Why is Koester's Allegheny Midland a Landmark Layout?

[AntonioFP45]

The trackwork alone, made me do a double-take the first time I saw it.  Remarkably realistic. Easy to see that a lot of planning, time and effort went into the AM railroad.  Tony helped raise the bar years ago.

[Packers#1]

I recently acquired some old MRs from 88, 89,93,98. One had an article on the Allengheny Midland. It looked like it was a really good layout.

[hminky]

Its a landmark layout because the Staff of MR feel they need to give a pat on the back to one of their own.

James

Thank you for the right answer. You win a ground foam coated puff ball for your effort.

Harold

[markpierce]

I think it is because it was one of the earlier V&O inspired, large, operations oriented, layouts that was complete, fully functional and operated on regularly.  It was around for actually decades.  It was also very well documented in MR and MRC.  -  Nevin

DITTO!  Additionally, Tony's layout provided him a learning experience which he shared with us, and he has evolved as evidenced by his current layout.  I wish I had his energy.

Mark

[Master of Big Sky Blue]

Its a landmark layout because the Staff of MR feel they need to give a pat on the back to one of their own.

James

[ndbprr]

Certain layouts in spite of their short comings have a way of making us think outside the box of model railroading and think railroading.  It started with Frank Ellison and his Delta Lines.  Then we had John Allen and the Gorre and Daphetid, Allan McClelland's Virginian and Ohio and on to Koester's layout.  I think it is the overall result.  Good to great in all areas with no glaring weaknesses that makes layouts stand out.  A prototypical feel in which we can imagine ourselves operating in that environment.  the interchange with other model railroads was unique at the time.  It may the ability of the story teller or it may be the layout but when one hears the name of one of those railroads a picture forms in our minds immediately of railroading not model railroading. 

[NevinW]

I think it is because it was one of the earlier V&O inspired, large, operations oriented, layouts that was complete, fully functional and operated on regularly.  It was around for actually decades.  It was also very well documented in MR and MRC.  -  Nevin

[johncolley]

I don't know if I would go that far, especially since it wasn't preserved, which is what one does with landmarks, eh? However it was a great operations based layout that was very inspirational to a lot of people, myself included. In fact, my desire for operating on big curves, beautiful trackwork, and turnouts despite my own very limited space and resources is what got me started in the Free-mo movement! For which I am thankful to Tony and others like him who, justifiably, proudly write about and discuss their layouts for others to enjoy and learn. In that vein I especially praise Joe Fugate and Charlie Comstock out here on the West Coast. jc5729 John Colley, Port townsend, WA

[Autobus Prime]

hm:

Koester has said as much.  It was in one of his recent columns; he wrote that the only really unusual feature was that he used a lot of stub-end staging. 

However, I think his layout is still a landmark just because he has written so much of its story in those columns, over the years...we know more about that story than we do about many other layouts.  I am speaking of the history of the layout and its builder, not the fictional history behind the AM.

Compare it to the shipwreck described here:

http://www.ipa.min-cultura.pt/pubs/TA/folder/18/318.pdf

The ship is not special at all - it was a common product of the period. However, we know about it, and can learn from it, and that makes it valuable.

 

[hminky]

Just got my April 2008 MR, and wonder why the AM is a landmark layout. It was a nice layout but it contained nothing groundbreaking. Others have done "proto-freelancing", which most of us have done for years, so that can't be what makes it special.

Well?

Harold