I model the 1950s because thats when the equipment I like was running.
Jim
Modeling the Baltimore waterfront in HO scale
That's a great question! I am even younger than you, yet I am trying to develop my layout to look like the early 1950s. For me, I was always enamored with Lionel artwork. Even through the 1960s, Lionel's catalogs maintained that Norman Rockwell feel. I think we all set up our layouts based on our each individual visualization. This visualization was probably most heavily influenced when we each first got involved with a model train.
Regards,
John O
jaabat wrote: I model the 1950s because thats when the equipment I like was running. Jim
Same here - I like to run steam and early model diesels with a mix of heavyweight and streamlined passenger cars so modelling the 50's (in may case, Autumn of 1956) is a logical choice. I'm sure that "boomer nostalgia" also drives a lot of this. I wonder if the scale railroaders who work in HO and N feel the same?
That being said, there's an awful lot of up to date engines and rolling stock on the market these days including Amtrak Viewliners and the like. The older engines do have an appeal that is missing on the newer stuff, though. I was looking at a model of a GE Amtrak Genesis engine the other day and the only difference between the engine and the box it came in was the fact that the engine had wheels...
There was an article in one of the magazines a while back where a modeler liked to model two eras, modern and 1940s-50s. He "changed his layout era" simply by replacing the vehicles on the layout.
Wouldn't it be cool to modern three eras all on the same layout...old, very old, and modern? Then your trains would become time travelers as they traversed the layout.
Jim H
I really struggle with this, because I truly like it all!!! I've been on a 19th Century kick for the last two years, BUT... lately I'm pursuing more of a 70's theme. WHY? I grew up in the 70's/80's and the SOO cut through my dad's farm in central MN. I'm also very fond of Trolley's and have bought a couple to run.
Even though I enjoy the transition period that so many model, and there are certainly AWESOME layouts depicting the 50's... I must admit that I get really tired of it. The layouts I'm drawn to these days are anything BUT the 50's themed layouts. Please don't take offense, just my opinion.
It seems to me to boil down to Nostalgia. What memory bring's you to that place where there is a certain level of comfort or joy. As much as I've avoided modeling my childhood "Era" so far, I'm undeniably drawn to it simply because of Nostalgia. I turn 35 today, and I'm certainly drawn to modeling the memories of my youth more than ever.
I think tapping into one's Nostalgia (whatever the era) adds noticable quality to the execution of the layout, and to the joy of the builder.
Greg
Happy Birthday, Greg
I know what you mean about nostalgia - and it's not necessarily for a nostalgia for something you or I have experienced ourselves - but it's more a sense of space and place. That's probably why I really like listening to old time radio shows it portrays a time way before I was born. My current layout was inspired by a booklet on the Woodstock and Sycamore traction company which ran a McKeen car at the turn of the last century in way-rural northeastern Illinois. It really represents a place where trolleys rule. There's a few Indian motorcycles on the layout but not one car.... Realistic? Nah. But it's what I like to look at...
Doug Murphy 'We few, we happy few, we band of brothers...' Henry V.
btw- from what I've seen Plasticville selling for at trainshows, I'd say folks are paying top dollar to get that 50's-60's "garden" look. I've notice our fellow posters using the same approach, but substituting DEPT 56 and other porcelain structures on the same streetscape. To each his own. I think we get stuck in that oval mode due to what comes in a starter set as far as track. I have certainly assembled my share of layouts in this configuration. Maybe the desire to get the trains up & runnin' first each year superceeded the need to develop a new real estate plan.
colts 13 RAVENS 17
fifedog wrote: colts 13 RAVENS 17
Do you know what COLTS stands for:Count On Losing This Saturday
GO RAVENS!!
jakeoregano wrote: fifedog wrote: colts 13 RAVENS 17Do you know what COLTS stands for:Count On Losing This SaturdayGO RAVENS!!
Jake, Fifedog I hate to be the bearer of bad news but as an eyewitness to the debacle it is my sad duty to inform you that the Ravens would have lost to a team of blind old ladies in wheelchairs. I should have sold my tickets like my wife wanted to.
btw - quit teasing.
jakeo - please pass me another tissue.
I don't know about phychobabble, but most of the towns around here were well established by the mid 1900's, so trying to model them as they are today wouldn't look too different than 50 years ago.
The downtowns are the same, though some buildings house different businesses now, and there may be more modern signs and street lighting. The local bank may have been merged into a megabank, and if it hasn't, it still likely has an ATM in the parking lot, but it's still the same building. It likely has a wheelchair ramp as well. Other public buildings (businesses, gov't buildings, including schools, and churches) may have added on or subdivided their original buildings, but they are still pretty much the same structures.
There are more traffic lights, as there are more cars trying to use nearly the same number of roads as there were in the '50's. Occasionally, a road might be upgraded to include a left turn lane, or a right turn blister, but the roads are basicly the same too.
One big difference here from the 50's to today is the shrinking of farmland and woods (or prairies). These areas are being replaced by residential areas with roadways that are very much not the 50's. I have not seen many layouts that have very much real estate dedicated to housing, as trains typically don't stop at houses, and don't often pass by them. This is probably why this type of modern scenery is omitted from layouts.
Another thing around here that wasn't around back then is the big box stores (the walmarts, best buys, targets, etc.) I'd say there often omitted because again, they rarely are located near a right of way.
Perhaps the people that are trying to make their layouts as realistic as possible are also running steam powered trains, which would put their layouts in a '50s timeframe, at the latest.
Of course, I try to make my layout look like a kinder, simpler time. So all I stated above could just as likely be a load of manure.
Just a few long winded thoughts,
J White
fifedog wrote:jwse30 - partner, I think you are on to something big! I don't think I've ever seen a layout with a Walmart, Target, Home Depot, Lowes, or any other modern big chain store. First we can put out a line of demolition crews and equipment, enough to knock out a whole block of Plasticville. Then we produce a line of big chain merchants, available in ready-built and kit form. We can revolutionalize the hobby, and retire mill---no billionaires! Let me know...
Nah, we wouldn't get rich. We would make one store on one layout, and then the rest would sprawl in and overtake that layout. From there, they would expand onto other people's layouts, and pretty soon there would be no more Plasticville, just layouts covered in big boxes that don't have railroad spurs. Eventually the layouts would have to cease rail operations, as the businesses the railroad used to serve have been bought out to make room for even more big boxes.
Nah, I think we'd be as likely to get lynched as rich... I'll pass.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month