Now then..
...there is quite a bit of discussion on this forum about points - electrofrog vs. dead frog, how to wire the frogs, which point motors are the best, etc.... and quite a lot about the best uncoupling devices to use.
But when I visit exhibitions I often wonder; why bother? The is because the majority of layouts that have rail-served factories, engine sheds, and goods-yards never actually move anything into or out of them, there is just an endless procession of through trains speeding by.
Of course there are exceptions; obviously if the model is of a terminus the loco has to be run-round the train (unless it's a DMU or push-pull train), but for many "roundy" style layouts you only ever see the "roundy" trains move whilst freight trains just sit forever in Purgatory Sidings waiting to be relieved of their load, and the locos stay endlessly on Eternity Shed waiting for their chance to pull a train like puppies in a dogs home waiting for an owner.
So should the advice on layout planning threads be; "don't bother with point motors, lock the points and wire the frogs permanently for the "main" because you won't actually ever throw those points?"
What do you think?
Cheers Jon :)
Controversial. :o :D
Quote from: RailGooner on September 12, 2018, 09:10:38 PM
Controversial. :o :D
.....but I finished with a smiley! :)
Cheers Jon :)
...there's another....
Couldn't agree more.
I've done wire-in-tube points, and electric points, but when I'm actually playing trains, I invariably end up using "the hand of God" to move the blades.
One thing that has to be said is that N isn't terribly good for shunting plank layouts. It lacks the reliability at low speed. O gauge is much nicer for that, and combined with DCC sound effects, even something as simple as an 08 playing with a couple 12T vans can be fascinating to watch given the high level of detailing possible in that scale.
Cheers, NeMo
I only use the continuous run lines and the passing loop at the station on my layout. I have a few sidings but they are now only used for show and I have even not reconnected the independent controller for the sidings. As a scenic modeller I like to watch the trains run in the landscape. I have no interest in shunting at all!
Personally I can't really be bothered with doing much shunting when I'm running the layout at a show. There is limited provision for it and some of my operating team like to, but I'm definitely in the "keep something moving" camp, with station stops and starts and exchanging trains in the freight loops. At least I know the pointwork and locos are up to the job of decent slow running when required.
I don't find it particularly interesting to watch shunting on other layouts either, if I'm honest.
I'm not savvy on the exhibition layouts but shunting involves lots of coupling and uncoupling, with technology always changing and advancing can this be done wherever the train is located or does it need to happen at fixed places, the result may mean the unsightly hand of god coupler
Quote from: PostModN66 on September 12, 2018, 09:12:25 PM
Quote from: RailGooner on September 12, 2018, 09:10:38 PM
Controversial. :o :D
.....but I finished with a smiley! :)
Cheers Jon :)
...there's another....
My post was as much in jest as yours Jon, hence the cheesy message icon and emoji. :beers:
If I'm playing at home I quite enjoy a bit of shunting, which invariably actually means just having something switch running line. Maybe put it in the bay platforms so I can bring something else out.
I can see why people don't tend to do this at exhibitions as it does require a bit more coordination between operators, concentration etc. Even more so actually shunting, which is usually inherently unrealistic unless it's been built as an integral part of the layout. Horseley Fields did it well with their steel terminal.
I do, conceptually, agree though. I like to see stuff traversing intricate pointwork, more than just zooming around. There seem to be more and more layouts that are just several concentric circles, with no scenic pointwork whatsoever, which always feels like a bit of a shame!
i suspect 2 reasons
1. the operators feel under pressure to keep trains running and so just go for simple mainline operations
2. the shunting is unreliable and they don't want a failure in front of a crowd
i think some more effort to have a few shunt or just light engine moves would be good though
tim
One thing that a layout could have is an active MPD/TMD, it could be somewhat self contained, various engines moving around, even going off scene on the premise of going to get stock from carriage sidings, or engine moves to a different Depot.
Chances are this section could have its own operator just for that purpose, however for a lengthy period of time I could see it being tedious and repetitive after a while.
Quote from: Intercity on September 12, 2018, 09:31:22 PM
..
shunting involves lots of coupling and uncoupling, with technology always changing and advancing can this be done wherever the train is located
...
Yes. Deep pockets are an advantage though:
https://dcctrainautomation.co.uk/krois-modell/5444-krois-n-digital-standard-coupler-n-ds
This is something I have been mulling over for years, on both sides of the exhibition barrier.
My OCD tends to flair a bit when I see beautiful depots full of lovely Diesels all lined up next to a busy main line....and still all lined up 6 hours later when I come back to the layout again as a viewer.
However, having operated even a simple layout like Hedges Hill Cutting, I can speak from experiance when I say; I takes concentration and if you get too deep into a conversation with someone, little wheels leave track....
My proposed exhibition layout being end to end, I am attempting to do three types of operation:
1) Simple in and out shuttling (eventually automatically) from a terminus station.
2) Diesels arriving, fuelling, leaving or being stabelled / repaired in the depot.
3) Freight train run-rounds in a headshunt using (probably) magnetic couplings.
Only time will tell if I can do any/all of this whilst talking to the public!
Skyline2uk
Quote from: Skyline2uk on September 12, 2018, 10:40:48 PM
3) Fright train run-rounds in a headshunt using (probably) magnetic couplings.
Would they be ghost trains? :uneasy: :worried:
Quote from: Newportnobby on September 12, 2018, 10:44:02 PM
Quote from: Skyline2uk on September 12, 2018, 10:40:48 PM
3) Fright train run-rounds in a headshunt using (probably) magnetic couplings.
Would they be ghost trains? :uneasy: :worried:
:laughabovepost:
Well surely you wouldn't seem em if they were.....
Skyline2uk
I agree. The obvious drawbacks of shunting in N versus larger gauges are wide frog gaps, the lack of sound or stay-alives in most shunting locos, plus the small and light rolling stock. One can argue the toss over how coupling efficiency compares between the gauges although at least in O you have the option of manual shunting with 3-link couplings.
There are several 2MMFS shunting layouts that seem to work well thanks to finer tolerances and more sophisticated couplings (take a look on YouTube at Ley Hill and Mayfield St in operation), so that option - or O Gauge - would be my choice for a shunting plank.
An exhibition is 7 hours continuous operating a layout. This is after setting up or checking everything over. My Ridgacre branch requires all trains to be driven and shunted at the terminus. Its a great little layout to operate for an hour or so at home but it is very hard work to run all day at an exhibition. A roundy roundy is so much easier to run at an exhibition. Using very simple technology it works ok though. This video is from three clips. All are as they were filmed and were the first shot, no second attempts were needed. The layout hasn't been run much over the summer and the track had not been recently cleaned.
For me a roundy roundy should not merely be the same train going round and round (although sometimes I do this). When running my roundy roundy as it should be - that is each train goes round just once at a time the punters get to see 11 different trains in a short time. I reckon when running this layout like this there are between 400 and 500 point changes an hour which means 2,000 to 3,000 point changes in a day at a show. This is a calculation, somehow I've never got round to actually counting them.
I installed some 22 point motors on my first Port Perran layout and built a console to operate it with.
I hate electrics so didn't enjoy the build experience, indeed finding it very frustrating and tedious.
It worked and worked well but after about a week of using the console I was completely bored with it and reverted to manual point changes.
At exhibitions I operate my current Trepol Bay layout from the side. That way I can reach the fiddle yard (to operate points manually) and talk to viewers (something that I feel is essential if you are exhibiting). Trepol Bay has a largish fiddle yard which allows me to have 12 trains set up. Generally I let each one run round 3 times then switch in a new one.
Personally, I find shunting at home or at exhibitions extremely boring, preferring to see trains run around the layout but I can see that some people like shunting operations. Each to his own and if you enjoy shunting I feel that electric points and auto uncoupling are a must.
One added thought, at the last exhibition I attended (this time with Tregonning), the layout opposite me was a simple shunting puzzle with a class 08 and four wagons. It did prove very popular with the public who were able to " have a go".
Quote from: Chris Morris on September 13, 2018, 07:43:01 AM
For me a roundy roundy should not merely be the same train going round and round (although sometimes I do this). When running my roundy roundy as it should be - that is each train goes round just once at a time the punters get to see 11 different trains in a short time.
Totally agree with that - running one train round repeatedly, even when there are multiple lines, if there's a fiddle yard full of stock is really irritating!
On James St we have three main areas of shunting: the dockyard (if Steve is not talking with spectators!) the James St terminus, where passenger and parcels trains arrive: th train loco is released: probably the incoming train is shunted to the carriage sidings, or another platform: then the released loco runs to shed for turning ; a freash train is drawn from the sidings, and a loco summoned from the shed to haul it. We also have an extensive goods yard at the lower level where again the incoming loco is realised, and the train broken down into the various sidings: and new trains made up from the sidings and a loco obtained from the shed. This does require some cooperation amongst the operators as some track work Is shared by the various actions.
We use B+B couplings, and are not 100% reliable, but we are working towards this, and I think we get a better success rate at every show. Part of the problem is the fine tolerances for N gauge, and transit to and from exhibitions can affect the set up of the couplings. But again, we are working towards every greater reliability...
Hopefully, you may judge for yourselves at Farnham in October, and, amongst others, TINGS next year.
Martyn
Quote from: njee20 on September 13, 2018, 09:20:00 AM
Quote from: Chris Morris on September 13, 2018, 07:43:01 AM
For me a roundy roundy should not merely be the same train going round and round (although sometimes I do this). When running my roundy roundy as it should be - that is each train goes round just once at a time the punters get to see 11 different trains in a short time.
Totally agree with that - running one train round repeatedly, even when there are multiple lines, if there's a fiddle yard full of stock is really irritating!
Yep, also agree. I can usually manage around 24 different trains by splitting each yard line in half, and this naturally means each train goes round once. Maybe one line in each direction will store a full length long train which can be allowed to trundle round and round for a few circuits if necessary (quick comfort break, and at the very end when it's time to pack the stock). Kids love to see a long ICE set belt round a couple of times!
Quote from: NeMo on September 12, 2018, 09:18:12 PM
One thing that has to be said is that N isn't terribly good for shunting plank layouts. It lacks the reliability at low speed.
Disagree.
I have a working rotary dumper N-Trak module which I used to take to exhibitions. 8' x 2'. 3 or 4 locos, 36 hoppers.
It was used intensively by up to three operators, one delivering fully coal hoppers and hauling away empties (to be refilled around the back - 18 hoppers at a time). Another packaged empties from the dumper sidings for the mainline loco and then packaged the full hoppers into groups of 3. The third operator would pull a 3 pack of hoppers and feed them up a steep slope to the rotary dumper to be emptied one at a time, then repeat and repeat.
The guys would keep this up non-stop for upto 3 hours at a time before they needed a rest.
All done at realistic speeds; needed to crawl to position hoppers accurately, very little hands on using Micro-trains couplers and magnets. Most hands-on due to operators not able to judge distances, direction and movement. Momentum is a real killer until you get used to it.
PECO track, a mix or 55 and 80 flex track. Digitrax DCC. 13 points electric + 3 manual - PECO solenoids, the great blade wreckers; now Tortii equipped.
@Chris Morris (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=3123)
Having watched your video, Chris, is there anything you do to the couplings on your trucks as many is the time I try to couple a loco up to coaches/trucks and they just end up bounding off down the line rather than couple? ::)
To add to Martyn's post about shunting on James Street I would agree that reliability with the B&B coupling is not 100%, but when you consider a typical day at a show involves probably 200 or so uncoupling moves I would say our success rate is very good. I don't think this would be possible using Rapido or other proprietary couplers, but should be possible with DGs too. Without going into too much detail (there are lots of coupler-related threads on the forum) you have to decide to uncouple or not, and then work accordingly to make it work.
I totally agree with the comments regarding layouts where no uncoupling takes place, but have these layouts been developed to actively avoid the need to uncouple while still making it appear possible, or have they tried and failed?
As Martyn said, if anyone is interested about how this is done on James Street just come and see us at a show, where I'm sure we would be able to find time to show how we do it. There is nothing unusual about what we use (apart from the B&Bs), just proprietary stuff used well. One final plug for B&Bs is the greatly improved look of a loco fitted with them, no great chunk of plastic sticking out!
Dave
Handsfree shunting is perfectly achievable in N and has been for many years. Back in the 1990s I was a member of Macclesfield club. We had a N gauge layout called Marfield on the exhibition circuit. We ran round branch trains, removed vans, milk tanks etc from the rear of through trains, shunted the goods yard etc. All using Poole era locos, and a mix of DGs and Elsie couplings.
There are many N gauge or 2mmFS shunting layouts around that run perfectly so I would refute the earlier claims that it is not achievable. Whether operators and visitors prefer watching trains go by or shunting is a different debate.
Norman
Quote from: NinOz on September 13, 2018, 09:43:57 AM
Quote from: NeMo on September 12, 2018, 09:18:12 PM
One thing that has to be said is that N isn't terribly good for shunting plank layouts. It lacks the reliability at low speed.
Disagree.
Good oh! Debate is always worthwhile.
Perhaps what I really mean is not that N-gauge shunting planks can't be done, they obviously can. But rather
than that getting short-wheelbase locos to run at scale speeds, time after time, across points and crossings requires a lot more planning and craftsmanship than doing the same in larger scales.
The bigger scales provide space for locos that have more momentum in the motor or flywheel that keeps the loco moving even when the circuit is broken for an instant; a longer wheelbase that can better span gaps, kinks, and insulated frogs; more weight to push away dust or grease at the rail that might break the circuit; and quite possibly things like capacitors inside them that store a little electrical energy to compensate for any breaks in the circuit.
The couplings are not really the issue, as clearly there are automatic couplers of various kinds, and have been for years.
Cheers, NeMo
It depends very much on the whole package. Well laid electrofrog trackwork, good rail joiners plus additional electrical wiring, the right locos.......all these are needed to make a layout work well. We have 08's and 03/4's that don't run that well, and Jinties that run like a dream, even over point runs and on curves. Anything is possible, but if you want gravity, bulk and inertia, N is not your scale!
I think we should clarify that on James st we rarely use 03/08's to shunt with, as has been mentioned due to reliability, we choose the super shunter route, usually a class 20 (goods yard)and I believe either a 27 or 33 in the dock yard. To my knowledge nobody to date has pointed out that we don't use shunting engines (03/08). Most people probably are not aware of what is prototypical correct.
Regards Stuart
And as a note about Stuart (Grid78) comment: another reason with using BoBo diesels is for 'grunt'; the 03,04, and 08 do not seem to have enough weight to reliably shunt the longer trains, especially when reversing. But that's another story.
Dave also makes the point about B+B reliability: as I said, we don't get 100%, but we are getting quite close, and closer every exhibition (fingers crossed).
At Southwold we ran a Jinty over the entire length of the layout with a short pick up goods and proved that it could be done. But another Jinty proved unreliable as a yard shunter when trialling at home, and so didn't get used at exhibitions.
Martyn
My favourite locos on the Ridgacre branch are the ivatt 2-6-0s. With pick up on drivers and tender wheels they are good at slow running over points. They do this more reliably than any tank loco.
I run a file gentky over some of the couplings when new if there are problems to get rid of any little bits of flash. It only takes the smallest amount to cause problems.
If I or any of my operating team do choose to indulge in a little shunting then we use a pair of these Minitrix BR361 shunters. They are the current tooling (not the old graunchy model), flywheel fitted and very smooth and quiet.
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/69/5885-130918215512.jpeg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=69010)
I have little Kof shunters which run fine over the electrofrogs and don't stall, but don't really have the weight to shift very much so we prefer the larger 361s.
Intriguing topic for a newb. I definitely want shunting action in my TMD and fuel stop, although appreciate getting the 08 (with sound) to be reliable at this will be ...tricky!
Does adding weight to wagons help shunting?
Although I will agree that the smaller shunters aren't always as reliable as they could be, the case is that it is the nature of the standard N coupling that are the biggest issue to my mind, as with probably most layouts larger locos will be used anyway. Most passing station layouts will be shunted by the train loco, which aside from short trip working is unlikely to be a shunter type. Take the present day as an example, 66's doing the whole range of duties as there isn't really many other loco types anyway......
I now use DG's, find they generally work quite okay, and couple/un-couple with little force needed. The difference in looks is also quite marked, which is a nice bonus.
Izzy
A few years ago I saw two layouts at a local show: one was a model of , I think, Burnham on Sea (there were, I remember 2 Layouts of the same place, both of which featured in the modelling press around the same time. The one I saw used what I think were DG couplings which seemed to work most of the time (I went back several times to view!) but unfortunately the layout seemed to be suffering derailments each time I looked (which I am prepared to forgive given the apparent tribulations of exhibiting). The second layout was a small shunting layout, probably about 2 feet long, using Rapido coupling and it worked every time! Again, I went to watch numerous times, but to my regret (I had very young grandson in tow) never asked the operator what the couplings were. What an idiot I am....
I suspect they were Peco 'Elsie' uncouplers or similar- so Uncoupling can be done reliably- I just need to work out how to do it for myself....
I was going to use Peco Electromagnetic Decouplers attached to my dcc system.
Surely it's 'that easy', I've seen them in action and they work.
Perhaps, as per my earlier comment, adding a little lead weight to each wagon will only help matters?
Earlier discussions over coupler options suggest adding friction works better than adding weight.
Ive assisted in the Exhibition of a "oo" exhibition fiddle yard and terminus layout. A day of bringing in Trains, uncoupling the loco running round and pulling back out, or bringing in a freight , splitting reforming and pull out. A very tiring day and quiet often coupling problems. I've yet to find a N gauge coupling I like that is reliable.
I've also exhibited a roundy with branch, much less tiring.
So my intention is to set up Tiree with hopefully 4 four trains each way, for the roundy, plus a branch shuttle. Yes a couple of the roundies will be freight and just occasionally will I pull one into the yard for shunting if I can find a reliable remote coupling. I hate the hand of God at shows...
One thing of course is Generally a Higher percentage of N is Modern period rather than steam period in OO. If you are in the last 40 Years there isn't that much shunting done...So all those sidings are disused as freight has gone to the roads.. Even with the 1963 date of Tiree, I'm grassing between the tracks of the sidings, as BR was already running down and closing lines long before Implimenting the Beeching report.
My experience of rapidos is that the Peco Elsie are great for having little resistance and lifting easily for coupling, but then this also means they seem to uncouple rather easily as well when running in a train, which is annoying.
By contrast the sprung types keep coupled when running, but the force needed to overcome their resistance to lifting is usually greater than the weight resistance of the wagon/coach and so they get pushed along rather than coupling up.
i have always used 3-link etc in other scales and so have no issue with the so called hand-of-God - I currently uncouple the DG's this way. After all, apart from recent times most UK coupling/un-coupling has been done this way in the real world. But then I have always done what suits me best, which might not be to other's tastes. We are all different after all.
Izzy
I agree with Izzy and others that main problem is couplings. Pointwork can be made to work fairly reliably. We have several different routes available to us on Northallerton and the trains traverse these consistently. However, its worth noting that Northallerton was built as a 'watching the trains go by' layout with no shunting. One of the original ideas was to include some sort of engineering sidings on the lower level but this was quickly dismissed as superfluous.
I think its also worth mentioning that @belstone (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=2569) from these parts has been developing a really interesting coupling system discussed here http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=22058.msg498999#msg498999 (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=22058.msg498999#msg498999)
cheers
Kirky
Quote from: Izzy on September 14, 2018, 11:14:27 AM
My experience of rapidos is that the Peco Elsie are great for having little resistance and lifting easily for coupling, but then this also means they seem to uncouple rather easily as well when running in a train, which is annoying.
You might find a dab of 'Tacky Wax' on each coupling might prevent the random uncoupling.
Quote from: Izzy on September 14, 2018, 11:14:27 AM
By contrast the sprung types keep coupled when running, but the force needed to overcome their resistance to lifting is usually greater than the weight resistance of the wagon/coach and so they get pushed along rather than coupling up.
Therein lies much of the problem for me. Wagons/coaches dancing off down the track rather than coupling up.
Quote from: ntpntpntp on September 13, 2018, 09:58:21 PM
If I or any of my operating team do choose to indulge in a little shunting then we use a pair of these Minitrix BR361 shunters. They are the current tooling (not the old graunchy model), flywheel fitted and very smooth and quiet.
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/69/5885-130918215512.jpeg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=69010)
I have little Kof shunters which run fine over the electrofrogs and don't stall, but don't really have the weight to shift very much so we prefer the larger 361s.
Now that is a lovely scene there, Very Very Very nicely modelled :beers:
We all have different tastes whichever side of the layout we are on - some just like watching the trains go by, and find shunting boreing, others like the intricacies of shunting and find the same train chasing it's own tail round in circles boreing.
I find shunting to be quite absorbing and in a way therapeutic.
Quote from: NinOz on September 13, 2018, 09:43:57 AMQuote from: NeMo on September 12, 2018, 09:18:12 PM
One thing that has to be said is that N isn't terribly good for shunting plank layouts. It lacks the reliability at low speed.
Disagree.
Also disagree - have done it successfully on a number of layouts from country branch-line termini to large inner-city layouts.
Quote from: Southerngooner on September 13, 2018, 05:07:45 PM
It depends very much on the whole package. Well laid electrofrog trackwork, good rail joiners plus additional electrical wiring, the right locos.......all these are needed to make a layout work well.
That quote for me sums it up very well. the whole package needs to be right to be successful.
Quote from: grid078 on September 13, 2018, 06:26:43 PM
I think we should clarify that on James st we rarely use 03/08's to shunt with, as has been mentioned due to reliability
On Hoglington, the most popular shunter for the carriage sidings (with both operators and viewers) is an 04 with a runner track fitted with pickups on the truck so 10 wheel pick-up. It can easily shift 12 coaches on the flat (except Minitrix Gresleys)
QuoteOn Hoglington, the most popular shunter for the carriage sidings (with both operators and viewers) is an 04 with a runner track fitted with pickups on the truck so 10 wheel pick-up. It can easily shift 12 coaches on the flat (except Minitrix Gresleys)
An insight into my OCD here: I never really like the idea of hard-wiring across coupled vehicles....unless it's a runner truck!
Apparently the gmfact that some 03/04s spend most of their lives permantly coupled to such wagons is enough to satisfy the niggles :worried:
Clever solution to more reliable running :thumbsup:
Skyline2uk
Thanks for all your input into this..... My further opinions on some of the above....
Both Rapidos (with modification) and EZShunts can be used to "let go" and to couple up pretty reliably, (in my experience). The problem comes with the "delayed action" part. Clearly Rapidos were never designed for this, and I have my doubts about this functionality in EZShunts. However, leaving empties in a siding and/or picking up a full train shouldn't be an issue. More complex shunting moves might be - but careful placement of magnets means that fairly intricate patterns of movement are possible on "Horseblock Lane" for example.
It should't be too hard for an engine to uncouple from a train and go on shed, or the reverse move, and if an engine comes off shed to run light to somewhere off-scene there is no coupling implication.
Short wheelbase locos are probably not as reliable as multi-axle diesels, I concur. My 08 is so "lumpy" that I couldn't use if for shunting, (in fact anything!) but let's see how good the N Gauge Society's Hunslet will be.
Whether or not shunting is interesting to the onlooker is of course completely legitimate. But I think at the layout design stage it is possible to arrange things so that "shunting" takes place while main line running is going on so you can appeal to everyone. This wouldn't be possible necessarily with an accurate model of a prototype; but if you go down this route, shouldn't your layout also operate like the prototype....meaning that factory should occasionally get a delivery!
So I would still make the appeal to layout operators; if you have a siding why not use it!!! Just saying.....
Cheers Jon :)
https://youtu.be/da-K-B7itO8
Shunting is pretty much all we do on Horseblock Lane! Occasionally with a shunter but normally with the train engine as anything less than spotlessly clean wheels and track causes the shunter problems.
My next layout has lots of shunting planned! It sounds like it will be an absolute pig to exhibit, but I'm hoping advance planning in the design will allow it to be simple and enjoyable to operate.
I agree with Jon though. Although those beautifully modelled factories should get a delivery....