carl425 There hasn't even been a pencil in my house for probably 20 years.
There hasn't even been a pencil in my house for probably 20 years.
Rich
Alton Junction
carl425 richhotrain Let me return to a more civil discussion of paper and pencil. It is simple, it is basic, and it is accurate. For YOU, but not necessarily for others. What you and the rest of the pencil pushers have failed to recognize is that different people have different skills, abilities and preferences. When someone is asking for software recommendations, it is pretty clear what his preference is. I find "use a pencil" as a response to be offensive (so we're even ).
richhotrain Let me return to a more civil discussion of paper and pencil. It is simple, it is basic, and it is accurate.
For YOU, but not necessarily for others. What you and the rest of the pencil pushers have failed to recognize is that different people have different skills, abilities and preferences. When someone is asking for software recommendations, it is pretty clear what his preference is. I find "use a pencil" as a response to be offensive (so we're even ).
Carl,
Offensive? Like when someone asks a DC wiring question and gets told they need DCC?
It may or maynot be offensive to suggest things not asked about by the OP, but no one who suggested pencil and paper called anyone names or demeaned anyone's intelligence.
And in drafting you don't push the pencil, you pull it.
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRALLike when someone asks a DC wiring question and gets told they need DCC?
Yes, exactly like that.
ATLANTIC CENTRALAnd in drafting you don't push the pencil, you pull it.
Aw c'mon, you know that was funny. ...and btw, I was using "pusher" as a synonym for "advocate".
Also if you notice, I was responding to someone who claimed offence when none was intended.
I have the right to remain silent. By posting here I have given up that right and accept that anything I say can and will be used as evidence to critique me.
Well this is interesting. It has been 20 days since I first posted this thread and 18 days since I decided on a program (XTrackCAD) and downloaded it, and the thread is still going even though my requiest has been fulfilled. Whatever, you folks feel free to keep the conversation going as long as you want!
Regards, Isaac
I model my railroad and you model yours! I model my way and you model yours!
SPSOT fan Well this is interesting. It has been 20 days since I first posted this thread and 18 days since I decided on a program (XTrackCAD) and downloaded it, and the thread is still going even though my requiest has been fulfilled. Whatever, you folks feel free to keep the conversation going as long as you want!
He is an anti-quadrille-ite!
richhotrainHe is an anti-quadrille-ite!
Nah, I'm just reducing my carbon footprint by boycotting pencils.
mbinsewi I have nothing against, or will I stand in the way of, anybody that wants to use a computer program to design their track work. The proof is in the actual building of the layout, if it actually does get built. Did you make changes? Did you make the changes because once you seen the actual plan laid out in front of you, with track and turnouts in hand, you thought it might work better if I did this? or that? The way I see it, if you need a computer program to figure out how to cram complex track work into a small area, your cluttering the layout with way too much track. With templates, turnout templates can be made from tracing the turnouts you have in a box, waiting to become part of a layout. It worked fine for me. It all fit just the way my crude, "drawing in the dirt with a stick" plan shows. By the way, just what is "complex" track work? Modeling nothing but a yard? or a model of Alton Junction? Design on my friends, how ever you wish to do so. If I build another layout, I'll "design" it the way I did my current layout, except, maybe I'll start with a flat bed of sand, and I'll sharpen the stick, to get finer details. Mike.
I have nothing against, or will I stand in the way of, anybody that wants to use a computer program to design their track work.
The proof is in the actual building of the layout, if it actually does get built. Did you make changes? Did you make the changes because once you seen the actual plan laid out in front of you, with track and turnouts in hand, you thought it might work better if I did this? or that?
The way I see it, if you need a computer program to figure out how to cram complex track work into a small area, your cluttering the layout with way too much track.
With templates, turnout templates can be made from tracing the turnouts you have in a box, waiting to become part of a layout. It worked fine for me. It all fit just the way my crude, "drawing in the dirt with a stick" plan shows.
By the way, just what is "complex" track work? Modeling nothing but a yard? or a model of Alton Junction?
Design on my friends, how ever you wish to do so.
If I build another layout, I'll "design" it the way I did my current layout, except, maybe I'll start with a flat bed of sand, and I'll sharpen the stick, to get finer details.
Mike.
Well said, Mike. And, if I have to, I'll "fiddle" a little with the track to get it to fit exactly as I want it. My experience has been that anything on paper doesn't always work out exactly the same as the finished product, regardless of whether on a computer or "stick in the sand". In the process of building my new layout, I'm already finding things a little different than on paper, and I'm only at the benchwork building stage.
I think one of the crucial advantages of using your computer is that in some programs (I use sketchup) you can spectate in any position of the layout, IN 3D. Now I think that is plain cool. You can draw the track out on paper, but if you have a 3d veiw you can view the layout from different angles to see if your track arrangement looks goofy from a particular vantage point. And as certian Gieco commercials would say: now thats a win-win!
Just my . Sketchup basic is free BTW.
I'm beginning to realize that Windows 10 and sound decoders have a lot in common. There are so many things you have to change in order to get them to work the way you want.
carl425 richhotrain He is an anti-quadrille-ite! Nah, I'm just reducing my carbon footprint by boycotting pencils.
richhotrain He is an anti-quadrille-ite!
I would think that sequestering carbon in graphite pencil 'leads' would actually reduce your footprint. Not by much, but still . . .
Robert
LINK to SNSR Blog
ROBERT PETRICKI would think that sequestering carbon in graphite pencil 'leads' would actually reduce your footprint. Not by much, but still . . .
Great. Now a second can of worms has been tipped over, with out a cover.
My You Tube
SPSOT fanWell this is interesting. It has been 20 days since I first posted this thread and 18 days since I decided on a program (XTrackCAD) and downloaded it, and the thread is still going even though my requiest has been fulfilled. Whatever, you folks feel free to keep the conversation going as long as you want!
Isaac,
Your question has been asked many times and it always touches a nerve or two. Bottom line is that both methods work, but some people (like me) seem to feel obligated to support their personal choices.
I am a dedicated CAD (3rdPlanIt) user. I used it to design the original concept for our new club layout, and I have used it countless times to refine the details of that layout. I was able to pinpoint the shape and position of each piece of benchwork, cookie cutter subroadbed and roadbed. There was very little waste because I could use the CAD to maximize the output from each sheet of plywood and Homasote. Almost all of the radii, grades and grade separations were built accurately the first time. Almost nothing has had to be cut a second time.
Have their been variations from the CAD plan? Absolutely. In one case, we determined that the position of a long bridge could be improved to make more side to side clearance for the track passing underneath. Making the change was easy and we were able to use most of the original subroadbed and Homasote cutouts.
I also have to add that I have used 3rdPlanIt for multiple other task both related and unrelated to layout planning. I have created and printed all of the control panel graphics. I have done detailed drawings for my son's highschool science projects for which he received top marks (we acknowledged my creation of the drawings by the way). I have done detailed drawings of the deck improvements, the garden plan, the property plan and more.
I learned in high school drafting class how to use a pencil and paper, and according to my marks (100%) I was quite good at it. And, I really enjoyed it. However, the things that I have been able to do quickly and easily with the CAD program make it a far superior method IMHO.
Okay, I'll shut up now! If you have read this far into my post you were probably wishing that I had shut up long ago! (or maybe before I even started)
Cheers!!
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
In my experience, track planning software is a diversion for people to vicariously build a layout when they neither have one nor intend to build one, at least over the near term. In which case, it is fun to sit around and design track plans on CAD or specially designed track planning software. Of course, there are also model railroaders that do use track planning software as a prelude to actually building a layout. So, it works both ways.
It reminds me of Train Simulator software in which you run an app on your laptop with the ability to pick locos and rolling stock consists and run them under various real life conditions. Once again, it is a diversion for people to vicariously run trains in the absence of an actual layout.
A few years back, I used to play with Microsoft Flight Simulator on my computer, not because I wanted to learn to fly but because I enjoyed being entertained by pretending that I was a pilot.
richhotrain In my experience, track planning software is a diversion for people to vicariously build a layout when they neither have one nor intend to build one, at least over the near term. In which case, it is fun to sit around and design track plans on CAD or specially designed track planning software. Of course, there are also model railroaders that do use track planning software as a prelude to actually building a layout. So, it works both ways. It reminds me of Train Simulator software in which you run an app on your laptop with the ability to pick locos and rolling stock consists and run them under various real life conditions. Once again, it is a diversion for people to vicariously run trains in the absence of an actual layout. A few years back, I used to play with Microsoft Flight Simulator on my computer, not because I wanted to learn to fly but because I enjoyed being entertained by pretending that I was a pilot. Rich
Beyond what you say about it being fun by itself, I think CAD certainly has a level of precision to it that pencil can't match. So it proably has an advantage in planning a complex array of track.
I was always leary of even planning my layout too precisely in the first place. Never could predict how many Atlas turnouts with the slight bow in the tangent track I had, but it sure did throw off the expected geometry of a nest of turnouts or yard ladder.
- Douglas
DoughlessI think CAD certainly has a level of precision to it that pencil can't match.
it certainly is. But I assume you have more than one tool in your tool box ...
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
gregc Doughless I think CAD certainly has a level of precision to it that pencil can't match. it certainly is. But I assume you have more than one tool in your tool box ...
Doughless I think CAD certainly has a level of precision to it that pencil can't match.
On a hand drawn drawing, you do the math and write down (on the drawing) the dimensions.
The drawing itself need not be "perfect". You do not use the drawing to do the engineering, you use it to record the result. And I can do that with reasonable accuracy at 1" = 1'.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL gregc Doughless I think CAD certainly has a level of precision to it that pencil can't match. it certainly is. But I assume you have more than one tool in your tool box ... On a hand drawn drawing, you do the math and write down (on the drawing) the dimensions. The drawing itself need not be "perfect". You do not use the drawing to do the engineering, you use it to record the result. And I can do that with reasonable accuracy at 1" = 1'. Sheldon
I agree, but now you're talking about having gone through a curve of learning how to properly draft. 1" = 1' is larger than the 8 x 11 graph paper many of us would use, and I just don't think planning on that kind of paper is as precise as CAD.
I'd prefer to plan by using a large sheet of paper, ruler, and pencil. Having being a sketch drawer throughout my younger days, planning that way would be more fun than mousing and clicking a computer screen. Its a matter of preferences in some cases.
May be interesting: When I was in grade school through early high school, I wanted to be an architect/ home builder. During those years, for fun, I would design house floor plans, complete with measurements.
Paper and pencil was great fun in many ways.
Doughless ATLANTIC CENTRAL gregc Doughless I think CAD certainly has a level of precision to it that pencil can't match. it certainly is. But I assume you have more than one tool in your tool box ... On a hand drawn drawing, you do the math and write down (on the drawing) the dimensions. The drawing itself need not be "perfect". You do not use the drawing to do the engineering, you use it to record the result. And I can do that with reasonable accuracy at 1" = 1'. Sheldon I agree, but now you're talking about having gone through a curve of learning how to properly draft. 1" = 1' is larger than the 8 x 11 graph paper many of us would use, and I just don't think planning on that kind of paper is as precise as CAD. I'd prefer to plan by using a large sheet of paper, ruler, and pencil. Having being a sketch drawer throughout my younger days, planning that way would be more fun than mousing and clicking a computer screen. Its a matter of preferences in some cases.
Paper? I have not drawn anything other than a working sketch on paper in 4 decades. Actual finished drawings are drawn on mylar, on a drafting table, with a parallel straight edge, and mechanical drafting pencils, or sometimes in ink with Leroy pens.........and a large assortment of triangles, curves, templates, compasses, scale rulers.......
Usually on 24" x 36" sheets....
I don't think I could even find a piece of graph paper in the house........
Graph paper is great for some sketch work, or even small working drawings, but being where I am at with hand drafting, I generally don't need it.
My weapon of choice for sketches (and for keeping my life organized) is a legal pad.....