In the real world I cannot ever recall...

[AY Mod]

Every day I see something new that curls my toenails.

 

... in the middle of nowhere on a platform. Must be a chemical version as well as being out of context.

[Dunsignalling]

6 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

Every day I see something new that curls my toenails.

 

... in the middle of nowhere on a platform. Must be a chemical version as well as being out of context.

Doctor Who's new motor? The Turdis.

[MarkSG]

45 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

It seems to me that Andy's OP refers to simple errors easily corrected by more careful observation of the prototype, rather than things everyone knows about but are technically hard to implement.  Hence buildings too close to tunnels, but not references to gauge - the one being easy to fix with a little more scenery, the other being a veteran can of worms.  Lamps, of course, fall into the latter category.

 

It seems to me that this is a classic example of the four square grid. I'm not sure how well this is going to work using code formatting, but let's have a go...

 

        A         B
   +--------+--------+
   |        |        |
 1 |   A1   |   B1   |  easy to know
   |        |        |
   +--------+--------+
   |        |        |
 2 |   A2   |   B2   |  hard to know
   |        |        |
   +--------+--------+
     easy     hard
      to       to
      fix      fix
   

 

The point is that column A refers to things that are easy to get right, while column B refers to things that are hard to get right. And row 1 is things that are reasily observable (or discoverable without specialist knowledge), while row 2 is things that require specialist (or, at least, not immediately obvious) knowledge to know.

 

What we're talking about here are things in cell A1 - easy to know, and easy to fix. Unless it' a pure "train set" layout (and that has its place, I'm not knocking it), there really shouldn't be anything in that category, at least on an exhibition layout (at home, of course, Rule 1 is the only rule there is).

 

By contrast, B1 (easy to know, hard to fix) contains most of the things that we accept as a necessary compromise on a model. Static passengers that never get on or off a train. Big plastic couplings. Frozen water. Static vehicles. Trees that don't respond to the weather. Weather. Etc. Some modellers make a greater effort to address these than others, and some are more amenable to being fixed than others (we can manage three link couplings if we want to, and moving vehicles are doable. I've even seen a couple of examples of realistically modelled flowing water). But there will always be visible compromises in any model railway. The very nature of  the thing makes it unavoidable.

 

To be honest, though, I think it's cell B1 that has the greatest potential for debate. That is, things which require at least a certain amount of specialist or non-obvious knowledge to be aware of, but that are easy to get right if you do know. A classic example of that, which I see a lot of at exhibitions, is farms, fields and farm animals - there is, often, quite a lot of that which is anachronistic on layouts, usually for the simple reason that most people aren't particularly familiar with farms to begin with and even less so with how they have changed over the years. But if you do know, it's easy to get it right.

 

As for cell B2 - hard to know, and hard to get right - I think that things like headcodes fall into that. Knowing that you should have them is probably an A2 issue, but knowing you should have them and getting them right is definitely in B2.

 

[KeithMacdonald]

1 minute ago, MarkSG said:

The point is that column A refers to things that are easy to get right, while column B refers to things that are hard to get right. And row 1 is things that are reasily observable (or discoverable without specialist knowledge), while row 2 is things that require specialist (or, at least, not immediately obvious) knowledge to know.

 

Donald Rumsfeld must have been a model railway enthusiast.

 

Quote

There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some
things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know.

 

[kevinlms]

10 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

Every day I see something new that curls my toenails.

 

... in the middle of nowhere on a platform. Must be a chemical version as well as being out of context.

They have something somewhat similar on the Melbourne Metro system. They have Authorised Officers (ticket inspecting and other duties).

Now many stations had public toilets, which were either divided up, or became exclusive to AO's. In places were there are none, portables appeared, again exclusive use.

[MarkSG]

16 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Doctor Who's new motor? The Turdis.

 

This is what's generally known in the festival and site management industry as a Turdis, for fairly obvious reasons:

 

 

Available in OO as well:

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/401792973659

[Nick C]

9 minutes ago, MarkSG said:

To be honest, though, I think it's cell B1 that has the greatest potential for debate. That is, things which require at least a certain amount of specialist or non-obvious knowledge to be aware of, but that are easy to get right if you do know. A classic example of that, which I see a lot of at exhibitions, is farms, fields and farm animals - there is, often, quite a lot of that which is anachronistic on layouts, usually for the simple reason that most people aren't particularly familiar with farms to begin with and even less so with how they have changed over the years. But if you do know, it's easy to get it right.

That's A2 surely? 

 

Another good example there is track plans and signalling - it's easy to make a prototypical track plan if you know what was done and why, but hard to know that in the first place. The signals themselves often move across to B2 though!

[kevinlms]

6 minutes ago, MarkSG said:

 

It seems to me that this is a classic example of the four square grid. I'm not sure how well this is going to work using code formatting, but let's have a go...

 

        A         B
   +--------+--------+
   |        |        |
 1 |   A1   |   B1   |  easy to know
   |        |        |
   +--------+--------+
   |        |        |
 2 |   A2   |   B2   |  hard to know
   |        |        |
   +--------+--------+
     easy     hard
      to       to
      fix      fix
   

 

 

 

By contrast, B1 (easy to know, hard to fix) contains most of the things that we accept as a necessary compromise on a model. Static passengers that never get on or off a train. Big plastic couplings. Frozen water. Static vehicles. Trees that don't respond to the weather. Weather. Etc. Some modellers make a greater effort to address these than others, and some are more amenable to being fixed than others (we can manage three link couplings if we want to, and moving vehicles are doable. I've even seen a couple of examples of realistically modelled flowing water). But there will always be visible compromises in any model railway. The very nature of  the thing makes it unavoidable.

 

 

 

Big plastic couplings (mentioned earlier), is something that almost everyone knows, but after 70 years of tension lock couplings, NO ONE has come up with an easy fix.

Yes, 3 link and screw couplings should be the right answer for most, but how would the youngest and oldest generations get on with that?

 

Just imagine how wealthy S.C. Pritchard would have become, if Tri-ang in it's early days had adopted his coupling as standard, under similar patent rights as Hornby Dublo paid.

 

He could have retired and not bothered with Peco - then no one could complain about their track!  😱

[Jol Wilkinson]

Perhaps what this topic shows is that many modellers often have imagination, but not the power of observation.

 

At a recent large exhibition I found that the "less is more" approach created the most interesting layouts, whereas those crammed to the gunwales with whatever the builders could lay their hands on were, frankly, boring.

 

[Kris]

5 minutes ago, kevinlms said:

Big plastic couplings (mentioned earlier), is something that almost everyone knows, but after 70 years of tension lock couplings, NO ONE has come up with an easy fix.

Yes, 3 link and screw couplings should be the right answer for most, but how would the youngest and oldest generations get on with that?

Non UK markets have different solutions that are successful.

There would be at least 3 major challenges to implementing a change in the UK are 70+ years of this style of coupling.

1. Getting all major manufacturers on board.
2. The howls of protest from those to whom change is always a bad thing. 
3. Backwards compatibility.

[kevinlms]

3 minutes ago, Kris said:

Non UK markets have different solutions that are successful.

There would be at least 3 major challenges to implementing a change in the UK are 70+ years of this style of coupling.

1. Getting all major manufacturers on board.
2. The howls of protest from those to whom change is always a bad thing. 
3. Backwards compatibility.

Yes, but almost all non-UK markets, don't have 3 links as standard (the screw coupling is common in Europe). So we're looking at a UK only solution, to replace the UK only solution, tension lock.

 

Even point 1. wasn't exactly a standard in the US for the Kadee type. It was the draft box that was actually the standard, of which the Kadee made their coupler fit. Once their patent expired, there was an explosion of compatibles - all of which came close at least, to point 3.

The howls of protest, (point 2) came from Kadee!

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, kevinlms said:

Big plastic couplings (mentioned earlier), is something that almost everyone knows, but after 70 years of tension lock couplings, NO ONE has come up with an easy fix.

Yes, 3 link and screw couplings should be the right answer for most, but how would the youngest and oldest generations get on with that?

Those withe patience and skill to use 3-link and screw couplings should be easily capable of fitting a set to an r-t-r model in a matter of minutes, irrespective of what it came with!

 

To me, they are only fit for looking at in any scale smaller than O, and I've hated the things without a break from the ages of seven to seventy. I have as little to do with them as possible and if they came as standard, I'd chop them off the same as I do T/Ls.

 

I can fit one on the front of a loco (for cosmetic purposes only) faster than I could couple the damned thing to another one.

 

If anyone does come up with an alternative to tension-locks for the masses, it will need to fit into NEM pockets if backward compatibility is to be provided.

 

FWIW I've been using Kadees for the past 30 years, mainly without resorting to the NEM sort, if avoidable. They are smaller, neater and more effective than the old Peco/HD ones, let alone modern mini-TLs that often don't tolerate other makes that appear identical!

 

John

Edited April 15, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[br2975]

In the real world I cannot ever recall................Perfection !

[westernviscount]

39 minutes ago, br2975 said:

In the real world I cannot ever recall................Perfection !

I do have the faintest memory of seeing King George V in steam, but I was very small ;-) 

[The Johnster]

33 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Those withe patience and skill to use 3-link and screw couplings should be easily capable of fitting a set to an r-t-r model in a matter of minutes, irrespective of what it came with!

 

To me, they are only fit for looking at in any scale smaller than O, and I've hated the things without a break from the ages of seven to seventy. I have as little to do with them as possible and if they came as standard, I'd chop them off the same as I do T/Ls.

 

I can fit one on the front of a loco (for cosmetic purposes only) faster than I could couple the damned thing to another one.

 

If anyone does come up with an alternative to tension-locks for the masses, it will need to fit into NEM pockets if backward compatibility is to be provided.

 

FWIW I've been using Kadees for the past 30 years, mainly without resorting to the NEM sort, if avoidable. They are smaller, neater and more effective than the old Peco/HD ones, let alone modern mini-TLs that often don't tolerate other makes that appear identical!

 

John

 

I'm in full agreement here, John, but use t/ls because my eyesight and hand-eye co-ordination are not up to the task any more.  I am sort of able to mentally tune them out of my conciousness when I'm operating the layout, and the modern iteration, the NEM profile, is much better than the old Hornby and Lima abominations at the discretion game, especially painted a neutral camouflage matt.  Compatibility of what claims to be a standard product is a 'mare, though, and there must be something better, but I have no idea what it is!  I'm considering re-installing my scale couplings.

 

For fixed rakes that are not normally handled, I'd recommend 'James' Trains' 3D printed couplings available from Shapeways.  Not cheap, nothing on Shapeways is, these are solid couplings for NEM sockets, printed in clear plastic so you have to paint them, track colour is fine.  3-link, instanter, and screw couplings are produced, and are very detailed; the instanters include the 'horns' for shortening/lengthening with a shunting pole.  You get a sprue of solid couplings with NEM beedlybops at each end, with the drawhooks printed in and the 'other' coupling handing from one drawhook. There are alternatives to cope with different NEM pocket heights,  They aren't a perfect solution, as your stock does not 'buffer up' when it is being propelled, and they are a little delicate and brittle if they are twisted or bent in any direction that they are not designed for, so are best left alone on stock that lives on the layout and is seldom handled.  I used them for my mineral rakes, but since the building of the colliery now need to be able to uncouple all mineral wagons anywhere for shunting and loading/unloading purposes.

 

I'm also thinking about a very old idea, the Peco/Hornby Dublo 'buckeye', for my minerals.  This would have the advantage of making lifting wagons out of rakes for loading (dipping in the coal box) and unloading (tipping in the coal box) much easier (I use real coal, mined for me by Tomparryharry from Big Pit), and they are easy to fit and at least as reliable as tension locks on well-laid and level track with minimum 30" radius curves.  I've been experimenting with basic hook and loop home-made types glued into NEM pockets, but cannot get reliable propelling without a lot of faff.  The Rosebud Kitmaster plastic hook and loops seemed to work well, I remember.

 

[westernviscount]

I cannot recall looking out of the train window seeing giants holding controllers...looking confused. 

[AY Mod]

1 hour ago, westernviscount said:

I cannot recall looking out of the train window seeing giants holding controllers...looking confused. 

 

You had to bring DCC into it.

 

 

 

[didcot]

On 14/04/2023 at 11:39, AY Mod said:

people in shiny clothes*.

... bicycles that stand up on their own.

Shell Suits and Children's bikes with stabilisers!

[andyman7]

On 14/04/2023 at 15:29, BMacdermott said:

The Angel station (London) has been rebuilt as that platform did  give the HSE apoplexy.🙂

 

My comment was directed at 'wildly narrow' island platforms on 'main line' layouts, where train speeds would be very high.

 

And, adding to the point made my Happy Hippo, my 'gripe' was with exhibition layouts where there has been little or no attention to real detail and the modeller puts - such as - a 2-wagon coal siding off a main line facing point. There are, no doubt,  plenty of examples of 'sidings off main line facing points' - Exeter Central carriage sidings being one.

 

Brian

Forest Hill on the the London Bridge - Croydon four track main line had a truly terrifying narrow central island platform that faced the fast lines. It was finally removed in the 1960s but it's the perfect example of a real life situation so implausible that if you made a model of it people would say that it's not realistic!

[br2975]

1 hour ago, westernviscount said:

I do have the faintest memory of seeing King George V in steam, but I was very small ;-) 

.

Puffs out chest, followed by sharp intake of breath.......

.

I happened across KGV inside the United Wagon Works in Newport Docks circa 1968 whilst being restored to working order by Messrs A.r. Adams staff, at the expense of H.P. Bulmer.

.

Three years later, 2nd. October 1971, together with hundreds of others, I was at Severn Tunnel Junction to witness him (surely not 'her' ?) breaking the steam ban.

 

[Clive Mortimore]

On 14/04/2023 at 11:39, AY Mod said:

... bicycles that stand up on their own.

 

 

Andy,

 

I take it you never mastered the art of propping your bike at the curb side by one of its pedals? 

 

I tried lots of times, and sometimes it was successful.  Until the first car passed and its slipstream meant I had a heap on the pavement .....................again.

 

Couldn't do it today as some ruffian would be off with it as you turned your back.

[KeithMacdonald]

5 hours ago, Kris said:

Non UK markets have different solutions that are successful.

There would be at least 3 major challenges to implementing a change in the UK are 70+ years of this style of coupling.

1. Getting all major manufacturers on board.
2. The howls of protest from those to whom change is always a bad thing. 
3. Backwards compatibility.

 

4. The rivet counters

 

5 hours ago, kevinlms said:

after 70 years of tension lock couplings, NO ONE has come up with an easy fix.

 

At the risk of being attacked by the purists, I'd go for the magnetic couplings.

https://www.keymodelworld.com/article/Hornby-magnetic-couplings-oo-gauge

(putting on tin helmet and ducking for cover)

[Halvarras]

A 75-ton breakdown crane with matching bogie crew coach and loco parked on a siding only accessible by a headshunt into which the loco by itself would just about fit (saw this epic layout planning fail at a show in Bristol decades ago - as you can see it stuck with me!) 

[SZ]

 Trackside nudist colonies

[BachelorBoy]

Things I've seen frequently in the real world, but rarely on layouts.

 

1) Deep shadows

2) Black and South Asian people