Amen to all of the above. HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!! I wonder if TK reads any of this stuff??? it would be interesting to hear his reaction to some of the comments
you all made.
The “HARVEN”
tony’s only problem is he’s affraid to admit he’s just playing with trains…
I’ve just recently gotten back into the hobby, and don’t have a layout yet. And until I can get rid of my son [;)] , I probably won’t for a while.So for now I’m just putting together my locomotive fleet and collecting rolling stock.
When the time does come, I suspect I will put together some form of dogbone with some switching opportunites and an intermodal yard, maybe even a small yard inside one end of the dogbone, and it will be DC without sound. And I’ll be happy there, since point-to-point and realistic operation aren’t prioroties with me.
In the meantime, I’m driving myself nuts when it comes to the locomotives. I’m modeling SP/UP/BNSF in 1997, give or take about 2 years. At first I thought adding SP light packages, accurate horns, AC units and plows to Athearn BB units would keep me happy. Now I’m about half a step from superdetailing everything (I didn’t think I’d ever consider grabirons & lift rings - but now???[(-D] ). But I’m loving doing the research necessary to kitbash UP’s SW10’s and SP’s slugs.
So I guess I’m gonna end up with locomotives that are almost TK’s museum quality, rolling stock that meets the “look and feel” of the era I’m modeling, and a layout that’s a step or two up from a bare sheet of plywood. [:D]
Everyone is entitled to several opinions, because opinions on any subject seldom come one to a customer. Self-confident personalities listen to the opinions of others, nod agreement (or snicker behind their hands) and then do whatever they wish, regardless. Less secure types worry about what Tony Koester, Joe Nitpicker or somebody who doesn’t like their prototype (or lack thereof) will think or say about their modeling.
The one thing that is certain is that there WILL be folks who disagree.
That said, I believe that there are several levels of “Good enough.”
-
“Wanna see it move, daddy!” Happy with a toy store trainset running on the living room rug. Having an expander track kit (2 switches and another half-circle of sectional track) is bliss beyond belief.
-
“Let’s play.” Wants more spurs, sidings and such, so the switcher can play put-n-take with cars. Likes buildings, even if they are actually discarded cereal boxes.
-
“Back to nature.” It may only be a single-track loop, but it runs through realistic scenery. Even a toy store set train looks good on nicely ballasted track passing through a forest, with occasional rock outcroppings and a wet-looking watercourse.
-
“Let’s run a railroad!” The starting point is a prototype road’s employee timetable, and the entire layout gets built and operated from there. Any resemblance to Tony Koester or tomikawatt is purely deliberate.
-
Joe Nitpicker at home. Gets actively perturbed if his newly-purchased boxcar has tackboards four inches to the left of the position on his prototype, and will immediately move them. (Everybody who knows what a tackboard is and where to look for it, raise your hands.) Every tie MUST have tieplates and four spikes, even other people’s.
-
Model Contest entrant. Starts with the prototype’s erection drawings and a gazillion photos, then builds as nearly perfect a model as possible, with the object of capturing Best (fi
Don’t forget us guys who don’t want or don’t have room for home layouts, so we do our modeling on modules in groups. I personally don’t care about operating, I’m a model builder and photographer mostly. I do get to operate on a friend’s large layout, but I’m there mostly to socialise with my train buddies. I didn’t even run any trains this past Wednesday night, I just took some photos and hung around.
Whatever turns your crank I guess! [:D]
Bob Boudreau
And apparently some people’s idea of fun in the hobby is being so full of themselves that they pretend Koester is talking about them so they can take offense. Rent a life!
It’s just a column in a magazine. One person’s opinion. It seems that some people on this forum are so desperate for attention themselves that they take personal offense at something so innouous.
Since I’m a ways away from a layout, I’m working on putting together a diorama to be able to display (and maybe photograph) some of my work. And that will keep me happy for now.
As for the layout? Ah, the best laid plans of mice and men - it wouldn’t surprise me if it never happens. And if that’s the way it goes, I’ll be happy with my diorama of a pair of tunnel motors pulling a string of mixed freight past the MP15AC/slug combo sitting outside the engine house.
JtM
Ah, yes, it’s time for another “flame Tony Koester” thread. A long tradition on the internet, dating back to rec.models.railroad and, before that, Compuserve. For starters, you know he’s doing his job as a columnist if he can still get people riled up. The worst thing you can do to a columnist is ignore him, so I guess Tony’s still doing a pretty good job…
Secondly, people out there love to hate Tony K. “How dare he suggest that some model railroads are better than others!”, seems to be a familiar cry. Apparently, we should be equally appreciative of all model railroads no matter if it’s Proto87 or a “dinner table” layout.
“How dare he suggest that we should be realistic!”, seems to be another refrain from the gospel of Koester bashers. Apparently, we should not care one whit about how “real” anything is…that steam engines carved out of soap are just as good as brass. Essentially, there’s a real backlash by those that can’t be bothered to do it right against those that can be bothered to do it right. A “reverse snobbery” if you will.
Fortunately for us, Student Of Big Sky Blue typed in Tony’s complete column this week on another thread, so we can all peruse it (and again, I thank SOBSB aka James for doing that):
[quote]
QUOTE: "During a recent discussion about the design and theme for a new HO model railroad, the topic of “good eneugh” -a benchmark of the state of the art created by Allen McClelland for his orginal HO scale Virginian & Ohio- came up. What will it take we wondered for a model railroad to be considered good eneugh in the 21st Century?
Here are my top ten attributes in no particular order.
1.Prototype BasedL Many, perhaps most new model railraods either embrace a specific prototype or, if freelanced, are prototype based. This trend is partly the result of manufacturors and importers producing accurate, well detailed, models, making the tast of modeling one railroad much easier. The wealth of information in m
How dare Barry Bonds think that I have to have fast reflexes, extrodinary strength, talent and a personal trainer to be good enough to be home run king.
I’ll stick to my whiffle ball and tee thank you very much.
Yup, another ba***-the-K thread. [swg]
If you’ve ever met Tony in person, you know he’s got the proverbial gift of gab and at a sufficient volume that you’ll have no problem ease dropping. He’s got strong opinions, and he’s prominent in the hobby. But the modeling police he’s not, and he would be the first to admit you don’t need his approval to be enjoying the hobby … so I wouldn’t sweat it.
His latest column seems to be saying that basically the bar of “good enough” is being raised in this century, and in general terms he’s right. The only question will be how soon and how much in each of the areas he lists.
I also note he says there will always be other popular trends besides the ones he lists as the up-and-coming “mainstream”. And remember, he’s simply listing what is becoming most popular … not that everyone must be marching lock step or you aren’t a model railroader.
Since when were model railroaders an homogenous lot?[swg]
I am actually building my first layout at the age of 58 and I am the only one required to “like” it. I will however, try to keep it within the realm of possibility.
After some rather extensive research, I have concluded that no dedicated logging railroads existed in Indiana so it is a good chance that the “Lost River Lumber Company” will the first one ! I’m sure it will be “good enough” for Mr. Koester. He seems like an alright guy.[:D]
Interesting discussion.
First off, I haven’t had my April issue delivered yet - but that’s a different gripe - so thanks for printing the article in question.
When it comes to modelling standards IMHO, we all have our own opinions of what is good enough. All I can add to the discussion is that my own perception of what is good enough has changed umpteen times since I started modelling in the early 1980s.
As my modelling improves with each new project and I learn new techniques, those earlier attempts, either scenery, loco building or weathering, which pleased me so much when I did them, no longer seem ‘good enough’.
Once I got a couple of sound chipped locos and DCC, silent locos, either with or without silent motors, and DC, no longer seemed ‘good enough’ .
Even then, the Soundtraxx LC decoders which I love the sound of (especially at their current price) no longer sound ‘good enough’ after I got my first Tsunami a couple of months ago.
So ‘what is good enough?’ for me will be very different for me as new and better equipment becomes available and my own skills improve.
Jon
operations, isn’t that playing with trains realistically?
Gee, I didn’t anticipate such visceral responses. I didn’t think I was bashing TK with my original post; I was merely trying to opine that perhaps he has a significantly higher standard of what’s “good enough” than an average-to-below-average *** like me. I’m sure he’s forgotten more about the hobby and railroading in general than I’ll ever know. There was certainly no intent to divide forum members into armed camps hurling such sarcastic remarks about. Sheesh.
I think I might just keep my posts confined to benchwork and cork roadbed for a while…
I’m going to build that layout in that takes 3 days to get from point to point in an abandoned doublewide. IT will have a computerized inventory system for car movement, and a floor shaker that follows the loco along the route as the operater follows his train. Local switching will be controlled by my cousin in Texas by sattelite------------------------ I like Tony’s TRAINS OF THOUGHT not “trains of gospel”
The artice was the general direction that the hobby is going in. So don’t ba***ony for this one. Anyway. seeing a 4-6-2 sext to a SD90 doesn’t bother me so much. What bothers me is the person that runs 1 engine from every RR under the sun and has no idea that most modelers model 1 RR.
If you’re going to run a 4-4-0 and a SD80MAC, go for it. This would bother me but it’s your railroad.
If you’re going to run only power for your era, go for it.
I will be modeling 1 era and it’ll either be 1968, the early 1980s, or the present (if I get IANR decals made)
my 2000th post[B)]
I think the original question is, “How good is really good enough?” I go in stages. When I complete some phase, I enjoy it and it is good enjough. When I discover something that I want to add, then it isn’t good enough until I either add it, or decide that I don’t want it. In either case, it is good enough for me. I can enjoy everyone’s layout if it more detailed than mine or less. I can appreciate them all. Not everyone has the same amount of time, skills or money.
Every modeler has to set that bar for himself (or herself). What’s good enough for me may not be good enough for you. I am building a large home layout. It is freelanced but I try to follow prototypical practices as best I can. I’ve gone DCC and am hooked on sound. When I hear the phrase “good enough” though, I think more in terms of the quality of my structures and scenery. It would be nice to have every structure be a contest quality but that simply isn’t realistic. I simply don’t have the time to spend 100+ hours building and superdetailing one piece. If I did, I need a couple more lifetimes to complete my layout and I’m not a believer in reincarnation. For that reason, most of my structures are plastic kits, built as designed. I paint and weather them to make them look “good enough” but they aren’t going to win any blue ribbons. I take the same approach to scenery. With a large layout, I am going for a great overall effect. I think I have achieved that in the parts I have scenicked so far. If you take the time to examine my layout with a magnifying glass, you will find flaws aplenty. I don’t care. As long as those flaws don’t jump out at you and become an eyesore, ruining the overall effect that I am trying to achieve, then that is what I define as “good enough” for me.
I am glad someone started this thread. It is this kind of material that makes these boards worth reading. It gets us all thinking about our approach to this hobby. It is far more worthwhile than to hear somebody whining about because their new loco turned out to be a lemon.
Dingoix, that raises an interesting question. If I were the polling type (which I’m not, by the way) I might poll members asking how many different roadnames/eras are represented in their locomotive rosters.
mononguy, I think this topic is absolutely good enuff. I’m with jecorbett in thay I’m glad someone started the thread. good enuff is a question I constantly live with, not only good enuff for me but will others be affected by my results. Yes I care what others think in a lot of areas. Goodenuff is important I think in club work and is what makes things really difficult to moderate without hurting feelings etc. Yet I’ve seen club work that is amazing. How do they determine as a group what is good enuff.[?]