Hi all,

In July of 1996, I sent the following letter to Mr. John Atkinson who moderates the Electronics Symposium in Model Railroader Magazine (a Kalmbach publication). The letter, which was sent to the address listed in the magazine, was returned as "Addressee unknown" (or something like that). I then resent the letter directly to Kalmbach in the hopes that they would forward it to Mr. Atkinson. Later in the year, I followed up with an E-mail to Kalmbach to determine if they had received the letter and received no response. I wonder if:

1. Kalmbach Publications never received the letter and did not know to what I was referring in my E-mail.
2. Kalmbach Publications received and forwarded the letter but Mr. Atkinson is extremely busy and has not gotten around to considering the proposal.
3. The proposal was not considered worthy and was discarded.
4. The proposal goes against the momentum of the industry which has decided that sound systems should be onboard the train.

or,

5. Some other completely innocent reason I'm too dumb to figure out.

In any event, I would have liked an acknowledgment of receipt or polite rejection from someone.

Regardless, I would like to submit this same proposal to the members of the Internet Model Railroad Community for your consideration. The letter for your consideration follows:

Electronics Symposium July 8, 1996
c/o John Atkinson
PO. Box 1113
Allen, Texas 75002

Dear Mr. Atkinson,

I have been having discussions with model railroaders, both during operating
sessions and on the Internet, about the future of sound systems in model railroading and have come up with a couple of ideas I'd like to throw out to your readers for their consideration. This discussion primarily concerns diesels but I'm sure someone may be able to apply these ideas to steam locomotives as well..

It has been my experience that sound systems mounted inside of locomotives or rolling stock have several drawbacks:

1. The small size of the speakers are inadequate to duplicate the sound of full size locomotives (the roar of a sixteen cylinder prime mover cannot adequately be reproduced through a three inch speaker).

2. When more than one train is equipped with a sound system, the conflicting sounds can quickly become overwhelming. Locomotive sounds can become annoying after a while when there are several engines on the layout so equipped (this is especially true for someone not actively involved in the running of a train. The sound can carry to other rooms in the house possibly annoying non-railroaders occupying the same building).

3. The installation of a sound system usually involves modification of the locomotive and in many cases requires a dummy diesel or box car fitted with the speaker to be towed directly behind the locomotive.

4. When the locomotive stutters or stalls because of poor electrical contact with the rail, the sound also stutters and stalls destroying the overall effect of the sound system.

 Instead of a sound system in the locomotive, I think the sound generating electronics could be installed in the hand held "tethered" speed controller with a "Walkman" type head phone jack for the output (figuring out the same installation in a radio controlled throttle will be left to the REAL geniuses out there).

The fidelity of the sound would be enhanced greatly with quality headphones and each engineer would only hear the sounds generated by his locomotive. Modern headsets are very light and would not likely be a distraction.

The sound generated by the electronics in the hand held controller would not be the sound heard while standing track side as the train goes by but rather the sounds heard by the engineer in the cab of the locomotive type he is supposed to be running. These sounds would include: diesel prime mover (Alco 539/244/251, EMD 567/645, or Baldwin, Whitcomb, etc.), air horns (combinations limited only by imagination), bell, flange squeal, or just about any sound heard inside a locomotive cab (when the engines you are running reach the preset limits of voltage/amperage you might even want alarm bells to go off). The size of a normal hand controller would allow more or larger components in the sound board than in the smaller confines of a model locomotive and still be well within the size and weight range to be comfortable. Perhaps in some applications, the sound generator could be included as part of the power supply with a two wire sound output to the controller output jack. This would be especially good news to the N and Z scale modelers.

Volume and sound intensity could be a function of voltage or amperage or a small "pot" mounted on the throttle but again, I leave that to the electronics geniuses among us to work this out. Perhaps, the output of the sound generator could be integrated with a radio communications headset (like the Radio Shack headsets that seem to be popular) so that when the dispatcher talks to a train he will hear the engine's sounds in the background when the engineer responds. Imagine hearing muted air horns or engine bell when an engineer blows for a grade crossing at the same time he transmits a message to the dispatcher or another engineer.

I hope these thoughts will be good for a few lines of discussion or perhaps these are just the ramblings of a model railroader who should be spending more time on his scenery.

Sincerely,

Steven Kay
(Address left out)

A couple more thoughts:

When I operate a model train, I do so from the point of view of the train crew.

So, you ask, what does this have to do with sound? As an engineer, I am used to the sounds of the locomotive cab whether they are steam or diesel. This is my frame of reference to trains. Another point of view is that of the railfan. Many modelers advocate a system built into the engine or placing speakers around the layout to broadcast the train sounds as if they were railfanning their own railroads. This is certainly a valid and highly popular approach. Its just not my cup of tea. The last point of view is that of Rail Industry Magnate is which case the only sound you need the swishing sound made when the pages of the Wall Street Journal or Baron's are turned.

I believe, although I don't have the electronic expertise to prove the idea, that both the locomotive cab interior sounds and external sounds can be programed into a throttle so that the choice would be the operators. I don't advocate external speakers since it is my belief that the sounds from more than one engine creates aural havoc in the railroad room and clouds rather than enhances the intended effect of locomotive sounds.

A dial control can determine the type of sound generated (EMD 567/645, Alco, GE, Baldwin, etc.).

Another switch can determine whether the sound is cab generated or "railfan" oriented.

A spring loaded switch located on the side of the throttle could be used to manually activate a reverb unit within the controller to simulate the sound of the engine when going through tunnels or bridges.

The reversing switch could activate the sound of locomotive reversing relays "clacking" in the electrical cabinet at the back of the "cab".

I know there are many out there who are far more familiar with electronic sound systems than I am. I hope you will consider the above ideas worthy of your time and response.

Please send all acrimonious, slanderous, and critical comments to me here at the Lackawanna Terminal Railway's general offices.