# What would impress me about model trains.



## jonmyrlebailey (Sep 3, 2011)

1. Swiss-watch precision when it comes to track-laying and railroad switches. This means there is no appreciable oscillation or body rolling of rolling stock vehicles side to side or pitching (abrupt up and down movement) of locomotives and train cars as if hitting bumps or potholes. The utmost in precision would be employed in straight sections of track to ensure they are laser-light straight (no kinks), curved sections to ensure they precisely follow a prescribed mathematical curve, the use of geometrically-correct easement curves as full-size railroads use, grading is mathematically correct for the scale of the layout, and road beds are precisely leveled. Changes in grade percentages should be gradual and not abrupt. There should be no sloppiness in the track work. It is almost impossible to find a YouTube video of a model railroad with track work this velvety smooth in any scale. Rail joints would have to be as near perfect as possible. Individual rails should be laid on high-grade machined wooden ties. Rails should be machined to perfection and of high-grade steel. Super-elevation should be mathematically correct as well. Track should be perfectly gauged as should the wheels of the rolling stock. 

Calipers, dial indicators and perhaps laser instruments might be employed in the world's finest model RR layouts. A regular tape measure, carpenter's level and steel ruler might not be precise enough for Swiss-watch-grade track laying. 

2. The wheels, axles, bearings and axles of train rolling stock would have to be machined for smooth rolling on the line as well. Rolling stock vehicles might also benefit from spring suspensions that are functional. 

3. the train couplers should be of Switch-watch precision as well with as little free-play as practical. 

Expensive model trains with countless manhours of work put into layouts should not ever wobble or teeter like cheap China-made plastic toys. If I were a rich man, I would want model train equipment to be hand-made by old-world European craftsmen to very tight tolerances. The Swiss, Germans, Austrians, English and Italians should be some of the best at this trade.

4. Trains should accelerate and decelerate naturally: not starting or stopping too abruptly but with a gradual, fluid smoothness as do full-size and much heavier trains. Acceleration and braking rates should be to accurate scale as are steady cruising speeds. This would require precision motors and gears in powered rolling stock as well as precision electronic speed controls. Speed of train vehicles, whether N scale or G scale, should be adjustable increments in as little as 1/10th scale miles per hour especially at low speeds nearing a stop as 5 scale mph and below. Trains should smoothly creep up to a red signal and stop. Model train behavior for serious high-dollar hobbyists should exhibit the laws of physics applied to full size and much heavier trains through precise electronics control. A scale train slowing to a stop or taking off from a stop should decelerate/accelerate at a rate of about no more than 0.20 scale mph/sec/sec. That is the train should take no less than about 5 seconds to go from 1 scale mph to 0 scale mph (a dead stop), vice-versa.

Many model trains, of various scales, seems to be going about 1-4 scale mph and stop instantly as if they hit a brick wall. It could simply be because the speed control electronics aren't that refined. 


5. curves should not be too tight and trains should not be too fast on the tight turns: for scaling a standard gauge pike with long-wheelbase American rolling stock as Pullman heavyweights and three-axle-truck diesel locomotives, the curve should be no sharper than 75 scale meters and max. scale speed on these should not exceed 25 scale mph: if you double the curve radius to 150 scale meters, you can double the scale speed to 50 mph

75 scale meters is about 17.50 actual feet in G scale (1/32)
150 scale meters is about 35 scale feet in G scale or 70 actual feet in diameter if a circle


----------



## MohawkMike (Jan 29, 2018)

Interesting. My close up experience is that real trains pitch, roll, sway, and jerk as they travel on the rails. Not always of course, but especially so when they are slowing down or speeding up.


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

I buy and run them to have fun, not to impress me with precision. Real trains roll rattle, bobble and sway. So do my toy trains. Seems realistic to me. 

One of the feature I love most on modern high end locos ( at least O-Gauge) is how the locos and sound-equipmed rolling stock squeal when they go around corners or brake, ust like real cars do: that is a nice feature. 

Take them apart and you'll see they are all precision machined inside, but deliberately made to look real on the outside and sway a bit as the real ones did. And you can get spring suspensions on rolling stock (and locos) ((which let's them sway even more on curves - nice!)) and you can get a momentum feature in power supplies that slows them down realistically instead of stopping quickly, as you said - all of that ust costs more, but then when does doing it right not cost more? Probably the price will impress too.


----------



## Fire21 (Mar 9, 2014)

Considering the precision with which real locomotives are built, and considering that a new one costs around 3 million dollars, I did some math.

If I do this correctly, O gauge is 1:48 size. Guessing a good O gauge loco is at least $200, then I took 48 times that. A good model loco, according to your precision demands should cost $9600. That's pretty darned high-end!

Nobody ever claimed model trains were real-world accurate. They are as accurate as manufacturers can reasonably and cost-effectively produce them.

I may be wrong in my way of calculating, but nonetheless, the precision you want would make the entire hobby cost prohibitive.


----------



## Vincent (Jan 28, 2018)

I've ridden Amtraks a few times, and I assure you that the sleeper cars rock pleasantly.


----------



## jonmyrlebailey (Sep 3, 2011)

Vincent said:


> I've ridden Amtraks a few times, and I assure you that the sleeper cars rock pleasantly.


The thing about full-size trains is that they sway at a much lower frequency than scale trains do on less than glass-smooth track.

It is like comparing a very short pendulum on a cuckoo clock with a very short-radius arc with a very long pendulum as at a museum of science with a very long-radius arc of swing. The analogy is the scale train is the short rapidly-oscillating pendulum while the 15-foot tall pendulum in the museum is the very-slow-swaying full size train. 

It might take a full size train a whole second or more to roll from one side to another over a bump. Many scale trains seem to flutter like the wings of a bird with several oscillations per second over a bump or dip in the track. This has to do with the laws of physics. Some scale track I have seen has visible unsightly kinks in them even on sections that are supposed to be straight and dips are visible to the eye as well. 

The China-made rolling stock could even probably run glass-smooth to the naked human eye as long as the tracks were laid and leveled precisely enough as with a dial indicator. With one machined rail piece and track tie at a time. Your road bed must be precisely machined or formed also. It should be solid like concrete, hard wood or steel. I don't believe track can be accurately leveled on cork. Flex track commercially made probably lacks precision machining to ensure uniform gauge and rail-head height even at the joints. Thin metal shims, or machined ties with a slight taper, could be used for super-elevating curves. 
Your ballast material, as sand, small pebbles or small gravel, is purely decorative scenery to mimic the look of a full-size railway's gravel. The trick is to machine the frogs, guide rails and points in RR switches precisely to minimize train jerkiness over them. 

If I were to get into scale trains as a hobby, I would endeavor to produce quality track work as much as humanly possible. The track work is the foundation of any railroad in regard to train performance. It deserves the most scrutiny. I have ridden on gently-swaying Amtrak coaches too but they don't flutter like a bird's wings. 

Any small imperfection in a scale track is going to be much worse than a small imperfection on a full size track. Blemishes are amplified exponentially as we scale down our models. Small much-less massive trains as HO or even G scale are going to oscillate much more rapidly over the slightest dip. They are much more sensitive to track blemishes than full size trains which can weigh tens of thousands of tons. 

I have been told that on a standard gauge full size track, the margin of gauge error is plus or minus 1/2 inch max. from the nominal rail separation of 56.50". 
Divide that 1/2" by whatever your scale is to find your proper gauge tolerances for your railroad's scale. For HO scale, 1/87, your scale standard-gauge track gauge tolerance should be no more than +/- 0.005"!! Five-thousandths of an inch. For G scale, 1/32, the gauge tolerance should be +/- 0.015". 

0.010" for O scale and so on. 

It is the endeavor of the most serious model railroaders in the world to have track work as nearly as perfect as possible. Not merely in terms of quality electrical contact but in physical train motion behavior as well.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

The high degree of precision that you're talking about would completely suck all the fun out of the hobby for me.

Trying to lay "bullet proof" trackwork, which I agree is essential to good operating, is already at the high end of my tolerance for precision.

Additionally, such high manufacturing tolerances would price all but the richest of us out of the hobby.

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but for me, that would be a disaster of epic proportions.


----------



## Ko Improbable (Mar 15, 2017)

Not to mention that not all real world track is well-maintained. There are stretches of operating railroads that the trains go through at about a human walking pace because the track undulates, pitches and weaves side to side.


----------



## jonmyrlebailey (Sep 3, 2011)

CTValleyRR said:


> The high degree of precision that you're talking about would completely suck all the fun out of the hobby for me.
> 
> Trying to lay "bullet proof" trackwork, which I agree is essential to good operating, is already at the high end of my tolerance for precision.
> 
> ...


A few hobbyists like to, or used to like to in the old days, lay their track one piece of rail and track tie at a time. Are the parts expensive to do this provided you have the patience, tools, proper measuring instruments and skills for this? 

I just could not see myself investing thousands into a train layout and have the rolling stock wobble like Weebles toys as they went around the track and find it aesthetically pleasing. 

I would strive to hone the necessary skills for track-laying perfection even if my layout scenery were modest or sparing.
Smooth-running trains would make me a proud layout owner.


----------



## fcwilt (Sep 27, 2013)

Hi,

My track is laid carefully but not to the tolerances you are discussing.

The trains run just fine and look good doing so.

So feel free to build a layout to your standards and post pictures of the results.

Frederick


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

Fire21 said:


> Considering the precision with which real locomotives are built, and considering that a new one costs around 3 million dollars, I did some math.
> 
> If I do this correctly, O gauge is 1:48 size. Guessing a good O gauge loco is at least $200, then I took 48 times that. A good model loco, according to your precision demands should cost $9600. That's pretty darned high-end!
> 
> ...


I'd do the computation differently. 1:48 scale means 1:48th as long, as wide, and as tall, for a volume and weight that ought to be somewhere around 1/48th _cubed _ in comparison to the prototype, or .00090% as big. Therefore, if a real loco is $5 million (a better estimated price for one with all the bells and whistles I think), then a premium 1:48 loco ought to cost about .00090% times $5 million, or $45. But a good model (what I consider good, MTH Premier or Lionel Legacy) diesel costs about $650 (at typical discounts you get), or 14 times as much.

-------------------------
More on that precision and all. The good thing about model railroading is that we can each make it whatever we want. 

Everything that jonmyrlebailey asked for to impress him is something he can buy if he looks in the right plays and shops well, and/or make himself on his layout. EVerything I want is something I can buy if Ishop well , too. That makes for a great, tailorable hobby. Personally, as I said earlier, I like a bit of sway and bobbing in my trains, etc., but I have seen track laid, literally, with a laser so it is straight level, and true. Not my thing. But if it is, a person has only themselves to blame if they don't get it. 

The one thing I did do with that laser (which I used when laying out my track, is that not one bit of the 325 feet of track I have is level. Every bit of track I have is either climbing of descending slightly, even if its only at 1/4%. Seems more real world to me, too.


----------



## jonmyrlebailey (Sep 3, 2011)

Ko Improbable said:


> Not to mention that not all real world track is well-maintained. There are stretches of operating railroads that the trains go through at about a human walking pace because the track undulates, pitches and weaves side to side.


This is probably because such RR's are:

a. cheap
b. greedy for high profits
c. have no pride
d. uncaring

and/or 

e. underfunded for proper and righteous track maintenance "in the eyes of the level-measurement gods with laser beams and dial-indicator nuts"

But at least they are safety-conscious enough to slow trains way down on such crappy track.

Still, those full-size rolling stock vehicles of the train will sway at a much lower rate due to their enormous size and mass. 

It is very hard, if not impossible, to replicate the slow, smooth rate of sway motion in scaled-down models. The best the scale modeler can do is make the track as neat as possible to minimize any train wobble if he can't entirely eliminate such jitter.


----------



## jonmyrlebailey (Sep 3, 2011)

Lee Willis said:


> I'd do the computation differently. 1:48 scale means 1:48th as long, as wide, and as tall, for a volume and weight that ought to be somewhere around 1/48th _cubed _ in comparison to the prototype, or .00090% as big. Therefore, if a real loco is $5 million (a better estimated price for one with all the bells and whistles I think), then a premium 1:48 loco ought to cost about .00090% times $5 million, or $45. But a good model (what I consider good, MTH Premier or Lionel Legacy) diesel costs about $650 (at typical discounts you get), or 14 times as much.
> 
> -------------------------
> More on that precision and all. The good thing about model railroading is that we can each make it whatever we want.
> ...


That's what I wanted to hear, sir.

The individual hobbyist can make his track work as neatly as he wishes provided he has the skills, patience, time and money needed. There are still retailers in this world who can supply this kind of hobbyist what he needs to suit his fancy. It doesn't all have to be mass-produced China-made stuff with plastic ties and warped track rails. 

I was not impressed with some Lionel sets I bought about 18 years ago. The aluminum track was warped at the joints. The semi-scale NYC Hudson steam locomotive would "porpoise", pitch up and down horribly, at every track joint. I have sold off most my Lionel collection and have a few more items to sell on eBay. I decided I don't like O scale or .027 anyway because of the unsightly 3rd rail in the middle of the track and the fact that the rail-heads are rounded not flat on top. I don't like rubber traction tires also. The tubular Lionel rails means the loco wheels have very little contact area for traction. I believe HO and G scale have flat rail-heads as full-size railways do for a better footprint for the driving wheels. 

I suspect this discriminating hobbyist will need some machining, woodworking, mathematical, civil engineering, carpentry and masonry skills: the mastery of the building trades in miniature, I guess. Is welding and sheet-metal work ever employed in the model RR hobby?


----------



## jonmyrlebailey (Sep 3, 2011)

fcwilt said:


> Hi,
> 
> My track is laid carefully but not to the tolerances you are discussing.
> 
> ...


Right now my "layouts" are in the PC game RR simulator, Trainz. I am able to get sway-free/pitch-free behavior but getting track curves to form a geometrically-perfect arc is something of a challenge. Grading the track takes some patience but is not too hard. If trains hit a change in grade percentage that is too abrupt, it will look unnatural. Some later editions of Trainz even have the option for curve super-elevation and can make the trains sway on purpose depending upon game settings. In DCC mode, however, trains will stop abruptly once the driver's speed controller dial goes to the next throttle position below 1 mph. 

NV3 Games Trainz has "Surveyor" for its layout building mode and Driver for running trains in sessions. 

Trainz RR Simulator is a good piece of software for designing physical model railroads. You can get a computerized mock-up with people, vehicles, animals, boats, trees, scenery, houses, water, sand towers, water tanks, buildings, roads, street signs, lights, signals, fences, mountains, bridges, rivers, yards, switches, roundhouses, signals and all. It comes with a Ruler Tool to make measurements. If you make a mistake its easy to erase as you are designing and building. The Topology Tool allows you to shape your ground: TERRAIN FEATURES as canyons, hills, valleys, lakes, rivers, plateaus and mountains. The Paint feature lets you color/texture your ground as gravel, sand or grass.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

All I can add is, do whatever turns your crank. 

Good luck to you in finding your perfect world.....:thumbsup:


----------



## fcwilt (Sep 27, 2013)

jonmyrlebailey said:


> Right now my "layouts" are in the PC game RR simulator, Trainz.


For designing a layout you will actually construct you want an application like 3rd PlanIt.

This is a CAD program specifically for layout design and as such has all the tools needed for that work.

You naturally can design the track plan of the layout but it also covers framing, scenery, structures, etc.

It has numerous tools to insure that what you draw can actually be built without issues.

While I have Trainz it has little connection to building a model railroad.

Frederick


----------



## DonR (Oct 18, 2012)

Here again we should step back and remember
that Model trains is a hobby...an enjoyable
thing to do when the important stuff is done.

The nice thing about our hobby is that, other than
some necessary physical and electrical standards,
the creative possibilities are through the roof.

Some of us enjoy doing the things that keep
our trains running. Others are more talented
and have the ability to create model works of art.

In the past, many of the layouts and the vehicles that
ran on them were created by actual machinists with
the talent and tools that made possible the engineering
beauty that we see in pics of their work.

I'm far from that status. But even so, my layout
is as level and my cheap store bought trains run as smoothly as the real railroads did back in the 50s and 60s, the
era I model.

Other than very poor modeler workmanship,
the scale of the layout is a major determinate of
accurate track work and train running smoothness.
A tiny 'gap' in an N scale track would represent
as much as 6 or 10 inch chasm for N wheels to
span...while the same gap in HO, or even more so
in 0 gauge, would be only a tolerable bump. Normal
expansion and contraction can be the cause.

We welcome anyone who can achieve the standards
of the past, as well as those who simply want to
sit back and watch trains run around their layout.

Anyone who has the abilities to build a layout with
the perfection discussed in this thread would certainly
get the admiration and respect of all of our members.

Don


----------



## mesenteria (Oct 29, 2015)

It takes hours of work to make tracks silky smooth. It can be done, but I don't manage it until weeks into proving my tracks and then running trains. As I notice some wobbles, or bucking at joints, I correct them to the extent possible. Even so, trains sway, buck, wobble, pitch and yaw. If you've ever seen UP's FEF #844 at speeds over 75 mph out on the main east of Cheyenne, you know that the prototype has a rough ride.


----------



## Eilif (Nov 6, 2017)

3,
2,
1,
Punchline....



jonmyrlebailey said:


> Right now my "layouts" are in the PC game RR simulator, Trainz.


Brother, if you can get an actual layout running like your video game railway then I really will be impressed.


----------



## TOM32 (Aug 3, 2010)

The ozone......from my mid 30's pre-war 259E ..............takes me back to the 40's..................


----------



## D&J Railroad (Oct 4, 2013)

I think most of us have that perfect track image in mind when we start building our layouts. As we run into minor issues with the benchwork, roadbed and track, we let minor things get by. If the trains run on the track with minimal or no problems, so be it. The larger the layout, the more is tolerated.
It's a trade off of performance vs. time to make it perfect. 
There are lots of model layouts on YouTube that you don't see track problems. It certainly can be done and in an expeditious manner. My empire has minor bump events at frogs depending on the rolling stock going over them. I've worked on them to lesson the rough ride, but can't eliminate it completely. The trains run and they look good. I always get compliments after an op session of the quality of my track work. I didn't spend an inordinate amount of time laying it to perfection, but my technique of using flexible caulk instead of track nails made it easier to do the minor adjustments before the caulk set up.
Good luck with your pursuits for high quality track. You will be proud of your accomplishment.


----------



## Nikola (Jun 11, 2012)

What impresses me are model trains that go round and round without derailing or uncoupling or fiddling by the operator. I guess OP has much higher standards than I. Oh, well.


----------



## Vincent (Jan 28, 2018)

Nikola said:


> What impresses me are model trains that go round and round without derailing or uncoupling or fiddling by the operator. I guess OP has much higher standards than I. Oh, well.


I occasionally have trains that do that.


----------



## Lee Willis (Jan 1, 2014)

Vincent said:


> I occasionally have trains that do that.


In my experience, at least O-Gauge model trains behave like that. I had an N Gauge layout for years, during the time the house was crowded with kids and space for a bigger scale was hard to come by. I loved it, but no matter how hard I tried, if I set up and ran four trains at once, I'd have a random, inexplicable de-couling or other "embarrassing event" about every half hour or hour. 

With hi-rail O-Gauge, I can set up four trains with a lot of cars each, and set them running, and they will still all be behaving themselves ten hours later - no problems. I realize its the non-scale flanges and rail height and monster couplers, but I don't really care. Makes for a lot of fun!!!


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Lee Willis said:


> I realize its the non-scale flanges and rail height and monster couplers


Those are probably the reasons you have no troubles.....coupled with (sorry for the pun) the sheer weight of the equipment, which also helps.... 

Perfection in model railroading is in the eye of the beholder.......if it works for you, you've won!


----------



## Yellowstone Special (Jun 23, 2015)

Interesting thread, Jon. Looks like you may expect more from your equipment than most of us.

I have an 88 sq. ft. conventional O scale Fastrack layout with 2 trains operating simultaneously that I've had for over 6 years now with no major problems. My Fastrack connections are tight, my equipment is inexpensive modern conventional, my curves are all 036, and all trains (I switch them out frequently) run very well at slow and fast speeds with no unexpected uncoupling of cars. 

Yes, there is some swaying on curves and a little bit of jerking during starts and stops. However, my Lionel and Williams locomotives do very well at realistic slow speeds and as you get good with the throttles, smooth as glass. But I like a little bit of jerking because that's how real trains operate.

Again, model railroading, especially O scale, is a toy train hobby and not necessarily meant to be 100% precise.


----------



## Vincent (Jan 28, 2018)

"Again, model railroading, especially O scale, is a toy train hobby and not necessarily meant to be 100% precise."

Quote of the day


----------



## jonmyrlebailey (Sep 3, 2011)

Vincent said:


> "Again, model railroading, especially O scale, is a toy train hobby and not necessarily meant to be 100% precise."
> 
> Quote of the day



Unless one is a billionaire and has the necessary means to MAKE it so precise by employing the world's top building or machining contractors for the track laying. 

OR

One, being of the working class, is or has been a machinist by trade and has mastered such precision workmanship skills. Machining is a precise trade. A master carpenter or woodworker might also make an excellent precision model RR builder. Masonry skills might be in order for the outdoor garden train builder. 

A train hobbyist can use ready-made off-the-shelf mass-produced track and switches or have track and switches custom-made by master craftsmen or make the track and switches himself from SCRATCH if HE is a master craftsman if its within his means and ability. There are a few so gifted who can even make their accurate-scale locomotives and train cars from SCRATCH!!!

Most hobbyists, yes, probably just want a toy to play with while a few might be dead serious about aesthetics.


----------



## gunrunnerjohn (Nov 10, 2010)

jonmyrlebailey said:


> Right now my "layouts" are in the PC game RR simulator, Trainz. I am able to get sway-free/pitch-free behavior but getting track curves to form a geometrically-perfect arc is something of a challenge. Grading the track takes some patience but is not too hard. If trains hit a change in grade percentage that is too abrupt, it will look unnatural. Some later editions of Trainz even have the option for curve super-elevation and can make the trains sway on purpose depending upon game settings. In DCC mode, however, trains will stop abruptly once the driver's speed controller dial goes to the next throttle position below 1 mph.


No offense here, but doing this in software is just a bit easier than all the precision you seem to demand in a layout. Talk is cheap, but when you're actually doing it in hardware, it's not so easy or precise. I'll be more impressed when I see this perfect layout when you have actually constructed it for real.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

jonmyrlebailey said:


> Most hobbyists, yes, probably just want a toy to play with while a few might be dead serious about aesthetics.


In my experience, there is no such thing as a "typical" modeler. Some want to watch trains run, some want to perform prototypically accurate switching operations, some want museum quality scenery and structures, some don't want all that stuff getting in the way, some demand perfect prototypical replication, others prefer a "close enough" approach.

There is nothing inherently better or worse about any of these approaches. While there is a minimum standard -- the trains have to run reliably -- beyond that, it's every hobbyist for himself. If you want to make or tweak items for your layout to run like a Swiss watch with micrometric tolerances, by all means go for it with my blessing, but don't dislocate your arm patting yourself on the back and thinking it makes you a better modeler or hobbyist than anyone else.

The golden rule is that there aren't any: your layout, your rules. We each do what makes us satisfied and happy with our own layouts and operations. Just because it's good for it's creator doesn't mean it's good for anyone else. But that's the beauty of this hobby: it doesn't have to be.


----------



## jonmyrlebailey (Sep 3, 2011)

fcwilt said:


> For designing a layout you will actually construct you want an application like 3rd PlanIt.
> 
> This is a CAD program specifically for layout design and as such has all the tools needed for that work.
> 
> ...


Trainz is a good inspiration for a physical model layout and can give you a good "ballpark" idea of sizes, dimensions, track and road grades and geometry involved. It can familiarize you with railroading and operational theory. A Trainz route can serve as an initial 'rough draft' for a physical layout anyway. Trainz is still a lot cheaper and a lot less work than a physical layout anyway.

If I were to become rich, I would SHOW my Trainz route carefully to model RR building contractors and project mangers and tell them to design a physical layout BASED UPON this the way Hollywood producers *base* a film upon a book of historical significance. No, I would not expect my expensive physical layout to look "the same" as my Trainz route. As a matter of fact, I would hope my physical layout would be far superior to my Trainz route in cosmetics, computer programming for the automation of vehicles and in mechanical function but I would want my rolling stock to roll just as smoothly as those Trainz images on the screen without the PC game animation jitter of course. If you are "Trainzer" you probably know how buggy this software can be. Stupid AI (artificial intelligence) drivers who back the train up at a red signal instead of holding fast as they should as well as failure to obey certain driver commands. An autonomous model layout would have "driver commands" too and those 'drivers' had better obey them to the T lest expensive physical damage occur to the train layout. In Trainz, faulty vehicles just ghost through one another when red signals and active grade crossings are violated without any costly damage.


----------

