Wright writes.....

[drmditch]

On my railway, both the former version and the improved model being re-built after a house move, there were and are quite steep gradients of about 1 in 45. (It is based on and in County Durham) On these the maximum passenger train length is five coaches. My kit built locomotives, mostly with Mashima motors and Comet two-stage gearboxes, have no problem with the gradients or the curves. The larger passenger engines are RTR, and most of them manage as well; for most of the time!

 

Has anyone any experience of using a banker on the steeper grades?

 

I was considering engineering a locomotive with quite high-gearing so it did not get left behind and could run uncoupled.

(I believe that the bankers used from Durham North Road station up to Relly Mill ran like this.)

[Headstock]

On my railway, both the former version and the improved model being re-built after a house move, there were and are quite steep gradients of about 1 in 45. (It is based on and in County Durham) On these the maximum passenger train length is five coaches. My kit built locomotives, mostly with Mashima motors and Comet two-stage gearboxes, have no problem with the gradients or the curves. The larger passenger engines are RTR, and most of them manage as well; for most of the time!

 

Has anyone any experience of using a banker on the steeper grades?

 

I was considering engineering a locomotive with quite high-gearing so it did not get left behind and could run uncoupled.

(I believe that the bankers used from Durham North Road station up to Relly Mill ran like this.)

 

Trains were routinely banked on Tebay but that was on the flat. Ideally, you want your locomotives geared about the same as there is a danger that a high geared banker will push the train off. I have experimented with the type of train you would have seen on the Worsbrough incline with some success. Forty-eight wagons were successfully banked up the 1 in 75 on LSGC with four 2-8-0's, two on the front and two on the back. All four locomotives had similar gearing and achieved what I wanted, the rear portion of the train buffered up while the front portion stretched its couplings. The whole formation completed a number of circuits, I was most chuffed.

Edited December 3, 2016 by Headstock

[Focalplane]

When you have compression of scale, doesn't that mean you should also have compression of speed?  I can see why Tony has designed Little Bytham with almost no compression of scale between the two defined ends of the scenic section.  If it was compressed, say by a factor of two, then an express moving at a scale 80mph would actually be seen to be traveling at twice that speed.  The eye might not be deceived if the viewer was not aware of the compression, but ultimately I think the brain would sense something inherently wrong.

 

At the other end of the spectrum of speed, movements around an engine shed and turntable should require very slow running if to seem realistic.  Again this  could be a compressed layout (mine certainly is).  Carnforth is a good example of a depot that is as long as the neighbouring station.  Given the speed limits and poorly ballasted track in such places, slow running would be mandated.

 

Because of the gearing inside most model express locomotives, slow running is less easy to achieve and I feel sure this may be one of the reasons why we see such unrealistic running on many exhibition layouts.

 

Just for fun, I just timed my Jubilee running on speed step 1 (slowest setting in DCC) over a scale distance of 86 meters (1.8 meters in 7mm scale 1:48).  It took 2 minutes 46 seconds.  This calculates at approximately 1.8 kph, slower than walking speed but prototypical for certain situations.

[Headstock]

All this talk of gradients and bankers reminds me of the fun and games we would have with the shed man on Tebay. If he was late off the shed with his banking engine we would sometimes start the train away, much to his consternation he would then have to chase it in order to catch up with slowly departing brake van on the rear.  Another trick was to try and block in his bankers with visiting engines so he had to regularly re shunt the shed to make sure they were available. Pure evil but Happy times.

[Flood]

When you have compression of scale, doesn't that mean you should also have compression of speed?  I can see why Tony has designed Little Bytham with almost no compression of scale between the two defined ends of the scenic section.  If it was compressed, say by a factor of two, then an express moving at a scale 80mph would actually be seen to be traveling at twice that speed.  The eye might not be deceived if the viewer was not aware of the compression, but ultimately I think the brain would sense something inherently wrong.

 

At the other end of the spectrum of speed, movements around an engine shed and turntable should require very slow running if to seem realistic.  Again this  could be a compressed layout (mine certainly is).  Carnforth is a good example of a depot that is as long as the neighbouring station.  Given the speed limits and poorly ballasted track in such places, slow running would be mandated.

 

I see what you are implying. As the distance a station covers needs to be compressed does this make the train appear too fast (as the overall distance travelled in front of the eye is less)? I think that the human brain possibly relates the speed of the loco to the amount of time taken to pass individual buildings, trees, signals or other smaller objects so even though the overall distance is less we may well compensate for this.

 

With regard to movements around an engine shed we have tried running 08s at a scale 15mph or less on Aberdeen Kirkhill. At home it appears very slow, at an exhibition I think it would drive the public to either boredom or to sleep. We tend to run light engine at about 22 mph, rakes at about 18 mph when on a longish distance shunting movement  (12 feet on average) and down to about 12-15 mph when entering sidings or the maintenance shed.

 

Graham H

[asmay2002]

When you have compression of scale, doesn't that mean you should also have compression of speed?  I can see why Tony has designed Little Bytham with almost no compression of scale between the two defined ends of the scenic section.  If it was compressed, say by a factor of two, then an express moving at a scale 80mph would actually be seen to be traveling at twice that speed.  The eye might not be deceived if the viewer was not aware of the compression, but ultimately I think the brain would sense something inherently wrong.

 

At the other end of the spectrum of speed, movements around an engine shed and turntable should require very slow running if to seem realistic.  Again this  could be a compressed layout (mine certainly is).  Carnforth is a good example of a depot that is as long as the neighbouring station.  Given the speed limits and poorly ballasted track in such places, slow running would be mandated.

 

Because of the gearing inside most model express locomotives, slow running is less easy to achieve and I feel sure this may be one of the reasons why we see such unrealistic running on many exhibition layouts.

 

Just for fun, I just timed my Jubilee running on speed step 1 (slowest setting in DCC) over a scale distance of 86 meters (1.8 meters in 7mm scale 1:48).  It took 2 minutes 46 seconds.  This calculates at approximately 1.8 kph, slower than walking speed but prototypical for certain situations.

When I watch a model locomotive moving the thing that conveys the speed to me is the rate at which the wheels/motion are going round (i.e revolutions per second) rather than distance covered.

[great central]

When I watch a model locomotive moving the thing that conveys the speed to me is the rate at which the wheels/motion are going round (i.e revolutions per second) rather than distance covered.

I tend to agree with this, watching old film of trains gives some idea of the kind of speed we should be looking for on models in my opinion. Far too often I see layouts seemingly operating to show how slow their trains can go.

This is often the case with post steam era layouts I think. One I watched a while ago I wanted to tell the operators to get a move on. Their trains approached a station along a main line at snails pace, and left the same way. In my experience that is not always the way it happens, braking is left almost as late as possible, allowing for speed limits obviously, and acceleration is usually pretty smart as well, especially some of the most modern powerful units.

[coachmann]

This is where DCC sound comes in useful. Enthusiasts familiar with steam know instinctively what a loco sounds like in any given situation. Using a speed dial controller is far more reliable than buttons which set either 1 speed step or multiples of speed steps at each press. One setting I would like to see introduced is an electrical surge that gives the drivers a temporary slip on starting and on frogs. However, I suppose it might harm motors.

[Tony Wright]

When you have compression of scale, doesn't that mean you should also have compression of speed?  I can see why Tony has designed Little Bytham with almost no compression of scale between the two defined ends of the scenic section.  If it was compressed, say by a factor of two, then an express moving at a scale 80mph would actually be seen to be traveling at twice that speed.  The eye might not be deceived if the viewer was not aware of the compression, but ultimately I think the brain would sense something inherently wrong.

 

At the other end of the spectrum of speed, movements around an engine shed and turntable should require very slow running if to seem realistic.  Again this  could be a compressed layout (mine certainly is).  Carnforth is a good example of a depot that is as long as the neighbouring station.  Given the speed limits and poorly ballasted track in such places, slow running would be mandated.

 

Because of the gearing inside most model express locomotives, slow running is less easy to achieve and I feel sure this may be one of the reasons why we see such unrealistic running on many exhibition layouts.

 

Just for fun, I just timed my Jubilee running on speed step 1 (slowest setting in DCC) over a scale distance of 86 meters (1.8 meters in 7mm scale 1:48).  It took 2 minutes 46 seconds.  This calculates at approximately 1.8 kph, slower than walking speed but prototypical for certain situations.

Thanks Paul,

 

Some very interesting thoughts and observations. 

 

May I, however, correct one point, please? You mention my designing Little Bytham. This is not true. The designing of the layout was done by Rob Kinsey and Ian Wilson. 

 

I've probably mentioned this before but Ian and I first considered Essendine as our joint project. However, even given a 'generous' footprint of 32' x 12' to work with, no matter how hard Ian tried, the layout design came out too compromised. That is, far too much compression, right-angle bends going on/off scene (on the fastest racetrack in the country!) and the potential problem of having to shorten trains to get everything into the fiddle yard unless curved points were used at the ends; I dislike curved points unless they're in sidings.

 

It was thus that Little Bytham was chosen. The selective compression was tolerable (15" short) because the main lines disappear/appear on the straight, the actual station and its trackwork are dead scale and all the trains are the correct length. The parameters of the design insisted on these things.

 

When all was finalised, we started building it. The 'we' in this case being a host of wonderful friends (all mentioned in the next issue of the MRJ). To say 'I'm' designing/building it would make a mockery of the considerable amount of work done by others. I want nobody getting the impression that it is all my own work.

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony.  

[Focalplane]

Point taken, Tony. I was using your name as a collective author, no offense to the many involved.

 

But it doesn't detract from the achievement thus obtained.

[Focalplane]

This is where DCC sound comes in useful. Enthusiasts familiar with steam know instinctively what a loco sounds like in any given situation. Using a speed dial controller is far more reliable than buttons which set either 1 speed step or multiples of speed steps at each press. One setting I would like to see introduced is an electrical surge that gives the drivers a temporary slip on starting and on frogs. However, I suppose it might harm motors.

Absolutely, sound adds a new dimension. Those chuffs at 1.8 kph added to the senses.

 

The only way I know to get slip to sound right is to have an axle chuff sensor and somehow instigate slippage. I have achieved it but more by mistake than design, and only with the Joob (because it has an axle sensor).

[CF MRC]

Slow down!

I am forever telling our operators to drive slowly on Copenhagen Fields, which has no longitudinal compression, especially with the heavy mainline trains. However, true speed is quite deceptive in 2mm: the following videos show the trains moving at a fair clip, but in fact they look pretty sedate in the flesh.

 

 

Did the pics you took turn out OK Tony?

 

Tim

[Jol Wilkinson]

We tend to view models from a greater distance in relative terms than we do/did the real thing. So the impression of speed is different. 

[Focalplane]

We tend to view models from a greater distance in relative terms than we do/did the real thing. So the impression of speed is different. 

 

Doesn't that also depend on the scale?  Think of it this way:

 

2mm scale - helicopter view

4mm scale - top floor of office building view

7mm scale - footbridge view

and so on.  Surely, the perceived speed will be different in case.

 

When I was a member of trainorders.com the moderator/owner made some wonderful stabilised videos from a helicopter of main line steam in the States.  The trains definitely looked like they were on an N gauge layout!  Sadly I cannot link to the movies as they are only available to subscribers.

 

But my point is not so much the perception of speed but that often model trains are accelerated and run faster than would be prototypical.

[coachmann]

Before going DCC I used a Gaugemaster controller with 'brake' control. It gave a measure of slow control and I watched the rods going around while mentally counting 4 chuffs per revolution. Without this I was running my locos too fast when shunting etc., but slow control using DC was dismally primitive when only a fraction of the voltage was being sent to the locos mechanism. DCC was the answer on several counts including giving ultra slow control on the full 12 volts while the decoder delivered sound. 

[CF MRC]

2mm scale doesn't have to be in a helicopter.

 

 

Tim

[glo41f]

Gosh those pictures of Copenhagen Fields running, to me, is what railway modelling is all about. A convincing set of models in a totally convincing landscape working in a most realistic way. All that is missing is the smoke and exhaust!  (What about a disco fogging machine for the tunnels Tim?)

 

This canter on model speed again is most interesting and provoking. I guess the wheel movement is the key as has been suggested. One way to test thsi is to watch a film of a train with no sound and try to guess the speed. If we view models the same way we will get something near right.

 

Martin Long

[CF MRC]

(What about a disco fogging machine for the tunnels Tim?)

 

Martin Long

We tried that 20 years ago at Olympia, Martin. It killed the running stone dead.

 

Tim

[jwealleans]

It works in the larger scales

but I can imagine it would overpower a 2mm layout. Edited December 4, 2016 by jwealleans

[t-b-g]

Roy Jackson's Retford layout is fitted with one of the clever digital speed measuring machines (I think it was from a firm called ACME). It was a very interesting exercise to firstly see what speed operators thought they were running trains at and then tell them the actual scale speed.

 

With a bit of experience using the speedometer, some of us started to be able to judge speeds fairly accurately and nowadays I can look at a model train and tell with a few mph what scale speed it is doing. It was, initially, very surprising at how wrong some of us were and many a train that should have been doing 25mph was being run at nearer 40mph.

 

The idea of running trains at extra slow speeds to pretend that it is travelling further isn't one that has much merit in my view. An express running at 35mph just because it is on a layout half the length it should be just doesn't look right.

 

I think that Frank Dyer had the right idea in his articles on operation in the MRJ way back when. He advocated adjusting acceleration and deceleration to allow a train to still be travelling at a reasonable speed as it came on scene or off scene. Most of his trains were stopping, so the idea doesn't really apply to trains running through but a slight adjustment, say running an express at 55mph instead of 70mph would not look silly and would still keep the train "on scene" longer than it would be.

[coachmann]

It must be a problem on small layouts in that the train no sooner accelerates out of the fiddle yard off stage than it is slowing down for the station. 

[Guest Brighton_JunctionLNER]

Hallo Jesse,

 

Pleased to note that you arrived home safely (as, I hope, did your luggage). I shall be asking for photos of the underside of that A2 when I come to overhaul my own, as the arrangement for your front bogie was better than mine. I also expect detailed pictures of your Quint set in due course.

 

Thank you for all your help over the weekend, especially when packing up. Most visitors disappear around then. I hope we'll be able to see you if you are back over next year.

i was glad to be of service!!! 

 

My luggage however took its sweet time at the airport and had me worried for a little bit.

Here is my email:

 

 simo_bmx@outlook.com 

 

If you send me an email bout what photos you need i can send some through.

 

cheers Jesse 

[Guest Brighton_JunctionLNER]

Jesse, you must bring that to a BRMA Sydney area meeting for a show-and-tell!

we need to get in contact as i would love to! 

[Michael Edge]

Leicester South is a fairly demanding layout to operate, the trains on the mainline can't be driven on autopilot. The shed, yard, and fiddle yard positions almost operate as an end to end layout with trains, light engines and stock moving back and forth to their own 'sequence'. If you get bored with that you can always try balancing a powered van on a working turntable, a sedate occupation but it requires a good deal of accuracy.

 

I would agree with you as regards the Youtube video's, all operators can be guilty of poor control. Generally, people underestimate the speed at which they are driving and are too concerned with what they are trying to achieve rather than what it looks like to the observer.

 

 

I wouldn't want to put you of representing a gradient, Tebay was built to represent banking over Shap. People thought that the trains were going up a hill but it was actually an optical illusion created by clever scenics and baseboard design. Gradients generally require operators to operate rather than sit back and watch the trains go by. If that is what you want to achieve then go for it. I've done quite a bit of work myself on a feasibility study into what would be the ultimate British gradient based layout, West Silkstone junction at the top of the Worsbrough incline.

I'm working on a projected layout based on the bottom end of Worsbrough, i've already tested trains on the 1 in 40 gradient.

[grahame]

Doesn't that also depend on the scale?  Think of it this way:

 

2mm scale - helicopter view

4mm scale - top floor of office building view

7mm scale - footbridge view

and so on.  Surely, the perceived speed will be different in case.

 

.

Surely it rather depends on the height of the layout and the relative viewing position - both of which are variable.

 

G.