Is it time to update N Trak Standards...???

[wm3798]

Inksky, did you migrate your argument over here because I already apologized for ruffling feathers and backed off at Atlas?  I think I've been convinced of two things...

1)  Alternative systems exist that I would be comfortable working with,
2)  There's nothing worse than fanatical devotion to fundamentalism.

It's time to sheath your lance and accept your laurels.  You won.

Lee

[inkaneer]

Inksky, did you migrate your argument over here because I already apologized for ruffling feathers and backed off at Atlas?  I think I've been convinced of two things...
1)  Alternative systems exist that I would be comfortable working with,
2)  There's nothing worse than fanatical devotion to fundamentalism.
It's time to sheath your lance and accept your laurels.  You won.

You drew a lot of lightning and not all was from me.  Ntrak is an N scale icon and despite what some people say it isn't a static world.  That's not to say it is for everyone.  It is for me.  So find whatever it is that is it for you but don't try to change my world because it doesn't suit you.  Maybe you should have rethought that post about expensive funerals before you posted it.  You didn't win a lot of friends with that one.

[Mr. G]

"second standard"???  Isn't that sort of an oxymoron? 

No.

  And what's wrong with creating an entirely new organization separate from Ntrak instead of trying a hostile takeover. 

The only hostility I'm seeing here and on the A-Board is from the grognards of the Ntrak community chafing at the idea of change.  If NTrak is truly about presenting it to the public, as the defenders keep claiming, then why not try to put the best foot forward, instead of appealing to the lowest common denominator?

[mmyers]

The only hostility I'm seeing here and on the A-Board is from the grognards of the Ntrak community chafing at the idea of change.  If NTrak is truly about presenting it to the public, as the defenders keep claiming, then why not try to put the best foot forward, instead of appealing to the lowest common denominator?

I'm sure that share of the public would be happy about the label. Truth is, we don't have to appeal to many of the particip[ants of this list. Modelrailroading already has you hook, line, and wallet.

Still can't figure out how changing three pieces of track and moving them 1/4 inch closer together will make a huge difference in the appearance of my modules. Doesn't the rest of the scenery count? Quite frankly I wish John hadn't posted those photos because the scenery on mine looks pretty stark.
Can you really tell the difference (or care to) between the ME code 55, Atlas code 55, Peco 55, and Atlas 80 on my modules. If you can, you'll know which ones are mine.

[John]

Martin .. I know which track is where 

Back to the topic ...

I personally don't like the 3rd track, and the optional mountain and whatever other tracks .. makes it look too much like a jumble for my tastes .. but then again, the only POFF I have, somebody else built, and it hasn't been in a show in 2 years ..  I much prefer our 1T modules, but even that gets old to run on at shows .. mainly because of the need to share the red line, especially when the red line is on DC and not DCC and all the politics that presents ..

Setting up and tearing down from shows is quite frankly a royal pain in the a$$ .. but a necessary evil .. and the current module designs could use some improvement there .. I would love to see some sort of mechanism that allows easier clamp up and joiner track attachment .. to me thats the weakness of the modular concept .. all those joiner tracks ..

I rarely run on a setup .. I leave that to others who don't have a lot of track at home to pull the long trains ..

There really is only one reason for me to do NTRAK .. I like the company of fellow NScalers, and many in our club are pretty damned good modelers, electricans, engineers, carpenters, etc .. so I learn from them ..  Dealing with the public is not my prime motivation ..

[wm3798]

Inkaneer,
I don't know your name, since you don't use it on the forums, so I can't really address this personally to you.

I agree with you, my comment about expensive funerals was off-handed and inappropriate.  The horse is out of the barn, and the apology I posted publicly obviously wasn't enough to close the door behind it.

It was not meant as a personal attack on anyone in particular, merely a metaphor that can be applied to any topic to illustrate that there are always people who don't like change, and in fact will go out of their way to block it, even if it is deemed possible, positive and desirable by a significant number of people, and sometimes that change can't happen until those people "go away."  Having been a small town politician, I know this type of person all too well.

My comment about the gene pool was related solely to antiquated products and designs, not to the people who choose to use them.  My point was that sooner or later the volume of these products will be eclipsed by the ongoing introduction of new products and designs, and N trak would be well behind the curve when that happens.   My point here was that if something better was the standard, then most people would simply use it, and many, perhaps a majority (who knows?) would upgrade their existing modules without a fuss. 

If you go back and re-read all that I posted in its entirety, I think you'll understand that I have a great deal of respect for N trak's concept and success.  My only question was if the concept would gain an advantage by being more welcoming to new products.  Nothing more, nothing less.  I guess I'll have to choose my words more carefully in the future.

Now, can we move on?
Lee

[inkaneer]

  And what's wrong with creating an entirely new organization separate from Ntrak instead of trying a hostile takeover. 

The only hostility I'm seeing here and on the A-Board is from the grognards of the Ntrak community chafing at the idea of change.  If NTrak is truly about presenting it to the public, as the defenders keep claiming, then why not try to put the best foot forward, instead of appealing to the lowest common denominator?
[/quote]

What you don't understand is that Ntrak is not some monolithic organizations staffed by automotrons that do things only one way.  In 35+ years individual member clubs have experimented with doing things like operations.  The point learned from all that is that the public doesn't want to see train operations. They want to see trains operate.  The entertainment in operations is with the one operating.  But kids [and adults too] like to count cars.  They want to see long trains go by and could care less if you are spotting that covered hopper next to a plastics factory.  Ntrak is basic stuff.  It answers those questions of  "How do you keep on the track", "How can you see something that small" and "Can that little engine pull all those cars?" that every non N scale person had in their minds.  In doing so it opens minds to the world of N scale.  And when you hand the controller over to some little kid who just walked up to the layout with his parents and say, "how about you help me run my train?" the real magic begins.  I've seen it happen time and time again.  That will not happen in operations.   

[bicknell]

Inkaneer is somewhat correct, but not thinking outside the box.  

If your idea of operations is taking a switcher out and swapping cars on 20 sidings and then returning to the yard, well, the public won't stand there and watch it.  Plain and simple, they find it boring.  I've seen folks do it at shows, they are ignored.

Long trains are the clear winner.  I get 10 times more attention from the public with my 100 car coal drag pulled by two little engines (they can do that?) than with any other train I run.

However, if you think outside the box there are some fun alternatives.  There's a guy named Don Kriegbaum from the Dayton group who built a module with an operating electromagnetic crane on it.  He operates it during shows loading scrap metal into gondolas.  However, he operates it from outside the layout, and encourages kids to run it with him.



I he's also in this video http://realityreduced.blip.tv/file/1119346/ check out about 12 minutes in for an interview with him.  You may want to start at 9 minutes though, and see some other animated modules.

To me, this is operations.  Perhaps not as much train operations, although he will spot some empty gons in place from time to time.  But it is an operating, moving part of the layout that the public loves to watch.

The unique thing about NTrak is that it is as much entertainment as it is modeling.  I really like entertaining folks but many find the public, well, annoying.  ;D  If you like entertaining then it's the right format for you, if not, stay away.

[inkaneer]

John wrote: "Setting up and tearing down from shows is quite frankly a royal pain in the a$$ .. but a necessary evil .. and the current module designs could use some improvement there .. I would love to see some sort of mechanism that allows easier clamp up and joiner track attachment .. to me thats the weakness of the modular concept .. all those joiner tracks .."

REPLY:  Set and tear down is a pain but it comes with the territory of having a modular layout.   Set up is more time and labor intensive but there are ways to reduce that.   Many hands make light work of big jobs.  In addition, getting rid of four foot modules in favor of six footers reduces set up time and effort.  I personally never liked the hexagonal corners be they 3 footers or four footers.  So I built "L" shaped corners with one leg being six feet long and the other four feet long.  In addition, I built end modules that measure six feet wide by 3.5 feet long.  These contain a 180 degree curve and each replaces 2 corners and one set of bridge tracks.  These end modules allow a larger radius curve than the usual three foot corners.  Both the "L" corners and the end modules will fit in the back of my minivan along with a couple of six foot straights.    We plan to use these at smaller shows where space is a premium.  We also have adopted a linear concept with a smaller "footprint".  We developed inside corner modules. We do "L" shaped Layouts as well as "U"'s and even a "J" shape.  "E"'s and "F"'s are possible with more modules.   We have even experimented with a new bridge track design that makes inserting bridge tracks so simple even a non Ntrak person can do it.  We want to do further testing on it to see how it will hold up.  It does require far better accuracy in the placement of the module tracks as far as that 2.5 inch distance from the sides of the module.  But, if perfected, it will eliminate hunting for the right length of track and eliminate the need for rail joiners. Just set the track in place and two clips it's that quick.  And all this is perfectly Ntrak compliant.

[inkaneer]

In response to Leo's post, so far the discussion has been essentially [not totally] about that 4.5 inch stip of module that houses the three community tracks. How about the rest of the module?  Leo mentioned the Dayton Ntrak group and the scrapyard.  Dayton also has a corner module with a drive-in theater with a movie playing.  OI know of other groups having similiar modules.  Dayton also has a corner module that features an African Safari animal park complete with tourist train.   Then there was the toronado module that originally was built by a member of the Gateway Ntrak club in St. Louis.  There are a lot more like that.  Put a turntable on a module and people will ask, "Does it operate?" Put a stream on a module with environtex water and people will ask, "Is it real?"  A member of our club has a combination transfer table and turntable. People stand there just watching it operate. Scenery counts big with the public and animation even bigger.  If I could change Ntrak the one thing I would definitely do is eliminate the POFF. And for those non Ntrak people out there POFF stands for Plain Old Four Footer.  It's the "plywood plains" module. The one that has a minimum of scenery and a minimum of effort. 

[sirenwerks]

...to illustrate that there are always people who don't like change, and in fact will go out of their way to block it, even if it is deemed possible, positive and desirable by a significant number of people, and sometimes that change can't happen until those people "go away."  Having been a small town politician, I know this type of person all too well.

I work with a few. There's a few in most every nonprofit and restrain organizations from effectively adapting. But the whole "If it ain't broke don't fix it." argument can not be applied, unless everyone involved is asked if it's broke. That includes former Ntrak participants, potential participants, and audience. And how many times do club members ask participants who leave in a huff or an unhappy looking audience member just how much they like what they're doing? And even when such a question is posed and a negative answer accepted, many times the receiver of the criticism decides to explain it away using a tertiary excuse, like "Oh, they were just having a bad day." or "That guy was a jerk anyway."

It's either groupthink or founder's syndrome, and it requires a lot of therapy to get over. I mean, look how many HO scale guys poo-poo N, despite the gains in product availability and quality we are seeing. I've poked my head into a few clubs over the last few years, Ntrak not being one of them (loops of three over-sized tracks killed me from the start), and they were all presented immediately as dysfunctional personality wars. They were either fiefdoms of a small cadre or over-democratic sloths. Pass.

Lee, you come up with a new mobile club 'standard' or start a One-Trak group in the Chesapeake Bay area and I will build a module or two. Just to help the hobby evolve.

[John]

REPLY:  Set and tear down is a pain but it comes with the territory of having a modular layout.   Set up is more time and labor intensive but there are ways to reduce that.   Many hands make light work of big jobs.  In addition, getting rid of four foot modules in favor of six footers reduces set up time and effort.  I personally never liked the hexagonal corners be they 3 footers or four footers.  So I built "L" shaped corners with one leg being six feet long and the other four feet long.  In addition, I built end modules that measure six feet wide by 3.5 feet long.  These contain a 180 degree curve and each replaces 2 corners and one set of bridge tracks.  These end modules allow a larger radius curve than the usual three foot corners.  Both the "L" corners and the end modules will fit in the back of my minivan along with a couple of six foot straights.    We plan to use these at smaller shows where space is a premium.  We also have adopted a linear concept with a smaller "footprint".  We developed inside corner modules. We do "L" shaped Layouts as well as "U"'s and even a "J" shape.  "E"'s and "F"'s are possible with more modules.   We have even experimented with a new bridge track design that makes inserting bridge tracks so simple even a non Ntrak person can do it.  We want to do further testing on it to see how it will hold up.  It does require far better accuracy in the placement of the module tracks as far as that 2.5 inch distance from the sides of the module.  But, if perfected, it will eliminate hunting for the right length of track and eliminate the need for rail joiners. Just set the track in place and two clips it's that quick.  And all this is perfectly Ntrak compliant.

So, in effect, you did change the "standards' .. 6 foot modules, bigger corners, etc .. maybe thats what we have been talking about all along ...

[Dave V]

I don't have a dog in this fight in that I've never been in an N Trak club...  But I can see both sides of the argument.  I'm tending toward the idea that N Trak ought to be left alone and that perhaps a new standard, Proto Trak or something along those lines, might be considered.  Look at how quickly T Trak took off...  T Trak's appeal is the reduced infrastructure (banquet tables versus free-standing benchwork), smaller footprint, and ease of construction (Unitrack).  T Trak has kind have gone all the way to one end of the spectrum (the super RTR)...  Might not a code 55 double-track (with optional Conrail-style controlled siding) standard appeal to the Railwire-type modelers on the other end of the spectrum?

Just a thought.

[bicknell]

If I could change Ntrak the one thing I would definitely do is eliminate the POFF. And for those non Ntrak people out there POFF stands for Plain Old Four Footer.  It's the "plywood plains" module. The one that has a minimum of scenery and a minimum of effort. 

Eliminating the POFF isn't the right answer, for two reasons.  First, we need a way to get new people into the hobby.  While I'll admit a 4'x'2 flat module is not the fanciest it can be made fairly nice, and is very easy for a new person.  I've seen 12 year olds build a POFF 90% on their own and have it turn out quite nice.  Second, there are a number of "utility" pieces on an NTrak layout.  For instance, I'm building a three track crossover on a pair of 4x'2' modules.  Can't fit it in 6' the way I want it, 8' is too long.  A pair of 4x'2's work nicely, and I want it flat to make the crossover work as nicely as possible.  While I want the layout to look good, the primary purpose of these modules is the operational capacity to move trains between tracks.  Also, when putting together layouts a couple of POFF's to close a loop made up of 8-20 foot scenes is necessary in most cases.

Now, all that said, I think clubs could do a lot more to encourage members to step up after they are have built a POFF or two.  A six foot module, or six foot module with one foot offset are both very nice.  Making a module set, say 3-4 4' modules or 2-3 6' modules where the ends are NTrak standards but the middle or not can make for 12-18 feet of scene that doesn't look at all like NTrak.  When you see these masterpieces they are amazing, but done too infrequently.

I think many folks think these larger module sets are too hard to transport or setup.  Here education is the key.  I know a guy who has 20' of yard that he insists on setting up and tearing down himself, and packs all in the back of his mini-van (ok, with the rear seat removed, but the front just folded down).  No trailers or large trucks.  He can set it up in under two hours, tear it down and pack it in 45 minutes.

Myself, I'm sitting on a plan for 4 6' modules making a 24' scene.  Living where there is not a big NTrak presence I have been sidetracked on four poffs and four corners so I have an "operating layout", but after that it's on to a big scene for me.

[inkaneer]

John writes: "So, in effect, you did change the "standards' .. 6 foot modules, bigger corners, etc .. maybe thats what we have been talking about all along ..."

REPLY:  Nope, everything is Ntrak compliant, 6 foot modules,  "L" corners, end modules, everything.
Ntrak standards say that minimum module size is 2 feet by 2 feet.  Max width is 3 feet.  There is no max length.  So my "L" corners are nothing more than a four foot corner with an attached two foot straight and is perfectly Ntrak compliant.