I have not read all these replies, but having been involved in the other two threads, I will just offer these thoughts:
Most all of my locos are "newer" production (last 20 years) and many came with decoders. I run DC. All the decoder equiped ones ran too slow on DC with the decoders still installed.
Most all run at acceptable speeds on my 13.8 volts DC with the decoders removed.
A few could run a little faster, but all get into the relm of 70 smph or faster.
Mike - my speed meaurements are done with a measured section of track and a stop watch - not perfect but repeated tests are averaged out........reasonably accurate in my view.
And yes, I think locos should run be able to run at prototypical top speeds - most of mine do, the rest are close.
While practices varied, most EMD F units were geared for 65 mph - even many used in passenger serivce here in the east. Many E units here in th east were only geared for 92 mph. The four gear selections for EMD E units were 85 mph, 92 mph, 98 mph and 117 mph - that comes right from an E8 operators manual....if your EMD E units are going 85 to 95 smph, they are generally going as fast as most of the real ones ever did.
It should also be noted, for all you "slow speed" fans, that the E8 operators manual lists "slowest sustained speed", which means the slowest speed an engineer should go with a train for an extended period of time to avoid traction motor overheating. for all four gear ratios, that speed is above 20 mph......
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRALIt should also be noted, for all you "slow speed" fans, that the E8 operators manual lists "slowest sustained speed", which means the slowest speed an engineer should go with a train for an extended period of time to avoid traction motor overheating. for all four gear ratios, that speed is above 20 mph...... Sheldon
Wonder what happens if the railroad had 20-25 miles of 20 mph speed restriction? Think of the near bankrupt railroads that did well to keep freight trains moving over poor track conditions. Some of these bankrupts was force to keep passenger service even though they was losing money hand over fist by keeping these unwanted passenger trains operating.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
mlehman I am not being philosophical when I say that I would expect a passenger locomotive model should reach approximately the same top speed as the prototype. I do have to wonder how people are measuring speed? Everyone have radar guns or one of those speed trap devices? I know about counting poles, but I am talking about actual data measured accurately, not approximations.
I am not being philosophical when I say that I would expect a passenger locomotive model should reach approximately the same top speed as the prototype.
I do have to wonder how people are measuring speed? Everyone have radar guns or one of those speed trap devices? I know about counting poles, but I am talking about actual data measured accurately, not approximations.
It seems to me that the shorter the stretch of track being used to measure speed, the less accurate the stop watch approach is likely to be. In my case, i am fortunate to have a 180 foot stretch of track, so at least I have a greater distance to measure speed.
Even without a stop watch, however, the eye doesn't lie. Before I actually measured the speed, I could see that the Intermountain F3A units were running slower than the Athearn Genesis F3A units. In fact, with the Athearn Genesis F3A in front of the Intermountain F3A, the Genesis eventually lapped the Intermountain F3A's, all four of them.
Rich
Alton Junction
richhotrainEven without a stop watch, however, the eye doesn't lie. Before I actually measured the speed, I could see that the Intermountain F3A units were running slower than the Athearn Genesis F3A units. In fact, with the Athearn Genesis F3A in front of the Intermountain F3A, the Genesis eventually lapped the Intermountain F3A's, all four of them. Rich
Rich,Do you know the gear ratio of the IM and Genesis F3As? Could be the IM F3As has a different ratio or slower speed motor then the Genesis.
There has to be a reason behind this problem.
Cheers the Bear.
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
richhotrainMike, that's a great point. On the thread that I started, I asked about the existence of special equipment to measure scale speed, but the only answers that I got were to use a stop watch.
Rich,
Try Googling "model railroad speedometer" and you'll get a number of choices, Bachrus and Boulder Creek Engineering among them.
Gotta hit the sack, been up getting my Raspberry Pi set-up to run JMRI, almost there, but still need my wife toi hack a couple of pieces of code or something to get it going remotely.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
mlehman richhotrain Mike, that's a great point. On the thread that I started, I asked about the existence of special equipment to measure scale speed, but the only answers that I got were to use a stop watch. Rich, Try Googling "model railroad speedometer" and you'll get a number of choices, Bachrus and Boulder Creek Engineering among them.
richhotrain Mike, that's a great point. On the thread that I started, I asked about the existence of special equipment to measure scale speed, but the only answers that I got were to use a stop watch.
Are there replacement gears available? Seems like there may be a market for them.
Proper speed is important to me. I would not expect a Baldwin Transfer Locomotive to run fast, nor would I expect a North Shore Elextroliner, or an Acela to run slow. To me proper speed capabilities are important to a realistic model.
Mike
A few years ago, I would likely have said that scale speed was very important to me. However, over the last 2 years or so, my desires in model railroading have shifted significantly. Scale accuracy no longer matters to me, nor does perfect fidelity of details or locations. I have come to the belief that I no longer am going to model things to show them off and have others tell me what they think about them. I do things my way for my enjoyment now and that includes running speeds. Though, if anything, I run much slower than the scale 45 MPH that most of the BAR mainline was rated for.
My layout isn't big enough for running anything at top speed, so I "gear down" some of my engines by setting the Vmax CV a bit lower. I trade unnecessary top speed for tighter speed steps at the low end.
I find this works particularly well for my Bachmann engines with "Sound Value" decoders. They like to take off like jackrabbits, so by cutting Vmax in half I reduce that dramatically.
My layout is full of bridges and grade crossings. Nobody should be going all that fast, anyway.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Hobbez A few years ago, I would likely have said that scale speed was very important to me. However, over the last 2 years or so, my desires in model railroading have shifted significantly. Scale accuracy no longer matters to me, nor does perfect fidelity of details or locations. I have come to the belief that I no longer am going to model things to show them off and have others tell me what they think about them. I do things my way for my enjoyment now and that includes running speeds. Though, if anything, I run much slower than the scale 45 MPH that most of the BAR mainline was rated for.
I agree. I am building my railroad for my pleasure.
Bear,
Now that I have had time to read more of this, and have helped Rich with the technical side of his question, I will respond to your "philosophical" question in more detail.
For me, all three factors carry equal importance - slow speed, pulling power and correct top speeds.
Maybe those of us with large curves and long mainlines are in the minority, but I have discussed before that here were I live, lots of folks have "basement sized" layouts, so to me the "experiance" of operating on layouts with 36" or larger curves and long mainlines is rather "common".
My own layout space is 900 sq feet and the layout specs include 36" minimum curves (many are larger than 36" R), #8 turnouts, and 7-8 scale miles of mainline. It also includes extensive "switching" districts and such.
One of my passions in modeling is relistic length trains for my era, the 1950's. That means 40-70 car freights, and passenger trains of a dozen or more cars at times.
I chose to built a large but simple layout to allow large curves, long trains and realistic mainline operations for my era and locale.
Locos don't need to go 100 smph, but barely 50 smph for a passenger loco would not be acceptable either. I do expect my locos to have top speeds similar to the typical speeds here in the Mid Atlantic in the 1950's - so passenger speeds of 60-70 are required.
Slow speed - this seems to have become some what of an "obsession" in this hobby. But in point of fact, I have done a lot of train watching, and I have never seen a real train travel at 1 mph for any continious time/distance. In fact many real locos can not/could not smoothly maintain such a speed. But rather they would be accelerating or decelerating slowly or smoothly.
So that is what I expect of my locos - smooth starts/stops and good control in the 3-5 smph range for switching/coupling. My Aristo Train Engineer throttles with pulse width motor control do just fine - even if some locos will not "cruise" as slow as some DCC decoders allow. The one thing I like most about The Aristo Train Engineer in this regard is tthe fact that once a loco starts moving, it will almost without fail continue at that minimum speed it started at without stalling - more important than "slowest possible speed".
Pulling power - I have done a lot of work in this area, free rolling trucks, better traction tires for locos that have them, more weight. I have no problem pulling my 50 to 70 car trains with two medium sized steam locos or 3-4 first generation diesels.
My layout is DC powered, and I have no problems double heading a number of different brands of locos, both steam and diesel - a search of this forum should provide info I have posted on this in the past.
Some may be happy only working a switching layout, that's fine. Personally I like all aspects of train operation.
One more thought - many modelers today are focused on the experiance of "being the Engineer", and that's fine. While I do engage in that activity, I also like being the dispatcher, or in simple "railfan" running, or in allowing mainline trains to "cruise" while I do the switching. My layout is designed to provide both switching and mainline operation as well as good "display" running - mainline speeds a must.
Heck Sheldon , with the number of good “philosophical topics” you touch upon in your last post , I would ask you to consider kicking off a series of “Philosophical Friday” threads, but considering the number of brickbats thrown in your direction during my brief time on the forum I quite understand why you would probably politely decline. I was unfortunately late on the scene and only caught the end of John Whitten s “Philosophical Friday” threads which I enjoyed. Cheers, the Bear (who rushes in where angels fear to tread).
While we have not stayed in close touch recently, John Whitten and I were actually off forum acquaintances back in those days. Like me, he simply became too busy for much of the non sense that goes on here.
I don't know everything about this hobby, but I did grow up working in hobby shops, I knew or met many of the movers and shakers of this hobby in the 70's and 80's (some before they made it big), was a long time member of a well published club, and have been at it myself for over 40 years - yes my views are generally carved in stone at this point.
I have been very lucky to learn and experiance this hobby with a number of people I would consider the "masters".
And yes my outspoken views take a lot of heat on here from time to time.
And, as you guessed, politely no, I simply don't have the time for a weekly column.
Glad you found my thoughts interesting.
BRAKIE richhotrain Even without a stop watch, however, the eye doesn't lie. Before I actually measured the speed, I could see that the Intermountain F3A units were running slower than the Athearn Genesis F3A units. In fact, with the Athearn Genesis F3A in front of the Intermountain F3A, the Genesis eventually lapped the Intermountain F3A's, all four of them. Rich Rich,Do you know the gear ratio of the IM and Genesis F3As? Could be the IM F3As has a different ratio or slower speed motor then the Genesis. There has to be a reason behind this problem.
richhotrain Even without a stop watch, however, the eye doesn't lie. Before I actually measured the speed, I could see that the Intermountain F3A units were running slower than the Athearn Genesis F3A units. In fact, with the Athearn Genesis F3A in front of the Intermountain F3A, the Genesis eventually lapped the Intermountain F3A's, all four of them. Rich
"JaBear" wrote:
It would appear that the majority who run passenger trains do so at a speed that “looks right” to them depending on the layouts limitations. Fast clocks and operations would appear to put their own spin on the speed issue. Then there are those whose interest lie mainly with switching so slow speed control is more important.
I think that's progress. 50 years ago, everything started like a jack rabbit and ran like a scalded dog. Slowing things down involved regearing and remotoring, i.e. major surgery. We've arrived where we're at now because industry has been responsive to the needs of modelers. I suspect that Rich will find a solution to what gives his IMs sloth (my personal suggestion on that is to call NWSL and see what they can offer in the way of gears). Most of us don't have the space or incliniation to run fast, but I think we mostly believed it should be on tap when needed.
mlehman "JaBear" wrote: It would appear that the majority who run passenger trains do so at a speed that “looks right” to them depending on the layouts limitations. Fast clocks and operations would appear to put their own spin on the speed issue. Then there are those whose interest lie mainly with switching so slow speed control is more important. I think that's progress. 50 years ago, everything started like a jack rabbit and ran like a scalded dog. Slowing things down involved regearing and remotoring, i.e. major surgery. We've arrived where we're at now because industry has been responsive to the needs of modelers. I suspect that Rich will find a solution to what gives his IMs sloth (my personal suggestion on that is to call NWSL and see what they can offer in the way of gears). Most of us don't have the space or incliniation to run fast, but I think we mostly believed it should be on tap when needed.
Mike, respectfully I think attempting to regear the Intermountain F unit would be a mistake. No stock gears are simply going to drop in and replace the factory gearing.
No one has yet to confirm what the gear ratio is on the Intermountain units or the Genesis units - if I get time I will try to confirm same on both brands and post the info.
I still say the problem is electrical and has more to do with differences in lighting board circuit design and/or motor design than with gear ratios. It will be interesting if the gear ratios of the Intermountain and Genesis are the same or similar.
Another interesting test would be to bypass the lighting board and speed test both brands on straight DC directly to the motor. Again, if I get some time.......
Yeah, that's why I suggested calling NWSL. If gearing is an issue for someone, they will know. If not, they'll likely know too, for instance, whether the factory gearing is roughly the same and such problems point in another direction.
I've been through something similar, trying to speed match my Genesis F units equipped with NCE DA-SR decoders with the Walthers/P2K F7 units with QSI DCC/sound. That took awhile and included a rash of flattened wheels and other such grief. Finally got it close enough for them to work together. QSI is a pain to deal with unless you have DecoderPro...which you'd not find, ahem, relevant.
I think your suggestion of putting examples of both on straight DC is certainly one way to determine if it's something other than the drive. Never thought twice about that with my F unit fleet...it was obviously an electrical/control issue there.
From waaaay back in an old issue of MR that came my way, I recall a formula of inches traveled in 5 seconds = scale MPH- this was for HO, and I may be off on the numbers. Maybe Koester would remember; it may have been in one of his pieces.
BRAKIE ATLANTIC CENTRAL It should also be noted, for all you "slow speed" fans, that the E8 operators manual lists "slowest sustained speed", which means the slowest speed an engineer should go with a train for an extended period of time to avoid traction motor overheating. for all four gear ratios, that speed is above 20 mph...... Sheldon Wonder what happens if the railroad had 20-25 miles of 20 mph speed restriction? Think of the near bankrupt railroads that did well to keep freight trains moving over poor track conditions. Some of these bankrupts was force to keep passenger service even though they was losing money hand over fist by keeping these unwanted passenger trains operating.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL It should also be noted, for all you "slow speed" fans, that the E8 operators manual lists "slowest sustained speed", which means the slowest speed an engineer should go with a train for an extended period of time to avoid traction motor overheating. for all four gear ratios, that speed is above 20 mph...... Sheldon
That would include the pre-Indiana Railroad Illinois Central branch trackage from Indianapolis, IN to Sullivan, IN, once a fairly busy IC coal hauling sub, later a showcase of deferred maintenance. When INRR finally got the funding for track upgrades, they took up everything from 85-pound to 125-pound rail, some sections of which were but four feet long. On the happy side, INRR didn't need any compromise rail joints to fit different sizes of track together for a long time; even some switches had heavy rail on one side, lighter on the other.
As I recall, IC had a 15 mph limit on the entire line, depending on weather conditions. Derailments were frequent enough that in the pre-radio days, train crews hoped to be spared the discomfort of finding a local home or business with a telephone to call for a ride out.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL One of my passions in modeling is relistic length trains for my era, the 1950's. That means 40-70 car freights, and passenger trains of a dozen or more cars at times. I chose to built a large but simple layout to allow large curves, long trains and realistic mainline operations for my era and locale. Locos don't need to go 100 smph, but barely 50 smph for a passenger loco would not be acceptable either. I do expect my locos to have top speeds similar to the typical speeds here in the Mid Atlantic in the 1950's - so passenger speeds of 60-70 are required. Slow speed - this seems to have become some what of an "obsession" in this hobby. But in point of fact, I have done a lot of train watching, and I have never seen a real train travel at 1 mph for any continious time/distance. In fact many real locos can not/could not smoothly maintain such a speed. But rather they would be accelerating or decelerating slowly or smoothly. So that is what I expect of my locos - smooth starts/stops and good control in the 3-5 smph range for switching/coupling. My Aristo Train Engineer throttles with pulse width motor control do just fine - even if some locos will not "cruise" as slow as some DCC decoders allow. The one thing I like most about The Aristo Train Engineer in this regard is tthe fact that once a loco starts moving, it will almost without fail continue at that minimum speed it started at without stalling - more important than "slowest possible speed". Sheldon
You've probably hit the point of the thread to a degree. What type of layout we have will dictate how important top speed, slow speed, and pulling power is to each of us.
As far as slow speed operation, its tough for our models to represent the shear tonnage with which a real locomotive has to deal with when starting from a dead stop. So putting effort into designing a model that will go 1 smph is important, but it should be operated at 1 smph for a short period of time.
I too run an aristo throttle, as well as a dcc system for when I want onboard sound. My observations indicate the ability to run or not run at 1 smph, AND do so QUIETLY, is not dependent upon the control system. It really just varies from loco to loco, even within the same run of the same model of the same manufacturer.
Which introduces another philisophical element, how important is quietness.
- Douglas
archyThat would include the pre-Indiana Railroad Illinois Central branch trackage from Indianapolis, IN to Sullivan, IN, once a fairly busy IC coal hauling sub, later a showcase of deferred maintenance...As I recall, IC had a 15 mph limit on the entire line, depending on weather conditions.
Yeah, that's on my home turf. Much different now. IC certainly had the locos for running slow
BTW, the Tulip Viaduct has a spiffy new viewing area: http://indianaeconomicdigest.net/main.asp?SectionID=31&SubSectionID=135&ArticleID=80230
DoughlessI too run an aristo throttle, as well as a dcc system for when I want onboard sound. My observations indicate the ability to run or not run at 1 smph, AND do so QUIETLY, is not dependent upon the control system. It really just varies from loco to loco, even within the same run of the same model of the same manufacturer. Which introduces another philisophical element, how important is quietness.
Oh, please do start a discussion, but it should be distinct from this one. Mechanical noise is a really good topic that applies to both DC and DCC, too.
b60bpI recall an old method of measuring speed. the first step was to get the length of a scale mile in your scale. In HO this is 60 ft 8 in, but rounding to 60 feet is close enough. 60 mph is equal in HO to 1 ft per second; calculate the time for other scales by dividing the scale mile by 60 to find out how much a train should travel in 1 second to acheive 60 mph. Pick a fixed point on your layout and run a ten foot long train past it, timing with a stop watch. If the ten foot train takes ten seconds it's doing sixty; if it takes 20 seconds it's doing 30, etc. It takes a bit of extrapolating but you can always set up speed charts such as seen on prototype employee timetables. this isn't an exact result but it should end up close.
Cheers, the Bear.