QUOTE: Originally posted by John Busby Hi Old Dad maybe I should get one of them myself forgeting the diferences in US and English spelling on some words. No sign writer could possably be worse at spelling than me. I have the curve problem as well. But if I riped it up I could only lay the same again. In the area that I just want to get finished so I can think about future expantion of the line and get to the area that will allow larger curves. regards John
Have fun with your trains
QUOTE: Originally posted by RhB_HJ BTW there are a few ( small number ) over there who have a real problem reading, writing and comprehending. Which is some doing considering it's online, eh!?! [;)][}:)][;)][:D]
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Yeah, but ya gotta be real delicate over there! [:0] I have to keep repeating that its a discussion about the overall future of the hobby, NOT what I personally want on my layout. It seams a small number of MLS members can take things real personal and think your putting them down if your not carefull (not from my post but from others I've read). Most are pretty good at reading the real issue and there have been some interesting and very different viewpoints. It seams each year the offerings open to the R1 rule are getting smaller and smaller (except LGB)
QUOTE: Originally posted by RhB_HJ Vic,[;)] Just finished reading what the MLSers had to say on this subject, I only check that outfit every two days or so. Pretty well down the line I expected, including the likely proponents for each side. [^][^][:0] In short: It's all about choice. The modeler chooses what he wants to run and the mfg chooses what he wants to produce; and somewhere along the line each modeler ends up with what he likes and each mfg sells to his target group. Kimbrit, Hornets nest? Not as bad as the gauge/scale thing.[;)][}:)][^] IMHO that's all for the better, the more often people think about these things, the more likely it will be that most will understand where LS is going and why.
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith Hey Ian, its 9:30pm pacific standard time, had Sushi for dinner, now watching "Secrets of the Dead" on PBS, wife's watching "American Idiots..I mean Idol" in the other room. Of course your probably hard at work as it must be afternoon your way.... [(-D]
QUOTE: Originally posted by iandor Vic and HJ I was thinking that you guys musn't have a life and it is the middle of the night over there, it is 11 AM thur here, but doing some calculations it must be about 7 pm last night (wed) where you are, so you have an apology in advance from me ok. Ian
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith QUOTE: Originally posted by Teran5 I personally have a minimum of 8 foot diamiter curves on the origional portion of my layout but with all of these new engines coming out, I decided to go with 10 on my new sections and then once done go back and replace my smaller curves. My stuff is squeezed onto three sides of the yard and the curve goes from the fence to the border in one place. Although I meet the requirments, it's a pain for my stuff to not work very well on the 8 foot i have. My USA SD40-2 usually pulls the cars off the track when going around, even with Kadee couplers. I think the problem is getting manufacturers to get their stuff to work not only on smaller curves, but ALSO work WELL on them. That would solve many problems. Teran, I think your experiencing what I fear is coming, as the turning radius gets larger more and more of us are going to find we dont have anywhere to expand to! You can only go so wide before most of us run out of real estate.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Teran5 I personally have a minimum of 8 foot diamiter curves on the origional portion of my layout but with all of these new engines coming out, I decided to go with 10 on my new sections and then once done go back and replace my smaller curves. My stuff is squeezed onto three sides of the yard and the curve goes from the fence to the border in one place. Although I meet the requirments, it's a pain for my stuff to not work very well on the 8 foot i have. My USA SD40-2 usually pulls the cars off the track when going around, even with Kadee couplers. I think the problem is getting manufacturers to get their stuff to work not only on smaller curves, but ALSO work WELL on them. That would solve many problems.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Capt Carrales Is there any rolling stock that is not viable for small diameter curves. I should hope not, I would hate to purchase ($100 US) what will end up a piece of junk.
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith I should point out my position isnt what I want! Its where are we going and is that a good thing? Are we heading toward a time when nothing new will work on less than 8 foot diameter? Where to seriously contemplate a garden RR we need to have a good acre of land ready? I dont want or expect a DASH 9 to negotiate a 4 foot turn, but I am concerned that as time goes on less and less on the smaller diameter capable items will be offered and more and more wider only items will come to dominate the market. How many suburban garden RR's will even consider the hobby when they go into the LHS and get told, "dont even think about a garden RR unless you have a 20' wide by 40 ' long area..." Thats why I see this trend as having some unforseen pitfalls for the hobby...
Get the Garden Railways newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month