Sheldon,I've notice a growth in detailed switching layouts over the past five years I have my thoughts on why this is happening but,we won't go there.
I will say the younger modelers wants the accurate museum quality models but,reducing the size of their layouts in the process or joining clubs and not bothering to build any layout.... IMHO the future of basement filling layouts will decline in the years to come due to the ever increasing cost of living and that means less money for hobbies..
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
BRAKIE Sheldon,I've notice a growth in detailed switching layouts over the past five years I have my thoughts on why this is happening but,we won't go there. I will say the younger modelers wants the accurate museum quality models but,reducing the size of their layouts in the process or joining clubs and not bothering to build any layout.... IMHO the future of basement filling layouts will decline in the years to come due to the ever increasing cost of living and that means less money for hobbies..
That may all be true, but it does not change the fact that in the last three decades, at least in this part of the country, large layouts have been pretty common place.
I will say that some years back I made the decission not to make my layout smaller, but to make it much simpler than my original plan 20 years ago.
Large and complex are two different things....
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRALThat may all be true, but it does not change the fact that in the last three decades, at least in this part of the country, large layouts have been pretty common place.
There's still a lot of basement filling layouts in Ohio in just about every scale but,the last layout tour I was on the majority of the owners was in their 50/60s. I did see one around three years ago that filled a basement and the layout consisted of three scales HO,S and Lionel. That was a first for me and the Lionel area had lots of animation.
In order to survive, I think the manufacturers such as Walthers and Rapido are going to have to create a business model with vastly much lower prices and less limited edition runs.
ATSFGuy In order to survive, I think the manufacturers such as Walthers and Rapido are going to have to create a business model with vastly much lower prices and less limited edition runs.
Sir MadogEven when I started out in the hobby some 50+ years ago, model trains were not cheap at all, so I think it is safe to say that the future does not depend on pricing alone
I was in the hobby back then and was buying brass diesels from Alco Models,Hallmark ,Trains Inc for around $34.00. Athearn cars was 1.49.A Hobbytown RS-3 shell kit was $11.95 and the drive was $19.95. MR was 50 or 60 cents.
Come to think about it those was fun days since old Charley at Hall's Hobby Shop would display new releases every Saturday morning-the day after payday. Needless to say the shop was packed every Saturday morning. Sleep in and you might end up with a empty bag. As a example when Alco Models RS-1 showed up on the shelf all Charley had was gone by noon. Of course unlike today Charlie could and would restock.
BRAKIE I was in the hobby back then and was buying brass diesels from Alco Models,Hallmark ,Trains Inc for around $34.00. Athearn cars was 1.49.A Hobbytown RS-3 shell kit was $11.95 and the drive was $19.95. MR was 50 or 60 cents.
Ah-ah-ah! Careful, now! You know what happens to threads that turn into "OMG this hobby has gotten so expensive" threads...
--Steven Otte, Model Railroader senior associate editorsotte@kalmbach.com
Steven Otte BRAKIE I was in the hobby back then and was buying brass diesels from Alco Models,Hallmark ,Trains Inc for around $34.00. Athearn cars was 1.49.A Hobbytown RS-3 shell kit was $11.95 and the drive was $19.95. MR was 50 or 60 cents. Ah-ah-ah! Careful, now! You know what happens to threads that turn into "OMG this hobby has gotten so expensive" threads...
What Larry always forgets is how much lower wages were back then, and he was making those "big" union bucks, others made even less. Those model trains were expensive.....
As Andre and I have pointed out for years, the hobby is no more expensive, and maybe even less expensive, than it ever was.
ATLANTIC CENTRALWhat Larry always forgets is how much lower wages were back then, and he was making those "big" union bucks, others made even less. Those model trains were expensive.....
A lot of shops was union back then even ditch diggers got a good wage. There was low paying jobs that was always begginig for help.
Steven OtteAh-ah-ah! Careful, now! You know what happens to threads that turn into "OMG this hobby has gotten so expensive" threads...
Steve,I was just reminiscing about the old days and the memories of pleasant Saturday mornings spent at Hall's Hobby Shop looking over new models and talking shop-including talking about those brand new GP30s!
Just got my 1,000th edition saturday, and finally got a day to read it. While he has a point on a couple, I do disagree with some of his predictions:
1-the shelf style layout. This works to an extent, but for those of us who model the mountain roads, or want to have high bridges,etc we still will go for a wider layout. The wall mounted will work somewhat though.
2.Battery power- I can see it used, but not very practical. I mean, around 1 hour of running per recharge cycle? Open house schedules null and void this. Until they can come up with a battery that holds a large charge and a quick recharge, learning to wire is still the best way to go.
What I agree with:I am part of the generation of modern era modelers...and there isnt a lot of buildings,people,equipment to pick from. The road I model has a roster of nothing but second (or third, or fourth) hand SD40-2s and several SD40-3 units, so I consider myself lucky there. But the boxcars they use for interchange are hard to find (Gunderson 60ft boxcars), as are the 100ton 3bay hoppers. The modern era modelers are coming into their own, and the manufacturers are gonna need to start producing for us.
(My Model Railroad, My Rules)
These are the opinions of an under 35 , from the east end of, and modeling, the same section of the Wheeling and Lake Erie railway. As well as a freelanced road (Austinville and Dynamite City railroad).
How many of you finding fault with battery power have ever tried it? Probably none of you.
Rule 1 of Battery Powered Radio Control
Dead Rail is not for everyone.
For some, it is the best thing since sliced bread. For others, not so much.
In the future, Battery Power will be an important part of the hobby to many people. Will it replace DC or DCC? Absolutely not. Both DC and DCC will always be around.
Battery Power will just add another dimension to people's enjoyment of the hobby. Like controlling your trains with a smart device. How fast has that technology become popular?
One of the great things about this hobby is, "It's your railroad. Do what you want".
Take time to see what battery powered radio control is all about and how it is implimented. Then decide for yourself if that technology is for you.
I have a friend that is firmly DCC. He has one battery powered train he uses to clean his track. He is happy. His tracks are clean. His trains perform well.
Don't forget Battery Powered locos will run just fine on DC or DCC layouts.
Pete Steinmetz
Dead Rail Society
www.deadrailsociety.com
On30 Modeler
Encinitas, CA
Doughless Since my subscription lapsed when we moved I spent the 10 DOLLARS this "controversial" issue cost and read the OP article "The Future of Model Railroading". First of all, the fact that Lance Mindheim wrote an article about the future of the hobby is a bit out of his normal focus. He normally writes about modeling, so I wouldn't consider him an expert in the field of hobby philosophy. I'd think Tony Koester would be a better choice. It is one man's opinion, clearly stated as such as to what he views, primarily, the "game changing" technological advances to be in the hobby. Overall, I think its a fair article that is generally unbiased. But it is tech heavy, and my observation is that there is a natural tendency towards tech heavy publications to view tech customers as smart and hip and noncustomers as stooges scared or philisophically opposed to change. He says, "I think the biggest thing holding the hobby back is complacency with the status quo. It's a lack of demand for superior products. This isn't my own gut opinion, but feedback I consistently get hear from manufacturers and leaders in the hobby. " Personally, I think he, well, the hobby leaders, are simply wrong. LM gives two areas that he thinks, in his opinion, will be "game changers" in the hobby. And its not another release of an F unit. Its battery power and off board sound, which is where the headphones come in. He he pretty much slams onboard sound since he says the pathway from the decoder to the ear was limited from the start. He thinks using smart phones as a throttle is a push. He believes static grass will get better, yet he is told that the good products that are available now sit on the shelves. He implies that other modelers don't put as much importance upon accurate scenery than he would. (That's probably because a lot of people in the hobby never get to the scenic stage of a layout, if I had to guess). As far as era: "The structure and detail market has been slow to embrace the trend towards the modern era. At some point, it will become so obvious that the suppliers will catch up to demand." And illustrates this point with a picture of a Summit Customcuts CVS pharmacy. As far as the future of layout design, he mentions the change from the 4x8 to the Allen McClelland/Tony Koester mainline run layout...to a smaller but more "operationally sophisticated" shelf-style switching and branchline layouts. I don't know what that means, but I think its amusing because of the smoke coming out of some ears as they read it. "This trend...also allows participation by the more sophisticated (LOL) modeler who may not want to devote the time necessary to build a larger layout." Other than a couple of misguided comments, I thought the article was presented as being one man's opinion about where he thinks the hobby is going presented as one man's opinion. Some of it I agree with, some I don't. But hardly offensive. But just intuitively reading between the lines, the article would be appreciated by the younger technology interested person that would be interested in more technologically advanced products, who might think that present day DCC and onboard sound is the technology his parents would choose.
Since my subscription lapsed when we moved I spent the 10 DOLLARS this "controversial" issue cost and read the OP article "The Future of Model Railroading".
First of all, the fact that Lance Mindheim wrote an article about the future of the hobby is a bit out of his normal focus. He normally writes about modeling, so I wouldn't consider him an expert in the field of hobby philosophy. I'd think Tony Koester would be a better choice.
It is one man's opinion, clearly stated as such as to what he views, primarily, the "game changing" technological advances to be in the hobby.
Overall, I think its a fair article that is generally unbiased. But it is tech heavy, and my observation is that there is a natural tendency towards tech heavy publications to view tech customers as smart and hip and noncustomers as stooges scared or philisophically opposed to change.
He says, "I think the biggest thing holding the hobby back is complacency with the status quo. It's a lack of demand for superior products. This isn't my own gut opinion, but feedback I consistently get hear from manufacturers and leaders in the hobby. " Personally, I think he, well, the hobby leaders, are simply wrong.
LM gives two areas that he thinks, in his opinion, will be "game changers" in the hobby. And its not another release of an F unit. Its battery power and off board sound, which is where the headphones come in. He he pretty much slams onboard sound since he says the pathway from the decoder to the ear was limited from the start.
He thinks using smart phones as a throttle is a push.
He believes static grass will get better, yet he is told that the good products that are available now sit on the shelves. He implies that other modelers don't put as much importance upon accurate scenery than he would. (That's probably because a lot of people in the hobby never get to the scenic stage of a layout, if I had to guess).
As far as era: "The structure and detail market has been slow to embrace the trend towards the modern era. At some point, it will become so obvious that the suppliers will catch up to demand." And illustrates this point with a picture of a Summit Customcuts CVS pharmacy.
As far as the future of layout design, he mentions the change from the 4x8 to the Allen McClelland/Tony Koester mainline run layout...to a smaller but more "operationally sophisticated" shelf-style switching and branchline layouts. I don't know what that means, but I think its amusing because of the smoke coming out of some ears as they read it.
"This trend...also allows participation by the more sophisticated (LOL) modeler who may not want to devote the time necessary to build a larger layout."
Other than a couple of misguided comments, I thought the article was presented as being one man's opinion about where he thinks the hobby is going presented as one man's opinion. Some of it I agree with, some I don't. But hardly offensive.
But just intuitively reading between the lines, the article would be appreciated by the younger technology interested person that would be interested in more technologically advanced products, who might think that present day DCC and onboard sound is the technology his parents would choose.
I am 43 and always had an intrest in the 1920s to the 1960s. Sure watching modern trains is fun but id can really bore the h*** out of me. There are not that many choices anymmore. So many railroads are gone. The locomotives of today just look the same regardless of EMD or GE Just the paint job is difrent. The 1950s have far more choices, from paint schemes to locomotives and cars. And what about the pasenger trains? Sure, modeling trains of today is fun and all but you see it every day! I love recreating history and keeping history alive. Nothing beats running a nice steam locomotive with a train of intresting paint schemes and a fine caboose. I always lose myself in a great booko about railroa
Everybody is in a stretch for the next best thing.
Deadrail with batteries
Bluerail/Bluetooth, etc....The thing is none of the above options don't offer anything that isn't already offered in DCC. Dead rail is convient...to an extent. Batteries are expensive, take up space, limit your run time, and need time to recharge. If you think converting a fleet to DCC is expensive with decoders $20/pop, try buying Li-ion batteries + decoders!Blue rail is in flux right now. And no one has really developed anything that is really also compatible with DCC. And DCC has a lot of options on the table that aren't co-existing with blue rail.
Don - Specializing in layout DC->DCC conversions
Modeling C&O transition era and steel industries There's Nothing Like Big Steam!
I really do admire those folks, who have the talent to foresee the future. Especially those, who predict, that the hobby will die, or DCC is at its end, or dead rail will replace track power.
I do not have such abilities. All I know is that the majority of model railroads are still straight forward DC or even 3-rail AC layouts and DCC took 30 years from its rather humble beginnings to where it is today. Maybe in 30 years time, dead rail and bluetooth will be the predominant way of operating model trains, but frankly, I couldn´t care less. I don´t think I´ll be around by then.
Sir MadogI do not have such abilities. All I know is that the majority of model railroads are still straight forward DC or even 3-rail AC layouts and DCC took 30 years from its rather humble beginnings to where it is today.
Ulrich,Not so long ago on this very forum the DCC advocates was tooting DC was dead..DC is still around and DCC is still around. You may recall I use a MRC Tech 6 so I can enjoy DCC or DCC/Sound or by a simple push of a button I can enjoy switching cars with one of my many DC engines.
R/C is far from being a new thought..It was first mention in a MR or RMC article back in the 60s.
Dead rail will come into being but,it will not replace DC or DCC.
Mike
CHARLES STEINMETZStay tuned to developments from Blue Rail.
Do those developments include the ability to MU with non-Blue Rail locomotives?
BMMECNYC CHARLES STEINMETZ Stay tuned to developments from Blue Rail. Do those developments include the ability to MU with non-Blue Rail locomotives?
CHARLES STEINMETZ Stay tuned to developments from Blue Rail.
And there is where choice comes into play. You can accept R/C and buy Blue Rail locomotives or stay with your current system and use what you already own...
While I think R/C is a good idea I will continue to use my Tech 6 since it fills my current and more then likely future needs.
Baldwin AS 616 The 1950s have far more choices, from paint schemes to locomotives and cars.
The 1950s have far more choices, from paint schemes to locomotives and cars.
I vigorously disagree with this sentiment. There's a much wider variety of paint schemes out there and car types than in the 1950s. That was the height of the red-brown boxcar. Current weather resistant paints (and clean air laws) have broadened the available palette vastly. The lengthened rules for car interchange lifespans mean there's titanic amount of long gone railroads roaming the rails.
No one had ever seen a coil car with mismatched hoods (a chance for three road names in one package!), a spine car, or the height variety of hi-cubes.
NittanyLion Baldwin AS 616 The 1950s have far more choices, from paint schemes to locomotives and cars. I vigorously disagree with this sentiment. There's a much wider variety of paint schemes out there and car types than in the 1950s. That was the height of the red-brown boxcar. Current weather resistant paints (and clean air laws) have broadened the available palette vastly. The lengthened rules for car interchange lifespans mean there's titanic amount of long gone railroads roaming the rails. No one had ever seen a coil car with mismatched hoods (a chance for three road names in one package!), a spine car, or the height variety of hi-cubes.
I strongly believe that there were more variety of paont schemes and more variety of cars. Check the wide variety of railroad books!
[Admin note: When quoting a previous post, please put your new content OUTSIDE the "quote" - "/quote" tags. Otherwise, nobody knows which words are your own and which you're quoting.]
You are welcome to your opinion, but actually the 50's were full of colorful paint schemes.
B&O Sentinal and Time Saver box cars - blue/orange, blue/silver
C&O Aluminum experimental box cars and hoppers left raw aluminum
Gerber billboard reefers
SP "overnight" box cars
Piggyback trailers with all manner of colorful schemes - SP orange, B&O blue and orange, NKP blue, CP green, CNW green and yellow, Wabash light blue, just to name a few
Reefers - yellow, orange, silver, and more
Cabooses - oxide red, bright red, blue, green, etc.
PRR merchandise service cars
MoPac blue box cars
Just to name a few........
Even the "boring" "red" cars were all differnt shades......
I vigorously disagree with this sentiment. There's a much wider variety of paint schemes out there and car types than in the 1950s
Were you around in the 50's?
SP diesel colors:
Switcher: Orange/Black Tiger stripe.
If switcher were set up for road use, add silver ends.
Freight and dual service: Red, silver, black, orange.
Passenger: Daylight red, orange, black (we'll ignore the specially painted units initially assigned to the Golden State.
Passenger cars: Olive green, two tone gray, Daylight, Harbor Mist gray and yellow (UP compatibility), stainless steel and red stripe.
Yeah, a lot of the freight cars were mineral brown. So what? Most freight cars today are pretty boring when it comes to color. Well, maybe not the pink grain hoppers, but then neither was the vast fleet of orange PFE reefers.
Of course, in 1950 there were over 100 class 1's and at least as many diesel paint schemes. Hell, the M&StL had almost as many paint schemes for RS-1's as they had RS-1's.
I'll admit there are some really attractive paint schemes now (especially the Genessee and Wyoming associated regionals), but on the whole, I'll stick with the 50's.
Andre
ATLANTIC CENTRALYou are welcome to your opinion, but actually the 50's were full of colorful paint schemes.
The IPD era has those colors beat by a land side. I recall seeing lots of BCR and Oxide Red freight cars.
--------------------------------------
Andre,I guess you never looked at short line engines? There are many colorful short line engines including one that wear CB&Q Black,Red,Grey scheme.
Yeah, I've seen short line engines. So what? And CB&Q colors? Who cares? Anybody living in Burlington territory in the 50's could have seen the same thing.
CHARLES STEINMETZAll I can say is stay tuned.
Well, even though I will most likely never change over to it, I am a big supporter of any direct radio approach to command control for model trains. I do think it is a simpler, better approach than sending the signal through the rails.
But BlueRail leaves me cold.......as a "user interface" I hate smart phones, and tablets are too big for this purpose (don't like them much better anyway). No touch screens for me thank you.
I want a throttle I can hold and control with one hand....without a touch screen.