Where Worlds Collide

I find the concept of modular model railway layouts interesting. I find the idea of building a small module which can be joined up with those of others to make a much larger whole appealing. Unfortunately I’ve been disappointed in what I’ve seen at exhibitions; too many layouts have horribly mismatching scenery, and run a mix of British, American, Continental and Japanese trains on the same layout, which completely destroys any concept of realism. I’m sure it’s possible to do better than this.

(At which point those who happily mix British, German, American and Japanese trains on the same layout protest “But it’s fun! You just don’t understand”. Sorry, but to me it’s Hurting Wrong Fun – I don’t accept the idea that the only valid form of ‘fun’ is when you throw realism out of the window; I find doing prototype research and then making up accurate trains from a particular time and place is ‘fun’, but that’s an entirely different rant)

The only widely-accepted standard, the American N-trak, isn’t really appropriate for British outline modelling, largely because of it’s unrealistically-wide track spacing. While this might be appropriate for North American prototypes, it doesn’t look at all right for British layouts. And personally I don’t like the 3-track configuration; whatever the operational benefits it still doesn’t look right to me. Three track mainlines are uncommon in Britain; even if the third track is supposed to be a siding or goods loop.

Various British-outline groups, such as the East Surrey N-Gauge Group, the East Dorset N Gauge Group, the North East Area Group and the Chester Area Group have each been building modular layouts. As far as I can tell, each have rejected Ntrak for at least some of the reasons listed above, and have devised their own standards.

British N needs a modular standard.

I feel the standard should be more of a meta-standard, describing things like baseboard heights and standardised electrical connections, but allow some flexibility on the number and locations of tracks. Individual groups will probably want to choose a more restricted standard track formation for their own modules, and interface modules between the more popular configurations should be encouraged. I would guess that two- and three-track formations will be the most popular.

It should support both “roundy-roundy” formations with four corner sections, and “all-in-a-line” formations with a return loop at each end. “Roundy-roundy” modules need to be fixed length so that the other side of the rectangle joins up; “all-in-a-line” modules don’t have to be.

Track standards (code 80 vs. code 55) should not be part of the standard. Individual groups may decide to standardise on one of the other, but I would not like to see a standard that mandates code 80 and prohibits the more realistic code 55.

The standard should neither mandate nor prohibit scenic breaks or end profiles. This is one of the more awkward problems with modular layouts; it’s hard to get scenery to ‘flow’ between modules, and you either get abrupt transitions, or boring flat baseboards that might be OK for modelling the American prairies but isn’t so good for hillier areas. My preference would be for scenic dividers between the modules, breaking up the layout into separate ‘scenes’, although this only really works for large multi-section modules.

When setting up a modular layout at an exhibition, the organiser should be allowed to (and even encouraged to) insist that all modules and rolling stock are from a particular nation and period, rather than be expected to include every module available just because it’s there, even if it doesn’t fit the theme.

Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Channel freight back on track
Some better rail news, at last. Freight services through the channel tunnel are getting back to normal after months of disruption due to masses of illegal immigrants stowing away on the trains. For months, rail transport was the loser while the whole issue was kicked back and forth like a political football between the British and French governments.

An EWS spokesman said: “It surely cannot be difficult for the Republic of France to find sufficient resources for 24-hour policing of a freight yard.”

In May several trains arrived at the Dollands Moor freight terminal in Kent with more than 50 asylum seekers on board. Whole carriage-loads of fresh pasta, fruit and vegetables had to be destroyed when they were found inside. EWS estimated the crisis was costing it £500,000 a week.

The British Freight Group estimated that 6,000 extra lorries are using roads around Calais and Folkestone because of the disruption.

Geoff Dossetter, a spokesman for the Freight Transport Association, said: “The one thing you need from freight trains is reliability. The disruption has delivered a compete absence of that. There’s been a major loss of confidence in the product.”

European single market commissioner Frits Bolkestein is pursuing legal action against France for breaching the Treaty of Rome, which requires countries to facilitate free trade. But the case could take two years to reach court.

I accept that the whole issue of immigration and asylum is a highly-charged issue, but the way the rail industry has suffered from a political crisis not of their own making is nothing short of scandalous.

ITV News: Rail strike brings more misery
Northern commuters have suffered a lot in recent months, with strikes by both Arriva Trans-Pennine and First North Western. I don’t know how much of this is due to union militancy and how much is due to the bus companies that run the two franchises trying to treat highly-skilled traincrews like bus drivers.

On thing is sure; while this macho posturing continues, the customer is the loser. Of couse, it may be that the management’s long-term aim is to let their train services go down the toilet and replace them all with buses.

CNN.com – 100 feared dead in Indian rail disaster

As many as 100 people are feared dead after a passenger train derailed in a remote region of northeastern India sending at least one car plunging into a river.

There seem to be a lot of bad rail crashes in India; but this is not so much a reflection of Indian Railways’ poor safety record as a reflection of the huge size of their network and the vast numbers of people that use it.

As far as I know, they don’t have wheel/rail separation in India; there is no Indian equivalent of Railtrack.

Guardian | Business | Rail modernisation – the difference between us and the Swiss
The difference being that the Swiss Bahn 2000 project has come in on time and 20% less than budget. Compare and contrast with the Boiling Frogs of Railtrack, and the ill-fated West Coast Modernisation. The reason?

Chris Jackson, deputy editor of Railway Gazette , said: ‘The difference in Switzerland is that the same organisation runs the tracks, trains and projects, and they know what they are doing. Simple.

Pity the Observe chose (in the dead-tree edition) to use a photo of the narrow gauge Wengernalpbahn rather than a modern Re460 and the double deck stock mentioned in the article.