I have 3 layouts going. Yeah, I know it is not too bright, but it has been an exploration. These three layout are:
The Indiana Branch of the PRR set in 1950. This the most functional layout of the bunch–meaning I can actually run a train on it–but also the slowest moving forward. I want to develop historical accuracy and build it the way it was. Operationally it is sound and it allows me to run small switchers. The problem is, for want of accuracy, I keep getting stalled. Believe it or not, I’m stalled now because I can’t seem find out what the streets looked like. Where did the brick stop and start? Without being able to determine how and where to start the streets, I have not been able to work on the buildings.
None of the pictures I’ve found show the street. It seems people think trains and buildings are more interesting.
Research takes time–time I have to take off work for. And so it sits. Out of frustration and for want of doing some modeling I have started an N-scale loop with no turnouts just so trains can distract me in my office. I have everything I need to build it except the hardwood plywood I’m building the shelves from. So far, I’ve only worked on a diorama for it. I’ll build it very quickly once both the two scenes are done. I can’t have it disrupting my work in construction for a long time. And is should be completely done by the time I finish remodeling the basement.
These two layouts have been a preamble to building a basement layout that seems to keep moving more and more distant into the future.
The Rock Ridge and Train City II is where my passion lies. And it keeps evolving. I keep planning, and it doesn’t quite work out they way I want it. So I start over and plan again. Finally I’ve come to the point that it won’t really do what I want in the space I have. It does almost, but not quite. I can make it work by makin
Although I’d say keep the PRR and dump the other one ([:-^]) but I understand!
I’ve been all over the map lately with what I want to do too, so I feel your pain. But I have the benefit of a complete and fully operational layout. Your problem is that you’re having to divide your time and interest among several unfinished projects.
If you can store what you’ve done so far with your PRR, consider putting it away for awhile until you’ve finished the Rock Ridge layout. Once the Rock Ridge is up and running and you can operate it, you may feel the itch to go back to the PRR. At least if you kept some of it you don’t have to start over.
One layout at a time, and I think you’ll be more satisfied.
My plan to keep things interesting is dual eras on the same layout… This would include some interchangeable structures to show decay and neglect in the early Conrail years versus the neat-and-tidy PRR days.
The problem is the PRR is in the center of the room.
I have one wall where the PRR can go–if I reduce it to a height of about 26" and put it under the new layout–I could actually keep it.
I’m not going to do anything rash. I don’t have to do anything until I get a plan and refinish the basement. But I also feel that any effort I put into it now will be effort I won’t have for the other unfinished projects.
If space is limited, I would follow Dave’s lead (and to a degree mine) and reserve your prototype fidelity bug for the N scale. While you can elaborate on details like street paving etc. better in HO, you can represent more of the actual railroad in N. Also, given the smaller size, some of the details won’t be as pressing.
The N scale plan you have is very simple, which is actually the right way to approach an experiment in a new scale. But as you get more adept at working with the smaller stuff, you might consider broadening the possibilities of what you can do in N. The PRR flavored line would be an excellent subject.
My first inclination was to dismiss the “N-Scale for everything solution.” Instead, I’ll put it into the the I’ll think about it space in my brain. The PRR layout actually runs as is in HO though.
I’m pretty sure you know the layout I’m talking about. Right now it takes up 13ft by 30". In N-scale the same layout would take up 7 ft x 16". Modeling more of the prototype, believe it or not, is not much of an issue as there was very little compression to begin with.
For me it is an issue of detail. For example, here is a building that sits in front of the layout.
I’m not sure I can do it justice in HO, let alone N Scale. And N scale takes longer to model and more patience. As much as I would like to think I model by my eyesight, I really model for the camera. Because of the size, it is just plain harder to make N-scale look “clean.”
I’m not really whining here, but I’m anxious to get back to HO for a while. I’ve learned a lot from modeling itty-bitty, but HO feels like HOme.
BTW-My mother in law lives with us. She is 91 and has Old-timer’s. When she leaves the building, my office will change rooms and I’ll have more bookshelf space. I have more elaborate N-scale plans for the new office. But if this occurs before the PRR is actually destroyed, it can move to the new space
One must know the boundaries of one’s comfort zones… I agree that if detail is your key component, then N scale remains a good second choice. My goal is more operation oriented, so I demand that my 3x12 space provide for 20 car trains, industrial switching and functional passing sidings. I enjoy scratching out structures, but I lack the patience for hyper detail, so N works great for my goals.
Now you get a glimpse of why I consider prototypical model railroading to be highly over-rated.
Its very time consuming, constricting, and (for me) very stiffling creatively. This is why I prefer the John Allen or George Sellios approach, using real world insprations but on a freelanced RR where you can excercise a great deal more creativity building your layout. Your not restained by the fact that you cannot find the right picture, or picture of the right era, or find the exactly correct locomotive or building part. Their approaches are far more enjoyable (for me). You can go a more earthy approach like Sellios, or full on custom-planet visionary like John Allen or Malcomn Furlow.
