Marshall,
I am not a railroader by profession, but I think I have some feel for
this question.
At least as regards putting on a "show" for an audience at a model
train event, I'd leave the fast clock and any adherence to prototype
timing at home. While you don't want to be running trains at break-
neck speed, if you slow them down too much, I think your audience
will get bored. Motion is the thing when it comes to entertainment.
Variety, and keep 'em moving. That may be more challenging with a
switching layout, but I would keep the Entertainment word foremost.
Good luck.
John Sauer
--- In BRHSlist@y..., "Marshall Thayer" <zephyr9903@e...> wrote:
> My 1940's Q-based switching layout will not only be a home layout
for me and potential operators to enjoy, but is envisioned as being
portable for shows.
>
> I'd like to operate as realistically as possible, but not allow
things to be too sluggish for a general audience to appreciate.
>
> While I realize that the usual use of a "scale-time" fast clock is
to make a compressed main line work with a more-realistic looking
timetable, I'm thinking that a less-accellerated clock might make
sense for yard and industrial switching as well.
>
> How about you former railroaders out there? Do you think a 3:1 or
4:1 fast clock would help eliminate the actual time used in walking
from one end to another, coupling brake hoses, discussing car spots
with receiving industries, breaking for lunch, etc. would allow for a
reasonable workload to be accomplished in an average shift without a
lot of real-minutes inaction? I think it would be really neat to
stage an entire calendar day at a train show in a 6-hour or 8-hour
period.
>
> BUT - I need some informed opinions from our ever-knowledgeable
listers!
>
> Marshall Thayer (stuck in the Forties tonight and every night)
> Marshall Thayer
> Consulting Model Railroader
> Las Vegas, NV
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: dwfiedler
> To: BRHSlist@y...
> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 3:34 AM
> Subject: [BRHSlist] CBQ donating land for US-based WWII POW camps?
>
>
> Hi everybody:
>
> I am writing a book about the World War II era prisoner of war
camps
> in Missouri. As you may know, about half a million Axis soldiers
> captured in fighting overseas were sent to the US, and
approximately
> 15-18,000 Germans and Italians ended up in Missouri. How is this
> involves the Chicago Burlington & Quincy is that I have come
across
> the following information in the course of my research:
>
> -------------------
>
> During the government's review of potential sites for locating
> new
> prisoner of war camps in the Midwest, the Chicago, Burlington &
> Quincy Railroad offered land for a camp at several possible
> locations, including Maryville, Missouri, and Centerville, Iowa.
The
> government declined the railroad's offer, based on guidelines in
> place at the time for locating internment camps that said
facilities
> to house POWs should not be located in areas with a mean annual
> temperature of less than 56 degress Fahrenheit, citing savings in
> construction and heating costs gained by placing camps in more
> moderate climates. (DRURY)
>
> -------------------------
>
> Do you have any idea why the CBQ would make such an offer to the
> government, and/or if there are any historical resources that
might
> address this activity that I should check with?
>
> Thanks for your help, and best regards-
>
> David Fiedler
> St Louis, Mo
> 314/956-7353
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|