BIG JERRhad to abandon my so called computer generated plan an use thumb tacks to attach track too the bench work ,build a couple a buildings ..... yes I'm a backwards planner
didn't John Armstrong suggest that as an alternative to paper (or CAD) if you have trouble visualizing, i.e., a track plan laid out as 12 in to the foot on wood (or foam)?
Co-owner of the proposed CT River Valley RR (HO scale) http://home.comcast.net/~docinct/CTRiverValleyRR/
interesting thought ,,,,,,Yes im a backwards planer in this scale. now I have built my own home including ,prints,land development,frame ,plumb,electr.,hvac,and everything else to get it to turn key....I did a back yard g-scale 100'x20' drew a plan and more or less stuck to it.......but I guess because of the reduced scale I just am having a little more trouble visualizing,not the problem with the house 21/2 acres a few stakes and some string ........again in the g-scale plenty of room ......but since Ive never done any thing this small and have only seen HO @ shows and videos just couldn't imagine the amount of space and what could that space yield. bought ,gosh 10 of kelmbaughs books ,read and ask questions here every morning for a11/2 years ,marvel at other peoples work,but I think because I dont know anybody who has a layout so I could be up close to see ops &space management.so I had to abandon my so called computer generated plan an use thumb tacks to attach track too the bench work ,build a couple a buildings and now I can see it ,had I stayed with my original plan I would be ripping it out rite now totally frustrated because on paper looked good but in opts it was cramped and ..... well never worked. I guess what Im saying is it takes a lot more bench for a scale scene that I had ever imagined........Im learning ,having fun,spending a ton a money,but Im not frustrated and havent had to tear anything out ,(well nothing that removing a few thumb tacks couldnt fix)then I will make my finial plan and remove the temp track ,temp industries ,and start laying my foam board and road board ,and the part that makes it scenery.......yes Im a backwards planner..Jerry
I appreciate this thread. I am not a newbie really but then again I have not had a successful layout. To that end I have been lurking on this forum and others to try to do the proper research.
My list of issues and questions:
Issue -- an unfinished basement is not conducive to a long term layout. Ad hoc power (long runs of extension cords) and the dust from concrete walls just doesn't do it. So I am currently trying to sheet rock over the walls in my designated space (long story about what had to be done prior to my getting to this project doesn't need to be repeated here).
Issue -- running more than one train at a time is hard to do using DC. Switching to DCC before starting the current layout made a lot of sense. Even with my 4x8 test loop I could see that it was more fun. Of course that leads to questions on proper wiring, reversing loops, and power districts. Some of which I have answers to, some not yet. Of course this meant dealing with older engines that weren't DCC capable. Some have been converted, some will not.
Issue -- fixing a time and place for the layout simplifies the planning. Rather than trying to squeeze as much as I could into the space available (been there, done that, twice), I am trying to mimic something real or near real. I spent some time trying to build a plausible rationale for the tracks and the trains that run on them.
Question -- how much do I want to worry about operation (switching) versus just running trains? I have had experience with a train chasing its tail (boring after a while) so while I want to be able to do continuous running I also want to be able to park a train and bring in another (hence a need for staging). That begs a question -- how much vertical separation do you need to get down to the staging? My second layout had a switch on a downhill grade that constantly caused derailments. Lesson learned -- don't do that. I now understand grades and transitions better than I would have simply reading about it.
Issue -- Nothing kills the buzz better than having the trains constantly stalling. I learned this was a combination of power connections and dirty track. Having a single power connection for a 4x8 and relying on the rail joiners to carry the connection isn't a good idea. Another issue is keeping the track clean. Running the trains helps a lot. Running the trains with cars with plastic wheels doesn't. Changing to all metal wheels is expensive but necessary.
I could go on but my point is I thank those of you who reply to those of us who ask questions, especially the very basic ones. I have learned a lot reading through the replies. Thanks.
Mark
Silver Pilot The ability to formulate a clear sentence, to get one's thoughts and questions into a coherent, intellegible paragraph is paramount to getting a good response.
Well, asking a clear question is important if you want a relevant reply fast. Not being able to communicate well in writing is clearly a handicap. But handicaps can be overcome.
In my opinion, the most important quality if you want to get an answer to something is persistence - that you keep at it until people understand your question, and you have gotten an answer you understand.
If necessary, you look for information elsewhere too, and you do your own tests. As someone (Chuck?) said; an ounce of testing is worth ten tons of opinions.
Smile, Stein
Excellent thread and excellent posts by some of the wiley veterans that I've enjoyed reading over the years. Without quoting his long thread, I'll try to add to the overall feel I got from of Fred's post on the previous page.
Sometimes it seems that the reponder to a thread, and I don't mean the wiley veteran's I spoke of above, is trying to guide the OP into the direction that they chose for themselves, rather than laying out various options for which the OP can choose. Choices that would satisfy the priorities they have, as silly and pointless as they may seem.
The noob gets into model railroading for a reason. He is already interested in the hobby before he posts anything here. Answering the question in a way that builds upon that reason (if we can detect it), rather than takes him away from it, is going to benefit the OP and will likely help him maintain his interest in the hobby until such time as he learns how to do things the right way, you know, they way we think he should do it.
My reason for getting into the hobby was, at age 6, visiting the Museum of Science and Industry and being awed by that awesome HO railroad they have. For me, there's no point in modeling something that's ugly. It has to look cool, which, of course, is subjective. Whether its a locomotive, mountain, building, whatever, being accurate to the prototype is secondary. Just like when I was 6, the layout has to look right. Didn't care then how the operating schematic was then. I've grown since then and operations matter.
Most folks on this forum, whether members or guests, probably got interested in "trains" when they were a kid. They probably lived near a railroad, whether it be a switching yard or class 1 mainline, rode with grandpappy on his steam locomotive for a few miles, visited daddy's workplace when the train switched out loads for empties, etc.. or saw a really cool layout somewhere. The noob OP, who ever it is, is trying to capture that, whatever that may be, in his model railroad. If he feels like he needs to learn the proper door height of a gp7 before he can buy a model of one, he's going to bolt.
The forum is designed for an exchange of ideas, and losing someone because we can't downshift our thinking into something the noob can understand and in a way that can help him achieve is immediate goal, well, that's a shame. He may otherwise have stuck around, learned, and became a contributor to the forum instead of discarding it.
- Douglas
Some very interesting points have been made above, including a couple of "Aha" moments for me.
I would like to apologize for my poor word choice in the initial posting. Just for the record, I am not intolerant of questions, and I love helping people, and am certainly not frustrated with "elementary" questions.
I do, however, feel that our hobby loses some potential members because their enthusiasm (and yes, enthusiasm is a terrific trait) because they get frustrated and don't ask for help until it's too late.
Keep those postings coming!
Connecticut Valley Railroad A Branch of the New York, New Haven, and Hartford
"If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right." -- Henry Ford
As a newcomer to the hobby who's been chewing over the many pieces of advice posted here on this forum, on various blogs and websites, and in a number of books, I'll give you my opinion for what it's worth.
I had a train set as a boy and never moved beyond "the ping-pong table". My family was not wealthy enough to support a hobby like this for one of a multitude of children and I frankly, didn't have the time with sports, academics, etc. to really get into it. Fast forward a few decades and now my son has expressed an interest in the hobby, which led to my resurgent interest in actually doing it this time, since I have some disposable income to dedicate to the hobby.
Thinking through the basics doesn't occur until there is a readily-apparent benefit to some basic operational understanding. If I don't understand something in a relatively short amount of time; forget it. If someone cannot explain a concept, a process, or function in a few paragraphs and why it is beneficial and cost-effective, it is not relevant for someone new to the hobby.
You have to break down your concepts into easily digestible portions that present the basic dumbed-down concepts and let the person figure out if that interests them or not. If it does, they will look for more information by and large. If you do not articulate a benefit coherently or if the person does not see the stated benefit as having a value to them, the concept will be ignored (until a later potential date when they have an "Aha!" moment.)
There's not going to be any one answer. The only way to minimize frustration is to put the information out there for people to find and articulate why it's important. Does it add to play-value, reality of their constructed world (hey, this really is not different that SimCity folks), or provide some other benefit to the person? If it does, it will be examined and used in some way.
As an example, I just read the posts on compromising on radii on a layout. Guess what? I'm ignoring the charts, John Armstrong, and the general opinions of 22"/24"/30"/etc. I'm going to layout a radius on my benchwork and I'm going to test my locomotives and my rolling stock on it because I want to see it. I "know" I can't go smaller than 22" because I already tested it. I want to "know" the other radii too, but I don't get that personal knowledge from reading another persons opinions. I get it by trying it saying, "Yep, they were right" or "No, I'm actually okay with that."
That's part of the second point of my post is that I wasn't really "happy" with the hobby until I said forget the books and what people are telling me, I want to start doing something. Now that I've figured out I don't want to spend time drawing a trackplan or planning an operational schematic, I'm much happier. I'm just slapping up sectional, portable benchwork and enjoying playing with the possibilities rather than worrying about everything being just so.
It took me a year to figure out I don't like the plan it, tweak it, plan it, tweak it, plan it, build it. I build, review, and accept/reject. It's working for me and I'm enjoying the hobby rather than being frustrated because now I am learning my own lessons instead of trying to read between the lines as to why something is said to be best and why some other thing is beneficial.
Mmm. I guess the new user has at least two main options:
If the new modeler wants advice on one simple, consistent and mostly reasonable for many people path to building a layout, he or she should go buy a starter book and follow that.
Say Jeff Wilson's "H0 scale Model Railroading - Getting Started in the Hobby" or Marty McGuirk's "N scale railroading: Getting started in the Hobby, second edition". Or one of the other starter books.
Any one of these books have the potential to lead the reader to a layout, provided he or she actually have the room for it in his or her home and is able to get the necessary skills.
If, on the other hand, the new modeler wants advice on at least some of the many alternate paths that can be followed, or customized/tailor made advice for his or her available space and wishes or dreams, he or she should ask questions in an interactive forum on the net.
And be prepared to get a lot of potentially conflicting advice.
Interactive user forums and books written by professional authors are different tools for different jobs.
CTValleyRR I find it more than a little amazing how many new users jump on to this site and say, "I have this new train set / layout plan / train room, now please help."
I find it more than a little amazing how many new users jump on to this site and say, "I have this new train set / layout plan / train room, now please help."
I'm not sure why you find it amazing. I get a train set. Set it up on the floor. Watch it chase it's tail around the oval for the 60 zillionth time. And I figure there's got to be more than this. This doesn't look like the display I saw at the club/museum/LHS. How do I get from the circle on the floor to the magnificent display I saw? In this day and age, the answer is I go search the Internet. I come across train.com - seems like a logical site to check. After wading through the ads, I come to the reader forums. Asking seems like the logical thing to do, since I don't see my question on the 1st page.
So I though I might try to stimulate some discussion on this topic. For old hands, how can we get new entrants to the hobby to think through the basics (what railroad, what era, what location, what equipment), as well as some basic operational understanding (switching, yards, point-to-point vs continuous running) BEFORE they get in over their heads with a layout or plan that doesn't suit their needs.
How can I, the newcomer, possibly know what era, prototype, or region I want to model? All I know is that the colors for railroad XYZ looked pretty good to me at the LHS. And I probably know enough to match the engine and caboose with the same railroad name. But I want to build my own version of that display I saw - how do I get there?
For newcomers to the hobby, what gets you started in a given direction? A layout at a train show, a pre-fab track plan, a train set, or what?
I would guess it's a combination of all 3. The train set (scale/gauge doesn't matter) is the 1st concrete step for most. The display layout stimulates the vision or dream - it could be just a photo in MR or in the LHS. It doesn't have to be a physical display layout. But if we remember back to when we really first started, I don't think the initial inspiration came from the prototype for very many, especially today. The pre-fab track plan is the 2nd step towards that vision, and the first beyond that train set.
Ultimately, it would be interesting to see if we can minimize the number of newcomers who charge ahead and then get frustrated, or jump on the forums having absolutely no idea how to proceed. Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?
I don't see that happening. Hobbies are supposed to involve the emotions as well as the intellect in order to bring us pleasure. If model railroading wasn't at least partially emotional, the great layouts would never be built.
Before Internet, how did we get our vision for our dream layout? From Lionel and other catalogs, from books, and from magazines - and maybe, once in a while - a physical visit to an already-built layout. The nice thing about the "good old days" is that the information was generated from one source, and didn't get contradicted 2 posts later. Catalogs, magazines, books are all one-way communication tools. At an LHS, you are pretty much a captive receiver of what the staff wants to tell you about how to proceed with the hobby. Same is true of visiting a layout. So for the most part, our instructions on next steps had some coherence and made some sense - whether for good or bad.
Post on this forum, asking whether trackplan X from book Z is a good one for a newbie to build - and what do you get? Use DCC, don't bother with DCC - and I, the newbie, don't even know without looking on the box whether my trainset used DCC or DC. Use foam and cork; no, use plywood and Homasote instead. Real model railroaders use metal wheels and Kadee couplers all their rolling stock. A 4x8 is a good starting point; no, it's not, build an around-the-walls layout instead, you'll be much happier. Of course, the question is never asked whether I have the money, carpentry skills and tools, or desire and interest to build more than the 4x8 at this time.
Plan your own layout, use ABC software. No, CDE software is much better in some way. Save the money and learning curve, draw with pencil and graph paper. Draw what? The only thing I the newbie have ever seen is multiple trains chasing their tails on a display layout. That's most likely the best I can do for a plan on the 1st try.
Anyway, you get my drift. It must be incredibly confusing and frustrating for a true newbie to receive the responses he does on this forum.
But my rant is not over. The newbie gets told his design is toy-like, and only runs trains on different paths in circles. Well, duh. What did I see in the display layout? Trains running in circles on perhaps rather convoluted paths. Isn't that what real model railroaders do? Didn't some 90+% of you (surprised me with how high a percentage it was) just confess that you did little more than glorified loop running in the thread on how you operated? Did any of you notice what a small minority of the posters spent their "operations" time switching?
Of course, nobody dares tell the newbie the truth. Most of us, if we even have functioning layouts, don't have layouts that are conducive to switching or T&T operations, no matter what our operational desires are. For switching, you have to have turnouts and rolling stock that doesn't derail, truly level track or roll prevention devices, locomotives that operate without a single jerk or hesitation at 5 scale MPH, and couplers that reliably couple and uncouple 99.99% of the time by whatever the specified method is. How many of our layouts consistently meet those criteria?
Timetable and train order ops are even more demanding. Multiple train staging, disciplined operators, a workable communications plan, and functional yards are all needed in addition to the requirements for switching operations. Yet we all criticize the newbie's planned layout if it isn't planned for T&T ops from the very beginning - a goal he has no realistic hope of achieving on the 1st layout (or likely, the 2nd, either).
Do I have a better suggestion? Unfortunately, no. Until we - the supposed mentors of the newbies - reach a consensus on a reasonable path for the majority of newbies, they are going to be confused by our contradictory recommendations, imposition of advanced practices before the newbie is ready to understand the reasons and pros and cons, and imposition of personal (but contradictory) views of how the hobby should be practiced.
If there are better ideas out there, I'm all ears.
Fred W
Hi,
steinjr Some people seem to feel that there are some "basic rules" (or at least, basic recommendations) to planning a layout, everybody should know those rules/recommendations, and if you don't want to learn those rules, then by golly - you deserve a good tongue lashing
My feeling is there are basic recommendations and they should be made; if the OP wants to listen or not is his problem.
However my biggest worry is all the well meant advices by "pro's" or "would be pro's" , and all of them different. It may be difficult, but when a new kid in town is asking about the minimum radius, he is not waiting for my personal view: so I tell him he'll find the information for HO on page 17 in 102 Realistic TP's. The beauty of the 102 TP's book is another table with different values on page 24. For N-scale even both tables on page 17 have different value's.
IMHO it is not to difficult to explain why plan 12 (Montadon Branch, in very same book) has more goodies then plan 13 (Great Northern Ry), despite its pretty looking picture. Compare the rough plan from a Penn Nut with the plan Texas Zephyr drew and built in Junior High. But how to tell him in a, to him decent or acceptable way? O'Dave felt himself put down by the NMRA table, while he liked the LDSIG table.
So I can read, I can listen, I understand most of the stuff presented, but for me it is sometimes hard to say things in a nice way. I know, "C'est la tone qui fait la musique". OTOH we also have to accept that not every one masters that art.
Paul
steinjr If you can't spell and you can't use a dictionary or a spell checker, you can't use search engines very well. Mind you - I am not talking about just the odd typo here, or people who don't know the difference between "there" and "their", or such piddling issues. If you cannot formulate a clear sentence or break your thoughts down into coherent paragraphs, it is hard for others (and yourself) to understand what you want to accomplish.
If you can't spell and you can't use a dictionary or a spell checker, you can't use search engines very well. Mind you - I am not talking about just the odd typo here, or people who don't know the difference between "there" and "their", or such piddling issues.
If you cannot formulate a clear sentence or break your thoughts down into coherent paragraphs, it is hard for others (and yourself) to understand what you want to accomplish.
As I said in a different post - any online forum is based on written communication. So, knowing the difference between 'there" and "their" or "to", "two", and "too" DOES make a difference in how the the person's written communication is interpreted. The ability to formulate a clear sentence, to get one's thoughts and questions into a coherent, intellegible paragraph is paramount to getting a good response. If I read a thread and it is poorly written, incoherent with poor grammar, spelling etc. I'm more likely than not will not respond to it. Typos are one thing, but if the OP doesn't take the time to properly formulate their post why should I waste my time responding with something when I've already wasted my time reading and trying to understand their post.
Also, if, based on the OP's post, it's easily apparent that they didn't bother trying to find an answer to their question before posting it for all to respond to, then why waste my time responding when the OP didn't feel it was worth their time trying to find an answer on their own. There are forum members who have been on this forum for quite awhile, post a lot fo questions, respond to a lot of questions yet haven't taken the time to be come familiar with basic terminology. They couldn't tell you the difference between switch points and a switch frog. Some may say "Big Deal" but when you're trying to explain something about a turnout then it becomes important.
To get back to the original premise of the OP, people need to invest a little of their own time on the subject their asking about. That would eliminate a lot of the newbies asking the same questions every week to 10 days. There seems to be a mindset amongst newbies to rush in and try to get something done or running and then ask questions like "What did I do wrong" or "How do I fix _____" instead of giving the project some real thought as to what the goal is, how to accomplish it or even is it achieveable or realistic. "Why think it about myself when I can go and ask someone else to solve it for me." Once you get people beyond this mindset then you can start to solve some of the issues cited by the OP.
Original question in the thread was:
how can we get new entrants to the hobby to think through the basics (what railroad, what era, what location, what equipment), as well as some basic operational understanding (switching, yards, point-to-point vs continuous running) BEFORE they get in over their heads with a layout or plan that doesn't suit their needs.
The debate so far has strayed in various directions, as forum debates tend to do.
Some people seem to feel that there are some "basic rules" (or at least, basic recommendations) to planning a layout, everybody should know those rules/recommendations, and if you don't want to learn those rules, then by golly - you deserve a good tongue lashing
Well, okay - the tongue lashing bit is maybe going a little bit overboard
Some people seem feel that the most important thing is to not scare new people away by overwhelming them, so keep things very simple, and just let the new model railroaders make their own mistakes and learn from that.
Whatever you do - don't mention the war (*). Umm - I mean - don't mention things like staging - that may send new modelers into screaming hysterics
(*) - Sorry about that - just had a Fawlty Towers moment there ....
I guess I fall somewhere in between. I do not feel that new modelers will have to learn by heart all design recommendations before they will be allowed to play. We are not in track planning boot camp here, and it is a hobby - it is supposed to be fun.
But I also feel that it is generally a good idea to ask some questions to get a clear idea about what the new modeler is actually looking for, rather than to make assumption.
The new modeler probably will not know exactly what he or she is looking for (and he/she certainly won't know what he or she will be wanting to do 30 years down the line), but it is likely that they at least will have some rough idea about why they want to build a model railroad layout.
I also feel that it is generally a good idea to point out some possible pitfalls and non-obvious alternatives when a new modeler shows up, either holding a random track plan in his hand or looking for a track plan.
That new track plan doesn't have to have interchange tracks or staging or whatever. It doesn't need to be about one specific railroad in one specific location at one specific time.
It should have whatever functionality the new modeler wants. But tempered by some experience.
It is fair game to point out that a starting layout need not be a H0 scale trains on a loop with two spurs on a 4x8 foot table.
It is fair game to point out that a track plan has spurs which cannot be switched very well without a runaround, and then go on to explain about facing and trailing spurs and runaround moves.
Or to point out that curves are sharper than recommended for the equipment the new modeler wants to run.
And stuff like that.
If the new modeler doesn't want to listen to advice, no problem. Their layout, their choices. Let them make their own experiences.
But we do not need to take things to either extreme : demanding that new modelers have to learn all the "rules", or being so afraid of scaring people away that we don't present them with any complexity.
Smile, Stein (aka Leo Tolstoy ...)
I think many of the "newbie questions" are more of how do I do this or how do I do that regarding the construction aspect of model railroading. I would say it safe to say that most if not all newbies have no idea what is meant by the term "Operation" thats something you get in the hospital right would be the typical response. Most want/need advice on the correct way to lay track, make turnouts aka switches to them function correctly. How do I keep my cars from derailing how do I make a mountain or a tunnel etc. There are very few people who venture into any hobby looking to get into the complicated or more complex aspects of the hobby right off the bat. Does a guy who wants to build an R/C plane with is kid and go to the park not knowing anything walk into a hobby shop and want ask to start off with a top of the line stunt flying airplane or something basic and rudimentary.
I know seasoned modeler who are extremely talented who have built fantastic model railroads who don't give a hoot about operation or doing this with that train or the proper length of a passing siding etc. etc. They do it for the love of building and the love of model trains. as long as it looks great and it works who cares and I tend ot agree with them. Model railroading allows you some free license if you will to create what isn't real and to make things the way you want them not necessarily the way someone e says they should be or the way the prototype did them. Isn't that part of the fun of the hobby creating what you want not what some else tell you you have to do, thats called work not fun.
Not everyone who ventures into a new hobby be it model railroading or R/C planes or riding motorcycles or anything stays in them very long and becomes very efficient at them or shal I say take them too seriously.
Lets be honest when you sit back and think about how much there really is involved in this hobby and how complex it can become it can be intimidating and the tail can definitely wag the dog no question about it. The best thing anyone can do is show newbies in the hobby what separates us from a lot of other hobbies. Our willingness to help the new guy and treat him the same as anyone else, you never know when a newbie might just be a diamond in the rough.
Paulus JasJust as learning what a pitcher does, you will have to learn what staging does. Just as knowing what a base is you will have to know what a trailing spur is. All Americans knew what Meat Loaf meant by getting to third base, so all modelrailroaders should know the relation between the length of their cars and the minimum radius.
Just as learning what a pitcher does, you will have to learn what staging does. Just as knowing what a base is you will have to know what a trailing spur is. All Americans knew what Meat Loaf meant by getting to third base, so all modelrailroaders should know the relation between the length of their cars and the minimum radius.
By the time you need to know what that third base means, you've been familiar with the rules of baseball for over a decade. I'd hope.
But to keep the analogy going, you can enjoy or start to enjoy a sport without knowing all the technical stuff right off the bat. When you're a kid and you're going to play football, the uncle enlisted to be quarterback is just going to tell you go "go deep" because kids like to run in a straight line really fast. If you go out to play football with the kids and huddle up and start telling them to run go routes, slants, fades, and all that its just going to confuse them and be no fun. People can readily enjoy football on the "wow that guy tackled that guy right after he caught the ball" without going into "the mike linebacker who came in on the blitz bit on the play action and the quarterback was free to throw the screen to the flanker, but the corner was in tight man coverage and the play resulted in the loss of yardage."
On day 1 of wanting to play football, you probably don't know or even need to know what the difference between a flanker and a slot receiver is. To me, throwing all that stuff at a guy that's like "hey I just put a sheet of plywood over a ping pong table and put the track from under the Christmas tree on it what now" is just going to be overwhelming. My favorite model railroad book HO Railroad from Start to Finish basically starts with this premise and eases into everything in a completely logical way. And it doesnt even have off layout staging.
hi Doc,
if you do not want to understand something, don't try.
What you fancy, is your business. An easy question: do you have spurs and why do they all face the same direction?, is not meant to get them started. But when someone comes up in a forum with a design, it is an issue you can question. Or as was done in another design with lots of spurs going into different directions, you could question why a runaround or passing siding was omitted.
All very basic and very easy to understand. If it is techno stuff for you, great. If some one else thinks, hey sounds logic, also great.
If someone tells he is not much into operation I do not know what is meant by it. If it means: I like to sit in a armchair, with the cat on my lap, a cigar in one hand and a cup of coffee in the other, I get the picture. If you want to have your trains looking great, you can enter the ratio debate. Again this is not helping someone to start; if you are happy with one foot long coaches on a 26" radius you are happy with it. If a new kid in town wants to run one foot long coaches it is so easy to say that an18" radius won't work. Hundreds of postings with all different opinions will follow. Should we leave it for "newbies" by repeating tables by John Armstrong and Andy Sperandeo using a 30" radius and #6 switches. (and #8's when S-curves are involved)?
hi Ulrich,
you hit the nail on the head, but
I hear the words of Spacemouse "even if you have the IQ of SpongeBob" or the words of a bitter ex HO-er "ït was not on the boxes". If you want to play football you will have to learn the rules, if you want to enjoy baseball you have to learn the rules. If you want to have an layout without derailments and with just a bit more then doing laps, you will have to learn the rules.
If you don't want to know, your problem. Looking back never use the word bitter. And when learning some rules or words is immediately technospeak to you, you have the problem. If you want to find out your self, don't ask questions on a forum.
A shortlist of questions can have a lot of different uses. If someone response is like: i just want to run some trains, great. Another might ask to explain the difference between trailing and facing spurs. A third might respond like: Is it really impossible to push a cut of autoracks through a #4 crossover?
To me the biggest problem making a shortlist are the old hats, War and Peace long debates whether a 1:2.5 ratio or a 1:3 ratio should be mentioned, or no ratio at all.
Paulus Jas hi Doc, the questions you mentioned are technostuff?
Yes, Paul, technostuff (or technospeak). As has been said multiple times in posts on this forum, we all bring our own interests and concerns to model railroading. I'm not much of an operations person (see Stein's post preceding). I enjoy building structures etc. and am spending far more time detailing than I did 20 yrs ago. My layout design will allow for some operations, but I won't drive my design or scenery decisions on that basis.
As to the quote, I'm sorry but any site designed for new to the hobby types needs to be more fundamental. If someone wants to operate (as opposed to run) a layout, then they can go do more reading and learn about that. But to ask someone if they worried about leading and trailing spurs is not going to help them get started.
Personally, I think everyone should read John Armstrong's book on operations and planning, or any good planning / thought process sites out on the web. And while experience is good for learning, so is ripping up and redesigning layouts in a CAD or design program. I am on version 12 of my layout design and it keeps evolving as I notice what doesn't work, what is overly complex, what doesn't serve the various structures (industries for the operations people) and scenery.
Alan
Sir Madog BUT: We also have to learn to accept the fact, that not all members and guests in this forum thrive to become expert model railroaders. If they can get their fun out of that 4 by 8 with a loop or a figure 8 on it, so it be!
Absolutely. A hobby is something we do because we think it is fun.Nobody should feel browbeaten into doing their model railroading in a way that is not fun for them, just because that is what someone else thinks is the fun way.
As I told another poster by PM a couple of days ago:
You must understand this: it is your layout. You are the boss of your layout. The rest of us can make suggestions about what to do and how to do it, but you are the one who have the final word about what will be done, and what will not be done, and how it will be done. If someone suggest a layout plan to you, and you mostly like it, but it doesn't have everything you want, you can say "I like this part of the plan, but I really wanted to have two trains running at the same time on my layout - any way to work that in ?", or some such thing. The important thing to remember is that it is your layout. You need to tell people what you want to have. They will try to give you some suggestions that fits your wishes. If what you want doesn't fit, they will tell you and suggest some alternatives. But you first need to tell them clearly what you want.
You must understand this: it is your layout. You are the boss of your layout. The rest of us can make suggestions about what to do and how to do it, but you are the one who have the final word about what will be done, and what will not be done, and how it will be done.
If someone suggest a layout plan to you, and you mostly like it, but it doesn't have everything you want, you can say "I like this part of the plan, but I really wanted to have two trains running at the same time on my layout - any way to work that in ?", or some such thing.
The important thing to remember is that it is your layout. You need to tell people what you want to have. They will try to give you some suggestions that fits your wishes. If what you want doesn't fit, they will tell you and suggest some alternatives.
But you first need to tell them clearly what you want.
IMO, getting advice never hurt anyone.Being asked to clarify what your goals are never hurt anyone.
You can always choose to disregard advice you don't want to follow.
It is harder to find any use of advice you never got :-)
tppytel What would be really helpful is a simple example of an operating session on a small layout, two trains maximum, describing what the trains are doing and why.
What would be really helpful is a simple example of an operating session on a small layout, two trains maximum, describing what the trains are doing and why.
Byron Henderson's website article "Starting Ops on a 4X8" is along those lines.
tppytel Today's world is all about pre-packaged solutions - "There's an App for that!" - and most younger folks and some older ones aren't comfortable with solving problems as you go.
Today's world is all about pre-packaged solutions - "There's an App for that!" - and most younger folks and some older ones aren't comfortable with solving problems as you go.
I agree. Sometimes it seems like some people just don't want to take the time read what's offered, and the nice, meaty posts by folks such as Stein (our own Tolstoy ) have no effect. But even if the OP doesn't want to invest the effort, others reading the thread will certainly benefit.
Conversely I do think that some people, mainly those who have trouble defining what they want or narrowing their focus, will benefit from just throwing some track down and running some trains. I would just remind them that they may not necessarily be satisfied with the results in the long term.
Quite an interesting discussion we have going on here - I just hope, it does not get out of hand.
You can lead a horse to the water, but you cannot make it drink. We cannot prevent anybody from making costly mistakes, unless he/she is willing to listen, to collect information from various sources and to communicate in an orderly manner.
I guess, we all started out with an oval made of snap track, a passing siding and a spur leading to whatever type of industry. We started to make scenery by covering a table top with something "green", put structures on it and glued some "trees" to it. In our days, the internet with its vast opportunities of information was not available, yet we learned - by reading a book or visiting a model railroading club. That´s the way I did it. Now we can share our knowledge, which we accumulated over decades. If we attach some small rules to the way we are prepared to share our knowledge with people who are asking us to do so, what´s so bad about it? IMHO, it is perfectly correct to expect properly articulated questions in a proper language, to expect feedback on the hints we give. We invite the posters asking questions to work with us - if he chooses not to, why bother to spend all the precious time in answering his questions?
BUT: We also have to learn to accept the fact, that not all members and guests in this forum thrive to become expert model railroaders. If they can get their fun out of that 4 by 8 with a loop or a figure 8 on it, so it be!
Enjoy!
CTValleyRRFor newcomers to the hobby, what gets you started in a given direction? A layout at a train show, a pre-fab track plan, a train set, or what?
For me it was a combination of things. While looking for O gauge sets to get for the Christmas tree, I started thinking back to my days as a kid and enjoying my HO and N scale trains. Then, while, window shopping at a LHS I started getting the urge to "play" with the N scale trains again. And after attending a local Rail Days, and seeing a number of HO and N scale layouts I decided building a small N scale layout would be a great way to spend some free time, help me relax, and bring the kids some enjoyment.
For me it's not all about operation, or era's, etc., it's just about relaxing and having some fun. I spent most of the past weekend crawling around underneath my layout working on the electrical and control panel drawer. Tedious work in some ways, but I enjoyed every minute of it.
Overtime I've made it a point to learn as much as I can, either through books, forums, or even simulator software. I think the key to avoid frustration is to first accept the simple fact that nothing happens overnight, and if you don't take your time and rush through it, you'll a) make tons of mistakes, and b) fail to enjoy the ride.
the questions you mentioned are technostuff?
When building a modelrailroad you have to learn a couple of things. I never said this list can be used without any explanation. It is just the kind of very basic knowledge you need. Very easy, very simple to understand; if you want to learn.
It is the kind of information you wil find in every book; problem is you can make this list very long indeed. But every newbie should become aware of at least the pitfall that they can't run every train they fancy over every configuration of tracks. And that there is more then just laprunning.
steinjrit comes from Byron Henderson's Layout Design blog:
Actually it reads well and is informative (seen this stuff somewhere else), highly recommended reading. I seem to have stumbled into some of his cornerstones and avoided some (not all) of his planning pitfalls all on my own (or is it because I read it somewhere and think they are my thoughts?).
Doc in CTPaulus JasKeep in mind this shortlist [ the NMRA list] is meant for newbies, an experienced modeller will know which standards he can ease a bit. Questions 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 are "technospeak" and probably mean nothing to newbies or even some moderately experience modelers.
Paulus JasKeep in mind this shortlist [ the NMRA list] is meant for newbies, an experienced modeller will know which standards he can ease a bit.
Questions 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 are "technospeak" and probably mean nothing to newbies or even some moderately experience modelers.
Right. I don't think it would be possible to create a single very short list of questions you can give to someone starting out with track planning, which magically will make him or her aware of most issues he or she should think about.
And of course - most people learn more from their own mistakes than from the advice of someone else. As the old saying goes: "good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment" :-)
Still - it can't harm people too bad to read a couple of pages of lessons one could possibly learn from someone else's experience. Here is another such lists of tips, where things are explained fairly clearly as we go along - it comes from Byron Henderson's Layout Design blog:
Track Plan Analysis: http://mrsvc.blogspot.com/2008/02/track-plan-analysis-indexed.html
Questions 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 are "technospeak" and probably mean nothing to newbies or even some moderately experience modelers. Actually I'm not sure a lot of new to the hobby know what staging is let alone a trailing spur.
Maybe I am not giving people enough credit for reading forums (or even MR), searching the internet or actually going out and buying a planning book (like those from John Armstrong or Tony Keoster ).
hi,
I always loved the cornerstones of good-design by Byron Henderson. His list can be made a bit longer; a short list with 12 points is all you need.
The NMRA-site is a prime exemple of what I do not want. Looking at the 10 points for good design I found them very abstract. And looking for data regarding radii and switch numbers i coudn't find any standards. A list like:
1 Did you not only drew your trackplan, but also your room or space with all obstacles?
2 Did you apply a 2,5 ratio for your minimum radius?
3 Did you apply a 4 ratio for your switches? (Devide your min. radius by 4 and you have a matching switch- number)
4 Did you use a higher switchnumber when S-curves are used.
5 Did you provide for staging?
6 Do you have at least one passing siding?
7 Do you have facing and trailing spurs?
8 Do you have spurs to at least a teamtrack, a freighthouse, an interchange and a big landmark industry?
9 Is the reach-in distance never more then 30"?
10 Is aisle-width never under 24", with an average aisle-width of 30"?
Questions about grades, easements and footprints are still missing.
Keep in mind this shortlist is meant for newbies, an experienced modeller will know which standards he can ease a bit. To many times the old hats are debating these standards over the heads of those who still have never heard or realised a big 2-10-2 steamer is not able to run over a 18" curve with #4 switches.
If a rather short posting like this one, allready gives the impression of being as long as and as boring as War and Peace, we are facing a different problem.
jecorbett I'm not sure a lot of newbies are going to listen to all that sound advice. I didn't. I read all kinds of good advice but I thought I knew what I wanted and I didn't pay much attention to all that good advice. As a result, I started two unsuccesful layouts. With newbies, a lot of time enthusiasm trumps reason. Some people just have to learn things through experience.
I'm not sure a lot of newbies are going to listen to all that sound advice. I didn't. I read all kinds of good advice but I thought I knew what I wanted and I didn't pay much attention to all that good advice. As a result, I started two unsuccesful layouts. With newbies, a lot of time enthusiasm trumps reason. Some people just have to learn things through experience.
And I'm not sure that isn't all bad. A lot of people, such as the the original poster, are looking for a solution to "get it right the first time". The LDSig motto is "only make new mistakes".
Sometimes those mistakes aren't a waste of time. Consider them practice It may take years of bouncing around for the modeler to decide on what he or she wants out of a layout (or prototype or era or region). There may be an extraordinary few who know from the very first 1x4 exactly what they want to do. The vast majority or newcomers, not so much. Unfortunately the RTR, immediate gratification society we now have doesn't value the journey, They want to be beamed directly to the destination. I dno't the think the majority of new modelers know where their personal destination is.
There currently is more information available to modelers than there has been at any time. The beauty of the modern internet over old school books is that research is just a few clicks away. The danger of the internet over books is that the internet is not permanent. About 15-20 years ago I wrote a letter to the NMRA and told them that they needed to start a project where they sought out dispatchers and interviewed them to see how they operated TT&TO. I suggested that they send an interview team to the dispatch offices of the major railroads and solict dispatchers to be interviewed. that was going to be the last time there was a critical mass of TT&TO qualified dispatchers in concentrated locations.
TT&TO died about 1985. That means that to be a qood TT&TO dispatcher you had to have started dispatching in about 1980. Most railroaders retire with about 35 years of service. If you do the math that means that the within the next 5 years, the vast majority of dispatchers who actually operated TT&TO will have retired. Within the next 30 years the majority of people who operated trains, as crews or dispatchers, under TT&TO will be dead. There will be no one left who has actually seen it work. There will be no more first hand experience on the forums to answer questions.
By the way, to the best of my knowledge the NMRA did not act on my suggestion.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
steinjr So - you reply to each new poster as he or she comes online and asks the first questions. Some get up to speed fast, some at an average tempo, some slow, some never. Smile, Stein
So - you reply to each new poster as he or she comes online and asks the first questions. Some get up to speed fast, some at an average tempo, some slow, some never.
.. that´s life - you win a few and you lose a few ...
Seriously, I admire the patience some of you guys show in answering the sometimes not so intelligent questions raised here. However, there is a risk of "dumping" just to much of our knowledge on to someone who has yet to learn the basic language of model railroading, which may be discouraging to some of the newbies in here.Does it make sense to explain the details of a real railroad operation to someone, who just wants to put up a "train set" to watch trains running around a loop? Maybe not, but how to tell, how serious a guy is about entering into this fascinating and rewarding hobby?
IMHO, this is not the job of a forum, but should be vested with the LHS or local clubs.