The topics covered in another thread about how different people view modeling from different personal, and cultural perspectives. Although a bit tumultuous at times, the last few posts were quite interesting, and informative. I invite a slight reprise of topics covered; Regional differences, focus on scale, the occasional whimsical thought, as well as others new bits of info, and civil personal views here.
I liked the thought of the Brit's focus on the local light rails. It definitely mirrors the usefulness of the early "backwoods" short lines of early America in a way. I wonder if the focus on regional style was naturally tighter for the English sect of modeling, just do to the fact the country has more definition in regional styling? After all, We are influenced by our surroundings if nothing else.
Aha! I just remarked on that other thread that there seemed some tetchiness and that the subject probably needed its own thread. And you made one. Many thanks.
In case anyone thinks that I am trying to say that UK modelling is better than the US in any way, can I point out that a lot of UK built layouts on the exhibition circuit are dull and lack imagination and that for a decade or so UK modelling of structures and scenery has lagged some way behind the best in the US.
That said, the best in the UK is very good indeed. This is just to give a flavour.
Pempoul - French narrow-gauge in 1:50 scale http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEuTB6Iuje8 everything except the rail and the wheels has been built from scratch. It's a ten year labour of love from a husband and wife team.
Crumley & Little Wickhill - North of England narrow-gauge in 4mm scale on N gauge track. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oxo-KbrNRYM a truly exceptional piece of work and very clever design to capture an entire valley. The product of a group of modellers.
World's End Quay - Light/industrial railway in 1 Gauge, 10mm to the foot on 45 mm gauge track. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/179/entry-393-worlds-end-quay/ beautiful work showing that even very large scale can be done in a small space. The work of one man.
I think maybe excitement over the new scenery here may have skewed your view, ie, looked fine and far enough from the norm for me, to be very interesting. I only saw a million questions because Ive never been to Europe, or deeply looked into railroad workings there :D! Like the bits that look like "shovel handles" under the x-shape on the boxcars in the first video. Is it a strap? hinge? My favorite has got to be the 1 scale layout for the flocking on the grass, and the "old shop barn", and the molded brick, and the wooden trackfill, and the. ::).......yea I liked it ;D. The large scale figurine work I saw, and tend to be attracted to, seems to have just the right touch of whimsy for me. Its easier to ad a little "life" to them at that scale. One thing I noted while watching this,(keep in mind Im a "high speed O-gauge looper") The 1:50 video. At that good of prototype speed I never wanted to hear "chuff" from a sound system so bad ever. It was a very nice cupola car too. Is that right? What is the proper UK term for it?
You know Skarloey, I at least thought You might be able to take a stab at the ID of that 3d layout I posted on the layout thread. Its set in Merionthshire.
Hi GG
I'm Colin, BTW. Being called Skar makes me feel like a character in a fantasy novel.
Those links are to the best I've seen, allowing for my heavily skewed interest towards narrow-gauge and light/industrial railways. I tend not to remember the less interesting layouts, but I assure you there are plenty of them. :(
I have no idea what the shovel handle shaped framing on the box cars might be. The prototype is a French metre gauge line that vanished in the 1960s. Nor can I recall what the French call the cupolas on the wagons. Essentially they protected the brakes man. It reminds me that one difference between the UK and US is that while modelling overseas prototypes isn't common in the UK it is more common (so far as I can tell) than in the US. Common enough to support a magazine like Continental Modeller, a monthly UK publication specifically serving those who model non-British prototypes.
I agree with you about the gauge 1 layout. The movement and heft of a steam loco is best shown at large scale.
The other layout didn't come off well on the video. The clever aspect is that the way it is designed forces the viewer to look down the length of it so from either direction the train seems to disappear down/up the valley away from the viewer over a distance of some 12 feet. That's a very unusual, but very lifelike perspective. All other models I can think of have the trains passing across the viewer's field of vision left to right or right to left.
Sound is only just catching on over here and among those exhibiting there is some resistance to it as an entire weekend listening to someone's trains apparently gets a bit tiresome!
I'll see if I can ID that layout.
Quote from: GG1onFordsDTandI on September 09, 2013, 01:02:18 AM
You know Skarloey, I at least thought You might be able to take a stab at the ID of that 3d layout I posted on the layout thread. Its set in Merionthshire.
Merionethshire? Is that the design with the balloon loops and umpteen wyes?
Re: the "shovel handles" - I'm going to guess that they may be some kind of mechanism to open what I believe are windows where those small X-braces are located. Those French box cars could be used to haul livestock (see the "forty and eight" cars) and ventilation would be important.
Quote from: Skarloey Railway on September 09, 2013, 06:41:18 AM
Hi GG
I'm Colin, BTW. Being called Skar makes me feel like a character in a fantasy novel.
Those links are to the best I've seen, allowing for my heavily skewed interest towards narrow-gauge and light/industrial railways. I tend not to remember the less interesting layouts, but I assure you there are plenty of them. :(
I agree with you about the gauge 1 layout. The movement and heft of a steam loco is best shown at large scale.
The other layout didn't come off well on the video. The clever aspect is that the way it is designed forces the viewer to look down the length of it so from either direction the train seems to disappear down/up the valley away from the viewer over a distance of some 12 feet. That's a very unusual, but very lifelike perspective. All other models I can think of have the trains passing across the viewer's field of vision left to right or right to left.
Sound is only just catching on over here and among those exhibiting there is some resistance to it as an entire weekend listening to someone's trains apparently gets a bit tiresome!
I'll see if I can ID that layout.
OK Colin, although I admit if you don't sign posts as Colin, Im likely to preserve privacy by using ....??? Skarface ?;D?(I may forget too :-[)
The diagonal/length view does add quite a bit of depth, speaking of depth the rolling valleys on the smaller displays were very grandiose too. The up close, left to right view, is how I liked to watch my Grandfather run his lighted passenger trains in the dark. Id try to not move except for my eyes, and then try to identify the passenger cars going by at speed like I was standing near it..
The few sound locos I have spend most of the time sound off because I run lots of steam, looping and usually at a scale 90mph ::). Older PW O is noisy enough, combine it with non stop chuff, bells, and whistle, and you have an assault on the senses that wipes out sound from the real world a bit too well. After forty+ years my ears are "in tune" with the natural track sounds of O gauge too, any problems are often heard before spotted, especially at higher speeds, and the new sounds interfere with that. But in a slow switching environment I love it! Even diesel movement becomes exiting for me, with the rhythms of air brakes, fan, turbines, and stuff . I couldn't resist finding an operating hot box car(smoking bearings, and squeal) for
occasional use.(its the most annoying thing ever produced for a model railroad).
Scale sizes, and how they tend to be modeled, vs the type of detail I prefer, mainly as many operating items as possible, is one of the reasons I lean to the larger scales. If our trains were static models, Id stick to rail fanning, and history. I like doors that open, water tower pipes that lower, swing, or telescope, cranes that lift, guys throwing things out the door of a freight car, pot belly stoves making a caboose smoke, coal and lumber dumping/loading. The less toy like cars are the better, but well, I like toys too, allot. N and HO trains don't really offer that operating ability. Small scale locos of today, are little marvels of model engineering, the older ones not so much. too jerky for my taste. Also. only one engine smaller than S lasted a year for me, even as an adult. Scale products in O are often much more expensive than their smaller counterparts too. One reason is size, but the reasons for HO being the most popular world wide I think is obvious, its the biggest size available with reasonable "prototypical" track radius, and with popularity, lower cost. I think its the reason for the On30 trends also. The cost part has been offset for some by the lower cost of HO track. As far as modeling the opposite shores I think there was a lack of exposure to UK rail. Before Thomas, the only things I knew about were the Mallard, and Scottsman in steam, Croc's(2) and Valtellina for electrics, they were the only five European engines Grandpa owned, all brass and only the mallard was painted. If I ever go modern era, I think the Japanese trains would be my target. High speed, styling both serious and outrageous, the Nankai 50000 Rapi:t is definitely a train I could live with, even in small scale.
Quote from: ebtnut on September 09, 2013, 11:06:29 AM
Re: the "shovel handles" - I'm going to guess that they may be some kind of mechanism to open what I believe are windows where those small X-braces are located. Those French box cars could be used to haul livestock (see the "forty and eight" cars) and ventilation would be important.
Interesting, forming a little awning I too!?!?
Quote from: ebtnut on September 09, 2013, 11:06:29 AM
Re: the "shovel handles" - I'm going to guess that they may be some kind of mechanism to open what I believe are windows where those small X-braces are located. Those French box cars could be used to haul livestock (see the "forty and eight" cars) and ventilation would be important.
I've found this pic of the real thing: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Couvert_Breton.jpg Haven't the foggiest how they work but I think ventilation is a good deduction.
Colin.
Here is one in the ouvert, er.....opened position.
http://cfcdn.chez.com/wagonRB.htm
Quote from: TimR on September 09, 2013, 05:20:29 PM
Here is one in the ouvert, er.....opened position.
http://cfcdn.chez.com/wagonRB.htm
Thank you. I'd never have guessed they slid down. I assumed they swung out but couldn't see where they hinged.
Not what I expected Colin but with that photo it was easy for me to see to see. The notches at different heights were the first clue, then I spotted the welded triangle stops, because I love to weld, and the finally outer guide plates over top the structural steel. I thought about the clearances, and wind lift on the non existent awnings too, it just didn't make allot of sense to me mechanically. Thanks to you Colin, and Tim for taking time, Im a little more worldly now. ;) Do these operate(open) on any euro-scale models? I also saw similar window panels on what I thought was an English car, sans "shovel handle" any idea what the trick to operation is on them?
Im wondering now if the 3d landscape is a bit too obscure. I thought some one would make a stab at it. One of my Grandfathers brought back a children's book from overseas, while visiting Welsh relatives. It wasn't Thomas ::). Later I saw an animated TV show for kids by the same title and assumed it was also at least somewhat popular...I liked it. Recently I saw it mentioned on another site, some one was doing a very loose interpretation of it, and I, remembering a map, I found it and decided to learn the SCARM program a little better, recreating the rail map of where the little green train ran, in 3d SCARM.
one of the biggest difference I can see between us modeling and European modeling has to do with the terminal facilities. in Europe and the uk, passenger trains are very common, so modeling often focuses on the intricate trackage around station areas. also most lines have at least 2 tracks.
in the us, passenger trains are rare in most of the country, with freight trains running on single track common. thus our efforts focus on small yards and moving freight. the only places we have European type passenger terminals are in the major cities like new York and Chicago, where commuter trains dominate. those terminals see few if any freight trains, and on those passenger heavy lines railroads tend to run freight at night rather than get stuck in a siding for hours during the day.
I watched a segment on the History channel about Freight Trains and they commented that in the US, 97% of all trains are heavy freight, which includes coal and ore as well. Only 3% was passenger service.
I also found it humerously interesting that they said the demise of a lot of train service came in the 50's & 60's with the arrival of the interstate highways and shipping by trucks, which had only started reversing itself in the 90's with a lot of heavy rail freight service. They then showed a segment on freight car maintenance and construction as well as Diesel locomotive construction, and it showed during the construction and maintenance of the freight cars and during the construction of the locomotive, where they build or repaired the entire freight car and built the entire engine frame, diesel, generator and support systems, then they pick it all up and set it down on the two trucks. Interestingly enough, probably due to the Teamsters Union, even now it seems that trains are still being moved with "trucks"! ;D ;)
Oh the irony! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rd_CAvruEIg
Quote from: jward on September 10, 2013, 07:40:47 AM
one of the biggest difference I can see between us modeling and European modeling has to do with the terminal facilities. in Europe and the uk, passenger trains are very common, so modeling often focuses on the intricate trackage around station areas. also most lines have at least 2 tracks.
in the us, passenger trains are rare in most of the country, with freight trains running on single track common. thus our efforts focus on small yards and moving freight. the only places we have European type passenger terminals are in the major cities like new York and Chicago, where commuter trains dominate. those terminals see few if any freight trains, and on those passenger heavy lines railroads tend to run freight at night rather than get stuck in a siding for hours during the day.
That's the situation today. Back in the pre-car and pre-airline age I suspect UK and US rail traffic was much the same. Today, the bulk of traffic in the UK is passenger and most freight goes by road whereas in the US, as I understand it, passenger traffic had been lost to airlines and the car while the greater distance involved in freight movement is enough to offset the cost of transshipment from rail to road.
A type of model RR that basically doesn't exist in the UK is where an entire section of RR is modelled with multiple stations, freight yards and so on. Reading Model Railroader (the only US model RR magazine easily available in the UK) it seems every US modeller owns a basement the size of an Olympic swimming pool and a RR empire to suit. I suspect this isn't true! The great bulk of UK model layouts have one or at most two stations.
Colin
If any of you US types are planning to visit the UK, I strongly recommend a visit to the Isle of Man. They have one of everything - narrow gauge steam, a working horsecar around the Douglass harbor, a narrow gauge trolley line, and an electric/rack trolley up to the top of the tallest mountain. You can see and ride it all in two good days.
A busy two days! There are actually three narrow gauge steam railways on the Isle of Man. The 3' gauge Isle of Man Steam railway most people are familiar with, the charming 2' gauge Groudle Glen Railway http://www.ggr.org.uk/ and the eccentric 19" gauge Laxey Mines Railway http://www.laxeyminerailway.im/sidebar/restoration-of-the-railway.aspx Given that the electric tramway between Douglas and Ramsey is 3' gauge and the tramway up Snaefell is rack fitted 3'6" gauge you could, with a bit of planning, manage steam on 3 gauges and electric on 2 gauges, not to mention the horse drawn tramway.
Travel may no longer be an option for me due to an injury Vs $ on hand. But if I can, after I finish off a few more places Id like to see in North America, and maybe a Bullet train ride in Japan, England is my next stop for sure. My sister spent a few years going to school there, and though back for many years, still tells me I should just move there. Not visit, but move. Outside of the pub brawls, she seems to think the "vibe" fits my personality to a tee. She also brings up the Isle of Man quite a bit. Maybe I should consider it more deeply? The world keeps pointing me there ;).
OK ...no 3d layout guesses... It is a map of the tracks of the M&LRTCL Merioneth and Llantisilly Railway Traction Company Limited, home to Ivor the Engine, and Edwin Jones "the Steam", his driver. I'm not sure if its that obscure, or if I'm just that much older, but that's what it is. Have you at least heard of them? I thought he was mildly popular at least.
Quote from: Skarloey Railway on September 10, 2013, 01:51:16 PM
A type of model RR that basically doesn't exist in the UK is where an entire section of RR is modelled with multiple stations, freight yards and so on. Reading Model Railroader (the only US model RR magazine easily available in the UK) it seems every US modeller owns a basement the size of an Olympic swimming pool and a RR empire to suit. I suspect this isn't true! The great bulk of UK model layouts have one or at most two stations.
Colin
it is true that many of us like to model a whole railroad, ala shortline, or a section of a larger railroad. but it is true that not all of us have a huge area to work with. there is an art form to smaller layouts.
as for model railroader, I don't think they are really representative of us modellers. for one most of us are more intelligent than the 6th grade reading level writing in mr would represent. a lot of us are quite well versed in our respective areas of study. another thing is that mr tends to feature layouts with long straight sections along each wall. they think linearly, I think vertically. this is the difference between say, pelle seborg vs john allen. the effects are quite different. it's the difference between having a layout which uses straight track to unintentionally remind you how small it is, vs one that seems to extend beyond the room, where sometimes you can't tell where the walls actually are.
Things have certainly been moving apace on the Isle of Man since I visited in the late '80's. The Groudle Glen line wan't on our itinerary, and the Laxey Mine tram wasn't even a dream back then. The Laxey Wheel was impressive enough, though. What is the gauge of the Laxey tram? And my, but those little lokies are small!
Quote from: jward on September 10, 2013, 10:11:51 PM
it is true that many of us like to model a whole railroad, ala shortline, or a section of a larger railroad. but it is true that not all of us have a huge area to work with. there is an art form to smaller layouts.
as for model railroader, I don't think they are really representative of us modellers. for one most of us are more intelligent than the 6th grade reading level writing in mr would represent. a lot of us are quite well versed in our respective areas of study. another thing is that mr tends to feature layouts with long straight sections along each wall. they think linearly, I think vertically. this is the difference between say, pelle seborg vs john allen. the effects are quite different. it's the difference between having a layout which uses straight track to unintentionally remind you how small it is, vs one that seems to extend beyond the room, where sometimes you can't tell where the walls actually are.
[/quote]
MR does leave a lot to be desired. I also get a free online mag, Model Railroad Hobbyist, which has a higher level of intelligence. I do like Seborg's work, though. The long straight sections along the wall aren't nearly so bad as what happens when two long straight sections meet at 90 degrees. It's as though the viewer just isn't supposed to notice those bits! The one that annoys me most, though, is two lines of track supposedly separated by many prototype miles running adjacent to each other. I don't care that one track is 10" higher than the other, it just looks wrong. It's for that reason that John Allen's work doesn't really do it for me. That said, using benchwork to create a multi-level RR works well for my eye because each scene is separate.
Colin.
Quote from: ebtnut on September 11, 2013, 11:45:49 AM
Things have certainly been moving apace on the Isle of Man since I visited in the late '80's. The Groudle Glen line wan't on our itinerary, and the Laxey Mine tram wasn't even a dream back then. The Laxey Wheel was impressive enough, though. What is the gauge of the Laxey tram? And my, but those little lokies are small!
The Laxey Mines Railway is 19" gauge. The electric tramway from Laxey to the top of Snaefell is a rack-operated 3'6" gauge line.
Quote from: GG1onFordsDTandI on September 10, 2013, 08:06:56 PM
OK ...no 3d layout guesses... It is a map of the tracks of the M&LRTCL Merioneth and Llantisilly Railway Traction Company Limited, home to Ivor the Engine, and Edwin Jones "the Steam", his driver. I'm not sure if its that obscure, or if I'm just that much older, but that's what it is. Have you at least heard of them? I thought he was mildly popular at least.
I was a fan of Ivor but had no idea his line was anything like as complicated. It resembles the map of the London Underground more than anything in North Wales.
Hm-m-m-m. Three foot gauge, two foot gauge and 19" gauge steam, 36" gauge and 42" gauge electric trams, commercial horsecar service. Wonder if someone would be brave enough to suggest a national narrow gauge convention on the Isle?
Quote from: Skarloey Railway on September 11, 2013, 01:54:37 PM
Quote from: jward on September 10, 2013, 10:11:51 PM
The one that annoys me most, though, is two lines of track supposedly separated by many prototype miles running adjacent to each other. I don't care that one track is 10" higher than the other, it just looks wrong. It's for that reason that John Allen's work doesn't really do it for me. That said, using benchwork to create a multi-level RR works well for my eye because each scene is separate.
Colin.
you would hate pittsburgh, and many other places in this area then. around here, railroads parallel each other at different elevations. they cross each other on bridges, some quite spectacular. where I live, I have the former pennsy mainline in my backyard, down the hill was the b&o and p&le running side by side, and on the other side of the river, the pennsy and union rr also parallel each other. 2 miles from my house the union and pennsy cross the river side by side, overtop the b&o and p&le. on the other bank both the pennsy and union rr have major junctions, with the pennsy passing over the union once, and under it twice.
all of this is still in service with minor changes. the pennsy became Norfolk southern. the b&o and p&le are now part of csx, and portions of the b&o line have been torn out in favour of the p&le.
also, when running a john allen type layout, which is the entire point of such a layout, you are concentrating on where your train is and you really don't notice the other levels. to me that is more fun than watching a train orbit the room of wide open space.
Ah, if the prototype has two tracks parallel to each other I am totally fine with it. What I dislike is two or more parallel lines with each supposedly many miles away from the others. My particular interest is narrow-gauge and the image that narrow gauge conjures up, especially in the Western USA but even in parts of the UK, is two rails in the middle of nowhere. An image somewhat spoiled if there's another set of rails fifty yards 'up the hill' :o
Good point about how the operator sees his train, though. The human eye and brain can focus on one item and completely exclude anything else in the way a camera cannot.
"Once through the scene" has always been my logic when building model railways, right from a teenager.
Quote from: rogertra on September 12, 2013, 05:03:15 PM
"Once through the scene" has always been my logic when building model railways, right from a teenager.
I agree, and continuing the theatre metaphor, the scene is everything between the audience and the back drop.
Quote from: Skarloey Railway on September 12, 2013, 05:25:03 PM
Quote from: rogertra on September 12, 2013, 05:03:15 PM
"Once through the scene" has always been my logic when building model railways, right from a teenager.
I agree, and continuing the theatre metaphor, the scene is everything between the audience and the back drop.
And as I earn 100% of my living in technical theatre, I couldn't agree more. :)
Quote from: rogertra on September 12, 2013, 06:30:57 PM
And as I earn 100% of my living in technical theatre, I couldn't agree more. :)
Interesting. You could have some useful thoughts on the way a model railroad/way presents itself to the observer (audience) I have thought of it as a series of scenes arranged linearly, each separated by some form of visual or physical scene-break representing either something not modelled or elapsed time between scenes. (I should admit that I am a modeller only in theory nowadays, though I was a railway modeller into my early twenties (ie, thirty years ago) and was a professional modelmaker for many years so have practical experience as well.) In a scene involving a passing siding or spur or station there is both the setting for the scene and implied drama/action (or at least the potential for drama/action) within the scene. But as I said above, for narrow-gauge particularly, and for any gauge in general, the norm on a railroad is miles of plain single or double track with pockets of more complex trackwork here and there - the reverse of what we see on most models.
What I haven't figured out is a way to give the lengths of plain track connecting our sidings, spurs and stations any kind of action at all. This is odd because on the real thing the action of driving, firing and conducting does not let up in between stops. It has occurred to me that some kind of combination of scale modelling for loops, spurs and stations combined with computer modelling of the miles of track in between might more accurately reflect RR practise and the experience of being in charge of an engine.
Quote from: Skarloey Railway on September 11, 2013, 01:59:10 PM
Quote from: GG1onFordsDTandI on September 10, 2013, 08:06:56 PM
OK ...no 3d layout guesses... It is a map of the tracks of the M&LRTCL Merioneth and Llantisilly Railway Traction Company Limited, home to Ivor the Engine, and Edwin Jones "the Steam", his driver. I'm not sure if its that obscure, or if I'm just that much older, but that's what it is. Have you at least heard of them? I thought he was mildly popular at least.
I was a fan of Ivor but had no idea his line was anything like as complicated. It resembles the map of the London Underground more than anything in North Wales.
I "looped" the mainline ends together underground ;D...Silly me ;)
But the rest is pretty close to an illustrated map.
Thanks to all for supplying an interesting read! Please keep it rolling!
you cannot model what it's like to actually run an engine. I've run them, and even the computer simulators don't really capture the experience. on a model railroad the closest you can get would be to crank up the momentum settings all the way and try to run your train, having to change your throttle and brake settings and wait forever for the changes to take effect. you don't get the effect of the train kicking you in the butt as you start down a hill, you can't pull against the brakes, you have no dynamic braking to play with and you don't have to worry about your train getting away from you while you desperately try to recharge the air pressure because you used up all your air.
running an engine is an art form that even many of the professionals never truly master.
with some of the train simulators, you can get some of this effect but not all.
Having never run a loco, I wouldn't know. The control sensations are known only to those who have done it, for sure. The closest Ive come would be a front open car rider, "feeling", and hearing, the load shift behind us after an apex. The momentum and load, I think get in concept. Similar to the runaway effect of riding level into a curve, very heavy, then an immediate 7% downhill, with another 0-27 curve at the bottom, run in conventional. 12v to 4v max sudden drop, one chance to get it right, too soon you stall, to late, or not enough, you jump, too much drop, you hit neutral/reverse, worse than the stall. Looks like controlling that old EL-C rectifier, by necessity, is a bit more prototypical than my modeling. No wonder its enough to keep me occupied ;).
Skarloey Railway asked about what to do with scenery between towns, how to make it interesting and how to recreate the feeling of driving, firing and conducting between stops.
Well, you can't. It's that simple.
The distances between modelled towns, even on the largest of model railroads is insignificant compared to the real thing. Add to that it is impossible to recreate the actual operating and firing of a locomotive on a model railroad when, in fact, you are not "operating the locomotive" you are standing next to it running it remotely as a line side observer. Yes, some of us, myself included, like to operate our locomotives and thus our trains in a realistic fashion and at realistic speeds between towns and when switching etc.. But we are still a line side observer, we are not running the locomotive.
As for what to do with the scenery between towns the answer is, nothing. Nothing beyond nice scenery but nothing eye-catching. As mentioned above, the distances between our towns is insignificant compared to the real thing. Even on the largest model railroads, the distance between towns is what, three train lengths at most and how many of us are lucky enough to have that sort of space? For most of us, as the head end is arriving in the second town, the caboose is just leaving the first town. So the trick is, do not draw attention to the short gap between towns.
Sure, you can have a bridge over a river, that's nice, putting in a grade crossing is a good idea, you get to blow a 14L and ring the bell but mainly, boringly simple but well done scenery is all you need so as not to draw attention to the short gap between towns. Let the viewer's eye be drawn to the interesting buildings and industries that are in your towns, this will make your model railroad look bigger.
Like Jeff Ward, I've also operated locomotives up to an RS-3 and I've also fired and driven steam locos. Not in road freight service but in yard service and passenger service and nothing on the market comes even close to emulating that feeling. Not MSTS nor Trainz and not even the best one of all, Train Simulator.
You see, Roger, if that was the space I was limited with I would only model one location and everything else would be represented by the staging. I doubt most of you would even consider this a layout, but one of my favourites on the exhibition circuit is 'Dungeness Sidings'. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/15082-camrail-2010-including-photographic-retrospective/ and scroll down about halfway. It's one yard of plain gauge 1 track on a sleep-built retaining wall surrounded by a lot of shingle but it is very evocative of time and space, albeit a little low on operation.
But I would disagree with your approach to scenery partly because I prefer scenery to towns in real life and partly because the landscape is a dominant feature for most of the narrow gauge prototypes I prefer, such as on the Ferrocarril de Tocopilla al Toco in Chile: http://www.railpictures.net/photo/431208/
I agree with others that train simulators do not evoke standing on the footplate. I've only been on the footplate of a handful of small NG prototypes and the pitch yaw and roll along with the smell are pretty intense experiences and cannot be replicated on a PC. However, needing to 'drive' the train and manage the grades and curves for a length of time between stops must be better than a thirty second squeeze on the throttle as you clear one yard throat and enter the next.
Colin.
I agree that there are no good answers for the problem of too little run space, and lack of realistic control.
On my own model railroad, the problem of too little space between between towns was solved by modeling only one town. Nothing ever truly leaves town! Trains arrive and depart, and operate at restricted speed.
Trains arrive and depart by having their consists removed on a fiddle track, after pulling out of the passenger terminal. Trains laying over between arrival and departure are held on tracks, and power is run to their respective engine terminals.
This is helped by the fact that on my railroad, the first train of the day arrives at 4:30am and the last one leaves at 9:30pm. Then the terminal is empty until the next day. This is based on the actual operation of the location modeled.
As was typical of big-city terminals, arrivals end to be early to mid-morning, and departures tend to be early evening. The pace slows down in the afternoon. This allows passengers a full business day in the city, after traveling overnight from their originating city. And by going home in the early evening, they can get a night's rest aboard the train before arriving back at their home.
Momentum can give you some degree of realism, although I've advised against DCC for cost/benefit reasons.
Not all actual locomotives take a lot of time to get going. I remember trying out an N-scale locomotive at a hobby shop. The test track had a momentum throttle, but the loco was not DCC-equipped.
I opened the throttle, and nothing happened. This was with a single light unit. Being used to running actual locomotives, I opened the throttle a bit more. Suddenly the loco started moving backwards, right off the end of the track!
"A little slow to load", I observed.
Maybe a good momentum-equipped power pack would be a good compromise for those wanting momentum but wanting to avoid DCC.
I really like the concept of hidden staging tracks, but lack the space to develop this concept. I do have a long stretch of single-track mainline behind the backdrop of the railroad that I can store long trains out of sight in.
The key to running actual trains is to know how to control the air brakes and dynamic brakes in order to control the slack in the train. Think of it as playing an accordion. You need to try to keep it stretched or bunched as much as possible, to keep slack from running in and out of the train. That can result in a very rough ride and possible broken coupler knuckles. And if you have a lot of horsepower on the head end, you can break a coupler knuckle simply by accelerating too quickly, especially if the slack isn't run out.
On a model railroad, you haven't got a chance of duplicating that. The cars cannot be braked independently of the locomotives, and model passenger trains use the same coupler systems that the freight trains do. Thus passenger trains have the same slack considerations as freight trains. I've never run actual passenger trains, but I've run trains with occupied business cars in them. You have to be extremely careful not to jolt the cars.
Maybe, if realism in controlling the model were the top priority, the best solution would be to link a train driver type computer simulation with the control system on a model railroad. A micro-camera in the locomotive cab could put a display on the computer screen of the track ahead. I have operated full-sized loco simulators and they are quite realistic. But even they have a graphic on the display screen that shows the location of the slack in the train.
Les
My 30 x 10 foot (at present) model railroad is only one yard. See photos in other threads.
This 30 foot yard occupies one side of the room and, for now, through staging occupies the other side of the room with two other reverse loop staging yards, located in another room and remotely operated via a video link, planed for the future.
So, unlike the vast majority of North American model railroads, I have only one yard. A model of a minor division point.
As for running and or operating the trains. As I said below, we do not run our locomotives like real engineers, that's impossible. For a start, we are a line side observer, we are not in a cab. All we try to do, at least those of us who are not just playing trains, is try to visually duplicate the actions of a real locomotive and or train. Momentum, for example, is another simulation, not an "operation". Ditto for braking and acceleration, all we are trying to do is visually simulate what real trains do, we are not actually duplicating anything.
To me, "operation" is what it's all about. The scenery is just a supporting player. Yes, I like my scenery to look real but the main goal is realistic and prototypical operation.
A commuter train from Montreal arrives in Track One the main track. The 4-6-2 uncouples and runs eastward towards the roundhouse complex. Meanwhile, the 0-6-0 yard engine backs off the Yard Lead onto the main track, stops and then pulls forward to couple onto the three commuter cars sitting on Track One, the main track. He then backs up, clear of the commuter bay track. The next move shoves the commuter cars into track two, a bay platform where they are serviced and lay over for tomorrow's run. The 0-6-0 returns to the Yard Lead.
Meanwhile, the 4-6-2 has run eastward to the end of the yard and has backed onto the roundhouse lead at the yard's east end. Here it is watered and sanded. It then draws forward onto the service track and stops over the ash pit where its fire is cleaned. Once the fire is cleaned it pulls forward under the coaling tower where the tender bunker is filled. Next move is onto the turntable. If the engine has no additional service required and is not assigned to another run, it's turned on the 'table to face westward and stabled on one of the field tracks to await tomorrow's commuter run. If a boiler washout is scheduled or some maintenance work is required, it is sent nose first into the appropriate roundhouse stall for the work to be done. Yes, my roundhouse stalls are assigned functions, just like the real ones. Stall one, for instance, is the boiler washout stall. :)
Then there's freight, with the setting out and adding cuts of cars to various through freights, switching local industries, originating and terminating main line and branch way freights, originating and terminating connecting railroad interchange freights etc., etc.. I have two switchers working most of the "day" just to keep up. One switches the freight yard and one takes care of the industrial switching and the passenger train switching. A 24 hour operating session runs in excess of four hours.
That's what I'm into and try to simulate on my model railroad. Taking a train and letting run around aimlessly has no interest for me. It's the day to day, prototypical work done in and around the yard is what is interesting.
I'm not trying to say there's only one way to do anything and you've clearly found what works for you. In the railroads I'm interested in operation was pretty low key, the Talyllyn, where my interest in proper railways (as opposed to toy trains) began, pre-preservation had two-three trains a day, max, and operated under a one engine in steam policy. Probably your average branch terminus in standard gauge is not much different. For such prototypes factors other than operation has to take precedence.
I agree with you that on a model RR the operator's view is currently that of a bystander, as it has been since the very first model railway. To overcome that we have accepted certain compromises, one of which is the impossibility of modelling scale size between towns and accepting a great deal of compression within our yard limits. What interests me now is whether modern computer and optical technology can be applied to model railways to more faithfully replicate the real thing. For example, two modelled yards and a PC running a simulation of the thirty miles of trackage linking them could be more prototypical than turning a blind eye to the fact that only ten feet separate your yard limits.
Think of this. Thirty years ago my only opportunity for talking to railway modellers was once a week at my local club, I typed on a manual typewriter, my music was vinyl and my books were made of trees. Today I can talk to modellers across the world at the click of a button, my music is MP3s and FLAC, I'm about to buy an e-reader to replace my books, and I write on a laptop. But in thirty years, with the exception of sound equipped locos and DCC, model railways hasn't change much at all. For some that may be an attraction but I think we are missing opportunities to transform the hobby by combining the craft of modelling with the unlimited possibilities of virtual reality through computer simulation.
Skarloey Railway.
You raise some interesting points when it comes to computer simulation for gap between our stations.
I tried that on MSTS back when it was fairly new but got frustrated with the programming and went back to model railroading. :)
However, it is a good idea and, as you have mentioned, who knows what the future will bring.
I do know of several modellers who model north American short lines with one train per day and, if you have a reasonable amount of space for a 50 to 100 foot "main line", even with a run from an interchange (modelled staging) through one or two "towns", and operate in a realistic manner, a two men train crew can keep you busy for a few hours.
Even my industrial yard can take me a couple of real hours to switch when operating at scale speeds, stopping at grade crossings for them to be flagged etc., etc.. Much more interesting, to me, than watching a train run around a circle of track.
BTW, I've been to the Talyllyn and all the other Welsh narrow gauge and standard gauge railways for that matter but sadly only when the "heritage" lines became big train sets.
I use a reverse loop to turn my passenger train consists. I think the place modeled used wyes, but I do not have the space for them.
The terminal is a run-through design, but wasn't used that way during the period I model. Everything arrives either from the north or south, and leaves in the same direction. The only exception is one train that has some through cars that are given to another railroad. I have another train that arrives from the north on one railroad, and departs to the north on another. So, it has to be turned and power has to be changed.
I've never tried to do a complete operating "day" in one session.
I like the concept of Roger's roundhouse, where stalls are assigned to functions servicing steam engines. My regular operations are Dieselized, so the roundhouse at the one terminal that still has one parks it's (and its tenant road's) locomotives in it. Usually, I park the same locomotive in an assigned stall just to help me remember what is in there. There are six stalls, and three outdoor "garden" tracks.
Les
Quote from: rogertra on September 13, 2013, 05:42:04 PM
BTW, I've been to the Talyllyn and all the other Welsh narrow gauge and standard gauge railways for that matter but sadly only when the "heritage" lines became big train sets.
I read Tom Rolt's railway Adventure at an impressionable age and was captivated by its depiction of an antique line and its precarious existence. 1977 aged 16 I spent two weeks volunteering on the line and was unhappy to discover how much had been lost in the effort to preserve. Having walked the trackbed of the old Welsh Highland line back in the 80s I've also had misgivings about its rebuild. Somehow the indent of sleepers in a grassed-over trackbed is better preservation than a rebuilt with pressed-steel sleepers and Garratt locos repatriated from S. Africa hauling eleven car trains.
Skarl,
Well, the railroad has to make money to exist. Apparently, the authentic power is not up to hauling the size trains needed to satisfy the public's demand. In a sense, it is too bad, because the historic flavor of the line is lost.
I think most of this is lost on the tourists. If it is anything like narrow-gauge operations in the US, the very idea of riding a steam train (or any train) is enough of a novelty to draw their business.
There are many places in this country where the very experience of riding a train is a tourist draw. It doesn't even have to be a steam train. The parts of the country where train riding is used as everyday transportation are few, and limited to very densely populated areas. The rest of the country are mostly devoid of passenger trains, or, at most, limited to one train a day in each direction with stations many miles apart. Many heavy freight trunk lines have no passenger trains at all.
I used to work for a railroad that had begun as an end-to-end merger of two narrow-gauge lines. It was changed to standard gauge and was the route of the first streamlined passenger train in the region. By the time I got there, it was a freight-only short line. Small stretches of the original track roadbed remained in places as a reminder.
Les
Way back in the 1970s, I was a steward (not the waiter type) on a steam excursion behind 6218 from Montreal to Portland Me..
We stopped at Berlin Me. to have the tender filled by the local fire department and as we were waiting , we let the local kids on board.
"Wow, there's seats in here!" was heard several times. They'd never seen a passenger train, only freight.
I do feel some comment s regarding skarloey's comments are in order. with regards to distance between towns, if your cabin is still in one yard and the engine entering the other the problem is your train is too long for the layout. things need to be selectively compressed. since we all have limited space to work with, we must make some compromises. on my own painfully small layout, my compromise was to loosely model the 1970s, use mostly 40 foot cars and first generation diesels like the rs3 and gp9, and to limit train length to about 5 cars.
my current layout occupies 30 sq ft. for those mathematically challenged, a 4x8 sheet of plywood is 32 sq ft.
in this space I was able to get a small yard in one town, a switching area in another town, and another industrial siding. I have a twice around loop for continuous running, a turntable in the yard, and a wye for turning things at the other end of the line. this is all done in HO scale, with a minimum radius of 18" and #5switches. it can be done, and done in a way that doesn't look like a toy, but you have to be creative about it. with limited horizontal space you have to think vertically, for example.
my experience running previous incarnations of my layout, and other's layouts, is that there is a practical limit of about 20-25 cars if you intend to operate like a real railroad. longer than that and you run into trouble breaking trains down in the yard. long cuts of cars do not back well due to the significant train weight.
small industries which can handle 1 or 2 cars will work better than massive ones which dominate the limited space we have. likewise, I find that a winding mainline is preferable to a straight one. it males the space seem larger. also yards can and I feel should be on curves, as the often are in real life. only the areas near the ladder, where cars are coupled and uncoupled need to be straight.
for staging yards, my experience is that loop types are preferable to dead end ones. for one thing, they're self staging. you don't have to pull a train out and turn it around before it is ready to go again. and with regards to fiddle yards, the less we handle the the equipment, the better the details hold up.
Jeff.
I agree with train lengths. My staging yards, once they expand, will hold several (not sure how many) 25 + car freights plus power and caboose. Of course, there will also be shorter ones, for shorter trains.
However, as I model a minor division point, practically every 25+ car freight will be a through freight. Eastward, the trains will be blocked so that the block of cars assigned to my yard will be on the rear and westward trains the block for my yard will be on the head end. This is due to the yard lead being on the west end of the yard. Eastbound trains will stop with the van (caboose) just pass the crossover to the yard lead and west bound trains will stop short of the same crossover. Eastbound the yard switcher will come off the yard lead and will detach the van and set it aside and draw the cut of cars into the lead and shove them into an mty track and then pull the waiting cut of cars from the A&D track and shove them down onto the waiting train. He'll then tack the van back on, the road power pumps up the brakes and, away goes the eastbound. Westbound the power will stop short of the crossover, uncouple and draw forward into the clear. The switcher can now access the front of the train, pull the interchange cut clear and shove it into an mty yard track, pull the outgoing cut of cars from the A&D track and shove them down on top of the waiting train. As soon as the switcher is out of the way on the yard lead, the road power backs down onto its train, pumps up the air and away it goes.
Both east and west bound there are (or will be) water cranes located so that waiting road power can fill their tenders while the yard engine is switching their train.
BTW, although the yard is a minor division point, it is not a division point for the main line, just for the various branch lines it feeds, just like Farnham Quebec. So power and through train vans will not be swapped.
My two longest yard tracks tracks take 14 and 16 cars each but my yard lead on takes eight cars plus the switcher. Now the model railroad bible says that the yard lead should at least be as long as your longest yard track. We guess what, the model railroad bible is wrong! Yard built before radio had leads only as long as far as the engineer and switchmen could see. So steam age yard leads were not 50 to 100 cars long, they were usually around 20 to 25 cars long. As far as the engineer and switchmen could safely see each other at night. So my yard lead of eight cars is about proportionally correct. :)
BTW, in case anyone else besides the three or four of us participating in this tread are following this, a real railroad yard is NOT, repeat NOT used for "storing" cars. A railroad yard is a fluid thing. Cars arrive only to be sorted out into blocks to forward them to their next destination. The last thing a yardmaster wants cluttering up his yard are cars being stored. Cars being stored are stored elsewhere until business picks up. They are not stored in the yard. So, if you have cars just sitting around in your yard that are not going anywhere, get rid of them! Put them on shelves, like I do, until they are needed.
Now, mind you, if I decide there's been a downturn in business, say real longshoreman's strike in the Port of Montreal, then I pull all the waybills of cars heading to and from the Port of Montreal and hold them and don't put them back into the waybill rotation until the real strike ends. Now I have a surplus of cars. What do I do? I do what the railroads do. I call a freight extra and send all those mty boxcars etc. off to some unmodelled siding out in the boonies (staging) and there I place them on shelves, with their waybills, until a need them again. :)
So that is another prototype you can follow, the real world. :-)
This is interesting. I like the idea of making more of the model by focusing in on the prototypes activities to make more of the space you're able to model. Switching (shunting in the UK) is labour intensive and slow, far slower than it is shown on most models I've seen. That may be because most models I've seen are at exhibitions where the public must be entertained and would probably drift off if a loco spent fifteen minutes dropping off a few cars.
The drawback is many of these activities are, for practical reasons, best in HO/OO or better yet, in O, which means we have compromises in getting everything to fit. N gauge is much better in that respect but who enjoys switching in N gauge, especially as we all get older.
So, two yards separated by a holding area long enough to take the longest train + the space for braking and acceleration modelled in HO or (ideally) O gauge. Mainline on one or two levels, shelf style, running above the yards and round the room modelled in N gauge.
The yard switcher gets the train together in one of the yards. Meantime, in staging on the upper deck the train is all ready prepared to go. Once the train is made up, the switcher leaves off and the road engine backs on, hooks up and trundles off into the holding area. At the same time, the N gauge version of the train starts on its winding way around the room, maybe passing another train midway, until it returns to staging, at which point, the larger scale train starts up and trundles into the second yard ready for being broken down or switched to its destination. If the N gauge mainline is modelled so that they eye is always two feet from the train then it needn't be hyper-detailed as we're after the 'train in the landscape' while the yards are modelled to allow for prototypical operation. That way each scale does what its best at.
Colin.
not sure how thing are done in the uk, but there is a reason switching is painfully slow in real life: safety and damage control. on the real railroads, the phrase "no more than four" is drilled into crews heads. the laws of physics say that the impact force of two objects colliding increases with the square of speed. that is, using two cars coupling at 1 mph as an example. couple the cars at 4 more the impact is 16 times as great, couple at 10 the force is 100 times greater. over 4 mph and damaged freight rises dramatically.
safety factors on most railroads dictate that trains must be stopped when crew members board and unboard. the days of brakemen swinging on and off the cars like monkeys are thankfully over. no longer do they kick cars, with brakemen riding the kicked car and securing the handbrake while in motion.
another factor that takes time has to do with the brakes. on cuts of cars being worked in the yard, the air is often left in the string. when cars are uncoupled, the angle cock must be turned on the cars so that when the airline parts after dropping one car, you don't lose the air in the rest of the string. with so many angle cocks turned, the air is effectively bottled in each car, and the locomotive has only its own brakes to use to slow down. when the hoses part, the air leaks out of the car being dropped, instantly setting the brakes.
before the cut can be worked, somebody has to walk it, and turn all those angle cocks. since they are located next to the coupler where the air line enters the car body, there is no safe way to do it on a moving train. after the cut is worked, somebody must walk the track and turn all the angle cocks back, and reconnect the air lines between the cars. they must also look for "jams" where the knuckles on both cars are closed, preventing them from coupling. when they find a jam, the yard engine must couple back up to the string and pull it forward a few feet so that one of the knuckles can be opened, then back the cars together again. all of this takes a lot of time.
when I worked the power plant job, it often took us 3-4 hours to assemble a 100 car train of empties. we put the air in the cars as we went.
Quote from: jward on September 14, 2013, 09:00:13 AM
not sure how thing are done in the uk...safety factors on most railroads dictate that trains must be stopped when crew members board and unboard. the days of brakemen swinging on and off the cars like monkeys are thankfully over. no longer do they kick cars, with brakemen riding the kicked car and securing the handbrake while in motion.
Oh, but in some places they still do. Well, almost, the brakemen on this train don't jump from wagon to wagon like in the old days when a train like this might be in charge of only a handful of men, but this recreation of a 'gravity' train on the Festiniog Railway shows the principle. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dVEW5wKrFE the first half of the clip shows the train going up the line under steam power. Gravity then takes over for the descent.
I should add that railways/railroads post 1930 (ish) has more or less zero interest to me and my preference is 19th century to pre world war one.
Jward made an observation I had taken for granted, but is often overlooked or not understood in the model railroad world. Rail yards are not used for storing cars. Some big terminals may have storage yards, but they are not typical. The closest thing to storage tracks in many yards is the "rip track" where cars awaiting repairs are kept. RIP means "repair in place".
Most rail yards are used either for classifying (sorting) cars, or holding blocks of cars for trains to pick up. In theory, any yard more than 50% full is considered jammed and difficult or impossible to work.
The cars are not making any money for the railroad if they are not in use. So a healthy railroad will not have plugged yards.
On my own passenger-oriented railroad, at the end of the operating cycle, the terminal tracks are empty. The few cars that remain overnight are spotted on tracks at the mail-handling facility or the express house.
Since almost all the action during the summertime (the time or year modeled, as on most model railroads) takes place in daylight, it relieves me of the need to add lighting for night operations.
Les
Les.
It was me not Jeff who pointed out that yards are not for storing cars but yards should be kept fluid. :)
My yard is also a terminal for commuter trains to and from Montreal. I do not have a coach yard but the commuter train's three or four passenger cars lay over the in bay platform where they are (in theory) serviced ready for their next run. So I guess, in a way, that track could be considered storage. :)
Commuter trains depart from track 2, the bay platform, but arrive on track one, the main track. The train engine, usually a light 4-6-2 head off to the roundhouse while the 0-6-0 switcher which looks after passenger trains and the industrial area, switches the mty passenger cars from track one over to track two for servicing and the next departure. As I mentioned before, I have an 0-8-0 that switches the freight yard tracks.
You mention lighting.
Another point where younger modellers get it wrong. Steam engines only ran with the headlight on from around 1958/1959 or so. Before that, the headlight was off during the day except when entering longer tunnels, in falling snow, heavy fog, when approaching a platform with waiting passengers or whenever extra safety was called for.
A steam loco's headlight has two positions, "On" or "Off", they are not dimmable. It would be nice (Bachmann?) if all DCC systems permitted individual control over both headlights. I also really do not like those DCC systems that automatically switch headlights when the engine changes direction. That's NOT realistic. Manual changing of headlights should be the default with automatic as an option.
A steam locomotive's headlight was a 90W electric lamp. It wasn't a sealed beam headlight like a diesel or modern steam excursion steam locos. The steam headlight should be yellowish, not not white nor with a blue tint. Bachmann and other makers should also note this. :)
Switch engines, at night, usually operate with both headlights "On". Steam are always on a full, because you cannot dim a steam headlight, but diesels operate (usually) with both headlights on dim, day and night. They only go to full when entering the main track during switching moves.
Jeff and Les.
Any photos?
Roger,
You make some good points.
I'll try to get some pictures posted. Do they have to be downloaded from a site like Photobucket?
Les
Les.
You upload the photos to Photobucket, it's free and once you've uploaded the photos you will find underneath each photo, or to the right if you're looking at the larger version of your photo a list of link options. You left click the link the one that reads "IMG" and that automatically copies the link.
In your post, you then right click, where you want to photo to go, and the image will appear in your post, thus: -
(http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l99/rogertra/The%20new%20Great%20Eastern%20Railway/B80B062B-4FCA-4473-9B39-D34AD8E0C939-1159-00000720D3E6C14D_zps54bdd53d-1.jpg) (http://s94.photobucket.com/user/rogertra/media/The%20new%20Great%20Eastern%20Railway/B80B062B-4FCA-4473-9B39-D34AD8E0C939-1159-00000720D3E6C14D_zps54bdd53d-1.jpg.html)
Now, as you are composing your post all you will see is the URL but don't worry, if you click on the "preview" button below, you will see your photo as it will appear in your post. Once you are happy, you can either add more photos or text and once you are done, press the "Post" button as usual.
The photo above is looking east towards the roundhouse. caboose track, and the east end ladder track. The main is the stone ballast and the other tracks are yard tracks. The main yard is to the left and the two tracks to the right are interchange tracks used by the NYC, the D&H and the Rutland Road. Off in the distance, the tracks spilt and one will go through the wall almost straight ahead and that will be the GER main like to the Maritimes and the line curving to the right will be the track going down into the USA and the NYC, D&H and Rutland Road but at the moment it leads to staging.
Buildings are just place holders until I decide what to do.
Posting photos is, once you've set up a Photobucket, or Flickr account, is dead easy. An idiot could do it, as I've just proven above. :)
(http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff315/Lesforan/N-scale%20Trains%20of%20Denver/CBQ17CaliforniaZephyrarrivesfromChicago.jpg) (http://s239.photobucket.com/user/Lesforan/media/N-scale%20Trains%20of%20Denver/CBQ17CaliforniaZephyrarrivesfromChicago.jpg.html)
Here is a photo of the California Zephyr on arrival from Chicago.
This is a test of sorts to see how this works.
Les
OK! That worked!
Thanks, Roger.
Now I can post pictures to show the things I have been talking about here!
Les
Les.
Great photo and well done on the posting. :)
Told you an idiot could do it, didn't I? ;D
Nice train BTW, you've got to post more photos.
Forgot to mention. Did you know that if you click on a posted photo, it takes you to that person's Photobucket page and you can view other photos they've up loaded to Photobucket? I just did that and you've got some nice photos there.
Well, thanks, Roger!
I posted a bunch of photos in the "Show us your layout "thread.
Les
Quote from: Desertdweller on September 15, 2013, 05:34:03 PM
Well, thanks, Roger!
I posted a bunch of photos in the "Show us your layout "thread.
Les
Just saw those Les, well done. :)
Skarloey, The gravity train, that's one interesting ride.
Not a fan of car bodies, are you Les? :D ......;) Now Im off to the layout thread for another look 8)
GG1,
Yeah, I'm a fan of carbody units of any make. Always wanted to run one in real life, but never got the chance.
I've ridden in them, though.
I'm really a fan of streamlined passenger trains. By happy coincidence, almost all of these used carbody units.
E7's, E8's, and PA1's are my most common units. I have a good share of passenger F's, and various other types, including E9's, the E5 you noted, a pair of FPA2's, and a DL109. And my newest type, a U30CG!
My railroad exists before the big mergers of the late 1960's. And business looks to be a bit healthier than it really was back then, although all my trains had real prototypes.
There is one harbinger of bad times to come in the sky: a Boeing 707. The trains could compete with the Boeing 399, offering better accommodations though at slower speed. But they just couldn't compete with the 707, twice the speed of the elegant 399.
Les
Ive been on more trains than planes while traveling;D And prefer it that way! ;) Unless I was in control 8)... :-\... Better scratch that :o
Id rather drive the train 8)
The Zephyr domed observation car :-* art deco perfection, "Head-end-to-toe" in Silver, a Lady :D
Yes, indeed!
I've ridden in a couple of the CZ obs cars (unless it was the same one twice). One I remember riding was the "Silver Solarium".
I you were riding in one of these, where would you prefer, the teardrop end lounge or the dome?
I rode in all the dome cars I could, and it's a good thing I did, although I never thought they would all disappear like they did.
Rode in the two CB&Q originals, "Silver Dome" and "Silver Castle". Got run out of a GN "Great Dome" (it was for first-class only and I just had a coach ticket). All the Budd domes were nice, as were the Milwaukee Road "Superdomes".
Probably the most unusual one I ever rode was a NP dome sleeper with a lounge in the dome. It had tables like a UP dome diner. NP added lounge space in the dome when they pulled the obs cars off the "North Coast Limited".
Les