Im just wondering how far other people go to achieve realism on their layouts. Do you have to have wiindshield wipers on your windows,lift bars ,a engineer in the cab,windows that work on the engine,see thru fan blades,the right kind of horn or bell sound,grab irons that are not molded on,the right rail size,ditches on each side of the tracks for drainage,smoke for steam and diesel engines,lines on your telephone poles,birds on your telephone lines,curtains in all the windows,lettering that is so small you have to have a magnifier to read and sometimes even that doesnt help,paint eyebrows and other features on faces of the people on your layout,piles of to scale dung in cattle yards, smoke coming out of all of your chimneys,see thru lift rings not molded on, etc.
I am all over the map on this one.
For locomotives I want durability. Anything that can easily break during a maintenance or repair event is unwanted.
For freight cars, I am a bit more of a stickler. There needs to be enough detail to look great in photographs, but I will never turn a car over and inspect the underframe details with a magnifying glass.
Trackwork must be functional. All detail is secondary to flawless operation.
Buildings get a lot more detail. These do not have moving parts or require maintenance, so I tend to go all-out on these.
Automobiles I use generally straight from the box. I paint a few things flat black to make them disappear, but other than that, they are good enough.
Figures get the full treatment from me. I am an award-winning figure painter, so I take this way too seriously.
-Kevin
All of the above! Of course I will be a couple of centuries old by the time I get there![swg][(-D][(-D]
Seriously, I love having really detailed stuff but it is not essential to my enjoyment of the hobby. I’m quite happy with Athearn BB freight cars with upgraded wheels, couplers at the right height, and proper weight. Having said that, I do like the small collection of well detailed RTR items that I have.
Where I am fussy is with the decoders I use. AFIC, Loksound is worth the money. I also agree with Kevin. Track work has to work. Code comes in a distant second.
Dave
I like the way Kevin did his post so I’ll follow his format.
Locomotives: Pretty much out of the box, maybe redo the lighting.
Freight cars: Only add Kadee couplers and make sure they roll properly.
Passenger cars: Lighting, interiors, passengers, paint, add Kadee Shelf Couplers and diaphragms.
Trackwork: No derails!!! Ballast and crossings, no paint at this point.
Structures: Try my best to make them as real looking as I can, Detailed interiors that can be seen and most defiantly realistic lighting, figures, most are powered by Arduino Random Lighting Controllers.
Automobiles/Vehicles: Paint and lighting, headlights, taillights and running lights.
Figures: While I can’t even come close to Kevin’s figure painting I do spend a lot of time painting figures.
Automation: I like to see things do something so anything that I can make move while staying realistic is my goal on automation.
Mel
My Model Railroad
http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/
Bakersfield, California
I’m beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
Do you have to have wiindshield wipers on your windows,lift bars
,a engineer in the cab,windows that work on the engine,
see thru fan blades,the right kind of horn or bell sound,
grab irons that are not molded on,the right rail size,
ditches on each side of the tracks for drainage,
smoke for steam and diesel engines,lines on your telephone poles,birds on your telephone lines,curtains in all the windows,lettering that is so small you have to have a magnifier to read and sometimes even that doesnt help,paint eyebrows and other features on faces of the people on your layout,piles of to scale dung in cattle yards, smoke coming out of all of your chimneys,
see thru lift rings not molded on, etc.
Yes, to all of the above not stricken.
A similar question was asked years ago by Wolfgang Dudler, now one of our sadly gone members. He asked, “Do we really need 1:87 bird poop?”
I immediately posted a photo of a recently-completed bridge, complete with a seagull and a big messy white blotch below him. There followed, of course, a discussion of the defecatory habits of large shore birds.
I’ve had two instances where I fooled people with pictures of my layout they thought were real. One was a placid mill pond with a stone arch bridge at one end and a trio if swans. The other was a picture of my Saint Anne Street subway station. A native New Yorker asked me what line it was on, because he didn’t recognize the station name.
Oh boy Im waiting for DoctorWaynes response… 
I used to not really care for detail or realism, but the more I learned about each engine’s history, the more I wanted accuracy and detail.
An inccurate, crude model just doesnt do its historical prototype justice.
I model the steam era, and one reason I do is because steam engines just have more pipes and odd parts and pieces placed on or around the engine. I find beauty in how these grimy oily machines look. Without detail kind of ruins the point of modeling the steam era for me.
I have yet to finish my layout so I cant speak for that yet.
Im sure as my eyesight gets worse, my demand for detail will lessen…
Cheers!
Charles
Pretty much what Kevin said (except for the award-winning part!).
Operational requirements and spending limits basically lead to a lot of compromises. I also must admit that I’m not that skilled as a modeler… Some of the amazing work posted here is just beyond my reach!
Simon
I never know how to answer these kind of questions.
I try to go as far as I can, while recognizing the limitations of time and budget. I don’t have award-winning skills, but I have moderately decent skills, and I try to use them where they can do the most good.
Regarding windshield wipers, birds, and belt buckles on the gandy dancers . . . N scale pretty much solves that issue. The manufacturers have stepped up their game in that arena; my game has already pretty much slowed to a crawl stepping up.
But a serious response . . . Pelle Soeborg and Luke Towan are at the far end of the line. Worth aspiring to and working towards.
Robert
This answer probable speaks for most here in a nutshell.
Next topic?
I run two timeframes on my layout. A 1914/19 time with steam locomotives and a 1970s timeframe running diesels. It has to be entertaining for my grandchildren.
All the locomotives have to work without exception. I do not count the rivets. All have crew where possible
Most of the goods wagons on the steam layout have names of members of our family on their sides. To entertain the children as they see ‘their wagon’ running.
The trains that run (either steam or diesel) have a start point and destination.
Every train must have a reason to be on the track and are in their timeframes. Passenger are added to the passenger cars.
Scenery. I hate ‘the perfect look’ on my layout. Grass is overgrown in places. Branches of trees ‘smack’ the coach sides as the train passes. Views at the backscene have to ‘go further out’ where possible. I like to have ‘fifty shades of green’.
Simple scenes. I like to make little scenes that have nothing to do with the railway. A delivery of coal to a house. A road vehicle being unloaded with a man on a forklift truck. Changing a wheel on a road vehicle . Men working in the timber yard.
Animals. Dogs ‘on a walk’ with the Postman. Guard dogs. Birds on buildings. Sheep being ‘rounded up’ by a sheepdog.
Putting it all together a railway with a purpose in a general scene.
There is so much more to do. It is not perfect by any means, but I am getting there.
Then the grandchildren arrive. (Not as much now because of Covid.) Then rule 1 takes over. (Their rule 1). The searchlight wagon and rocket launcher are brought out along with Iron Man and the rest of the Superheroes. I am relegated to Signalman. &n
Yep, pretty much. I do add a crew to my locomotives when I redo them with detail parts, lights and decoder.
Mike.
I go for the “good enough” approach.
I also aim to ensure people can get lost in the layout while keeping it grounded to my geographic location and era.
Ditto. Though I will add that photographing the scene is the best way for me to see where improvements can be made.
Yep!!
That’s why I’m a fan of the late W. Allen McClelland, “Good Enough”.
[2c] Cheers, the Bear.[:)]
A lot of this has to do with what you know about the prototype. What you don’t know may not interest you and in that case won’t appear on your layout.
The second factor is operations as compared to static display.
For well known reasons it is not possible to realistically model an operating railroad. Therefore, the standard of “realism” can’t be based on reality.
If it looks right it is right is a useful mantra for modelling anything for fun.
For me, the hobby is about nostalgia and the visceral experience of being trackside and seeing steam locomotives bear down on me, pass by, and disappearing around the bend. I can capture that with a minimum of assistance from the models. So, I do need some scenery, nothing too spicy, and the trackwork has to be 99.9% reliable, and the locomotives and rolling stock need to remind me what it all looks like underway.
After that, some things can begin to get in my way. Smoke issuing from smoke generators is definitely one, although I quite appreciate the tinny sounds/noises/din emitting from the sound devices. Go figure. I can’t have real water anywhere on the layout for a whole host of reasons, not least of which is that it simply doesn’t scale. I do like some scale people here and there, a boat of some kind, and there ought to be some conveyances other than the rolling stock. A bus, a van,… And of course, lots and lots of trees and utility poles. From there, my mind easily fills in the rest.
I spent several years learning Timetable and Train Order operations to add realism to my layout.
Good enough - for me, is my policy.
Locos will be fitted with Hoses at each end and Freight-stock that has moulded Ladders and Steps, these will be carved-off and replaced with preferably metal equivalents - since for me, these two aspects give the realism I satisfied with.
As for Scenery & Scenic details, these are 9 below 0 on my list, not that I don’t like to admire and respect good Scenery - just that I’d be OK with Foam/Cork on bare Baseboards, so long as I had Trains running - which to me is the most important aspect of MRR’s. Paul
Ok, I will tell you of a few of my attempts … just a few .
I once successfully installed WORKING windshield wipers on an Athern dash 9. ( it was a time consuming endeavor, and I have not attempted it since.) I used a vibrating motor out of an old cellphone, 2 small springs, 3 small steel guitar strings cut incredibly short, and some brass sheet cut to fit an oscalating pully mounted to the motor.
I have also built working brakes on a Tichy ore car (also time consuming and I will never do it again.)
I have “weatherized” an abandoned tank car with bird poop (turned out great. I will probably do it again… sooner or later.)
AND: I have been known to put scale crushed beer cans in the bed of pick-up trucks.