Where is "the line"?


I suppose it is my fault for not articulating it properly and the result was assumption piled upon misunderstanding. I certainly had no intention of upsetting anyone and I never meant to imply that my way was any better or worse than any other. Because I would not do it in no way could ever or should ever be considered as a mandate to anyone else not to do it. I just thought it was a little extreme to the extreme!

It struck a nerve, that's for sure! SHEESH! Take it easy guys, I'm on your side! LOL!
 
Maybe it has all been said. I'm not going to participate in this thread any more. I spend my bucks, and my time, as I choose, and if I were Tony, I'd attempt to explain the nuances available to lookers and interested parties about the hobby. The Model Railroader magazine is generally a newcomer's magazine anyway. Tony is the Major Domo who explains to those who care to learn that there are other ways to enjoy the hobby, and to evolve in it. While MR spends several issues describing how they build the basic Timetable and Weigh Bill on a slab of plywood, with two turnouts, others write in and showcase years of experience, in all scales and solving all types of problems.

"A man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?"
 
I say, "Vive la differance".

I'll second that!


If that's the case Louis, then I'll simply have to invite you to join Karl and me for the next quarterly Op Session on the CL&W!:D
Ken I would enjoy observing an operating session. Not having a clue of what to do or when to do it I might cause a problem if I did any more.
If you meet in the evening I'd be getting sleepy at about 8pm because I am almost always in bed by 9pm. :)

...
Now if I only had an extra 250K and some suitable land...
I'm with you!

I suppose it is my fault for not articulating it properly and the result was assumption piled upon misunderstanding. I certainly had no intention of upsetting anyone and I never meant to imply that my way was any better or worse than any other. Because I would not do it in no way could ever or should ever be considered as a mandate to anyone else not to do it. I just thought it was a little extreme to the extreme!

It struck a nerve, that's for sure! SHEESH! Take it easy guys, I'm on your side! LOL!
Bruce don't be so hard on yourself. This is a great thread that has taught me more than I have learned from any source in recent weeks. You opened up a discussion that has brought some new ideas into the light for me, thank you!

...

"A man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?"
Brilliant!
 
I suppose it is my fault for not articulating it properly and the result was assumption piled upon misunderstanding. I certainly had no intention of upsetting anyone and I never meant to imply that my way was any better or worse than any other. Because I would not do it in no way could ever or should ever be considered as a mandate to anyone else not to do it. I just thought it was a little extreme to the extreme!

It struck a nerve, that's for sure! SHEESH! Take it easy guys, I'm on your side! LOL!

No harm, no foul. You did sound like you were ranting a little. Maybe if we were all sitting around a table or in a living room drinking beers it would have sounded like you intended. This format allows for no emotion, body language, tones or facial expressions, so this happens sometimes. I agree with Louis, it was a good thread. I haven't posted in a while, so thanks for attracting my attention. I'll also restate: if this is a part of the hobby you haven't experienced, you should try it out. You'll be surprised.
 
Hey, it's ok, I get it! I'm done. No opinions "outside the lines" (MRR PC?) and for land's sake NO ASSUMTIONS or examples of what CAN be done vs what SHOULD be done when exploring possibilities of equipment usage will be forthcoming from me concerning power hook ups or running practices, scenery, industries or any other damned thing! Being SUCH a newb I'm reminded over and again that apparently I don't have the "right" to pontificate.

I'll just tug my forelock and be on my way.
 
Hey, it's ok, I get it! I'm done. No opinions "outside the lines" (MRR PC?) and for land's sake NO ASSUMTIONS or examples of what CAN be done vs what SHOULD be done when exploring possibilities of equipment usage will be forthcoming from me concerning power hook ups or running practices, scenery, industries or any other damned thing! Being SUCH a newb I'm reminded over and again that apparently I don't have the "right" to pontificate.

I'll just tug my forelock and be on my way.
Bruce, there are as many ways of model railroading as there are model railroaders.
Or, to put it another way, opinions are like posteriors. Everybody has one, some just smell better than others.
 
You started out by calling layout owners who don't operate during a session "INSANE".

That's how pretty much every layout owner that I know who has a formal operating session with more than a few people operates.

That's how I run an operating session.

Its OK to have an opinion but when you start calling people names and making value judgments on they way they operate, especially without having done it yourself and having miss-read the article, expect pushback.
 
Now now...nobody said you couldn't have an opinion. Of course nobody said it wouldn't get shot full of holes either! ;) That happens in forums.
 
If I had a million to spend on trains, I would have something that I could run or operate by myself, though with provision for others to come over and either play with trains, or operate as intended. I would not want to hold myself captive to not being able to run or operate because there's nobody there to help me.
Yes, in this day and age that is what computers are for. A layout should be able to have as many operators as is needed (even dispatcher) be they human or not. The museum hasn't quite gotten that far, we can run 100% computer, or 100% human, but not mixed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CSX_road_slug said:
If that's the case Louis, then I'll simply have to invite you to join Karl and me for the next quarterly Op Session on the CL&W
Ken I would enjoy observing an operating session. Not having a clue of what to do or when to do it I might cause a problem if I did any more.
If you meet in the evening I'd be getting sleepy at about 8pm because I am almost always in bed by 9pm. :)
Well if anyone is in Denver with a free Saturday on their hands I could take you to an OC&E operating session (as long as it isn't my week to dispatch). The day ends at 4:00 pm. so there is no conflict with bedtime.

WJLI26 said:
Now if I only had an extra 250K and some suitable land...
I'm with you!
I think you might be $750K short.
 
If I had a million to spend on trains, I would have something that I could run or operate by myself, though with provision for others to come over and either play with trains, or operate as intended. I would not want to hold myself captive to not being able to run or operate because there's nobody there to help me.

Just understand that Koester never said he was unable to operate anything by himself or the only way to run anything was to have 20 guys over. He was describing a full blown operating session when the whole railroad comes alive.
 
Yes, in this day and age that is what computers are for. A layout should be able to have as many operators as is needed (even dispatcher) be they human or not. The museum hasn't quite gotten that far, we can run 100% computer, or 100% human, but not mixed.

Well yes and no. Depends on your definition of "operations". If you mean just running trains to a schedule. Then yes a computer can do that. If you mean operating a railroad, then no a computer can't do that. A computer can't switch, cars a computer can't spot cars, a computer can't pull industries. If you deviate from the plan, a computer can't really dispatch either.

For me, I don't see the attraction of computer operated trains.
 
I think you might be $750K short.

You may be right :rolleyes:.

As far as computer operation, since I mostly operate on by myself, I don't really see a tremendous advantage ... right now. But, If I incorporate some of the ideas I've come up with, or some of the suggestions offered on forums, blogs or articles, I could see some automation and animation coming in the future. Right now, my priority is to get my core railroad operating. Building in some multi-operator capability comes next then - anything is possible.

Seriously, returning to the Op's premise, there is no one way of doing it when it comes to Model Railroading. I believe that the OP misinterpreted what TK was saying in his opinion piece, (and it was an opinion type article), and took exception to it. There are individuals out there that will pontificate on the proper way things should be done, but most of us just go about our hobby at are best ability.

This months MR also contains an article by a fellow who hangs out on the Yahoo MRC Forum, who wrote about building a signal system with Arduino microcontrollers. Way out of my league today, but something to learn about, as it may prove useful, down the road. I'm still digesting Bruce Chubb's series from the last eight or so RMC issues. I'm very familiar with signal systems, but found this series informative and useful. I suppose one has to approach this hobby with an open mind. Otherwise one misses entirely too much.
 
A computer can't switch, cars a computer can't spot cars, a computer can't pull industries. If you deviate from the plan, a computer can't really dispatch either.
So your trying to say that computers can land a probe on mars, auto drive an automobile on the highways, and dynamically recognize faces (and even specific faces) in motion pictures, but they can't "operate" toy trains? I think I need more convincing before I can buy that statement. I believe the only reason it isn't done is because of cost. I can't imagine fitting 1000 box cars with remotely controlled knuckle couplers and some sort of sensors to identify their reporting marks, let along sensing on every single industrial siding (and any other place a car could be spotted) to know exactly which car is there. I'm not saying it wouldn't still be lost with a mechanical malfunction though, like when the Kadee sticks to one side and won't couple properly, car derails, or stall on dirty track, but the basic concepts necessary for moving a car from a yard to an industry seem programmable. We know computers can build and schedule trains.

I do agree on the second thought on the appeal of a layout with just computerized trains. We do it at the museum just because guests want to see trains moving and we don't have enough people to always be manually running them. I've always seen a computer as just filling in like an extra board when a call board vacancy or absent dispatcher occurs due to lack of humans.

Actually this does give me an idea. I might make my next set of AI students have their programs solve a John Alan time saver instead of doing the traditional (and by now almost boring) traveling salesman problem. I'll have to ponder on that a while but it seems like it is still an NP-complete problem.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well if anyone is in Denver with a free Saturday on their hands I could take you to an OC&E operating session (as long as it isn't my week to dispatch). The day ends at 4:00 pm. so there is no conflict with bedtime.

I think you might be $750K short.

I would enjoy that and the train ride to Denver would be great. Should be some "interesting" people on the train as well. I might be the only one coming to visit Denver for model railroad smoke.

If I hit the Power Ball I'll let you know how far $250K goes, but I'll keep another $750K in reserve, better make it a million or two.

If it were any other project I would bet my bottom dollar I will come in under budget, but when it comes to my trains I have yet to keep from going over budget for more than a month at a time.

I find it best not to set a budget, I stopped doing it all together. If I see at the end of a month I have some of my budget left I go shopping and blow the budget out of the water!

I just buy what I want and stop sweating the details. Instead of all cash my grandsons will get trains when I finally expire.
 
What I meant was, computers can't do it NOW. I agree that given millions of dollars and years of development you could probably get a computer operation that could do industrial switching.

I also know that despite millions of dollars and decades of effort prototype railroads have not been able to successfully automate dispatching. A model setting would be much simpler a scenario and would need as rigorous safety protocol so it might be able to be done.

As I said, you can get a computer to run trains around a layout on a script today, but today, right now, there is no way to automate switching. By the way, that Mars probe needs a whole room full of people to program it's every move, so it's not really autonomous.
 



Back
Top