.tulane.edu> wrote in message
news:398891D6.C3EB49A2@cmasi.chem.tulane.edu...
> I do not have spings, so I was trying to avoid a design that would need
> springs. Would you use the springs to hold the coupler in the locked or
> non-pivoting mode and when the train went around a curve the spring would
> allow the shaft to come out of the channel and pivot? The advantage I see
> to the spring is that the spring would ensure that the coupler slid into
> the locked position, where as simply using the backward motion may not
> guarantee that the coupler slid into the locked position.
>
> chris
>
> James Powell wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.trains, Thomas Cook writes:
> > > YES! I know this has been done in model railroading, so it should be
> > > possible in LEGO too. I look forward to a successful design, Chris.
> >
> >
> > How about the spring blocks like in 4559 for the crossing gates?
> >
> > Would they work?
> >
> > James
>
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: New train MOCs
|
| I do not have spings, so I was trying to avoid a design that would need springs. Would you use the springs to hold the coupler in the locked or non-pivoting mode and when the train went around a curve the spring would allow the shaft to come out of (...) (24 years ago, 2-Aug-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
26 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
