TIMESAVER: A Tribute to John Allen

My last layout was an 11x4 switching layout that was loosely based on The Timesaver.

Tom 

Got one of those built into my logging railroad:

here's everything about switching layouts...http://www.wymann.info/ShuntingPuzzles/

howard

Excellent idea for shows, John!  Yes I remember seeing the original John Allen Timesaver in print with track plan and a photograph of John and 3 or 4 guys switching or looking on, seems to be in a sun room in John's house.  I recall reading in MR or RMC a tribute to John after hiss passing when in high school.

I built a similar affair with HO track to try out On30 trains in my slow jump from HO to O gauge.  I never thought to take a photograph, because I never thought I would ever want to show anyone.  One thing I learned was that switching layouts weren't for me.  I preferred a train run with a few sidings along the way.  There is something for everyone.

Tom and Samparfitt, yours look great!  Sawdust43, nice Website Link!!  I first tried the Inglebrook shown on the site before building a Timesaver.

sawdust43 posted:

here's everything about switching layouts...http://www.wymann.info/ShuntingPuzzles/

howard

I read the article and it had interesting and inspiring concepts for application to large layouts as well.  For instance I have designated certain businesses on my layout that require ice to refrigerate brewery product and agricultural equipment and produce.  My card system incorporates operations to juggle cars (empties and full) from the businesses in an area in town and eventually to a yard, where they are added to trains for distant destinations.  My operations are very slowly evolving.  I have not yet completed my first of six sessions.  I have found that the switching portion of my sessions becomes a little tedious after a while.  Nonetheless, the creativity and imagination of others is inspiring.

John C. posted:

 

Everyone really liked and enjoyed this switching challenge!  I'm planning a future submission for a feature article in OGR. 

That looks great and it's a good idea too, and does look like fun. Can you post a couple more pics? That is if possible without messing up your plans for an article...Which I will be looking forward to seeing in OGR Magazine! That is a good topic for an OGR article too, IMO. Good luck with it (and the sooner the better! ). 

I might do as Mark says above and try it in HO or something smaller to start. That's a good idea too. Would also give me an excuse for that DCC system I have been wanting.  (And the switch and track expense would be much less in HO, allowing more for DCC system. )

The link above posted by Sawdust43 looks neat too. Looks like it might even explain how to work these things for us prototypically challenged folks (me anyway).

Nice to see another Time Saver come to life. It's one of those plans I have always loved since the 70's. I really don;t care what scale or guage it's in, it's just a cool problem. 

Forumite Leighline brings one to the Allentown show every now and then...

This is a version of Time Saver that I built in O gauge back in 2012. I am very impressed that you were able to pull it off @16 lbs. Mine is more like 40 lbs. 

Mine is 32"x144".

Next year, I plan to add a switch (like the original) to allow this layout to tie into a main layout.

Note the "switch to nowhere" on the top right in the picture of a surviving original above.

That one looks great, Tom!!

Tom your version looks fantastic! Yes mine weighs significantly less and that was definitely intentional. My sole purpose and primary goal was to be able to transport it to various train shows and train events in the Central Indiana area. I will run it at my house too. But I was going to make certain that I could move it all by myself and all--including engine, cars, buildings, transformer, DCS System, all at one time! I have this wonderful red metal rolling cart with three total shelves. The layout sits on the top shelf. The bottom two shelves each have one large plastic bucket that is filled with the above listed items. It's one neat unit that I can easily roll in or out of anywhere all by myself.

To the other poster about who suggested about making a video, I want to do that but right now I am going to wait for reasons I can't disclose at this particular moment. At some point there will be a video.

It looks like you are using ore cars. Brilliant for a down-sized TimeSaver! As you know the key is fitting the correct number of cars on each siding.

Are you using Kaydee couplers? They should work much better than the big claw couplers. That's why I use the beefy GarGraves bumpers. They give me something real solid to push against to get the couplers closed.

When you look at the original, there was zero ground cover, scenery, or buildings. I think buildings add a nice touch giving the cars a destination. I do like your use of a background. That would be a nice addition to mine.

I have mine setup to run DCS Remote Commander w/ a Z1000 transformer. It works very well. My biggest issue is the arcing on the rails (pitting) when people (including myself) forget to throw the switch.

Gilly

Gilly@N&W posted:

It looks like you are using ore cars. Brilliant for a down-sized TimeSaver! As you know the key is fitting the correct number of cars on each siding.

Are you using Kaydee couplers? They should work much better than the big claw couplers. That's why I use the beefy GarGraves bumpers. They give me something real solid to push against to get the couplers closed.

When you look at the original, there was zero ground cover, scenery, or buildings. I think buildings add a nice touch giving the cars a destination. I do like your use of a background. That would be a nice addition to mine.

I have mine setup to run DCS Remote Commander w/ a Z1000 transformer. It works very well. My biggest issue is the arcing on the rails (pitting) when people (including myself) forget to throw the switch.

Gilly

Tom I am using the regular standard couplers. Fortunately, these or cars have a tab on the couplers that you just simply push down to release. Of course I'm using full-blown DCS so I have control of the engines couplers. For my bumpers, I'm using gargraves track. I take off two of the wooden ties and pile them on top of each other and then use screws to hold them in place. They are sufficiently strong to stop anything from running off the end of the track and actually help the cars couple. The cars are just not heavy enough to stay in place when the engine bumps into them for the coupler to engage. I just gently back them into the bumper and everything couples! John Allen would have been thrilled if he would have had these tabs and automatic uncoupling by the engine because you can couple or uncouple absolutely anywhere and use no magnets! Nice simple and easy. That's what I was going for. Thank you for the compliment about the backdrop. I know the backdrop is incredibly simple. A layout does not look finished to me unless it has a backdrop. I also went crazy and actually weathered the track because I just couldn't stand it. I am very seriously considering putting down ballast and putting down like gravel inbetween the rails and adding some bushes or something like that just to give it a little life. I know that was not John Allen's intention or purpose.

Actually I consider My Time Saver and extension of the glacier Gravel Company. I want to paint a model copy of the glacier Gravel Company on the backdrop.

Here a few more pictures of the TimeSaver from about 2012......

This is me.....about 30lbs heavier......

This little boy really gets it......Look at how pleased Tom (Gilly) looks!

John.....the picture of John Allen's original TimeSaver that Gilly posted above can be visited.......I took that picture at the San Diego RR Museum and display layouts in Balboa Park, San Diego.

Peter

This is something I've actually never heard about until now. I suppose it is probably because I was 2 years old when John Allen passed away and most likely never saw the articles that were out there about stuff like this.

Thanks so much for sharing this. I have never built anything like this in any scale and have never tried to work this out. Hmm, might have to give it a go someday.

Dave,

If you are interested, here are a couple links to some John Allen material in print.

https://kalmbachhobbystore.com...al-download/mrpdf040

https://kalmbachhobbystore.com...al-download/mrpdf031

It looks like the large paperback book they did on him back in the early '80s is out of print.  It tells more than you would ever want to know.

Great layout! Goes to show what you can do with O gauge in a small space.
I actually came up with a plan for a 30" door I took out last year. I'm saving the door for "one day". My wife saw it in the garage the other day and when I told her why I'm saving it I got "the look"

Bob, The plan is good.  Yes, I just used the switches I had on hand when I tried it in HO, actually I was running On30 equipment.  The sidings swung out in different directions, but the operational results were the same.  I am using an old door for my workbench right now.  I could look at three quarters of the stuff in our garage right now and give my wife, daughter, and mother-in-law "the look"!    It does work both ways.    However, I don't say a word.  

Awesome stuff. You know, I do remember thumbing through MR in my much younger days and I did see one of these as a layout, but I thought to myself, "how would you even get this to work switching stuff back and forth, you won't get anything done". Ah, the naivety of youth.

About doors, yeah, they are very useful for so many things. About the " look", it does work both ways but you need to use the Scooby-Doo look back. That would be the "I don't get it Shaggy".

Dave NYC Hudson PRR K4 posted:

Awesome stuff. You know, I do remember thumbing through MR in my much younger days and I did see one of these as a layout, but I thought to myself, "how would you even get this to work switching stuff back and forth, you won't get anything done". Ah, the naivety of youth.

About doors, yeah, they are very useful for so many things. About the " look", it does work both ways but you need to use the Scooby-Doo look back. That would be the "I don't get it Shaggy".

  Very true!!  

I've got plenty of ammo to send back in the other direction but as the great George Carlin once said....

"Did you ever notice how your stuff is stuff and other peoples stuff is crap"

As an FYI, a key item that makes TimeSaver "work", is the size of the sidings. Each should hold the cars as shown on the attached diagram plus engine.

Per the original rules, you start with 5 cars and switch them to 5 destination tracks. The first variation is to do it in the shortest time. The second is to do it in the fewest moves. There are numerous other variations. 

Not to be one of those know it all critics, but the door panel plan is missing the switchback track.  

I do like the addition of another track for more action. 

Though I find the Timesaver and interesting game, I actually prefer the more-prototypical Inglenook puzzle. Depending on the size of your turnouts and rolling stock, it can be built in a 5-3-3 configuration in 10-12 feet in length and about 24" wide, depending on the length of the equipment involved.

Prototype examples:

Gilly@N&W posted:

As an FYI, a key item that makes TimeSaver "work", is the size of the sidings. Each should hold the cars as shown on the attached diagram plus engine.

Per the original rules, you start with 5 cars and switch them to 5 destination tracks. The first variation is to do it in the shortest time. The second is to do it in the fewest moves. There are numerous other variations. 

I seen this diagram many times. It is interesting. It is helpful. I don't know who came up with it. But it is not correct. On the run around track, if you look at John Allen's or Russ Cain's twin, you can see that the distance of the run-around is equal on both sides. You can put two pieces of Rolling Stock on either side of it. I have studied and studied that diagram trying to figure out how they determined that one car went on one of the tracks and two of the cars went on the other of the tracks when the tracks are absolutely the same identical length.

RSJB18 posted:

I've got plenty of ammo to send back in the other direction but as the great George Carlin once said....

"Did you ever notice how your stuff is stuff and other peoples stuff is crap"

Yes, and a very fond fan of George. Back in the early 90's, my brother and I drove our late mother to her sister's in VA. Mom didn't much like our music, so I put in George Carlin. After that, every trip we made she would demand at least two of his CD's on the ride down and back up.

Good topic John. I meant to reply earlier.

The time saver is what really changed my thinking about layouts and design. I've always loved trains, but in my early teens, back in the 70's, I attended a show, where a guy had one. I fell in love with that thing, and hovered around it watching other people try it. Then I took a turn. From that point on, whenever nobody was using it, I was there perfecting my moves and time. 

The time saver also appeals to my love of problem solving. I've even incorporated a tight switching location into my current layout at Red Wing.

Here's the punchline: The guy who owned the time saver that got me hooked (my mentor as it were) came over to my open house a couple years ago, and fell in love with my layout, but more specifically he was really anxious to try his hand at Red Wing. We had come full circle. I have to call Gary.

Big_Boy_4005 posted:

Good topic John. I meant to earlier.

The time saver is what really changed my thinking about layouts and design. I've always loved trains, but in my early teens, back in the 70's, I attended a show, where a guy had one. I fell in love with that thing, and hovered around it watching other people try it. Then I took a turn. From that point on, whenever nobody was using it, I was there perfecting my moves and time. 

The time saver also appeals to my love of problem solving. I've even incorporated a tight switching location into my current layout at Red Wing.

Here's the punchline: The guy who owned the time saver that got me hooked (my mentor as it were) came over to my open house a couple years ago, and fell in love with my layout, but more specifically he was really anxious to try his hand at Red Wing. We had come full circle. I have to call Gary.

That's a really neat story Elliott! Thanks for sharing.

I almost forgot, but Tom's layout reminded me. I did a simpler version of the time saver at a show back in 2005. That was a fun show. I let the kids run it. The show's promoter said it it was the most popular display. Unfortunately, that was the last show I ever did, too much work.

That is a neat one, Elliot!  Yes I can see setting up and working a show is a lot of work.  I really appreciate all the guys who take the time to bring layouts, modules, and Timesaver like setups to shows.  I like to support them anyway I can.  

At one point in time in an old, old MR, I read that there was a practical application for the "switch to nowhere". 

After John's passing, some of his crew came up with the idea to connect two timesavers back to back using that switch. There were additional rules involving passing one car to the other layout. You had to coordinate with your "competitor" for passing the car to them while still trying to beat them on time. 

I once had a very rough nscale timesaver that was the back half of an n-trak module. 

Thanks john and Mark.

A few footnotes to my previous posts:

• For that show, I used the Lionel couplers and electromagnets. They worked really well. No need for Kadees there. Granted, the cars were hand picked Lionel so they worked well together.
• I still have the "portable" layout, and I might be interested in getting back into doing shows, but someone needs to be the muscle. It would be great if I could find a scout group or something. I'd love to share my knowledge and experience with the next generation.
• Those two kids in that picture with the "younger" me were my best "customers". The older one in the snoopy shirt, reminded me of me, when I discovered the time saver, only younger. He was a natural with the cab-1.
• The track plan for that show was only about a half a time saver, but it showed the basic concept of facing and trailing point switching, and the use of a runaround.
• I suppose I could have made the switching more complicated, but I only owned eight 072 switches for the layout. Two were used for a passing siding on a separate loop. Two formed the runaround for the switching area. Two came off the runaround going into the spurs, and one was used to create a third spur. That left one spare, oh well. 

Greg Nagy posted:

At one point in time in an old, old MR, I read that there was a practical application for the "switch to nowhere". 

After John's passing, some of his crew came up with the idea to connect two timesavers back to back using that switch. There were additional rules involving passing one car to the other layout. You had to coordinate with your "competitor" for passing the car to them while still trying to beat them on time. 

 

I once had a very rough nscale timesaver that was the back half of an n-trak module. 

Here is a link that shows an article in a 1976 Model Railroader that has the two Timesavers connected together.  I used to have that magazine issue; I started getting MR back in the late '60s.  I was thinking in the Lynn Westcott book, there was a photograph of John with some guys with two Timesavers connected, but it may be this photograph instead.  My copy of the Westcott book is packed away right now.   http://www.wymann.info/Shuntin...es/sw-timesaver.html

Big_Boy_4005 posted:

Thanks john and Mark.

A few footnotes to my previous posts:

• For that show, I used the Lionel couplers and electromagnets. They worked really well. No need for Kadees there. Granted, the cars were hand picked Lionel so they worked well together.
• I still have the "portable" layout, and I might be interested in getting back into doing shows, but someone needs to be the muscle. It would be great if I could find a scout group or something. I'd love to share my knowledge and experience with the next generation.
• Those two kids in that picture with the "younger" me were my best "customers". The older one in the snoopy shirt, reminded me of me, when I discovered the time saver, only younger. He was a natural with the cab-1.
• The track plan for that show was only about a half a time saver, but it showed the basic concept of facing and trailing point switching, and the use of a runaround.
• I suppose I could have made the switching more complicated, but I only owned eight 072 switches for the layout. Two were used for a passing siding on a separate loop. Two formed the runaround for the switching area. Two came off the runaround going into the spurs, and one was used to create a third spur. That left one spare, oh well. 

Forum member Andy Hummell of the Pittsburgh Independent Hirailers (This year's MTH Blue Comet award winning club)told me it doesn't take long for the group to do the 'standard' setup with a half dozen guys.  Their Kennywood Park Christmas setup takes a lot longer, over a period of more than one day.  Of course they swap off taking turns with duties.  

The point being, yes you would need muscle to help you transport, setup and even attend the Timesaver when you need to use the restroom, etc.  Interacting with the visitors is the easy part I would think, but tiring I'm sure for those of us getting older or having health issues.

Many modular groups create terrific scenes on their modules.  A time saver incorporated in one of them would be an interesting addition.  I have a version of the old MR plan Gum Stump and Snowshoe incorporated into my layout.  Not as challenging as a time saver but it provides scenic and operating interest.

I figured and figured but I could not come up with a way to fit a "timesaver" into my layout design. It takes more space than it first appears. So I was disappointed. I still enjoy reading about John Allen's work with the marvelous writing of Linn Westcott and track planning by John Armstrong. In terms of model railroad authorship, their era was truly "golden". Teimesaver is a wonderful Allen legacy.

Don Merz

Just for the fun and interest, I put together a time-saver using FasTrack, and using the FasTrack remote uncouplers.   Shown are more uncouplers than generally used in recognition that our claw couplers are not as flexible as Kadee-style couplers, but this does not change the game parameters.   All of the car-length sections are sized for 40' scale cars and a diesel switcher.   This fits in 2' by 9'3".

Using TMCC/Legacy the turnouts can be controller remotely, as can the remote uncouplers using one of the other TMCC/Legacy components (my understanding, have not actually done this).   I think it might be more fun to control everything from one remote.

The red dots are the center of the FasTrack 5" uncoupling tracks, and I have shown lighted FasTrack bumpers.  Turnouts are O72 and one O72 'Y'.   There are three broad curved sections: one full size O72, one half-O72, and one half-size O84 so that couplers will tend to be centered over the track for coupling.   -Ken

Ken,

Thanks for posting a FasTrack timesaver, this one really looks good. I really like that you were able to incorporate uncoupling track sections. I will have to look at this in more detail. I have a version of the timesaver on my small layout but you have so much more in same area.  I would like to reconfigure mine now. You always have great track plans.

Thanks,

-Tom

John C,

Thanks for starting this thread. Wonderful contributions from all who have replied. Great ideas here.

Many thanks to all.

-Tom

A variation on the FasTrack Timesaver:  with leads to extend the spurs and make switching a bit more prototypical - cars cannot be spotted or stored here (only between the red dots of the uncouplers and lighted bumpers).   With footprints for industries if one wishes to populate the Timesaver with structures.

With five cars spotted randomly:

Here is a little more of John Allen's stuff....these pics were taken in 2009 when I visited San Diego.....I figured people would like to see these....salvaged pieces of his railroad and a TimeSaver

Don't mean to get off topic.....but, I believe these are historical artifacts of model railroading that should be shared.....

Peter

Peter, Thank you for sharing those.  I did not know they were in a museum.  The next to last photograph, showing two Timesavers tied together, proves the purpose of that extra switch  The article describes how two guys could make a timed game of it.  The magazine article shown, is the one I was referring to that I had long ago.  John himself is standing in the foreground as I recall watching two friends play the timed game.  I remember it well, though I lost those old magazines in a move back in the late '70s or my mother threw them out; I don't know which.

I have built a couple of variations over the years but the latest for me has been the one in 7 1/2 inch gauge for the Train Mountain live steam park in Chiloquin Or.  Kids can do the moves in less than 10 min, us seniors can do it in around 15min, and if the team has ever worked on a real railroad it could take all afternoon!    A team is an engineer and a switchman.  The switchman calls the shots while the engineer just has to control the train.  Timed events can also be a true team effort where the crew changes positions for a second run and then combine the times.  During meets this is a spot where you want to get a folding chair and an ice chest and Kabitz away!  Thank you John for providing so much fun for all these years!  Russ

That’s neat, Russ.

Peter, Thanks for the pics, I had never seen those before. Glad they were able to salvage a few things after the fire and keep them preserved and displayed for all to see. Definitely some great model RR history there.

Elliott I really appreciate what you're saying about lugging heavy modules. When I made my timesaver I had one specific intentional priority purpose. That was to make that thing as lightweight and ridiculously easy to move as possible. I succeeded beyond my wildest imagination!

I wish that I could take full credit for thinking about that rolling cart that I attached the layout to. It was a complete by chance accident. I walked into a Harbor Freight store one night saw that cart and bells started ringing in my head! The layout itself is incredibly light at 16 pounds. But of course I still had to haul the Transformer the command control stuff the cars and a couple of buildings. I bought a couple of plastic containers that fit perfectly on to the middle and lower shelf of that rolling cart. I can roll everything in at one time!

In fact, a couple of guys started swearing and cussing at me as they saw me leaving the Carmel Show pulling that entire assembly with one finger as I was walking down the hallway. They laughed afterwards and said you are brilliant! These are two of the three guys that were hauling in gigantic modules for about 30 minutes passing back and forth in front of me a dozen times.

I thought back to my days of being with a modular Club in Billings Montana. Greatest guys in the world! We lugged that lay out into the largest shopping mall in the state of Montana near Christmas time. The interaction with the public was fun. But getting that layout in and out of there was Zero fun.

That is why when I decided I would like to do something like that again I was going to make a very small modular setup that just me could get in and out of places easily easily easily.

Well John, my portable layout was never intended to be a time saver. That was just what I did with it for one show. Each module isn't very heavy. There are 2' x 4' rectangles and 2' x 2' triangles. All are covered with indoor outdoor carpet. There is no permanent track plan, all the track has Velcro on the bottom of the ties, allowing it to stick to the carpeted tops.

The problems start with the number of modules involved. I have 24 rectangles and 24 triangles, and I frequently used all the rectangles to make a layout. It got to be a pain loading the truck, then unloading and setting up. Then to add to the setup time, I had to assemble the track, then WIRE the whole thing. I had incorporated some time saving features, with folding legs and generic wiring and plugs, which helped, but I still had to make a lot of connections on site.

I wasn't one to keep things simple either. There were no plain loops of track. Each loop had relay automation of some sort. There were passing sidings, protected crossings and yard sequencers where trains would take turns running. Never a dull moment! It was totally unique, because I never met anyone as crazy as myself.

Here are a few pictures of some of my different creations. (Sorry about the topic drift)

I called this thing the "brain". It was eight relay modules wired together to form a four track sequencer.

These next two layouts used the brain to run four trains on the outer loop. Same setup, different locations. Then there were double figure eights in the middle with relay protected quad diamonds.

This was one of the smaller layouts I did.

Double figure eights again, but the outer loop has double passing sidings with relay automation.

This was a crazy one. I was given this space on an outside corner in the corridor of the mall.

There were two loops that crossed over each other. One ran two trains loop to loop with a passing siding in the middle. The other was a giant dog bone with two passing sidings

This was the last setup. A loop of track with the mini time saver on the outside, and a loop with a single passing siding on the inside. The brain was repurposed to just two tracks instead of four.

What this thing really needs is its own trailer, for storage and hauling. That would make a huge difference.

I will tell you all one thing about the TimeSaver that I do not understand. Look at the posted diagram about two posts above. The one that shows how many cars can fit in any particular area. Look at the run around tracks. One side shows it can hold two cars and the other side it shows it can hold one car. The sidings are the exact same length. You tell me? Both sides hold two cars easily. And you can use either side as well.  . I have always wondered who came up with this diagram? I have seen it several times and several places and the diagram was done just slightly differently so it's more than one person that created one. But I've got a news flash, when you connect those run around tracks they're going to be the same length and they're going to hold at least two cars on both sides.

Putnam Division posted:

Here is a little more of John Allen's stuff....these pics were taken in 2009 when I visited San Diego.....I figured people would like to see these....salvaged pieces of his railroad and a TimeSaver

Don't mean to get off topic.....but, I believe these are historical artifacts of model railroading that should be shared.....

Peter

Just information the timesaver that is pictured in this Photograph belong to Russ Cain one of John Allen's operators. Somebody somewhere has John Allen's timesaver. Right now I can't remember off the top of my head who has it. I know that it has been displayed at the nmra National Convention before sometime in the 2000s. But the one at the San Diego model railroad museum is the twin belonging to Russ Cain.

John, the tracks of the runaround look the same length, but I believe the rule is that you aren't allowed to spot cars on a switch. That would account for the difference in capacity. It also makes the problem slightly more challenging.

Big_Boy_4005 posted:

John, the tracks of the runaround look the same length, but I believe the rule is that you aren't allowed to spot cars on a switch. That would account for the difference in capacity. It also makes the problem slightly more challenging.

If you look closely at the original plan there is an exact equal amount of trackage on both sides and switches. It is exactly identical on both side on John Allen's and Russ Kane's track plan. I wonder who came up with the particular drawing and stated the number of cars? On my particular design I can only spot one car on either side without it being on top of a turnout. And I would not have wanted to stretch it out to a ridiculous length to accommodate the not parking on a turnout rule. Maybe that is the case. But in many of the time-savers I've seen it looks to me like the sidings are virtually identical and the number of turnouts on them are virtually identical.

John C. posted:

Big_Boy_4005 posted:

John, the tracks of the runaround look the same length, but I believe the rule is that you aren't allowed to spot cars on a switch. That would account for the difference in capacity. It also makes the problem slightly more challenging.

If you look closely at the original plan there is an exact equal amount of trackage on both sides and switches. It is exactly identical on both side on John Allen's and Russ Kane's track plan. I wonder who came up with the particular drawing and stated the number of cars? On my particular design I can only spot one car on either side without it being on top of a turnout. And I would not have wanted to stretch it out to a ridiculous length to accommodate the not parking on a turnout rule. Maybe that is the case. But in many of the time-savers I've seen it looks to me like the sidings are virtually identical and the number of turnouts on them are virtually identical.

I believe it has to do with not fouling the path from C to B and is probably related to a common RR 'rule' rather than usable space.

Just wanted to point out that forum member John Coy had his 3-rail O scale timesaver featured in the June issue of NMRA Magazine!!! 

Congratulations John and well done!  It's nice to see the NMRA acknowledge us 3-railers every so often.

George

@G3750 posted:

Just wanted to point out that forum member John Coy had his 3-rail O scale timesaver featured in the June issue of NMRA Magazine!!! 

Congratulations John and well done!  It's nice to see the NMRA acknowledge us 3-railers every so often.

George

Congratulations, John!!!!

I was a member of the NMRA off and on when I modeled HO and N.  You are right, George.  I do not ever remember seeing anyone modeling 3-rail in print nor saw it in person.

@Mark Boyce posted:

Congratulations, John!!!!

I was a member of the NMRA off and on when I modeled HO and N.  You are right, George.  I do not ever remember seeing anyone modeling 3-rail in print nor saw it in person.

Mark,

Neal Schorr and Bob Bartizek are NMRA members, as am I.  

George

@G3750 posted:

Mark,

Neal Schorr and Bob Bartizek are NMRA members, as am I.  

George

 I knew you, Neal, and John Coy are and now Bob too. Thank you for bringing to my attention that I didn't type all I meant.  I meant to write "I do not ever remember seeing anyone modeling 3-rail in print nor saw it in person at the time I was in NMRA 20 years ago".  

@John C. posted:

Just information the timesaver that is pictured in this Photograph belong to Russ Cain one of John Allen's operators. Somebody somewhere has John Allen's timesaver. Right now I can't remember off the top of my head who has it. I know that it has been displayed at the nmra National Convention before sometime in the 2000s. But the one at the San Diego model railroad museum is the twin belonging to Russ Cain.

According to this link that Mark Boyce posted, it is in Chattanooga, TN.  

http://www.wymann.info/Shuntin...es/sw-timesaver.html

@G3750 posted:

Mark,

Neal Schorr and Bob Bartizek are NMRA members, as am I.  

George

I'm also a member of NMRA (along with TCA and LCCA), although it might be a stretch to call my 3-rail efforts "modeling".  Not sure why it should be surprising that someone is interested in both scale and toy trains, or might want to combine the two.

IMO, this is a problem with the train hobby in general - the idea that one person's approach to the hobby is less worthy than another's.  We are more alike than different, and we should act accordingly.

Edit:  I met Neal Schorr on a layout tour at the 2016 NMRA convention.  I was wearing a TCA hat; he saw it and came up and introduced himself - nice guy and great hi-railer.  Looking back, I wonder how many people might have avoided me due to wearing a TCA hat.  (The bus trip from **** - driver got stuck in the grass while trying to turn around in the layout owner's driveway.) 

Fort Pitt Highrailer's modular timesaver version.   Two 6 ft modules. (In addition, two regular (4 track modules, left in picture)   Note the control panel upper right picture. Time saver modules required an additional power supply, lower right, in picture.

Mike, I have never seen the timesaver modules anywhere the Fort Pitt Hirailers have setup, however I haven't attended since the meets moved from Cranberry to the Masonic building.  They look great!!

@Mark Boyce posted:

Mike, I have never seen the timesaver modules anywhere the Fort Pitt Hirailers have setup, however I haven't attended since the meets moved from Cranberry to the Masonic building.  They look great!!

Pictures are dated, long ago.  Timesaver was, one of many, Matt Irwin projects, he has been gone for some time.   On occasion, the modules would be displayed at the Pittsburgh Home and Garden show, though that event was restricted, and cut short, this year, 2020, do to Covid-19.   Set-up and operation, usually takes a bit more time, than is available.  The control panel, can be installed on the public side, of the display, with a lot of supervision.  We haven't done that in some time.  

@Mike CT posted:

Pictures are dated, long ago.  Timesaver was, one of many, Matt Irwin projects, he has been gone for some time.   On occasion, the modules would be displayed at the Pittsburgh Home and Garden show, though that event was restricted, and cut short, this year, 2020, do to Covid-19.   Set-up and operation, usually takes a bit more time, than is available.  The control panel, can be installed on the public side, of the display, with a lot of supervision.  We haven't done that in some time.  

 

Mike, I wondered if the Pittsburgh Home and Garden Show was the best venue for setting it up.  I have never trekked into the city for it, once I became aware perhaps 7 or 8 years ago.  I have seen Matt Irwin's name, but wondered if he was no longer active or still with us.  I definitely can imagine much supervision would be needed for the control to be setup on the visitor side.  Thank you for the information.  All this time I have read you posts, I never realized you are in the Pittsburgh area.  Probably my fault not putting 2 and 2 together.   

@Ken-Oscale posted:

Just for the fun and interest, I put together a time-saver using FasTrack, and using the FasTrack remote uncouplers.   Shown are more uncouplers than generally used in recognition that our claw couplers are not as flexible as Kadee-style couplers, but this does not change the game parameters.   All of the car-length sections are sized for 40' scale cars and a diesel switcher....

I like the plan, but I do not understand the use of so many uncouplers. If the diesel engine is a Lionel remote controlled switcher (anything other than LionChief 1.0), you have remote uncoupling at the switch engine. For those occasions where you need to uncouple two cars from each other, one uncoupler will work by uncoupling and then backing the two cars slowly and gently to where you want them without recoupling. They will usually recouple only if there are many cars or you back with a quick jolt.

You also mentioned lighted FasTrack bumpers. I have not read anything good about those bumpers, has there been an improvement to them recently?

Back in the 70's MR ran an extensive article on John and his rail empire.  He had a lot of fun with it in addition to realism.  Prior to plastic models, when everything was scratch built, he put a plastic model under a hot light and let it warp and partially melt, trying to make a point.  The edge of his layout that had a model chain link fence, the fence posts were needles to keep people from laying hands or arms on top of it to admire his work.  He also eschewed diesel engines.  A visitor to his layout noticed a man in a noose, hanging off one of his bridges and just had to ask.  John replied, "He was a diesel salesman".

Speaking of John Allen's sense of humor...I remember hearing that he had a boxcar that had a ball bearing that moved back and forth when cars were switched too roughly...when the ball bearing hit a contact at one end of the car after such rough handling, a noise (buzz?) went off embarrassing the offending operator.

Tom

@PRR8976 posted:

Speaking of John Allen's sense of humor...I remember hearing that he had a boxcar that had a ball bearing that moved back and forth when cars were switched too roughly...when the ball bearing hit a contact at one end of the car after such rough handling, a noise (buzz?) went off embarrassing the offending operator.

Tom

Remember "Operation"? 😁😁

Yes, exactly like that. Bob.

Tom

@RSJB18 posted:

Remember "Operation"? 😁😁

Yes indeed! A different use of the word.  That would keep folks hands off the layout!  

Fort Pitt High Railers have these two modules.  2/15/24.   Edit add: Most important feature, is the parallel track, work-arounds, two pictured.  IMO, seems to work well, with an Atlas SW model, IMO.  GP7 or 9 pictured, controlled with TMCC.  Mike CT.