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.
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
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
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
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
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
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/