jwar wrote:Thanks Joe for another outstanding clinic. Just wondering if you use a prototype locomotive maintaince system for your units entering your service facilitys. Im Planning to do this when I get to the operational point this fall. Will keep one person very busy for te evening....John
Thanks Joe for another outstanding clinic. Just wondering if you use a prototype locomotive maintaince system for your units entering your service facilitys. Im Planning to do this when I get to the operational point this fall. Will keep one person very busy for te evening....John
Joe Fugate Modeling the 1980s SP Siskiyou Line in southern Oregon
Joe,A couple of side notes..First is on safety.
You said:
Detailed right-of-way: Detail and weather the track and things close to the track since that’s where you spend most of your time looking when running trains. Bridges and structures close to the track also fit this category.=====================================================
While this is excellent detail advice remember that brakemen/conductors need to walk along the edge of the right of way so,keep rails and ties back far enough so these crewmen won't trip and fall. This is a common safety mistake seen time after time on layouts.My past experience and observation is the ties and rail seems to be 1/2 a crane boom from the nearest rail.
======================================================
Second side note.
Joe,For the record there is no real difference if the cars are weathered or not..You see it boils down to the modelers preference as far as weathering cars and locomotives and has NO real operational value.Also large layouts can be realistically operated by DC control..
The reason I point this out is to let modelers of ALL skill levels and DC users know you can still operate prototypically with unweathered cars and locomotives and your current DC system..
I hope that this is taken in the spirit of this operation clinic as another option as that is my intention...
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Brunton wrote:Your "Quality of Run" topic was very interesting, Joe. As I read it I was thinking "He keeps saying 'smaller layout,' but his is pretty big." But your comments make a lot of sense. Do you ever think about reducing the size of your layout?
Joe,
I really liked the "qulity of run" post. This has always been my goal, but I never really thought about prioritizing things in quite this manner. Some great food for thought as I continue construction (track laying) on my new layout. Thanks again.
Ron
Owner and superintendant of the N scale Texas Colorado & Western Railway, a protolanced representaion of the BNSF from Fort Worth, TX through Wichita Falls TX and into Colorado.
Check out the TC&WRy on at https://www.facebook.com/TCWRy
Check out my MRR How-To YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/c/RonsTrainsNThings
Your "Quality of Run" topic was very interesting, Joe. As I read it I was thinking "He keeps saying 'smaller layout,' but his is pretty big." But your comments make a lot of sense. Do you ever think about reducing the size of your layout?
Quality of run has been something of a concern for me - I have a LOT of hidden trackage, especially in The Behemoth Helix. Most of my branch lines are hidden, appearing mainly in the towns, with most of the distance in between on hidden trackage. But the goal of all that hidden trackage isn't just to increase the length of the runs - it allows me to arrange the layout to INCLUDE all the non-hidden elements. Otherwise I'd lose towns and scenic features (like scenes that aren't infested with a mess of track) I really want. Take the bad with the good, I guess.
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
Bob Hayes wrote:Joe, Just a few questions: How much of this forum is going to be rehashed on Vol. #5? When is Vol. #4 going to arrive? Do you ever sleep? Bob Hayes
Bob Hayes wrote:In your Aug. 08, 2006 posting entitled "What do we mean by 'prototype operation'?", you state that "On the Siskiyou Line, empty cars went south (railroad WEST) to the Lumber mills, and cars loaded with lumber came north (railroad EAST)." Over here on the Cascade Line, most of the lumber cars going south are loaded with lumber and the ones going north are empty. I would think that was the way it was 30 years ago, too. Does that mean that the loaded cars from points south of Eugene went north to Eugene to get on trains going south through Klamath Falls??? Nit Picking Bob Hayes
Bob grech wrote:Joe. From what i've seen of your work, I for one would love to see you post this clinic. You have elevated this hobby to a new level. I especially like your technical and writting skills. I often refer to your web site for inspiration and ideas. Keep up the great work.
Have Fun.... Bob.
Great idea for a clinic, Joe... "count me in..."
Bob
Brunton wrote:Curse you, Joe Fugate!! I'm going to have to stop construction and have some fun operating my trains, AND IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!! AARGH!!
I'm going to have to stop construction and have some fun operating my trains, AND IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!! AARGH!!
Curse you, Joe Fugate!!
I've been building my layout with the ultimate goal of realistic operations for some time now. Construction is slow because of other demands on my time. But I have been making progress.
If I slow down even more to try my hand at piece-parts operating (the only kind I can do right now), I'll never get done.
I've managed to avoid that temptation until now, but your accursed Operations thread is making it just that much harder. Now I'm thinking I'll just HAVE to try a few lone-wolf sessions in the very near future (say next week).
n2mopac wrote:Thanks for the insight on the railfan/engineer debate. I don't know why these two points of view always have to be at odds. Being newer to the hobby I have begun to make the real transformation from the pure railfan that I was when I started 10 years ago to a more deeply interested engineer. I still, however, enjoy just watching the trains run sometimes. These are two sides of the same coin and should be able to peacefully coexist. Ron
You have nailed my sentiments exactly on the whole railfan/engineer debate.
BRAKIE wrote:Joe,Can current or past railroaders join in on the discussion?
Thanks for starting this new clinic. You and I have written many times here, on your forum, and via email concerning operations and operating rules. It is a somewhat new area of interest to me. I have learned much from your insights in the past and I look forward to finding some new nuggets in this clinic. Each of your clinics here have been greatly valuable and this one is beginning with signs of the same. I look forward to following it closely.
Thanks for the insight on the railfan/engineer debate. I don't know why these two points of view always have to be at odds. Being newer to the hobby I have begun to make the real transformation from the pure railfan that I was when I started 10 years ago to a more deeply interested engineer. I still, however, enjoy just watching the trains run sometimes. These are two sides of the same coin and should be able to peacefully coexist.
Thanks again,
electrolove wrote:Joe, I really like this clinic. I have the book Track Planning for Realistic Operation but it's so much in there so it's sometimes hard to read and understand. You are explaining this in a way that is very easy to understand. I'm looking forward to the rest of this clinic. BTW: Is this the same content that you will show us on the Prototype operation secrets DVD? Thanks Joe
I'm always willing to learn something. I'm in.
Regards,
Tom