Thanks, Jeff. You make the point I was reaching for. For longer cars to be commercially viable, there has to be a market which can accommodate them. That means enough layouts with curves suitable for longer cars. Sure, you can run a 60-footer around a sharp curve. It looks like crap, but you can do it. Never mind the compromises -- such as underbody or end details deleted so your couplers can swing WAY over -- you can do it.
Take a look at the compromises AM had to make with the 4-8-4. Look at all that open space around the trailing truck -especially behind, where the drawbar is. This was necessary to make the locomotive viable to those with the tinplate curves. Now take a look at a photo of the ATSF 2900 series 4-8-4 prototype, and you will realize just how much plumbing detail had to be sacrificed to make the model viable for the AF market. The area where you see air in the model (can you see air?) is dark with appliances, connections and various pipes. This is NOT a knock on AM -- it's just recognition of the reality of having to market to two different sets of standards to make the model financially viable. A so-called scale modeler -- the SGS, in Raleigh's Designation (I personally also add the "C" for curmudgeon) -- can add the necessary detail so that the rivets can truly be counted. In principle dimensions, the locomotive is a true scale model. In terms of the rivet-counter, it needs additional work. I have no quarrel with this -- we are modelers, after all. For a more side-by-side look at what the difference means, check out the Weaver or Atlas O sites and compare how they make their RS3 models -- the 3-rail version vs. the scale versions. The prototype RS3 is about 55 feet long. What do you need to do for the tinplaters? You mount the trucks on a so-called Talgo mounting so the couplers will swing completely from side to side. The pilot and end underframes are either eliminated. The side steps are mounted on the talgo truck, so they swing back and forth under the main frame. (There must be a high mortality rate among 3-rail O scale brakeman who forget not to get off the steps before the locomotive hits an outside curve.) Would I, as a "scale" modeler, accept these compromises? Not on your life. I claim no authority on this subject. My comments are just from my long-time observations, of things I believe to be true. Mind you, I also believe in the Easter Rodent -- SOMEBODY better bring me some chocolate!! Speaking of 4 x 8s, my switching layout is essentially a 4 x 8, cut crosswise into three 32-inch by 48 inch sections, to create a 32 inch by 12 foot long surface. I have used a track plan designed for HO (Switchman's Nightmare, #6 in Westcott's ancient 101 Track Plans), but doubled the dimensions rather than increased it by 1.36. I use Code 100 flex track (approx. 112# rail) and #8 turnouts. These proportions and my standards aren't for everybody but they work for me. And the layout fits nicely along one wall of the spare bedroom of my apartment. I currently run three locomotives on it at a time and rotate in about 60 freight cars (the layout comfortably accommodates 24 plus a van) in random switch lists that have never been repeated in more than 3000 operating sessions. The locomotives also rotate in from month to month. Like most of us, I have far more equipment than can sit on the layout, hence the rotation system. When cars or locomotives rotate out, their first stop is the kitchen table, er, workbench, where they are serviced, then stored for their next turn. regards ... pqr P.S. -- Interestingly, when the NMRA first set standards for HO interchange, the MINIMUM acceptable radius was 24 inches. It was the coming of HO trainsets for the traditional 4 x 8 that changed the perceptions of acceptable curvature. In other words, this is where "HO Hirail" began to evolve. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeffrey Madden To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 8:21 AM Subject: {S-Scale List} RE: longer cars. Yes, the longer (modern) freight cars and locomotives will come, but the S community - hi-rail, AF, scale will have to evolve as to their layout designs, bumping up minimum radius curves, and the use of more gradual turnouts. HO went through this transition years ago. modern Messages in this topic (12) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity a.. 5New Members b.. 4New Photos c.. 6New Files Visit Your Group Yahoo! Finance It's Now Personal Guides, news, advice & more. Sell Online Start selling with our award-winning e-commerce tools. Find helpful tips for Moderators on the Yahoo! Groups team blog. . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 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/
