I have seen a number of posts and articles about the lack of interest in modeling railroading among those under the age of 50 (or 60, or 100). I was thinking about this as I drove past a train while in Oakland. As I passed it, I thought, “Oh, intermodal. Bummer.” That got me to thinking, could this be part of the reason for the lack of interest? To me, a train has a variety of cars. I remember, as a kid, watching the boxcars, the tankers, the livestock cars. The variety made it interesting–a bunch of giant metal boxes full of Chinese merchandise, not so much.
Note: The intent of this thread is not to devovle into a discussion of the state of the “younger generation.” It is intended only as an observation about variety in trains.
You have to remember, Intermodal is the new name given to ‘‘piggy back’’ starting in the 50’s when there were no containers. Back then, they were mixed with pure freight trains, so it would depend on the era you want to model. [:D]
40’s,50’s era ‘‘Piggy Back’’ Trailers on Flat Car,(TOFC) in todays terms:
I doubt it. Those younger who don’t remember railroading when most merchandise went in box cars instead of containers won’t have the “ho-hum” attitude towards an intermodal train. If they are modellers, there’s a good chance they will model this modern era. The era they know. Even as they grow older, I’ll bet a good number will still model this (early 21st century) era. For them, these will eventually be the “good old days” that they will remember.
Besides, for those of a certain age, it’s probably more than just intermodal trains that affect interests. (Many of those trains have containers from different sources offering a variety of colors and sizes.) There’s a certain sameness along the main routes of the class ones. (Not too mention all the class ones that have disappeared over the years.) While there are still manifest trains, often they are dominated by covered hoppers and tank cars. Many trains are unit trains like coal, grain, autos, ethanol etc. Motive power is pretty well standardized around a few model types. I think it probably affects railfanning more than modelling.
That’s one advantage modellers have over those that don’t. We can turn back the clock to our individual “good old days.” While many would disagree with my time period, for me it’s the late 1970s. Even though back then were the dark days of railroading (and my version of 1978 is a lot better than what things were like) it’s when I came of age, railroad wise.
Intermodal are also more expensive than box cars, hoppers, covered hoppers, gondolas, etc. To model what you now mostly see on RRs today is more expensive than the rolling stock in the old days.
Since I’m modeling present day, intermodal is a big part of operations on my layout. I think it presents an interesting interface between rail and trucks. Not only am I modeling, for lack of a better term, normal intermodal, I am also modeling UPS intermodal as well. Intermodal does not have to be expensive. While the store bought containers are sky rocketing in price, I have learned to make my own. You would not believe what you can accomplish with some styrene and a good printer. By the way thanks MR and Lance Mandheim for the inspiration. Now if someone would only make some well car kits. I won’t hold my breath waiting for that to happen.
I’m pretty certain intermodal has affected interest in model railroading – positively. Why?
First, I am not an intermodal or present day modeler, so don’t have an axe to grind in terms of personal appeal. But present day modeling has taken a noticeable upswing since I was a kid. There’s a lot more contemporary stuff on the market that someone is buying. It also fits well with the substantial interest in railfanning, something facilitated by the 'net, cell phones, and digital media in general.
As for them kids in the hobby, I wouldn’t worry about them too much. They’re all on social media or whatever kids do these days. In fact, I think it’s many of them who’ve created the growth in contemporary modeling. They just don’t spend a lot of time hanging in old school media like this forum, paper editions of magazines, etc. While I’ve also noticed this is a perrenial worry of those over 50 in this hobby since I started as a teenager, now that I’m well past 50, the contirnuing existence of the hobby tells me there’s a big helping of “chicken little” to most of that.
Mike,I’m 66 and been hearing the young is not interested in trains since the 60s…Just about everything was going to doom the hobby,starting with the slot cars of the 60s,video games of the 80s,computers,D&D etc,etc.
Perhaps some needs to go trackside or train shows to see younger faces?
I had that same reaction in the early 1990s. I went on a very long cross county trip that and that was what I saw, that and unit trains with bathtub gondolas. Yawn. I instantly lost all interest in modeling anything “modern”. So yes, I can definitely see how trains are not nearly as appealing as they once were.
Even as a kid the boring box cars that were all over the place weren’t so boring because they all had names of interesting places or far away railroads on them. We just to watch the build dates to find the oldest car in the train. Now there are Chinese symbols or corporate shipping name on the “boxes” that are meaningless and uninteresting.
Since then (about 4 years ago) I have found there is still a varity of freight cars out there on merchandise or manifest trains. It is just harder to find them. The cars are interesting even if they are much larger than they used to be. I-beam flats, zillions of different tank styles and covered hopper styles, refers, box, auto-racks. I have put together enough stuff to field one “modern” train. But it is still not enough to suck me into modeling the “modern” era, especially if I wasn’t already interested in the trains.
I think people like to model what they see, and are most impressionable in the teens, twenties and thirties (my guess from personal experience and observation).
I got to see some D&RGW in the 80’s which included a variety such as mixed freight, TOFC and unit coal trains (including those lothesome [to some] bathtub and hi-side gondola coal cars. Fortunately for those of us who saw those 80’s coal trains and want to model them, Athearn has upgraded the MDC bathtub and hi-side gons and sold them in some common unit train markings. But I digress.
I don’t think intermodal has lessened interest in model railroading except maybe for those who were in their prime before intermodal got big. I use myself as an example, my prime was 70’s and 80’s, and a bit into the 90’s. What came after my prime was wide cabs, ditch lights, graffiti, conspicuity stripes, and awful looking painted out freight cars. I have lost interest in railfanning over how I used to be and now enjoy the hobby through watching video’s, reading books and internet photo’s, and modeling trains before all that became common place. It’s a generational thing. So I expect those who are in their prime of train watching, teens through 30’s, are probably big intermodal fans.
BTW, I’m an intermodal fan too because intermodal was very popular in the 80’s, especially the 2nd half of the 80’s when spine cars, Twin Stack articulated well cars, Thrall articulated well cars, Front Runners, and the ubiquitous 89’ TOFC flat car were very common. To that end I have build up a sizable fleet appropriate for 80’s time frame because intermodal will very much be a part of my layout, along with the Piggy Packer and Mi-Jack crane etc.
23, and model the PRR. Nothing against those who model the modern era, I just perfer the challenge of modeling the 1950’s, but I do admit something. Yes I have an NS GP35, a Conrail Gp38, and possibly soon a NS SD40-2…all for running a modern “local” train.
My 75th birthday is history, and I DON’T find stacks boring. Quite the opposite. Now, the wheeled platforms may be boring, but there’s a remarkable lack of uniformity in the boxes themselves. And not all of them are filled with, “Products from China.” The 48 and 53 footers you see on the ‘second level’ are domestic - they don’t fit the slots in oceangoing containerships.
So, do I model stacks? No. While an occasional standard container might show up as a flatcar load, the catenary precludes double stacks. I do run JNR standard container cars (five containers on a 20 meter long dedicated carrier) because that service had already gotten a start in 1964.
We all model what we like, and see interest in what we want to find interesting. Mine is no secret, and I’m quite willing to bet that it isn’t shared by many on this side of the Pacific. (All the plain and fancy paint jobs on self-propelled diesel generators bore me to tears…)
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - without a single diesel-electric)
Oh for sure, I agree, I was basing my reply on my experience on what I saw and grew up with in the Chicago area, not very unusual to see, many railroads and what they run, I didn’t read what I experienced in a book. My Modeling passion, Trucks & Trains, not Trains & Trucks. Got my first truck ride in an old 1932 LaMoone, in 1946 My Dad driving after the War, I was four (4), my love of trucks, was born.
I don’t model the intermodel era, but I do alot of railfanning/railphotography in California, mostly on or around Donner Pass. Intermodel trains are not that boring, and the stack trains themselves are propably the most colorful and visually interesting trains you can photograph. Some of my best photographs are of stack trains. If I was modeling todays intermodel, it would be relatively easy to lightly weather a couple containers here or there, then randomly load them on the cars.
As far as variety goes, has anyone seen trains with just a few container cars along with mixed freight, or are they all unit trains?
I am also curious if they all originate or terminate at large facilities, such as ports or large trucking terminals. Or are there much smaller facilities that deal with a handful of cars?
This discussion has got me thinking about these things.[:)]
I think this depends on your perspective. Individual rolling stock is neat, but I’m not there for the rolling stock, i’m there for the train as a whole, for the feel of the ground shaking, the sounds, and all of that.
In terms of modeling trains, I attempt to show what is there. For example, I model New Jersey electrified lines, which all feature commuter trains. Some would find those Arrow MUs boring and repetitive, but then you couldn’t really make a model of something like the NEC without them.
The same goes for intermodal, which is a major moneymaking operation on the railroad. I’m currently trying to figure out what classes of flat car I would need to make a “Trailvan” TOFC train for my layout. These were hot-shot freight trains running on near passenger speeds up the NEC, so I would argue they are far from boring!
I think it generally makes sense to move things in bulk when possible. That said, I vaguely remember reading somwhere (probably in an old MR magazine), about a small intermodal facility . It was pretty much two tracks, a ramp for trailers, and an overhead container crane. It was in the location of an old yard, with most of the tracks taken up and paved over, and the mainline passing on the right (in the photo). I remember thinking that it was surprisin
Frank,That’s another thing I like about Industrial Switching Layouts(ISL) one needs trucks in order to have a believable ISL regardless of size.
I prefer Trucks N Stuff’s trucks-not cheap but,well worth the cash since they are detailed and comes in several well known truck lines like Knight,Con-Way,CFI,Landstar,Swift and of course the orange pumpkins-Schneider.
I use Boley box trucks for the smaller deliverly trucks.
