Prof Klyzlr

Dear TalbotJohn, Either Preiser or Woodland Scenics should have you covered... Suspect you'd land on something like https://www.walthers.com/train-personnel-scenic-accents-r-pkg-6 https://www.walthers.com/scenic-accents-r-figures-depot-workers-accessories https://www.walthers.com/scenic-accents-r-rail-workers-w-handcar-pkg-5 https://www.walthers.com/train-mechanics-scenic-accents-r-pkg-60 Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Can't speak for recent performance, but SMJ hosted me for a night a few years ago during a work-trip, excellent modelling, really friendly team-members, highly reccomended! I also visited MJHobby, well stocked and again very friendly and helpful team-members... Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

RE O2R SG US-outline Micro layout See "Chicago Fork" https://www.carendt.com/small-layout-scrapbook/page-97a-may-2010/ (scroll at least 1/3rd way down the page...) also worth checking out https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/18011 and https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/10708 https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/15624 https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/36211 https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/31878 https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/22604 Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear John, Hopefully these help... https://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/images/Sound-Value-Decoder-Quick-Start-Guide.pdf (see Page 5) https://soundtraxx.com/content/Reference/Factory-Installed/Bachmann/Spectrum/ho2-8-0consolidation.pdf Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear 44-tonner fans, Wow, I didn't realise the Williams 44 was only powered on one axle per truck? Seriously thinking a pair of Stanton trucks might be the best "all wheel drive" 2R conversion option? Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear Gary, So, I wanna know where and how you'll be modelling the "soft rail joint" visible in the middle of the prototype (Google Street View) road crossing... ??? ;-) Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear RMWebbers, Re "Coal on a shelf" Google - "Tony Koester Coal Fork Branch" (Will need squeezing to fit your space, but useful guide) - "Model Railroader Thin Branch" (Could be a walk-up start, if it's straightened-out a little, from "L" to "I" format) Also reccomend visiting the "Appalachian Railway Modeling" website, more Eastern Coal prototype and modelling info than you can fit in one lifetime... https://appalachianrailroadmodeling.com/ Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

I thought you had to say the name 3 times in order to summon a model RR master? ;-)

"90210" for the win... (Only because Oregon City 97045 didn't use MP15s within Blue Heron... ;-) and Seattle gives too many ZIP codes to choose from... ;-) ) Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear RMWebbers, My apologies, it appears my inquiry has been mis-understood on a number of levels. In order of appearance: Yes, such benchwork form-factor has been publicised by many "name brand" modellers for some decades (Iain Rice, et al), and has been a staple on the UK and Aussie exhibition circuit for an equally long time. No, there is no legal or financial interest at-play. The root of the issue is as follows: 1 - US modellers say - "Proscenium benchwork is hard" - "Cannot get the vertical endplates/profile boards to mate properly" - "Cannot achieve (module) alignment" - "Cannot achieve reproducible (rail-end accross module joint) alignment" 2 - Prof K says "...all such issues have been well-solved by UK and Aussie exhibition modellers for some time, decades even, and proscenium modules are commmonly used under much-harsher-than-US-home-layout conditions without issue..." 3 - US modeller responds "...ah, but this is all heresay, spoken-in-hushed-tones, passed from Master to Student 'tribal knowledge'... ...we know of no-such techniques here..." 4 - to which Prof K thinks "...what a load of parochial nonsense, making layout sections with positive mechanical alignment systems, building proscenium modules which just 'fall together correctly', and bulletproof module<>module rail-joint alignment, are common knowledge accross the worldwide model railway community..." .....BUT it started me thinking to myself "...OK, so where did YOU (That would be ME, Prof K) learn about such things? WHERE and HOW LONG have such aleged 'common knowledge' techniques been published/promoted/communicated?" (specifically relating to full-proscenium module formats, but any and all references appreciated). Many Thanks, will chase up those references... (agreed, Carl A covered a lot of the visual and aesthetic matters relating to Prosceniums, but the core of the inquiry specifically relates to multi-section and joining/alignment methods and techniques). Thankfully, this mission is not related or centred around my own layouts, rather it's a (somewhat academic-style) chase for previously-documented, historical examples, to show that "what is unknown in one location may well be 'common knowledge' elsewhere, and has been since <insert earliest known reference HERE>". FWIW, a similar chase occured in the last year-or-so, where the use of graphite as rail-treatment was heralded by some in the US as "an amazing just-this-minute-discovered breakthru". The "UK and Elsewhere" modelling contingent (understandably) blew mouthfuls of tea all over their computer screens laughing, and the resulting "prior art search" provided examples of the technique being known/published (Model Railway Constructor) as far back as the 1930s.... Agreed, and I'm going back thru my personal library as we speak to confirm the specific titles/published-years/chapter/segment references. :-) However, the basics of sectional/modular alignment systems (which have been adapted to suit the evolution from "domino" to "full proscenium" module form-factors), predate "Approach to Model Railway Layout Design" by some decades.... ...any and all clues as to "how far back" and "where such techniques were publicised/published" is the continuing mission... Many Many Thanks, and pls do keep the hints and references coming! Happy Modelling, Aiming to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear RMWebbers, An appeal to the Brains Trust. I've just had a minor challenge laid before me, to find and confirm "prior art" articles and documentation RE Proscenium Module design, specifically in multi-section layout uses. Now I'm seeing some references to some of Iain Rice's early show layouts (Treggarrick?) circa late 1970s, but the challenge centres around the idea that "...sure, 'exhibition layouts' and builders may know how to build sectional layout successfully, but that's all un-written 'tribal knowledge'... where's the documentation/evidence for the rest of us?..." I'm trowelling thru my personal library and archives as we speak, but if anyone can provide references (Books, magazine articles, specific authors/modellers or layouts to look up), That would be greatly appreciated... Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear RMWebbers, Can't speak to the poor experiences noted above, but down here in the Antipodes, inspired by Keith H, Mike Dannemann, Keiran Ryan, and others, 5mm Foamcore of various makes has been used extensively to build exhibition and home layouts, some now clocking up over 2 decades and 1000s of kilometres of touring-circuit travel without issue. Many of these have been documented online, Google any of the following: - "Camp 4 Foamcore layout" https://www.zelmeroz.com/album_model/members/klyzlr/Camp4.pdf - "ChicagO Fork" https://lone.net/trains/carendt.morphoist.com/scrapbook/page97a/index.html#chicago - "ChicagHO Fork" https://lone.net/trains/carendt.morphoist.com/scrapbook/page103a/index.html#chicago-fork https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/magazine/mrh-2013-09-sep/layout-chicago-fork - "Toorong" https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/18802?page=1#comment-157401 https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/18802 - "Brooklyn 3AM" https://lone.net/trains/carendt.morphoist.com/scrapbook/page87/index.html - "Wood'n'Days" (On42 logging using Dead-rail and actual-wood rails!) W4D_Pre_Con_Birthday.jpg It's also worth checking out: - Wetterall Food Services http://mmrrc.blogspot.com/2014/04/wetterau-food-services-micro-layout_26.html - Herrin Micro https://herrinmicro.blogspot.com/ I've integrated Lighting, Control/DCC, 10s of discrete power-circuits + smoke gens + "Botex" laser-crab lighting effects, and even complete 2+2.1 speaker rigs _into_ the foamcore modules, and have not experienced any weight or longevity issues which might prompt the nneed to "strip out and transport seperately" said equipment. ("Brooklyn 3AM" weighed in at around 12 kilos complete, well within the 20 kilo "single man lift" rating of Aussie "WorkCover" OHS specs, or a large bag of dry dog-food). While I've not been picky about Foamcore sources,my latest/last "bulk order" of Foamcore was a 25-sheet carton of 3A Composites 5mm thick 60" x 40" foamcore. This scales out delivered at approx AUD$12 per sheet. FWIW it only takes 2x sheets + a 60x40 sheet of matteboard to create a 5' x 2' x 2' "full proscenium" module which weighs in at under 7kilos "naked" (ready for track). (Wanna try a free 1/10th sized example? Download this PDF, print and glue to cereal box cardboard, then cut out the components and tab/slot/glue together... Straight_Foamcore_Module_1Tenth_scale.pdf ) My current build is another Foamcore multi-section exhibition layout, and hope to have it ready for General Public exhibition debut for Oct... ;-) Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear RMWebbers, Surely it's gotta be a Railbox boxcar? Both "common as mud" on the prototype, and a scheme painted on every "modernish" boxcar model produced over the last 3 decades? Also, unlike a dedicated/captive/specific-service reefer, a plausible "mis-switch"/"mis-routing" candidate that could appear on Any RR at Any time... Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear RMWebbers, A quick question for the RMWeb luminaries... I've been smitten by the Kibri/Veissmann 16100/26100 Robel Track Maintainance Vehicle, and understand that the difference between the 1xxxx and 2xxxx versions is "kit" VS RTR, but what does that really mean? - How "completely knocked down" is the "kit" version? - Does it include a motor and mechanism? - If Yes, is the mech complete, or does it need assembly? - Does the "kit" include a DCC decoder? Given the price difference down here in Aust, I'm tempted to go for the kit version, but want to have a bit of an idea of what I'm jumping-into before throwing $$$ anywhere... Many Thanks in Advance for any and all wisdom... Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear RMWebbers, A quick question for the RMWeb luminaries... I've been smitten by the Kibri/Veissmann 16100/26100 Robel Track Maintainance Vehicle, and understand that the difference between the 1xxxx and 2xxxx versions is "kit" VS RTR, but what does that really mean? - How "completely knocked down" is the "kit" version? - Does it include a motor and mechanism? - If Yes, is the mech complete, or does it need assembly? - Does the "kit" include a DCC decoder? Given the price difference down here in Aust, I'm tempted to go for the kit version, but want to have a bit of an idea of what I'm jumping-into before throwing $$$ anywhere... Many Thanks in Advance for any and all wisdom... Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear RMWebbers, A few life things messing with the flow at the moment, but a new phone gives new photo-opportunities, as did a minor spurt in modelling progress.... Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear Fulton, Apologies if I missed it along the way, but how are you handling the "non-track side" of those white "FP&O" industry buildings, between the track and the viewer aisle? IE are the viewers looking at a "blank wall", a "theatre black flat", or other? Will the viewer be forced to look around (either L or R) of the building, or will the layout be displayed soo low that a "drone shot" look over the top will be the default viewer experience? Intrigued, but very very impressed! Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr PS do CSX use the RCP platforms in Florida?

Yep, like those ones, only made of Actual-Obtainium.... Prof Klyzlr

Dear RMWebbers, In the spirit of "know the rules before you break 'em", I fully accept that running MU'd 6-axle SDs and GEs and 85' Amtrak cars in HO really does want 22" or larger radii... ...however, I have a future show-layout application pending where the "mainline passing-parade" will be an adjunct to the main-game, they need to "roll by slowly in the background" along a 8' scene, and then turn-n-burn "backstage" in as-compact-a-space-as-possible to save exhibition stand space, and minimise the ammount of "stuff" needed to transport to/from the show, and set-up/teardown at same... Soooo, with the full range of: - eliminating Kadees on fixed-rakes of Amtrak stock (they will always run together, in the same train, in the same consist order) - loosing "self centring" and any other "coupler swing limiting" mechanisms on affected fixed-rake trains - truck-pivot-point talgo'd draftgear - metal wheels + graphite - and massively simplified underbody running-gear (which will be all-but-invisible at viewing-height + distance) - sympathetic scene-design and designed-in integrated viewblocking (so the screamingly-tight curves are strictly "backstage", all on-scene running will be tangent and "scale sized curves" ;-) ), tricks/tools at disposal, I have the intent of bending such trains around 18", if not tighter (15"? maybe?)... ...we'll see, I gotta get the current layout build done first... ;-) Happy Modelling, Aiming to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

A real 44 tonner, please a REAL 44 TONNER.... (with center-motor drive, 2R wheels + pilots, and NO Traction Tyres pls Pls PLS!) Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear RMWebbers, Gotta be honest, I love me a decent dose of telephoto foreshortening. I find it provides a fantastic Prototype<>Modelgenic pre-visualisation tool, and makes "model from photos" missions far more do-able in a practical (let alone small/micro-layout-esque) space... ...and hey, if I can take a photo of the final model scene, get modellers-who-I-trust to compare directly to the reference photo of the prototype (tele foreshortening and all. are we saying it's not a prototype image?), play "spot 5 things which are different", and fail, (and believe me, if it looks wrong they will absolutely tell me.... they have-done and do on a regular basis ;-) ) then I'll take all the benefits tele-forshortening provides every day of the week ending in "y"... ;-) Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear RMWebbers, "NYNJ" - nee "NYCH"/"New York Cross Harbor" - nee "Bush Terminal" Newcomers, Might I respectfully suggest a quick search thru the forum here with the above-listed Railroad names, as bounded by quote-marks ("), as these RR-name/operator changes are the accepted key era-delineators of the Brooklyn Street Switching and related carfloating operations between 39th St and the Bush Army Terminal, and accross the Hudson to the Greenville Float Terminal... ...as well as "Brooklyn 3AM"... Much of the stated "when and why it is so" confusion RE "Turnout RIGHT to curve LEFT" situation southbound along 1st Ave in Brooklyn has been well documented and discussed here on RMWeb previously, (in the "Carl Arendt and Shortliner Jack" era, RIP), as well as site-survey documentation of the "curve thru Loft Building 20" between 41st and 2nd, the interchange with the South Brooklyn Railway (SBK)/NYC Metro at 39th St, and the changes-over-time in track-array/operations/spurs/interchanges around the blocks bounded by: - The Hudson River Bulkhead and 2nd Ave W<>E - 38th St and 42nd St N<>S Much of this conversation is backed-up and based-off the astoundingly excellent work of Phil M Goldstein and the TrainWeb site (All the Respect and Credit) http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/ http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/bt.html http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/nych.html http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/nynjr.html http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/sbr.html To get the full "timeline" without doing-one's-head-in, (esp from a distance), requires following the above links in listed/time/RR-era sequence... IE BT (OG) --> NYCH (B3AM) --> NYNJ (post 2000 - now) Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

Dear RMWebbers, Just a sidenote, the "Center for Railroad Photography and Art" linked above is run by Scott Lothes, who along with Ken Wiseman-Yee, were the two major documenters of the Oregon City/Blue Heron Paper street-switching ops in Oregon City, Ore circa 2000. The OG members here may recall the late "Shortliner Jack" and others being rather rabid fans of the "OC Switcher", and Scott continues his excellent RR research and visual documentation thru the CRP&A today... (For those fans of contemporary/modern-era western railroading, inc the gritty LA street and river-channel switching, via the CRP&A site you may wish to check the work of Adam Normandin...) Also worth checking out the CRP&A's podcasts, available free on YT https://www.youtube.com/user/railphotoart/videos Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr

(Prof tries very hard to stop slamming his head against a wall)

Dear Mars, At a mechanical level, yes. Knuckle couplers (and their associated height/design/mounting specs) have been standardised since 1893, well-predating the F-unit you're using as your "early time marker". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_coupling#Automatic_Couplers https://www.railwayage.com/mechanical/freight-cars/mechanical-couplers/ Westinghouse airbrakes have been mandated in the same law circa 1893 referenced above, which means that at a basic level "train brakes" (and the associated locomotive controls for said braking systems) have been compatible for a looooooong time, certainly predating your F-unit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railroad_Safety_Appliance_Act MU-connections, the "multiple-unit" cables which allow one diesel loco to control others coupled to it, were standardised early in the "first generation" era of diesels. Originally Alcos VS EMD VS GE VS Whitcomb et al used subtle (and in some cases not-soo-subtle) different combinations of cables, Control<>cable mapping, and even voltage-levels. However, after some typicallly US-esque "let the market work out the winner" argy-bargy, a single multi-pin electrical "MU cable" + a set of 3x paired pneumatic cables + Train-line pneumatic brakeline format with known spec voltage specs won-out. Your "F-unit + GP3x" combo were both EMD products, so should be 100% MU compatible. http://www.railway-technical.com/trains/rolling-stock-index-l/diesel-locomotives/us-locomotive-mu-control.html Now, as far as plausibly running an F-unit and EMD GP3x together, that's a bigger call. Era-wise, the "GP3x" series is considered "2nd gen" EMD, and is much more likely to be seen in-company with other GP units, esp GP18/20 (earlier) and GP30/35/38/40 (older). F-units were commonly seen in company with other F's, and "compatible" first-gen locos such as EMD GP7/9s, Alco RS locos, et al. There is also the minor issue of gear-ratios. Older units were commonly geared for the envisaged tasks, wiith some F-units being geared "low" for drag-freight work, and some "higher" for passenger work. Later 2nd-gen diesels were typically geared more-closely (although not-necessarily exactly the same), and thus were more-freely-interchangable in terms of "building an MU consist for a given train-weight/load/route"... So, in total, that would be a "Kinda, Sure, but typically No" to the question of "...could I plausibly run an F-unit and GP32(?) in MU..." Happy Modelling, Aim to Improve, Prof Klyzlr