So which type of modeler are you?

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
21

Definitely a railroad modeler, year 'round. I enjoy having a purpose for running my trains plus the social aspect of hosting op sessions. If I had the real estate available I would model deep, densely-detailed scenes; but since I don’t, I simply concentrate on detailing the area around the track as well as I am able.

I do however try to avoid the spaghetti-bowl effect of crowded trackwork, by having only one main line ROW passing thru a scene - the way we normally encounter them in everyday life.

22

I would classify myself on the side of Railroad modeler, and I would guess most on model train forums would lean to that side. In order to model a “world” where trains are a part of it seems like it would be much costlier in terms of time and money; I barely have the time and money to model a railroad, let a lone a world which includes trains; bless you if you can do the latter.

As far as time of year, I’m a year round person - definitely. I enjoy trains and modeling to much to give it up for the entire warm season, although I do spend more time outside, I still retreat to the basement regularly to enjoy working on the layout - it’s cool and pleasent down there when it can be quite hot and sometimes humid in Virginia in summer time.

23

I’ve realized I’m a model landscape architect who thought it would be cool to have a couple trains running through that landscape. The scenery is (will be) the focus.

24

I dabble in both camps. The layout became more focused on operations when I extened it to accomodate the SD-40 and the layout became point-to-point. Some of my esteemed friends love watching trains go around a layout, I much prefer having them do something prototypical.

25

I fall into both camps, err, maybe not either camp, umm, I hate the idea of overcatergorization, as it too often excludes nuance and complexity…I want it all.

26

That’s me, focus on the landscape, and the more natural-looking the better. The trains, track, bridges and such just add to the effect.

While it is fun to run trains I get more satisfaction from building and detailing. I really enjoyed getting the corner of my layout finished to my liking during the holidays. Since then its been all about benchwork and laying track to get my second dogbone ready for the fun part. The new area is like a big blank slate.

As far as operations go, I am definitely a lone wolf. Not necessarily by choice, but there are no clubs anywhere around and I’ve yet to meet anyone that has a real layout at the local Hobbytown.

27

I’m a combination of the scenery modeler, and a new type-the rolling stock/motive power detailer.

28

Sam Posey’s book Playing With Trains: A Passion Beyond Scale dwells on this topic. He contrasts so-called ‘operators’ like Tony Koester (p. 142) with the more fanciful ‘scenery makers’ such as Malcolm Furlow (p. 150). Made it seem like two sides at war with each other - possibly an exaggeration?

29

That’s what I would call it considering the scenery on the old AM and his new NKP is IMHO well above average scenery modeling.

Earlier I forgot to mention I been called a railroader/ industrialist. Maybe,but,I call myself a modeler wanna be. [(-D]

30

I’m both, currently more into reworking restored locomotives. I finished my track work on my current and final layout in the early 90s so I had the ability to “run” my trains before and during scenery time.

Work got me down for 15 years so I slacked off. After I retired I dug in on all fours. Now the age factor is kicking in and working on scenery isn’t as much fun as it used to be. When I hurt bad it’s bench work, when I can get the pain pills to kick in scenery is my thing. I suspect my layout will be similar to John Allen’s, unfinished when I go.

All aspects of model railroading has been great for over 65 years for me. Only one thing better . . . . more of it!!!

Mel
&nb

31

I’m building a miniature world which includes trains and operation but my layout also includes lots of non railroad structures and scenes. Once upon a time a decided that all the models I build shall be HO scale so they can all be displayed together instead of having different scale models scattered all over the house.

j…

32

I don’t see it as a war so much as a matter of choice. I think few of us are trying to say our way is the only way or even the best way. And it’s not all or nothing. It’s just matter of where the emphasis is going to be. What part of the hobby is getting the lion’s share of your time and money. If operations or even just running trains is the priority, then minimal scenery as Tony Koester described in his recent column will suffice. However if creating a miniature world is the priority, then the emphasis is going to be on the setting for the railroad. Certainly one can combine good operations with outstanding scenery but I think most of us will emphasize one over the other. Operations were certainly a big part of the G&D but what made it a memorable layout was the magnificent scenery. I think if operations were his primary objective, John Allen would have completed the mainline first and then added the scenery. As it was, the layout was almost completely scenicked but he never completed the mainline and operated it as he had envisioned when he started the project. He had one major bridge that needed to be built to complete the mainline but he never was able to do that before he passed away. I don’t think anyone would suggest that made the G&D less magnificent.

On the other side of the coin was the V&O. Most certainly the e

33

I second the comments from jecorbett, you did an excellent job with that one foot area. It looks wonderful and very realistic.

Wayne

34

I tend to place an emphasis on scenery to create a miniature world. However, my latest, and probably my last layout, is a point to point with some operational potential.

35

Eh? Say What?

ROAR

36

I agree with Brent above. I’m in the airline industry and deal with paperwork, dispatchers and clearances at work. I have zero desire to do so on my layout. I do attend some operating sessions, but it is more for the social aspect than the operating part.

That’s not to say I don’t appreciate some of the operating schemes modelers create. It’s just not my cup of tea. I enjoy running interesting trains through nicely detailed scenes. I’ve just begun rebuilding, rubber gauging between On30 to HO steam era with my eight-year-old son. He does enjoy switching cars around so there will be a little operating potential, but I have no intent on designing an operating scheme nor holding any sessions.

But what a great hobby that we can all fulfill our own desires!

Scott

37

Scott,

I think you bring up an important point about where operations has taken us. And I say this as someone who likes to operate and appreciates what the more, ahem, intense operators are trying to achieve. They do it so well that it can often simulate all the pressures of real world ops, except getting paid or suffering physical injury/death.[;)] Lots of stress is implicit, part of what people have come to expect of ops.

I will say that I take part in some of this, but mostly on someone else’s RR.

Brent wrote:

“…stress just doesn’t scale down.”

I suspect what Brent wrote is actually another way of saying that operations actually DOES scale down, all too well, in fact, for his enjoyment. Not that Brent is saying there’s anything bad about how others do operations, just not his cup of tea.

And you noted this fact of modern life…

I also noted you are (were?) a narrowgauger, a sure sign that in many ways, even if you’re into ops, it might be preference for a far more relaxed approach to it.

I noted my own preference to “have it all” on the last page. But I should amend that to say I want it all except the stress part – at least on my own layout.

So I modestly suggest that there’s probably a third way out there that, if we must categorize (something I’m not real fond of, but that’s how these discussions go), is represented by the idea of “stress free operations.”

In other words, running some trains with the emphasis on keeping things light in terms of rules, and paperwork. Not saying it should replace or even challenge at all the way ops have evolved in the 5 decades of experience read

38

Having been involved in operating sessions on a number of different layouts with a number of different operating schemes, yes, some go very far into all the prototype “actions”, and it can be too much stress.

I like operations, but I do like simple, low stress operating schemes/systems.

My own layout uses CTC for the mainline - BUT - it is a simplified CTC system, and a simplified signal system making it easier, faster (because our distances are shorter and our clocks are sped up) and thereby way less stressful.

In place of the multi step process of levers and switches on a true CTC panel, mine is simple lighted pushbuttons. The dispatcher sets the routes thru the interlocking, generally with only one button, and than one more button gives the next train aurthority into the next two siganal blocks - yes the next two signal blocks.

Each power block not part of an interlocking is divided into two signal blocks. Each interlocking is actually a buffer block in terms of power - it is only powered when both sides of the interlocking are assigned to the same throttle.

Interlocking signals are absolute, just like the prototype, but are never used for “yellow” indications (actually some show yellow in place of green for restricted speed diverging routes).

Anyway, this simple system makes it easy for operators to understand and remember what to do. If they mess up - we have automatic train control - their train just stops until the dispatcher fixes things.

Off the mainline operators have simple switch lists and a whole section of layout to themselves for their “work”. Very relaxed pace…

Other low stress feature - interlockings work like the real thing - a dispatcher or tower operator cannot throw a switch while a train is in the interlocking - it simply will not throw.

Operators get paperwork, but they don’t “do” any paperwork - it is just their instructions.

So that’s my take on lo

39

Sheldon,

Those are great ideas and examples of how to apply this principle to a more “standard” gauge, mainline scenario that is more mainstream than narrowgauge.

It also points out how wide and deep this gray area of ops is. Depending on how a person implements it, it could be anywhere from slighly more organized than “just run!” to a fully signaled mainline that seems indistinguishable in look to the more formal concept that ops has become, but which has most of the gotchas filtered out by eliminating much of the more arcane nature of such ops in favor of simplified, unambiguous signal aspects, etc.

Another way of putting this is that there is no single “right” way to do ops. Rather, there’s a variety of different ways, depending on one’s taste for complexity.

I’m sure someone will say, but there is, the prototype way…well, yeah, but they’re not paying me enough for that[;)][2c]

Although I’m sure some are willing to gladly pay for that sort of thing, witness the popularity of rail museums’ use of “engineer-fo-a-day, more than a cab ride” programs. But many folks nowadays want something more like a 3D game, in some cases, or like having your buddies over to run the Lionel and you’re shouting (in your inside voice) to the next fellow about a meet you want to set up. I think there’s a place for everybody at this table, although I neither want to dilute the way ops has become more prototypical or to suggest that those just rolling the wheels need do anything else to enjoy the hobby.

40

I’m the Operations Chairman of a very large club layout (halfway into a 6300 sq. ft. layout space and 70 members). Our current mainline takes a good 15 minutes to traverse the entire thing at 60 scale mph, and we have 40" min. curves and #8 mainline switches, with some great scenery in places. It’s a first class layout to run trains on.

With all that being said, I can’t stand roundy-round operations even on such a great big layout. I just can’t. I can do maybe a loop or two by myself just to test the equipment, perhaps a few more loops with other members running the opposite way to make it interesting. But just putting a train on the track and watching it go 'round? It’s like watching paint dry to me.

I’ve heard tales of other model railroaders that come home from work, put a train on their looped layout, and just open the throttle and watch it go…for hours. What do they think about while this is happening? When I do something like that and it requires no thought to accomplish (painting the house, mowing the lawn, weeding the garden), all I think about is whatever is stressing me out in "Real Life"™. I need a hobby that challenges me to think, and watching trains run by themselves isn’t much of a challenge. When I step through the front door of the club, "Real Life"™ ceases to matter because I have so much to do in HO scale.

Paul A. Cutler III