开云体育

Compiled by: Ivo A. Benda.



NEW REVELATION

1) THE NEW REVELATION OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, Peter D. F., 1992, 779 original pages, complex version of The Lord Jesus Christ about TODAY'S SITUATION EARTHLY HUMANKIND including history and ways solving in 30 chapters. Received in 1988. KEY MATERIAL ! ! !

2) FUNDAMENTALS OF HUMAN SPIRITUALITY, Peter D. F., 1982, 262 pages, expose human spirituality in relation to Creation. Covered in 1982.

3) WHO ARE YOU AND WHY ARE YOU HERE ?, Peter D. F., 1984, 256 pages, position earthly man in Creation. Processed in 1984.

4) MESSAGES FROM WITHIN, Peter D. F., 1982, 278 pages, further information extension of The New Revelation.

5) FOUR CONCEPTS OF THE SPIRITUAL STRUCTURE OF CREATION, Peter D. F., 1983, 119 pages, further flaring information of The New Revelation.

6) MAJOR IDEAS OF THE NEW REVELATION, Peter D. F., 1985, 266 pages, next information extension of The New Revelation.

7) COROLLARIES TO THE NEW REVELATION OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST , Peter D. F., 1997, 352 pages. Received in 1992-4. Last completive information to The New Revelation. Indicate read as far as up triple read through previous books.


Pictures and diagram wasn't in original books, was processed by Ivo A. Bendou on account of better illustration one chain of events (no however of all, it unfortunately that way isn't possible).

Books "The New Revelation" are concerning lifely everyone on the planet Earth, because everyone has a suite - material body - fabricated by pseudocreators ! ! ! Understanding this fact gives a possibility in solving everyone`s problem on the planet Earth.

Please, extend these information with love in heart to all directions, don't worry of nothing, primarily to school - teachers, officials and scientists and everyone who are interested in, remember on ours dear journalist and politicians, which we are loving so much. Will it be done with the help of many people and big scrape for pseudocreators.

1508. Purgative event on 9/11/ 2001 in New York (301). (Received by Ivo A. Benda)
9/14/2001 9:02 - 9:41 A.M.
Place : Ceska Lipa, Czech Republic

Dear Ivo,

sincerely greeting you, me, Ashtar - commander of a Grand cosmic squadron. Yes, I'm glad that you put together this way and I can hand over the new information.

As we informed you, earthly humankind, many times in hundreds of our messages, on basis of YOUR CHOISES - earthly humankind - the purgative processes of planet Earth are proceeding.

She purifies more and more of a coarse vibration energies, these are partly thoughts of negative people which are aired and partly originators themselves - planet Earth than moves theirs souls to other dimensions and darker worlds this way, where they will have a number of choices in their lives, where to go, whether further - deeper into the dark worlds (they are many), or back home - to the Light - to the True Creation - heaven - where is an infinite number of various worlds.

Now we are witnesses one of stages of the purgative processes, and no one of you can't imagine, how much coarse vibrations - negative thoughts - emitted the crew of "Titanic" - The Twins (WTC) - for the 28 years their existence, and how much woe had been caused to the other people and to the planet Earth this way. It simply was one of the strongest coarse energy radiators on the planet Earth. It signifies not, those, who bodily erased this coarse vibration center, are "the saints" and led by the Light. Here holds the well-known rule - the Dark will destroy itself.

Herewith you can take a note, how all the media are under baton of negative aliens again - the pseudocreators and the saurians - they widely used their control posts and massively deluged billions of human senses by their coarse energy control programs - energies. Thereby these people being more manageable, declining vibrations themselves and being in a even stronger trap of the negative state. There have been invited a lot of people of various professions into media (chats after the attack), but as you have mentioned yourself, just very spiritual - amorous people weren't there. It isn't by chance, those are unacceptable for their time-proven programs of evil and fear. It's like this your "democracy". Rank of people have founded out already, they are in low water, exactly in accordance with an esoteric energy principle - "IDENTICAL POLARIZES IDENTICAL" - so "WHAT YOU ARE EMITING, THIS YOU ARE GETTING BACK AS WELL", only the time of return is differ (because of edification).

Yes, then what someone inseminates, so is it reaped, whether evil or good - thereabouts no difference. That is why, dear Ivo, try to emit the good and the love further to reap the good and the love too - and you are on the right way because you're feeling what you're reaping yourself.

Yes, the time has gone ahead, there will be another events and you on the mission of light, you're primarily the soothers with your love and humility, harmony and peace. Your open hearts will generate a "salvage net" to those who will capture. There's no need to watch those coarse shots in media all round, it's enough just let informed and go on the way of light - the right one. You have the inner guidance and so you're not referred to an outer means of communication. Thereby those, who are left to the coarse energy media, will further get through into a still deeper abyss, what they have prepared themselves in cooperation with saurians and pseudocreators coming from the hells.

Stay forceful within these last days of the old world and daily sense the right time of your recall - elevation of vibrations (the ascension) to a 5th dimension of the planet Earth. There you'll be able to fully live in amorous world and help those, who are getting through into the abyss at the same time.

Dear Ivo, this message was given to you by Ashtar - the commander of the Grand cosmic squadron."

"And now me Ptaah, the commander of the Cosmic squadron from Pleiades, I'm joining. Yes, I also heartily greeting you and wishing fine amorous day with floods of love, which I'm sending to you. You are longing for the New Earth in the 5th dimension, I now, your point of outgoing is coming day by day, the events of final partition getting a fast drift and everything accelerates.

Who didn't use a time to work on, now easily turns into a toy - puppet of saurians and is unfortunately directed to the darker worlds than the planet Earth in the 3rd and in 4th dimension at the present. Yes, we-all Cosmic people are sending love to terrestrials all the time and helping those who are wondering. Yes, we know it from many other planets where the negative state came to final showdown, such a theatre isn't unknown for us. These control programs of the 2nd side are established for billions of years and already proved on a number of alternative planets. But we-all, your brothers and sisters are helping people who are turning very truly to God - the Creator Primary or to us, beings of the Light. But we are able to help only to those of callers, who are trying to live in harmony with the divine order, themselves. The "ruthless capital men" don't belonging among these - those, who are knifing masses of other people of energy and that's where they're in effect most successful. Between those comes generally the staff of 400 firms in the Twins, which were nonexisting since the morning of 9/11/ 2001. Yes, none of those who are tampering the divine order will feel safe anywhere after this another Dark forces action. Namely it's the revenge which has been chosen by them.

Just emanate the love and the humility, the harmony and the good farther, brothers and sisters of the Light, because your positive emanation will select you within these final days of the partition of humankind in the progress to the higher creation.

Yes, the rain in the Czech country remains with a small intervals for a week yet, since Friday the 9/7/2001, of purpose to clean up your air to the limit in advance before the 9/11/2001, in order the next coarse vibration floods (broaden by media into the senses of controlled people) absorb easily and can clean up new coarse vibrations of those people who are supplied by media and airing it on - over 90% of people ! (note: the constant rain took about a month finally ...)

Because here in the Czech country there is a relatively greatest percentage of folks on the light mission, so this is a help you from our beloved the Creator Primary of all and of all. Yes, be still sure on the way of light in the future and further emanate the love and the harmony - be the lightly port in this stormy sea of the last days.

Thousands of brothers and sisters in our ships everywhere above you are sending love and crossing fingers for fulfilling your light missions.

This was told to you with love and delight by Ptaah, the commander of the cosmic squadron from Pleiades.

Thank you beloved light friends, thank you the Creator Primary for all the help. Ivo with love.

Hello --

Sorry, Jeff, for the delay in getting back about this -- work's been
kinda busy!

Thanks for posting the info on the Rice book. If anyone is searching
for this book on-line, it might help to have the ISBN number.

The ISBN number for "Small, Smart & Practical Track Plans" is --

0890244162

I'd be interested to know how many North American modellers have
adopted the British techniques of fiddle yards or traverser tracks or
even Rice's more radical interchange track "elevator". I think these
solutions can be useful but they may require some compromises in what
you expect from your layout.

For example, I was sketching some layout designs for a (roughly) 10-
by-12 space and was discussing the possibility of using a "train
turntable" with a friend. In the layout I was sketching, I needed a
way to turn trains after they travelled through the main scene on the
layout, but I did not have room for a loop of any sort.

In addition to the engineering challenges I'd be up against, my
friend made a very good observation: having to operate the special
table or shelfwork during the operating session could really detract
from one's overall enjoyment of the layout.

My friend was concerned that the VERY OBVIOUS "model railroad"
thoughts imposed by having to deal with a full-size mechanical and
electronic interlocking system, movable benchwork and the concern
over accidentally sending models on a one-way trip to the floor would
really get in the way of operating trains and enjoying the layout. I
think he made a very good point and it was not really something that
I had thought of until then.

The point I want to make is that these special solutions -- traverser
tracks, flying interchanges, train turntables -- can be made to work
and can prove to be practical, but you might want to consider how
integral a part of train operations the special solution will become.

If it is something that MUST be employed to get a train through the
scenes on your layout -- that is, if you have to operate the special
solution right in the middle of a switching job or a local turn --
you might want to evaluate how that's going to affect the layout's
operations and your expectations from the layout.

If it's the only way you're going to be able to operate trains in a
very small space, then it might be worth it. If it's something
that's going to get in the way of normal operations, you might want
to reconsider it, as I did on that particular plan.

All that said, though, I'd be really interested to hear from anyone
who has built such a contraption and how they use it on their
layout. I'd be interested to hear about how it affects operations
and how it has been integrated into operations.

Thanks!

Jon Piasecki


--- In small-layout-design@y..., thehatchers@t... wrote:

Hi Folks,
I haven't seen much on this list lately so I thought I'd
get some conversation going.
I just picked up the Ian Rice book "Small, Smart & Practical
Track Plans" and had a read through. Lots of good ideas though
the U.S. exchange is a killer!
I'd be interested in seeing what the rest of you think about it.
One thing that I found quite nifty was the Verticalia Belt line
which had switching layouts on 3 different levels connected by a
removable staging yard.
So, you could assemble your train on the top level classification
yard, run it onto the portable staging and connect it to the middle
level yard and carry out your tasks, then onto the staging yard and
down to the lower level to do your set out and pick ups, returning
to the top via staging with an entirely different consist for the
yard.
Coincidentally,I had just finished reading about David Barrow's

final

thoughts on the South Plains District switching layout (MR Oct '97).
In that article he had devised a movable staging yard with the

added

benefit of not having to have the layout sections connected, or

even

in the same room.
It seems to me it wouldn't be that much of a stretch to merge the 2
ideas together: instead of moving the staging yard around on the
horizontal, you could put both sections on one wall with brackets

and

simply move the staging yard vertically. The result: all the fun in

a

fraction of the space!
As I've stated before, I model in a closet, literally, so this is
somewhat of a revelation for me in terms of the possibilities.
Thoughts, anyone?
Jeff

Jon and list,

These items pop up now and then in the model press when they seem to be short on anything of substance or want to introduce something "new" to the hobby. As one friend of mine put it, "There really hasn't been much of anything new in the hobby for the past forty years - most of the ideas are stolen or reworks of something from the past."

IMO, they are gimmicks and really aren't employed in the real world on a serious layout. When I see things like track elevators (vertical switch - been there, read that a L-O-N-G time ago) swivel plates, train turntables, and other gimmicks, I just move on to more serious and realistic articles.

Not trying to be difficult, but really people, has anyone ever seen one of these contraptions in use on a real layout. And if so, I bet it is only one or two of you on probably just one layout each, if that. Hardly a ground swell.

Well I have to go now and get back to work on the anti gravity interchange track which is picked up by a radio controlled model of the Goodyear blimp using advanced photon modulation technology and carried away to Oz - or is that never-never land? Who cares. I'm sure some model railroad mag will pay me to print it.


At 05:55 AM 2/23/01, jonp@... wrote:

The point I want to make is that these special solutions -- traverser
tracks, flying interchanges, train turntables -- can be made to work
and can prove to be practical, but you might want to consider how
integral a part of train operations the special solution will become.

Paul Kossart - Peru, Illinois, USA
BRHS, La Salle & Bureau County Model Railroad Club

Modeling the Fictional CB&Q Illiniwek River Branch in HO in the 1960's...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Serving Agriculture and Industry in the Illiniwek River Valley since 1904."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--- In small-layout-design@y..., Paul/Celine Kossart <kozys@t...>
wrote:


IMO, they are gimmicks and really aren't employed in the real world
on a serious layout. When I see things like track elevators (vertical
switch - been there, read that a L-O-N-G time ago) swivel plates,
train turntables,and other gimmicks, I just move on to more serious
and realistic articles.

Not trying to be difficult, but really people, has anyone ever seen
one of these contraptions in use on a real layout. And if so, I bet
it is only one or two of you on probably just one layout each, if
that. Hardly a ground swell.

Hey there, Paul.
Despite the fact that there's only 10 of us, I wouldn't make that bet.
This is SMALL layout design, where the nature of our
compromises are more prone to be "gimmicky" than in
other designs.
When you think about it, all layouts use gimmicks to satisfy
their creators' need to have operations in limited space. We are
just so used to them that we don't think of them as "gimmicks"
anymore. Rather, they are "solutions" to our lack of space issues.
Examples would include:
1) Hidden staging.
2) Helixes/ multideck layouts
3) Selective compression
In our situations, the space is SO limited, that more drastic steps
may need to be taken. The result: compromises that others perceive to
be gimmicks.
These gimmicks don't exist in an intellectual vacuum. They really
are used. I may have an advantage here as I am a member of the BRMNA
(British Railway Modellers of North America)where most folks are used
to making do with a lot less space. These ideas aren't "new", in fact
I suspect most of them pre-date HO when a lot of Brits were trying to
fit their O scale layouts into considerably smaller abodes. You'd be
hard pressed to look through one of their monthlies without coming
across one or more of these "gimmicks". Just take a look at Paul
Dolkos' 1996 MRP article to see what I'm talking about.
However, if you're looking for examples close to home, you need go
no further than MR:
1) Barrow's South Plains layout revisited (staging on the fly)
2) Dolkos' Tight Yankee/Compact Dixie (sector plate)
3) Ben King's TC&NW (complete train turntable at Grizzly Flats)
4) Paul Scoles (moveable staging via carry ferry)
5) Nick Palette's portable BN switching layout(sector plate)

Also, there is a fellow up here in Vancouver, B.C., who had his layout
on the Trains '96 tour. I think his last name is Green. I know he was
mentioned in some capacity on ldsig not too long ago in connection
with the thread on teenagers and model railroading. If memory serves,
he has a multideck point to point where each terminus is a well
constructed traverser. It's not a small layout either by any stretch!
Summary: These "gimmicks" are used extensively over the pond and in
increasing numbers here as space becomes more of a premium. They are
referred to as solutions because they work. The use of gimmicks will
increase as operational interest increases with a
corresponding decrease in available space. I suspect that is why this
group is called Small Layout Design vs. Nice Diorama Design. Finally,
I'm pretty sure that the above authors would consider their efforts to
be serious and realistic in both their intent and execution. YVMV.
Now, let's see what we can do about that train turning problem....
Jeff

Hi Joseph,
Just thought I'd take a look for any new updates.
The photos are great. Looks like the layout is really coming
along nicely.
Kudos to your wife on the kits!
Jeff

The new up--- In small-layout-design@y..., Joseph Curtis
<jcurtis@m...> wrote:

My layout is a 7' x 4' cockpit-style layout based on one of the

plans in

Iain Rice's book "Small, Smart, and Practical Layouts". It will

eventually

grow on either end. Even though I live in a house, I have no

basement (not

seimically sound in my neighborhood) and have to share the 10' x

10'
extra

room as the home office. Another design consideration was that we

are

planning on moving in a couple of years, so I thought I would start

small,

keep it transportable, and learn as I went.

The benchwork is complete. I used 1" x 4" for the frame, 1/4"

plywood for

the decking, 2" x 2" for legs (braced with leftover 1" x 4"). Blue

foam was

secured to the plywood with Liquid Nails. I haven't installed any

roadbed

yet because I'm playing with the track plan using actual track. I

used 3rd

Plan-It for the initial design, but there's nothing like a little

actual

operation to work out kinks in the design. I've laid the track

right
on the

blue foam and used track nails to tack it in place so I can

operate.
This

has caused me to re-design my plan from what I've published on my

web site.

I need to update the track plan and also upload some new photos. Be
forewarned that some of the photos may take a couple of minutes to

download

if you are on a slow dial-up connection.

My wife loves to build Campbell-style kits (which she could do

during the

apartment years), and we have a few already to go when the scenery

gets a

little further along. BTW, I have placed the kits on the blue foam

as a part

of testing operations. Made a difference in the track plan. I

discovered

that I had too much track and my buildings were in less than ideal

places.

For example, she had constructed Campbell's "Brett's Brewery" and

it
looked

great. The original draft of the plan would have put this kit back

in the

corner where one couldn't admire all the detail and work she put

into it, so

I moved it to a more prominent location on the layout, the

trade-off
being

that the track is on the far side of the building. So until I get a

walk

around throttle, I have to literally look through the brewery's

lower floor

to spot the car (which is easy if you also leave the box car's door

open:

align the daylight). Little things like this have convinced me that
"operationing your plan" early will make for a better layout.

Feel free to check out what's currently on the web site now and

check back

every so often because I do update it at least once a week. The URL

is:

Joseph R. Curtis
Superintendent & Shay Driver
Mendocino Coast Lumber & Railroad Company

Hello All --

Paul, you're going to hate Model Railroad Planning 2001! :o)

When I saw the teaser on the cover that reads "The Helix Killer", my
first thought was "Could that be an elevator or something?" But I
dismissed the thought, thinking that "Nah, no-one would actually do
it."

Well -- there it is on page 78. An article by Dick Roberts on
building a whole-train elevator. And point one in the "Learning
points" box is "Just because everyone else isn't doing it doesn't
mean you shouldn't give it a try".

I agree that these sorts of things are rather exotic (at least in
North America) and you're not likely to find them on many layouts
here. However, for modellers with very limited space, they may solve
some problems and provide some opportunities.

For example: you want some staging on a shelf layout but don't want
to sacrifice an entire shelf to a staging yard, or make a shelf
excessively deep for a yard. An option might be to put space for a
single track behind some building flats and use a two, three or four-
track elevator in that space.

I would not be overly concerned about it being "gimmicky", but I
_would_ be concerned about:

* the engineering costs
(time, complexity, reliability, maintentance)

* the impact on train operations
(will it be a hassle to operate during a
session and will it detract from the
miniature world illusion?)

Used for staging, I think an elevator has the potential to add a lot
to a layout. Not sure that I would try it myself, but I think it
could be done.

While you don't see elevators, sector plates and traverser tables
often in North America, you do see sector plates and traversers
frequently on British layouts - and almost always on serious layouts
featuring high-quality models.

Thanks --

Jon Piasecki

jonp@...



--- In small-layout-design@y..., Paul/Celine Kossart <kozys@t...>
wrote:

Jon and list,

These items pop up now and then in the model press when they seem

to be

short on anything of substance or want to introduce something "new"

to the

hobby. As one friend of mine put it, "There really hasn't been

much of

anything new in the hobby for the past forty years - most of the

ideas are

stolen or reworks of something from the past."

IMO, they are gimmicks and really aren't employed in the real world

on a

serious layout. When I see things like track elevators (vertical

switch -

been there, read that a L-O-N-G time ago) swivel plates, train

turntables,

and other gimmicks, I just move on to more serious and realistic

articles.

Not trying to be difficult, but really people, has anyone ever seen

one of

these contraptions in use on a real layout. And if so, I bet it is

only

one or two of you on probably just one layout each, if that.

Hardly a

ground swell.

Well I have to go now and get back to work on the anti gravity

interchange

track which is picked up by a radio controlled model of the

Goodyear blimp

using advanced photon modulation technology and carried away to

Oz - or is

that never-never land? Who cares. I'm sure some model railroad

mag will

pay me to print it.

Thanks Jeff! I've been busy laying track, so I need to get so more digital
photos taken of my progress. I've also started work on the "bridge" that
will connect the two penninsulas to provide the continuous running. The
liftout section will be modeled as a trestle. I'll post a photo of how I
built the framing for the lift out section, including the hand-holds so that
the trestle remains secure while being moved.

If anyone is interested in seeing progress as of a couple of weeks ago:

Hello All --

How would the members of this list feel about the list finally "going
public"?

small-layout-design (SLD) is presently "not listed in directory" at
Yahoo Groups. I wanted to keep it this way initially to see how
things pan out at LDSIG and LayoutConstruction.

LDSIG has gotten to be quite a noisy place without a lot being said
about layout design lately.

LayoutConstruction is growing nicely and it seems to be evolving into
a pretty good general discussion group.

So – I'm thinking that the time may be here for SLD to do an IPO and
finally go public – that is, get listed in the Yahoo Groups directory
and undertake some self-promotion to build membership and get more
discussion happening.

As the moderator of the group, there's just one thing that I would
really like to encourage:

** I'd like for us to stay on topic. **

On topic for this group is small layout design, construction and
operation. On topic for us can range from how you found and
researched a layout design element to how you actually built and
operate your layout. Even if you have a larger layout, you can stay
on topic here by discussing your approaches to planning and the
lessons you learned in the process.

OFF topic for this group would be posts about where to find homasote,
which type of homasote to use, how to carry homasote home in the car,
whether it's worth it or not to rent the pickup truck from Home Depot
for $19 per hour to carry homasote home, "hey, my local lumber guy
carries my homasote home for me for free so give him a call if you
live in South Carolina"… you get the idea! General modelling and
construction posts are off topic here unless they illustrate a
particular aspect of small layout construction and design.

If we're straying off topic and things are getting overly noisy or
too general, I may try to nudge the list back towards its focus. If
things get really out of hand, I may change the settings on the group
and make it completely moderated where messages are reviewed before
being posted on the list. I'm not trying to be a control freak or
anything like that, but I just want to see this list stick to its
goals.

So – let me know what you think about going public. If there's
another way that we could increase the list membership and stimulate
discussion, let me know and we'll see what we can do.

Thanks –

Jon Piasecki
Moderator
Small Layout Design

Hi Jon,
It's going to be a lot of work for you, and only you know whether
you're up for the task or not. I remember layout construction
increased it's membership by around 200 in less than a week.
There were militating circumstances to be sure, but that's still
a lot of traffic!
I agree that in order to stimulate discussion we should encourage
more folks to get involved in the group. Having said that, I'm pretty
sure that you will still have to put up with a number of "off topic"
threads such as:
1) The homasote/foamboard controversy
2) Aged lumber vs. ripped plywood along with a treatise on the
various types and grades of said plywood,and
3) The ubiquitous DCC threads that tend to last as long as a good flu.

These topics seem to be part and parcel of the construction side of
things which is the second item in your mandate. Although they do
nothing for me personally, I don't know how you can avoid them when a
lister announces or questions the merits of materials in the
construction of their own small layout.
To encourage further list membership, one could advertise at train
shows, preferably with a module or small layout present to emphasize
the concept. Better yet, get one of the groups' layouts published in
a popular mag and plug the site!
You could also consider a website or SIG membership to promote the
concepts internationally.
I realize this is alot of extra work, but hey, you asked :>)
I think you've put a tremendous amount of work/thought into the group
so far, and I'm interested in seeing it develop.
Realistically, the quickest way to expand a group is to go public.
Release the hounds Jon, and good luck!

Jeff Hatcher
"Please fasten your seatbelts and observe the no flaming signs"












--- In small-layout-design@y..., jonp@b... wrote:

Hello All --

How would the members of this list feel about the list finally

"going

public"?

small-layout-design (SLD) is presently "not listed in directory" at
Yahoo Groups. I wanted to keep it this way initially to see how
things pan out at LDSIG and LayoutConstruction.

LDSIG has gotten to be quite a noisy place without a lot being said
about layout design lately.

LayoutConstruction is growing nicely and it seems to be evolving

into

a pretty good general discussion group.

So – I'm thinking that the time may be here for SLD to do an

IPO and

finally go public – that is, get listed in the Yahoo Groups

directory

and undertake some self-promotion to build membership and get more
discussion happening.

As the moderator of the group, there's just one thing that I would
really like to encourage:

** I'd like for us to stay on topic. **

On topic for this group is small layout design, construction and
operation. On topic for us can range from how you found and
researched a layout design element to how you actually built and
operate your layout. Even if you have a larger layout, you can

stay

on topic here by discussing your approaches to planning and the
lessons you learned in the process.

OFF topic for this group would be posts about where to find

homasote,

which type of homasote to use, how to carry homasote home in the

car,

whether it's worth it or not to rent the pickup truck from Home

Depot

for $19 per hour to carry homasote home, "hey, my local lumber guy
carries my homasote home for me for free so give him a call if you
live in South Carolina"… you get the idea! General modelling

and

construction posts are off topic here unless they illustrate a
particular aspect of small layout construction and design.

If we're straying off topic and things are getting overly noisy or
too general, I may try to nudge the list back towards its focus.

If

things get really out of hand, I may change the settings on the

group

and make it completely moderated where messages are reviewed before
being posted on the list. I'm not trying to be a control freak or
anything like that, but I just want to see this list stick to its
goals.

So – let me know what you think about going public. If there's
another way that we could increase the list membership and

stimulate

discussion, let me know and we'll see what we can do.

Thanks –

Jon Piasecki
Moderator
Small Layout Design

Hello All --

Just a note to let you know about some small layout articles in the
April Model Railroader:

The cover story features a very nicely done "large" small layout --
an 8'×8' based on a published trackplan.

There's also an article on fitting 4×8 and 5×9 layouts with along-the-
walls shelf extesnions into typical small bedrooms.

I don't subscribe to MR and only pick up issues when they have
something interesting that stands out, so I was unaware that MR was
running a "small layout contest".

I have not been paying a lot of attention to the hobby press in the
last year or two, but within the issues of MR and MRP that I have
picked up in the last three months, there does seem to be a lot of
press on smaller layouts lately.

Anyone else notice this too?

Thanks --

Jon Piasecki
jonp@...

Visit the Toronto Hamilton & Buffalo
Historical Society Website at

At 03:01 AM 3/10/01, jonp@... wrote:

...I have not been paying a lot of attention to the hobby press in the
last year or two, but within the issues of MR and MRP that I have
picked up in the last three months, there does seem to be a lot of
press on smaller layouts lately.

Anyone else notice this too?

Yes I've noticed it and it saddens me. The model RR mags were always a place where you could see these huge layouts and have something to aspire to some day. How many people or kids coming up dream about someday having a small room or closet to build their "Empire" in? I realize that the trend is towards smaller living spaces and many houses don't have basements; the mags are just responding to this reality. But I think that's sad. Personally, I prefer seeing layouts that are bigger than life, but maybe someday...who knows, that dream layout could become a reality for me. Kind of like equating a trip to the local, traveling carnival to a Disney theme park vacation. Having only space for a small layout may be better than nothing, but to me it's would always be just a compromise as I lament what could have been.

FWIW,


Paul Kossart - Peru, Illinois, USA
BRHS, La Salle & Bureau County Model Railroad Club

Modeling the Fictional CB&Q Illiniwek River Branch in HO in the 1960's...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Serving Agriculture and Industry in the Illiniwek River Valley since 1904."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello --

Interesting comments from Paul, but I have to disagree that a growing
focus on smaller layouts is a "sad" development.

I think the focus on smaller layouts will really benefit the hobby.
When a young kid or teen looks through the hobby press these days,
they are seeing layouts and plans that are very do-able.

They'll look at an 8-by-8 plan for a bedroom and say "Hey! I can do
that right here in my room! The shevles will go over the head of the
bed and the desk, and the industrial district will be along the long
wall, and a drop-leaf reverse loop will be in front of the closet,
and..." ...and it grows from there.

I believe small plans will encourage people new to the hobby to
actually get building and experimenting. The basement-
filling "lifetime" layouts will evolve later from their small layout
experiences.

I can see Paul's point if he means that he is saddened by the fact
that small layouts appear to be displacing the larger "lifetime"
layouts and "empires". But I don't think that's the case -- the
larger layouts will continue to exist, with small layouts serving as
stepping stones to larger efforts.

In fact, Paul, I believe another trend that's getting a lot of press
these days will ensure the future of the larger lifetime layout: the
emphasis on operations, particularly Time Table & Train Order (TT&TO)
operations, virtually guarantees there will still be large layouts in
the hobby's future.

Thanks --

Jon Piasecki


--- In small-layout-design@y..., Paul/Celine Kossart <kozys@t...>
wrote:

Yes I've noticed it and it saddens me. The model RR mags
were always a place where you could see these huge layouts
and have something to aspire to some day. How many people
or kids coming up dream about someday having a small room
or closet to build their "Empire" in?

<edit>

I am interested in the small layouts that are showing up in MR. I am
trying to figure out how to get CPR's Nelson yard, or at least a
representation, into a room 8'10" x 9'4".

Given that the yard looks like this: (Now for some bad ASCII art)


LAKE
various warehouses
mostly on south (town) side
___________ East
_-
_-
| diesel shop about here> _ -
| ladder starts about here> _ -
| West _ -
-_ _ -
-_ _ - <the longest straight part
-________ -
&#92; ^ladder
&#92;______ coach yard, two track freight house, team track,
&#92;_____ coal dealer, 3 fuel oil dealers
& 1 propane (LP gas) dealer

Somehow I'll need to bend this into a U-shape without messing it up
too much. I do have a good drawing of the track plan so I've got
something to work with. I've downloaded Atlas RightTrack but haven't
taken the time to play with it much. At some point there may be
enough money for 3rd Planit or CadRail but I'd rather buy a few more
decoders.

I don't think that I want an "Empire" as I don't think I have the
time, energy or focus to do it right. Besides, there's an empire a
few blocks away if I want to see long trains run. The owner used 3+
boxes of Atlas flex, so there's lots of track.


--- In small-layout-design@y..., Paul/Celine Kossart <kozys@t...>
wrote:

At 03:01 AM 3/10/01, jonp@b... wrote:

...I have not been paying a lot of attention to the hobby press in

the

last year or two, but within the issues of MR and MRP that I have
picked up in the last three months, there does seem to be a lot of
press on smaller layouts lately.

Anyone else notice this too?

Yes I've noticed it and it saddens me. The model RR mags were

always a

place where you could see these huge layouts and have something to

aspire

to some day. How many people or kids coming up dream about someday

having

a small room or closet to build their "Empire" in? I realize that

the

trend is towards smaller living spaces and many houses don't have
basements; the mags are just responding to this reality. But I

think

that's sad. Personally, I prefer seeing layouts that are bigger

than life,

but maybe someday...who knows, that dream layout could become a

reality for

me. Kind of like equating a trip to the local, traveling carnival

to a

Disney theme park vacation. Having only space for a small layout

may be

better than nothing, but to me it's would always be just a

compromise as I

lament what could have been.

FWIW,


Paul Kossart - Peru, Illinois, USA
BRHS, La Salle & Bureau County Model Railroad Club

Modeling the Fictional CB&Q Illiniwek River Branch in HO in the

1960's...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Serving Agriculture and Industry in the Illiniwek River Valley

since 1904."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--- In small-layout-design@y..., jonp@b... wrote:

I have not been paying a lot of attention to the hobby press in the
last year or two, but within the issues of MR and MRP that I have
picked up in the last three months, there does seem to be a lot of
press on smaller layouts lately.

Anyone else notice this too?

Thanks --

Firstly let me commend Jon on a great idea for a layout design group.
I too find the signal to noise ratio on the LDSIG to be worse than
normal lately and the RMR newsgroup is insane at times. Cudos for
going public.

I have been struggling with a space for my layout and have resigned
myself to using the dark dank basement. I have a space about 16x13.
That is not all that small but I have decided to keep my layout small
due to cost considerations. Which brings me to my main point.

I am pleased with the attention small layouts have been recieving in
the press. Smaller means less expensive and quicker to build. I know I
am in it for the long term but for a man with a young family, mortgage
and car payment, the basement empire may be too much too soon. It
would be a shame to loose a potentially prolific modeler after the
interest wanes due to a lumbering mass of expensive layout that never
seems to be finished.

In my family room I have converted a large closet into a work area
with a 6'x2.5' bench and several shelves and a filing cabinet to hold
my extensive MR collection. I have a small test track and have been
toying with the idea of replacing the test track with an operating
micro layout. I am new to this term and I am looking for ideas and
resources. The space would probably be 1x6 feet. I am interested in
trying out handlaid turnout and control techniques.

Greg Williams
cpr_fan@...
www.trainweb.org/cprmodeling

Hello Greg --

For ideas on a 1×6 shelf-type layout, take a look at the British
hobby press. British layouts tend to be smaller shelf-like affairs
with some sort of hidden "staging" or fiddle yard off to one side.
Trains can be assembled in the fiddle yard and then brought "on
stage" for some operation.

A well stocked hobby shop or book store should have some British
magazines -- take a look for one called _Model Railway Journal_ --
it's a good magazine featuring advanced and high quality modelling.

I think Chapters, if there's one in your area, carries it. If you
can, take a look through several issues of MRJ as sometimes just
looking at one issue may make you think the magazine does not have
articles that are of general interest.

If Chapters does not carry it, try a specialty bookstore or newstand.

Also, take a look at Model Railroad Planning 2001. There's an
article there on a small layout that adapts the classic Timesaver
track plan to a British-style O scale layout. Also take a look at
the article from the guy modelling Pembroke, Ontario, in HO fine
scale -- you might find that interesting.

One-by-six is pretty small, but you could get some switching
operation into something that size. Consider modelling a prototype
scene -- say, a specific industry or something -- that could be
incorporated into a larger layout later.

Good luck with your layout!

Thanks --

Jon Piasecki
jonp@...

I am looking forward to the MRP 2001. Have not seen it yet.

I live in a rural area and get to Chapters in Fredericton about once a month. British railroad mags are not there. :(

Hopefully I'll have something designed in the next few weeks and I will share with the group.

I am thinking of giving it a period feel using truss rod cars. Motive power is my problem. I have a nice 4-4-0 but with tender it takes up alot of space. It would date the layout to 1920 or so. I have a 0-4-0 Dockside but I feel it is of too modern an era.

If I go with my GE 44 Tonner I have to move to a more modern era and am stuck with 40' cars. Anyone have any thoughts on small motive power from the early 1900s? I am hoping this is within the scope of the group as it is discussing small motive power for a small layout.

==
Greg Williams
Argyle, New Brunswick
Canada

cpr_fan@...


_____________________________________________________________
Visit today! Get your
free @RRmail.com e-mail account from !

At 02:27 AM 3/13/01, jonp@... wrote:

I think the focus on smaller layouts will really benefit the hobby.
When a young kid or teen looks through the hobby press these days,
they are seeing layouts and plans that are very do-able.

They'll look at an 8-by-8 plan for a bedroom and say "Hey! I can do
that right here in my room! The shevles will go over the head of the
bed and the desk, and the industrial district will be along the long
wall, and a drop-leaf reverse loop will be in front of the closet,
and..." ...and it grows from there.

Jon and list,

At the risk of sounding Grinch-like, there have and continue to be, numerous layout planning books presenting layout plans for smaller areas. I am afraid that if newcomers to the hobby see such a large emphasis put on these type layouts in the hobby press they will think that this is the status quo. Personally, and YMMV, I see a small layout as a compromise acceptable only when one simply cannot find the space for the larger layout they should be aspiring to.

I agree the smaller layout needs to be a beginning and a stepping stone as the basement filling empire can't always, and probably shouldn't be always, the beginner's first attempt. I built my share of smaller layouts over the last few decades, starting with a couple versions of the 4 by 8 Plywood Pacifics as a youth, but the dream was always to someday have the room for that basement filling dream layout - In other words, I kept my eyes on the prize.

Of course I realize many people do not have a basement available to them; in that case, this discussion is moot. However, I am tainted, having lived my entire life here in the basement rich Midwest. To me, if it don't have a basement, it ain't a house, and I would never seriously consider purchasing. I guess what I am saying that for me, this basement filling layout should be what is actually aspired to, and the smaller layouts are at best, stepping stones to that end. For an individual to choose a smaller layout, when one has the room for more, is simply unimaginable to me. I don't want the newcomers to think the smaller layout is all there is. And I think the growing coverage, acceptance, and desirability of this type of layout in MR, GMR and MRP is sending the message that having ONLY his type of layout forever if okay - there is no more. I hope I am wrong. Shouldn't the model press, or any periodical or individual representing whatever interest, showcase the best that interest can be, and not send the message that the mediocre or compromise is all right as THE end result?

I believe small plans will encourage people new to the hobby to
actually get building and experimenting. The basement-
filling "lifetime" layouts will evolve later from their small layout
experiences.

Agreed, but where will the example or motivation to build these basement-filling "lifetime" layouts come from as the hobby mags continue to downplay their existence and desirability.

I can see Paul's point if he means that he is saddened by the fact
that small layouts appear to be displacing the larger "lifetime"
layouts and "empires". But I don't think that's the case -- the
larger layouts will continue to exist, with small layouts serving as
stepping stones to larger efforts.

I guess that is my point exactly, Jon. In other words, what I have been dreaming of accomplishing my entire life is now seeming to be downplayed and presented as not necessarily that important or even desirable.

In fact, Paul, I believe another trend that's getting a lot of press
these days will ensure the future of the larger lifetime layout: the
emphasis on operations, particularly Time Table & Train Order (TT&TO)
operations, virtually guarantees there will still be large layouts in
the hobby's future.

Again I hope your are right and that the type of layout which I so badly want doesn't end up being a dinosaur - unusual, uncommon, and unwanted.

The funny part about all this is that now that I have the space to finally accomplish this lifelong dream, the recent onset of physical impairment due to rheumatoid arthritis may force me to have to abandon my dream and only be able to build and maintain a much smaller (read greatly compromised) layout - that is why I joined this list.

Anyway, that's my two cents, and a whole lot more, worth.


Paul (I'm not always this negative sounding) Kossart - Peru, Illinois, USA
BRHS, La Salle & Bureau County Model Railroad Club

Proto-Freelancing The CB&Q Illiniwek River Branch in HO in the 1960's...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Serving Agriculture and Industry in the Illiniwek River Valley since 1904."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello –

I'm also working on a layout based on a prototype yard. Here are
some things I've learned and am still learning as I work on the
design:

Duplicate the function of the yard, rather than every track. Learn
how the railway used the yard and how trains and cars worked their
way through the yard. At first, I wanted to duplicate every track in
my prototype's yard but found I simply don't have the room. By
studying the track plan, I started to identify what basic functions
the yard served – passing siding, storage of cars for local
industries, a team track, a crane track, a scale track, local
industry sidings – and worked to include those FUNCTIONS in my
design, rather than each specific track. For an example of how to
adapt a the function of a prototype's track arrangement in a model,
check out the article in the recent Model Railroader about 5-by-9
layouts with shelves in bedrooms. Look at the sidebar item on how to
simulate a prototype's wye-interchange with linear track on a
layout. This is the sort of technique you need to consider when
adapting a complex prototype plan to a very small space – model the
FUNCTION rather than the actual alignment.

Get as much information as you can about the "context" of the yard.
Go to the library and see if you can find local maps – old fire
insurance maps are particularly useful – and see if you can determine
what was around the yard. For example, what sorts of industries were
around the yard? Did public streets cut through the yard? (A street
cuts through the yard I'm modelling, and it adds an unique
operational consideration.) What did the trains have to travel
through to get in to and out of the yard? This sort of research can
help you plan operations, scenery, structures, track arrangements and
so on.

Visit the site if you can. Even if the track iteself is gone,
visiting the area can help to give you a sense of the space occupied
by the prototype and how things were aligned and arranged in the real
world.

Understanding how the real yard was built and what functions it
served can really help you decide what to represent in your model.

As for actually designing it: you can try working with some track
planning software, but you may find it useful to be able to sketch
things ACCURATELY by hand first. I've found manual doodling to be
faster than drawing on a computer for the first rough drafts. After
the first sketches, I turn to the computer for more accurate layout
and fiddling (I use Corel Draw for my layout work).

When drawing by hand (or on a computer), it is very important to draw
turnouts and curves ACCURATELY. When sketching by hand, I think we
all tend to be overly optimistic about the size of turnouts and
curves – we draw them a lot smaller than they really are. This is
particularly frustrating when you have a very small layout space
available – you're sure to disappoint yourself with grand plans that,
when you start to buy track and turnouts and lay them out, just won't
fit.

Take some time to make your own track templates, or buy a template
from your hobby shop. John Armstrong describes how to make simple
cardboard curve and turnout templates in _Trackplanning for Realistic
Operation_. Make accurate templates and use them – you will be
surprised just how large turnouts actually are!

As for Nelson Yard – your ASCII art suggests that the general
arrangement already is U-shaped, so I think it would not be too
difficult to wrap the yard around the "long" dimension of your room.

When I first designed my yard layout, a friend reviewed the plan and
noted that a yard on a small layout is not going to offer a lot in
the way of operation, so he suggested I focus on the industries
around and just off of the yard. I think I would suggest the same
thing for Nelson – you might want to represent the yard tracks with
just a main route and two yard tracks and focus on representing the
freight house, fuel dealers and warehouses. All depends, of course,
on the sort of operation you're looking for.

Would you be able to scan a copy of your track diagram for Nelson
Yard so we can post it in the list's Files area?

If you'd like to see the layout I'm working on, check out
the "Modelling Brantford: Brantford Yard in a Bedroom" article at the
Toronto Hamilton & Buffalo Railway Historical Society website at –



I think I've captured the overall look and function of the yard (at
least as much as I can in the space available), but I'm not certain
how I'm going to support the "on stage" area shown in the plan. I
need to reconsider how to stage trains and deal with them at either
end of the layout.

Hope all this is helpful.

Thanks –

Jon Piasecki

jonp@...



From: b-freemantle@...
Date: Tue Mar 13, 2001 11:46pm
Subject: Re: : April MR

<edit>

I am
trying to figure out how to get CPR's Nelson yard, or at least a
representation, into a room 8'10" x 9'4".

<edit>

LAKE
various warehouses
mostly on south (town) side
___________ East
_-
_-
| diesel shop about here> _ -
| ladder starts about here> _ -
| West _ -
-_ _ -
-_ _ - <the longest straight part
-________ -
&#92; ^ladder
&#92;______ coach yard, two track freight house, team track,
&#92;_____ coal dealer, 3 fuel oil dealers
& 1 propane (LP gas) dealer

<edit>