This, I believe, is the absolute key, to a layout’s sustainability, (emphasis mine). [:)]
How many times have we read here that so and so is dismantling their layout because, they’re bored, there’s nothing left to do on it, it didn’t operate as they wished…etc, etc, etc!
Without someone knowing what they truely want out of a layout, (unless they are purposely using it as an temporary step to develop techniques), there is no way it will last any length of time after basic construction is finished. In planning a layout, this idea of a realistic, resonable concept is the key to developing a layout into a “lifetime layout”.
In planning layouts for myself & others, that is the one thing I MUST know before I can design something they will be satisfied with. What do they truely want from their layout? After this everything else becomes relatively easy to develop a solution to. Questions like, what era, what area, can that be done in allowable space, scenery emphasis vs. operational emphasis, etc, basically fall into place after the main question is answered. I realize that layouts can and do change over the years, but a change like you stated, still is not a complete tear down and start over, it is simply a modification to the plan for the better.
I have to agree that no one can design a perfect layout.
My point is that once you stop building/expanding/detailing the model railroad, interest starts to wane. Either because you’re a builder at heart and have nothing left to build or because you like operating but it eventually becomes the same old operations. Of course when you’re dealing with people, processes vary which is why I didn’t specify a time. While I am not familiar with all the history of each the above cited layouts, as far as I know, none of them was a finished layout for the period cited and of course none of them moved and/or continued his old layout. It’s not how long you had the layout it’s how long ago was it finished.
[i] My point is that once you stop building/expanding/detailing the model railroad, interest starts to wane. Either because you’re a builder at heart and have nothing left to build or because you like operating but it eventually becomes the same old operations. Of course when you’re dealing with people, processes vary which is why I didn’t specify a time. While I am not familiar with all the history of each the above cited layouts, as far as I know, none of them was a finished layout for the period cited and of course none of them moved and/or continued his old layout. It’s not how long you had the layout it’s how long ago was it finished.
Enjoy
Paul [/i]
Actually, except for Koester, they all moved into new places. McClellan is doing an expanded version of the V&0, Brooman carried on with the Utah Belt (expanded version), Chubb’s new layout is more prototype oriented and larger, but is otherwise planned around operations as was the old Sunset Valley. Tony Koester’s just gone back to his first love, the NKP, but much of his motive power will be re-usable since the AM’s steam power was largely based on NKP prototypes.
All these gents are doing is refining and expanding on themes they developed early on with the possible exception of TK who is getting out of the Appalachian coal business. In any case, TK is still the operations oriented type he has always been, he’s just emphasizing TT&TO ops. Besides, a significant portion of AM traffic was fast bridge traffic, which is what the NKP was famous for.
All these guys had layouts whose lives can be measured in decades and they’re still interested in the same things that turned their cranks years ago. It’s not as if Brooman went from modeling modern diesel operations in the Southwest to modeling Maine Central’s Mountain Division in the 40’s or McClellan suddenly switching his emphasis from a fictional Appalachian coal road to a model of British Railwa
Wow. My name up in lights. I never realized my topic from the other day was going to lead to this!..
First of all, I’ve not been feeling all that great lately because of my diabetes, and when I’m not feeling well with this stuff, I get tired of looking at my same old layout, house and property, county, state, country, planet, etc, and am grumpy and tend to find fault with almost everything. On the other hand, when I’m feeling good, I have no problem with anything - well, mostly anything…
What set me off about my layout the other day was that I tried running a new loco on it that just kept derailing and kept derailing until I finally said to heck with it, and walked away. Another thing is that there are a number of structures I’d like to add to it, but just don’t have the room. It was this frustration (and not feeling well like I said) that caused me to create the topic. When it comes right down to it I really wouldn’t want to rip my present layout up and build a new one, but if anything, would like to add a few feet to it, but just don’t have the room. Maybe one of these days I’ll have a bigger train room and can do more with it, but until then I’m just going to have to make peace with it being the way it is.
[quote user=“andrechapelon”]
[i] My point is that once you stop building/expanding/detailing the model railroad, interest starts to wane. Either because you’re a builder at heart and have nothing left to build or because you like operating but it eventually becomes the same old operations. Of course when you’re dealing with people, processes vary which is why I didn’t specify a time. While I am not familiar with all the history of each the above cited layouts, as far as I know, none of them was a finished layout for the period cited and of course none of them moved and/or continued his old layout. It’s not how long you had the layout it’s how long ago was it finished.
Enjoy
Paul [/i]
Actually, except for Koester, they all moved into new places. McClellan is doing an expanded version of the V&0, Brooman carried on with the Utah Belt (expanded version), Chubb’s new layout is more prototype oriented and larger, but is otherwise planned around operations as was the old Sunset Valley. Tony Koester’s just gone back to his first love, the NKP, but much of his motive power will be re-usable since the AM’s steam power was largely based on NKP prototypes.
All these gents are doing is refining and expanding on themes they developed early on with the possible exception of TK who is getting out of the Appalachian coal business. In any case, TK is still the operations oriented type he has always been, he’s just emphasizing TT&TO ops. Besides, a significant portion of AM traffic was fast bridge traffic, which is what the NKP was famous for.
All these guys had layouts whose lives can be measured in decades and they’re still interested in the same things that turned their cranks years ago. It’s not as if Brooman went from modeling modern diesel operations in the Southwest to modeling Maine Central’s Mountain Division in the 40’s or McClellan suddenly switching his emphasis from a fictional Appalachian coal road
To be honest, I don’t think my layout will have “Sustainability” as it’s currently designed. It may just be that it’s too small for what I’m doing with it. Right now, of course, I’m still building most of the time, and I’m satisfied to just run trains and railfan, with some fun switching every now and then. I always run by myself. Maybe, that needs to change, too.
I did plan for expansion. I’ve got a few turnouts that could easily be re-routed to a new section of layout, and with the discovery of Peco curved turnouts, I realize that it’s a piece of cake to put a reasonable extension anywhere off the perimeter, whether the track there is straight or curved.
But, still I fear that my real excitement is the Building process, primarily scenery. So, somewhere in my long-range plans are the options of joining a club or building modules. Funny, no one has mentioned modules at all. There’s an opportunity to take the “same old layout” and run it a different way every time.
What you need to do is inject some newcreativity in your layout.
ONE EXAMPLE might be upgrading your track: frome code 100 to 83, (or 83 to 70), or handlaying fine scale. Everything will run better because your skills have improved.
Rail line right-of-ways may not change, but RR’s improve them. Scenery changes. New buildings replace old old - gradually. Industrial content changes.
ORIGINAL MOTIVATION is often just 'running train’s. Then comes ‘pursuit’ of a Goal.
BUT Goals, when reached, motivation often decreases. What counts is the pursuit of perfection, not the attainment of same.
Once you had Lay a switch kit and see the difference, you’ll be amazed.
Tracklayer… hope you didn’t mind your name up in lights and, maybe, it cheered you up a bit. more than that I hope you’re feeling better. My late wife was type 1 Diabetic and my brother is type 2 so I know what a pain it can be [|(]. Thanks for inspiring a thread that’s thrown up some useful ideas. [8D]
Hi Don. Actually I am considering re-tracking the entire layout. Hopefully that will improve the performance of my problem locos. Otherwise, I can live with the rest of it.
But they were finished years earlier and operated for a very long time, which disproves your statement that “sustainable interest is only possible as long as the layout is under construction.”
Not at all Dave. Glad to be of service… And yes, I’m feel much better. Thanks for your concern. I’ve just got to learn to stay on my diet, get plenty of exercise and rest…
That’s only three impossibles for a railroad fan [sigh]
Did you ever get a good guideline on how to achieve them from anyone? I’ve just discovered that my brother has been wandering round in the usual information fog for the last few years [|(] I really am fed up with medics and the system.
Um… [%-)] on the topic… could we drop the “who did what” debate and move on with ways of making MRR work for us for a long time please? [:P]