Trenton Transportation Company

[Jeff AKA St0rm]

Man that's tiny! 

Thats's what she said 

[OldEastRR]

I love it on this forum that any word "against" or perceived to be "against" any of the controlling band of the forum by an outsider (anyone not involved in the original group) usually results in scorn, harsh rebuttal, or sarcastic mockery. Way to go, guys. You keep THAT model railroading tradition alive.

[peteski]

I love it on this forum that any word "against" or perceived to be "against" any of the controlling band of the forum by an outsider (anyone not involved in the original group) usually results in scorn, harsh rebuttal, or sarcastic mockery. Way to go, guys. You keep THAT model railroading tradition alive.

Really? What gave you that impression? I'm not an "insider", and IMO David answered your question fully and truthfully.  He admitted that the runaround was not necessary.

Was it the comment from Ms. Dee? Or the pictorial response from pwnj (who is also rather a newbie here)?  I don't see any additional comments to your question and David's reply. You found those being harsh, sarcastic or scorning you? Maybe we are being a wee bit oversensitive? 

[tom mann]

I love it on this forum that any word "against" or perceived to be "against" any of the controlling band of the forum by an outsider (anyone not involved in the original group) usually results in scorn, harsh rebuttal, or sarcastic mockery. Way to go, guys. You keep THAT model railroading tradition alive.

The problem with this theory is that not a single person who replied to this thread (with the exception of Ed a few pages back) was part of the "original group".

And your post is the first instance of sarcasm in this thread, BTW.

[DKS]

Maybe we are being a wee bit oversensitive?

This.

In truth, I was hoping there would be further discussion on the topic. Perhaps I should not have admitted that I wanted a runaround for the sake of having one.

[Philip H]

Perhaps I should not have admitted that I wanted a runaround for the sake of having one.

Sure you should.  Defending our choices - they are for us after all - is a time honored Railwire tradition.  Just look at the . . . cr@p . . . I got for suggesting a turnout on a trestle as a conceit to solve an operational problem.

As to the run around track vs. just running around . . . meh . . . we've got bigger fish to fry, like getting you to do a thread on photography with your point and shoot - you really managed to squeeze blood from a turnip there old friend.

[wm3798]

I'm going to measure the little book case next to my desk in the den, and send you a diagram so you can design something that will fit.  To give you some guidance, it's about 5' x 24", but has a divider in the middle of it. 

Oh, and I want to model the complete yard facilities at Port Covington, including the 9 million bushel grain elevator, the coal pier with the rotary dumper, and the Spring Garden trestle and draw span.  And I want it to be all in snap track.

What do you think?

[DKS]

like getting you to do a thread on photography with your point and shoot - you really managed to squeeze blood from a turnip there old friend.

Honestly, it's no big deal. It was just a matter of finding a pocket camera that provides manual aperture control, which is relatively rare. The model I have is the Canon PowerShot SD4000 IS, which is now a few years old (>3500 exposures and still clicking perfectly), but you can still buy them. The other great thing about this particular camera is you can take pretty decent model videos, although you'll need a lot of light on the scene, and the auto-focus may result in some "hunting" in macro, so it's not a straightforward process.

The only "trick" in getting good model shots is to choose the best focus point. I do this by trial and error, since you cannot manually focus it. The right spot is not necessarily in the center of the frame, so I aim at different points of the scene and take test exposures. Once I find the "sweet spot," I will lock the focus by holding the shutter button halfway down, re-compose the shot, then release the shutter. After a while this becomes second nature and you can capture good shots quickly.

[parkrrrr]

The only "trick" in getting good model shots is to choose the best focus point. I do this by trial and error, since you cannot manually focus it.

You might look into CHDK. It adds a lot of features to PowerShot cameras, including the SD4000. Among those are aperture override and subject distance override, which might let you manage manual focus and aperture priority at the same time. I'm pretty sure it lets me do manual focus on my PowerShot A540, anyway, but that might be a feature of the camera; it's been a while since I used it.

[DKS]

Thanks for that tip! I confess I'd be just a teensy bit leery of making firmware changes to a camera that has been 100% reliable for years, however... call me unnecessarily paranoid.

[packers#1]

At the risk of adding to a discussion which may have been settled, I like the runaround being on the layout, but not so much because it adds to operations, but primarily because of what it adds in terms of photography and feel.
I think having the run around reinforces the idea of this being an industrial area, and adds to the idea that this line has more than two or three I dustries but is a slice of the real world. It also adds to the overall photographic opportunities on such a small layout, and increases car capacity.
So I suppose in short, I dig the run around and I'm loving the layout David; I may have to copy it and swap the location to the South and model a textile mill with a 44-tonner, similar to the Ware Shoals RR

[pwnj]

I was going to say the same. The runaround adds more "scene" to the little layout. And even at this size, you're not designing a layout to be a duplicate of a prototypical railroad, but more specifically to be a bunch of little scenes from a real railroad.  If this was real, there would be lots more track, lots more city, connection to the rest of the railroad, interchanges, etc., etc., etc.  The runaround adds to the "suggestion" illusion that there's more here than you see (even though there ain't!).   

[DKS]

I don't think the runaround question was necessarily "settled," and I'm glad to see further discussion on the point. The two replies above articulate the very reason I wanted it: to add a sense of there being more railroad beyond the layout borders, and to reinforce the feeling of an industrial line with token elements common to such railroads. So, the runaround essentially serves as more of a functional prop than an operational necessity.

[packers#1]

So DKS, what is the minimum radius on the main line?

[DKS]

The minimum on the outer loop is 7.2". The minimum for the inner track on the passing siding and the switchback to Union Rubber is 6".