DFW Portable Layouts -- Mainline and Traction

[Chris Webster]

That's some beautiful workmanship Jim! I really like how your wiring design avoids the need to solder anything next to the foam - that's smart.

Are you using 6 ft rail sections, or did you solder shorter sections together? I can't tell from looking at your photos.

[R.K. Maroon]

That's some beautiful workmanship Jim! I really like how your wiring design avoids the need to solder anything next to the foam - that's smart

Thanks, Chris -- It is not clear that the investment of time and expense in the terminal-block-and-crimped-lug wiring method makes sense for most, but it's flexibility really works for well for us. We have to complete any upgrade in the months between shows, and the wiring changes with each upgrade. Soldered installations are not as readily adaptable.

Ae you using 6 ft rail sections, or did you solder shorter sections together?

This is a good question. Four- foot long modules are optimum for lumber and foamboard, but rail comes in three and six-foot lengths. What to do? Our decision was based on what we had. Until recently, all our rail inventory, mostly salvaged from older layouts, was three-foot. So we got good at soldering. Last year we had the chance to buy salvaged sections which were all or most of six feet. Those were great to use. We did wind up with quite a few short pieces, but it was super fast and we did not miss soldering.

Jim

[R.K. Maroon]

The club had a really good work session yesterday (Saturday). All the primary wiring needed to get the layout in basic operation the day was completed on Friday so we were in a position to setup the layout and give it a full test. We started with just the half of the layout with the new and modified modules. We found two minor issues with the wiring (a shorted Gapmaster and a pair of crossed wires), but those were fixed easily enough. That led to a three track, three throttle, three engine test. For reference, the Rock Island and Frisco units are on the double-track main. Track between them here is a shared passing siding and interchange track. The T&P is the yard, which is part of the inner loop:


Here's the link in case the photo doesn't show:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/72yxokup44zanvzc69fgg/02-Three-Track-Test-Run.png?rlkey=4hh3nu7o4r2k87nz0srr4l8ui&dl=0

We always use Atlas SWs for our test runs, as they are very reliable and seem to accommodate iffy track and wiring as well as anything. If they don't run, not much else will. To our surprise but great satisfaction, all three tracks ran with no major issues. With that we setup the rest of the layout. Again, everything ran with no derailments or other issues:


https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/g76m7rj6974nxjvvcwknk/04-Three-Track-Test-Run-Full-Loop.png?rlkey=7zlodry8po2phz05pwzy776ar&dl=0

The T&P SW is in the industrial switching area of the layout. As you can see, the track work of industrial spurs is not complete. That will be part of the next phase of the layout build. The through-track in this area is part of the inner loop, which includes the yard and lead tracks at each end that connect to the industrial area. The lead tracks also connect the yard to the track 2 of the main line, as can be seen in the photo. The east lead is to the left of the Frisco unit. The west lead is behind us and out of the photo.

A video of the full layout test run can be seen here:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/y3o1yah58nrkuljxee6qi/04-Three-Track-Test-Run-Full-Loop.mp4?rlkey=iq55rq83iys9xswxbqb8o2pck

The last thing we did was to replace the SW on Main Track 1 with a Scale-Craft Mountain (the same one recently posted in the Scale-Craft Mountain thread). You can see it in the upper left of this overhead view:


https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/zhzp855nqyruo4swjijwu/06-Three-Track-Test-Run-Aerial.jpg?rlkey=76f24objmp8xro0j5f2swa0in&dl=0

Again, everything ran no problem. A video of this run can be seen here:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/07vh5knmsjotfygjm9bxo/05-Three-Track-Test-Run-Steam.mp4?rlkey=c8tezq8s2fkjjvmv7qx3t0bek

There was some rail height mismatch across the module borders, but nothing too bad. We'll work on that next but are basically in good shape for our open house. More photos and video after we clean things up and get some full consists running.

I should also mention that the traction layout, which can be seen in the photos and video, has recently completed a major upgrade to the overhead. It is now ready for the open-house as well.

Jim

[E7]

Looking good Jim! I'm envious.

Rich

[up148]

Great looking modular layout Jim. Now time for scenery. Enjoy.

[bob turner]

You are really getting good at photography! How are you stabilizing the camera? Are your hands really that steady?

I have this little shake - had it since I was a kid. I need a tripod for locomotive shots, and probably could not do a movie like yours. It isn't bad, but when I fly an aircraft with sensitive ailerons (like the Extra 300) I can see the wings wiggling as my hand moves!

[R.K. Maroon]

How are you stabilizing the camera? Are your hands really that steady?

I had a career in gyro stabilization, so this is a subject I can geek out about. I will keep it brief.

Stabilization is the act of holding a camera steady enough to not degrade the recorded image. Failure to stabilize a camera when recording video can cause two kinds of degradation. The worst is blurring, where the camera moves fast enough during frame exposure to smear the image. The other is aptly called "sea motion". The camera motion here is too slow to blur the image but sufficiently large to cause the object of interest to wander around the video frame. One can think of blurring as high-frequency, fast motion, while sea motion is low-frequency, slow motion. A blurred image in ruined, while the human mind is remarkably tolerant of sea motion (that is, until somebody points it out).

There is an easy way to prevent blurring. Use a wide camera angle and shoot from a distance. In these conditions, nominal hand-shaking (like I have) will not blur the image. You will get sea motion, but it won't be very noticeable or annoying as long as the object being recorded does not wander beyond the edge of the frame. To see this, take a second look at this video (link below) and notice how much the locomotive floats around the frame. It gets worse when I get closer (following the locomotive directly behind) and better when I later back off. It becomes more annoying once you see it, but we tend to be object focused and not video-quality focused, so we tolerate it.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/07vh5knmsjotfygjm9bxo/05-Three-Track-Test-Run-Steam.mp4?rlkey=c8tezq8s2fkjjvmv7qx3t0bek

[bob turner]

I believe we have progressed digitally to the point where we can fix a lot of that. I am thinking something like a digital autocorrelation function or similar.

Think of how great that would be on those old steam chasing videos!

I know they are stabilizing cameras in things like drones and helicopters, but I am thinking that it won't be long before we can inexpensively fix old videos (once they are digitized).

How are you with Z-transforms? That is where my expertise stopped (old dude).

[R.K. Maroon]

Bob is trying to smoke me out here. I will resist the temptation to hold forth at length, but will say that mechanical stabilization (holding camera steady) is always better than electronic or digital stabilization. The former prevents the problem, the latter tries to fix the problem. The obvious example is a blurred image --- no amount of post-processing can recreate an image that was never there to begin with.

As to sea motion, YouTube used to have an option (and maybe still does) that will remove camera shake from your video. I tried it once or twice and it just doesn't work on a video like the one just posted, where the camera is following a locomotive going around the layout. The problem is really hard because both the camera and the object are moving.

[gregj410]

Really nice track work. That SW navigated those turnouts so nicely at what looks like a reasonable spreed too. Forgive me if you already posted this, but what is the height of the modules? Looks like a great viewing height.

[R.K. Maroon]

Greg -- The layout deck height is 48". This was the standard when I joined the club. We agree that its a good viewing height, and it's also a convenient height to work on the layout. I suspect the height was chosen in part to discourage adventurous small hands from wandering onto the layout.

The network of turnouts in the switching area were salvaged from the club's previous "permanent" layout when we lost our space (almost seven years ago now). We were not sure we would be able to re-use them successfully, but, to our pleasant surprise, we have not had any operational problems. I for one never tire of watching trains navigate the array. The late Richard Moore scratch-built all these turnouts using RIght-0-Way points, frogs, rail, and switch ties. He did quite a few over the years and became proficient at it.

Jim

[E7]

Jim, A great topic and highly entertaining. Was wondering if you (the club, that is) plan to put plexiglass or some kind of catch fencing on the outer edge in case of errant locos?

I recall seeing some pictures of the club members in a back issue of O Scale News 48/ft and the late Mr. Moore had a rather luxurious growth of whiskers, if I am note mistaken.

From what I see history wise, it is not wise to have the home of a club's layout rely on the benevolence of a landlord.

Rich

[R.K. Maroon]

Rich, you have a very good memory. RIchard indeed had an impressive beard. Here he is trying to set it on fire:


https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/ezc8fin95njtewdis9jnq/Sparky.jpg?rlkey=iwrgoo912ycpe7jhqgvkfcx01

Richard and I spent a lot of time together working on the club layouts. He taught me how to lay track and build turnouts and was a true pleasure to work with. He was good natured and knew how to have a good time. He comes to mind often when the club is in session. He would have enjoyed seeing where we are today.


https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/jqukfdafpzosnnaq7hlht/Richard-Moore-Xmas-Eve-2015.jpg?rlkey=swk3nrl32eoq9toe4iuolb5wb

[E7]

Sounds like a really good guy! Not nearly enough like him around!

[De Bruin]

Yeah Richard was a real good guy, and a good worker too, I miss him as well.