Scale Speeds

[REGP]

Got a bit puzzled by the mention of scale speeds in some publications/forums, especially as some imply it's a complicated process.

Am I correct in thinking that these are arrived at by simply dividing a mile (5280 feet) by 148 (for N of course) and  measuring the time a loco takes to cover a fixed distance e.g.

1 foot covered in 10 seconds or 6 feet in 1 minute = 10 MPH

5 feet covered in 10 seconds or 30 feet in 1 minute = 50 MPH

Or is there some other more complicated formula I should be using?

Thanks in advance.

Ray

[Sprintex]

That's pretty much it yes, your calculations are spot on 


Paul

[Jack]

I use this, http://www.mcr5.org/NMRA/articals/speed.htm . I can't remember if I got it through this forum or another one (which I don't use anymore). Although it's for Railroads (US) there is a custom box to add your own scale.

[oscar]

I use this:-  http://www.nhsouth.com/crafts/workbench/ssc.htm

[Sprintex]

Can't really see the need for conversion sites as it's easy enough?

(mph) (ft/min)
10          5.95
20        11.89
30        17.84
40        23.78
50        29.73
60        35.68
70        41.62
80        47.57
90        53.51
100       59.46
110       65.41
120       71.35
125       74.32


Paul

[trainsdownunder]

I just turn the controller until it looks about right ! 

[Newportnobby]

I just turn the controller until it looks about right ! 

That's me to a T

[martink]

My rule of thumb for BR Mk1s or earlier is: one coach per second is 40mph (50mph for Mk3s).  Works for any scale (even 1:1), just count the seconds as the train goes by.

[weave]

Hi all,

My annoyance with speed is not so much how fast the trains go (although some are ridiculously too fast) but the lack of slowing down to stop. More on youtube than exhibitions. I know some of it is remote control but it looks awful when a train is hurtling round, comes into the station and just stops.

Here endeth the little rant. Should be on angry thread.

I'm with the 'what looks right' guys as long as you all slow down gradually. Think of the passengers!

Cheers Weave

[Agrippa]

Some youtube videos show trains moving at TVG speeds when they're not
TGVs. I'll exempt the Addams family train wreck because it's so funny. 

[boffin22]

Sprintex
Thanks for the speed table. I now have some backup to show my 4 year old granddaughter that she shouldn't really think Thomas shunts at 500 mph. Meeting Monday!
David N.

[stevieboy]

What is considered to be a 'good' slow speed (purely to test the loco's running qualities)?

I've managed to get around 3mph on DC from one of the Class 14's I had which seemed pretty slow.  Does DCC improve this further?

Steve

[Newportnobby]

What is considered to be a 'good' slow speed (purely to test the loco's running qualities)?

I've managed to get around 3mph on DC from one of the Class 14's I had which seemed pretty slow.  Does DCC improve this further?

Steve

I reckon 3mph is good enough for me. Anything less and terminal boredom would set in, methinks
Mind you, it's great to have steamers at walking pace around shed areas

[EtchedPixels]

What is considered to be a 'good' slow speed (purely to test the loco's running qualities)?

I've managed to get around 3mph on DC from one of the Class 14's I had which seemed pretty slow.  Does DCC improve this further?

It can do. With a CT decoder my class 24 really doesn't have a bottom speed. It gets to the point where the decoder will pulse the motor minute amounts at a regular rate and it crawls at about one sleeper a minute.

If you are getting down to a scale 3mph I'm not sure less is useful unless you are modelling an MGR coal setup or something similar !

[Brooksy]

I've been meaning to work this out for a while and due to seeing this topic just have, so 

This is what I found: a loop of my track (as measured on xtrakcad) is a little over 6m (6.06). Obviously this isn't exact and it depends on whether you take the outer or the inner loop (I've done an average).

This works out as a scale distance of 0.557 miles (6.06/1000*0.62137*148). I can then get the scale speed by dividing this distance by the time taken to do the loop (in hours (so time in sec/3600). Or if I pre-multiply the scale distance by 3600 I can just divide by the time in seconds - handily for me that number (0.557*3600) comes out to be roughly 2000 (easy to remember - 2005 to be exact).

The handy thing about measuring the time around the whole loop is that the times get big enough so the error in the timing is lower.

I hope that I've done that right - now my head hurts but I'm going to try it out later.