I,m in a bit of a quandry!Iwould like to think that i model as close to real as possible,but i’ve noticed that some manufacturers are putting out models in road liveries that i know for a fact never had those locos.Whats my problem,well some dont look too bad-case in point W.P. only ran with 4 axle units,but i can buy a C628 in classic W.P. orange and silver and it doesnt really look at all wrong,but i know that this was never pototypical,and some of my mates will know as well.So do i say to heck with it and expand my world into fantasyland,or keep myself well and truly grounded in reality? And it’s not just loco’s i’m thinking of,structures,locales etc!!! mick
There is no rule, so nobody can really say that you should or should not be completely prototypical. You will have to decide if being completely prototypical is more important or if running locomotives in paint schemes they never wore is more important. For the most part, my layout is prototypical, but I make some exceptions, and I don’t care if someone does not like it.
I’d have to say that there is only one person that can answer that question, and his name is Mick! Sorry I can’t give any better advice than that.
But I’ll run on a bit, anyway…
You won’t be totally prototypical no matter what you do, there are just too many compromises we have to make. So the question you will have to answer is whether your goal is to create the illusion of reality, matching the facts that you know, or do you want to create something that suggests that reality, but might take some liberties to add things that you find interesting or fun?
Let’s see, do you have to send that 628 down to the fueling rack every so often or it stops running? It does run on diesel fuel, right? My point is that we try to emulate the real world, not recreate it - it’s not physically possible. If you are in a club, you will always have guys who are commonly referred to as rivet counters. They love to tell you that the WP used Golden Glow headlights only until 1972 so, if you have one on an engine that was built after 1972, you’re an idiot. Just tell them, “that’s nice, thanks for the information” and continue to run what you want. If it doesn’t bother you, who cares what your mates think? If it bothers them so much, ask them when they are buying you the correct prototype. [:)]
sarges, this question is a source of intense frustration for many of us. For others, it is clear…sure, do what makes you happy, or they feel that they are completely unwilling to compromise on their personal approach to fidelity to the prototype. In other words, some will fudge it to get something that has strong appeal, like this loco you are talking about, or they put up their hand and refuse to budge.
What is it that appeals to you about model railroading in general? Do you get excited about engines, and really work hard to find ways to get new ones now and then? If so, then fidelity probably comes second for you.
On the other hand, if keeping some credibility with your buddies is really important to you, you will probably be very sensitive to their judgments…won’t you? You’d like to fit in as much as possible, so you take a lot of your cues from them. Trouble is, if you continually do that, they will steer you in a direction where you will be unhappy under the surface. Shakespeare said, “To thine own self be true.” This is where you have to decide which factor about modelling has what I would call primacy. Is it the friendship and rules side of it, or is it the gut appeal and enjoying what you like about the hobby?
I haven’t actually told you what to do, notice, but I hope you at least have a different way of thinking about your problem that makes it easier to decide. Good luck.
Well to all who have already responded,thanks, my mind is now made up-i’ll run what i want,how i want etc.My mates are quite boneheaded in their beliefs on the hobby,but i must admit i enjoy watching trains run,trying to keep to a timetable adds interest,but often i don’t!! I think that i am one who just loves trains,but don’t want it to look like a toy!Maybe these fellas should take a step back and just enjoy the hobby,i certainly will be.Thanks again,by the way did some great railfanning this morning-double headed 4-6-2’s thruogh the Blue mountains,AWESOME !!! Mick
Ah, I wondered why there was a gin and a VHO stabled in Sydney Yard this morning…
You can never be “totally prototypical” since you don’t have the same brake systems, uncoupling systems and power systems as the prototype and the weight distribution isn’t the same. You also underestimate the incredible mass of behind the scenes support services and operation used to make a railroad go. Plus a railroad is a business, it has to make a profit and the failure to properly execute the plan can result in injury or death. A real railroad can be very serious. Your model trains are a hobby, its supposed to be fun.
What you can do is decide which aspects of a real railroad you you want to emphasize and work on getting them to the point that they create the “feel” of the prototype (or at least the “feel” as you and your operators understand it).
Dave H.
There are disciplines to be followed in prototypical modeling.You see it does take a lot of research to insure you have correct cars for your road and all other railroad cars that you will be using in the time period being modeled.There is no sense in half stepping with correct engines and “foobie” cars if one decides to become a prototypical modeler.You will need to model the “standard” station and other railroad structure designs including bridges and signals of the chosen railroad.Scenery must reflex the scenery that the chosen road travels through.
This may sound like a lot of trouble but,it is not…You see you have books to help you with research as well as your computer.Of course you may have to detail freight cars to bring them up to the prototypical modeling standards…
Is prototypical modeling worth the extra effort needed? To my mind no,I enjoy the freedom of buying models that I like…I do drawl lines like no BNSF,NS or CSX boxcars o with roof walks and other obvious “foobie” cars nor will I pull 34 foot hoppers or wooden reefers with a (say) SD70.
So,prototypical modeling is a choice a modeler must make…
Good luck!
And that is exactly why I won’t come see your layout. You only have 3,275 rivets when actually the real engine had 3,276. How embarrassing. How can you live with yourself?
The extra rivet was added during the reshopping in 1955. Since this model is of the pre-1955 engine, it is actually correct. You gotta do better research if you’re gonna be a rivet counter.
Enjoy
Paul
Gee,I guess that leaves my layout out as well…Most of my models are missing rivets or have to many.[:O]
Don’t let yourself get stuck un the totally prototype trap. You’ll drive yourself nuts trying to make sure everything is just so and correct to the nth degree. One day that one model that you just have to have will come out, but you can’t get it because your road didn’t run that type or it has something that the prototype didn’t have.
I’ve based my layout loosely on the KCS southern division. The KCS has been known to run power from all over the map and still does today. Having it loosely based allows me to add in power from my fictional road, the MGRy (Midland Gulf Railway).
The message here is don’t limit yourself to ‘prototype only’ operations. If someone comes and looks at my layout and starts saying I should run only total prototype, I remind them of two things. Whose layout is it and where the door is located.
Mick,
Don’t know about you, but I like running D&H passenger trains with my CPR AC4400’s.
If WE were to be prototypical, we’d need a room large enough to make prototypical curves.
Few of us have a room this large.
Prototypical, in my opinion, is what you make your layout.
Just my 2 cents
Gordon
Should I Be Totally Prototypical?
How can you even live with yourself asking such a question?
I hope that the Precision Police will forward this response to you in your re-education cell.
[:-,]
A lot of it also depends on how much you like history and research. I personally enjoy research and finding out things about the railroad and the region I am modeling. So I incorporate the bits of information as a I encounter them.
There was a gunpowder mill in the area I am modeling. I recently learned they got their sulphur from upstate New York (after researching how gunpowder was made in the 1890’s). So on my layout car loads of sulphur will come in from New York. Too much rivet counting? Well I have to put something on the waybill and its no more trouble to put the actual origin than a ficticious one, plus it was fun to do the industrial archeology.
Really most prototype modeling boils down to when faced with a choice, being armed with the information to make a choice that matches history. It takes no more effort to apply the correct number decal to the model than it does to apply the incorrect number.
What gives “rivet counting” a bad name isn’t really the rivet counting, it is really just really poor manners. Really what rivet counting is is quality modeling and craftsmanship. Does that mean I super detail everything? No. But it does mean I like to do the research. On one board I was roundly criticized for not putting tie plates under the rails and having joint bars every 39 ft and not having 4 spikes per tie. For not “modeling” the track (on the other hand, the person doing the criticism manufacturers and sells track superdetailing supplies, so may not be entirely objective). Oh well, to each his own.
Dave H.
Brakie, would it help if I left a smiley face so that you KNOW I’m kidding around? [:)]
Obviously it wasn’t obvious enough…obviously.
I don’t understand your quandary. If you’re determined to do what other people tell you, why go with the views of people on this forum who will probably never see your railroad, and who, incidentally, cannot give you a definitive answer. Go with what your mates tell you to do, they’ll be seeing and maybe operating your railroad.
And by the way, it isn’t real, it is fantasy-land.
Ray
You already know the answer to your question. All you have to do is look within. We can give you all sorts of advice but, ultimately, it’s up to you on how you ultimately want to model. You answered your question in the first several sentances. I model prototypically but not prototypically at the same time. I model business trains of the wester railroads of KC in the 80’s and 90’s but, use some existing models that several railroads owned but, either no longer had or had but were stored but never used. This also applies for locomotives and freight cars.
Ch
Gee,Dave,maybe I should have added a smiley???