This has become very frustrating and confusing for me. I initially thought I wanted to model the Ontario Northland Railway which explains my user name. At an operating session last night I had the chance to play with some steam locomotives that had sound in them. These were incredible looking and one was a replica of the old steam locomotive at the CNE grounds in Toronto Ontario. I remember climbing on that as a kid. Now I want to model steam engines. I've been flopping back and forth on what to do. Is this normal when planning a Railway?
Of course. Was it because of the sound [and maybe all the external moving parts] that you got excited about steam?
I'd say, hold off before you go spending large amounts of money. Go to as many op sessions as you can, watch some videos of operating steam, then see how you feel about it after ~2-3 months.
As for me, I've flip-flopped a little myself. I grew up near the B&O in Maryland, and did most of my railfanning on that road during my teen years - so that;s what I'm modeling. But for a while, I thought the blue, gray and yellow of the CSX "Bright Future" scheme looked really cool, so I got into that soon after I returned to the hobby. Then I gradually realized that (1) I missed having cabooses on the ends of my trains, and (2) I hate having to install ditch lights. So getting my B&O fleet out of mothballs was a no-brainer for me!
-Ken in Maryland (B&O modeler, former CSX modeler)
ONR,
Yea, it's normal. I started out wanting to model steam but became enamored with early diesel. Now I have both on my layout and I enjoy either one.
I just did a quick search and it appears that the ONR has a long history. The name came into being in April 1946. From 1946 thru the late 50's is transitional era modeling at it's best. The ONRH&TS should be a good resource for you for gleaning information about the prototype.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Your dilemma is precisely why so many of us choose not to model, per se, in the first place. We enjoy railroading first, and the various parts of it second. If you want to enjoy more than one part of it, you really have to widen your horizons and abandon/compromise on some constraints.
It is why I and others freelance or protolance, depending on what you want to accomplish. I make a layout that passes for a lot of places, or make two or three types of terrain, even seasons, and run what I want. I have two SD-75M modern locos because I could get them cheaply in warbonnet livery from the Santa Fe. Everything else ranges from 1914 - 1952 for building dates, but I range up to 1959 because the CPR, one of my roads, ran steam until then.
The hobby really should be as fun as you can make it, but the responsibility for that experience and its richness is entirely yours. I take mine seriously, so I have a whopping mish-mash of locos.
Crandell
Why can't you do both?
Let me explain, you could have a museum/steam train rides. Or your railroad could have a business train like the UP which has steam power. That would work for a present day RR. OR you could model the transition era where your railroad was in the process of switching from steam to diesel. I have even seen modelers who have two sets of stock and set pieces for their layout and switch back and forth between time periods.
Bottom line this is fun, its your railroad, Do what makes you happy,
A frequent problem for folks, the good news is there is a way to do both. You can build a diesel era layout and have excursion trains. The steam locos could even fill in on freights, should a couple of the diesels be out of service. If you want an extensive steam collection, have a railway museum, such as Steamtown.
Have fun,
Richard
cowman If you want an extensive steam collection, have a railway museum, such as Steamtown.
If you want an extensive steam collection, have a railway museum, such as Steamtown.
Thats what the owner of the layout I visited has. It must have at least 15 steam locomotives and a bunch of old diesel locomotives in it. I was told it was there just to give some of the trains a reason for being there since the ONR didn't have one. Its to big for my space though, I would guess its around 5x8 feet. I took a bunch of pictures of it.
You can always have just one steamer and a couple of heavyweight coachs, you have a tourist train and a steam loco on your layout. The one that used to be in the southern part of VT went from one town to another. Didn't turn the loco, just did a runaround and pulled the coachs with the loco backing to the starting point.
Why chose?
I'm running 2 eras, the Western Maryland in the 50s and the MMID in the 80's. Same trackage, just doin a time warp.
After all, its your railroad!!
Karl
NCE über alles!
For the most part steam is my favourite. However there are many modern diesels that I really want to own. So to deal with that problem I am now planning out of sight staging. This way I will be able to run my modern diesels down the rabbit hole off the layout and go back to a better era.
I will also leave any really modern structures loose on the layout so I can just remove them.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
selector Your dilemma is precisely why so many of us choose not to model, per se, in the first place. We enjoy railroading first, and the various parts of it second. If you want to enjoy more than one part of it, you really have to widen your horizons and abandon/compromise on some constraints. Crandell
Thats what I was told yesterday. My friends layout is fairly big, very detailed and almost museum like for the lack of a better word and its very ONR based. One guy said it is about as over the top as you can get. I know I will never reach that level and I'm going to have to compromise. I have a young son who I'm hoping is going to be a big part of this too and he likes CP locomotives, the brighter red the better. It will be my railway or I should say our railway so I can do what interests both of us.
I began my first layouts (1970's) with Steam but they never ran very well and then I joined a Club and saw the Diesels with all wheel pickup and I never looked back!
With me current Layout
I finally decided on an era of the mid 70's to the mid 80's which included the beginnings of Conrail in 1976 allowed me to run any diesel from most any railroad that went to form Conrail.
EL - PRR - PC - NYC - CNJ - NH - Reading and anything that was merged before Conrail.
This really gets a lot of visitors as they just can't understand why I have so many different engines on the layout from so many other railroads and I just have to laugh!
I guess they never realized what Conrail really represented!
As a side benefit - when I see an engine on sale I can usually get it as it will almost always fit my era!
BOB H - Clarion, PA
Been there, done that!!!!
Railroad Museum is a way around it if you want to model "modern" times.
That's what I'm doing & I have a spot for a 2-3 track yard to "model" it too.
Then again, it is MY railway, so seeing a D&H PA hauling a D&H passenger train followed by a CPR AC4400 will be a common site on my tracks.
If you want to see first hand, I'm in Whitby.
Gordon
Brought to you by the letters C.P.R. as well as D&H!
K1a - all the way
You could model the transition period when both steam and early diesels where still in use together.
NP 2626 "Northern Pacific, really terrific"
Northern Pacific Railway Historical Association: http://www.nprha.org/
ONR FAN I've been flopping back and forth on what to do. Is this normal when planning a Railway?
Hi gentlemen,
lets not forget a pratical side. Passenger coaches, modern freight cars and big engines, all one foot long in HO, need large radii (30+ ) and long turnouts (#6 or #8). Keep in mind too that a mainline will require much more tracks then a remote branchline.
The best era to chose might depend on the balance between the available space, your operational wishes and the minimum standards for the kind of equipment you want tu use. While an 18" radius is doing well for a HO branch in the 50's with equipment no longer then 50 ft; the same radius is great in N-scale when you opt for modern 85 or 90 ft long cars.
Smile
Paul
why not do both, I like steam but not as much as diesels. like Karl my soon to be layout will be able to run both transition, and modern.... and everything inbetween.
SP&S modeler, 1960's give or take a decade or two for some equipment.
http://www.youtube.com/user/SGTDUPREY?feature=guide
Gary DuPrey
N scale model railroader
Model the era that you like most and just include the steam. If you need a justification, just say on your version money was tight and the diesels had to wait. Steam was used in some parts of the world throughout the twentieth century.
Enjoy
I just got through posting the response below, to the same question by another beginner. The thoughts seemed worth repeating:
I wonder why there is even a hint of guilt about mixing eras? Yet this does seem to be the case. Somehow; or, another, when people become interested in Model Railroading they happen upon the idea from what they read on the forums, that it is a "No-No" to mix eras. Somehow they come to this conclusion, even though they are fully aware that they are the one paying for, building and operating their Model Railroad. In essence, we are creating a fictitious world, whether we are strict prototype modelers; or, not! So, it is our right as the financier, builder and operator of our model railroads, to do as we dang well please with them.
When I started out, I came to the hobby with a deep interest in modeling steam era and liked the idea of freelancing, as I could then use any steam locomotive I desired. As I got farther into the hobby, I determined that I was very interested in the Northern Pacific Railway and joined the Northern Pacific Railway Historical Association. This peaked my interest in N.P. locomotives and fostered an interest in 1st Gen. diesels, so I updated my equipment to the transition period, so I could have both steam and diesel.
As I have gone along, over time my interest has become more prototype oriented.
The above has been my case, others will have a completely different journey. Possibly you might become interested in adhering to strict prototype, possibly you will stay totally freelanced in era and equipment. The idea is to have fun; so, don't let anyone tell you, you can't do exactly what you want to do and don't feel guilty about doing so!
Hi!
While finding an era to model (or RR or location) can be difficult for some, for others it was never a question. My first layout in the 1950s was 1950s Santa Fe, and every layout since has been of the same time and RR. There was never a serious question otherwise.
Being 68, I was (as a kid in Chicago) up close and personal with steam locos from the CN&W and IC. So my layouts have always incorporated steam (ATSF). When I was a kid, it was modern railroading, today its reliving my childhood.
You are apparently younger, and not experienced everyday steam railroading - but its attraction has gotten to you. So now you are torn......... what era to model.
My advice is to weigh the options, and to not jump one way or the other until you are fairly certain.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
ONR FAN This has become very frustrating and confusing for me. I initially thought I wanted to model the Ontario Northland Railway which explains my user name. At an operating session last night I had the chance to play with some steam locomotives that had sound in them. These were incredible looking and one was a replica of the old steam locomotive at the CNE grounds in Toronto Ontario. I remember climbing on that as a kid. Now I want to model steam engines. I've been flopping back and forth on what to do. Is this normal when planning a Railway?
You do what you gotta do. If there is a piece of rolling stock you just gotta have, get it, run it, enjoy it. You can deal with anachronisms by ignoring them, or some times running modern era and some times running steam era. The buildings will look fine in any time. You can swap out the motor vehicles as required. Or you can decide that the transition era lasted longer than it did in real life. Not to worry.
If you are modeling the Ontario Northland, consider modeling the town of North Bay. The tracks come in along the water front into a compact freight yard in front of the train station. The rest of the town is neatly arranged behind the station.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com
When I got into the model railroading in the 1960s, brass steam engines were cheep to buy, but didn't run well without a lot of maintenance.So I sold them off and purchased Athearn diesels, they ran much better. I was in a club at the time with no home layout. When I was able to start my modular layout dering the early 1990s, I choose to model what I grew up with. . . Diesels. Proto 2000, Athearn, Atlas started producing high quality models and also in steam too. I stayed with first and early second generation diesels, operation was what I wanted on my home layout and still enjoy switching operations..
ONR FANNow I want to model steam engines.
As to prototype -- Most Class I railroads went to diesel from steam by the end of 1957 -- Perhaps a "circa 1957" starting timeframe to go up or down?
CR&T is circa 1956 for motive power roster flexibility of steam/electric/diesel.
Conemaugh Road & Traction circa 1956
That is pretty much what I do. It doesn't matter to me all that much, what trains ran where or when, on my layout. I build my scenery to mostly represent New England, because I lived in NE all my life and I know how New England looks. Era? Well that doesn't matter to me to much ether, again I grew up in the 50's & 60's, and I can remember how things looked in New England in the 50's&60's so that what I try to model to the best of my ability. As far as the trains I run on my layout? Well now, you can see almost any era, any road name, whether steam or diesel, on my layout. I know a lot of you folks will cringe reading this, but hey, I am in this hobby to enjoy myself. So while building my layout I am doing so as to please me, and not worry about pleasing someone else. I know a lot of folks build their layouts perfectly, right down to the last rivet, and that's great, I give you all a lot credit, because what you do compared to my way, is just so much harder than what I do. It's a hobby to have fun with, and I am having the time of my life.
Sam
I guess I'm a little different from most of the opinions in this thread.
To me, having a hodge-podge of equipment with no real theme or reasoning is little different from what I did in 3 rail O for 15 years. When I moved back to scale modeling about 10 years ago, I wanted my layout to portray a unified, understandable theme. I wanted the the layout to represent a plausible railroad(s) in the real world. I ended up choosing coastal Oregon in 1900 - standard and narrow gauge.
The era was driven by what I wanted the layout to show and the equipment I wanted to use. I wanted to represent logging using dog hole schooners - which set constraints on how late the layout could be. I also wanted to use knuckle couplers for switching, and assume air brakes in my model operations. That pretty much constrained how early the layout could be. I wanted to avoid the financial hardships throughout the West inflicted by the Silver Crash and its aftermath in the mid-1890s.
Picking an era and region has proved to be very beneficial to my wallet. When I think about a possible acquisition of a new model, I realize that 99% of what's available is not suitable for my region and era. So in keeping with a small layout, not a whole lot of modeling time, and even less $$ with kids in college, having less than a dozen engines is a good thing. What little I have gets operated. With a small roster, and car fleet, occasionally turning over a few pieces (selling and replacing with more desirable) is fun.
just my way of having fun, yours may differ
Fred W
....modeling foggy coastal Oregon, where it's always 1900....
I have two eras that I am interested in and plan on eventually modeling both. 1959, Final year of steam on my freelance railroad and 1969. In the area I plan on modeling the industries are mostly still in operation in those time periods so the only changes will be some rolling stock and vehicles as well as eliminating the steamers and replacing them with more modern EMDs and ALCOs. By putting in some extra staging tracks the anachronisms for either era can be rolled off the layout and it can continue to be prototypical.
On at least one occasion I read about an individual that moved his layout through several eras by changing out rolling stock and covered more than 40 years if memory serves me correctly. So if you were to do something like that you don't really have to decide and you are spared the strangeness of steam and double stacks and other such strangeness.
If the real world (aka Universe 3, Neil Armstrong) doesn't have what you want, just move your layout to another universe! Avoid Universe 1, Leslie LaCroix - they traded railroads for huge moving conveyor belts (The Roads Must Roll, R. A. Heinlein.) Universe 11 is also reputed to be pretty nasty. I personally model in Universe 13, Alfred E. Neumann - What, me worry?
Why did I move. I wanted to model a particular coal mining operation in Kyushu, but my railroad is set in Central Honshu - a place where there's never been a workable coal seam. Thanks to My Pal Al, there is now...
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964 - sort of)
You're talking about Eric Brooman, whose Utah Belt was originally set in the mid-late 70's and who has "modernized" over the last 35-40 years.
Joe Fugate starts in 1980 and updates each year until 1990 and then goes back to 1980 and starts again.
Haven't seen anyone do a reverse Brooman yet (i.e. start with current era and backdate each year). Of course, it would take something like 55 years to get back to the steam era.
Andre
If you're interested in a broad period of time, you can build a layout where you can rotate the era you're modelling. I've been working on a new layout that will do that, and I've done it in the past - even wrote an article about it for RMC a long time ago. You may have to compromise a little, but it's worth it.
Otherwise, don't worry about it. If you're interested in Ontario Northland steam and diesel, then run both. Doesn't bother me, some people are more interested in a railroad or a place than in the timeframe.
ONR FAN, at least you are beyond another trap beginners fall into. That is buying a lot of locomotives and equipment that you think looks neat, and ending up with a hodge-podge of equipment from different eras and locations that do not go realistically together at all. By wanting to model ONR or a similar railroad you have started to focus on what you really want and what can develop into a satisfying long-term modeling project. By focusing on ONR, you have tied down a geographic area that you want to model, that is a big step in itself!
You have made a good start, now think about the type of locomotives you would enjoy running. That will help focus on the timeframe you would enjoy modeling. Don't forget the tourist train idea if you can not give up on steamers.
George In Midcoast Maine, 'bout halfway up the Rockland branch