http://www.trainboard.com/railimages/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/4309
I model in N scale. The Three Foot Rule applies!
Since I'm not yet into prototype operations, duplicate numbers don't bother me at all. If that changes, I'll be buying decals to overcome the problem.
Darrell, quiet...for now
Not in the Bloody Least. When Accurail came out with their outside braced Rio Grande boxcars, I went bananas, and bought enough to pack up all of Salt Lake City and haul it piece-meal to Denver, and didn't look back. Actually, I run them mixed in with other cars, and nobody seems to notice (at least I don't see anyone standing around with binoculars, checking).
Of course, Accurail offers decals to change the numbers, and maybe one day if I get REALLY antsy, I'll order them and change the last two numbers on each ar, but for the time being, I'm too busy watching my new 3-cylinder 1600 Mountain hauling them to notice that they're all numbered the same.
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
Yes it bothers me. But I try to do things proto! You wouldnt see dups out on the real road so why should you have dups on your railroad? Like I tell my wife, "A different roadnumber!"
Kevin
YES ...........Even though I have no layout at current time, planning one, dupes Irriatate the mortal crap out of me. Why? you ask? Dont know. I have a list of everything cataorgized with maker, road and number, reporting marks as well. Every time I go to the Hobby Store I take the list. Had my first trainset loco from 23 years ago old bachmann U boat and got another one in a lot of train stuff that I got from my boss and the SAME LOCO was in there. Same # and everything, but the sideframes. That lasted 15 minutes. Patched.
J.W.
I renumber every car as part of its, "Prepare for placement in operation," inspection (just the first time it's prepared for operation, not every time.) All of my freight equipment carries numbers I have seen in prototype service, either in photos or with my personal eyeballs.
That said, I have two cars that drive casual visitors crazy. Both (a box car and a drop-side gondola) are JNR standard basic black with white stenciling, and both are numbered 1027! Thing is, the box car is WaRa1027, while the gondola is ToMu1027. The katakana prefix identifies car type and capacity, and is part of the car number! (Katakana is a phonetic form of written Japanese, and the appropriate symbols appear both on the cars and on their car cards.)
Of course, the assigned lading is a dead giveaway. Nobody is going to spot an open gon at the freighthouse with a load of fine furniture, and spotting a new box car at the tipple for a capacity load of nut coal is even less likely.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - language included)
it is impossible to operate with switch lists with duplicate car numbers - how do you delivered or picked up the correct car if there are dups?
Then Texas Zepher wrote:
" border="0" /> It doesn't bother me much at all, but the computer hates it. A duplicate numbered car will just end up sitting unless its twin happens to show up on the exact same siding. Then it might get moved but probably not since by that time it is probably the car at the very end of the siding.
.........>>>>>
I don't use a computer for ops generation. Even if you do, it is probably possible to set things up so that a cut of cars is designated by a single car card that has the first and last car number on it. I know this is not a problem for old school types like me that work with all paper systems.
This would avoid any issue with a computer program that stumbles over duplicate numbers and certainly permits the use of duplicate car numbers under the right circumstances.
I generally use only cars with distinct numbers on my layout, but I also feel that any real need for it in the model world is driven more by the familiar neurotic need for perfection, than any need for recordkeeping, safety inspections, return on investment, or the other factors that drive real-world needs for unique car numbers. I used to work with inventory and record keeping for the transportation division of a Fortune 500 corporation. True, it was trucks, not trains, but the same basic principles apply -- never use a duplicate number fo an asset or it messes up the system. But even with it, we had ways to designate distinct assets with duplicate numbers, let's say acquired through a merger, by adding a prefix, etc to the numbers in our system.
That said, the only duplicate car numbers on my layout are set-up as cuts. My paper system handles this just fine. And while I keep an inventory of rolling stock, it is to help me avoid buying duplicate road numbers on the 95% of my rolling stock that does have unique road numbers. I don't worry too much about cases like the couple of sets of duplicate numbered hoppers I mentioned earlier. I could even buy several more of these and designate several more distinct cuts of cars with different end car numbers from the same set of six numbers. If you don't get a case of overwhelming cognitive dissonnance from the fact that there is more than one car of a certain number on your layout, it works just fine. And visitors will rarely notice this sleight of hand, especially if most everything else on your layout is uniquely numbered.
Of course, if everything on your railroad is set up for individual car railroading because of era or prototype, then you are stuck with needing unique numbers. But many people and most of those modeling the last couple of decades can certainly use this small compromise as a workable solution for a certain precentage of their rolling stock fleet. It you have the time, it's always easy to upgarde to unique numbers when and if you have the time to do so.
In short, the need for unqiue car numbers in model railroading is driven less by any practical reason in most cases than it is by what each of us considers to be what meets our personal psychological need for a "good enough" depiction of reality, just like the numerous other compromises that modelers are forced to make all the time. We each do what works best for us.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
fiatfan wrote: I have a small layout and have very few duplicates. When I do, I just erase either the first or last number on one of the cars. Tom
I have a small layout and have very few duplicates. When I do, I just erase either the first or last number on one of the cars.
Okay... I think I'll just stick to mixing up paint to match the car color, paint over one of the numbers and put a new one (decal) in its place. Though it's a pain in the neck to do it that way, I just feel a lot better about it.
Tracklayer
Daniel1975 wrote: I know the numbers are tiny (even on most HO scale models) and I know that most visitors not familiar with the Hobby wouldn't even notice it but I insist on different numbers.Red Caboose really has great models and they always have a run of 6 to 12 cars with different numbers and then they will release another run with another 6 to 12 new numbers.... as I said this is a detail but I don't want the same number twice.
I know the numbers are tiny (even on most HO scale models) and I know that most visitors not familiar with the Hobby wouldn't even notice it but I insist on different numbers.
Red Caboose really has great models and they always have a run of 6 to 12 cars with different numbers and then they will release another run with another 6 to 12 new numbers.... as I said this is a detail but I don't want the same number twice.
It's an evil plot to get you to buy more cars
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
nfmisso wrote:it is impossible to operate with switch lists with duplicate car numbers - how do you delivered or picked up the correct car if there are dups?
fiatfan wrote: I just erase either the first or last number on one of the cars.
Life is simple - eat, drink, play with trains!
Go Big Red!
PA&ERR "If you think you are doing something stupid, you're probably right!"
nbrodar wrote: On a locomotive or caboose, yes. I insist each locomotive and caboose has an unique number, and that the number is correct for the unit's class.On a car no. If I can get the cars with individual numbers, great. If not, I'm not going to sweat it. I don't use car numbers in my operations, anyway.Nick
On a locomotive or caboose, yes. I insist each locomotive and caboose has an unique number, and that the number is correct for the unit's class.
On a car no. If I can get the cars with individual numbers, great. If not, I'm not going to sweat it. I don't use car numbers in my operations, anyway.
Nick
Since I am in DCC, and use the cab # of the loco for addresses, duplicates would be a problem. However, I am limited out to 10 locos for a number of reasons, and cannot see that I would ever have a duplicate problem. As for rolling stock, nope, not a problem for me. They all trail the same way.
Metro Red Line wrote:I personally don't like converted-train structures on the layout...true they exist in the real world but on a layout, especially a small one, it seems like it's more appropriate to maintain a good contrast between the things on the tracks and the things off the tracks. Unless you have a large layout, a building made from a boxcar still looks like a boxcar.
Metro,
I guess it depends on how much you try to "disguise" it and allow it to blend in with the layout. I haven't really done anything more than put a roof and a floor on the boxcar and place it on top of skids. Re-painting, weathering, aging, adding a window(s) and door - with an overhang, etc. can make it less stark and less like its siblings that are one the track.
In this month's (March 2007) issue of MR, BTS (Bill's Train Stop) has an ad on pg. 16 for an HO Signal Maintainer's Storage shed, made from an old baggage car. I guess if you are primarily running freight and you want your MOW buildings to look destinctive from your rolling stock, this might be a way to do it, too.
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Take a Ride on the Reading with the: Reading Company Technical & Historical Society http://www.readingrailroad.org/
We have avoided it so far, but would probably renumber them if necessary.
Sue
Anything is possible if you do not know what you are talking about.
I don't let it stop me from buying something I want, but I will renumber it.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
TerryinTexas
See my Web Site Here
http://conewriversubdivision.yolasite.com/
At this point it doesn't bother me, but hey... I only have around 30 pieces of rolling stock. Some of you have that many of ONE type car....
I can see where it wouldn't be too good if you're into operations which I will get into in the future. When that happens I'm going to have to learn to renumber.
JaRRell
nfmisso wrote:Yes; definitely, because it is impossible to operate with switch lists with duplicate car numbers - how do you delivered or picked up the correct car if there are dups?
True, but not everyone is into the "operations" part of the hobby. Most folks I've met don't have a layout large enough to warrant renumbering cars for larger fleets, nor even room for more than a couple of folks around the layout. In fact, for many, smaller switching layouts are the norm and therein, it's often a case of picking up one car and replacing it with an identical one, so we're not talking long strings of similar cars at any particular industry or siding.
If you have the time and inclination to renumber cars, then have it, and that's nice to see. however, in the long run, to me it's not that big a deal. I guess it's just where you set your priorities within the hobby, and since it's a pretty HUGE hobby, with multiple areas of interest, there's lots of room for everyone
Respects,
Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running BearSpace Mouse for president!15 year veteran fire fighterCollector of Apple //e'sRunning Bear EnterprisesHistory Channel Club life member.beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam
Yes, I avoid it on my layouts...annnnnd yes, I do notice it when I visit modular setups.
tstage - nice MOW shack.
dirtyd79 wrote:Yes because it really seems kind of cheesy running the deja vu lines. Something about it just looks like sort of a we don't give a **** display set up by employees at a toystore. What'd I'd really like to see is some enterprising company offer an un-numbered freight car. Like you have all the paint and logos but no numbers. Until then though I guess we'll just have to be content to un-number them oursevles.
Accurail offers decorate un-numbered cars, and decal sets to number them that match.
Bowser generally offers 12 numbers at a time, and retires those 12 after each run.
If you want a large enough quantity (100+ in many cases), there are several companies that will produce runs for you.
Tracklayer wrote: SpaceMouse wrote:I'm living with it for the time being. Eventually, I'll get around to changing them. You take what you get when you model un-popular eras.Un-popular eras ?... I had no idea any era of model railroading was unpopular Mr. Mouse (Chip).Tracklayer
SpaceMouse wrote:I'm living with it for the time being. Eventually, I'll get around to changing them. You take what you get when you model un-popular eras.
Un-popular eras ?... I had no idea any era of model railroading was unpopular Mr. Mouse (Chip).
I would guess any period of time where there was a railroad worker's strike would be an unpopular era to model :)
tstage wrote:...or, you can turn them into useful structures around your layout:
...or, you can turn them into useful structures around your layout:
I personally don't like converted-train structures on the layout...true they exist in the real world but on a layout, especially a small one, it seems like it's more appropriate to maintain a good contrast between the things on the tracks and the things off the tracks. Unless you have a large layout, a building made from a boxcar still looks like a boxcar.