Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

We need to do better in our representations of the prototypes.............

4811 views
52 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2009
  • From: Staten Island NY
  • 1,734 posts
Posted by joe323 on Tuesday, February 18, 2014 4:48 PM

Why not put a sealed dome over the layout to simulate a scale atmosphere with a few smoking units (scale pollution ).

Joe Staten Island West 

  • Member since
    May 2011
  • 743 posts
Posted by Steven S on Tuesday, February 18, 2014 3:49 PM

Kyle
We need small prime movers,

 

Might fit into a G scale loco...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9zt3SF_Flc

 

...and HO scale traction motors

 

Someone has thought of it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QE5tJTeBdj8

 

Steve S

  • Member since
    May 2011
  • 743 posts
Posted by Steven S on Tuesday, February 18, 2014 3:41 PM

Sir Madog
Has anyone thought of scale light?

 

If you scaled down the wavelength, I suppose you'd have to use UV light for HO, X-rays for N, and Gamma rays for Z scale.  This could get dangerous.

 

Steve S

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • 2,616 posts
Posted by peahrens on Tuesday, February 18, 2014 1:43 PM

I also like the idea of how many HO boxcars would fit in a 40' boxcar, but think the best way to address the issue with finality is to prove it. 

If we could rent a full size 40' car, I think the problem would be stacking them neatly, essential to getting an accurate maximum.  I'm not sure we could get the top rows in anyway above the door top, so maybe we could use reefers and climb out the hatch, but I digress.  So here's my proposed alternative.  Most of us have some old Blue Box cars and also the original box.  Put the cars in the boxes and send them to the OP (not me).  He can weigh the car in the box (total weight).  Then, the OP could build a full size Atheran Blue Box (of appropriate layers of cardboard to get the right thickness).  He would have to weigh the materials, and just build the bottom and double that for the weight of a total box.  Then, we would keep sending our BB cars in boxes and he would start filling the full size BB, keeping track of the inserted BB numbers of cars and weight.  When filled, he could compare the contents weight with the weight of the empty full size (with top) BB plus the weight of a standard empty 40' full size car.  Then he could report the exact ratio of the full scale to the contents, and if 1:1 we would not have to re-weight our cars.  If not 1:1, we would have to add or subtract weight from our rolling stock to achieve full prototypical-ness.  Of course, the OP should return our BB cars, but he can keep the full size BB box (turn it into a museum?).

Paul

Modeling HO with a transition era UP bent

  • Member since
    April 2009
  • From: Staten Island NY
  • 1,734 posts
Posted by joe323 on Tuesday, February 18, 2014 12:08 PM

Sir Madog

We talk about scale speed, scale time, scale dimensions and scale weight. Has anyone thought of scale light?

Does light scale down? The intensity of light is measured in Lux (lx). A sunny day with a clear blue sky has around 100,000 lx around noon; at sunset, this value goes down to about 50 lx. Now, on our layouts, do we divide this by the scale we model in? Or the square of that value, as the intensity of light can also be expressed by light radiation per sq.ft.?

In any case, if we scale down light, we won´t have to worry about too much detail on our layouts - we will hardly see any Laugh

 

 

I got to th thinking about this today I calculate that we should have 114 lumens per scale foot. I reduced the diameter of the sun to HO scale and the distance to ho scale both are still well over a million miles and then divided the average 10,000 lumens per square foot on the sun by 87.  Anyway it complicated.  Suffice it to say that the average 100 watt incandescent bulb producing about 1600 lumen there is no way to reproduce light in scale. 

Joe Staten Island West 

  • Member since
    May 2008
  • From: Miles City, Montana
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by FRRYKid on Monday, February 17, 2014 10:25 PM

Sir Madog

We talk about scale speed, scale time, scale dimensions and scale weight. Has anyone thought of scale light?

Does light scale down? The intensity of light is measured in Lux (lx). A sunny day with a clear blue sky has around 100,000 lx around noon; at sunset, this value goes down to about 50 lx. Now, on our layouts, do we divide this by the scale we model in? Or the square of that value, as the intensity of light can also be expressed by light radiation per sq.ft.?

In any case, if we scale down light, we won´t have to worry about too much detail on our layouts - we will hardly see any Laugh

 

I don't remember the issue, but I seem to remember an article in MR discussing this very point on lighting a freight house.

"The only stupid question is the unasked question."
Brain waves can power an electric train. RealFact #832 from Snapple.
  • Member since
    April 2009
  • From: Staten Island NY
  • 1,734 posts
Posted by joe323 on Friday, February 14, 2014 11:32 AM

When you think about it, having everything be prototypical makes no since. Even if we can get an HO scale diesel engine that actually works, how are you going to do maintance? Think about having to change the oil. Or checking the fluid levels. At least it isn't a gas engine where you have to replace the spark plugsSmile, Wink & Grin

 

Doesn't anyone remember the comoc book character the atom?  Or is it Honey I Shrunk the Engineer? :) 

Joe Staten Island West 

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Chi-Town
  • 7,712 posts
Posted by zstripe on Friday, February 14, 2014 3:09 AM

If that was the case, I doubt, you would fit also.Laugh

Frank

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Grand Blanc, Mi
  • 151 posts
Posted by wrumbel on Thursday, February 13, 2014 4:49 PM

So if I model HO in my HO scale basement wouldn't that be 1:1.  I don't think that boxcar is going to fit!Stick out tongue

Wayne

  • Member since
    July 2007
  • From: Pottstown PA
  • 1,039 posts
Posted by rdgk1se3019 on Thursday, February 13, 2014 4:48 PM

wrumbel
So if I model HO scale trains in my HO scale basement that's 1:1. I don't think that boxcar will fit through the door!

 

Easy fix for that.Smile, Wink & Grin

 

Just build the layout IN the boxcar.Idea

Dennis Blank Jr.

CEO,COO,CFO,CMO,Bossman,Slavedriver,Engineer,Trackforeman,Grunt. Birdsboro & Reading Railroad

  • Member since
    December 2004
  • From: Grand Blanc, Mi
  • 151 posts
Posted by wrumbel on Thursday, February 13, 2014 4:46 PM

So if I model HO scale trains in my HO scale basement that's 1:1.  I don't think that boxcar will fit through the door!

Wayne

  • Member since
    February 2007
  • From: Warren, MI O scaler
  • 553 posts
Posted by el-capitan on Thursday, February 13, 2014 8:01 AM

Kyle

, or a 3,132ft stretch of flex track, 

 

You use 36 ft sections of flextrack? How big is your layout? How do you get it home from the LHS?

 Check out the Deming Sub by clicking on the pics:

Deming Sub Deming Sub

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 918 posts
Posted by Kyle on Thursday, February 13, 2014 2:21 AM

What about the locomotives getting power from the rails, or a 3,132ft stretch of flex track, and rail joiners, all so unprototypicalSurprise!! We need small prime movers, and HO scale traction motors in the trucks!  We should make all track to prototypical standards!  Not to mention everything that is horribly over sized (wheels, couplers, etc)!  MischiefWait a minute, we forgot about the crew that should be in the cab working the controls, we need to shrink ourselves to HO scale.  What about te fake water on the layouts, it should be replaced with actual water!SoapBox

 

When you think about it, having everything be prototypical makes no since.  Even if we can get an HO scale diesel engine that actually works, how are you going to do maintance?  Think about having to change the oil.  Or checking the fluid levels.  At least it isn't a gas engine where you have to replace the spark plugsSmile, Wink & Grin

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 53 posts
Posted by Greybeard on Thursday, February 13, 2014 12:02 AM

joe323
I think the term for this thread is economies of scale (modeling)

Can I pay with HO scale dollars?

Rich.

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • 8,876 posts
Posted by maxman on Wednesday, February 12, 2014 11:58 PM

zstripe
But anyway, I am one of those crazy people that count mentally, when viewing anything that I see, for instance, wheel lugs on a truck. Even if I know already how many there are, I still do it and try to remember where I started from.

Rainman, is that you?

  • Member since
    July 2007
  • From: Pottstown PA
  • 1,039 posts
Posted by rdgk1se3019 on Wednesday, February 12, 2014 5:48 PM

Just remember.......the bigger an object......the more gravimetric attraction it will have.......Whistling

Dennis Blank Jr.

CEO,COO,CFO,CMO,Bossman,Slavedriver,Engineer,Trackforeman,Grunt. Birdsboro & Reading Railroad

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Southeast Texas
  • 5,449 posts
Posted by mobilman44 on Wednesday, February 12, 2014 8:45 AM

Zstripe,

   Looking back to my High School years (Lane Tech - Chicago 62), a number of courses were a big help to me in Model Railroading.   Two years of wood shop, electric shop, two years of drafting, Algebra/Geometry, and even typing have proven useful in the Hobby.   Of course there is that year of Russian I took, which almost did me in.

Ha, be it Wright JC, DePaul University, or University of Louisville - nothing there was learned to help me be a better model railroader.    Of course without them, I likely couldn't afford to be in the Hobby.

 

ENJOY  !

 

Mobilman44

 

Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central 

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Chi-Town
  • 7,712 posts
Posted by zstripe on Saturday, February 8, 2014 1:46 AM

Jabear,

I missed some of the reply's, on was on the FSM site. But anyway, I am one of those crazy people that count mentally, when viewing anything that I see, for instance, wheel lugs on a truck. Even if I know already how many there are, I still do it and try to remember where I started from. It carry's on to anything that involves counting. I'm obsessed with mentally counting things and always finding faster ways to do it. My four years of Machine design and drawing blue prints, probably had a lot to do with it.Bow  I had a lot of schooling. So what do I do with it all? I wind up driving a truck and owning my own, for 45yrs of my life. Laugh Laugh

Striped

  • Member since
    January 2005
  • From: Kansas City Area
  • 1,161 posts
Posted by gmcrail on Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:32 AM

Interestingly enough, a 100,00 LB 40-foot boxcar, when converted to ounces (16,000,000)  and divided 3 times by 87.1  (That's correct for HO Scale  comes out to 2.4214 ounces (rounded).  Pretty close to the NMRA RP, huh? Don't forget that weight has mass and mass has dimension in this space-time continuum.  Hence the 3x division.   Big Smile

Edit: For a loaded car with a 145,000LB loaded weight, the calculation is even closer: 3.5110  ounces. Not only do our HO models match prototype dimension, they match in weight as well!!Smile, Wink & Grin

 

Don't I remember a similar thread a few years back...?

---

Gary M. Collins gmcrailgNOSPAM@gmail.com

===================================

"Common Sense, Ain't!" -- G. M. Collins

===================================

http://fhn.site90.net

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: US
  • 973 posts
Posted by jmbjmb on Friday, February 7, 2014 10:39 PM

Steve S, you must not be a Dr Who fan.  You guys need to watch British SciFi more.  It's a wibbly, wobbley, timey, whimey thing. 

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Hillsboro, Oregon
  • 934 posts
Posted by Eric97123 on Friday, February 7, 2014 5:12 PM

mobilman44

 

Shouldn't be much of a problem, for after all, a small loco weighing in a 500,000 lbs would only be 5,745 lbs in HO scale.

 

 

 

 

I would love to see something that small that weighs that much.  I love sailing and there would be big money spent for something the small and weighs that much to use as ballast for a keel. 

 

The cube thing confused me too when I started out but once I was able to picture it, it made lots of sense.

  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Southwest US
  • 12,914 posts
Posted by tomikawaTT on Friday, February 7, 2014 4:29 PM

To scale a linear dimension, divide by the scale factor (HO 1:87)

To scale an area, divide by the square of the scale factor (HO 1:7,569)  A model of a building 87 feet square would take one square foot of layout space.

To scale a volume, divide by the cube of the scale factor (HO 1:658,503)  An HO scale building with a volume of one cubic foot would represent a prototype building with a volume of 658,503 cubic feet.  Assuming the model has the same density as the thing being modeled, an accurate HO scale model of a 100 ton (loaded total weight) car would weigh a littlt less than 5 ounces - a good ballpark figure for NMRA recommended weight for a 50 foot, 70 ton capacity boxcar.

Seems that we're already close enough for most purposes...

Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - with cars weighted to NMRA RP)

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Utica, OH
  • 4,000 posts
Posted by jecorbett on Friday, February 7, 2014 1:43 PM

zstripe

Interesting to note that some of the poster's, paid attention in school. Oops Whistling

Striped

 

I'm good as long as we stick to basic arithmetic. Trigonometry and calculus would be another matter. Algebra and geometry might be a little challenging as well.

  • Member since
    April 2009
  • From: Staten Island NY
  • 1,734 posts
Posted by joe323 on Friday, February 7, 2014 5:59 AM
I think the term for this thread is economies of scale (modeling)

Joe Staten Island West 

  • Member since
    December 2011
  • From: Northern Minnesota
  • 2,774 posts
Posted by NP2626 on Friday, February 7, 2014 5:40 AM

I see that some of you appear to have no actual sense of humor, what so ever!  I took the original poster's question as a humorous question, something to get people to step back and think; Yes, this is, after all, a hobby and I should remember to have fun with it! 

I must be wrong, again! 

NP 2626 "Northern Pacific, really terrific"

Northern Pacific Railway Historical Association:  http://www.nprha.org/

  • Member since
    August 2011
  • From: A Comfy Cave, New Zealand
  • 6,249 posts
Posted by "JaBear" on Friday, February 7, 2014 4:47 AM

NP2626
"Was a "fun/ interesting" thread, so just how many scale 40' box cars do actually fit in the prototype"? 658,503

RTR or Kit Question WhistlingSmile, Wink & Grin

Interesting to note that some of the poster's, paid attention in schoolOopsWhistling

I trust you weren't one of those students who spent too much time looking out the window Frank ? I myself would have never done such a thing of course Geeked, but I can tell you that when the railcar, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NZR_RM_class_(Vulcan) ,went past school near the Southland Main Trunk, there was about quarter of an hour before the lunch break.Dinner 

Thanks Mobilman44. Big Smile

Cheers, the Bear. 

 

 

"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, February 7, 2014 2:45 AM

We talk about scale speed, scale time, scale dimensions and scale weight. Has anyone thought of scale light?

Does light scale down? The intensity of light is measured in Lux (lx). A sunny day with a clear blue sky has around 100,000 lx around noon; at sunset, this value goes down to about 50 lx. Now, on our layouts, do we divide this by the scale we model in? Or the square of that value, as the intensity of light can also be expressed by light radiation per sq.ft.?

In any case, if we scale down light, we won´t have to worry about too much detail on our layouts - we will hardly see any Laugh

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 15,797 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Friday, February 7, 2014 12:31 AM

Mobilman44:

Your thread is indeed fun! We all need something every once in a while to make our eyeballs go funny!LaughLaughLaugh

Dave

I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!

  • Member since
    May 2011
  • 743 posts
Posted by Steven S on Thursday, February 6, 2014 11:51 PM

jmbjmb
What about scale time? If it's a linear dimension, then shall we divide by 87?

 

If you have a scale mile and are running at scale speeds then time remains the same.   But most of us don't have scales distances so we use fast clocks to speed up time. 

 

Steve S

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!