@emperorofthenorthpole
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I wasn’t able to make it this year due to prior obligations.
They did put a layout together and it’s very likely that somethings will change, the first of which may be the height of the rail.
I’ll be sure to post the revisions once they are finalized.
If you are referring to the R104 turns, they are done all with straight track. They space the outer tie by 1/2 stud per piece of straight track and it makes a long gentle curve.
Did not notice that, but that still creates a problem with the amount of money needed to buy that much straight track. Unless we buy them through Lego (using the LUGbulk like program for Big LUG projects, Sorry I honestly cant remember the name) it honestly might be cheaper to just buy the 3rd party track as opposed to brick linking all that straight track.
For what its worth, I am absolutely for this. I think we have gone too long without a LUG standard and it is about time we get one that will work for us and we stick to it. I just want to make everyone aware of what goes into it. for those wondering about MILS and ballasting parts for this standard, reference this: http://l-gauge.org/wiki/index.php/Reference_Instructions . Regardless, I think this should be brought up at the q2 meeting, and we should draft some examples of this for q3 that way we can get the ball rolling on parts ordering and what not.
Actuaally Bricktracks is R104 and R120. The method using curves to make straights is somewhere in the neighborhood of R256.
I’d love to see this adopted as the LUG standard for train layouts. PennLUG will be rebuilding its layout and we’ll be taking a very similar approach. It’s not intended to replace LUG layouts, but provide a separate platform for collaborations.
If anyone has questions, let me know. I’m on the “rules committee” and we’re still pretty open to suggestions right now while we get a first layout together at Brickworld Chicago this year.
