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.
@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.
Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership
