Prototype and freelance prototype model railroading seem to be “the thing” to do with layout design these days. I have decided to go with prototype freelancing. I have chosen the N&W in the mid 1950’s in VA, WV, and NC as my guide. I am particularly interested in the "Pochantas Division" which ran from Bluefield, WV to Williamson, WV. But, I want a division point in the middle of the layout and an interchange with the Southern Railway. I also love building and kitbashing Fine Scale Miniature kits (which of course have nothing to do with Appalachian railroading). There just is not enough space for everything (no matter how large your layout space might be). [:'(] I would love to faithfully model “Pokey” but I can figure out how to do it in a 20 foot x 30 foot area. What is your opinion about prototype modeling vs prototype freelancing vs even freelance modeling.[8D]
Hey Craig,
Of course, it’s all a matter of personal preference. The only “best” that matters is what’s best for each individual.
Personally, I’m more attracted to proto-lancing or freelancing. The fiction behind the layout I started a year ago is that an early railroad inserted itself between the Union Pacific and the Chicago & Northwestern, and acts primarily as a bridge route between the two.
I’m calling it the Missouri Valley Western, and I expect to eventually paint a fair amount of rolling stock and motive power in my own colors. In the meantime, I’m using a lot of C&NW equipment, and the funny thing is that I like the looks of it so much I’ve even wondered about those painting projects. That, of course, would lead me away from proto-lancing and back more toward prototype modeling.
(I should mention I grew up along the C&NW, so that eplains the affinity.)
In the end, thugh, the freedom that comes with freelancing is probably too big of an attraction for me. I understand the lure for those who aim to replicate reality in miniature, but that ain’t why I model. I enjoy doing the research necessary to create a plausible story, setting and traffic pattern. Beyond that, I want to build the railroad I imagine, rather than one that actually existed.
Good luck with your layout!
Jim
You asked: “What is your opinion about prototype modeling vs prototype freelancing vs even freelance modeling.”
To me there are distinctions between the three. They are:
Prototype Modeling - Faithfully reproducing Trains, Buildings, and Scenery in a specific location of the Prototype one is modeling.
Prototype Freelancing - Reproducing some Trains, some Buildings, and some Scenery of the Prototype one is modeling. Trains, Buildings, and Scenery do not have to be faithfully reproduced, and liberties may be taken.
Freelancing - You can to model whatever you want to, including fictional Railroads in fictional settings.
In all model railroading, one should strive to represent their railroad as being real, operating in a convincing setting.
If you made a left to right line with absolute prototype fidelity on one end of the spectrum, and complete make-believe free-lancing in the other, you’d find most of us somewhere in the middle. Many folks model a real railroad, but on a fictional branchline, or condense several areas of a real railroad into a single layout. Others have “made up” railroads they model, but set them in real locations with models of real terrain, buildings etc. With a very few exceptions, no one is 100% true to the prototype or 100% “just made up”.
In my case I’m taking a real railroad that became part of Northern Pacific in 1900, and imagining what it might have been like had it continued to run as an independent road.
“What If” is also the CR&T…
[1] What if the PRR had electrified from Harrisburg to Pittsburgh?
[2] What if the local PCC (traction) were also an interurban & shortline?
While there is no Conemaugh City – There is a Conemaugh Valley.
Catching “the flavor” of a geographic area is a worthwhile and quite achievable goal in model railroading. Allen McClelland modeled his Virginian & Ohio “to be good enough.” Tony Koester calls it LDE = Layout Design Element – Where the layout captures aspects of the prototype that may, or may not, be named after the prototype.
Hi!
Prototype modeling means different things to different people. True prototype would be a scale version of the actual area - including all the structures and roads and trees and etc., etc. I seriously doubt any of us can get to a true prototype representation - if for nothing else, due to the size of the area modeled.
So those of us who do a compressed version of a scene or area are modeling a prototype, but it just isn’t an exact one - foot for foot. We just don’t have the room, if nothing else, to model a sizeable scene.
That being said, whether you compress your area or leave out parts or just make up your own “landscape”, you can mix and match to suit your preferences. A good suggestion is to pick out landmarks or specific structures or scenes and model those, but “generisize” the rest to blend in.
Hey, the bottom line is its your RR, and its primary function is to please YOU !!!
ENJOY,
A huge waste of time to define. Its all making compromises, just choose yours and go. Why try to define something that has too many dimension or options to neatly pigeonhole.
I’m not even sure there is a single spot on the continuum for even one model railroader. All of us have to make some compromises with the real world due to time, money, space, etc. While there are some who advocate strick purity, I find proto free lancing, more akin to Allen Mcelland’s style to be a practical reality. That is the specific location, structures, etc, are fictional, but inspired by reality. Since I cannot in the space and time available create an exact replica, I go for creating a deja vu experience – the one where people “know” they’ve been there/seen that RR before, but can’t quite place it.
The key is internal self consistency. This means that within the story that is your RR, all the elements fit with one another in such as way that the world you create is believable. If your story is a small class 1 granger route in the 1940s, then BN unit coal trains running through Applachian scenary won’t fit the story. This is what made the V&O so real – it’s story was so internally self consistent that is WAS a railroad in people’s minds.
Hi Craig
My answer to your question is to “do what you like” and do not be too concerned with some perceived protocall about how somebody says you should build your railroad empire. So what if your Fine Scale Miniature kits don’t quite fit your prototype. Use them anyhow!
I don’t think most of us build a model railroad in order to please someone else, so why get distracted by somebody else’s opinions.
Like the drag racers say “run what ya brung”!
Dave
Dave,
I hear what you are saying!![:D] When all is said and done, the model railroad should please its builder. I think that if one ponders too long on what to build, time will pass and nothing will be built. I disagree with the late John Allen. He thought that one should build something only once and more than that was do to poor planning.[tdn] It may be poor planning but with the change in technology, scenery techniques, etc, what was good a few years ago may not be good now. So, rebuilding areas is just a part of the fun of model railroading.
With all due respect to John Allen, the prototype railroads rebuild, reroute, `daylight’ tunnels, widen curves… And that’s just what the engineers decide, not counting the efforts of Mother Nature.
Of course, they have the advantage of not having to build benchwork or scenery.
A look at a satellite view of Wyoming is educational - there are a LOT of ex-UP routes that were modified/re-routed over the years as better earthmovers became available.
I cover the entire spectrum. My JNR rolling stock is 100% prototypical in numbering (numbers I had personally recorded in my area during my era) and in schedule (TTTO 24/30) Trackplans are selectively minimized. My freelance coal hauler is the equivalent of an improbabillium mine - there’s no coal in the area - and some of the rolling stock is equally improbable. Seven axle articulated coal hoppers, anyone. And if I have a new (not necessarily better) idea…
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - as it might have been)
Since this is an opinion column, I’ll toss mine in.
I see only two choices - prototype or freelance.
In prototype you try to capture the essence of a particular railroad (or group of railroads). To this end you use the name, logo, etc. of a real railroad plus whatever rolling stock, engines, structures that exist for it in your scale and for your era (if you’re following one). You fill in the gaps with whatever is close. To this you might add a few goodies if they are in keeping with the essence of the railroad. For example, your model of the Southern Pacific could well include a UP Big Boy lettered for the SP because it fits, but you wouldn’t use it on a shortline such as the Maryland & Pennsylvania where it doesn’t. How close you adhere to your prototype is a personal choice.
In freelance you have your own railroad name and run whatever you want. You follow whatever overall theme that appeals to you or none at all.
Sometimes I think we have too many categories trying to precisely categorize everyone.
Enjoy
Paul
I find it hard to define those two choices. To me the question is more like, “Do you like gray or medium gray?”
This where I have problems with the terms. If I make up my own towns, but make them typical of a particular area, and letter all the engines and cabooses for the same railroad (regardless of whether they owned them or not), then I would be a prototype modeler by that definition.
If I modeled a series of specific towns, included track arrangements prototypical for the towns, included industries found in the towns, modeled buildings compressed from those found in the prototype and operate schedules and methods consistent from the prototype, but I put my own roadname on the engines and cabooses, I would be freelancing according to the above definition.
So the only difference between prototype and freelance according to the above definition is the lettering on the engine and caboose. In my mind the “freelance” layo
[quote user=“dehusman”]
IRONROOSTER:
I see only two choices - prototype or freelance.
I find it hard to define those two choices. To me the question is more like, “Do you like gray or medium gray?”
In prototype you try to capture the essence of a particular railroad (or group of railroads). To this end you use the name, logo, etc. of a real railroad plus whatever rolling stock, engines, structures that exist for it in your scale and for your era (if you’re following one). You fill in the gaps with whatever is close. To this you might add a few goodies if they are in keeping with the essence of the railroad. For example, your model of the Southern Pacific could well include a UP Big Boy lettered for the SP because it fits, but you wouldn’t use it on a shortline such as the Maryland & Pennsylvania where it doesn’t. How close you adhere to your prototype is a personal choice.
In freelance you have your own railroad name and run whatever you want. You follow whatever overall theme that appeals to you or none at all.
This where I have problems with the terms. If I make up my own towns, but make them typical of a particular area, and letter all the engines and cabooses for the same railroad (regardless of whether they owned them or not), then I would be a prototype modeler by that definition.
If I modeled a series of specific towns, included track arrangements prototypical for the towns, included industries found in the towns, modeled buildings compressed from those found in the prototype and operate schedules and methods consistent from the prototype, but I put my own roadname on the engines and caboos
100% agreement.
Exactamundo.
Great definitions, Elmer !
Rich
Been around long enough to have dabbled in all types. For example, in the late 70’s into early 1980’s I had a fictional railroad called the Mojave Western. Distinctive paint scheme, lettering, I even had my “operations directives” for the layout. In addition, I had a shortline owned by the Mojave but with its own paint scheme, the Oklahoma Northern, red and white colors. The theory was the Mojave was a transcon, and I was doing just a portion in Oklahoma wheat terminal country. The Oklahoma Northern fed traffic to the MW.
In 1984 I started rebuilding, doing the the entire railroad in Santa Fe, following the Santa Fe grain ops in Oklahoma in the summer of 1989. I actually retained the ON as a shortline feeder from staging to the Santa Fe connection. I began modeling the railroad by doing Enid OK, my hometown, with all the large terminal elevators, using the old Santa Fe branch from Guthrie to Kiowa KS. All the towns are modeled for that line. Then I included part of the ATSF mainline from Arkansas City, through Guthrie to Okla City. Ark City is staging, modeled portion is Guthrie through Okie City with staging for the south.
Long story short, I enjoyed the ATSF Okla Div. more than any layout I ever built. The trackwork in various towns varies from the prototype because of space constraints and room constraints. The layout is three decks, connected, in a space 29ft by 33ft. And yes, in 2011 the Oklahoma Northern is still interchanging with the Santa Fe.
So I guess I would classifiy as proto modeler with artistic license.
Bob
I am not sure what you would call what I do… maybe a mix between protofreelancing and freelancing. I choose a railroad -75% CSX with a few UP and BNSF thrown in there and a fairly broad time period-undefined modern period (so I can run new stuff and trains that may no longer be on the rails today but was around 10-15 years ago), and instead of modeling the east coast scenery I model more of deserty type of scenery found in eastern Oregon/Washington-Southern Idaho. I greatly admire someone who can faithly model a year, a place and a specific railroad but I dont want to box myself in that much.
You’re getting wrapped around the axle on definitions. I model a prototype line in terms of traffic types, general traffic flow, and equipment practices. My local is semi plausible based on my prototype, but it has lots of compromises due to the inherent space restrictions we all face.
I suppose you could consider that Proto-Lancing.
It would seem to me that there were probably a lot of locations where the NW and Southern crossed paths in the vicinity of the Pokey, so it wouldn’t be a big stretch to include an interchange on your layout. You won’t lose points, especially with people like me who know nothing of the line, but like good modeling and fun operations.
My suggestion is to find a prototype scene that absolutely nails the Pokey, then make that the centerpiece of your plan. Then add on the other elements you want to include, just keep in mind that your going for a plausible blend of elements, not outright fantasy (Amtrak Acela rolling through Bluefield) or strict prototype, where every inch of track and every rivet is accounted for.
Have fun, and keep us posted with the progress. Now go BUILD something!
Lee
I recall a railroad by a guy named Lee, can’t remember the last name, who had done a protolance RR based on the D&RGW having extended beyond Craig/Yampa Valley and making a new bridge route to SLC. He used D&RGW models over a route that never had track laid. It was very cool. Later he went totally freelance and pained his own power which he made up. I, being a Rio Grande fan, lost interest in his new layout because it was something else, but it was a cool idea.
Of course if you go totally freelance, your going to have to do a lot of painting so your gonna have to like painting!