After reading the latest article on the Downtown Spur, I was wondering if folks felt this type of model operation could hold interest for long? No please don’t misinterpret, because I too have just a handful of industries on a single branch, basically a single train, few cars operation. But my space is much, much less than what he has available, so the design is space constrained. No, what I mean by the question is if one has the space to build a layout that could handle multiple trains and operators (whether mainline or multiple switching locations), could constraining it to a single spur, but with near scale industries and spacing keep interest if the switching is relatively simple? Could spending 30 actual minutes spotting one boxcar capture interest as much as spending those same 30 minutes simulating moving the limited over 30 miles of mountain passes or switching in and out of 10 different industries?
I hope this question doesn’t start a flame war, because that’s not the intent. The intent is to examine the theory of layout design to see if there is some balance between selective compression/loss of realism vs interesting work (play value). I would argue there is some balance; that one extreme would be an exact model of a mile of railroad would be as boring as sitting at the crossing watching 100 double stacks go by, while the other extreme of micro industries smaller than the boxcar serving them would be toylike as well.
1.Rotate the industries to be switch every operation session. No need to switch every industry every time.
2.Rotate the number of cars every operating session just because you can (say) spot 15 cars there’s no real need to.
3.Realistic switching speed is a must and a slow count to 15 works for the switchman to do his work-unlocking a switch opening derails, setting/releasing handbrakes etc.
ISLs isn’t for everybody but, for those of us that likes to switch they’re just the thing to build.
BTW…They’re cheap to build too and a detailer’s delight since you can detail the layout until the cows come home.
I guess it depends on a person’s interest and available space. If you are more into layout building and not so much into operations, it could get boring. However, if it is a choice between a small layout and no layout and you like switching problem solving, it could be a lot of fun for a long time.
I’m with you on that, Brakie! My layout, because of space constraints, is only 1 1/2’ (on average) x 20’, point-to-point and serves about 8 industries (I say ‘about’ because my new expansion is not completed yet and I don’t know how many industries I will be able to add). I love the idea of being able to use a variety of rolling stock and motive power, taking the existing ones off and adding alternative ones. I only have about 200-250 pieces of rolling stock and nearly 30 locomotives, so this is plenty of material to work with/ Part of my layout is a “switching puzzle” which I hope to simplify a bit, just to make the switching moves a bit more realistic, as well as adding realism to the scenes, allowing more for roads and off-line structures. This layout has already provided hours of building, as well as operational enjoyment and it is only about 1/3 complete.
All that depends on your interests. For some people who like intense switching, or big time mainline operation, the answer is probably no. For others something as low key as Mindheim’s Downtown Spur is perfect.
I’m not sure that kind of layout would do it for me, so mine has a different design based on what I like to build and operate. By the same token, my design wouldn’t necessarily work for someone else. I employ selective compression with my mainline, but do tend to favor larger industries. For me the balance was between having some mainline and/or branchline run to feel like a train is going somewhere, and having sufficiently large customers to appear to justify rail service. I’m not sure a layout set entirely within an urban area would maintain my interest in scenic modeling either.
I also prefer to see the real picture instead of fakeshopped photos.
However.
Photographic backgrounds and skies seems to be a growing trend for layouts so,are we looking at photoshopped skies or a sky photo fasten to the backdrop?
It wouldn’t work for me. I’d be adding in more spurs the moment I got it built with that much elbow room. But I can also see it’s advantages.
As someone mentioned, there’s a range of balances that people prefer in a layout. Particularly if it’s your first, but oftentimes after several people are still trying to establish their real interests, something that keeps them involved, doesn’t bore them, is enough of a challenge, but doesn’t turn intimidating. Articles like this get you thinking, even if they’re not your cup of tea, because of how starkly they present the available choices made in creating them.
On the other hand, if it keeps Lance’s interest for a year or two, it’s done it’s job. He’ll be thinking about the next one by then. Don’t get me wrong. Lance is a monogamist. He’s faithfully married to one layout at a time…until the next one comes along. So I guess he’s a serial monolayoutist [;)]
I agree with you completely on what you have said, but I think that this last line is the best one you said in the entire post. It is the philosophy that I have followed since I started having definitive goals for my hobby when I was 10.
Your line of thinking is exactly what has keep me from doing a big long single line and making it all about switching. I love his work and he is an inspiration since I model a modern CSX but I have a big loop with 8 industries to switch so I can do either switching or just let a long train run. But at the same time that is not say my next layout will be more concentrated switching.
Follow the progress photos on Lance’s site and you can see how the backdrops look in the room http://www.lancemindheim.com/progress_photos.htm . There are quite a few wider shots of the layout space showing how it all fits.
Thank you all, great discussion. I guess I should add my current layout is a 2x8 HO switching layout with just five “industries” only one of which is large enough to receive several carloads per week. The others maybe one a week at most if they were real.
While I do enjoy the switching work, I also find the space limiting. Looking toward the day when I have more space available, I’ve been doing designs. Down one design path is essentially what Lance has done – spreading out the single spur into a more realistic space and industry size. Down the other path is adding more switching locations to either represent different towns or industrial areas within a city so that multiple trains could be working at once.
My going in preference would be to do as Lance has done – single town/switching area spread out realistically. But, seeing the video and reading the article makes me wonder if such a layout could hold interest long enough to finish it.