Brakie,I understand that you don't see details and that you just see numbers when operating, but can you understand that other people do see the details when operating?
You know I'm an operations guy, too. I get my kicks from runaround moves and kicking cars as much as the next ops guy. I used hundreds of low-quality cars because I was focused on quantity, not quality. But, if I had resources, I would have used nothing but the best stuff because I like to be transported away to the era I'm modeling (in my head)...and the quickest way to knock me out of that mind-state is clunky details, poor paint, foobie paint jobs, and so on. Oh, I still enjoyed switching my low-quality cars around...but it felt better with a greater sense of satisfaction with the "good stuff".
It's like the difference in rail height. Code 100 to Code 70 is only 30 thou. That's about 4 sheets of paper. One wouldn't think it would make much difference but big rails make our trains look smaller. Any model looks better on Code 70 track vs. Code 100 just because the proportions look better and our trains appear be more massive. Still, it's just 30 thousandths of an inch but it makes a big difference.
riogrande5761,Thanks! The point of this hobby is to replicate the real thing. Being more accurate should be encouraged and celebrated. Those who accomplish this higher level should also recognize that not everyone can meet these higher personal standards, either through lack of desire, talent, time, or resources. Be humble. Likewise, those that can't elevate their modeling shouldn't be so defensive, nor try to justify their poor quality modeling by saying it's just as good and there's no need to get any better. Be humble, too. Accept constructive criticism for what it is: trying to help you elevate your modeling it's not a personal attack.
WRT Facebook, it can be managed to do what you want. Most of the complaints I've heard about FB come from people unaware that they can delete content they don't like from their newsfeed. They can block individual people, too. Just don't share too much on FB. Figure that everything you say on FB, even commenting on a newstory on another website that uses FB for their comments section will show up on all your friend's newsfeeds or even friends of friends. Most people who get in trouble on FB are the ones that don't know how it works.
I agree on the usual cycle of topics coming up again and again. It's rather amusing to see it all unfold the exact same way it did last month/year/decade.
BigDaddy,WRT FB hiding posts, I always browse FB with the "Most Recent" mode engaged. Log in, and look in the upper left side of the page. Right under your name are the words "News Feed" and three horizontal dots. Click on the three dots and a little pop up appears with "Top Stories" and "Most Recent". Click on "Most Recent". It will order your newsfeed chronologically for as long as you're signed in. Whenever you log in, check that option and make sure it's "Most Recent". That should solve your problem of seeing different posts in different orders every time you visit or refresh a page.
I am on this forum the most. There is one other I check regularly and a couple of specialty yahoo groups.
This forum has all types which I thnk is good. I suppose I'm not as serious about this hobby as many are, so the "what's your favorite locomotive" type topics don't bother me. I read and respond to those as the mood strikes me.
I'm in the hobby primarily to run trains. I enjoy the model building, but it is secondary. I use everything - RTR, shake the box kits, craftsman kits, scratch built - to get the layout built. So this forum is the best fit for me.
Paul
Paul3but can you understand that other people do see the details when operating?
Paul,Yes,I understand that to a point but,if they are using a switch list or CC/WB their eyes should be focus on their work and seeing most layouts are built below eye level even when seated its getting harder to see those details.
About Code 70. Instead of C83 and C100 being the selected sizes C70 should have been the defacto standard track size.
IMHO we prattled on and on and on about wanting higher detailed cars and locomotives while plum forgetting track is a model too.
Should we start looking at a higher tier track standards for our detailed cars and locomotives?
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
BRAKIE Paul3 but can you understand that other people do see the details when operating? Paul,Yes,I understand that to a point but,if they are using a switch list or CC/WB their eyes should be focus on their work and seeing most layouts are built below eye level even when seated its getting harder to see those details. About Code 70. Instead of C83 and C100 being the selected sizes C70 should have been the defacto standard track size. IMHO we prattled on and on and on about wanting higher detailed cars and locomotives while plum forgetting track is a model too. Should we start looking at a higher tier track standards for our detailed cars and locomotives?
Paul3 but can you understand that other people do see the details when operating?
Ken G Price My N-Scale Layout
Digitrax Super Empire Builder Radio System. South Valley Texas Railroad. SVTRR
N-Scale out west. 1996-1998 or so! UP, SP, Missouri Pacific, C&NW.
LakeBRAKIE. You are doing it correctly, I am doing it correctly and so are others. Our correct may not be theirs, and theirs may not be our own. What I don't get is the, 'If your standards are not as high as mine, you are doing it wrong, attitude'. Not just different, but totally wrong.
Ken,I hear that a lot and yet,I never once said my way was the only way..
I suspect I focus on my switching because that's how I did my job as a brakeman and I suspect subconsciously I'm obeying a lot of safety and operation rules that was pounded,tattooed and branded in my head years ago. This is why I can place my higher detail cars in among my BB and Roundhouse cars and not even notice the difference in detail simply because I'm focusing on the numbers and the task at hand.
And a lot of folks doesn't understand that.
BRAKIE riogrande5761 All too often. I've bumped into a few non-rivit counters who have been quite rude. There is a forum I don't visit much because of one hobbyist, who is dominant presence there, has a history of aggressiveness toward those who are not of his philosophy or way of thinking. Jim,Here's the rub..As they say in Western novels "Somebody has to open the dance" and usually its an uncalled for comment from either side.
riogrande5761 All too often. I've bumped into a few non-rivit counters who have been quite rude. There is a forum I don't visit much because of one hobbyist, who is dominant presence there, has a history of aggressiveness toward those who are not of his philosophy or way of thinking.
Jim,Here's the rub..As they say in Western novels "Somebody has to open the dance" and usually its an uncalled for comment from either side.
Larry, the rub is, what qualifies as an "uncalled for comment"? Paul's point is that some people are overly sensitive and get rude when "rivit counters are in the room. IMO, it's the rudeness that "opens the dance" quite clearly and quite unnecessarily.
Certain individuals have taken offense, (I agree with Paul here) when some folks get into that realism thing. More often than not, it isn't aimed at an individual or model, yet people still place themselves at odds if they are in a certain catgory and then lash out.
Now if certain terms or words come across as offensive like bogus or fantasy, even in a general context and not when talking about someones pet model, please find me a "euphamism" for a model which doesn't match a real box car which gets the point across without making people feel personally attacked? And I don't think being rude is called for when someone discusses models matching the real thing or not. It is what it is.
I said it before and I'll said again and need be again and again.. I could fill a yard with my BB Roundhouse and my higher detail cars and I won't be able to tell them apart because I'm to focus on switching,reading car numbers and operating my engine and that alone is no small task because of the CV settings. In short you turn off the power and the engine will slow before it stops. You gotta focus there to or risk having the engine to take a nose dive off the end of the layout. Now if I'm just gawking at my cars,yes,I can tell them apart easily.
Now if I'm just gawking at my cars,yes,I can tell them apart easily.
That is totally fine of course. I get it that if a model looks like a box car, even in a generic way, it's fulfilling a purpose to some modelers. I just don't get why some feel offended when that topic is discussed, or should I say, digust! Just kidding. Anyway, realsim is absolutley part of the hobby and I think there is room for folks who care about it and for those who don't to coexist.
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
GregC said: "if I look at the MR General Discussion and modeltrainsforum General Model Train Discussion pages, i see 16 posts updated in the last 24 hours on MR but only 3 on MRF. The general discussions, Model Railroad Hobbyist page has only 3. So it looks like the MR page is much more active than both."
I'm not quite sure what Greg is getting at. He mentions MR and MRH in one line, and then goes on to talk about "modeltrainsforum" which probably means MOdeltrainforum.com and then cites update numbers for each.
But each of these forums is structured differently, and if you look at "most recent posts" for each you get a different slice of their material.
I look at MR, MRH, Trainorders.com's model forum, and the Atlas Rescue Forum most days and they all have turnover in topics. Some are more active in others and some have busy "coffee club" areas that may be fun but don't answer a lot of modeling questions.
Forums I like are those where I can ask or answer a question and get involved in an interesting discussion with like-minded people. And I'm not talking about "the hobby is dying" or "how much do you have in boxes in the basement."
I don't think any of the more popular forums predominate in generalized modeling utility. For people without much time, root around and pick one you like. For people with time on their hands, there is far too much for anyone to absorb.
Paul3 I thought that was going to be a stellar tip, but that box was already checked. I do not see what I saw 30 minutes ago. Correct that: 2 min ago, it constantly changes. There is some sort of algorithm going on.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
riogrande5761Larry, the rub is, what qualifies as an "uncalled for comment"? Paul's point is that some people are overly sensitive and get rude when "rivet counters are in the room. IMO, it's the rudeness that "opens the dance" quite clearly and quite unnecessarily.
Jim,On forums the dance can be open by things like: "I get it that if a model looks like a box car, even in a generic way, it's fulfilling a purpose to some modelers." A lot will see that as a elitist view and take offense.
I freely admit my modeling style and comments gets a lot of "higher tier" modelers DVD's twisted out of shape..I always like to show the other side of the coin which many believe is dead wrong simply because it goes against their modeling style.
Like I mention before I'm seriouly thinking about selling the bulk of my HO except the higher detailed cars and locomotives.
Why is that?
You may recall back in 2005 I had a massive heart attack and made a round trip to death's door. I figure that will save my olderest Grandson from having to get rid of the BB,Roundhouse and Accurail cars and any locomotive that doesn't fit his standards-he prefers the higher tier models.
One dealer has already offered me a very nice lot price. That will leave me with my 94/95 era cars and locomotives which is my higher tier models.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Crandell, ... First it assumes that one has that kind of time, and/or suitibly nimble computer skills..........
Crandell,
...
First it assumes that one has that kind of time, and/or suitibly nimble computer skills..........
Thanks for your thoughtful reply, Sheldon. Here, I am not suggesting that one should, or must, go to a range of forums. I was saying that this is my experience, and I'm comparatively new to the hobby. I am also not saying each forum should afford its members a full and comprehensive range of experience, skills, and know-how. As many commenting here seem to say, they don't...as a rule. While a few really competent and accomplished modellers do post here occasionally, and definitely lurk, MR seems to attract the newcomers who tend to ask questions that the more accomplished modellers have grown tired of fielding.
My response was framed in the question of frequency of participation, or posting. This forum is about as busy as the busiest in my experience going to at least six or seven other forums over the years. The less busy ones are the ones where the old-timers and truly accomplished modellers frequent...such as railroad line. But the Atlas Rescue, Model Railroad Hobbyist, Big Blue, and modeltrainforums, and modelrailroadforums (two different places), compare quite favourably. Their cultures are different, and the set of skills and experience are somewhat different.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Second it assumes that one desires that much interaction with other people........ (here is were I'm going sound a bit snooty) I have been on this forum for nearly a decade, and honestly, it has not dramaticly increased my knowledge base regarding this hobby. OK, I came from 35 years of prior experiance, worked in the business, had mentors who are greats in this hobby - I get that. And, by the way, I have been very happy to share my knowledge - even if it is sometimes outside the mainstream and not always warmly received.
Second it assumes that one desires that much interaction with other people........
(here is were I'm going sound a bit snooty) I have been on this forum for nearly a decade, and honestly, it has not dramaticly increased my knowledge base regarding this hobby. OK, I came from 35 years of prior experiance, worked in the business, had mentors who are greats in this hobby - I get that.
And, by the way, I have been very happy to share my knowledge - even if it is sometimes outside the mainstream and not always warmly received.
My observation didn't pertain to you per se....it was a generalization about what a person might expect, and not the exceptions such as yourself. In the same way, a person who only knows this forum would go to railroad line and find a different experience...a substantially different experience. He would still find the newcomer, such as I was, but the weight of the modelling would be quite imposing.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL And I have made some great internet friends on here, no question. But honestly, if I never clicked on this site again, I don't see the quality of my modeling deminished in the slightest.
And I have made some great internet friends on here, no question.
But honestly, if I never clicked on this site again, I don't see the quality of my modeling deminished in the slightest.
I wouldn't expect that to be the case at all. As you say, you came here with two decades or more of modelling under your belt, so you could have run tutorials from the get-go. Perhaps I am not seeing your point just above...
ATLANTIC CENTRAL In fact, I cut back on this forum, and cut out the other two so that I would have more time for actually building the layout and models.......
In fact, I cut back on this forum, and cut out the other two so that I would have more time for actually building the layout and models.......
Which is what I would expect of someone who was not here looking for information but much more often providing it. And this forum is one of the places very accommodating to both sides of that prospective exchange if the good will exists in its members, new and old.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL And all those people I mentioned above who I know in this hobby who do not spend any time on any forum - I know for a fact that is how they feel - they would rather be actually building/running trains...... Again, please don't be offended, you did not offend me, I understand that many people thrive on the social side of this hobby or any hobby. But for me, the social side is just that, one small side...... And right now, the bit that I am on here, is my total social side. Work, family, and actually building model trains are way more important....... Sheldon
And all those people I mentioned above who I know in this hobby who do not spend any time on any forum - I know for a fact that is how they feel - they would rather be actually building/running trains......
Again, please don't be offended, you did not offend me, I understand that many people thrive on the social side of this hobby or any hobby.
But for me, the social side is just that, one small side......
And right now, the bit that I am on here, is my total social side. Work, family, and actually building model trains are way more important.......
Sheldon
I see, and I agree. I think some come here first to get a problem solved, but soon stay because of our forum's convivial nature. I almost never see newbies at railroad line. I can go back to it once a month and find the same posts, maybe now one line down on the front page for each sub-forum such as "middle scale" which includes HO over there. Here, at MR, I have seen several people who rarely comment pipe up when we have a thread of this nature and say it's the one thing that vexes them the most...posts that hold little or no interest by way of their topics, but their own thread gets shoved quickly down the page and eventually slips off the back because so few of our members can offer something constructive or instructive to the asker.
I'll close by saying I feel it is a very good thing we can discuss, and attempt to tweak (even if being self-serving when we do it) the culture here. Most of us would like to keep calling it a home, and all homes need a new coat of paint on the doors, or windows replaced, a new roof every 18-20+ years depending, and so on. A place can get run down if it isn't kept up. Even if we rehash this topic every few months, I don't see it as a bad thing. And, we do it civilly...thank goodness. It wasn't always the case here.
-Crandell
Jim,
I have stayed out of this so far, but here are few thoughts:
Terms like "bogus" and "foobie" unquestionably have a negative connotation, as if the owner/purchaser/viewer has been "fooled" or "duped" or "tricked".
Why can't we just call them what they are "generic"?
As I have said before, I can likely count rivets with the best of them on many subjects, I can identify the automobiles made by Checker Motors nearly to year by their visable features - you know those cabs/cars that never changed body style from 1958 to 1983........
And on many railroad topics I'm equally as knowledgeable. But I see no need to point out such things on other peoples modeling - unless the owner would happen to ask.
I agree with you and Paul, too many on both sides on this forum are too sensitive about this topic.
And then there are those like me...in the middle. I like correct well detailed models, but as I have said before, I'm not replacing a lifetime collection even if more correct models did exist, a great many of which don't, and I am not "doing without" key players in my operational or visual scheme just because no "perfect" model exists for that item.
And because I am a "big picture" kind of modeler, I accept, and in some cases even want "selectively compressed" or even "generic" rolling stock because sometimes they actually fit the "theme" better.
Now for my favorite gripe on this topic - the use of the word "quality". To me quality implies a lot more than just prototype accuracy. It also implies good trucks and couplers (even though I change them a lot), parts that fit, clean, well done paint/lettering, good execution of detail (even if the detail is not completely accurate or is molded on).
So using the word "quality" to seperate a Spring Mills B&O caboose from an Athearn Blue Box piggy back flat, does not work for me.
The Athearn Blue Box piggy back flat is very well made from every standpoint except high level of accuracy.........it is very high quality for its price point........and while not overly "accurate" for any one prototype, it is highly representive of a vast number of prototypes. Prototypes that by the way were largely home shop retrofits, with as many variations as there are photos of them - impossible for any manufacturer to even begin to cover accurately for more than a small series of car numbers for one or two roadnames........
Despite the high number of highly detailed and accurate models I own, I still own even more BB cars, 1950's Athearn and Varney metal cars, etc. And in the 1954 period I model, most are VERY "representitive"..........
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Jim, I have stayed out of this so far, but here are few thoughts: Terms like "bogus" and "foobie" unquestionably have a negative connotation, as if the owner/purchaser/viewer has been "fooled" or "duped" or "tricked". Why can't we just call them what they are "generic"?
Generic is one euphamism that may work and I'm fine with that. It could be in time, that word may eventually be thought of as unpleasant or negative because it is still assocated with an negative idea for some. Only time will tell.
Now for my favorite gripe on this topic - the use of the word "quality". To me quality implies a lot more than just prototype accuracy. It also implies good trucks and couplers (even though I change them a lot), parts that fit, clean, well done paint/lettering, good execution of detail (even if the detail is not completely accurate or is molded on). So using the word "quality" to seperate a Spring Mills B&O caboose from an Athearn Blue Box piggy back flat, does not work for me. The Athearn Blue Box piggy back flat is very well made from every standpoint except high level of accuracy.........it is very high quality for its price point........and while not overly "accurate" for any one prototype, it is highly representive of a vast number of prototypes. Prototypes that by the way were largely home shop retrofits, with as many variations as there are photos of them - impossible for any manufacturer to even begin to cover accurately for more than a small series of car numbers for one or two roadnames........ Despite the high number of highly detailed and accurate models I own, I still own even more BB cars, 1950's Athearn and Varney metal cars, etc. And in the 1954 period I model, most are VERY "representitive".......... Sheldon
Interesting you brought up the blue box Athearn piggy back flat car. I have owned, fiddled with and ran a number of Athearn blue box 85' flat cars. There are two types I am aware of - the all purpose flush deck flat car, of which to my knowledge there is no 85' prototype (lets call it "generic") and the 85' piggy back flat car, which appears to be a decent copy of the Pullman Standard F85B flat car:
http://canadianfreightcargallery.ca/cgi-bin/image.pl?i=ttx473930&o=ttx
I did have some of the generic flush deck bb flat cars but once Accurail offered their decent 89' flat car, I sold off all my blue box Athearn flush decks. Since then Atlas and Walthers have offered 89' flush decks which I now favor. The Athearn 85' P-S models, however, are decent replica's of a real flat car so those were kept.
Now as to the quality thing with the blue box piggy back flat cars, here is where I don't quite agree and from what I've read, quite a few others might not either. I have never been happy with the funky swing pocket coupler mount and the coupler tends to sag. Add to that the flat car sits pretty high up. To address that for modelers who didnt' care for the height, A-line has offered kits to gut the underframe and replace it with weighted parts to improve the ride height. So quality is, in this case, in the eye of the beholder. As another "quality" beef many have had with most blue box kits are those coupler draft gear metal clips. By todays standards, quality is "not so much". I apologies if I'm treading on hallowed ground here but even Athearn has acknowedge some of these quality misgivings and upgraded, improved their rolling stock in recent years.
Exhibit A: www.athearn.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=ATH93673
The RTR Athearn 85' flat car offers the following two major improvements:
I still do have one blue box oxide brown TTX piggy back flat car. Some years back I did modify that swing coupler box which I disliked and glued the tonge with the draft gear box to the underframe. The couple is close to the height gauge and the car operates well through #6 turnouts and 30" or greater curves. I am still not happy with height of the deck so I may try to hunt down the A-line kit to improve the quality of the car. Since I have confirmed the 85' cars were pretty common during my modeling time, I have found some RTR versions to beef up the fleet painted in TTX brown (see link above) and yellow.
Jim, here is the total disconnect between us, I'm not talking about Athearn 85' or 89' flat cars........they did not exist in my 1954 era.........
I'm talking about the 50' flat car with two 25' vans, the classic original piggyback service on the B&O, SP, NKP, etc.
Too much trouble to post pictures with this tablet, I will post some later,
Jim,I had several of those old BB 85' pig flats several years ago and never had any reason to modify the swing coupler box ..The only issue I had was with the tricky yoke and frame assembly and once I figured that out it worked quite well.
I was not worried about the swing coupler box because I knew it worked even during reverse moves into the club's intermodal yard. First hand observation helps.
I will agree with you on the deck height but, the height was unnoticeable when those flats was ran together.
Larry, whatever some may think, it appears the consensus disagree's - and the upgrades Athearn has made are proof that they felt the old swing coupler system was inferior. The one bb flat I have left works well enough the way I modified it - I don't plan on buying anymore since I prefer the improvements Athearn made.
My solution to the 89' car coupler issue is larger curves.......and true body mounted couplers....
I think with the direction this thread has taken, it should now be part of the "Nitpickin" thread.
Mike.
My You Tube
What we really need is the forum to have dedicated spaces for two divergent groops, one for newbees to post, every one expects begining questions and the people who go there are newbees or want to help newbees and an advanced section, not rivit counters per say but for people who want to show off or ask questions about advanced stuff like the best way to add advanced track detail wether it be turnout details or the grime found around turnouts. The forum I was most involved with was (it is a dead forum, still up but nobody posts) mmforums, it had alot of manufacturers and people like Dave Frary who has written books and articles on scenery for decades and been published countless times in Model Railroader. Like I said, that other forum is all but dead and I drifted over here. In fact I would post more but relying on other companys web services for posting pics has led to a lot of proublems for me and also a loss of valuble info from pics posted to this forum from accounts that have died, the links no longer work and the picture is lost to the newer forum members. It used to be a storage issue but not anymore with the cloud etc.
riogrande5761 Larry, whatever some may think, it appears the consensus disagree's - and the upgrades Athearn has made are proof that they felt the old swing coupler system was inferior. The one bb flat I have left works well enough the way I modified it - I don't plan on buying anymore since I prefer the improvements Athearn made.
Jim,Perhaps I had the "tinkerers skill" to solved the problem. Of course I could have listen to the consensus of the time and toss the kit into the nearest trash can but,seeing how well those cars ran at the club I wasn't about to toss it. I ended up building 17 of those flats (all TTX) and added two trailers to each flat and those trailers could be removed*-I used a "U" shape channel from Evergreen glued on its side as a holder and it worked quite well. The trailer's landing gear slip into the "U". As you know the TTX car came in one number so,I spent several hours renumbering those cars with decals.
*The club had a no lose load rule..I was told that rule was voted in after a load fall off a flat car and caused a derailment that sent a brass steam engine plummeting off a bridge.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL My solution to the 89' car coupler issue is larger curves.......and true body mounted couplers.... Sheldon
Sheldon,We had a guy to do that with Athearn 86' autopart boxcars at one of the clubs I was a member of and those cars ran without issues but our tightest main line curve was 36"..We called it the "Chevy Fast Forwarder" and it ran from North to South staging.
Tinker skills are pretty useful in the hobby. I had my own solution what worked fine regarding the funky tongue and swing mount, but what bothers me the most personally is the deck height. Here is the A-line kit for correct the deck height - the end weights are sold separately as well.
https://ppw-aline.com/collections/stick-on-lead-steel-weights/products/13202-athearn-85-flat-car-w-end-weights-undec
https://ppw-aline.com/collections/stick-on-lead-steel-weights/products/13200-weight-set-1car
I'll probably hunt the latter down to upgrade my bb flat car and have 3 of the upgraded 85' PS TT RTR cars coming in the mail this week to balance out the TOFC fleet a bit.
Basically that is what I did to my blue box flat car, converted it to body mount coupler vs. the quasi talgo mount that they have out-of-the-box.
BTW, here is a comment by Harry Wong regarding the upgrading the Athearn blue box car:
A-Line still makes an excellent weight + lowering kit for the classic Athearn blue box 85' flat. It works very well, and even allows for working cushion draft gear. All you need is the end weight kit, but the centersill kit is good stuff as well.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Jim, here is the total disconnect between us, I'm not talking about Athearn 85' or 89' flat cars........they did not exist in my 1954 era......... I'm talking about the 50' flat car with two 25' vans, the classic original piggyback service on the B&O, SP, NKP, etc. Too much trouble to post pictures with this tablet, I will post some later, Sheldon
ok, never mind! You did say "Athearn Blue Box piggy back flat" to be fair and Athearn does make two 85' piggy back flat cars in the blue box line in addition to the shorter ones. I do know they weren't built until 1960 but I forget everyones modeling era. Giving the length at 50' would have helped.
That reminds me, not long ago Athearn announced a new run of the 50' piggy back flat cars with two trailers - but my guess is you won't be interested in them because AFIAK, they are shall I say "alternate reality" paint jobs - the 25' trailers are painted in schemes you would have seen on mainly 45' trailers in the 1980's. I've seen 40' FRP trailers painted for CR and BN in the late 1970's as well. But man are these alternate reality trailers wierd looking to me!
http://www.athearn.com/Search/Default.aspx?SearchTerm=50%27+Flat&CatID=THRF
riogrande5761 ATLANTIC CENTRAL Jim, here is the total disconnect between us, I'm not talking about Athearn 85' or 89' flat cars........they did not exist in my 1954 era......... I'm talking about the 50' flat car with two 25' vans, the classic original piggyback service on the B&O, SP, NKP, etc. Too much trouble to post pictures with this tablet, I will post some later, Sheldon ok, never mind! You did say "Athearn Blue Box piggy back flat" to be fair and Athearn does make two 85' piggy back flat cars in the blue box line in addition to the shorter ones. I do know they weren't built until 1960 but I forget everyones modeling era. Giving the length at 50' would have helped. That reminds me, not long ago Athearn announced a new run of the 50' piggy back flat cars with two trailers - but my guess is you won't be interested in them because AFIAK, they are shall I say "alternate reality" paint jobs - the 25' trailers are painted in schemes you would have seen on mainly 45' trailers in the 1980's. I've seen 40' FRP trailers painted for CR and BN in the late 1970's as well. But man are these alternate reality trailers wierd looking to me! http://www.athearn.com/Search/Default.aspx?SearchTerm=50%27+Flat&CatID=THRF
Correct, I already have nearly all the previous RTR releases with the period correct paint schemes, as well as the old BB schemes, and lots of repaints, pictures later.
Brakie,Even when I'm focused on the switching move, my eyes are still wide open. I can see that this: http://www.knuckleheadquarters.net/images/TRA-TycoNewHavenBoxCar.jpg doesn't compare so well with this: http://rrmodelcraftsman.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/NERPM-2015-04.jpg Both are plug door NH boxcars, except one is realistic and the other...not so much.
Yes, operationally it makes no difference. I get that. But it's like the difference between operating on a Plywood Pacific-type railroad vs. a fully scenic'd one. Both can be operated the exact same way, but one certainly makes me feel better vs. the other. I can get drawn deeper into the illusion if I'm not distracted by unrealistic elements.
And IMHO, yes, track is a model, too. It's why I stay away from Atlas Code 100 and above-the-plywood switch motors these days. At my club, we do a lot of handlaying, some MicroEngineering flex, and Fast Tracks jigs for switches.
Why would anyone take offense if someone else judges a model to be generic? Especially when it is. How is that considered elitist? Unless it also included a statement like, "I would never, of course, lower myself to use such plebian models. Those are reserved for the lower classes." Now that would be elitist.
Lake,It's not just "...your standards are not as high as mine...", it's also "Your high standards are evil and are destroying the hobby!!!"
riogrande5761,WRT overly sensitive people online, sometimes it gets to the point where you can't wish some people a "Good day," without them replying, "What do you mean by that?"
BigDaddy,Hmm... I dunno. Are you looking at their page or your own newsfeed? Maybe they have set up their page to sort by latest reply instead of chronologically? I generally "follow" a page I like vs. going to that page. That way it appears on my newsfeed.
Crandall,For many years, I've seen people complain that real modeling topics get ignored while silly topics get all the replies. It's because as a discussion forum, debate drives it. Someone has to be pro and someone has to be con. When someone posts an awesome modeling topic of "How I did this...", at most there will be a few posts saying, "Huzzah!" but there's no debate about it because there's no con to be had...just pros. To get a good modeling discussion going, there needs to be at least two conflicting approaches or ideas to it. Otherwise, it will get just a couple replies and quickly sink to the bottom of the page.
Sheldon,WRT terms like "bogus" and "foobie" referring to being fooled or tricked into buying them, some times that's exactly what it is. I remember quite well how disappointed I was when I bought a NH E60F from Walthers as a 15 year old kid only to find out later that not only did the NH not actually have any, the paint scheme was completely fictional and the loco itself was never even on the East Coast, let alone in New Haven territory. At least today, the manufacturers are more willing to note when they do something completely fictional (in the fine print).
"Generic" really doesn't work, either. The new Atlas Trainmaster run of models is accurate, generic, and has a foobie. It's a very accurate model for one version of the TM. The detailing is generic as it's the same across all the paint schemes (they all have steam gen.'s even if the prototype did not). The NH paint job is a foobie; the NH never had any...which Atlas admits in the fine print: "Alternate History paint scheme: F-M produced artwork for the New haven Train Master, but the locomotives were never ordered."
BTW, the Athearn twin van 50' flat is representative of the late 1930's through WWII. In 1944, 53'6" flats started becoming the norm as trailers went from 24 to 26 feet long. By 1954, the trailers were getting to be 32'-35' long, and single trailers on 40' or 50' flats were more the norm. There's a picture in a NH book I own that shows the TOFC facility in New York City in 1954. Of the 35 trailers shown, only one is less than 30' long. The old Varney 40' single TOFC is actually a pretty good model for early 1950's TOFC.
Now that I've said all of the above, and getting back on topic, is the above TOFC paragraph in any way offensive to Sheldon? I hope not. I relayed accurate prototypical information in a polite "just the facts" way. Some, however, would see this as a personal attack on Sheldon and his modeling. Um, no, it wasn't. And maybe Sheldon has different data that conflicts with mine. That's fine, too. Neither is an attack on the other, but some would see it that way.
Paul3Brakie,Even when I'm focused on the switching move, my eyes are still wide open. I can see that this: http://www.knuckleheadquarters.net/images/TRA-TycoNewHavenBoxCar.jpg doesn't compare so well with this: http://rrmodelcraftsman.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/NERPM-2015-04.jpg Both are plug door NH boxcars, except one is realistic and the other...not so much.
Paul,Apples to oranges.We both know when you have cars like the older Roundhouse FMC (now Athearn RTR) they blend in just like BB cars with the higher tier cars especially if you're holding waybills,a throttle your eyes are not on the details. but,running your train-unless you are bent on smashing the cars against the bumper.
I suspect everybodies eye are open when they are switching-I have seen members doze of while running mindless loops during a open house though.
Paul, thanks for the history lesson that I have often given others on this forum about early piggyback.
I have nearly 100 early piggyback flats. 50/53', 40', many with single 32/35' vans, as well as twin 25/26' vans.
I modify the Athearn cars by making the trailers single axle, relocating the landing gear, adding bridge plates, improving the rub rails, etc. Easy and effective.
I also have about 18 of the "brand new" 75' flats (old Walthers kits) , in PRR, WABASH and ATLANTIC CENTRAL, with two 32/35' vans.
A great many of the earliest 40' cars were home built from the ground up, often on box car frames. Nobody is offering any of those cars in the "high end" market.......
Varney and Ulrich both had nice 40' early TOFC models.
Paul3 Why would anyone take offense if someone else judges a model to be generic? Especially when it is. How is that considered elitist? Unless it also included a statement like, "I would never, of course, lower myself to use such plebian models. Those are reserved for the lower classes." Now that would be elitist.
If the term "generic" or similar term, is used as a pejorative, combined with the entire concept of "generic" being subjective, it lends itself to being elitist.
As far as foobie or bogus. I cant see how someone who truly cares about fidelity can be tricked into buying something. Either they know or they don't. If they don't know the product is inaccurate before they buy it, then they apparently don't want to put the work it takes into acquiring the standards they pretend to have. It almost seems they want to hang with others in the elitist bubble even though they dont really have the knowledge.
- Douglas
Doughless Paul3 Why would anyone take offense if someone else judges a model to be generic? Especially when it is. How is that considered elitist? Unless it also included a statement like, "I would never, of course, lower myself to use such plebian models. Those are reserved for the lower classes." Now that would be elitist. If the term "generic" or similar term, is used as a pejorative, combined with the entire concept of "generic" being subjective, it lends itself to being elitist. As far as foobie or bogus. I cant see how someone who truly cares about fidelity can be tricked into buying something. Either they know or they don't. If they don't know the product is inaccurate before they buy it, then they apparently don't want to put the work it takes into the standards they pretend to have. It almost seems they want to hang with others in the elitist bubble even though they dont really have the knowledge. It makes for a weird discussion on a lot of forums.
As far as foobie or bogus. I cant see how someone who truly cares about fidelity can be tricked into buying something. Either they know or they don't. If they don't know the product is inaccurate before they buy it, then they apparently don't want to put the work it takes into the standards they pretend to have. It almost seems they want to hang with others in the elitist bubble even though they dont really have the knowledge.
It makes for a weird discussion on a lot of forums.
Well said, why is it the manufacturers job to inform you? If it really matters that much, learn before you buy.
ATLANTIC CENTRALWell said, why is it the manufacturers job to inform you? If it really matters that much, learn before you buy.
And don't rely on the reviewers to point it out either. A few years back MRN ran a review of the Bachmann gas-electric and trailing coach. The reviewer used the Maryland and Pennsylvania one. He never pointed out that the gas-electric was not the right model nor was the trailing coach.
But the flip side is that if you didn't want to build your own and wanted DCC, maybe it's close enough. Personally, if someone comes out with a camelback with dcc and sound lettered for the Ma&Pa in S scale I'll buy it.