06-18-2010, 05:14 AM
ocalicreek Wrote:Okay so I just followed your link over to the trainboard forum. Minor uproar indeed! :o
Hi Galen --
Where do you see a "minor uproar" ? I have followed Justin's design threads for quite a while (in several other forums, e.g. this thread: http://www.trainboard.com/grapevine/show...p?t=118794), and in my opinion, there was no "uproar" in the thread you read.
Justin just got told that even though his current track plan is perfectly fine prototypically, it might create more interesting switching (on a *model* railroad) to include a runaround.
It was also pointed out (politely) to him that when he used the excuses "there isn't enough room for a runaround" and "I can't afford an extra turnout", those excuses were fairly weak - there was room for a runaround, and a turnout would cost fairly little compared with what he needed for all the buildings in his track plan.
Nobody had any problem with: "I don't want to have a runaround" - that is a perfectly legitimate design decision.
Justin - design is looking good. Now get started on building it (says the man whose progress on his own layout is rather slow at times) :-)
Smile,
Stein