One of these http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/HO-OO-Triang-Wind-Up-Shunter-Switcher-Clockwork-Model-Railway-/160990314733?pt=Model_RR_Trains&hash=item257bc540ed, a custard and cream carriage (passenger car) and a handful of freight wagons on an oval of track. The 'square' dome on the the loco's boiler hides the clockwork spring.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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: 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.

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'

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.

Quote from: Stevelewis on September 11, 2013, 02:44:00 PM

Quote from: Yardmaster on September 10, 2013, 04:57:09 PM
Soon.

We wait  over  here  with  baited  breath!

I wonder  if  we  will get  stocks here  first  as  we  did  with   the  2-4-4-2?

It's 'bated breath'.
Unless you're fishing, in which case best of luck.

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.

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: 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.

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. 

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