Good point. Play back a video of your trains taken from the perspective of an N scale person and see what the speeds you run at really look like.
It is certainly true that, in the absence of a fast clock, model speed is just a scaled fraction of prototype speed. For example, 1 prototype mile per minute (60 mph) scales to 33 feet per minute in N scale, since 1 mile --> 33 feet, and 1 minute --> 1 minute. However, apparent speed (more properly, angular speed) depends on viewing distance. A train that is 10 miles away traveling 60 mph crosses half as much of your field of view as the same train that is 5 miles away. This is why a train appears to be going much faster as it sweeps by you than it does when its a mile down the tracks, even if it's actual speed is constant. So if you have the luxury of a large layout where you can see trains up close and far away, try the experiment yourself: keep the throttle at a fixed setting and see if the train appears to be moving much more slowly on the far side of the layout than it does on the near side. It's a neat psychological trick.
OFF TOPIC. As a new guy around here, I found it fascinating going through this old, resurfaced thread; seeing who is still here and who isn't. I noticed one member was listed as "Permanently dispatched". I am curious, does that mean he has passed on, or was just kicked off the board?
Lownen, It means he was banned for actions contrary to his agreement with Trainboard when he was appointed a moderator. During a disagreement with Trainboard, he deleted his blog and Railimages albums. While these were obviously his intellectual property, we do agree, when joining the Trainboard staff, not to disrupt threads upon leaving. Deleting his blog and images disrupted threads. He resigned on his own volition.
I understand. It makes sense to me, its a form of computer vandalism. If you do stuff like that when leaving a job you can be prosecuted.
Trainboard is staffed entirely by volunteers. Our goal is to maintain a continuity in the Trainboard community.
Why is scale speed important? Since thee are all kinds of other compromises in our layouts why would speed be any different? Doesn't it make sense to run the "visually appropriat" speed. That is, what looks right to the viewer? I run my bullet trains faster than my through freights which I run faster than my local switching. Is this just a personal taste just like some folks like super detailing? What am I missing?
You didn’t miss a thing Grey One. That was my point all along that Scale MPH didn’t necessarily appear Scale Speed. Most of us are probably running “Fast” passenger trains at a speed that would scale out to 45 mph or slower. I know on my layout most fast freights are moving along at a Scale MPH of around 25, which appears to be pretty fast, what with all the close proximity curves and smallish towns and scenes through with the trains travel. Strangely enough I’ve noticed that the more detailed (Cluttered) my layout becomes the slower my trains need to travel so they don’t look to speedy. Or maybe my brain is just slowing down and I need my trains to keep pace.
"Selective Compression." Although some things are built to true "scale," not everything is. As a result, speed may not appear appropriate for the features in a layout. I read that one of the largest N scale layouts is 33 scale miles long (1089 actual feet). This layout encompasses 1200 square feet -- larger than most of the rooms in my house combined -- yet it is only 33 scale miles. In many real railroads, a train may pass very few features for 33 miles, but many N scale layouts feature entire towns within just a few hundred scale feet. Many N layouts might feature a factory or industrial area, but a 4' x 8' sheet of plywood accounts for only 819,200 square feet -- many factories are well over a million square feet, but modelers often include numerous features, landscapes, buildings, and more all within that relatively tiny amount of scale space.
You mean like Lee Marvin getting down to the track side an squinting at the on coming train in the movie Donovan's Reef? Actually, haven't we all done that? Cheers, Jim CCRR
Well I must say I had to go back and see who it was. In doing so I saw the post made by Long Train and the notation he passed away October 12, 2005. Somehow I can't believe that was 2.5 years ago.
On that same note I just looked at my post and saw my join date. If I recall correctly my Trainboard number was 300. Those years went by fast!!!
I'm definitely in the slow group, I think it has to do with three things. I'll call them the Airlplane, Cartoon, and Aesthetic effects. I've always felt an aircraft was speeding up as it got closer to the ground even though I know that's not what's really happening. We see at what, 120 frames per second? Maybe that's as fast as we can process information and not go into some form of overload where details start to drop out of perception. Lastly, we put effort into creating a scene and so allowing the action to happen a little more slowly makes the candy sweeter.
bkm- Welcome to TrainBoard! This is why I've always had troubles with selective compression. Any train passes too quickly through a shortened scene. Boxcab E50
Welcome to Trainboard, bkm! I managed to squeeze a 20 scale mile run (650 linear feet) into an 11 x 23 stall of my garage by using multiple decks. Total trackage is just over 27 scale miles. As a newbie here, you should check out my blog and Railimages albums (links below) to see how I did this. In 250 square feet of space, I have 340 sq. ft. of table, which is only 200 acres. At 40 smph, it takes a freight 40 minutes to complete the loop--from the roundhouse up to the top, and then back again. A lot of people get a little bored--not me! With four trains running, they are 10 minutes apart. My goal with the PRR Portsmouth Branch was long runs, with little hidden track. Part of the reason was that I was working ridiculous hours, which made running with a group of friends impossible to schedule. I found that, after a while, even passenger trains running at 60 smph looked too fast. Because the trackplan is rather serpentine, I found 40-car freights looked long. I've gotten a 60-car freight up the ruling grade (without Accumate couplers!) but the extra care needed wasn't worth the effort. 40-car freights don't overwhelm my long straights, while 60-car freights are more or less overkill for the slight added effect.
That's cool. I formerly ran N scale... about 25-30 years ago. I am considering building a new railroad beginning construction this winter. I am attracted to Z scale because of the fineness and because I want more scale miles within my space. I am still formulating the whole concept, but my plan at this point is to build a mainline from one end of the house to the other. At Z scale it would be just under 2 miles, but I have to figure out how to get past doorways. I considered having it climb up to the ceiling or even into a tunnel through the attic, but I would rather have it at counter-height. I don't really want it to take over the whole house... it would be fine if it just emerged from a tunnel at the other end. I do want it to be integral to the house and not just hidden in a spare room. I am inspiried by Mr. Roger's trolley that circulates between his living room and the Neighborhood of Make Believe. On the mainline I want to us DC and teach my two sons about electricity (polarity, voltage, current, resistance, potentiometers, electrical motors, transformers, relays, switches, etc.). I also want to teach them logical problem solving like how to use signals and relays to switch tracks or make changes on sections to solve routing and scheduling problems. I think I can build enough complexity into it to cover all the boolean operations and their combinations. Besides the mainline, I am thinking of using modular table-top layouts in one room. They might be 4' x 4' because I don't have that much space, but they would be interchangeable so I could change a 4x4 layout for another one and keep the unused ones in storage. Each table-top layout would model a different industry -- wheat, steel, lumber, oil and gas, hardrock mining, auto, an intermodal port, etc. -- so for each industry I could teach my sons the important steps in a process. For steel we could go from the coal mine to the coke plant, and the ore mine to a bessemer converter or a furnance and foundry... for wheat we'd go from the combine in the field, truck it to the mill and load it onto rail and barges. Of course we'd go on a field trip and see the real thing too. As we learn from one module to the next, the trains on the mainline would remind us of what we're learning. We want to learn about bridge-building too, so we want to have a section with a span where we can build various kinds of trestles - cantilevered trusses, suspension, arches and so on. But I can't bridge those doorways... so I think I've got to shoot it over them which might take some serious switchbacks. What kind of grades in % or inches climbed per inch have you been able to run?
bkm, I planned for 2.5%, but one grade ended up at 2.7%. That's 2.7 inches per 100 inches. Most people would advise you to stay under 2%, including me. Once over 2% you start running into problems like coupler strength and straightlining curves. I think you should take your last post, and copy it to the Layout Design Discussion forum here at Trainboard. That's where members who are really into layout design hang out, and you might get a better response. Or, if you'd like, I'll just move this thread over there for you.
One aspect of compressed scenery is that curves are usually sharper than they would be in the real world. A model train does not look right coming around a sharp curve at what would otherwise be a reasonable scale speed. Ditto with our #6 turnouts: we need to slow down when taking the diversion.
I've always thought that scale speed looked slow, not fast. We get the "why so slow" question every now and then at the club. 'Course, we have a lot of grades. Since the link above is broken, here's a couple links for calculators... SCALE SPEED CALCULATOR Railroad Scale Speed Calculator (Unfortunately neither of them allow you put in your desired speed, and your desired distance, then get the seconds.)
