Recent threads resurrected a line of thought that has popped up from time to time in my mind when I’m trying to figure out what this hobby is all about for me.
There seem to be two general classes of interests in our hobby when it comes to layout design.
Do you want to watch trains run from here to there without worrying too much about modelling here or there or do you prefer modelling a real operating railroad albeit in compressed scale?
Reason I ask is prototype railroading up here involves a lot of single track mileage with no towns, no yards, no industries and no apparent reason to run a railroad through here. We have 4,000,000 sq miles of country with a population roughly the size of California. Most of our railroads run through endless miles of truly amazing scenery but have almost no interim destinations or departure points. Railroad serviced industries are also few and far between especially in the modern truck oriented age.
As my tastes run to rural southwestern desert, despite living in Pennsylvania, I opted for a simple track plan featuring mainly desert terrain in which to watch my trains roll. It’s so simple there is one passing siding. I did use Kato track, and I did plan it out in cadd, so I knew the pieces would fit together correctly. Also, I glued it down to the pink sheets of foam insulation using Liquid Nails. Under the foam insulation is a wooden frame that my Dad built.
I find watching the trains run to be relaxing, so the point was to be able to railfan my own layout simulating wide open spaces (mainly of the old Santa Fe).
However, you have to do what makes you happy.
I would never be happy trying to model an operation-oriented pike. I build up the trains the way I want and just run them, sometimes leaving the consist alone for a week. My son has pushed them above 80 cars, but most trains are only 15 to 20 cars.
My end goal is neither operations nor watching trains run. I build a model railroad because I like the models. I like the scenery, the locomotives, the rolling stock and the structures. I like industrial sidings with the activities of switching, and grade crossing with nothing but a train passing by while lights flash and perhaps crossing gates come down. I like a parking lot with an old man walking to his car with pair of dogs at his heels. All of these are a creation of a time and place.
I have a couple layouts for that reason. The HO is the operations layout with the high detail. The postwar layout is the “trains running and pushing buttons to do stuff aspect” is almost a mandatory thing in the postwar realm for some reason you just can’t not do that. The large scale I have is to be able to enjoy just runnin* outside on those gorgious days to nice to be inside. I don’t know where the 009 HOe fits yet.
Thanks for adding that perspective. I hadn’t realized that this was actually what I like about the models. Although I’m not a scenery fan (not yet anyway, that may well change as I get into doing some) I am mainly attracted to this hobby by the small scale world aspect.
So, I now wonder if the two aspects I described previously are two sides of the same coin: watching trains run is the more external modelling experience whereas operating a model railroad as a real operation is a more internal experience. The one involves you as a spectator and the other as an operator.
Actually that describes just about every Class 1 railroad in the US – miles of nothin’ between towns, and still more miles between the cities where the railroad even bothers to serve customers. The exceptions would be urban railroads such as the Indiana Harbor Belt or the EJ&E but even there, there are certainly uneventful stretches. And miles and miles of track with no crossings and no turnouts. Indeed I read that the Sante Fe deliberately selected a route between Kasas City and Chicago that bypassed many possible cities and towns because the goal was just to get to Chicago with the fewest complications and distractions possible. Oh there are towns along the way that have or had ATSF service, or fuel and water stops, but often the railroad came first then the town. Exceptions include Galesburg and perhaps Streator, and some crew change points like Chillicothe.
The fact is that even if we try to be prototypical in having “average” locomotive rosters, and “representative” mixes of rolling stock in our trains, with very rare exceptions we are not average or representative in the locales we model on our layouts, since few layouts are large enough to accurately model even one town or city, much less the three or four or five that we introduce for sake of interesting operations or interesting structure modeling or just an entertaining layout to look at. Or more interesting scenery for that matter – the number of railroad tunnels in the USA compared to the number of total railroad miles must be nearly infinitesimal. Yet it’s not s
Now that I finally have room for a model railroad, my plan is to combine the best of both realms. I will have a large oval for continuous running, with one large staging yard and a junction based on the real town of Lometa, TX. I will model the branchline from Lometa to Eden, TX inside the oval. I intend to hand lay the branchline. There will be several scratch built structures on the branchline, and numerous switching opportunities.
I like just watching model trains run. My new layout will support five of them just running around pretty good sized loops.
I like simulating prototype operations - without getting too deep in the weeds… My new layout will have CTC (simplified), signals, schedules, switching industries, etc. It will support a crew of 12.
I like building the models and the layout - on this note I like building models of trains (rolling stock and locomotives) but I also enjoy the non railroad aspects of the scenery - building the town, the farm, the rural neighborhood…
I like modeling both real prototypes, and fictional but plausable/believeable ones. I don’t have much interest in trying to duplicate real places, just like my scenes to have the right “flavor” of places I know and like.
If you modelled the Great Northern in Montana in the 1950’s, you could build a very realistic layout with few if any towns, but lots of scenery. As on the prototype, you could run the correct GN trains of the era based on the real passenger schedule (Fast Mail, Empire Builder, Western Star) and models of the actual scheduled freights - with perhaps a few extra trains, like a maintenance of way train thrown in. You would be ‘operating’ the layout just like the real GN, recreating what the GN really did…even if you aren’t stopping to drop off or pick up freight cars at all.
It is Rocky Mountain railroading for me. I have long sections of mountain wilderness running and can have two trains running all day without conflict while I can deliver cars to a few places by sneaking out on the main in between.
I worked in logistics for the Federal Government for 36 years often moving very sensitive material by plane, train, ship, and truck. I have sat in on MRR operations at some clubs and enjoyed chatting with the participants, however, there are no real-life consequences for screwing up in MRR ops and I tend to get bored by the slow pace of ops. I use to like plummeting down the mountain at a 100kmh on skis, I have tried the Nintendo Wii ski game. Not quite the same.[(-D] That is how I feel about ops.
For me, a MRR is a vehicle I use for modeling landscape and structures and anything else to make the layout pass the smell test in a photo. I keep getting better but will never be perfect, kinda like my guitar playing.[(-D]
One more thought - If I was the sort of person who felt some obligation to stick my nose in other peoples business, I might actually feel badly for those who ONLY run their trains for organized operating sessions.
I know some people find causal operation boring or pointless, but maybe we need a support group to help them “loosen up” a little…
And you would probably be wasting your time worrying about something that wasn’t broke.
Many people see model railroading as a team sport. Having operations with just one or two people is like saying you are going to play baseball with just one or two people.
A lot of it depends what your focus is. Some people approach model railroading as if they are railfans, they want to watch the parade go by more than they want to be in the parade.
Some people approach it more from the train crew perspective, they want to be immersed in the “experience” of doing what the train crews do.
Some people are more into the system perspective, they are focused on the movement and flow, how all the pieces interconnect.
And lastly there are the people who just like to build models and oh yeah, they can move, but the model building is the most imporant point.
None of them are right, none are wrong. The people in any one inclination need not have a “pity party” for the people with other approches.
Hmmmm, upon second thought this is how I feel. There always seems to be that one guy that gets bent out of shape if someone is not paying enough attention. If you get stuck looking at your train on a siding for twenty minutes and start chit-chatting you are likely to miss “the call”.[(-D] I have been a guest watching the goings-on and have seen this happen. We had much more respect for each other in the real world. I declined to join the club.
i freelance, but I need mountain scenes and operations, if only an approximation. Switching, double mains now instead of my hitherto single mains, and enjoying watching. That’s it.
Who says you can’t have some of watching trains go and operation on the same layout?
On my layout, it’s point-to-point setup, so watching trains run is not very easy. I like the operating aspect b/c it gives some level of reality. Modeling a genuine part of the country in a certain timeframe gives me the sense of enjoyment far more than watching a train go in a circle. Of course I’m not espousing one approach over another; I do what works for me and that’s what matters!
What about thru staging rather than point to point? A BIG continious route only part of which is seen. Trains enter the stage, just like leaving a staging yard on a point to point layout, travel across the stage, and then leave the stage.
What about the idea of only modeling one city, one place, and the rail activities there. Combined with the thru staging concept described above.
Build a bigger more realistic yard rather than two yards? Model a few junctions either side of that city that also go “off stage” to the rest of the world?
Just a thought.
Then you can also just let some trains run. This layout is designed so that 90% of the industries can be worked without fouling the main. I will be able to let four trains run on the main in display mode and still work the yard and industries.
You can have it all if you design the layout to do it all.
