Weekend Update for Mar. 28-31, 2025

[Paul S.]

Please update us what you've done on your model railroad this week/weekend. This weekly thread is intended for us to post snippets about our layout/project progress, rather than be a substitute for our layout-build or project threads. Think of this topic as a mini update on what you've accomplished during the week/weekend. The administrators/moderators will start a new update thread each Friday.

You can link from your layout-build thread or project to your posts in this thread as a part of a more extensive post there, or visa-versa (post to your build thread and link to that post when contributing to this thread).

Click on a post's #number (right-hand end of the post header) to get the URL to that particular post in your browser's address bar. Then just copy and paste.

So fellow RMRers, what have you been up to this week?

[Josef2618]

Sigh. Repairing damage to the club layout here in Clackamas. Unfreezing ground throws drenched in scenery goop, remounting wobbly trucks on ancient freight cars, replacing worn-out points on FastTracks switches, resoldering track feeders . . .

[Paul S.]

Sigh. Repairing damage to the club layout here in Clackamas. Unfreezing ground throws drenched in scenery goop, remounting wobbly trucks on ancient freight cars, replacing worn-out points on FastTracks switches, resoldering track feeders . . .

Sounds a bit like real railroad maintenance, Josef.

Point-and-stock rail change outs. Ugh. Thankfully I only ever did a few.

[Josef2618]

Fortunately, the parts weigh much less.

[Paul S.]

I'll be spray painting and hopefully planting another 50 trees this weekend. Perhaps another 50 more for the win.

Photos to follow. ...

[Paul S.]

Fortunately, the parts weigh much less.

Indeed. When someone says, "I'll throw the switch," I think, "Yeah, good luck with that." 😁

[N Scale Brad]

This weekend I've put all of the modules from the AsiaNrail layout together to check them out before an exbibit we are doing in early April. This test setup measures 13ft x 4ft. This is not how they will go together in the layout but this is how they can all fit in my layout room. As my main layout is around the room this modular layout is actually a layout within another layout.

[Paul S.]

Brad, do you have a particular favorite era you model for Japan?

[N Scale Brad]

Paul, The trains I collect are ones that my wife and I have actually ridden on. As my times in Japan range from 1999 to present, the trains are from the 1960's and 1970's up to the present time.

The 2-meter-long Tokyo module set represents my wife's home neighborhood of Tokyo as I remember seeing it for the first time in 1999. The 4-foot Ntrak module which is also used in the AsiaNtrail layouts is fictional and would represent something in the 1970's. The 2 smaller curved modules could be from any time since the 1960's.

[Paul S.]

Thanks, Brad.

[Paul S.]

I acquired a decently constructed Rail Line HOn3 D&RGW stock car, but it needed minor rehab work, along with a few new grab irons.



I also trimmed away part of the underbody to improve truck swing.



After I paint and weather it, I'll apply 1940's-era D&RGW decals, and install air hoses and a new brake wheel staff. The original was too short.

[JerryZ]

Concluded operating session #97 on Sunday. Kept 12 people plus myself busy for a little over 3 hours.

The session was a little over three hours, not my typical four hour Sunday session as I wanted to try out a 2.5:1 clock ratio. For years, I ran at 3:1 and did a slightly less that three hour session (I run for 8 fast clock hours). Yards got plugged (switching doesn't time compress), and there was at time far too much stress placed on the dispatcher / operator to get train orders dictated and issued since this activity doesn't compress either.

A two to one ratio solved those issues, but then I was getting some feedback that the 2:1 ratio dragged a bit, and some people really do not want to invest a full four hours into a session (old traditions die hard).

Two of the railroads in our group have converted to 2.5:1 clock ratios, and I liked how that worked out on their railroads. The problem is that since I run with the NCE clock as my fast clock, it can only handle integer clock ratios. What to do? Considered going out and purchasing Mike Dodd's fast clock system with a 2.5 :1 clock ratio (the solution taken on the other two layouts in the group, who use Mike's system), but really don't want to invest the funds to go in that direction. So, I tried using a JMRI driven solution, which worked out well.



One minor issue that cropped up was that my fascia fast clock displays were showing 13:00 for time when it was 1:00 PM. Railroads don't use military time (at least they did not in 1952), so I had to play with the settings in JMRI, as well as set the NCE system to "12 hour" clock display. A test I did this AM seems to fix that issue.

Also continuing work on my CB&Q XA-9 50 ft. 1 1/2 box car by "almost" finishing the air brake component placement and piping. Deciding whether or not I want to mount the "brake release lever", a detail that is largely ignored (with probably good reason) on commercial models.



This build is a part of a "group build" of five people doing the same car. I'm lagging a bit, my friend Allen finished his car. Here it is on my RR, where it will run until he gets further along on his railroad.



Regards,
Jerry

[Paul S.]

I'd never before heard of "and a half" with fast clocks, Jerry. Quite off the beaten path, but a good compromise. Keep us updated.

[JerryZ]

I am fortunate to live in an area with a lot of model railroads operating under TT&TO. Within our group of currently eleven active railroads, eight of them are operating under Timetable and Train Order rules. Of the rest, One is CTC, one is TWC, and one is MMI (Mother May I). So, we have a pretty good cross section of layouts to try out different things to make it easier to do TT&TO.

For at least four years, there has been a lot of discussion about what clock ratio seems to work best. I was a very vocal advocate for 2:1 when operating with "Boomer" crews. Gave them a lot of time to think. Gave boomer yardmasters more time to execute their tasks. With an experienced crew, 3:1 worked OK on my railroad, but from a layout owner standpoint, it was getting very hectic, and if I had a large amount of crew (14 and up), I just did not enjoy the experience.

Not only am I becoming a big fan of the 2.5:1 fast clock ratio, but I'm also experimenting with running longer trains, and run less of them. I enjoy running steam, but quite frankly, a single articulated on my railroad is usually limited to 17 cars. So instead of running more and shorter trains, I am now trying to max out trains to 25-26 cars, and I run a rear end helper on most trains (with diseasels right now). That requires 2 crews, but it slows them down a bit as they start to worry about spilling the whole train across the countryside, and it causes them to PAY ATTENTION! I have so far ran about 4 trains in each direction with 24 plus cars with a rear end helper, and have not had any operational problems. Less trains also lowers the stress on the dispatcher / operator.

I'm also looking at a few other "legal" ways to lessen the dispatcher's load by utilizing a check box on a clearance the eliminates writing Form V train orders, and letting some of my local switch jobs get out from their terminal to their switch locations with a manual block (basically set a red signal at train order offices between the two points, and if something shows up, issue a clearance after the train under manual block clears up).

[Paul S.]

Running longer trains and fewer of them! Why, Jerry, that sounds like Precision Scheduled Railroading.😄

That manual block idea in lieu of a Form V sounds intriguing. How do your local crews check for trains now using Form V?

[JerryZ]

Running longer trains and fewer of them! Why, Jerry, that sounds like Precision Scheduled Railroading.😄

That manual block idea in lieu of a Form V sounds intriguing. How do your local crews check for trains now using Form V?

I have to go back and read what I wrote again, as I don't think I was clear in what I stated. But instead of blathering on further, best to quote a good source, which shows a clearance with both a manual block "box", and a Form V box. This is from the OPSIG web site, Volume 2 of "19 East Copy 3" with a write up that explains the differences. The TO on the left is a traditional Form V written out.

\

As far a my railroad running a "Precision Scheduled Railroad", well, all of my Eastward freights ARE scheduled. 😁

What I am basically potentially eliminating is 2nd sections. Even with the longer trains, I still ran a 2nd section of Train 400, which is a second class eastward train. Swimming upstream against that in the last session was two westward extras. They will typically need help to get across the railroad against scheduled trains, especially if they do not depart on time.

Regards,
Jerry