N Gauge Forum

I have been surprised here by people's attitudes to layouts.
To me the operation is everything, the building a necessary inconvenience!
I enjoy the detailed planning of timetables and trying to ensure everything works as it should, the correct working of trains, the shunting, even allowing a chance of things going wrong (a loco failure for example) and fighting to catch up with the timetable or maybe a lower powered loco vice the rostered one, all the 'fun' of a real railway in miniature. I even take it to the lengths that a Hymek (for example) could not take more that 350 tons unaided up the bank while a Warship can manage 450 and a Western 525 tons and so if a substitute loco has to found then a banking engine is required if a loco of equal power is unavailable.
Others seem to find that a 'bore' preferring the building, electronics, scenic work and so on far more preferable to actually running a train!
To each their own, of course, but I was wondering if I am really in a tiny minority?
How do you run your layout?

Not happy with the poll... what about middle ground? builder AND operator?

My layout is still in the planning stage, but to me, the trains bring it to life.  I will not be having timetables, and Rule 1 will be overriding.

Or (c) a collector. I built and enjoyed it but am stuck in a bit of a rut with where to go and what to do next. I operate and enjoy watching the trains go round and round but get a bit fustrated that my layout isn't really designed well enough to switch the trains often enough. Doesn't stop me buying new trains though!

I am a builder,but like to watch trains go by,I am also a bit of a collector and rule 1 definitely rules in my world.

I haven't actually built much yet, but if anything my aim is to have a layout which looks nice from different angles, including of course the trains, whether running or standing still. I'm way too Rule 1 to have anything like a real railway. Actually going to the trouble of creating a working timetable, signalling etc. isn't something that has any appeal to me - seems like too much thinking, and I'm doing this hobby to wind down after a long day of thinking. Moreover I have no background in real railway operation which might inspire me. Having said that, I do try and keep the track layout workable, albeit within the constraints of the layout, and run reasonably plausible consists. But basically, as long as I can sit back and watch a train I like run around the layout, I'm happy  :beers:

Quote from: deibid on June 16, 2015, 02:12:19 PM
Not happy with the poll... what about middle ground? builder AND operator?

Humble apologies. I have altered it accordingly. It now gives 4 categories but the poll has been reset to zero to give everyone a chance to say what they prefer.

 :thankyousign:

Much better... am I the only voter??  ???

Everyone needs to resubmit their vote. When I first voted it was Builders 8, Operators 1.

So the expression 'builder' includes the folks who are most interested in the electrical/electronics side of the hobby?  I think I understood that correctly.  Well. so far I am a builder then.  I have zero knowledge of running a rail road in the real, so I don't see that changing in the future.  However, I love to watch trains go by and I think that is what captured my interest in the first place.

Regards, Allan.....

I guess I'm a bit anal in that I do not and will not employ Rule 1. Everything has to fit the period/region modelled so I have selected a location which would see everything but Scottish Region. I have, however, stepped outside my own parameters twice in that I bought a Blue Pullman (such a cracking model it would have been rude not to) and will be the proud owner of a Poppylino come next year.
I enjoy building layouts but run headlong into a mental block when it comes to electrickery as, no matter how clear folks try to make it for me, on the whole it's still gibberish :-[
Once I start running trains all other progress grinds to a halt, mind :doh:

Quote from: Zogbert Splod on June 16, 2015, 04:08:25 PM
So the expression 'builder' includes the folks who are most interested in the electrical/electronics side of the hobby?  I think I understood that correctly.  Well. so far I am a builder then.  I have zero knowledge of running a rail road in the real, so I don't see that changing in the future.  However, I love to watch trains go by and I think that is what captured my interest in the first place.

Regards, Allan.....

My original intention when asking the question was to enquire whether I was virtually alone in operating a model railway, ie, to a timetable, with operational problems thrown in (via the roll of a dice), limits to what particular locos can haul based on those laid down in BR's Working Timetables and so on, where the simple action of running a Class 14 is 'stretching Rule 1' on a 1970s set layout to near breaking point. If so then I would class you as an 'operator', even if you don't go quite so far as me, or do people prefer baseboard and layout building, the electronics, scenery and so on then just running trains as they wish, in which case you would be a 'builder'.
To each their own, and it is not a wish that either 'side' should try to persuade the other to their own view.
It was pointed out that there are other options, hence the expansion to 4 categories, and apologies to those asked to resubmit their vote because of it.
I hope this clarifies the aims of this particular question.
   

Of course this a can of worms.

I love track planning and track layout and getting my electrics done.

I'm a complete numpty when it comes to scenery and buildings, hence my layout is frozen with about 10% of the scenery done.

I like watching my trains go round but I'm not overly concerned about running to a strict timetable

So I can't say I enjoy building as I don't enjoy doing the scenery, but I can't say I'm an operator as I do want my scenery done before I start to run my layout intensively.

Oh well :-\

John P

The only way I can describe myself s a current collector, future operator and a aspiring amateur builder!!

I'm a bit like NN, except that my period is 1930s and location SR ex LSWR lines. Surely unless one goes out and buys a RTR layout complete with track, electrics and scenery, then we must fall into the building and operating category. I suppose there are a few who just build layouts and rarely do any running, but to me that would be a waste of a layout.

I don't really understand the collector mentality, trains are made to run - except for Del Prado, and even they can be used on the layout (parked on a shed road)

Each to thier own I don't like the idea of running to a timetable I just select a train and run it as I just love to see them running through the countryside .
I love doing the scenery but can't build a building to save my life .
I love the wiring although I probable overkill with wires.
I don't stick to one era or have Locos from only one area but I try to run the right Locos with the right stock but you might see a voyager in one direction and the Brighton Belle or a steam hauled passenger or frieght going the other way.
I'm definitely a rule one man.But I love my N gauge world.Its the only time I'm in total control I AM THE BOSS.
Bob

Love the anticipation of planning, the technical challenges of building, and the sheer childish pleasure of running trains :) Timetables and strict "real world" operational rules would take all the fun out of it for me!


Paul

Quote from: Sprintex on June 16, 2015, 08:13:31 PM
Love the anticipation of planning, the technical challenges of building, and the sheer childish pleasure of running trains :) Timetables and strict "real world" operational rules would take all the fun out of it for me!


Paul

I suppose my attitude to model railways owes much to having been a professional railwayman (Guard) for nearly 30 years - not running to the rule book, so far as I can, would be 'strange' to me.
But I do understand those who just 'run trains for fun', and there are times even I go insane  :confused1: and break my own 'rules', for example putting a Class 08 on a Paddington bound express. ::) Er, 'alf a mo, wasn't that done in real life about 5 or 6 years ago when an 08 hauled a Class One (the Down Sleepers if I'm right) from Paddington because no other loco was available? :-[
Thanks to everyone, so far, who has taken the trouble to reply.
I look forward to reading the thoughts of many more of you.

Quote from: newportnobby on June 16, 2015, 04:31:14 PM
I guess I'm a bit anal in that I do not and will not employ Rule 1.

I'm afraid Mick that if you are running period and location correct stock because you want to (rather than because of intimidation, blackmail or hypnotism) you are fully and profoundly employing rule 1!

It's your railway and you are running what you want!

Cheers  Jon  :)

Quote from: PostModN66 on June 16, 2015, 09:49:43 PM

Quote from: newportnobby on June 16, 2015, 04:31:14 PM
I guess I'm a bit anal in that I do not and will not employ Rule 1.

I'm afraid Mick that if you are running period and location correct stock because you want to (rather than because of intimidation, blackmail or hypnotism) you are fully and profoundly employing rule 1!

It's your railway and you are running what you want!

Cheers  Jon  :)

Thanks, Jon. It's good to know that I'm not a bit anal, after all :D
My interpretation of Rule 1 must be slightly different to the rest in that I mean I will not just run anything (apart from which I have no interest in railways of other countries so have no foreign stock).
As for intimidation, blackmail or hypnotism.........how come you know so much about my ex? :laugh:

I am not a number , I am a free man.................

For me, creating in 2mm is a whole series of challenges I've never encountered before.
Working through them is very rewarding and seeing the trains run is the icing on the cake.

This then leads to new operational challenges which themselves demand attention.

Then, if something needs to be altered, it's back to the first set of challenges - and so it goes on ........

And long may it do so - encouraged/ supported by all the experiences shared here on the Forum
Adrian

I'm definitely a bit of both - I very much like the making things aspect, but I also like to "play trains" in a rule-book friendly fashion.

The main appeal of N Gauge to me is that I can run trains, of an appropriate length, that actually go from one place to another, and pass through a reasonable representation of the environment they are supposed to be in.
Im not a "Rule #1" sort though, if it didn't run in the prototype area, it wont be seen on the layout, I dont even like to mix eras with the stock too much.I like class 50s and class 22 / D6300 locomotives but they wont be seen on the layout together.

Quote from: JasonBz on June 28, 2015, 12:22:16 AM

I like class 50s and class 22 / D6300 locomotives but they wont be seen on the layout together.

That's sad Jason - a D63XX hauling a 'dead' 50 would be a bit of a laugh and undoubtedly would have happened in real life if the '22s' had lived a natural lifespan  :laugh:.

Best wishes,
Greg.

Definitely builder at the moment but only as I don't have a working layout (or anything resembling a complete one!). Like Mike, I'm modelling the 1930's but the LNER 'Southern Sector' so there is quite a bit of designing and building required - there are only 3 suitable locomotives available from Dapol and Farish to modern standards! As for 'Rule 1', although my layout will be firmly set in GNR territory I'm happy to run GCR, GER and some NER locos as research shows that quite a few of these company's locos were frequent visitors to the GNRs part of the ECML. I'm also happy to have a few out of period locomotives as well, such as a D2 in pre 1928 green livery and a V4 (built 1941) - I might even stretch to a Castle to represent the 1925 exchange trials between the LNER and GWR!

As I only get to 'play trains' on certain exhibition layouts from time to time, I would really say that, at the moment at least, I'm a researcher and builder.

Model railways to me are model railways, but I must admit I've always been impressed with the way the Americans run their huge layouts with various operators playing the roles of driver, dispatcher, etc.

A builder I think I enjoy building anything really.  I like to watch the trains go round but I can't imagine me running a timetable but you never know I did start to enjoy shunting a bit  :help:

Morning all,

I think I'd have to put myself in the builder group. I really enjoy building the layout, so much so that I'm currently building one for someone else! Don't get me wrong, I do like to have an operating session now and then but this tends to be at an exhibition. Aside from pre-show tests this is about all the operating Sheaf gets in a year, after 6/7 hours solid operating at some shows I need a break!

Cheers,

Ollie

:NGaugersRule:

Quote from: Bealman on June 28, 2015, 10:18:15 AM
Model railways to me are model railways, but I must admit I've always been impressed with the way the Americans run their huge layouts with various operators playing the roles of driver, dispatcher, etc.

:) I'm always impressed by the sheer amount of room the Americans have in which to build their layouts!

Isn't it great to see how much this hobby gives in all different ways?
I'm currently an operator. I love to watch the trains go round and round! I'd like to make a small ultra-detailed scenic section to pose locos/trains in for photos but couldn't do it for a whole layout.

I almost chose the Both option, but went with Builder. I prefer building structures, bot in my past US interest and my current UK interest. I also, with the latter, prefer the Pre-grouping period, SER/SECR, which I'm finding would be very difficult to do in N. If I wasn't so fascinated my the mini size of N, and the scenic possibilities, I'd be working in a larger scale.

I could live with a sceniced layout where trains only moved occasionally, verses a bare layout with lots of trains in motion. :)

But that's just me.

Jim F

My current "problem" is that after spending the last 18 months building the boards and laying track and 51 points with motors is that I have ballasted all my intended scenic areas with the intention of finally fitting my back scene boards and begin so scenary but I keep ending up having to "test" all my locos and stock...then clean the track and "test" again....yeah I mean playing whenever I get the moment !.....I am an operator that cannot get on to being a builder.

I'm mainly a builder, but I do enjoy sitting back and watching trains travelling over my efforts.

It's both for me, my preference being to run prototypical trains in a prototypical location but stopping short of running to a timetable.
      For this reason my current layout represents a time period of two consecutive years which I have found to be a successful approach,the advantages makes it less likely to get it wrong where Loco's and stock are concerned with the added bonus of deterring me from making impulsive purchases. So, if everything goes to plan, what you should see are all the right trains, but not necessarily being ran in the right order. Building wise I view replicating prototypical buildings/structures/scenery as a difficult but rewarding challenge.
      Maybe it's the fact this layout attends exhibitions could have influenced my priority's towards railway modelling as anything not quite correct will sooner or later be pointed out. Saying that, any constructive criticism in my view is no bad thing and not taken personally.   

Quote from: Bealman on June 28, 2015, 10:18:15 AM
Model railways to me are model railways, but I must admit I've always been impressed with the way the Americans run their huge layouts with various operators playing the roles of driver, dispatcher, etc.

Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places, but I've never really seen operations done to anything like the same level with a UK prototype.  I'm fascinated by the whole tracking of cars/wagons, destinations, loads, etc to and from industries, yards and external destinations (aka fiddle yard / staging).

Is there something about the UK prototype that makes it a bad fit?  I get the impression that the US rail network was quite different to the UK (lower train density, but a lot more industrial locations with a direct connection to the railway?), but as I understand we used to have quite intensive goods service to many more smaller customers before everything became block trains and transmode containers.

Is it that we don't have enough space to build the layouts you need for "realistic" operations?

Or that it's simply not part of the model rail culture over here?

Oh, and to answer the original poll, I'd have to say "both", but with a definite bias towards operations and the functional side of build.  I like laying track, getting wiring in place, signals working properly, etc - but not that much in modelling things that have got little to do with running trains.

Quote from: tim-pelican on June 28, 2015, 06:13:06 PM

Quote from: Bealman on June 28, 2015, 10:18:15 AM
Model railways to me are model railways, but I must admit I've always been impressed with the way the Americans run their huge layouts with various operators playing the roles of driver, dispatcher, etc.

Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places, but I've never really seen operations done to anything like the same level with a UK prototype.  I'm fascinated by the whole tracking of cars/wagons, destinations, loads, etc to and from industries, yards and external destinations (aka fiddle yard / staging).

Is there something about the UK prototype that makes it a bad fit?  I get the impression that the US rail network was quite different to the UK (lower train density, but a lot more industrial locations with a direct connection to the railway?), but as I understand we used to have quite intensive goods service to many more smaller customers before everything became block trains and transmode containers.

Is it that we don't have enough space to build the layouts you need for "realistic" operations?

Or that it's simply not part of the model rail culture over here?

Oh, and to answer the original poll, I'd have to say "both", but with a definite bias towards operations and the functional side of build.  I like laying track, getting wiring in place, signals working properly, etc - but not that much in modelling things that have got little to do with running trains.

I can only answer your questions by saying that while our US counterpart usually seems to build a massive layout, simply because they have (by UK standards) a large amount of space, including several operational areas (stations, MPDs, goods yards, factories and docks etc.) and thus can simulate the actual operations of a real railway, shifting freight 'cars' between locations and suchlike (as on a real life railway) while we British only usually have room for just one, or at best two, such places.
Also whereas we British tend to be 'lone operators' (except in model railway clubs) the Americans seem to run groups with each person responsible for their 'patch' (if I understand it correctly).
It can best be summed up as on this side of 'the pond' we build 'stations' (and many try to operate them realistically) because we haven't got room to do much more while the Americans build 'lines' and run them to US operating practice simply because they have the room to do it.
I hope that goes some way to answering the questions.
Thanks for your input, as indeed to everyone who has (so far) contributed.

Builder.

I never, ever run trains at home unless I am (genuinely) testing the track, making a video or practicing for an exhibition.

That said, I do enjoy operating at exhibitions, and like to have a scheme in mind even if it is not a full timetable, and operate signals authentically - it's just that there doesn't seem any point doing it if no-one is watching!

Cheers  Jon  :)

Quote from: Ollie3440 on June 28, 2015, 10:37:18 AM
Morning all,

I think I'd have to put myself in the builder group. I really enjoy building the layout, so much so that I'm currently building one for someone else! Don't get me wrong, I do like to have an operating session now and then but this tends to be at an exhibition. Aside from pre-show tests this is about all the operating Sheaf gets in a year, after 6/7 hours solid operating at some shows I need a break!

Cheers,

Ollie

:NGaugersRule:

Ollie, you can't imagine how much I wish I knew someone like you to build the layout for me. I HATE trying to put it all together because I enjoy knowing that, if I throw a switch, SOMETHING actually will happen.
With me building it all I know is that the train will go about 2 feet - then hit a snag!
My scenic work is rubbish, my ballasting destroys electrical continuity and no matter how much time I spend cleaning the track NOTHING WORKS!
Oh for a friend who actually knows what they are doing to build the  :censored: thing for me so that I can just get on with running trains!

Sorry, rant over.
P/S Back to the plot.

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on June 28, 2015, 10:18:12 PM
Oh for a friend who actually knows what they are doing to build the  :censored: thing for me so that I can just get on with running trains!

There are days when that rings very true!  (Mainly days with point motors in them... wish I'd known about Kato before I started).  Or the temptation to buy a layout from eBay with the work already done.

It's very satisfying when it finally does work though  :claphappy:

Quote from: tim-pelican on June 28, 2015, 10:54:05 PM

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on June 28, 2015, 10:18:12 PM
Oh for a friend who actually knows what they are doing to build the  :censored: thing for me so that I can just get on with running trains!

There are days when that rings very true!  (Mainly days with point motors in them... wish I'd known about Kato before I started).  Or the temptation to buy a layout from eBay with the work already done.

It's very satisfying when it finally does work though  :claphappy:

The trouble is I like Peco track and have always used Code 80 and ballast inlays before - but this time I thought no, I'd be like everyone else and use loose ballast - how difficult can it be?
8 months later I found out how hard it can be.
I know Kato do gentle curves but they are still 'tight' by prototype standards; do they do yard lengths of flexi, does anyone know?

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on June 28, 2015, 11:35:14 PM

Quote from: tim-pelican on June 28, 2015, 10:54:05 PM

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on June 28, 2015, 10:18:12 PM
Oh for a friend who actually knows what they are doing to build the  :censored: thing for me so that I can just get on with running trains!

There are days when that rings very true!  (Mainly days with point motors in them... wish I'd known about Kato before I started).  Or the temptation to buy a layout from eBay with the work already done.

It's very satisfying when it finally does work though  :claphappy:

The trouble is I like Peco track and have always used Code 80 and ballast inlays before - but this time I thought no, I'd be like everyone else and use loose ballast - how difficult can it be?
8 months later I found out how hard it can be.
I know Kato do gentle curves but they are still 'tight' by prototype standards; do they do yard lengths of flexi, does anyone know?

They do indeed do flexitrack (part number 21-000) but it's just... flexitrack... and needs the adapter section to connect to normal unitrack.

I believe the Kato flextrack is actually Atlas code 80 track, marketed via Kato for home market. It does not have the built in roadbed of the Kato Unitrack.

Jim F

I thank you both, Railsquid and JimF, for your replies.

Quote from: tim-pelican on June 28, 2015, 10:54:05 PM

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on June 28, 2015, 10:18:12 PM
Oh for a friend who actually knows what they are doing to build the  :censored: thing for me so that I can just get on with running trains!

There are days when that rings very true!  (Mainly days with point motors in them... wish I'd known about Kato before I started).  Or the temptation to buy a layout from eBay with the work already done.

It's very satisfying when it finally does work though  :claphappy:

Tim,  I decided to give the point motors a miss on Peltin because of all the trouble they caused on my previous layout.
I very much enjoy running trains but am total rubbish at putting together anything more than a yard or two of plain track!
But thanks for the encouragement.
I once contacted a professional layout builder to see how much it would cost.
I had no objection to the first figure of '£4', it was all the 000s that came afterwards that I found a bit off putting  :o!
P/S This was about 10 years ago - I doubt the price has gone down.

I am a builder. I enjoy to build kits of wagons and locomotives. I have actually scrapped my ideas of an American layout because they are so into ready to run. For my trackwork I would love to try out the new Finetrax. However I will not go all the way with 2mm/9.42 gauge. It is fun that different persons have so different views of this hobby. One day I will try to go after a timetable too but today I am perfectly happy to just build my trains.

Sven

If you look at some of the stuff I have "bashed together" I would not say I'm a builder, more of an operating bodger  :scowl:

Quote from: paulprice on June 29, 2015, 09:42:36 AM
If you look at some of the stuff I have "bashed together" I would not say I'm a builder, more of an operating bodger  :scowl:

:laughabovepost:  Sadly, I can't find an icon for 'snap'!  :D

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on June 29, 2015, 09:46:03 AM

Quote from: paulprice on June 29, 2015, 09:42:36 AM
If you look at some of the stuff I have "bashed together" I would not say I'm a builder, more of an operating bodger  :scowl:

:laughabovepost:  Sadly, I can't find an icon for 'snap'!  :D

I would make us some badges so we could wear them with pride, but I dread to think how they would turn out, and how I would have to explain my inevitable injury to both the Domestic Overlord and the A& E Staff

Quote from: paulprice on June 29, 2015, 09:48:47 AM

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on June 29, 2015, 09:46:03 AM

Quote from: paulprice on June 29, 2015, 09:42:36 AM
If you look at some of the stuff I have "bashed together" I would not say I'm a builder, more of an operating bodger  :scowl:

:laughabovepost:  Sadly, I can't find an icon for 'snap'!  :D

I would make us some badges so we could wear them with pride, but I dread to think how they would turn out, and how I would have to explain my inevitable injury to both the Domestic Overlord and the A& E Staff

:laughabovepost:  :D

In fact I think we should pity those Chaps that can effortlessly produce stunning models at the drop of a hat, I mean they are missing out on all the fun......... personally I love miss haps like super gluing parts to my fingers, setting my fingers on fire with soldering attempts, gluing my for to my shoe, and my all time favourite of putting a protective glove on my hand when paint spraying to stop myself getting covered with paint, only later to realise it works better on the hand holding the model, rather that the paint can

Quote from: paulprice on June 29, 2015, 10:37:05 AM
.. personally I love miss haps like super gluing parts to my fingers,

You're lucky - I find superglue never actually 'glues' anything, even to my fingers! I once spent a whole 30 minutes trying to superglue a station bench kit together (there were only 4 parts) only to find once I tried to move it onto the platform it fell apart in my hand! :unimpressed:

Quote from: paulprice on June 29, 2015, 10:37:05 AM
In fact I think we should pity those Chaps that can effortlessly produce stunning models at the drop of a hat, I mean they are missing out on all the fun.........

...and, they keep having to pick their hats up too!

Quote from: Only Me on June 29, 2015, 10:55:45 AM

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on June 29, 2015, 10:43:21 AM

Quote from: paulprice on June 29, 2015, 10:37:05 AM
.. personally I love miss haps like super gluing parts to my fingers,

You're lucky - I find superglue never actually 'glues' anything, even to my fingers! I once spent a whole 30 minutes trying to superglue a station bench kit together (there were only 4 parts) only to find once I tried to move it onto the platform it fell apart in my hand! :unimpressed:

You are buying the wrong stuff then.... I have never failed to glue my fingers together!!..

This is the Ferrari of them :-

http://www.railroomelectronics.co.uk/Adhesives-Glue-s-Paint-s/Super-Glues/Page1.aspx (http://www.railroomelectronics.co.uk/Adhesives-Glue-s-Paint-s/Super-Glues/Page1.aspx)

Buying the wrong stuff" - the story of my life. :'(
But thanks for the tip. :thumbsup:

I enjoy both.  Building Portpatrick, and making minor changes over the years, has been fun.  But so was constructing a sequence derived from timetables for the Stranraer area.  And operating it at shows is the icing.  Now planning a more contemporary layout as a basis for some of my more current Scottish DMUs.

Meanwhile have finished the Ultima LMS 42ft CCT kit.  and making good progress on 10001.  3 Thompson non corr coaches await my attentions.  Lots to build.  And I have a spare Langley B1 body which I am looking at , thinking the Scottish fleet of K2s.  So building stock as well.

Going by the fact that my layout still hasn't progressed very far, and yet a lot of time has been put into testing my locos on a simple loop, I guess it could be said I'm more an operator than a builder...

Saying that though, once I get a decent soldering iron, I think the building will happen a bit faster...

I started off wanting to be an 'operator'. I built my coffee table, (I have always enjoyed using wood), and then thought about the actual layout. Using some of the excellent advice and tips, ( :thankyousign:), on this forum, I have got my track laid, have the points, (or should that be 'turnouts'?), all operating by means of WIT, the wire being fastened to toggle switches, which in turn operate an LED when, (in what I call),  the 'on' position. I have soldered track and droppers, have a separate DC circuit for when I put in street lights etc., and have done some scenic work. All of which I am enjoying. So, although I started out wanting to be an 'operator', I think I am turning into a 'builder'. (Fortunately, SWMBO is quite understanding  :) and it is fun).  ;D  David.

Quote from: dannyboy on June 30, 2015, 12:50:12 AM

have the points, (or should that be 'turnouts'?)

I think I can answer that with help from the actual Rule Book worked to by BR, AND the privatised railways, since. I quote from the April 1995 edition of the British Rail Rule Book (Appendix 14/Section 3) which was still current when I retired last year.

"3. Points. Securing unworked Points".

It then goes on (at length) about points. Unsecured points, secured points and making many other points about points ad infinitum  :sleep:!

In British usage the term 'point' is the correct and railwaylike expression in this case.
Turnout refers more to the number of people voting in an election.

However, abroad, overseas, in foreign lands they use 'turnout' in the way we British use the word 'point'  :confused1: and thus when Peco and other companies began to sell their track abroad (particularly in the USA) they adopted the word 'turnouts' for the points to avoid confusion (except in the UK where it caused, and still does cause, confusion, as in your case :confused2:.
Having said that our friends in the colonies, er sorry, I mean Commonwealth  :-[, might still refer to 'points' since their railways were constructed mainly by the British. I feel certain one of our Australian friends will correct me if I'm wrong.

Of course, many older railwaymen on the PW side still refer to 'leads' (as in the point 'leading' to another route) but I do not believe the term ever gained common usage outside the industry, indeed outside the PW department and is gradually dying out completely.

So, to sum up, BOTH terms are understood in the UK modeller's world but ONLY 'point' is absolutely, unquestionably the proper term in BRITISH use, a fact backed by the railway Rule Book.

I hope this solves your problem.

Greg.

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on June 30, 2015, 07:04:11 AM
However, abroad, overseas, in foreign lands they use 'turnout' in the way we British use the word 'point'  :confused1: and thus when Peco and other companies began to sell their track abroad (particularly in the USA) they adopted the word 'turnouts' for the points to avoid confusion . . .

Except it gets more confusing because in the USA they also call them 'switches' ;)


Paul

lets just call them, tracky changey things

"have the points, (or should that be 'turnouts'?)"

Thanks to Western Princess and Sprintex for clarifying that 'point' (sorry!).  ;D

Quote from: Sprintex on June 30, 2015, 08:31:58 AM

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on June 30, 2015, 07:04:11 AM
However, abroad, overseas, in foreign lands they use 'turnout' in the way we British use the word 'point'  :confused1: and thus when Peco and other companies began to sell their track abroad (particularly in the USA) they adopted the word 'turnouts' for the points to avoid confusion . . .

Except it gets more confusing because in the USA they also call them 'switches' ;)


Paul

That's true.

I'm confused, what's my name again. Nurse, Nurse............................

Quote from: paulprice on July 01, 2015, 07:13:03 AM
I'm confused, what's my name again. Nurse, Nurse............................

Your name is "Nurse"?  :confused2:

Anyway, here in Japan those pieces of track you can buy which allow a train to fork onto different routes are known as pointo, aka points. Presumably because the railway system was initially British-influenced. The technical Japanese name translates as "dividing-forking-machine", which rolls off the tongue less easily than pointo.

Quote from: railsquid on July 01, 2015, 08:43:11 AM
The technical Japanese name translates as "dividing-forking-machine", which rolls off the tongue less easily than pointo.

An accurate description one would guess. When it comes to technical terms I have heard a few descriptions of points by track gangs, particularly when it has taken most of a baking hot (or freezing cold) day to repair a problem, about which I will not go into detail here but can be summed up as " >:( :veryangry: :censored: :censored: points".

P/S I have also heard a few similar technical terms from passengers when trains have been delayed by a points problem.

Getting back to the main point of this thread (pun intended) I , in my OO days was mainly an operater with occasional lapses into building but since I have started building "Cromford" have found that While I still very occasionally like to sit back and watch the trains go by, I much prefer the building.I view it as a creative work,much like a sculptor. I never could, however, understand the mentality of people who just collect trains without running them or building a suitable setting to show them in.

Points refers to the moving bits and is used in day to day conversation by most railwaymen (and women!). Turnout is used to describe the whole unit ( by engineers etc).

The correct terms are Switches and Crossings, which is why they are referred to as A5, B6 etc - The Letter denoting the length of the Switch and the Number the angle of t Common Crossing (or Frog)

Quote from: JasonBz on July 02, 2015, 01:54:43 AM

The correct terms are Switches and Crossings, which is why they are referred to as A5, B6 etc - The Letter denoting the length of the Switch and the Number the angle of t Common Crossing (or Frog)

But not in my official railway publications such as the Rule Book and various Appendix to it, where the term 'point' is used throughout. However, I admit that I never had access to official publications issued to the PW department since, as a passenger guard, I had no opportunity.

However, all this is rather getting away from the original point of the question which is about whether people prefer to build layouts then just run them as they please (Rule One, if you like) or enjoy both building layouts and running them prototypically such as correct formations, all stock of the same general date and region, realistic speeds and a properly thought out timetable, running prototypically but actually dislike the building bit (that describes my position) or some other aspect such as collecting.

As the originator of this thread I am rather hoping that we can get back to its original purpose rather than wandering too far off the point.

Thanks,
Greg.

It was too hot last night to run my trains, I wondered why the Domestic Overlord said it was okay if I spent an hour playing with them.....I sense a plot

I had the same thing, nearly all the isolating sections not working the track had expanded ,serves me right for not using insulating rail joiners and being lazy just cutting the track in the fiddle yard ,most of the trains bumped into each other and of course it was the back train so pushed the one in front and derailed a lot of stock .That will teach me not to be lazy.
Bob

Quote from: Bob Tidbury on July 02, 2015, 09:19:57 AM
I had the same thing, nearly all the isolating sections not working the track had expanded ,serves me right for not using insulating rail joiners and being lazy just cutting the track in the fiddle yard ,most of the trains bumped into each other and of course it was the back train so pushed the one in front and derailed a lot of stock .That will teach me not to be lazy.
Bob

Hopefully things will sort themselves out today as the weather is more like a British summer - cool and wet! :)

When it cools a bit, perhaps some araldite in the joints would provide a fix

A thin sliver of plasticard would do the trick, Bob.

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on July 02, 2015, 07:06:02 AM

Quote from: JasonBz on July 02, 2015, 01:54:43 AM

The correct terms are Switches and Crossings, which is why they are referred to as A5, B6 etc - The Letter denoting the length of the Switch and the Number the angle of t Common Crossing (or Frog)

But not in my official railway publications such as the Rule Book and various Appendix to it, where the term 'point' is used throughout. However, I admit that I never had access to official publications issued to the PW department since, as a passenger guard, I had no opportunity.

However, all this is rather getting away from the original point of the question which is about whether people prefer to build layouts then just run them as they please (Rule One, if you like) or enjoy both building layouts and running them prototypically such as correct formations, all stock of the same general date and region, realistic speeds and a properly thought out timetable, running prototypically but actually dislike the building bit (that describes my position) or some other aspect such as collecting.

As the originator of this thread I am rather hoping that we can get back to its original purpose rather than wandering too far off the point.

Thanks,
Greg.

Sorry
I thought that telling it like it is would be a good thing for the members on here...Knowledge shared is knowledge gained
I didnt mean to go off topic, but sometimes one does stray a little,,,,I used to use the same rule book as you down in Kernow ;)

Quote from: JasonBz on July 03, 2015, 12:02:35 AM

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on July 02, 2015, 07:06:02 AM

Quote from: JasonBz on July 02, 2015, 01:54:43 AM

The correct terms are Switches and Crossings, which is why they are referred to as A5, B6 etc - The Letter denoting the length of the Switch and the Number the angle of t Common Crossing (or Frog)

But not in my official railway publications such as the Rule Book and various Appendix to it, where the term 'point' is used throughout. However, I admit that I never had access to official publications issued to the PW department since, as a passenger guard, I had no opportunity.

However, all this is rather getting away from the original point of the question which is about whether people prefer to build layouts then just run them as they please (Rule One, if you like) or enjoy both building layouts and running them prototypically such as correct formations, all stock of the same general date and region, realistic speeds and a properly thought out timetable, running prototypically but actually dislike the building bit (that describes my position) or some other aspect such as collecting.

As the originator of this thread I am rather hoping that we can get back to its original purpose rather than wandering too far off the point.

Thanks,
Greg.

Sorry
I thought that telling it like it is would be a good thing for the members on here...Knowledge shared is knowledge gained
I didnt mean to go off topic, but sometimes one does stray a little,,,,I used to use the same rule book as you down in Kernow ;)

No problem Jason, and I agree that it is a valid subject for discussion. I was simply suggesting though that it should be in another area.

Best wishes,
Greg.

Sorry to keep this discussion going but my son just gave me the latest Railnews in there is an article and they referred to points as TURNOUTS and that's in a proper British Railway Workers Paper
Bob