Opinions on Smoke..

As above, apart from the one about "toys tremoring through turnouts unrealistically".

 P48-ers, & 2-railers who are careful with their tracklaying, don't get that on their layouts.

Love good smoke units on steam models, and as my O gauge trains will be runnin outside in the garden I don't enviseage any problems .   

vonhammer87 posted:

So I belong to the Detroit Model Railroad Club, and recently some of our members have been buying units that are equipped with smoke.

And this brought up the discussion of running smoke. Some of the older members are of course against any use of smoke what so ever. They're reasoning is of course that it leaves a residue on everything and it will cause the rails to rust (we use hand-laid steel rail). 

We are in an old movie theater and have at least 20ft ceilings in some places and so the dissipation of smoke is not a problem. The main time we would be doing this is during open houses, as a crowd pleaser. A test was done during one with one locomotive, and the crowd loved seeing the smoke (even though it was a diesel). myself and a few members were talking about just running two or three locomotives at a time for a couple laps (1 lap takes about 20 minutes when running prototypically). 

Anyway, I was wondering if anyone has any opinions on smoke, and what your experiences have been. Personally I feel that having smoke adds to the experience.

vonhammer

The discussion at your club brings up a few issues that should be easy to deal with.  However, as seen here, this can be an issue that gets people worked up far more than one might expect if it were a purely technical issue.

You said

"Some...members are...against any use of smoke what so ever. They're reasoning is of course that it leaves a residue on everything..."

I have visited, worked on or operated at several O scale layouts where smoke equipped steam and diesel locomotives have been in use for years without any problems with residue on the rails, rolling stock or scenery.

I believe that the negative impressions some have regarding residue left by smoke units come from experiences with Seuthe or similar percolator type smoke units.  The fan driven smoke units used by MTH and Lionel do not splatter liquid over locomotives and the surrounding area like the Seuthes.  (Provided the operator follows the instructions and turns the fan off before adding more fluid. )

"...and it will cause the rails to rust (we use hand-laid steel rail."

This one aught to be easy to dismiss out of hand.  I'm not sure how mineral oil residue, even if it was left behind,  can cause steel to rust.  

I almost hate to mention Wahl clipper oil.

As for allergies, I have never heard of anyone exposed to mineral oil based smoke fluid suffering an event that meets the medical definition of an allergic reaction.  I would be interested to know what diagnosis was made for the person who suffered the episode mentioned by Christopher.  Some definitely do not like model train smoke.  Some find it highly irritating.  As seen here, they tend to let you know that they feel that way.  Give them an opportunity to avoid times when smoke units will be in operation if they so chose.

If anyone says that they are irritated by model train smoke I would ask them if they are irritated by candles.  Almost all of the candles sold today are made from petroleum based products.  They give off far more vapors, gases and particulates than a model train smoke unit.  As a test, hold a white saucer a few inches above the stack of a smoke equipped model train locomotive.  Look at the residue it leaves behind.  Now repeat the experiment by holding another white saucer a few inches above a burning candle.  Compare the saucers and decide which emits more, a burning candle or a model locomotive with a functioning smoke unit?

After five hundred years of burning candles every day the Vatican decided Michelangelo's paintings in the Sistine Chapel needed cleaning.  I think your club can go for a while without any concerns over residue left behind by modern model train smoke units.

You said

"The main time we would be doing this is during open houses, as a crowd pleaser. A test was done during one with one locomotive, and the crowd loved seeing the smoke (even though it was a diesel)."

I think most visitors will love the sound and smoke from many of today's O scale models.  They are real crowd pleasers.  And some of us love it too.

Ted Hikel posted:

As for allergies, I have never heard of anyone exposed to mineral oil based smoke fluid suffering an event that meets the medical definition of an allergic reaction.  I would be interested to know what diagnosis was made for the person who suffered the episode mentioned by Christopher.  Some definitely do not like model train smoke.  Some find it highly irritating.  As seen here, they tend to let you know that they feel that way.  Give them an opportunity to avoid times when smoke units will be in operation if they so chose.

 

 

What do you mean what was the diagonosis? He was allergic as heck to the smoke or whatever was in it. His reaction was violent and he went out of the house in an ambulance to the hospital! 

A few weeks after the incident, the local group was setting up a modular display for the local Greenburg show and blasting the smoke. The same guy who had already built a module for the railroad, delivered it for set up, and he wound up watching the display run from OUTSIDE in the rain looking in through the windows. He ended up donating his module to the group and I never saw him again.

So, yes the possibility exists. How rare, I don't know, I'm not a doctor or a lawyer. If it is a child who is just discovering they are allergic to the smoke, well, geez, why would I expect you guys to understand that possibility. But as a club who owns the building open to the public, why not make a simple call and get some advice from someone who is qualified to answer it? If they clear it, great, blast away. If they don't then you'll have the risk to weigh. At least you'll go in knowing where you stand for liability.

You'd be amazed at allergy root causes. They are often something you'd never suspect. People who are allergic to gold are almost always allergic to an additive. I know someone who cannot wear most green colored clothing not because of the green dye but because of an additive. In terms of an allergy to the vapor - maybe it is the vapor. Or it very well could be one particular ingredient. If one ingredient, its possible that some fluids don't use that    ingredient and you can find relief

Sorry, I say "smoke 'em if you got 'em".   There may be a rare person that could be allergic to smoke or some ingredient in certain brands of smoke,  I don't see why that should translate into a feeling that smoke is undesirable.  Plenty of people have a real demonstrated allergy to stuff like peanuts, but you can buy them in most stores, and find them at many gatherings.  I think the "smoke is the devil's spawn" group needs to step back and view the situation realistically.  Next we'll be banning sound because it might damage hearing.

maybe the smoke issue gets too much attention. in the end it is a personal choice.

Bob C.

Robert Coniglio posted:

maybe the smoke issue gets too much attention. in the end it is a personal choice.

 

Bob C.

 

Bingo.

Don't, and won't, use it. Comes down to the fact that it ain't realistic. White-only smoke was more or less uncommon on real steam locos under way. When someone comes up with "smoke" that gets dark while the loco is under load, e.g., and provides simulated soot weathering for my locos and rolling stock I might jump in.
Of course, OSHA or EPA or some other Feddle agency would kill such a product at birth.

P.S. When I did use smoke on my carpet layout, long ago, my better half hated the smell, even if I used something that smelled like fresh-baked cupcakes.

The hysteria reaction is almost comical. As said many times in this thread it's a personal decision with the exception I feel sorry for those who don't have there own layout and dont have the freedom to choose. Glad not in this situation.

rex desilets posted:

Don't, and won't, use it. Comes down to the fact that it ain't realistic.

How real is that 3rd rail?

I don't always use smoke when I run trains, but when I do, I prefer lots of it.  Stay smokey my friends

Volhammer87 et al,

Interesting thread with the smokers vs. the non-smokers.  To specifically answer your original question, we would suggest that you consider that all smoke fluids are not created equal. Most of the train manufacturers have their brand of smoke fluid made overseas. And of course they want the customer to use only their product from a marketing viewpoint much the same as your car dealer wants you to use only the dealer's service for your automobile. Most of the manufacturers place a small sample vial of their brand in with the packaging of their new locomotives. That is where the customer first experiences a bad experience with smoke. That stuff stinks!!!   That is where the negative opinions start and decisions are quicklly made to not only not use the smoke option, but for ever more frown on anyone who chooses to run with smoke. 

Quality control and ingredients can and many times is a problem with foreign manufacturing. It is the same with smoke fluid. Much of the bad omens, vibes, and options about smoke fluid come from the tears and trials of using the foreign made fluids. That is precisely why we got into the business several years ago...to give customers a choice.

With a 12+ year history of making smoke fluid for hobbyists, we take great pride in making it right here in the USA with only the finest and purest ingredients available.  Our formulas and product is refined to the point that it does not leave an oily residue on the tracks, trains, or scenery.  When operated and fired correctly, the modern smoke units using our product will produce lots of vaporized smoke that dissipates quickly and does not fog up the room or layout. We even have lots of options and choices including a scent called "NADA" which is not just plain oil, but it has specific ingredients to product no smell...this was designed for those who have allergies or sensitivities to the smell of smoke. It is used by several clubs and large displays where the public is present.

The rest of our line is a personal choice with 50 different scents available that range from holiday scents, to prototypical coal and oil smells, with some fun choices in the mix.  All of them produce a lot of smoke that trails over the locomotive, leaves a light pleasant scent, and then dissipates quickly.

As has been mentioned in this thread, smoke is a choice. It is a free choice. Most would agree that there is no compromise: either you like the smoke, or you choose no smoke.  But for those who enjoy a steam engine with a plum of smoke coming out of the stack, there is a manufacturer who has a proven track record of delivering a premium product.  see www.megasteam.com

gunrunnerjohn posted:

rex desilets posted:

Don't, and won't, use it. Comes down to the fact that it ain't realistic.

How real is that 3rd rail?

John,

Dont bother.  I put out a post or two that pointed out several of the incredibly unrealistic basic aspects of model railroading that every model railroader encounters every time they play with their trains - and it's like talking to zombies or very small children - either (a) no acknowledgment at all; or (b) acknowledgement but with the ridiculous caveat that a locomotive that does not have a prototypical feature is more prototypical than a locomotive that has that prototypical feature.  

gunrunnerjohn posted:

There may be a rare person that could be allergic to smoke or some ingredient in certain brands of smoke,  I don't see why that should translate into a feeling that smoke is undesirable. 

 I think the "smoke is the devil's spawn" group needs to step back and view the situation realistically. 

Next we'll be banning sound because it might damage hearing.

Well, it would be undesireable for the person who is allergic. It isn't undesireable for me for that reason. I'll turn my smoke units on when I want to in my own home.

I didn't say "smoke was the devil's spawn," I simply suggested someone from the club simply pick up the phone and make sure they are covered or maybe a sign of some sort that might give them cover. Their situation is different than those who are making personal choices in their own homes.

Also, a kid has the choice to pick up a peanut and put it in his mouth. Whether someone has a reasonable expectation to breath or not in a semi public space is a little different story from the peanut in my view. Granted, it is not like they are shooting mustard gas into the air, but, again, most if not all of the respondants here are unqualified to make the detemination about liability.

Mega-Steam posted:

Volhammer87 et al. 

Our formulas and product is refined to the point that it does not leave an oily residue on the tracks, trains, or scenery.  When operated and fired correctly, the modern smoke units using our product will produce lots of vaporized smoke that dissipates quickly and does not fog up the room or layout. .

I've been using your products exclusively for a while now (and always stock up when I see you at the West Springfield show on NADA and Eliminator, and tummy seasonal flavors). Curious from your response about 2 things:

1- when I use Megasteam, especially with my MTH steamers, the basement, even with my industrial vents on, is a thick cloud.  I actually like it, but stopped using smoke effects a few months back because I don't know what it is that I and my children are inhaling. Can you talk a little bit more about this?

2- I never thought about where the black or (discolored) residue on my rails was coming from, until I read this and one other thread. In essence, is the "soot" on my rails coming from the smoke vapor?  If not, the smoke vapor has to be going somewhere, as it isn't just evaporating into thin air. Can you talk a little bit about this too please?  

Thanks for your comments 

Peter 

Nothing like a smoke thread to get things stirred up. A little smoke is OK but filling a whole room-not so much. I used Megasteam and u=it was fine. Non-irritating and I have sensitive sinuses but  my old Lionels aren't heavy smokers like some of the newer ones. MTH smoke seems heavy and irritating.

Smoke and mirrors go together.  Especially in this hobby, where it's all smoke and mirrors really. 

I use the occasional mirror on my layouts to create the illusion of extra length.

I don't think that mirrors are a health risk - unless they accidentally get broken.

Does the risk outweigh the benefit of the illusion?  

What do others think?

Cheers

Laughing! Again this kind of thread was my introduction to OGR. I thought "what a bunch of loons these people are!"

My real, and only, concern is that smoke units seem a frequent point of failure. They are definitely NOT designed for easy servicing! And they WILL require same! Buying replacement wicks should be as easy and as routine as buying smoke fluid! And replacing the wicking should be just about as easy as adding smoke fluid. Don't believe ANY of my locomotives come with instructions for any smoke unit maintenance whatsoever! In fact, instructions with the 3-rd Rail engines strongly imply it best to NOT use the units at all!

How people can say the steam is "unprototypical" staggers me. Sound too. What could be more un-prototypical than an entirely smokeless steam locomotive rather slilently running along rails with nothing other than the mechanical sound of the thing dragging itself over the toy rails?

So, give me sound! And give me smoke!

But,  I'd sure like easily ordered wicking and easily serviced smoke units too. In fact, I wish it were easy to know when to add fluid and how much to add. It isn't! Ride the razor between burning the wick and flooding the unit!

How people can say the steam is "unprototypical" staggers me.

 

No—I don't think anyone said steam coming out of an engine is unprototypical. 

What they said is that the smoke coming out of the model does not look prototypical.

If a person can run the train without smoke and it looks unprototypical, or they can run the train with smoke and it still looks unprototypical, why would someone spend the money to fill the room up with smoke.

gunrunnerjohn posted:

rex desilets posted:

Don't, and won't, use it. Comes down to the fact that it ain't realistic.

How real is that 3rd rail?

Well, you can always run on 5-ft gauge 2-rail track

christopher N&W posted:

How people can say the steam is "unprototypical" staggers me.

 

No—I don't think anyone said steam coming out of an engine is unprototypical. 

What they said is that the smoke coming out of the model does not look prototypical.

If a person can run the train without smoke and it looks unprototypical, or they can run the train with smoke and it still looks unprototypical, why would someone spend the money to fill the room up with smoke.

Correct on all points.

rex desilets posted:

gunrunnerjohn posted:

rex desilets posted:

Don't, and won't, use it. Comes down to the fact that it ain't realistic.

How real is that 3rd rail?

Well, you can always run on 5-ft gauge 2-rail track

And that's very close to correct for trolleys in PA 

I am seriously entertained by these comments. So not having smoke is just as realistic as having smoke because model smoke doesn't exactly duplicate the prototype? Really? HAHAHAHAHA.... Ok.  

I still see a lot of 2 railers that are deathly afraid of having anything in common with 3 railers. They are bound and determined to be taken "seriously" as modelers and not toy train collectors.

My view is simple... Model railroading IS compromise. That's a fact. Think of a scale of "realism" with Toy trains on one end and a prototype train that has been shrunk with a shrink ray on the other end. All model railroaders fit in between somewhere. It is all about what compromises you are personally willing to accept. Nobody has any business telling anyone else that their level of compromise is superior to anyone else's because they are compromising as well.

To each their own. Enjoy your railroad the way you like and let others do the same.

PJB posted:

Mega-Steam posted:

Volhammer87 et al. 

Our formulas and product is refined to the point that it does not leave an oily residue on the tracks, trains, or scenery.  When operated and fired correctly, the modern smoke units using our product will produce lots of vaporized smoke that dissipates quickly and does not fog up the room or layout. .

I've been using your products exclusively for a while now (and always stock up when I see you at the West Springfield show on NADA and Eliminator, and tummy seasonal flavors). Curious from your response about 2 things:

1- when I use Megasteam, especially with my MTH steamers, the basement, even with my industrial vents on, is a thick cloud.  I actually like it, but stopped using smoke effects a few months back because I don't know what it is that I and my children are inhaling. Can you talk a little bit more about this?

2- I never thought about where the black or (discolored) residue on my rails was coming from, until I read this and one other thread. In essence, is the "soot" on my rails coming from the smoke vapor?  If not, the smoke vapor has to be going somewhere, as it isn't just evaporating into thin air. Can you talk a little bit about this too please?  

Thanks for your comments 

Peter 

 

Peter, Thanks for your questions:

1.)  A thick cloud of continued smoke is not good, nor recommended for extended periods of time. If the locomotive is fired correctly...ie. enough smoke fluid to provide smoke output, but not too much and the correct amount of power...ie. 16-18 volts for best smoke, the operator should have nice plumes of smoke that dissipate quickly. A lot of different conditions play into the amount of smoke produced. If it is overpowering,  you can set the smoke level to Med. and you will still get a lot smoke, but not the thick cloud you are experiencing. If you are running with DCS, you could set the main power slightly lower and see if that helps. There are many variables involved with the vaporizing that produces the white smoke-like effects. Vaporizing occurs when the highly specialized and refined oils we use are drawn up into the wicking material and make contact with the heating elements. It is not soot. Which is why we cannot make "BS" black smoke...that is a carbon produced by burning and that burning produces soot...which would be a problem for both the trains, the environment, and the operator.  What you are inhaling is vaporized highly refined precision oils that are so light that they do indeed evaporate into the air. Our special formulas require strict guidelines and our ingredients are so refined that it is perfectly safe to use, but like everything else, not abuse. We take great care in our entire production process so that our customers who chose to use the smoke feature can operator safely.  NOTE: As mentioned earlier, most of the manufacturer's choose to have their own brand of smoke fluid produced overseas in foreign facilities. Their materials and ingredients and quality control can be a problem. Above all, if operators or guests experience any discomfort, they should get some fresh air or simply turn the smoke unit off. That is where common sense comes to play. Our NADA and ELIMINATOR types are the best choices for keeping the smoke units clean and operational-issue free and prolonging the life of the wicking material and also for not producing a scent that some would find offensive.

2.) Black or discolored residue on the rails can come from many different factors. It can occur even for those who don't use smoke fluid or the smoke feature. Under normal firing conditions mentioned above, the vaporized smoke fluid will not settle on the train, the tracks, or the scenery.  However, overfilling the units with too much smoke fluid can cause the units to slightly spill small amounts of oil on the tracks. Care should be taken to not overfill the units by following each manufacturer's filling directions. Residue on the rails can also be attributed to the wheel material making contact with the track.  Black wheels, painted wheels, etc. tend to put a small amount of dark material on the tracks. We use a roller track cleaner on a regular basis to maintain the best electrical contact for the rails.

The bottom line is that we produce what we feel is the "World's finest smoke fluid" and it is produced so that if one chooses to operate that particular feature, they can safely enjoy the effects. It is not intended to be used 100% of the time at full blast and we leave that choice up to the individual operator.  This is a personal choice like many other things relating to model railroading. Thanks for the questions and the opportunity to respond.

JT's Mega-Steam

mwb posted:

rex desilets posted:

How real is that 3rd rail?

Well, you can always run on 5-ft gauge 2-rail track

And that's very close to correct for trolleys in PA 

Well, that takes care of the smoke controversy...

jonnyspeed posted:

I am seriously entertained by these comments. So not having smoke is just as realistic as having smoke because model smoke doesn't exactly duplicate the prototype? Really? HAHAHAHAHA.... Ok.  

Nobody has any business telling anyone else that their level of compromise is superior to anyone else's because they are compromising as well.

No—what was said, at least what I said, is that in some people's view, neither is realistic and neither is prototypical.  

As I see it MOST of the comments here are NOT making a judgement about people who use smoke as you suggest. Maybe you could tell us which people you are accusing of telling others that their way is superior so we know what you are all worked up about.

christopher N&W posted:

Ted Hikel posted:

As for allergies, I have never heard of anyone exposed to mineral oil based smoke fluid suffering an event that meets the medical definition of an allergic reaction.  I would be interested to know what diagnosis was made for the person who suffered the episode mentioned by Christopher.  Some definitely do not like model train smoke.  Some find it highly irritating.  As seen here, they tend to let you know that they feel that way.  Give them an opportunity to avoid times when smoke units will be in operation if they so chose.

 

 

What do you mean what was the diagonosis? He was allergic as heck to the smoke or whatever was in it. His reaction was violent and he went out of the house in an ambulance to the hospital!

Christopher

I understand that most people would see a guest coming over to their house and leaving in an ambulance as THE significant event. 

My perspective is atypical.  As someone who was a provider of pre-hospital emergency care I would be interested to know what symptoms the patient was experiencing, what the EMTs or Paramedics found, what actions were taken in the field and what the diagnosis and treatment were at the hospital. 

On one end of the spectrum someone with a history of respiratory problems could have experienced violent coughing, felt ill, received low flow O2 from the BLS the ambulance crew on the way to the hospital and was examined and discharged from the ER.

On the other end of the spectrum a very serious allergic reaction could result in a skin rash, hives, swelling, the inability to speak in complete sentences, low blood pressure and a rapid heart rate and prompt the Paramedics on a ALS unit to consider IM and IV medication, high flow O2, artificial respiration,  intubation and receive a diagnosis in the ER that resulted in admission to the hospital.

One results in having a bad day.  The other is a life threatening emergency.  If an otherwise healthy person has ever experienced a life threatening emergency that was medically attributed to model train smoke I would sure like to know more about it.

rex desilets posted:

Robert Coniglio posted:

maybe the smoke issue gets too much attention. in the end it is a personal choice. 

Bob C. 

Bingo.

Don't, and won't, use it. Comes down to the fact that it ain't realistic. White-only smoke was more or less uncommon on real steam locos under way ...

Oh, really? Steam locomotive exhaust is a combination of firebox combustion products and exhaust steam from the cylinders that enhances the draft. In cold weather a clean-burning steam locomotive produces lots of spectacular white "smoke" in the form of steam condensation. I like a model that emulates the white steam exhaust, rather than inefficient black smoke!

Ace posted:

rex desilets posted:

Robert Coniglio posted:

maybe the smoke issue gets too much attention. in the end it is a personal choice. 

Bob C. 

Bingo.

Don't, and won't, use it. Comes down to the fact that it ain't realistic. White-only smoke was more or less uncommon on real steam locos under way ...

Oh, really? Steam locomotive exhaust is a combination of firebox combustion products and exhaust steam from the cylinders that enhances the draft. In cold weather a clean-burning steam locomotive produces lots of spectacular white "smoke" in the form of steam condensation. I like a model that emulates the white steam exhaust, rather than inefficient black smoke!

Ace, 

Why are you confusing things with facts? 

Ted Hikel posted:

One results in having a bad day.  The other is a life threatening emergency.  If an otherwise healthy person has ever experienced a life threatening emergency that was medically attributed to model train smoke I would sure like to know more about it.

Hi Ted,

The guy is dead so I can't help you with his medical specifics now. I don't know if he saw Jesus in the ambulance or not. 

My MTH engines don't smoke like this. The trains in the photos have good smoke units, though. Other than for Rex, I think these photos make the case for the guys who say the model train smoke does not look prototypical.

I feel what is needed is a cool, calm, objective discussion of smoke units in model trains. Should be a "sticky" somewhere.

Yah, I know. "Good luck with that!"

That is what I needed when I first came here about 15 months ago. The fact that it is a matter of personal preference to use them or not is clear and, frankly, pretty obvious. When I got my first "modern" steamer, I was perplexed that the 3-rd Rail instruction booklet STRONGLY implied it best to keep ones locomotive "pristine" and not use the unit at all! Also laying out that no return was possible on a unit that had ever activated the smoke unit. I also did not know what the "smoke" really was . . . aerosolized mineral oil.

What is certainly NOT clear to neophytes is how these units work and the pitfalls in using them. They are certainly among the most, if not THE most, troubleprone areas of these toys.

While I very much like the smoke, I can find much to agree with the poster who expressed the "more trouble than it's worth" sentiment.

The exaggerations here, and the well "outside the third standard deviation" medical cases are more debating tactics than helpful.

Smoke is a personal choice for all of us, whether it is because of health reasons, maintenance issues or what we like to see. Me, I love it. So does this guy.

I am certainly in the smoke camp.

Terry Danks posted:

That is what I needed when I first came here about 15 months ago. The fact that it is a matter of personal preference to use them or not is clear and, frankly, pretty obvious. When I got my first "modern" steamer, I was perplexed that the 3-rd Rail instruction booklet STRONGLY implied it best to keep ones locomotive "pristine" and not use the unit at all! Also laying out that no return was possible on a unit that had ever activated the smoke unit. I also did not know what the "smoke" really was . . . aerosolized mineral oil.

What is certainly NOT clear to neophytes is how these units work and the pitfalls in using them. They are certainly among the most, if not THE most, troubleprone areas of these toys.

Interesting ... 

... Not saying this is the case here as I don't know all the facts, but as a general statement, when there is a surprise material condition (use smoke, no refund) unknown to the buyer before the purchase or a surprise term that materially diminishes your enjoyment of the product, this is usually unenforceable and allows the buyer even greater rights. 

In terms of "it's a personal choice" comments: I totally agree. The problem is there are so many who will attempt to argue the merits by saying they won't use smoke effects because models don't emulate the volume of smoke of the prototype and, thus, render the model "toy like."  This argument is, of course, not only illogical but asinine. And, it has innumerable logical retorts/counter-points - but don't try to discuss this with those who are beating the asinine illogical drum. They either can't or won't accept logic and facts. This is what leads to the endless debates - not the smoke effects.    

Hey, the G scale model smoke is getting there. The others, nope, looks a little cheesy.

smoke is good if you handle it well. after years of using smoke I have developed a feel for when and how much to fill. I keep a bottle at the ready and refill during operation.

Bob C.

The exaggerations here, and the well "outside the third standard deviation" medical cases are more debating tactics than helpful.

 

Please don't misrepresent this here. What I wrote was not an exageration. I relayed an event that really happened so the club might make a simple check into where they might stand on a legal level. Simple enough, and it should have passed with a quick nod and without comment. But no, I got a bunch of bottom blow from you and other doubters.

That G scale smoke looks awesome. I wonder how many scale miles /oz. of smoke fluid that the Hudson gets with the output setting used in the video.  The smoke looks more realistic than I've see with most live steamers!

  I for one just wouldn't want to be breathing that much smoke indoors.  Again - each to his own.