The Evil of the Fast Clock

You kind of touched on this above, but this bears breaking out since it's one of those big myths about operations.

Myth: "I don't want to use a fast clock because it makes things too stressful."

Reality: The problem is not with the clock ratio, it's poor scheduling. Whether you use a fast clock at a 4:1, 6:1 or any other ratio, or your 1:1 wristwatch, it takes the same amount of "real time" to perform a task, or travel a certain distance. You fit the schedule to how long it takes to do the task. If it takes 15-20 real minutes to do something, you wouldn't schedule 10 minutes to do it, so don't schedule it for 30 fast-minutes on a 4:1 clock. Schedule it for at least 80 fast-minutes (20 real minutes on the 4:1 clock). Better yet round it up to an even hour and a half or more to complete switching duties.

Time is time. It passes at a fairly constant rate (special relativity and all that not being particular relevant to the speeds involved in model railroad operations  ) and the scale that we measure it on is pretty arbitrary anyway. So whether you mark the time using hours, fast-hours or wags of a dogs tail, you tailor the schedule to the operations, not the operations to an unrealistically arbitrary schedule. Time doesn't pass faster with a fast-clock, you're just measuring it differently.

If you're modelling a specific prototype, it's tempting to just take the prototype schedule and just compress it using a fast-clock ratio, but the reality is that you're probably going to have to do a lot of tweaking to fit the schedule to your situation. 

Track planning and size is a factor

Running a prototype schedule can be achieved, it tends to be easier on bigger layouts.  Any schedule that involves switching is going to probably need a low ratio or require adjustment.  You can get away with a 2:1 or 4:1 no problem because most modelers wont go so far as to simulate building air pressure, or hooking up hoses.  Also most passenger schedules are a bit padded though it happens more in modern times than perhaps in the 50's (guessing on the current trend I've seen).

The rule of thumb to selecting a ratio has to do with the distance between stations and often it is an average at best.  What can fit in what scenes or require additional track for levels, a needed curve because they're at the end of the room, etc.  So getting each location to match perfectly in scale miles not 1:87 but for a 4:1 fast clock would be 1:348 is almost impossible, but the law of averages can make it work out.  Tweaking a schedule to fit what the layout is capable of is often necessary, and despite changing what the prototype may show on an official timetable enhances the operation.

What often happen is a layout is built before operations is even considered.  So when operations is introduced scheduling must be planned properly as you mention.  Too many layouts also try to be too tight with not just their schedules, but their available cabs and crews.  Then they get into a mess they never recover from, and I've seen this add stress from experience.

From what I've experienced in Sudbury so far, the schedule is actually padded a fair bit.  This is probably a good thing.  Besides the actual switching of The Canadian will be the challenge, but I think is attainable as is.

Thanks

Sean

Pro vs. Amateur

I've noticed an issue with some operation schemes, especially when trying to replicate a prototype schedule.  The original schedule was created for professional railroaders, and you have amateurs trying to reproduce it.  While any fool can run a train (a model, at least) on schedule, switching is a skill, and it's the same no matter how big the cars are.  Most modelers I have met are not as skilled as the guys I have worked with, and it shows when they start operating.  It's not a judgment, it's a simple fact.  Switching schedules need to be padded to allow extra time because of less experienced crews.

rocket powered switchers?

Learning good switching procedures is an operations skill, like any other.  You need to teach rookies the ropes so that they do things in an efficient and reasonably realistic way.  The problem we have found with new people is that they want to run the switchers too fast in order to hurry up and get done, which is actually the opposite of what you are suggesting is the problem.  Our fast clock and traffic volume is such that you can comfortably take your time with your switching and still get your work done quickly enough for the yard to keep up.  Seeing a switcher rocket around the yard doesn't enhance the realism of the operation at all.

One thing which makes switching easier for the crews in Sudbury is the use of switchlists.  The yardmaster makes up handwritten lists from the car cards he keeps in a file box in his office, and the crews use them for their work.  Usually each list just deals with the cars in one track, telling the crew which track each car is to be moved to; they don't need to know destinations or loads, just where they go.  If you just pull the whole track and shove each car at the end of the cut into the new track assigned, it doesn't take long at all to complete the work, even with low speeds and a big yard.

2 man crews and no schedule

Totally agree, I've seen plenty of flying around.  In fact I've been accused of running too slow

One thing to add to Jurgen's comment that helps the rookie get around at least familiarity is 2 man crews are offered for new members.  Even some veteran members will run 2 men when we have enough operators in a session.  This takes quite a bit of stress off participants.

The other thing is with the exception of our passengers nothing is on a schedule.  Everything however is called for a time on the fast clock for the crew to know when to go on duty and call for clearance.

Now The Canadian will probably be a bit of a learning experience for everyone I'm sure when it arrives in Sudbury later this season.  That of course will be on a schedule.  But proper instructions and others in the area to help I'm sure will make it fairly smooth.

Thanks

Sean

Prototypical yard switching

There's realism (based on speed, detail, etc.) and there's complexity.  You're right, pulling a whole track and classifying the cars one at a time is simple enough that anybody with a little sense can do it, but when things get more complicated (for example, needing cars from multiple tracks built in a specific order) skill becomes a major factor, and it doesn't matter how fast the engine is going.  It's not the speed of the engine, it's the speed of the operator's mind that matters there.  I have seen inexperienced operators throw up their hands in disgust after switching themselves into a corner - in a 4 track yard with 10 car length of room per track, and 15-20 cars in the yard.

Keeping things simple helps, definitely.  On the other hand, real railroading, especially flat switching a yard, is rarely simple.  Do you want simplicity, or realism?

On a related prototype note, I hate it when the yardmaster gives me a switchlist with line-by-line, step-by-step instructions on how to switch the track.  I much prefer to be told what needs to be done, and then given the freedom to go and do it.  I remember reading of one conductor who told the yardmaster to come and switch the cars himself, since there was only room for one conductor on the crew.  Of course, that does require that the conductor have some skill already, or he gets himself into a lot of trouble fairly quickly.

Simple and complex

Well I see your point, and I can think of one thing that someone inexperienced may have issues with on our layout and it's not the main yard itself.  There are 2 locations I can think of that really take some thinking.  The first is rather simple if you have experience in small yards and that is a temporary staging yard we use on our Little Current Sub.  Again this another one of those jobs that if you've never been in a situation like this your limited to track and need to plan accordingly.  An experienced member would be with this crew so they can learn.  Personally I never had issue here as I had previous experience in similar situations.

The big one that took me a while was the freight shed.  3 tracks parallel across 4 bays with a total of up to 12 cars that can be in the shipping process at any time.  This is the one operation where a yard crew even experienced on other layouts may find challenging.  The YM only indicates which cars are complete and ready to be moved out.  It's then up to the yard switcher to go out and move them farthest away from the doors in the proper bay, have room for any additional empties on the storage track.  Also it helps to try avoiding to block the mainline for too long, or know how to get out of the way.

The yardmaster is actually the one who is thinking 2 or 3 moves and giving him a switch list to the crews in the yard only.  He doesn't have the time to switch them himself as he is too busy planning on what lift is going to be ready for the next train coming into town, not to mention getting all the locals ready.  Locals run out of the yard are actually given the "here is the cards, now go".  But when it comes to the actual yard itself, there is no easier way to tell the crews what needs to be done.

Speaking of which I've been YM in many clubs in the past working of SL's only.  With Sudbury YM there is a strong learning curve that I'm still not all the way yet.  Last time I ran the yard a few of our local customers didn't get service  The only way to learn though, is through mistakes.

Thanks

Sean

blocking locals?

Ken, it sounds like you are describing blocking an outbound local, which is something we haven't been doing so far, partly because most of the locals are one industry jobs and don't need to be concerned about blocking enroute.  Crews have the option of doing blocking before departure, or there are a couple places it can be done along the way if it will ball things up in the yard.

Blocking Locals

This may be a big deal, depending on your prototype.  If a local will switch at multiple locations, it may be necessary to have the yard block into rough station order (i.e. block everything for a given town together, but without sorting into separate customers beyond that) to avoid the local crew being able to claim an extra day's pay for blocking their own train.  Another concern might be restrictions on whether the road crew would be allowed to perform blocking within terminal limits at all unless their job was called as a "roadswitcher" as opposed to a "local."

always something new to learn and add

Good points, Ken.  We are always looking for ways to enhance the realism of our operations, and blocking locals is one place we can do some work on that front.  The one local which does the most work enroute is the Webbwood Sub pickup, which arrives on schedule 96 from Webbwood, drops its whole train and then leaves with new local traffic the way it came as an extra.  This train becomes the Thessalon Sub local after a crew change at Webbwood, and that train would have a bunch of places to work along the way.  The thing of it is that most of these places aren't on the layout so there is really no one who would care about the way the train is blocked once it's in staging, but the blocking could still be done, just to make the train more realistic when it leaves and add a little something to yard ops.

The thing with any operating system is you need to start out simple and add more complexity as you are comfortable with it.  Even the prototype had to work up to achieving whatever level of complexity its operations presented at any given point; model railways are no different.

Blocking: not just for locals

Blocking is not just needed for locals, although that's an obvious place to start.  It also makes sense as part of a larger operation.  For example:

Say there are four trains which terminate at a yard, another four which originate there, and ten more towns or terminals in either direction.  Each train that comes in might have cars for any of the 11 (ten plus local) destinations in a given direction.  Each departing train could have cars for any of the 10 forward destinations.  Mis-routed cars add to that.  Ideally, outbound trains should be build in station order so that solid blocks can be handled later on.  Even if they are going to be re-switched, it still makes sense to block the cars if possible.

A yard handling that little traffic would likely only have 5 or 6 tracks at the most, so clearly there has to be some shuffling.  The yardmaster will decide which cars need to go out on a given train, and in what order the blocks need to be, and the yard crew would then figure out the most efficient way of arranging those blocks.  It is not always a case of "go get all the cars for A, then for B, then for C" as sometimes things can be more efficiently done if several portions of the train are built consecutively and then combined at the last minute.

So, for a model railroad with a single yard in the middle and staging yards at each end, there can still be a lot of classification to do if there is a clear idea of what other terminals are represented by those staging yards.  It's a lot of work, but it also adds to the realism and entertainment value of a prototypical operating session.

mainline train blocking

The route map of the Sudbury Division is fairly complex, so it's hard to describe how the destinations of the various through trains relate to Sudbury Yard without going into a lot of detail.  Suffice it to say that most of the originating trains are turns which serve a limited number of places each, sometimes only  one industry.  For through traffic, the local traffic headed north towards Western Canada and east towards Montreal are most likely to need some sort of blocking to facilitate switching down the line.  The thing is that adding this blocking to the appropriate trains would add a lot of complexity to the switching, and I'm not sure that the crews wouldn't be looking for extra pay if the had to do more than one drop and one lift before leaving on the prototype.  Again, there are division yards around 50 miles down the line where reblocking could be done.  

An additional point is that we have prototype blocking manuals for CP Rail, and we try to reflect these guidelines in our staging of trains from distant points.  We also take account for cars which would have theoretically been lifted enroute since they departed the terminal, which would likely have been up at the front behind the units.  These are all little details which tell a story when you understand the traffic on our routes.

Track Layout and Switching

Ken,

I have somewhat limited experience with switching, but believe that the track layout of a yard or industrial area can have a large impact on operations. I operated on a friend's layout, and he believed in very complex track work. One of his towns was very hard to switch, due to short sidings and opposed spurs. I enjoyed operating his layout, but the learning curve was not so much fun.

We have few experienced modelers in my area that will be part of the train crew on our layouts  I have and will try to make my track work easy to switch for the new guys or less dedicated operators. I hope to have three yards, I may design two of these for more casual operation.

Regards,

John

*********************************************************************************************************************************************

All the time he's boxing, he's thinking. All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him. Jack Dempsey

Making it easy is a good thing

I have a friend who built himself a very complex addition to his layout.  It is the best looking portion of his layout, and the most interesting to operate, but it is so complex that he found himself avoiding it, and has had to develop an operating scheme which forces him to operate it.  I find it quite enjoyable, but I have seen and heard of others who cannot stand it.  He and I are both professional railroaders, so we have an advantage over many of the people who try it, and even we get stuck sometimes.

So, yes, I agree that the design of a yard or town can have a major impact on operations.  They key, in my humble opinion, is to avoid complexity just for complexity's sake and to make the track plan as efficient as possible, then make the operation itself challenging enough to be interesting.  Multiple locals, specific car spots, special handling, on-layout moves, etc. can all add to the logistical complexity without requiring a triple switchback with a double flying switch and a healthy dose of luck to complete.

no more complicated than necessary

Our track arrangements are all based on the prototype, so you won't find any switching puzzles on our layout.  I find the switching pretty low stress.  What does add a lot of time is sometimes (prototypically) needing to run around your train, and with long sidings that takes a bit of time, and just having a lot of travel time between switching locations.  We also have stored cars and off-spot cars which need to be cycled through industries sometimes, and these things all add to the movements needed just to serve one industry.

One thing we are going to add soon is finished lumber traffic off the Pineland spur.  The trackage there consists of three stub tracks at the end of a mile long spur.  The three tracks are for unloading tree length logs, and all tracks are full of log rack cars except when the empties are being switched for loads.  The trick is the finished lumber cars are spotted on the single track approach, and have to be moved out of the way and then respotted when the work is done by the Pulp Train, and this is just as on the prototype, too.  The spur is really a mile long, too, since it's a down a helix from the junction by Nairn, so running up and down the spur does take time, and you want to make sure you do things logically to avoid running back and forth more times than necessary.  The Plup Train is one of the more popular locals, and will get more interesting still as the layout is expanded.

Facing points

So, why did it happen?

Dear AzBaja,

I am interested that

- you built your layout
- and presumably planned and laid the track in each town with (possibly multiple) facing-point spurs relative to the prevailng source/direction of "local" trains that had to switch said towns.

- and now you find that you are ripping said facing-point spurs out

- and have worked out that you are "not a switching puzzle fan"

This prompts a few (completely insinctive, and honestly-curious/wanting to know the answer) questions.

1 - At the point of planning/building/laying the track, were you _previously_ a "switching-track-arrangement fan"?

2 - If YES, then I assume the discovery that you don't prefer "switching puzzles" came at some stage later?
(with resulting change in mindset which now prompts you to remove/rework the facing-point spurs?)

3 - If NO, I'd love to know what,
against presumably a clear-and-existing "don't prefer switching puzzles" preference,

prompted you to plan/build/lay all of those now-problematic facing-point spurs initially?

(If we assume "facing point spur" = switching puzzle,
it would seem that you inadvertently laid a load of "puzzle" trackage, against your own better judgement?)

Please do not mishear me, I'm not trying to browbeat you over modelling-missions-past,

just trying to understand (and hopefully learn from someone who's "already trod the path"),
what the thought/ethos/plan/design/build process was that got you to this point,
(via what seems from the outside-looking-in to be an about-face in mindset/approach???)

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

creative switching and the good old days

The runaround moves on the Sudbury Division involve turns at the far point of their runs.  We don't do runaround moves to switch a facing point spur, it's just easier to switch those on the way back, as Chris suggested.  On the prototype, in good old (reckless?) days, they would sometimes do a flying switch maneuver to drop a facing point car, maybe to save a stop on the return trip, which makes sense to real train crews.  Those maneuvers are pretty much banned these days; even kicking cars in a yard is frowned apon in some places.

I remember 30 years ago watching the CN town switcher crew working the Uniroyal plant at the west end of town in Kitchener.  The spur into the plant was trailing point from the station, but the tire shipping was facing inside the plant trackage, so they would saw back and forth to fish out the loaded cars, and then put them up on the main, throw the switch back to the main and go back in to do more work.  The station was downhill from the plant, and the crews would just leave the brakes off on the cars, and they would just roll slowly down the main, one at a time towards the station, rolling over (protected) grade crossings unattended.  I'm sure the railway lawyers would have a kitten if crews were doing that these days.

Experience

Prof Klyzir.

When I was younger, a long time ago, I could put more track in a given space then would fit. I owned a lot of snap switches and 18 inch radius track. To my horror I found my new 2-8-4 Berkshire locomotive did not run on my layout.

I soon discovered that a lot of 15 inch sidings were not very functional, and the last ladder track in the yard only held 2 cars.  I demonstrated that a S curve was a bad idea

I also discovered that the horn hook couplers were not very reliable. I proved that the cheap locomotives were not the best buy.

These things are bloody obvious, but they weren't then. Experience and research have helped make my hobby a lot more fun  My point is we live and learn, we build and learn, and we operate and learn. It is a journey and sometimes we need to back up and do some of it over. I think that is just part of the hobby.

I post here to share my experience and the other modelers experience, I understand your point, but mistakes are part of any successful endeavor. Our experience changes us as well as our layouts.

Regards

John.

********************************************************************************************************************************************

Good judgment comes from experience, and often experience comes from bad judgment. Rita Mae Brown

switching, blocking, changing track

I sort of skimmed through some of this, so if I missed something sorry.  But I wanted to sum up a few things I have seen.

As for our club we don't have a swtiching puzzle but I would say the sheds take some thought.  Blocking isn't necessary as yout going to be making so many moves I find it's easier to just get over there and start.

Some layouts certainly need blocking.  If Ted is following this, he may be familiar with the mess you can get in switching the short line to Barrie.  Lots of facing and trailing spurs and very small run around tracks make it a necessity.  I learned that the hard way and spent 8 hours switching on 1:1 scale one day on Ted's Mactier Sub vscale route.  That was lots of fun though.

Now as far as changing track, that may be a prototypical operation ironically enough I've seen this happen provided they still got service.  I may have missed if it was changed or torn out completely.  What is more common however is the use of service tracks or run around tracks that may be added as necessary to save time in operations.  Changing to how an industry gets in and out is often due to the location and are rarely adjusted but I have heard that this does in fact happen when it is possible if it makes it easier to switch.  

Thanks

Sean