Login
or
Register
Home
»
Garden Railways
»
Forums
»
Garden Railroading
»
Agricultural vs Industrial: A new controversy?
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: <i>Originally posted by SandyR</i> <br />There's a third way to look at it: a railfan's railroad, where you just sit and watch the train(s) go by. That's my approach. <br />SandyR <br />[/quote] <br /> <br />I agree. I'm just having one big loop. I don't care where those loads came from, or where they're going either. They're just on a train going past. I might build a coal mine loading tower (called 'bins'here), but only cause I want the challenge of doing it, not because I need it to make my railway historically or economically complete. <br /> <br />There are billions of miles of railway in the world that don't have stations or sidings. It's just main line going from one place to another, passing through scenery on the way. That's what I like to model and the best thing is you can run any type train on it and it looks OK. <br /> <br />On the subject of building made from pottery raised by Capt Carrales, there's a good example in Australia ( see photo 2) http://www.users.bigpond.com/huntergpmj/gregs/BuildingsGall.htm <br />Some one here in NZ was making people from them and they looked OK too. <br /> <br />Glen Anthony.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Search the Community
FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTER
Get the
Garden Railways
newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month
Sign up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from
Garden Railways
magazine. Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy