Northlandz

[Dr EMD]

OK. Here's the web site as I hinted.



http://www.northlandz.com/ It is in northern Jersey.

Admission
Adults                  $13.75
Children (2-12)      $9.75
Children under 2    FREE
Senior Citizens     $12.50

Is it worth it?

[richG]

Yes, it is worth it. It has been around for quite a few years. There is a lot to see. I believe you walk almost a mile to see everything. At least it was like that a few years ago. Early critics where jealous model railroaders.

Rich

[Terry Toenges]

I'd say it's definitely worth it.
Nit pickers probably won't agree as some of the scenery looks like what it is - painted plaster. The whole place shows it's age.
Having said that, it's totally awesome! I whole heartedly recommend it.

[ebtnut]

These kinds of displays are really public entertainments that include trains.  That is not necessarily a bad thing if it gets some folks interested in train modeling.  I just visited the display at the Carnegie Science Center in Pittsburgh.  It measures about 30 x 85 feet.  All of the trains are Lionel, running on Gargraves track.  However, virtually all of the structures on the layout are at 1/4" scale, and most all of them represent real prototypes.  The big new feature this year is a model of Forbes Field, where the Pirates used to play prior to the 1970's.  The grandstands are full of "people" which, if you look closer, turn out to be the heads of colored Q-tips (over 20,000 of the them ).  The water features are real water, and the boats are moved by magnets attached to a chain loop under the layout.  They also have an auto lighting feature that takes you through night and day in about 20 minutes.

[Atlantic Central]

Well,

Like I said in the K-10 thread, I was unimpressed. At Northlandz, the only "claim to fame" is size/volume/quanitity, not quality. Yes it is showing its age but it is apparent that even on day one, there where some serious shortcuts/low standards, especially from the stand point of the trains themselves.

Strickly from an artistic standpoint it is interesting, but personally I have never cared for model scenery done in that overly artistic "caricature" stlye - you know like a ride at Disney World.

Now as public display layouts go, I think Choo Choo Barn, Roadside America, The B&O Railroad Museum layout (old and new), the Brunswick Maryland B&O layout, The Ellicott City Railroad Museum layout, the now gone layout once at Cyprus Gardens, just to name a few, are/where all much better than Northlandz.

Or, maybe my standards and expectations are just too high.

Sheldon

[rogertra]

I agree with what Sheldon wrote.

I've never been impressed by the big, overblown toy train sets like Northlandz.  It's not a model railway, it's toy train set.  Period.

I agree with Sheldon and overly artistic "caricature" stlye of modelling.

Selios and the Franklin & South Manchester,  John Allen and his G&D and that artist guy that Model Railroader was pushing a few years ago.  Fine modelling by all but I don't like the style.

[Atlantic Central]

Roger,

That other guy was John Olson - apparently he has been busy building amusments for Disney. The folks at MR just revisted his modeling in the February issue as part of a new series, Landmark Layouts - 75 Years.

Like you said, and to be clear before the flamers start, these guys are all great model builders,but like you, I simply don't care for their fantasy, caricature style.

Sheldon

[Terry Toenges]

Sheldon, Roger, EBT -
I'm aware that you guys are craftsmen at what you do. I envy your skills and dedication to the hobby.
Your standards and expectations aren't too high because that is what you strive for.
Some of the other layouts mentioned are done by folks who are serious model railroaders with an eye for detail and operations.
I don't think Northlandz was ever intended to be up to those standards. The trains there just go round and round.
For guys like me who just like playing with trains, it's the neatest train layout I ever saw.

[Atlantic Central]

Terry,

As I have stated more than once, this is a big hobby with something to offer everyone, and I have no problem with those who do not get as deeply involed in the more complex aspects of the hobby. I for one don't like and therefore avoid sound in the small scale I model in, yet I do many things considered very advanced by many.

However, I do believe the following positions are valid:

Public displays have a responsibility to represent themselves honestly - when I arrived at Northlandz I felt disappointed and dupped out of my time and money - glad it was not the only reason for the trip.

People who just "collect" trains should not call themselves "modelers". I'm personally not impressed with the expenditure of lots of money - in fact I laugh to myself at every BMW and Benz I see on the road.

Anyone who actually builds and runs a layout, no mater how simple or modest, is however a modeler. That is how we ALL start in this hobby, no matter how far we later go.


I'm not the rivet counter many think. Just because I have high standards and a moderately large knowledge base about the prototype does not mean I take this all too seriously. That is one reason I freelance - to not take it too seriously, but rather to have my own little fantasy world.

My own non-serious views include:

Keeping weathering to the bare minimum necessary to instill a sense of realisum.

I run shorty passenger cars because of our sharp model curves. But I insist that my own passenger fleet have diaphragms that touch and work at nearly scale coupling distances. This to me is more realistic on our sharp curves than scale 80' cars with gaps between them.

Having signals but simplifing them so the average person can understand what they mean.

Making "operating sessions" nearly paper work free so that its about the trains.

I like "model railfanning" or just watching trains, some of the time, so my layout plan allows continous running - as I feel most layouts should since our runs are so short.

I like well detailed models and scenes, but find a correct sense of proportion is more important than the level of detail. So if a detail has to be oversized, it might be better left off.

Anyway, thats just a few of my thoughts on model trains - publicly displayed or other wise.

Still having lots of fun - but then everybodies idea of fun is different!

Sheldon

[Beatle (TrainBrain)]

IS IT WORTH IT!?!?

I've been there...you WON'T forget it!

[sour rails]

     I've never been there, but by looking at the pictures I don't see the unrealistic nature that some of you have said.  The nature of John Allen's modeling was more like a painter trying to give the allusion of depth to a flat surface.   This resulted in unreal scenery.  Northlandz seems to be totaly different.  Everything I've seen of it, without actualy going there, seems to be realistic.  But we seem to see a different type of too much modeling.  The most noticeable are the bridges.  Sure they are realistic by design, but too long by prototypical guidlines.  That's just one that I see very clearly.  But the modeling is quite different than John Allen's G&D.

From the pictures I've seen of it, I'd say, " Yes, it is worth it."  If you only visit once, think of it as buying a freight car that you don't get to keep.

[kevin2083]

I see too much vertical scenery, and not enough horizontal.

[Terry Toenges]

Kevin - Turn your head sideways
Just kidding.
The way it's built, there's no room to really step back far enough to get good "horizontal" pics.

[Guilford Guy]

G&D was a pioneer of Railraoding, the scenery was actually pretty magnificent. I don't mean to start an argument, I believe many of excellently detailed and scenicked layouts but... Could you please post pictures of your own layout before talking about whats wrong with other peoples...

[Atlantic Central]

Guilford Guy,

I acknowledged that John Allen was a great modeler, but there are different "styles" to how scenery is done. Some are more realistic, while some are more artistic.

I'm not saying one is right or wrong, but I am saying I have a personal preference.

My current layout is still under construction - and I don't have a photo hosting site to post any pictures, and I don't have/will not make time to do so. This is the only forum I follow and I don't have time/interest in any more "WEB" posting than what I do here.

But if you really want to see a layout I was envolved in, get some back issues of Model Railroader and look up the multiple articles on the Severna Park Model Railroad Club. I am no longer a member there, but I was a very active member years ago the first few times they appeared in MR and several scenery/structure projects of mine are still on that layout some 25-30 years later.

And, Roger, who expressed similar views to mine about "artistic" scenery has a web site, has published articles in magazines, and has great scenery on his layout (Roger, hope you don't mind me blowing your horn for you).

Has any layout you have had a hand in been in a magazine?

Sheldon