Acceptable standards at exhibitions

[LBRJ]

Complaining about non-adherence to operations as laid the Rule Book is all well and good, but as the OP, and no doubt others, should recall, the Rules were observed more in the breach, when it suited.

You could say “rules are for the obedience of fools, and the guidance of wise men” and not be too far off the truth.

[woodenhead]

10 minutes ago, Ricochet said:

This post cannot be serious...

 

Does it really matter whether a train is slightly further ahead on a platform? 

Whilst The Johnster was probably expecting to be shot down from his post, he probably also expected a number to support him too.

 

Model railways or railway modelling is a very broad church - from circles of set track on a carpet with Flying Scotsman breaking the world land speed record to extremely detailed finescale models where the builder has achingly built an accurate depiction of a byegone era.

 

It's the beauty of the hobby, we're a mix of eccentrics and for exhibitors its a matter of finding a path that suits most.

[TEAMYAKIMA]

17 minutes ago, Ricochet said:

This post cannot be serious...

 

Does it really matter whether a train is slightly further ahead on a platform? 

 

Of course it doesn't 'matter', but I think that the OP simply sees the irony of people who model in P4 and therefore go to extraordinary lengths to get things 100% right (ie not 99% right) in one aspect of a layout and yet not take the same amount of care in another aspect.

 

Having said that, I do agree that all of us who exhibit layouts are always 'up against it' - untrained operators, unforeseen problems and the shear workload of operating a layout for 6/8 hours. That last aspect should not be overlooked - that (tedious) prototypical move is absolutely carefree the first time you do it, slightly less so the fifth time you do it and by the time you get to repeating it for the 100th time it get's REALLY tedious and human nature being what it is ........................................

 

 

Edited October 3, 2022 by TEAMYAKIMA

[TheQ]

How scale do you want to go? Many branch lines had only half a dozen trains a day, often only in day light hours.

 

if we spread them out and divide the time by the  scale by say 1/76 then that's only a train every 3 minutes.., You do that on a show layout, and after a minute of waiting for the next train to appear the punters will all have wandered off..

 

Unfortunately many couplings even AJ s need a bit of a hit to couple up if you've got free running wheel sets on light wagons...

Edited October 3, 2022 by TheQ

[sulzer27jd]

13 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

You've watched a tiny amount of operating on YouTube and from this have decided to condem the layouts featured. You know as well as I do, you are setting yourself up for a fall. Those layouts will have been operated for hours, by different people in the team, but you are condeming them on the basis of a few seconds.

 

However, I look forward to seeing what sanctions you propose for those who fail to meet your standards.

 

Just remember that there are human beings on the recieving end of your brickbats. Anyone commenting might like to consider how those people will feel reading this and moderate thier tone accordingly. 

Surely, even on RMWeb, the poster is entitled to an opinion. 

[woodenhead]

At Wigan there was a model that was a pastiche of Alston (oop North).

 

N scale but finescale track (Wayne Kinney), bespoke handbuilt buildings from around the town of Alston gathered to create a high street alongside the station.

 

Beautiful model, beautiful track, but I would not want to spend two whole days operating it as it is quite limited in that respect.  Great for a quick play and admiration of your skills as a builder, but you wouldn't want to be doing it solidly for 6 hours straight and for two days running. 

 

Luckily for the builder he was one of those chaps who likes to engage with his audience and he would talk about the town itself, the model, the track or how he made the buildings and was really friendly, otherwise I could imagine it would be a dire time spent exhibiting.

 

He was doing a fine job of selling N gauge with finescale track over 2mm FS whose stand was right behind him.

[Phil Parker]

11 minutes ago, sulzer27jd said:

Surely, even on RMWeb, the poster is entitled to an opinion. 

 

Yes they are - but I'd like to think any criticism would bear in mind how the people who are being criticised will take it. They will be fellow enthusiasts, working a long day for free to entertain.

[bécasse]

Given that the everyday train formation on the Farringdon branch, at least in BR days, was a single carriage, there will probably have been plenty of occasions when it arrived at Farringdon without a single passenger aboard. In such circumstances the procedure described was almost certainly the procedure followed in reality, any parcels traffic being dealt with after run round when the train would have been pushed further back along the platform. Remember, railwaymen always found the easiest (safe) way to do any regular task.

 

As for going outside the home signal when running round, there may have been places where it was necessary, but not many and not at Farringdon. In other locations there was often a dolly by the points, but if not, as here, the display of a green flag (or even just the relevant arm movement) by the signalman sufficed, the driver having visually checked that the point blades had gone over.

[whart57]

I'm interested in these discussions around whether a coach is placed right according to the rule book because surely we are dealing here with how closely the rule book was followed at the distant ends of the railway where the prying eyes of inspectors and managers didn't reach. I can't remember where I read this but it was in some memoir that one of the impacts of nationalisation was a less rigid enforcement regime on the GWR so that the old way of running up to the end of the platform with your B-set and then setting back for the run round was dropped in practice for stopping the train where it's convenient for the crew to run round. Sod the passengers in the rain, there probably weren't any by then anyway. Or any parcels.

 

I have always had a desire to model Wingham Canterbury Road, the East Kent Light Railway terminus. The rare passenger to turn up for a train there in the last years discovered the crew were reluctant to even bring the coach to the platform and they would encourage the passenger to climb into the coach using a sack trolley as a ladder. This was probably only recorded because by then the only people taking a train from Wingham rather than the much more frequent and comfortable East Kent bus were railway enthusiasts coming out to experience the final years of the Colonel Stephens light railways.

 

Now that would be fun to model and show at an exhibition.

[Blandford1969]

2 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

Also becasue the crew wanted to get the job done, not show off how sloooooowly their locomotive could move. 😉

They also wanted to get to the pub

[Paul H Vigor]

2 hours ago, Wheatley said:

Real steam shunting was carried out briskly because it (generally) involved giving the rake a hefty shove and letting momentum do the rest, not placing wagons individually using the loco. If you crack how to do that on a model you're on to something. Movements  where the loco stay attached (which is what we all end up doing by default because we haven't cracked scale loose shunting yet) should be under the  direct control of the  shunter (or person acting as  shunter, e.g. guard), quite often by preceding the movement on foot, which means effectively walking pace. That's  quite hard to judge on a model.

 

I suspect the Hand of God is less of an issue on a  finescale* layout as the choice is usually 3 links or AJs, but as F-Unit says, the only way to swap lamps on the model is by using tweezers. 

 

(*  Define that however you like). 

Fly shunting? Historic videos I've seen suggest a dangerous operation for the human shunters on the ground? As you say, hard to reproduce in model form, like gravity shunting. Re gravity shunting: the most convincing modelled example I've seen was on a splendid model of Wellington (Salop) on which the coaches of the Craven Arms/Much Wenlock train were 'gravity' shunted into the bay platform at Wellington. It was cleverly done!

[Bernard Lamb]

1 hour ago, Ricochet said:

This post cannot be serious...

 

Does it really matter whether a train is slightly further ahead on a platform? 

If you are modelling The Elizabeth Line it would be.

Come to that a modern layout based on many stations would need marker boards for the various formations. 4, 8, and 12 at my local station. If I say to somebord who is joining the train at another station that I will be in coach 2 then it becomes very important to know where the train will stop.

Bernard

[Paul H Vigor]

10 minutes ago, Blandford1969 said:

They also wanted to get to the pub

Some years ago I recall reading a bitter complaint about Port Erin on the IOM Steam Railway. Apparently a passenger wishing to photograph the loco on arrival was very upset when the crew ran the loco off the train straight to the shed - before our photographer could get into position. Sometimes we forget that whilst we are gricing, others are working?

[newbryford]

8 minutes ago, Bernard Lamb said:

If you are modelling The Elizabeth Line it would be.

Come to that a modern layout based on many stations would need marker boards for the various formations. 4, 8, and 12 at my local station. If I say to somebord who is joining the train at another station that I will be in coach 2 then it becomes very important to know where the train will stop.

Bernard

 

But the OP and subsequent comments, were referring to a train stopping short for a run round manoeuvre.

[LBRJ]

At one well known station with a long platform and mostly short trains, we used to stop a long way short  on occasion.

If we had not done so, the arriving  passengers would have ended up in some sort of platform melee with those trying to board, and we would have been late away thus missing the mainline connection :O

Edited October 3, 2022 by LBRJ

[Cwmtwrch]

1 hour ago, TEAMYAKIMA said:

Of course it doesn't 'matter', but I think that the OP simply sees the irony of people who model in P4 and therefore go to extraordinary lengths to get things 100% right (ie not 99% right) in one aspect of a layout and yet not take the same amount of care in another aspect.

Everyone has their own particular interests, and it's only human for them to be seen by that person as more important. Some people build very detailed etched brass kits complete with valve gear; I will happily convert a r-t-r loco because I'm more interested in other aspects [and don't have the skills or patience to do what they do either]. Model scale and period; materials and information available; and his or her interests, objectives, time available and, most importantly, skill sets, all affect what is achievable by a modeller. Some concentrate on individual detail, some on a less detailed wider picture; for both 100% right in at least some aspects may [or may not] be an aspiration, but it can never be achieved in reality.

[Wheatley]

9 minutes ago, Paul H Vigor said:

Fly shunting? 

No, loose shunting - propelling wagons into sidings by giving them a push and letting them roll, stopped by the shunter/guard running alongside and jamming a brake stick between the top of the brake lever and the solebar/curb rail. Dangerous if done incorrectly but an everyday operation. 

 

Fly shunting, on the other hand, is drawing the wagon behind the loco, uncoupling on the move then changing the points smartish between the now  (hopefully) accelerating loco and the  wagon to get it into a  different siding without running round. Impressive but dangerous when done well by skilled men, lethal when done by less skilled men (*) and consequently banned almost everywhere  some time ago.

 

I wouldn't normally correct you but this is a thread  about prototype fidelity... 

 

Johnster raises  an important point though, the minutiae of day to day operations is very hard to capture and record let alone learn, it relies on reading first hand accounts or watching historic cine film, and there were plenty of places  where 'normal' practice was  anything but as becasse and LBRJ have just pointed out. Frank Dyer's articles in MRJ 30 onwards and Don Rowland's  articles on Alpraham Sidings  a hundred or so issues  later are probably the only times I've seen it written down in a comprehensive and accurate (but necessarily generalist) way. 

 

(* Aldwarke Junction some years  ago, I arrived with the pay run to find the signalmen intently watching the goings on the BSC yard where several bogie bolsters and a load of steel billets  were not where they were  supposed to be. 

 

"Whats going on ?"

"Tha knows how there's a knack to fly shunting ?"

"Yes"

"They 'ant gorrit". )

[TEAMYAKIMA]

Having just looked on YouTube and found coverage of Faringdon I think it would be interesting to hear from the layout's owner/operator. The layout is truly outstanding in every aspect that I have any knowledge /appreciation of and so my initial thought is that the team must be operating in that manner based on some knowledge /information of how the real station operated at the time modelled. 

 

I must point out that I personally have absolutely no axe to grind here either way. Each owner operates their layout as they see fit. 

Edited October 3, 2022 by TEAMYAKIMA

[whart57]

Fly shunting only works because of momentum built up and that overcoming friction and other braking forces. As momentum and braking are impacted by mass then the velocity component doesn't have to be big. A full size wagon weighing many tons will roll a long way even if only moving at walking pace.

 

The problem with reproducing that on a model is that mass scales down by the cube of the linear scale, 00 scale may be 1:76.4 in length but it is more like 1:450,000 in mass. The physics of fly shunting simply can't be scaled down, a 4mm scale wagon no matter how free-running will not behave like a full size one.

[Mallard60022]

An interesting OP to start a great discussion. The shunting bits are wonderful for me; I had no idea about that, other than seeing the galloping Shunter with Pole jammed over the Brake Lever on old Vids/Films/ DVDs.. 

Fine models should be operated as well as possible just as someone attempting to make a fine Film should really research what the action should look like. 

However, there are limits, such as the Lamps changes mentioned and trying to achieve scale speeds, acceleration, slowing etc. 

It is necessary to accept a compromise, as we should in watching films that include our favourite subjects.

We often comment on poor prototype reproduction in Films and so why not on what is supposed to be a super accurate Scale Model Railway? Not to someone's face unless, they are your pal or fellow operator that is learning the ropes.

My take on this is that if the model is excellent and the things move about and look realistic I don't really care, BUT I would chat with a friend I was with, away from the layout, about somethings that looked a bit 'daft'.

We all need to lighten up a bit but I do agree with one poster here that says it seems odd that someone will attempt to get everything just so and then have little idea of how the real things actually performed and seemingly hasn't studied that. However that's life isn't it?

I wouldn't do exhibitions as my operational knowledge is rubbish. So bad in fact I even annoy myself when playing with my train set in the loft. Grrrrrr.

Phil 

[Mallard60022]

2 hours ago, Ricochet said:

This post cannot be serious...

 

Does it really matter whether a train is slightly further ahead on a platform? 

The post was there to prompt discussion. Whether parts of it are 'serious' is up to the reader. 

 

Second Question. Answer is yes, to some and to others...they wouldn't notice.

That's how it is. Be happy.

Phil

[bmthtrains - David]

I’m a little perplexed by the OP’s unrealistic expectations, but it does raise the useful discussion of how little of railway operations is actually understood by modellers, myself included. I see the hobby very much as a visual one, so getting things to look right is more important to me, but there is certainly room to learn more about how things move and operate. 

 

Personally though, I see exhibition layouts as entertainment so I want to be entertained. This means lots of trains moving, not deathly accurate recreations of specific shunting procedures and timetables. What I does turn me off is unrealistic landscapes and settings - weird tunnels that appear from nowhere to cover the tracks and tiles of scenery that don’t actually exist. Get the look and feel right and I’m sold - operational procedures are quite far down my checklist.

 

David

[KeithMacdonald]

33 minutes ago, whart57 said:

The problem with reproducing that on a model is that mass scales down by the cube of the linear scale, 00 scale may be 1:76.4 in length but it is more like 1:450,000 in mass. The physics of fly shunting simply can't be scaled down, a 4mm scale wagon no matter how free-running will not behave like a full size one.

 

@whart57 - an excellent point!

 

The only modelling remedy for the scaled-mass issue might be filling the fly shunting wagons with lead. Or, for the really really serious perfectionists (including the Elucidated Brethren of the Counted Rivet) you could try uranium. But do make sure it's depleted uranium, or when the wagons collide one might have a Nano Ramsey nuclear event.
 

Quote

 

There was a blinding blue flash, a deafening BANG! -  and all the monitors went blank.  There was a stunned silence. Grouty, Smiler Steve and I looked at each other. In chorus we all said “What the [expletive deleted] was that!” We quickly donned our Railtrack hi-vis jackets and went outside to see what had happened. In the middle of the yard, there was a neat 2 foot crater in the tarmac, but of the trains and a large section of track there was no sign. They’d gone.  Disappeared. Vaporised. 

 

 

As documented by @Ducking Giraffe in The Rivet Police (Part 4)

[Steamport Southport]

22 minutes ago, bmthtrains - David said:

I’m a little perplexed by the OP’s unrealistic expectations, but it does raise the useful discussion of how little of railway operations is actually understood by modellers, myself included. I see the hobby very much as a visual one, so getting things to look right is more important to me, but there is certainly room to learn more about how things move and operate. 

 

Personally though, I see exhibition layouts as entertainment so I want to be entertained. This means lots of trains moving, not deathly accurate recreations of specific shunting procedures and timetables. What I does turn me off is unrealistic landscapes and settings - weird tunnels that appear from nowhere to cover the tracks and tiles of scenery that don’t actually exist. Get the look and feel right and I’m sold - operational procedures are quite far down my checklist.

 

David

 

That's because you've probably never done it in real life (whether paid or a volunteer) or observed train workings for hours on end when the railways were still mostly loco hauled and it wasn't all units.

 

These things shout out at you when you know about them. Just like when you see a model locomotive that is incorrect or the wrong coaches in The Elizabethan.

 

Most of the things Johnster said have been mentioned numerous times in the model railway press by people such as Bob Essery and David Jenkinson.  There are even books on the subject. Maybe he shouldn't have named the layouts though.

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Railway-Operation-Modeller-R-Essery/dp/1857801687

 

For reference, don't shoot me down for linking to Amazon....

 

 

I also remember Rev Awdry having a very angry rant about the TV version of Thomas The Tank Engine being unrealistic when he had strived for years to get things right.

 

 

Jason

[Nearholmer]

Given that, loose shunting possibly excepted, it’s as easy to operate reasonably prototypically as it is not to, I think a lot of the ‘problem’ boils down to ignorance, on the part of both operators and viewers.

 

We’ve got to a time, fairly distant from much traditional railway operation, where many people simply don’t know what right looks like in terms of operation, a sort of “still photograph” view of railways, where people get tremendously excited about visible difference in wagon brake gear, but have no idea how the type of brake in use affects operation, for instance.

 

Personally, I can see where the OP is coming from to some degree, in that a “still-photo perfect” layout does deserve to be operated plausibly, in the same way that a Stradivarius deserves to be played well. If nothing else, the presently ignorant proportion of the audience might learn something from it.