shortliner Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 (edited) ....and posts giving reasons why people shouldn't build them - boring, not prototypical, etc., I came across this one on FB, which to my mind proves that a "Timesaver" can be worth building. Very neatly done, small space model - click on the picture and it will enlarge Kim Nipkow 14 hrs...A little something from Switzerland. My latest layout. Actually a classic: John Allen's Timesaver. Took the original trackplan and put some scenery and structures around it. Thought I share it here. Edited July 10, 2018 by shortliner 12 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tove Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 ....and posts giving reasons why people shouldn't build them - boring, not prototypical, etc., Pahh...! I would imagine the commentators/critiques would be more at home with something like this then....... Brian. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
long island jack Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Pahh...! I would imagine the commentators/critiques would be more at home with something like this then....... 72680Bigjigs Freight Train Set.jpg Brian. WOW!!! what track did you use, who make are those trees, is the bridge scratch built or a kit!!!!!...………………... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Regularity Posted July 10, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 10, 2018 I’ve had this lot for over 50 years: And this for nearly as long: 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wendell1976 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 (edited) The only things I have a problem with a Timesaver layout is the runaround and three of the sidings are way too short. The sidings that are to the left and right of the runaround can only fit the locomotive and one car(or two cars without the locomotive). That is not prototypical in real life. The runaround itself can only fit two cars on one side of it(or a locomotive plus one car) and only one car on the other side. This also isn't prototypical in real life. The runaround and most of the sidings need to be extended to make the Timesaver more authentic. John Allen never intended for the Timesaver to be based on real life switching; he only intended for it to be just a "puzzle." Wendell Idaho, USA Edited July 10, 2018 by Wendell1976 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted July 10, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 10, 2018 The only things I have a problem with a Timesaver layout is the runaround and three of the sidings are way too short. The sidings that are to the left and right of the runaround can only fit the locomotive and one car(or two cars without the locomotive). That is not prototypical in real life. The runaround itself can only fit two cars on one side of it(or a locomotive plus one car) and only one car on the other side. This also isn't prototypical in real life. The runaround and most of the sidings need to be extended to make the Timesaver more authentic. John Allen never intended for the Timesaver to be based on real life switching; he only intended for it to be just a "puzzle." Wendell Idaho, USA Yes, but we can't all have large layouts. Sidings can, sometimes, be very short. I do agree with you about the overly short loop. It might be better to extend that into a staging area so the viewer can't see how short it is. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium 2996 Victor Posted July 10, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 10, 2018 It’s a nice-looking little layout, well put together, and with great scenery that disguises the fact that it’s a Timesaver. I tend to agree with Wendell’s comments insofar as the loop and spurs are not of prototypical length, which is of course because its essentially a puzzle. However, if an extra track were added running parallel to the main line from the cross-over and exiting stage left (or right), this would be the prototypical loop for appearances sake, and could end at a dual-track sector plate, thus: The layout would then serve a dual purpose, either as a prototypical model railroad, or by ignoring the loop track, as a switching puzzle as the operator requires. I’m doing something similar with my Ashover Light Railway layout: it’s basically an Inglenook with and additional kick-back siding and a small passenger station. I'll be able to either run it as a “proper” model railway or purely as a shunting puzzle. Cheers, Mark 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Regularity Posted July 10, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 10, 2018 Yes, but we can't all have large layouts. Sidings can, sometimes, be very short. I do agree with you about the overly short loop. It might be better to extend that into a staging area so the viewer can't see how short it is. I think the point is, and I think you are alluding to this so I am agreeing with you, is that the Timesaver is not a brilliant basis for an authentic layout, unlike a much simpler arrangement of single spur with multiple spots. But, not everyone's boat is floated by a desire for an authentic layout. I mean, I never pretend that the Playcraft plastic train set from circa 1967 is authentic (it is more akin to a plateway!) but I have been able to have a surprising amount of fun with authentic operations on it. (My then 3-year old son was slightly mystified by it all!) 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Enterprisingwestern Posted July 10, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 10, 2018 Also, if you are a stock builder, a timesaver type layout is a lot easier to get out and set up than a larger more "prototypical" layout for testing purposes. Mike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Regularity Posted July 10, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 10, 2018 That also applies to a single turnout layout (if not more so), such as this: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/135372-new-shelf-layout-build-thread/ Timesaver was intended purely as a shunting puzzle, such as real railways go out of their way to avoid, and as a fun way to pass excessive time, which is precisely the way for a real railway to lose money. Still, each to their own, as the onanist said. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wendell1976 Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 "Sidings can, sometimes, be very short." I agree with this statement as long as a two-car capacity track is not touching either side of the runaround. I have seen very short siding tracks in real life here in The States. Wendell Idaho, USA Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted July 11, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 11, 2018 When we were in Provence earlier this year, I got to see quite a lot of the old standard-gauge Bouches du Rhone light railways. I could see that Spacesaver design, with a longer loop, working well in that context. Like in parts of the USA, most of the BdR lines were for agricultural traffic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wendell1976 Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 For a more "authentic" Timesaver layout, check out Martin Hogg's HO scale Brett layout. Hogg had spread the runaround and sidings on his switching layout. The layout is a 1X8(1 foot by 8 foot) and it's modeled after Idaho. You can watch Hogg's video clips on YouTube(titled "Switching Brett"). Wendell Idaho, USA Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogtrains Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 For a more "authentic" Timesaver layout, check out Martin Hogg's HO scale Brett layout. Hogg had spread the runaround and sidings on his switching layout. The layout is a 1X8(1 foot by 8 foot) and it's modeled after Idaho. You can watch Hogg's video clips on YouTube(titled "Switching Brett"). Wendell Idaho, USA Thanks for the mention Wendell :-) I don't visit RMWeb that often and when I saw this thread I was going to say that someone had recently commented that Brett was similar to a Timesaver .. this video gives a little insight into the planning and thinking behind the layout.. https://youtu.be/00vx8wc--rc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
puck Posted July 16, 2018 Share Posted July 16, 2018 Isn't Ashburton a Timesaver with a loading dock? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now