Show us your layout

[Skarloey Railway]

Skar-

Well, I don't know. I think the rabbit warren layouts have a certain appeal, kind of a tour-de-force of track work. I think a branch mining or logging run like this could be a lot of fun on a larger layout, introducing some meticulous animation while displaying the builder's equally meticulous commitment to quality construction standards. Such a thing would also capture the ad lib quality of many back woods and mountain short lines. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
                                    -- D

I can only give a UK perspective and here they were looked down on and made it hard for any modeller of narrow gauge to be taken seriously by the wider community of railway modellers.

I have a feeling that in the UK there has been a greater focus on emulating the prototype, particularly in how the model looks, both in modelling a specific prototype or in creating a 'might-have-been' layout,  than there is in the US. Three possible reasons for this might be:
The content of model railway magazines in the UK has leant heavily towards the prototype.
The popularity of local model railway clubs means that joining in with (and therefore becoming influenced by) an established group of modellers leads to a collective standard of 'good modelling' to which most then aspire to.
The number of local model railway exhibitions means that anyone interested in model railways has a reasonably easy way of seeing a variety of layouts, scales, prototypes and so on, in the flesh.

Having observed US and UK model railways/railroads for a number of years now, they, and their creators, are, in my opinion, surprisingly different in aim and execution.

[GG1onFordsDTandI]

 

[rogertra]

I agree with Skar.

UK magazines concentrate on prototype modelling even if the station is a "what if".

If you are modelling say British Railways, Southern Region, like I did until recently, then the architectural style of the station buildings, signalboxs, signals, fencing, lettering, colours and even the track layout are expected to follow Southern practice.  And of course, let's not forget locomotives and the Southern rolling stock as well.  Freight cars are all expected to be models of the real thing and not some generic "Athearn" type freight cars painted in various liveries.

Of course that's just the models that appear in the model press.

Freelance modelling, like mine, where the whole railway is made up, is almost unknown in the UK, except perhaps for the narrow gauge crowd.

Not saying one is better than the other, just showing how UK modellers differ from North American modellers.

[Skarloey Railway]

I agree with Skar.

UK magazines concentrate on prototype modelling even if the station is a "what if".

If you are modelling say British Railways, Southern Region, like I did until recently, then the architectural style of the station buildings, signalboxs, signals, fencing, lettering, colours and even the track layout are expected to follow Southern practice.  And of course, let's not forget locomotives and the Southern rolling stock as well.  Freight cars are all expected to be models of the real thing and not some generic "Athearn" type freight cars painted in various liveries.

Of course that's just the models that appear in the model press.

Freelance modelling, like mine, where the whole railway is made up, is almost unknown in the UK, except perhaps for the narrow gauge crowd.

Not saying one is better than the other, just showing how UK modellers differ from North American modellers.

phew   thought I was on my own there. It would be nice to have a discussion of differences without any side feeling they are under attack.

Yes, free-lancing of 'mainline' railroads is very rare in the UK. What tends to happen is people either follow a prototype location or they imagineer a might have been location operated by a real railway company, the archetypal Great Western Railway branch terminus being the classic example. Conversely, modelling in narrow-gauge, industrial, and what we call 'light' railways (standard gauge but in other respects similar to quirky narrow-gauge lines and maybe similar to US short-lines) tends to see as many, if not more, wholly freelance modelling as prototype modelling.  

At a guess the lack of freelance work in mainline railways is because few modellers work pre 1923 when most of the independent companies were amalgamated into the big four and post 1923 the very names of the companies, Southern Railway, Great Western Railway, London Midland and Scottish, and London and North-Eastern Railway, pretty much boxed the compass and didn't leave any actual geography in which to place a freelanced railway, though a rare few have tried. Post 1948, of course, we only had one railway, British Railways, and again there was no place left over in which the imagination could create anything plausible.
In narrow-gauge, industrial and 'light' railways there are dozens of prototypes the modeller can draw on and it's relatively easy to freelance and still be plausible.

Another reason UK modelling is different is each of our railway companies going right back into the nineteenth century tended to build or design their own locomotives, often with a distinctive style. Freelancing then becomes tricky because your line also needs its distinctive style and the degree of scratch-building involved is more than most modellers want. In the US, builders like Baldwin, Lima, Mason and the predecessors of Alco provided locos for mainline RRs so it's easier to freelance as you just need a few standard designs with the name of your RR on the tender and it looks perfectly plausible. Case in point being Bachmann's and other US manufacturers habit of releasing a loco in a variety of road names. I cannot stress enough that if Bachmann UK or Hornby did that (other than for a model intended for children, such as Hogwarts castle), they would be derided. In the UK a model loco intended for serious modellers will likely be released in some of the different liveries it carried during its life but never in a freelance livery or that of another company.

The downside to the above is, if exhibitions are anything to go by, British railway modelling can be very nicely done and 'true to life' but also rather dull and originality and imagination tends to be at a premium.  

[jward]

while that standardization of locomotive designs may have been true with diesels, it was most certainly not true with steam. railroads tended to write specs for, and purchase locomotives for, specific conditions on their line. a locomotive from pennsy did not look like a locomotive from reading, or union pacific. and steamers on any particular road tended to have a family look.

with diesels, the situation was different. emd in particular designed an all purpose locomotive, the ft, and sent it all over the country on a demonstration tour, where it performed beyond anybody's wildest expectations. numerous lines were so impressed that they ordered as many as they could get, with production limited by world war 2. once the war was over, they flocked to emd for the upgraded successor models, the f3 and f7. due to the backlog of orders at emd, many were forced to purchase similar locomotives from other suppliers. as soon as the backlog of orders dried up, so did the diesel business of Baldwin and Fairbanks morse.

to show how far the standardization went in emd products, consider the line as of the late 1940s. the models offered were the sw1, sw7, gp7, f7 and e7. the sw1 was he oddball of the bunch, using a 6 cylinder version of the 567 engine. the 12 cylinder version of this engine powered the sw7, and two of them powered the e7/e8. that's right: you could transplant the engine out of a passenger locomotive capable of over 100mph into a yard unit  with a 40mph top speed. the gp7 and f7 shared the 16 cylinder version of this engine. many parts were standard and could be used in any size 567 block.  contrast that to steam, where many railroads had foundries and blacksmith shops to fabricate replacement parts.

this standardization is why you can take an American diesel and paint it for a dozen or more roads and still be reasonably accurate. or freelance your own line and be sure a standard off the shelf diesel looks right. minor differences could be ordered as options if desired. they included dynamic brakes for mountain roads, a steam boiler for passenger service, or a variety of headlight options.

pulling to give an idea of how these options worked, many railroads ordered at least some of their gp7s and gp9s with boilers for passenger service. these were commonly seen pulling commuter trains during the week, and freights on the weekends. the new haven even had a fleet of diesels, the dl109s, built to run passenger trains during the day and freights at night. those same gp7s and gp9s could work the low speed yard jobs as well.

[rogertra]

Jeff.

You comments below are, for intents and purposes, correct for the USA but not for Canada.

Canadian diesels were different from US diesels in subtle ways.  You cannot really paint an American GP9, for example,  in Canadian National colours and call it correct as it isn't.  Canadian diesels have headlights in different locations, bells in different locations, usually up on the hood whereas in the US it's under the running board and Canadian units have one more step on the step boards than American units do.  There are differences in car body vents and filters and the number of each, winerization hatches, exhaust mufflers and several other detail variations just to name a few.  Oh, and CN GP9s ran long hood forward. 

[Desertdweller]

I find it rather disturbing that model railroaders in the UK are influenced so much by peer pressure, to the extent of a whole variety of model railroads being disapproved of by other modelers.

That is too bad, because model railroading is a non-competitive hobby, intended for the enjoyment of the owner/builder.  My first N-scale railroad was built in a desk drawer.  It featured a twice-around folded loop, a forked siding in the center with a mine, and a siding outside the loop in front that acted as an interchange track.
Rolling stock was limited to 40' cars and short four-axle or even three axle locomotives.

I don't suppose that would have gone over well in the UK.

My present railroad models a real place, selectively compressed.  I like it when other people like my railroad, but it really doesn't much matter to me.  It is my railroad in my own house, built by myself with my own money.
It can be nit-picked by critics, but I figure, if they don't like my railroad they can build their own.  Actually, I've found few critics who actually have their own model railroads.

Les

[Skarloey Railway]

@Jward
Apologies. I knew the Penn RR had distinctive loco designs (those Belpaire fireboxes) but didn't appreciate other standard gauge roads did as well. Thanks for the correction. My comment was based on US 3' narrow-gauge where many lines in the 1870s and 1880s were equipped with 'off-the-shelf' Baldwin Americans, Moguls and Consolidations - hence why I'm so keen on Bachmann doing an early 3' gauge 4-4-0 in ON30! In the UK, for comparison, between 1863 and 1914 just about every narrow-gauge common carrier went to a different loco builder and got a one-off design, which is rather frustrating for the modeller wanting to equip his own railway.

I note that on Bachmann's current HO product list the Richmond 4-4-0 is only named for the Ma & Pa, presumably the only road it ran on, while the Baldwin 2-8-0 is named for a number of roads, including the Durango & Silverton which I'm pretty sure it couldn't run on even if it tried!

[jonathan]

I am not normally one who gets into the mix when things go awry...

However, the intention of this thread was to share photos and diagrams of members' layouts and/or plans for layouts.

How did this become an endless yack fest? We seem to have gone off the rails somehow.

More photos, less words, please. 

Regards,

Jonathan

[Jerrys HO]

GG1

Now hers to hoping page 25 of this fine thread can return to its original topic, showing layouts of all forms of trains.
Maybe a new thread devoted to scale vs toys is needed for all to have their further say in?

Jonathan

am not normally one who gets into the mix when things go awry...

However, the intention of this thread was to share photos and diagrams of members' layouts and/or plans for layouts.

How did this become an endless yack fest? We seem to have gone off the rails somehow.

More photos, less words, please.

Yes lets continue to enjoy what this thread was for. For those who wish to get off the topic please start another thread. Would really hate to see this thread get locked.


Jerry

[Skarloey Railway]

GG1

Now hers to hoping page 25 of this fine thread can return to its original topic, showing layouts of all forms of trains.
Maybe a new thread devoted to scale vs toys is needed for all to have their further say in?

Jonathan

am not normally one who gets into the mix when things go awry...

However, the intention of this thread was to share photos and diagrams of members' layouts and/or plans for layouts.

How did this become an endless yack fest? We seem to have gone off the rails somehow.

More photos, less words, please.

Yes lets continue to enjoy what this thread was for. For those who wish to get off the topic please start another thread. Would really hate to see this thread get locked.


Jerry

Nothing has been said to make this thread go awry and nothing has been said that would be cause to get the thread locked.

[Bucksco]

The IHC covered hopper thread and this one have made my trigger finger rather itchy......

[Skarloey Railway]

The IHC covered hopper thread and this one have made my trigger finger rather itchy......

Genuinely, I would like to know why you feel that way.

There does seem to be a different approach between US and UK model rail enthusiasts and given that Bachmann supplies both countries it seems a worthwhile discussion. I accept it probably needs its own thread but your comment suggests any such discussion would not be welcome.

[Bucksco]

I will quote Jonathan:

"the intention of this thread was to share photos and diagrams of members' layouts and/or plans for layouts.

How did this become an endless yack fest? We seem to have gone off the rails somehow.

More photos, less words, please."

[Skarloey Railway]

Fine, GG1onFordsDTandI has started a new thread on the subject.
http://www.bachmanntrains.com/home-usa/board/index.php/topic,24350.0.html