On another post in this section I asked the question “what is a layout?”. Subsequent posters suggested I ask this question on a new post - which is what I am doing here.
I’ve been playing with trains since before 1955. My first “layout” was in 1956. It was a Lionel, and since that time I’ve had one in N scale, and several in HO scale. All of these “layouts” had similar attributes.
They were platforms of various size, with model railroad track secured to it, and said tracks were powered with electricity which subsequently ran motorized locomotives and the like around the layout. With or without scenery, I considered these to be layouts.
A module - to me - is a portable section of benchwork upon which tracks are placed, and said tracks are powered to facilitate the running of trains or other motorized units. And, modules are intended to be connected to other modules to form a structure that could be considered a portable layout.
A layout is simply the track arrangement on a model railroad. The whole model railroad used to be called simply a model railroad or a pike.
A modular unit or module is part of a model railroad specifically designed to link with other modules in order to create a whole model railroad.
Using these definitions both a pike and a module can have a layout.
I think the word layout coming to mean the whole model railroad came about because in when I was growing up the model railroads seldom got beyond the track nailed to a board phase with a few plastic buildings sitting around on it. Hence it was still just a “layout” of track on a board, and that is what everyone got to see and talk about.
Who knows. Potato - patato, Tomato - Tamato. Do we care. I don’t know that it has hurt discussion not having nailed down definitions. Most everyone can figure out what everyone else is talking about.
a layout to me, is anything where a train can run with scenery complete or incomplete. though when I set up my ez track I consider it just a oval of track just for the heck of running a train.
a module is a smaller piece of a larger layout that is interchangeable with any other piece of the layout.
There is a layout I have seen on occasion at various venues over the years. Depending on the space available determines how much of it they put up. They have a wonderfully detailed logging part where trains run through and dump logs. They also have two modules they can add on if they have the space. One contains a huge sawmill model and the other is a mill pond where they actually use real water quite effectively. Even though these spectacular modules do not have track and trains on them I still consider them part of the layout as they add to the visuals immensely.
I don’t think track has to be powered to be considered a layout as many garden railroads use batteries to power the Loco’s. My son had a rather large Thomas setup that covered a 5’ x 10’ sheet of plywood for a few years. It was quite elaborate and we called it the layout. It had push and battery powered engines on it.
From the point of view of a Model Railroader, I agree that for the most part, the layout is the track because without track ( powered or unpowered) it is not a Model Railroad. However anything added that will enhance the layout, whether it has track or not I would consider it part of the layout.
I agree with Cuyama, A section is a piece that can be detached, a module is a piece that has a standard end configuration.
All modules are sections, but all sections are not modules. The layout is total assembled “model railroad” of whatever size. So an N track module can be a module, a section and a layout all at once, but not all layouts have sections, not all sections are modules and an indiviual section or module may not be a “layout” by itself.
I would admit to being sloppy in my own use of the term. I agree with the above gentleman, my own sloppy use notwithstanding. Sectional vs. modular. Fremo is modular; you build a module, move to Indiana, find a local Fremo club, cart your module there one evening, get invited to 'hook ‘er up’, and soon the lot of you are playing trains. That can’t be achieved reliably unless the modules are standardized.
I call my layout modular at times, but I am wrong to do so. It is built in sections so that I can clip wires, wrap them up and tape them to the underside, back out some screws and bolts, saw through some scenery and some rails I still haven’t parted, and cart out the section that I hope will go through the loft door. [:^)]
I would define a layout as any device constructed for the primary purpose of operating a model railroad. Said device could be permanent or portable (thus a module would perfectly qualify), but must have track and other necessities of operation permanently installed.
Defining the term “layout” brings to mind, Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart’s definition of pornography. “I know it when I see it”.
I cannot define the term layout, but I know it when I see it.
It is a configuration of track on a surface and an electrically powered locomotive pulling rolling stock behind it. That can be as simple as an American Flyer train on track set on a carpet under the Christmas tree or as complex as a scale layout on a foam or plywood surface.
John Reid says that it can be anything that you think it can be, but calling it a layout does not make it a layout. John builds dioramas which are not layouts, so John calls them “static layouts”.
Mike O’Brien of the Glendale Model Railroad Club puts it well on his web site. To paraphrase, a model railroad layout is designed to be operated, just as automobiles are designed to be driven. Non-operating static railroad models are not usually considered “layouts” but rather “displays”.
A layout is a complete unit that forms a railway which may or may not contain sections or moduals
A section is part of a layout consisting a board with track wiring etcthat conects to the other sections to form a layout
A modual is a standardised unit that will only conect to other moduals made to the same standards N track for instance. Note there are other standard systems But a modual is built to one of these standard systems to use with the system it is built to.
Scenery does not come into the definitions it as you don’t need it to have a layout or modual, but you do need it once it becomes called a Model Railway
IMHO a layout/section or module have one thing in common: that they can be used to run trains. Distinctly different from a diorama which is static.
A layout may or may not have sections or modules. Sections or modules can be placed together to make a layout but by themselves don’t equal a layout. Sections basically only fit together one way to form a layout, modules can be arragned in different orders to form a layout. They key factor is continuity of track.
I guess I’ll edit my definition of dioramas. Normally they are static with well done scenery but They could be designed to become modules or sections. Come to think of it I’ve seen photos of dioramas in magazines that folks have taken outdoors to photograph then reinstalled into the layout. Or would that make them asection?
IDK but a sense of function (not necessarily operations) is a big distinction for me.
Well, sounds like most all of you agree that a “layout” is a “place/facility” where trains are operated. Be it on a living room rug, a 4x8 piece of plywood, or a room filling structure - if it has trains running on tracks, it can be called a layout.
While I admire the skills involved in building of some of the dioramas I have seen, without “running trains” they are simply not layouts - and should be called what they are - dioramas…
I disagree with the notion that layout, module, section, diorama, etc…can be what ever you want it to be. If a person is trying to communicate something, he should use a word that best describes the thing he’s talking about. Otherwise the reader has a harder time understanding what the writer is conveying. All of the words have slightly different meanings, IMO.
I think Cuyama’s definitions of the terms used in the two threads are best.
Having said that, we are all guilty of using the terms sloppily; sometimes frequently. Having thought about the definition of a Layout as described by Texas Zephyr, I have used that term sloppily for many years to describe the whole Pike.
Intersting in the opposite direction. A few years back I built what I called a diorama to demonstrate what was possible for the city’s light-rail promotion. It was just an n-scale strip of track slightly “S” shaped with some scenery along the way and a station at one end. The light rail train ran up and back (auto reversing) along the track. I never thought of it as a layout even though it had a running train. Probably because the intent was just for simiple viewing by spectators rather than the enjoyment of running the train.
Agree. What John proposes amounts to solipsism. In order for any two people to work constructively for a mutual purpose, they must agree to a taxonomy and to generally prescriptive rules and conventions that flow from them. They must agree on conventions so that they don’t work contrarily on a project, for example. That is why we have building codes; apart from the safety of the eventual occupants, there must be safety for those erecting the building as well.
Similarly, we in the hobby should (don’t have to, but we’ll both get further if we do) find ways to see and to do what we share conventionally. That was the whole reasoning behind the NMRA and its published guidelines and conventions. As a group, the hobby profited immensely from their orientation/philosophy and their work.