Re: Different weights for loads/empties -
> But is it a first we really care about?
Mind if I might inject something at this point?
I make my living railroading. I am a engineer for the Arkansas Southern RR,
a Watco company. My primary responsibility is to cover the Waldron
Subdivision. I am also called upon to fill-in on the Nashville Sub of the
Arkansas Southern, as well as often being loaned-out to fill engineer
shortages on other Watco properties. Train lengths and weights that I have
run will vary from a GP and a handful of cars up to 5 SD's, 8,000+ feet, and
13,000+ tons. In fact, I am currently on call waiting for a window to open
in order to make interchange with the KCS at their Heavener yard. From my
conversations with the ATM on duty, sounds like they'll need me to make
interchange, pick up my loads, double/triple over onto approximately 130
grain empties, and pull the empties out behind us onto our branch lead to
clear up room for the KCS. Once the empties are cut off, we will then
continuing on our way. Basically, I eat and sleep 1:1 scale railroading.
I say all the above to qualify this statement: One of the KEY missing
elements in simulating railroading with models is the impact of loaded cars
versus empties.
On a prototype railroad tonnage ratings are VERY IMPORTANT. Trains handle
VASTLY different when dealing with empties or loads, and their power
requirements are very different. For example, on (near) level ground, a
loaded car takes 2 1/2 times longer/farther to bring to a stop than an
empty. Also, the differences on grades between loads and empties is
DRAMATIC.
For years, I've dabbled with ways to factor such differences into model
railroading so that it really makes a difference whether or not a model car
is loaded or empty. I have yet to find a livable solution. Open top cars
offer a workable solution, as is now (apparently) beginning to be done in
HO.
We are missing out on a LOT of operational challenge by NOT having actual
tonnage concerns. In fact, that was one of THE reasons I dabbled in Sn3. I
felt that given the combination of grades, small steam engines, and cars
with removable weights of some sort to reflect loads/empties, one could have
actual tonnage concerns and hence a LOT of operation in a smaller layout
"package".
Perhaps "one of these days" it can be done digitally with momentum via DCC.
That is, you hook on to a train, dial in the pre-figured weight "factor" of
the train, and away you go. For this to work in regards to grade, though,
that "factor" would also have to play into effect on said grades, which
complicates the idea.
To me, a more workable solution would be actual weighting of the cars, and
reduced tractive effort on the model locomotives. (Most pull too good on
grades.)
Okay, enough for this novelette. I'll shut up now!
Andre Ming
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
