Has anyone tried to model a sizable chunk of a class 1 in Z-Scale?
Is this a trick question? A LARGE Z-Scale layout? Don’t those combination of terms pretty much fall into the category of “Oxymoronisms”, like:
Jumbo shrimp
Honest laywer*
Corporate integrity
High-pressure vacuum salesman
(Feel free to add more…)
Tom
- Disclaimer: This is NOT a slap to any of you who ARE honest lawyers. [:)]
It would be cool to build a basement size Z layout–Then send it off on it’s merry way and either not see if fr 3 hours or follow it around with a magnifying glass.
I don’t know if you could consider it large, but there was a Southern Pacific layout in Z scale featured in the March 04 issue of MR. Showed 4 seasons on the SP. Not a lot of trackage or operations, but some cool scenery.
I have a friend who built one in a briefcase, another on a ranger type hat - on the brim!
Bob Boudreau
A guy at my club was a professor at the local university. He built a z layout in his center (pencil) desk drawer and would run it while the class was working on projects/ tests, etc.
I’d hate to be in his class. Pop quiz every day so he can railfan.
(sorry for the above mistake…)
All depends on what is considered the word “big”.
Myself I’m currently working on a walk-around style Z scale layout which will occupy all my 6.5 x 4 meter-trainroom (sorry fellows but as an european I’m not very familiar with inches, 1/2, 4/16, 87/529, 1579534/5431975461321247 inches[:D]…) that is roughly 22" x 15".
Why having chosen Z scale, as my available room could allow a big N scale empire, or even an honest HO one?
Because my two main goals are:
-running long prototypical trains (up to 80 cars), who amaze me as here in Europe trains are mostly f#@in’ electric powered passenger trains or the same way boring bullet trains.
-having broad curves: my tightest samples are 50 cm / 20" radius, not far from a prototype 110 meter-radius.
The origin of all this is a serie of trips spent in California between 1995 and 2003 (I work as a crew member), and the opportunity of seeing trains when I was driving a rental car. That’s why I became fond of the famous Tehachapi Pass, where I spent many days railfanning; that’s why I elected to model that road (at last some chosen locations).
And for my above purposes any scale other than Z would have been unsuitable.
As I’m a slow worker I hope having completed my trackwork and my wiring within 3 years or so.
If you plan to spend vacation time in France (yes, why not ?[:D]) don’t hesitate to contact me, so as to show you my work with a great enjoyment.
Dominique
Two interresting links for a medimu sized Z scale layout (1 x 6 meter):
http://hometown.aol.de/redrockrail
http://www.zettzeit.ch/lonesome.html
N’joy!
Dominique, I just spent a week in France (Paris and Lyon) and my boys and I did not find the TGV boring at all! Actually we had a great time, first time riders and I suppose the initial reaction is amazement at the smooth running and the speed. However, I could imagine that a layout based on the TGV system would become boring quite quickly. I am now missing desperately CHeese!!
Hi Simon, I agree with you as a passenger. But as a railfan I’m sensitive to the thrill of a 12000-ton freight train struggling on a 2.5% slope (guess what I’m meaning, from my above post!); on the opposite the sight and the sound of a bullet train at its cruising speed leave me completely cold.
Dominique
It is rumored that Sally Jesse Rapheal, has a very large Z scale Layout in her home, some say it is on the order of 20’x10’ or such. but not having ever seen her layout, i can’t say what size it really is.
Read the story about the desert hog!!! [:D]
Tom
DD
No need to apologize for measuring in meters. Americans are slow and lazy in continuing to use their obsolete measuring system. They should have made the change decades ago but are too arogant to change. Eventually they will catch up with the rest of the world but until then, it makes it difficult and expensive for the rest of us. You are correct in that Americans are so foolish as to continue to measure by 1/2 and 1/4 and 1/8 and 1/16 and 1/32 and 1/64, ad nasueum when the rest of the world found a practical alternative. One of the reasons I like Kato unitrack is that I can measure in meters. I couldn’t bear to use Atlas material with American measurements. By the way I am an American but I am not slow or lazy enough to use the obsolete American “system”. Of course it is stretching the imagination to call it a “system”.
Larry
Larry,
I hear you, but “changing” isn’t that simple.
Should we scrap our current railroad tracks all over the country because the gauge is 4ft, 8-1/2"
Not that simple.
similarly, throwing out / modifying machinery, measuring tools, etc. isn’t trivial.
As a mechanical engineer, I would love to switch, but it’s just not that easy.
In college, we did 95% of our engineering schoolwork using the metric system. I think we’d all agree it’s superior.
The US probably had a lot more of the “american” system infrastructure in place than other areas of the world, making the switch much more difficult, since we’re not starting from scratch (just like our standard track gauge).
How much do you weigh? My guess is you’d answer in pounds. It’s so built into our lives, it’s hard to change.
Ah well. If God had wanted us to measure in metric He would have given us two meters at the end of our legs.[swg]
Also, you can’t play real football on a 100 meter field - who ever heard of 4th and millimeters[?][%-)]
Enjoy
Paul
CARRfan
You can’t reason with drunks or the self appointed experts.
Even Dominique had enough class to put a smiley face in his post.
Give someone a set of metric tools for Christmas and look out.
Dominque,
Malhereusement, vos liens ne fonctionnent pas. [:(]
Regarding converting to the metric system …
In the early 1970s, Canada’s federal government passed legislation forcing conversion to metric. Despite 30+years of official “metric-ism”, we still buy 2x4s for wall studs (still at 16" centers, not 40.64cm) ; 4x8ft sheets of plywood; Canadian football is still played in yards and feet; and CN and CP (et al.) still use 4’-8.5" guage as standard.
The youngest generation knows nothing of the old “imperial” (british) system of feet, inches, pounds, ounces, and farenheit. Some of my own generation (35-ish) use a mix of both metric and imperial. Many of my parents’ (70-ish) generation wouldn’t know a kilogram from an encephalogram if it bit them on the nose. As for distance, these days that seems to be measured more in hours than in miles or kilometres so it doesn’t to make any difference whether we’re 300km or 180miles apart. Either way, its still a 3hr drive.
CARRfan and IRONROOSTER :
You don’t need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just change the water. As I said above, the NFL like the CFL (Canadian Football League) can still use yards and feet. The railways would just use the metric equivalent of 4’-8.5" as the standard guage (= 143.51cm or 1.4351m or 14351mm).
Ball Bearings, Retaining Rings, Screws, Nuts, Washers, Sheet Metal Thicknesses.
These are just a couple items that come to mind from industry. Instead of asking for a ball bearing with a 1" inner diameter and a 1.25" Outer Diameter, you’d have to ask for a ball bearing with a 25.4mm ID and a 31.75mm OD.
It’s theoretically possible. But if I tried to spec a 25.4mm ID ball bearing, I’d be throwing a wrench into a machine that seems to be working ok.
A possible better transition would be to slowly start using metric sized things - using metric sized bearings for example. But if they’re harder to come by, I’d be crazy to spec something metric just to do it (bearings are easy to come by, so maybe they’re already on the way to a nice transition).
I agree, the situation is not the best. But there is so much machinery, etc. in place, it will be hard to change.
With the advent of computer controlled machinery, it may get easier in time - the computer doesn’t care if you want to use inches or mm, which is nice. But if I currently take a part drawing dimensioned in metric to a machine shop in this country, I’d get a price increase because of the conversion that may have to take place. So I wouldn’t do that!
I’d love to change. When I got out of school, I was totally annoyed at having to use the American system. But it’s so deeply engrained, changing it anytime soon isn’t very likely.
What’s the speed limit on your local freeway? (you probably know it in miles per hour).
Again, not a fan of the American system, just realizing it’s here to stay for a while longer.
And sadly, when I have to do some extreme calculations, I usually do them in the metric system, then convert back to American later. Doing any type of calculating is SO much easier in the metric system.
Thanks for your comments Carr. Perhaps I read it incorrectly but it appears gv may have been implying that I am a “drunk or self appointed expert” whatever that may mean. Of course changes usually require some effort but that does not mean that changes should not be undertaken. Almost the entire rest of the world made the change to metric long ago and benefitted from it. Had Americans made the change long ago much loss could have been avoided.
Much design and manufacturing is already done in metric in this country. It is the consumers at home who have not made much effort to change but they are slowly changing. I believe it is a mistake to change very slowly rather than quickly so as to get the benefits sooner rather than later.
Glad to hear from a fellow engineer. I was a civil engineer before becoming an attorney. As an engineer, it is frustrating to know most of the rest of the world has a good measuring system while Americans insist on using the obsolete American measurements. I believe engineers, having some understanding, should take more initiative in changing. I can understand why uninformed people might resist change but engineers have little excuse for not taking the initiative. I could never understand why engineers wouldn’t take more initiative. Perhaps engineers are most to blame for this country being so far behind the rest of the world in measuring.
It is ironic that medical professionals get their education and training with metric units and then use obsolete American units when they weigh and measure patients and communicate with patients. Like engineers they could also use metric in their practice. Patients will learn quickly if doctors communicate that way.
By the way, our railroad gauge does not have to change. Our gauge is 1.435 meters just like most of the rest of the world. Distances are the same regardless of what unit of measurement you use to measure them.
Larry