Hello Jim, and welcome to the forums. I model the 1950s, even though I wasn't even born until 20 years later. The reason this is a popular time to model is because it is known as the Transistion Era, where many railroads moved from steam to diesel locomotives. This gives even the prototype modeler the excuse to run diesels next to steam and it is still plausible.
Scott
Because EMD E & F units are beautiful, and they reflect the optimism of mid-century modernism.
Welcome to the Forums, Jim.
Your first posts are moderated, so they may not appear immediately. That will clear up quickly.
Let us know if you decide to build a layout!
York1 John
Jim SladeFirst off, love model railroads
to the Model Railroader discussion forums. Please stay around and join the conversations.
Shock ControlBecause EMD E & F units are beautiful.
This, and since I model 1954, I also get steam locomotives, beautiful automobiles, and no graffiti.
I previously modeled 1968, and there is some equipment from that year that I also love, but compromises must be made.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
Railroads were more visible, and had a more visible role, in developing and in sustaining the country and its economy 70-130 years ago. Today, they run between buildings and are only visible, and most annoying, at crossings where commuters wait impatiently.
Secondly, back in those times, the outer mechanical workings of locomotives was more visible and it was mystifying. Those of us who attempt to learn about valve gear soon figure it out, but otherwise it's just a maze of levers and rods that pivot on pins. It's all fascinating.
Of course, it helps that locomotives back then were large, black, hissed, roared, and shook the ground. Today they don't shake the ground quite as much due to their mechanical nature (reciprocating engine providing electrical power to traction motors). They make noise, and they're large and fast, but they don't have visible moving parts, unless you count the axles ends turning.
Transition offers the best of both worlds. Even diesels were getting second generation models coming on line by then, and traction motors like the GG1 were well-established. So really, you could have three types of locomotives to play with, plus the odd turbine.
In addition to what others have said, it was generally a optimistic and prosperious time. Railroads had lots of new equipment, etc.
It was a positive time for the railroad industry and a positive time in general, that's more fun then a depression or a time of neglect.
Sheldon
I grew up in my teens during the 50s and that is still the best years of my life, life has been going down hill ever since the 50s. I’ll second Kevin on the NO Graffiti! I model the early to mid 50s for the same reasons mentioned in the above posts. I love steam locomotives and the early diesels.As a 14th birthday present our next door neighbor (El Paso TX Southern Pacific Yard Super) arranged for me to ride in the cab of a pair of Southern Pacific Articulateds from El Paso to Alamogordo NM and back in 1951. Still is the biggest thrill of my life, I can still taste the desert flies from the windows open and 40 MPH air conditioning of the 50s. Stick around and when you get started in model railroading post pictures of your venture. Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
I also suspect that it was the first golden age for HO scale model railroads and that gave the era strong roots. There's a feedback mechanism. The era is popular because it was a strong period for the real railroads, which lead to availabilty of models, but the availability of models feeds on being a popular era to model because...there's a lot of available models.
Since I model more recent times, late 80's, 90's, early 2000's, I'll get a big bag of popcorn, and sit and watch and listen.
I was born in 49, but while in the car with my dad, I never saw a steam loco at a crossing, or working in a yard.
I'll say one thing, you guys that model the 40's sure have a plethora of things to choose from.
Mike.
My You Tube
Steam engines in motion are pretty look at. Many model railroaders are.. hum hum... retired and remember these days vividly.
But I would argue that most pikes today feature diesel engines. Books and media are not necessarily representative of what people model at home.
Simon
All those colorful boxcars!
Often, people are interested in modeling what they saw as a youth, and although the numbers are dwindling, most model railroaders are in their 70s and remember the trains of the '50s, and if you were interested in trains then, there was a big crowd who lamented the change from steam to diesel and shunned anything powered by internal combustion.
Another draw is passenger trains. The 1950s was the heyday of the passenger train. Railroads were optimistic they'd be inundated with passengers in the post-war years as people who were forced to stay home and conserve resources during WWII were suddenly free to go out and explore. Of course, they did so in their cars, and by the 1960s, passenger trains were in severe decline.
The mid-'40s through mid-'50s has a lot to offer as a setting, and as stated already, there's lots of equipment to choose from, although if you become enamored with steam, you may find your favorite railroad isn't as well represented as you'd like it to be as steam could be very railroad-specific.
I started with Tyco F7s in Santa Fe Warbonnet paint, but the trains I saw around me at the time were Penn Central GG1s and Amtrak Metroliners. As I've gotten to that point where there's time, space, and money for a layout, I want to re-create what I saw trackside during after-dinner walks at my grandparents', so I'm planning a mid-70s layout.
Anything you choose, you'll have fun. Be sure to enjoy the journey!
Eric
I basically model the 1980-2007.
Although I'm fascinated with steam locomotives like the Hudson, Big Boy, Northern, Consolidation and others. I really wanted to do a 1938 New York based on the Century. I couldn't do it because I really love Amtrak and it didn't exist.
Mid last year I collected a few freight cars. (Years in the making.) I need like 7 more cars not counting coaches, another steam engine for them and replacement tenders to finish a 1940s branch line.
The idea was to use New York Central but the problem is the locomotives didn't look like their prototype and made it unrealistic for me. Using fictional railroad made more sense than jamming in other railroad Southern Pacific.
It was going to based after World War 2 in 1946-49. With nothing else but pure steam, no diesels of any kind. I could go back to 1940 or during the war, if I felt like it. This way there's no main line focus on long diesel passenger and freight trains, war covered flatcars, boxcars, or troop trains. Since I have problems picking and choosing freight cars with pictures. Plus Pullman green was still the international color for most railroads until 1952.
Amtrak America, 1971-Present.
Jim Slade I love seeing all of the 1940's / 1950s railroad displays wherever I go. Would love to have one myself, and I feel I would try to depict the 1940s as well. This seems to be the standard, and I was curious why others feel this is so. Why choose the 1940s over say the 1990s or the 1880s?
I love seeing all of the 1940's / 1950s railroad displays wherever I go. Would love to have one myself, and I feel I would try to depict the 1940s as well. This seems to be the standard, and I was curious why others feel this is so. Why choose the 1940s over say the 1990s or the 1880s?
It's the only era where steam and diesel really overlaps, not counting preserved steamers in tourist/excursion service.
Chris van der Heide
My Algoma Central Railway Modeling Blog
Great summary Eric!
Eric WhiteOften, people are interested in modeling what they saw as a youth, and although the numbers are dwindling, most model railroaders are in their 70s and remember the trains of the '50s,
I was born in the late 1960s, and the only steam locomotive I have ever seen on the mainline was the 4-8-4 pulling the Freedom Train.
This makes me think the era of 1940-1959 has real staying power. It fascinates me even though I model a year over a decade before I was born.
Eric WhiteAnother draw is passenger trains. The 1950s was the heyday of the passenger train.
I am 100% sure this is true for most people that model this era, but not for me. I just cannot get excited about passenger trains.
Eric WhiteThe mid-'40s through mid-'50s has a lot to offer as a setting
Yes it does! No national restaurant chains, but lots of small local businesses. Communities that were much more self contained. You can model anything from modest farm communities before they were run-down, to magnificent big cities.
Almost nothing waa cookie-cutter construction in 1954.
Eric WhiteI started with Tyco F7s in Santa Fe Warbonnet paint
Me too!
Our hobby itself roughly came into being around 1900 when Lionel started. Previously, model railroading was either crude, inexpensive wooden trains (mostly home made) or exquisite metal ones made by craftsmen that only the wealthy would own. As time marched on, more and more people became middle class and could afford a hobby like model railroading. However, then the Great Depression happened in 1929 followed by WWII in 1941-45 and for roughly 16 years people had to restrict their hobby to minimal investment.After the war, there was an explosion of interest in model railroading. You had a growing middle class that were moving into single family homes and started having kids (the boomers). Suddenly, many people had hobby money to spend (something they hadn't been able to do for a decade and a half), kids to share it with or spend it on, and a basement, attic or garage to set up trains. Lionel, American Flyer, and the relatively new HO were spreading across the nation spawning train shows, model railroad clubs, magazines, and even kid's TV programs. It was a high point of the hobby.As the '50s rolled on, steam was disappearing replaced by "diseasels" (as some old steamheads called 'em). Many old hobbyists refused to acknowledge diesels and wouldn't railfan or take pictures of them. They stopped progressing in time and froze their interests in steam. Then the '60s came and passenger trains started disappearing. The era of 1968 to 1976 were so transformative to the railroad business with mega-mergers, Amtrak, Conrail, etc. that many hobbyists refused to move on, sticking with the old Class I railroads.Add the crushing bankruptcies of the 1960s and 1970s, and it wasn't "fun" to model those days compared to the bright and shiny post-war era. Nostalgia is a powerful force in our hobby, and folks who lived through both eras mostly preferred the past over contemporary modeling. They would express those feelings to the next generation of modelers, and as a result railroads like Penn Central (1968-1976) got very little interest from the hobby at large.Today, that large older generation of folks that remember the 1940s-1950s are disappearing. The next generation after them that remember the 1960s and 1970s are now heading into their best earnings of their respective careers (the last decade before retirement), and thus there is recent increased interest in the previously under-represented era of the late 1960s and 1970s.My prediction is that you'll see fewer "transition era" layouts and more '60s-'70s layouts in the next dozen years or so as time catches up with us all.
Paul3My prediction is that you'll see fewer "transition era" layouts and more '60s-'70s layouts in the next dozen years or so as time catches up with us all.
Great summary. I think one thing that may help the transition era to last a while longer is the sheer amount vintage HO stuff that's still out there. When I used to go to train shows before the pandemic - remember train shows? - I would still see tons of PRR, B&O, etc., along with the ubiquitous ATSF warbonnet F units. People may remain drawn to this era out of availability, if nothing else.
As one who models 1900 (suitable locomotives and cars are a lot scarcer), I can understand the attraction of late '40s/early '50s. It's a much, much quicker process to get a layout up and running, and rolling stock is considerably smaller than it is in later years so smaller radius curves can be used. You can start out with completely ready to run equipment, and then change as your model building desires change. There's a lot more documentation of prototype practices, and color photos of equipment in real life.
I chose 1900 because both narrow and standard gauge were still in use, sailing ships still carried lumber from Northern California and Southern Oregon, and knuckle couplers were becoming widely used. Rolling stock was about 3/4 the size of 1940s equivalents. But there are precious few of us that choose to model that era so a lot of model building is required.
Fred W
Well, I'm 63, born in 1957, my teens were the late 60's and early 70's. I have no interest in the trains of that era.
I never saw a steam locomotive in regular service - except, I have been watching #90 at Strasburg almost since the day she arrived in 1967......
And I know lots of guys my age who model present day OR time periods even earlier than my 1954 era.
So much for the idea that "most " people model the trains of their youth. 10 years behind the counter of a train store, and 50 years in this hobby has not backed up that theory one bit.
Looking at all age groups, my guess is one third of modelers choose the era of their youth.
The boomers, of which I am the tail end, represent a big group of modelers for a lot of the reasons Paul3 mentioned. So even a 1/3 of the older half of us is a lot of 1950's or very early 60's modelers.
No doubt that interest will shift.
But I will point out for the 100th time. When I started modeling in 1968, the 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, 10's and now, did not exist to choose from.
Some people change eras, some people don't..........
I think the era that was once popular that has lost a large precentage of modelers is the 1900 to 1920 period wihch was a popular choice among more serious modelers when I was a teen.
Same is true of the 1940's.
The depths of the depression may have never been a popular era, but back then it seemed that the eras either side of the depression were.
I think Paul3 made some excellent points about why the 50's has been so popular, but I'm not sure the 60's or 70's will be the era that replaces it.
I think there will be more growth in modeling present day, or the "recent" past as the boomers disappear from the scene.
Simple:
Okay seriously though a few thoughts.1. If you consider a lot of retirees are model railroaders, the 1950's lines up with their childhood and their nostalgic memories of that era. So its a draw to recapture the magic of that time.
2. Older model railroaders who were adults in the 50's (who are likely now gone from us) might have chosen that as their era to model because it was their last era to model steam engines as they remembered. Many railfans and model railroaders swore off the hobby following diesels, so its likely they were happy to focus on the waning days of steam as "the good old days."3. For younger model railroaders who were not alive in the 1950's, it has an aesthetic appeal as I alluded to with using the meme above. F-Units, late era steam engines, streamliners, classic cars, carhop diners, rockabilly, drive in theaters, etc. Obviously there are certain turnoffs to modeling the era for those of us who didn't live it (the Jim Crowe south in particular is coming up in debates as to "what level of prototypicality is acceptable" lately), but for the most part the nostalgic appeal of the era still exists in our pop culture zeitgeist even for the under-50 crowd who didn't live in it 4. Steam and diesels, that is a strong appeal for building a roster regardless of age, and that era was the last era (in the US at least) where both engine types ran alongside each other in noticable numbers. CTC signals and radio comunications give it an air of modernity that helps it from feeling as long ago. Of course I personally would like to someday model the 50's (my "dream layout" in my head would be a late 50's or maybe even early 60's setting based on how my hometown and the surrounding region looked many years before I was born. But I do think modelers should give some thought into what other eras have to offer. It seems their is a lot of growth in 60's-80's models, in part for the reason I mentioned above that people like to model their childhood memories and the dirty worn out era of Penn Central, the dying grasp of the Rock Island etc... that is all now nostalgic to my parent's generation that grew up watching railroading struggle. Likewise I think the growth of commuter rail will mean people my age will grow to have a fondness for short distance passenger trains (look at Rapido's commuter announcements lately for evidence that market is beginning to bloom). Furthermore many modelers are turning back to the early 1900's to when steam was king to fully embrace a historical era that is now 120+ years in the past. Just because the 50's is popular doesn't mean we should treat it as the king and end all be all of model railroads, but we can appreciate the reasons it is seen as a golden era for many.
Shock ControlWhen I used to go to train shows before the pandemic - remember train shows? - I would still see tons of PRR, B&O, etc., along with the ubiquitous ATSF warbonnet F units. People may remain drawn to this era out of availability, if nothing else.
Well, and the reason manufacturers make so many items for the post-war transition era is because so many people buy them!
When I started in the hobby in 1971, many model railroaders were only interested in steam engines and tended to model the 1940's or earlier. Twenty years later, the steam-diesel transition era had become very popular, largely because that generation of modellers remembered that era and loved both types of engines.
Although I believe the number of transition era modellers have fallen, with more people modelling "today" (or at least the recent past) than ever before, the transition era has been surprisingly resilient and holds on to a pretty strong following.
p.s. My perception is that in the last 20 years or so the 1960's, the last years before Amtrak and the major mergers (BN, Penn Central, etc.) seems to be rising in popularity. It allows modellers to model the "old" railroads like say New York Central, but still run just diesels. Diesel engine models seem to be more reliable and less prone to problems than steam models - especially in smaller scales.
Why the 40's?
For me, IMO, there is no other era of railroading more fascinating, more visceral, more urgent, than this time.
The world is at war. Millions are dying. The call was made and the railroads stepped up to the plate and drove it out of the park and beyond the parking lot! The railroads didnt just build this country, they made it great. They made it a winner.
Our first industry, to which no other would exist without it. I can think of no other time in railroading history that stands out as much, or as proudly. Without railroads, this country, or any other... is nothing.
It is also a time of "changing the gaurd". By that i mean the dawn of diesel electrics, and the demise of steam. A very pivotal time in railroading. A time which one can see the handing off of the baton to the next generation. The only time when one can see the best of steam, and the unknown future of railroading to come, under the flag of diesel power, at the same time.
I cant find another time that captures and cultivates my model railroading endeavors than this era. "The golden age of railroads" - fitting and appropo. In this time do we see the true spirit of railroading, the true power of it.
There was nothing like it up to the 1940's, and nothing since either. The only thing I can think of that might rival the railroads was NASA's quest for the moon. At no other time has man stood so tall, or proud. It was the railroads who put him there.
Best Regards,
PMR
xboxtravis7992 3. For younger model railroaders who were not alive in the 1950's, it has an aesthetic appeal as I alluded to with using the meme above. F-Units, late era steam engines, streamliners, classic cars, carhop diners, rockabilly, drive in theaters, etc. Obviously there are certain turnoffs to modeling the era for those of us who didn't live it (the Jim Crowe south in particular is coming up in debates as to "what level of prototypicality is acceptable" lately), but for the most part the nostalgic appeal of the era still exists in our pop culture zeitgeist even for the under-50 crowd who didn't live in it
3. For younger model railroaders who were not alive in the 1950's, it has an aesthetic appeal as I alluded to with using the meme above. F-Units, late era steam engines, streamliners, classic cars, carhop diners, rockabilly, drive in theaters, etc. Obviously there are certain turnoffs to modeling the era for those of us who didn't live it (the Jim Crowe south in particular is coming up in debates as to "what level of prototypicality is acceptable" lately), but for the most part the nostalgic appeal of the era still exists in our pop culture zeitgeist even for the under-50 crowd who didn't live in it
Turnoffs?
I for one have no interest in portraying much of anything negative no matter what era I model. Maybe that is why I have no interest in the rusty, bankrupt, era of my youth, the late 60's and 70's
I don't model crime - if I did it would be the dead bank robber laying in the street after the police showed up.
I don't model extreme poverty.
There is no house on fire on my layout.
I don't model racism - there are no little signs on my model restaurants that say "whites only".
How exactly does one model "Jim Crow" in 1/87th scale? And who is discussing this nonsense? Nobody I know in this hobby is talking about this, and I know people of all flavors in this hobby.
This is why I have never cared for the modeling of George Sellios - the depression was not as "depressing" as he modeled it, and even if it was why would you want to?
The haters just like to look for problems that are not there in the things other people do.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL How exactly does one model "Jim Crow" in 1/87th scale? And who is discussing this nonsense?
How exactly does one model "Jim Crow" in 1/87th scale? And who is discussing this nonsense?
If you are a prototype modeler, and you model certain railroads and locations in a certain era and area, and you tried to accurately model buildings and equipment, it might be subtly implied by separate waiting rooms, divided coaches (this can be noticed on certain coach equipment ordered by certain RRs that had entrance vestibules at both ends when it was normal to have vestibules at one end on other contemporary cars) etc.
It's not a conscious choice to "model" it or not exactly, but if you went for a period-accurate model of the rolling stock and/or stations, the answer to "why two waiting rooms" is uncomfortable if your really think about it, even if you didn't realize it.
You're just modeling the real-world equipment as it existed, but the reason it was that way in the real world still existed.
Beats me. I like the post 2000 era. And the south, but it has nothing to do with Jim Crow, whoever that is.
- Douglas
ATLANTIC CENTRALI for one have no interest in portraying much of anything negative no matter what era I model.
Same here.
My model railroad is an escape. I model August 3rd, 1954, but not the real one.
There is no ugliness in my alternative 1954. It is just a perfect day with glorious human harmony.
I am also a wargamer, and my beliefs carry into that hobby too. I don't model corpses or casualties, my German WW2 army does not display correct iconography, my confederate army flies blue flags with white stripes (similar to a Greek flag), and there are no blood stains on weapons or uniforms on my Napoleanics.
My 1/48 scale historical military modeling is all scenes of soldiers at rest.
Why would anybody bring strife to your modelled scenes?
xboxtravis7992 Obviously there are certain turnoffs to modeling the era for those of us who didn't live it (the Jim Crowe south in particular is coming up in debates as to "what level of prototypicality is acceptable" lately),
I think I saw an article about modeling a segregated waiting room, but other than that, how, other than having a Black porter in your Pullman car would you do that?
Put Sim Web, Casey Jones Afro brakeman in your engine and throw in a few statues of Confederate generals? I hope the hobby doesn't get Woke.
Like Sheldon I don't model unpleasant things, including the banned term graffitti, graveyards, accidents, crime or even traffic tickets.
Born in '51, I think, but am not certain, I saw a doubleheaded PRR steam freight. Only one, until I went to Strasburg in the 70's. But my 50's American Flyer was steam. All the model railroads I saw (not that many as a kid) at least had steam.
Buildings looked like buildings, not Pikestuff sheet metal and Taco Bells. I never ate at a Taco Bell. Modern buildings don't have painted signs on brick walls, unless it's a painted, politically correct mural. They don't have water towers with aged wood.
I watched the Youtube webcams, thinking I should know the difference between an SD##AC and a SD##DC. I even kept a log on an excel spreadsheet. I found most of the locos stayed on the same webcam but no good, they all look the same to me.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
cv_acr ATLANTIC CENTRAL How exactly does one model "Jim Crow" in 1/87th scale? And who is discussing this nonsense? If you are a prototype modeler, and you model certain railroads and locations in a certain era and area, and you tried to accurately model buildings and equipment, it might be subtly implied by separate waiting rooms, divided coaches (this can be noticed on certain coach equipment ordered by certain RRs that had entrance vestibules at both ends when it was normal to have vestibules at one end on other contemporary cars) etc. It's not a conscious choice to "model" it or not exactly, but if you went for a period-accurate model of the rolling stock and/or stations, the answer to "why two waiting rooms" is uncomfortable if your really think about it, even if you didn't realize it. You're just modeling the real-world equipment as it existed, but the reason it was that way in the real world still existed.
I'm not that OCD to scratch build that station that had two waiting rooms. Nor am I putting any interiors in passenger cars that would replicate those conditions. Maybe off this forum I can tell you my interesting 1963 personal experience with some counties in Maryland still segregated and some not. It was a story my mixed race grandchildren found interesting.
So maybe I fail the "serious prototype modeler" test despite my attention to detail for my region and era.
I famously had two hunters field dressing a velociraptor, and components of a scrapped flying saucer in a gondola load.
I guess my 1954 is not as accurate as it should be.
I do like the steam locomotives though.
SeeYou190 I famously had two hunters field dressing a velociraptor, and components of a scrapped flying saucer in a gondola load. I guess my 1954 is not as accurate as it should be. I do like the steam locomotives though. -Kevin seriously Kevin, the Roswell crash was 1947, get your time period straight
seriously Kevin, the Roswell crash was 1947, get your time period straight
I model a mid-century modern street in the US northeast, circa 1957, with a train running behind it. I run F units and a steam shifter with a sloped tender. It is winter.
I don't weather my cars. I want them looking like they would have looked the day they were painted.
The residents on my street mix high-end cocktails, and they listen to jazz and space-age bachelor pad music on their hi-fis. They read The New Yorker and Playboy. In a few years, they will watch Peter Gunn and The Twilight Zone. They voted for Adlai Stevenson in the most recent election, and they will vote for Kennedy in the next.
It's my layout, and that's how I model it.
Billwizseriously Kevin, the Roswell crash was 1947, get your time period straight
Ooops. I guess I accidentally got one "right"?
Shock Control I model a mid-century modern street in the US northeast, circa 1957, with a train running behind it. I run F units and a steam shifter with a sloped tender. It is winter. I don't weather my cars. I want them looking like they would have looked the day they were painted. The residents on my street mix high-end cocktails, and they listen to jazz and space-age bachelor pad music on their hi-fis. They read The New Yorker and Playboy. In a few years, they will watch Peter Gunn and The Twilight Zone. They voted for Adlai Stevenson in the most recent election, and they will vote for Kennedy in the next. It's my layout, and that's how I model it.
OK, that's fine, it's your little world.
I don't even care to think about what might be going on in the heads of my little 1/87 people, or what their politics or beverage habits are.....
But come to think of it, I have never installed a political sign on a layout, and never had a bar or a liquor store on one either........
Great! I need to get another bag of popcorn and, a drink! This thread has gone into different directions!
Keep it up guys! Love it!
ATLANTIC CENTRALOK, that's fine, it's your little world. I don't even care to think about what might be going on in the heads of my little 1/87 people, or what their politics or beverage habits are..... But come to think of it, I have never installed a political sign on a layout, and never had a bar or a liquor store on one either........ Sheldon
Well, I go out of my way to find mid-century moderne structures, so I have to create fantasies about the 1/87 scale people who would have the good taste to live in those houses!
xboxtravis7992 cv_acr ATLANTIC CENTRAL How exactly does one model "Jim Crow" in 1/87th scale? And who is discussing this nonsense? If you are a prototype modeler, and you model certain railroads and locations in a certain era and area, and you tried to accurately model buildings and equipment, it might be subtly implied by separate waiting rooms, divided coaches (this can be noticed on certain coach equipment ordered by certain RRs that had entrance vestibules at both ends when it was normal to have vestibules at one end on other contemporary cars) etc. It's not a conscious choice to "model" it or not exactly, but if you went for a period-accurate model of the rolling stock and/or stations, the answer to "why two waiting rooms" is uncomfortable if your really think about it, even if you didn't realize it. You're just modeling the real-world equipment as it existed, but the reason it was that way in the real world still existed. Yes this was exactly what I was getting at. As the push for more prototypical realism goes, we eventually have to face this issue. Jim Crow is the most obvious example, but I have found plenty of other instances of the ugly moments of the past that were very visible along the railroading history scene (labor rights issues, the near extinction of the Buffalo, war, etc). Ultimately I think there are only two appropriate mindsets to approach it, either we model to utmost prototypical authenticity with the goal to show the ugly side as it was because its honest to our work (while also treading the fine line to not glamorize the ugly parts), or to embrace the world of no societal ills and view our model railroads as a fantastical representation of reality not as it was, but as we wish it was with no crime and no social strife. Eventually I think prototypical modelers will have to answer the question, are we show a segregated world especially on southern railroads in the US in aim of authenticity? Its sometimes shocking to realize that while southern railroads were the biggest offender many of what we consider to be "western lines" like the ATSF and SP also participated in segregation because while most of their line was through the west they had terminals in former Confederate states on the eastern edge of their routes. No the debates haven't been happening on forums like this, but the subject has come up on Facebook and Discord especially among modelers my age. We don't really have a clean cut answer, but the reason I bring it up is part of why I can see the 50's loosing some of their modeling appeal for the current generation. Of course one could choose to model the era of desegregation as those Jim Crow laws ended and those two waiting room stations became one, turning the focus from the ugly time and onto the positive changes that followed it. But how does one comfortably explain that the reason they chose to model a train consist or a station with a clear "whites" and "blacks" section is because they wanted to represent history honestly and not glorify it? Its a question this hobby does need to ask, and it does put the glamor of the 1950's era (and before then too) in the crosshairs.
Yes this was exactly what I was getting at. As the push for more prototypical realism goes, we eventually have to face this issue. Jim Crow is the most obvious example, but I have found plenty of other instances of the ugly moments of the past that were very visible along the railroading history scene (labor rights issues, the near extinction of the Buffalo, war, etc). Ultimately I think there are only two appropriate mindsets to approach it, either we model to utmost prototypical authenticity with the goal to show the ugly side as it was because its honest to our work (while also treading the fine line to not glamorize the ugly parts), or to embrace the world of no societal ills and view our model railroads as a fantastical representation of reality not as it was, but as we wish it was with no crime and no social strife. Eventually I think prototypical modelers will have to answer the question, are we show a segregated world especially on southern railroads in the US in aim of authenticity? Its sometimes shocking to realize that while southern railroads were the biggest offender many of what we consider to be "western lines" like the ATSF and SP also participated in segregation because while most of their line was through the west they had terminals in former Confederate states on the eastern edge of their routes. No the debates haven't been happening on forums like this, but the subject has come up on Facebook and Discord especially among modelers my age. We don't really have a clean cut answer, but the reason I bring it up is part of why I can see the 50's loosing some of their modeling appeal for the current generation. Of course one could choose to model the era of desegregation as those Jim Crow laws ended and those two waiting room stations became one, turning the focus from the ugly time and onto the positive changes that followed it. But how does one comfortably explain that the reason they chose to model a train consist or a station with a clear "whites" and "blacks" section is because they wanted to represent history honestly and not glorify it? Its a question this hobby does need to ask, and it does put the glamor of the 1950's era (and before then too) in the crosshairs.
Well Travis you are welcome to agonize over that moral conundrum however you please. But I lived part of that and I don't have any guilt about anything.
And while I like building models that represent the "objects" of my chosen time period, I am not interested in using my hobby to tell a story of social commentary, good or bad.
It is a hobby and an escape, maybe when your older you will understand the value of that.
So feel free to count me among the fantasy modelers.
I tried to look at Facebook, signed up for two model train groups, can't even deal with how that stuff works. And the other stuff on there........
I could tell the story of my encounter with segregation when I was 6 years old, but I suspect that the moderators would not be happy.
Let's just say as a young white child moving from an intergrated school district to a segragated school district, I was shocked and so was my mother. I'm 63 and I remember it like yesterday.
Dr King was right, we should judge people by the content of their character, funny thing is, Dr King and JFK fail my character test.......
PS - Why am I so cranked up about this? Because if I wanted to hear this kind of BS I would be on Facebook......
I don't think the practical aspect of modeling this era has been mentioned at least for freight modeling - smaller engines, smaller cars equals a chance of a better looking layout. Two bay hoppers, 8,000 gallon tanks, 40 and 50 foot boxcars allows one to have a nice looking train on a 6 x 10 layout or even a 4 x 8. Four axelswitchers ad geeps can look prety good on a 24" radius, big SDs and GEVOs not so much.
ATLANTIC CENTRALDr King was right, we should judge people by the content of their character, funny thing is, Dr King and JFK fail my character test....... Sheldon
Well, they serve as great examples of flawed people who did great things.
Shock Control ATLANTIC CENTRAL Dr King was right, we should judge people by the content of their character, funny thing is, Dr King and JFK fail my character test....... Sheldon Well, they serve as great examples of flawed people who did great things.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Dr King was right, we should judge people by the content of their character, funny thing is, Dr King and JFK fail my character test....... Sheldon
I had a reply, but I feel it is time to just let this go.
arbe1948 I don't think the practical aspect of modeling this era has been mentioned at least for freight modeling - smaller engines, smaller cars equals a chance of a better looking layout. Two bay hoppers, 8,000 gallon tanks, 40 and 50 foot boxcars allows one to have a nice looking train on a 6 x 10 layout or even a 4 x 8. Four axelswitchers ad geeps can look prety good on a 24" radius, big SDs and GEVOs not so much.
Agreed, I am getting ready to build a new layout, a moderately large one. And by modeling the 50's, my large curves, long trains and big spaces will seem even more realistic.
ATLANTIC CENTRALIf I wanted to hear this kind of <SNIP> I would be on Facebook.
I hope the moderators clean this thread up before it gets deleted.
SeeYou190 ATLANTIC CENTRAL If I wanted to hear this kind of <SNIP> I would be on Facebook. I hope the moderators clean this thread up before it gets deleted. -Kevin
ATLANTIC CENTRAL If I wanted to hear this kind of <SNIP> I would be on Facebook.
Agreed,
One last thought to Travis, there has been "ugly" in EVERY time period in the history of man, and we are no more "enlightened" today than 100 years ago. We just think we are.
Trying to get back on subject.
I like modeling my hometown of Toledo, if that were the case now I would be stuck with CSX, GTW and NS none of which I really care about. By modeling the 50's and 60's I have the PRR, NYC, B&O, C&O, NKP, Wabash, DT&I, Ann Arbor, D&TSL and Toledo Terminal along with their much nicer paint schemes compared with the current crap.
And if I really want to go off the reservation I can throw in the Ohio Public Service a freight only Interurban that operated in the 50's.
Rick Jesionowski
Rule 1: This is my railroad.
Rule 2: I make the rules.
Rule 3: Illuminating discussion of prototype history, equipment and operating practices is always welcome, but in the event of visitor-perceived anacronisms, detail descrepancies or operating errors, consult RULE 1!
ATLANTIC CENTRALHow exactly does one model "Jim Crow" in 1/87th scale? Sheldon
So if you got past that without throwing up...
I model the 1930's-1940's for some very pragmatic reasons. Almost all freight still traveled by rail. There were lots of small local trains and lots of industries to switch, as centralization was just getting started. Freight cars were mostly about 40' long, so a train of a given length has more cars than more recent eras, giving a model train a more realistic appearance even if it is short. Highways were mostly primitive, so most travel was still done by rail, meaning passenger trains were in abundance and stopped everywhere.
As far as the not really pragmatic reasons - I love steam, and diesels are "eh..." at best. And the nostalgia factor for that era is very big for me.
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
Many of us like steam locomotives and diesel locomotives. In the 1950's both types of locomotive were in use, and a model railroad can have both types AND be prototypical (real). Many of us want our model world to be prototypical.
Other reasons to model the 1950's. Freight cars in the '50s were only 40 feet long. Later era's began to run 50 foot and longer freight cars. You can fit more 40 foot cars onto a layout than you can 50 footers.
Many of us like to model the era that we grew up in. I grew up in the 1950's giving me a second reason to model the 1950's along side my love of both steam and diesel engines.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com
- As many already mentioned, I also like steam engines, but also have diesels, so it places me in the transition era.
- But also, I like the automobiles from the 50's and 60's.
- Due to limited space, my layout is only 6x9 feet, so I am using smaller curves, which limits me to shorter (= older era) engines and train cars.
I am born in the 60's, so I have no memories to fall back on for my modelling era.
I am not strictly prototypical with my railroad, so I tend to stretch the era, placing it into early 60's, with some older railroad equipment still in use.
When I got into model railroading in the mid-'50s, I didn't have any thoughts about eras, and simply ran what I liked, steam and diesel.When I got into the hobby somewhat deeper in the late '60s/early '70s, I was primarily modelling the time of the start of that era, but couldn't give up on including steam.When I finally had room to build a decent-size layout, it continued in the same vein, but I finally opted to model the late '30s, when the Depression was mostly over, steam was still king (although there were some diesels around), and the future had at least the possibility of even better days ahead. While I try to be reasonably faithful to that time frame, I'm unabashed about running some not-all-that-common cars of that era, especially covered hoppers (although none of the larger and more sophisticated ones seen nowadays).The cars and locos are weathered, but, in most cases, not extremely so, and most of the structures have a well-maintained appearance. For me, the '50s have very little appeal, as much of what I saw and experienced was not to my liking.
Pretty-well all of the following eras were interesting in their own way, but for me, that doesn't make them candidates for modelling.I admit that my layout is a fantasy of what may have been or may not been, but because I acknowledge it as a fantasy, it suits my interests almost perfectly.
Wayne
Sheldon,In the September 2001 issue (page 68), Model Railroader ran an Trackside Photo where the flag pole in front of the town hall building had a Battle Flag of the Army of Tennessee mounted above a US Flag. It caused a big stink on rec.models.railroad in August 2001 at the time. Of course, less than a month later we had more important things to think about.
Paul3 Sheldon,In the September 2001 issue (page 68), Model Railroader ran an Trackside Photo where the flag pole in front of the town hall building had a Battle Flag of the Army of Tennessee mounted above a US Flag. It caused a big stink on rec.models.railroad in August 2001 at the time. Of course, less than a month later we had more important things to think about.
Well, I missed the controversy because I was not on any forums or chat groups in 2001........
I likely looked at the photo without even noticing.
As a student of history, I'm not in favor of re-writing or erasing the ugly parts, but I have no desire to replicate them on my layout either.
I think using the idea of "modeling accuracy" as an excuse to bring this up is a straw man.
I choose to exclude "ugly" from my modeling, if that makes me not "scale" enough or "serious" enough, so be it.
Pruitt ATLANTIC CENTRAL How exactly does one model "Jim Crow" in 1/87th scale? Sheldon Well, I don't know about modeling Jim Crow, but right smack in my modeling era (~1935-1946/7), and in my modeled area, was the Heart Mountain Relocation Center (one of Japanese-American internment camps in WWII). The CB&Q had a station called "Vocation" there for six or seven years. I will be modeling this station stop as it is part of the history of the region. I will not have passenger trains full of American citizens stopping there, as I consider the forced relocation to have been a huge black eye on the history of this country (where were the German-American Relocation Centers?). So if you got past that without throwing up... I model the 1930's-1940's for some very pragmatic reasons. Almost all freight still traveled by rail. There were lots of small local trains and lots of industries to switch, as centralization was just getting started. Freight cars were mostly about 40' long, so a train of a given length has more cars than more recent eras, giving a model train a more realistic appearance even if it is short. Highways were mostly primitive, so most travel was still done by rail, meaning passenger trains were in abundance and stopped everywhere. As far as the not really pragmatic reasons - I love steam, and diesels are "eh..." at best. And the nostalgia factor for that era is very big for me.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL How exactly does one model "Jim Crow" in 1/87th scale? Sheldon
Well, I don't know about modeling Jim Crow, but right smack in my modeling era (~1935-1946/7), and in my modeled area, was the Heart Mountain Relocation Center (one of Japanese-American internment camps in WWII). The CB&Q had a station called "Vocation" there for six or seven years. I will be modeling this station stop as it is part of the history of the region. I will not have passenger trains full of American citizens stopping there, as I consider the forced relocation to have been a huge black eye on the history of this country (where were the German-American Relocation Centers?).
Interesting how where you grow up influences certain perspectives. Growing up in Nebraska, or maybe Wyoming, Jim Crow laws were discussed probably in a 10 minute session in junior high or high school sociology class, but I can tell you a lot about the Mormon Trial, the Oregon Trail, Indian wars of the west. Folks who lived back east probably had time for different subjects than folks living in the Prairie/West.
When I moved to Indiana at age 22, people were baffled by my lack of detailed knowledge of the American Civil War. I knew about Grant and Lee, but the people I met knew the names of many generals on both sides, battles, weapons of the day. Of course the civil war happened near Indiana. Nebraska wasn't even a state until 1867.
I guess now kids are supposed to learn certain things in a uniform manner, with geographic emphasis being less important. Oh well.
German Amercians were not considered a threat because there was no chance of the Germans ever invading America....or Britain for that matter. Germany never commisioned a proper Navy, never thought of it because invading USA or Britain was never the plan...no landing crafts etc....no aircraft carriers, just a few battle ships and U boats built for sinking supply ships, not for bombarding shorelines. Germany's threat was on a different level, notably mainland europe and future economic domination of that contintent, not direct to America. Japan's Navy was huge, including numerous aircraft carriers. Ocean-going invasions is what Japan did back then, and invasion of the west coast was thought to be a real threat. The dynamics were not the same.
But, the thought of modeling social issues on my layout never occurred to me. I'm not a big non-railroad scenery person. My shelf layouts focus on the trains and industries so any people I place on the layout will be workers, which I assume will be mostly male considering the trains and the industries.
Since I focus on a switching layouts, branch line layouts, I can dictate the types of cars on the layout. Two bay cement hoppers, short corn syrup tank cars, oil tank cars that are about 53 feet long.
There are still plenty of short cars to adequately model modern era in modest spaces.
Pruittwhere were the German-American Relocation Centers?)
Lots of places.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_German_Americans#World_War_II
The War Department wanted mass relocation for all Axis-related Americans, but couldn't figure out how to manage the 15+ million German and Italian Americans.
What an interesting thread. Once over I thought it was going to be 'blocked'.
I wasn't going to join in as the O.P. was talking of the layouts set in the 1940s.
Speaking from the UK when I was a lad most layouts were of the Great Western region; mainly 1930s.
Times and plans change. Now with a lot of models ready available peope can build a layout quickly. The trouble arises that although rule 1 applies people are not really modeling; just placing items on a board. They haven't thought out the overal plan. They haven't modeled anything. They run trains without a reason. They then become enchanted and give up - maybe to build another layout or give up altogether.
I have two layouts running on the same track plan.
First is diesels set in a timeframe 1968 - 1983. Why then? It was a time when I was around the 1-1 scale. The models I have I have seen most of the real ones.
The scenery the trains run through are of areas my family know, therefore are involved one way or another.
My other layout is steam in 1914 - 1919. I was reading a book about The North Eastern Railways prior to and during The Great War. It mentions that in 1909 Railway Companies were told to build 'Ambulance Trains' for in case of war. Nursing Staff to 'be ready' for any emergency regarding war. In 1912 Several Military Manouvres took place on the East Coast in case of invasion. Britain had a great fear that 'a country in the east' would invade. (Germany was that country although never mentioned.)
The factories on my Sovereign Street section are 'in the main' making materials for the war effort. Engineering and clothing are the products. Trains that run all have a purpose.
I make little scenes around the layout to 'bring life' to it. Scenes that are nothing to do with railroads, but are /was all around us. I dislike things being 'perfect'. The sky is not all blue. The grass is not always cut short. Even now I have walked thrugh long grass up to my waist. Trees are fifty shades of green. The color black is very, very difficult to see in nature.
That's me and my railroad. My railroad that has a reason to be there. A living railroad.
David
To the world you are someone. To someone you are the world
I cannot afford the luxury of a negative thought
Well, I picked the early 50's for the mix of steam and diesel. I picked the Maryland and Pennsylvania RR because it had small steam, freight cars, and passenger cars dating back to the early 1900's. It also had diesel switchers (SW1, NW2, SW9).
As others mentioned, I don't model segregation, dirt, depression, graphetti, etc. If I want depressing realism, the evening news brings me plenty.
Enjoy
Paul
Wayne nailed it for me! I started out in HO in 1951 and just stayed there. I loved trains and the trains I liked the best were what I saw every day as a teen. The powerful Southern Pacific AC-9s pulling the slight grade from ElPaso TX to Alamogordo NM every morning. The AC-9s would be going north when I walked to school in the mornings and the SP Golden State passenger was headed south into town on my way home from school. Early on the Golden State was pulled by Alco PAs and about a year later by EMD E7s. Thus my love for both steam and diesel of the early to mid 1950s. I graduated high school in 1956 so that ended walking under the SP tracks every day but the memories of those times have stayed with me for 65 years.I was helped along by my mentor John Allen and his original G&D layout. His small 3’7” by 6’8” G&D could be replicated in a bedroom of a railroad crazy teen. I didn’t buy my first diesel until the 60s, my Roundhouse 0-6-0 served me well for many years until I bought my first F7 but stuck with my steam, the rubber band drive didn’t do much for me. The F7 bit the dust somewhere along the way but my 0-6-0 still looks and runs like it did when I bought it 70 years ago, great! Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
It's hard with a topic like this to come up with a "one size fits all" answer. Some folks like the 1950's because they're old enough to remember it, and want to recreate what they saw. But some younger folks want to model that time to recreate the things they missed because they hadn't been born yet, like steam engines and the great streamlined passenger trains. Others have a family connection, ancestors or other relatives who were railroaders back in that time and passed along their stories and knowledge.
And others find tons of 50s-era HO stuff for short dough at train shows. Availability influences choices.
The 1940s were really the first well documented era of railroading for the enthusiast and modeler -- the Lucius Beebe picture books, the introduction of Trains magazine by Kalmbach. One could make the case that the decades from 1900 to 1940 were even more interesting from a modeling perspective -- when even small towns had passenger train service (and a depot with an agent/operator), and even pretty small businesses and factories had rail service because the truck business was not yet really national. But it was not a well documented era in ways that were accessible to the railfan and modeler. Now in the internet age we see some astounding documentation from long ago, but that stuff was not easy to find before Google!
Another factor is that the hobby is aging. It was still a young person's hobby -- both toy and scale model trains -- into the 1950s. Then things started to change.
Yet another factor is that you can only buy what someone is selling and that first enthusiasic rush towards mass produced locomotives, rolling stock, structures that came after WWII -- well some of that tooling proved to be remarkably durable. Many models that were for sale in 1950 -- and modeled the then current era -- were still for sale in 2000 and some are still for sale here in 2021!
Dave Nelson
Stop making me regret picking Conrail in 1979 lol
My local club models 50's and a lot of elements are transferable between the two eras in a way. Many of the buildings were still up, albeit some abandoned after the disastrous state of the 70's economy. A lot of freight cars from the 50's can easily be mixed into a 1970s era consist (would look off without a COTS label though), and 50's cars were relatively well represented, even if many families had replaced them with more modern "economical" cars.
After seeing that FAIL of a fundraising pitch, I am thinking of modeling Penn Central. There are lots of broken PRR and NYC cars at the train shows.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL OK, that's fine, it's your little world. I don't even care to think about what might be going on in the heads of my little 1/87 people, or what their politics or beverage habits are..... But come to think of it, I have never installed a political sign on a layout, and never had a bar or a liquor store on one either........ Sheldon
I have one liquor store and four bars on my layout. I've also got a brewery turning out Strumpet Beer and Ale, plus a delivery truck and an ice bunker reefer I've built for the same brand. I know my era is a bit late for billboard beer reefers, but I like them so I have them.
I'm not too harsh about enforcing era rules. There are a couple of early sixties autos, and the lastest thing on the layout is a Playboy centerfold from 1967, hung above a workbench inside the roundhouse. My structures are mostly either brick or clapboard, so they span many eras.
Boxcars all have roofwalks.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
I set my date in 1954 with automobile billboards. That works well for me. Three advertisements for the 1954 cars that are a bit faded are fine.
MisterBeasley ATLANTIC CENTRAL OK, that's fine, it's your little world. I don't even care to think about what might be going on in the heads of my little 1/87 people, or what their politics or beverage habits are..... But come to think of it, I have never installed a political sign on a layout, and never had a bar or a liquor store on one either........ Sheldon I have one liquor store and four bars on my layout. I've also got a brewery turning out Strumpet Beer and Ale, plus a delivery truck and an ice bunker reefer I've built for the same brand. I know my era is a bit late for billboard beer reefers, but I like them so I have them. I'm not too harsh about enforcing era rules. There are a couple of early sixties autos, and the lastest thing on the layout is a Playboy centerfold from 1967, hung above a workbench inside the roundhouse. My structures are mostly either brick or clapboard, so they span many eras. Boxcars all have roofwalks.
I have no issue with those who drink "adult" beverages, but having watched up close as a number of people have struggled with drug and alcohol addiction, I made the choice to set a specific different example. I don't drink.
Before making that choice I was only the most occasional social drinker. I don't miss it one bit, but then again I never craved it.
I think I have a billboard reefer or two floating around, but it is just something I don't think about. I could barely tell you the name or location of a liquor store here in our little town, so I have never thought to put one on the layout.
I don't go to "bars", we don't eat in the "bar" section at restaurants. It is just off my radar completely.
Lastspikemike Parts of this thread a tad alarming to those of us outside the USA. It is important to know about the history of the rest of the World.
Parts of this thread a tad alarming to those of us outside the USA.
It is important to know about the history of the rest of the World.
Once again, nothing from the OP Mr. Slade. Another one these post. Sorry I replied to begin with.
Mr. Slade can go back into hiding.
mbinsewiOnce again, nothing from the OP Mr. Slade.
His post might have sat in the "waiting admin approval" queue for a couple days. In that time he probably assumed it was lost to gremlins, and went on.
I would like the forum to send an email to new members letting them know how this process works.
By the time we see it, and welcome them in, they might have given up already.
Or, Mr. Slade might have been turned off by the ugliness in some responses.
Yes, thank you Travis.
If we use his logic:
We can't model the 50's because of segregation.
We can't model the 40's because of Hitler and the Holocaust would be too much in focus.
We can't model the 30's because of the depression.
We can't model the 20's because of gangsters, speakeasy's and risky investments.
We can't model the teens because of the other ugly war and a flue pandemic.
And the 1860's would be totally off the table, as would the rest of the later 19th century.....
Etc, etc
I think Jim Slade may be held up by not posting more than once. He has to get multiple approvals before he gets off 'moderation'.
I for one am interested in the movement in that 'railroad Hamilton watch". It turns out to be true that some railroads did not approve 'older' watches, regardless of condition, for certain service -- one potential later reason being the risk of magnetization of the hairspring. That does not change the interest in the craftsmanship and precision that went into true railroad grade ... or in some of the schemes and scams that could accompany that...
Can we see pictures of the watch and its inner workings?
OvermodI think Jim Slade may be held up by not posting more than once. He has to get multiple approvals before he gets off 'moderation'.
OK, I guess, I thought once your post showed up, you were already approved, and the post was allowed to be.
So, after he posted this, then he went into moderation?
Whatever, agree with Kevin, they should let new members know this proceedure.
Usually the first 5 or so posts by a new member are moderated. Unless there is reason to continue moderation, the admins will generally clear a member for unlimited posting after this probationary period.
I did check the moderation forum yesterday and today and Jim has not submitted another post. Therefore, it's speculation as to the reason or reasons he has not posted again. We'll just have to wait and see...
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
I think he's humbly lurking while he reads the opinions. He needs to be "proactive" in posting multiple times at the beginning, which might 'go against the grain' for someone new -- but I think it is advisable, and I've furnished one 'excuse'.
SeeYou190 Or, Mr. Slade might have been turned off by the ugliness in some responses. -Kevin
I think Kevin nailed it.The OP stated “First off, love model railroads.”
I’ll be surprised if he stays. Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
I think its presumptive to assume that others are as offended as we are, for whatever it was that was even offensive in this thread.
I've seen a lot of OPs give up on a thread after posing a question.
RR_Mel SeeYou190 Or, Mr. Slade might have been turned off by the ugliness in some responses. -Kevin I think Kevin nailed it.The OP stated “First off, love model railroads.” I’ll be surprised if he stays. Mel My Model Railroad http://melvineperry.blogspot.com/ Bakersfield, California I'm beginning to realize that aging is not for wimps.
Well, Travis "suggested" that modeling the Southeast United States "too correctly" in the 1940's or 50's might imply one is not "racially sensitive" enough for todays politically correct climate.
Maybe the OP did not take well to the idea of being called a racist because he likes trains from the 40's and 50's?
However obsurd the connection might be. And it is an absurd connection, that's why I called him on it.
To me that sparks a tangential question, what is model railroading?
If you're modeling people to the degree that there should be the "proper" level of diversity and social awareness, it kind of gets into the depths of modeling. Stuff I would address after the layout is mainly finished. I'd be still working on the correct angle and look of a caged ladder on a cement silo, adding broken pallets to a loading dock, than thinking about that stuff, if I ever would make the time to do so.
Its certainly modeling. And could be very good modeling. What's being modeled, I'm not sure.
Doughless What's being modeled, I'm not sure.
My layout is a fantasy. Most I would categorize as caricatures. I have never seen any layout that tried to model to social strife of its time period except for the occassional picket line or gathering of beatnicks.
I have seen more godzillas and king kongs on layouts than people getting arrested.
Let's get back to having fun.
There is a gentleman who I believe lives in Los Angeles, and he tries to model very realistically the contemporary era. He has or had videos on YouTube. He said he almost never runs the trains. His layout shows people getting arrested, victims of crime, and, IIRC, a burning building. If that's your thing, great, but I would never think of doing something like this.
SeeYou190Or, Mr. Slade might have been turned off by the ugliness in some responses. -Kevin
Or pontificating by those who ad-nauseum loudly self exalt themselves belaboring narcisstic comments such as "I always life long make the right choices for the right reason and rarely if ever make a mistakes". /out hear before the lock
Rio Grande. The Action Road - Focus 1977-1983
I'm going to go against the grain and say why I didn't go with the transition era.
Variety, documentation, and aesthetics.
While, yes, the 40s/50s definitely had more road names to pick from and there's more kinds of 40' boxcar than I could ever hope to understand, railcars have had a relentless march towards specialization. Aside from stockcars vanishing, every type of railcar that existed then, exists now. But, there were few covered hoppers, none of them the big 3, 4, 5, or 6 bay ones that come in all kinds of shapes and size. Tank cars didn't come in the massive variety they do now. The entire set of intermodal didn't exist. Automobiles still went in boxcars. Even the simple hopper didn't have as big a family tree. Coil cars, one of my personal favorites, were still in the future.
Access to documentation is different too. I didn't go with my childhood because I didn't trust my own memories, plus there was something of a transition going on in my area in the late 80s and early 90s. Contemporary modeling gave me access to a period of time with large scale digital photography. No one had to digitize someone's old slides. They just natively uploaded them to websites. Shifting a few years ahead of my original plan gave me Street View. I have a literal time machine. Plus, by going with my own adulthood, I have personal documentation. I don't envy those guys that I see at the shows digging through the binders of slides. I can still drive over to a spot to check something out.
Honestly, judging from my family photos and recollections, Western Pennsylvania in the 40s and 50s was ugly. Everything was filthy. The sky was a uniform battleship gray. My mom recalls the days they weren't allowed to go play in the snow because it was orange, from pollution from the nearby sintering plant. Everything had a thin film of coal dust on it, year round. Most surprisingly, is that there wasn't a dang tree anywhere in sight. The woods I played in as a kid were barren scrubland when my parents were kids. Frankly, it isn't an environment I was interested in duplicating. We have pictures that are color pictures, but you would only know if someone told you. It was a dirty, nasty place.
NittanyLionWhile, yes, the 40s/50s definitely had more road names to pick from and there's more kinds of 40' boxcar than I could ever hope to understand, railcars have had a relentless march towards specialization.
In my boxcar fleet, I have dozens of different styles of 40 foot boxcars, but 90% of them are reddish brown. I can certainly understand the attraction of a more colorful world that modern eras offer.
NittanyLionHonestly, judging from my family photos and recollections, Western Pennsylvania in the 40s and 50s was ugly. Everything was filthy.
Yes. The more I researched 1954, I was amazed at how dirty and filthy everything was. I model the myth, not the reality.
The beauty of model railroading. There is no right or wrong as far as I can see.
Whatever a modeler builds is entirely up to them and if they enjoy it, great.
Keep it that way.
SeeYou190 NittanyLion While, yes, the 40s/50s definitely had more road names to pick from and there's more kinds of 40' boxcar than I could ever hope to understand, railcars have had a relentless march towards specialization. In my boxcar fleet, I have dozens of different styles of 40 foot boxcars, but 90% of them are reddish brown. I can certainly understand the attraction of a more colorful world that modern eras offer. NittanyLion Honestly, judging from my family photos and recollections, Western Pennsylvania in the 40s and 50s was ugly. Everything was filthy. Yes. The more I researched 1954, I was amazed at how dirty and filthy everything was. I model the myth, not the reality. -Kevin
NittanyLion While, yes, the 40s/50s definitely had more road names to pick from and there's more kinds of 40' boxcar than I could ever hope to understand, railcars have had a relentless march towards specialization.
NittanyLion Honestly, judging from my family photos and recollections, Western Pennsylvania in the 40s and 50s was ugly. Everything was filthy.
Yes, the industrial areas in big cities were dirty in the 50's, and the 60's, 70's and the 80's when I sold MATCO TOOLS in southeast Baltimore. And those old industrial areas are still working and they are still dirty today.........
SeeYou190 Doughless What's being modeled, I'm not sure. My layout is a fantasy. Most I would categorize as caricatures. I have never seen any layout that tried to model to social strife of its time period except for the occassional picket line or gathering of beatnicks. I have seen more godzillas and king kongs on layouts than people getting arrested. Let's get back to having fun. -Kevin
The choice between fantasy or realism is in the beholder. Whether its dinosaur fights or people getting arrested neither really has to do with supporting the trains. Its fine that folks do that, and it is fun and harmless since its just a modeling scene, I was just commenting that the kinds of scenes that folks are talking about modeling or avoiding modeling simply do get much consideration from me.
Maybe because I haven't gotten as far into the fine details and I'm still building landscaping, structures, and ballasting before the layout has to be taken down.
I have really attempted to stick to a 1950's era, late steam/early diesel layout, and I just can't do it because for me there's too much modern equipment that I like, and said modern equipment looks silly behind a big articulated. Don't get me wrong, I love steam and the early diesels, always wanted a CB&Q E-5A, yet at the same time, I was not there and have absolutely no memories of that era or even the '60's. So I always cave and switch back to late '70's/early '80's which I do remember.
Yes, I have a few GP-7's, but they are in later paint schemes worn well after the steam era, and I'm only planning to have one steam engine, a 2-8-8-4, for myself (son will have 3). All the rest of my rolling stock fits pretty well in the 1970's and 1980's at this point.
I do not mean to infer that others should do what I'm doing at all; it's just the time period that I vaguely remember. I specifically remember all the pre-Conrail rolling stock fading into history. I also have good memories of the bicentennial celebrations and of seeing the eastern Freedom Train in person. It was a good time to be a kid.
John
NittanyLion I'm going to go against the grain and say why I didn't go with the transition era. Variety, documentation, and aesthetics. While, yes, the 40s/50s definitely had more road names to pick from and there's more kinds of 40' boxcar than I could ever hope to understand, railcars have had a relentless march towards specialization. Aside from stockcars vanishing, every type of railcar that existed then, exists now. But, there were few covered hoppers, none of them the big 3, 4, 5, or 6 bay ones that come in all kinds of shapes and size. Tank cars didn't come in the massive variety they do now. The entire set of intermodal didn't exist. Automobiles still went in boxcars. Even the simple hopper didn't have as big a family tree. Coil cars, one of my personal favorites, were still in the future. Access to documentation is different too. I didn't go with my childhood because I didn't trust my own memories, plus there was something of a transition going on in my area in the late 80s and early 90s. Contemporary modeling gave me access to a period of time with large scale digital photography. No one had to digitize someone's old slides. They just natively uploaded them to websites. Shifting a few years ahead of my original plan gave me Street View. I have a literal time machine. Plus, by going with my own adulthood, I have personal documentation. I don't envy those guys that I see at the shows digging through the binders of slides. I can still drive over to a spot to check something out. Honestly, judging from my family photos and recollections, Western Pennsylvania in the 40s and 50s was ugly. Everything was filthy. The sky was a uniform battleship gray. My mom recalls the days they weren't allowed to go play in the snow because it was orange, from pollution from the nearby sintering plant. Everything had a thin film of coal dust on it, year round. Most surprisingly, is that there wasn't a dang tree anywhere in sight. The woods I played in as a kid were barren scrubland when my parents were kids. Frankly, it isn't an environment I was interested in duplicating. We have pictures that are color pictures, but you would only know if someone told you. It was a dirty, nasty place.
This is a good comment. It mirrors my feelings well. I usually just say that I like to model what I see (or saw 10 to 15 years ago that has been pressed into my memory that it seems like yesterday). Your explanation provides more detail about how I think about my interests.
Interesting comments about industrial areas. My experience with real life railroads comes from small towns, rural areas, or suburbs. Pole type buildings, prefab concrete walls, warehouse looking structures located outside of congested older areas. I guess its a bit cleaner and newer environment than other things that can be modeled.
Interestingly, at age 58 I find that in my memories of my youth, and in my memories of traveling through the countryside during the bulk of my career from age 22 to 50, its always a warm sunny day in the spring or summer. Which I find strange for a person who lived in the midwest where its cold and cloudy probably 40-50% of the days. I guess I'm an optimist at the heart, and somehow can't recall the gloomier times. I don't think I could model a winter or leafless brown/gray late autumn timeframe.
Doughless I don't think I could model a winter or leafless brown/gray late autumn timeframe. I bet you could do a small section of your layout. Be a little different. A little gray sky. Not many leaves on the trees. Fifty shades of brown. An old bird's nest in a tree. I know you can do it. Dare yourself to have a layout that is a little different. David
I don't think I could model a winter or leafless brown/gray late autumn timeframe.
I bet you could do a small section of your layout. Be a little different.
A little gray sky. Not many leaves on the trees. Fifty shades of brown. An old bird's nest in a tree. I know you can do it. Dare yourself to have a layout that is a little different.
Doughless I don't think I could model a winter or leafless brown/gray late autumn timeframe.
I like what Mike Confalone did with his Allagash. Gray skies, bare trees, some snow.
Not to get off topic,
There is another guy out there, can't think of his name.
I model thee CGW(loosly) in the 50s. That was the era of my childhood.
Mike
LastspikemikeI find it interesting that movie sets usually show
Everything on a set is posed, positioned, lighted, and focused to intentionally set a mood for the production.
The cleanliness of any automobiles it decided upon to set mood, era, and possibly locale.
Also, vintage automobiles shown in Hollywood movies are virtually always rented by the studio, often from vintage car collectors living in southern California. I suspect the studios may therefore not wish to 'dirty up' these valuable rented vehicles, or the owners of the car maybe stipulate in the rental agreement that the car cannot be altered etc.
It may depend too on the era and location of where the movie is set. Cars in areas with snow often rust more than cars in warmer weather states, due to the salt and now chemicals put on roads in the winter to melt ice and snow off them.
Plus, for movies set in the past, it could just be that people in the 'olden days' kept their cars cleaner. As a kid, seems like there were a lot of TV ads for Turtle Wax and different types of products for washing and waxing your car at home. I know my father parked the '60 Chev in the driveway and hand washed it with the garden hose quite frequently.
Great topic ... enjoying the varied reasons for selecting a timeframe. Add me to the list of people who model what I saw growing up. Living just north of Pittsburgh, Conrail was a natural choice. As for my time period of 1989 - 1992: that's when I first "got the railroad bug" and so the nostalgia of that combined with my youth froze that period in my mind. It's a good period to model IMO -- past the rusty days of the bankrupt Eastern roads but before every car became a rolling canvas for "artists"; and plenty of different types of rolling stock that so often now are just endless intermodal trains of containers.
wjstix Also, vintage automobiles shown in Hollywood movies are virtually always rented by the studio, often from vintage car collectors living in southern California. I suspect the studios may therefore not wish to 'dirty up' these valuable rented vehicles, or the owners of the car maybe stipulate in the rental agreement that the car cannot be altered etc. It may depend too on the era and location of where the movie is set. Cars in areas with snow often rust more than cars in warmer weather states, due to the salt and now chemicals put on roads in the winter to melt ice and snow off them. Plus, for movies set in the past, it could just be that people in the 'olden days' kept their cars cleaner. As a kid, seems like there were a lot of TV ads for Turtle Wax and different types of products for washing and waxing your car at home. I know my father parked the '60 Chev in the driveway and hand washed it with the garden hose quite frequently.
I got to see one such car close up at an auto show in Columbus, Oh. At the time it was owned by Len Imke, a local car dealer. It was a yellow late 1930s convertible. It had a rather impressive resume. It made its debut in Casablanca. I'm not positive since the movie is black and white but I think it is the car Major Strasser was racing to the airport in near the end of the movie. It appeared in The Godfather. If I remember right, it was passed by Vito Corleone's ambulance when he was being driven home from the hospital. I've think I've spotted it in a number of other movies made before and since then. I believe I saw it in the movie Seabiscuit. In almost every case, it makes no more than a cameo appearance in a movie. A few seconds on film than back to the owner. I'm not sure who owns it now.
For my next layout, I am thinking of modeling Stonehenge in HO, circa 1959. I'm looking for old photos so I can replicate the exact amount of wear and tear on the stones that would have reflected its 1959 condition.
Around the perimiter, I plan to run a Lionel HO train with the exploding boxcar, helicopter car, satellite car, missile car, and livestock car with the giraffe poking his head out of the top.
A big part of their popularity is that trains were shorter and locomotives and cars were smaller and thus more "modelable" back in the 40s and 50s. In contrast, modelling the present day accurately presents some big challenges as trains are 150 to 200 cars long typically, unless you're modelling a shortline or spur. And then there's the aesthetics.. I like the modern power and rolling stock but not the graffitti.. so I model the mid to late 90s..
I model the modern era, because I generally like the modern design of F units. The modern era also had shorter cars and engines that could go around 18" radius curves.
I do not model the contemporary era.
Shock Control I model the modern era, because I generally like the modern design of F units. The modern era also had shorter cars and engines that could go around 18" radius curves. I do not model the contemporary era.
You call it the modern era, but most readers on here are not going to understand. They will, think you are talking about present day. All those elements of style that you appreciate from that time are just a blur in history to most people.
Turns out my customer who pays me to help him rehab houses has just had us get started on his latest project. A 1983 post modern revival interpratation that has seen better days.
Been busy for a two weeks helping him plan changes and starting on 5hem.
Most of vestiges of 50s railroading were with us all the way up until the late 60s..most of the freight car fleet was still 40-50 ft, the paint jobs of the 50s were still visible, we still had the REA and its green trucks everywhere, mail (until 1968) still moved by train, we had rr operated passenger service (ableit less of it), there were still depots and freight houses, except for the dime stores and dept stores, small towns had mostly local businesses, the design of large trucks didn't change much from the 50s (Kenworths, Macks, Whites). So even if you model the 60s you can still have things from the 50s. (except for steam)
Why model the 1940s-50s?
Two words: steam locomotives.
The transition era allows us to model the biggest, best and most easily acquired steam loco models, ones that were most recently witnessed and are the most photographed. Transition era info is the most accessible info from the steam era, and of course we get to throw in diesels too.
More broadly, the variety of motive power & rolling stock, the vast catalogues of information & pictures (and oral histories!) readily available for modelers, the colorful variety of well-maintained equipment, and the vibrant local surroundings unique to each railroad (which were much closer to their communities back then) mean the transition era is the easiest and most exciting entry point for many modelers.
Personally, I wasn't born anywhere near the 1950s (I'm a late millennial!) but the transition era is easily the most appealing, it allows me to use the adult versions of steam locos I saw on TV as a kid, and it presents (*on the surface*) a veritable utopia, before urban decay/suburban flight destroyed our cities, rural areas emptied out, and countrysides were paved over with ugly subdivisions.
azrailMost of the freight car fleet was still 40-50 ft, the paint jobs of the 50s were still visible, we still had the REA and its green trucks everywhere, mail (until 1968) still moved by train.
The STRATTON AND GILLETTE was originally set in 1968. That is a great year to model. You had the distinctive design on second generation diesels, newer styles of rolling stock, but all the cool stuff from the 50s was still floating around.
MjorstadTwo words: steam locomotives.
And there is the reason why the SGRR was back-dated to 1954.
I settled on the mid 50's for my switching layout for a number of reasons:
1) Absolutely LOVE the Great Northern paint scheme of that period.
2) Smaller diesel engines, more smaller industries served by rail, more LTL freight and colorful 40' cars.
3) Really enjoy looking at the many cars and trucks of the day that are a part of the scenery. It became 1957 specifically so I could include the Ford C model tilt cabs (1957-1990) in my scenes.
LastspikemikeComtemporary railroads are exceptionally difficult to model convincingly unless you have lots of space (and money to fill it with) or prefer N scale.
There are several members of this forum convincingly modeling contemporary railroads in small spaces.
Maybe they are just unusually good at overcoming exceptional difficulties.
It all depends on what your goals are. Sheldon needs a basement to model 1954 to his liking, but many model 2010 beautifully on a shelf.
Lastspikemike Plus more stuff was moved by rail until the highway system
Plus more stuff was moved by rail until the highway system
Freight's decline started way earlier than that. Trucking put the knife into railroads in the 1930s, but peak mileage was hit in 1916. Track mileage decreased more between 1916 and 1945 than 1945 to 1965.
If you like passenger train movements the transition era pretty much maximizes that aspect.
The transition era was the era of massive passenger cuts. The 60s gets the coverage because that's when the patient died, but passenger service was admitted to hospice care in the 1950s. Peak passenger service was 1920. The transition era came after a generation of decline.
World War II simply interrupted a decline for about 10 years. The problems of the late 60s and early 70s actually started in the 50s, but were caused by events in the 30s that were modestly delayed in the 40s. The era was hardly a golden age like it is depicted.
NittanyLion Lastspikemike Plus more stuff was moved by rail until the highway system Freight's decline started way earlier than that. Trucking put the knife into railroads in the 1930s, but peak mileage was hit in 1916. Track mileage decreased more between 1916 and 1945 than 1945 to 1965. If you like passenger train movements the transition era pretty much maximizes that aspect. The transition era was the era of massive passenger cuts. The 60s gets the coverage because that's when the patient died, but passenger service was admitted to hospice care in the 1950s. Peak passenger service was 1920. The transition era came after a generation of decline. World War II simply interrupted a decline for about 10 years. The problems of the late 60s and early 70s actually started in the 50s, but were caused by events in the 30s that were modestly delayed in the 40s. The era was hardly a golden age like it is depicted.
Here is what all the negative Nancy's don't understand.
It is not about the numbers or the outcomes at the end of the decade or early in the next decade.
It is about renewal, hope and optimism.
The war was hard on the railroads infrastructure, the 50's was a time of rebuilding, looking forward, new ideas, new technolgy.
Diesel locomotives
New freight equipment, some of it with bright new optimistic paint schemes.
New ideas like piggyback, express freight trains, open auto racks, the beginning of better bulk cars like covered hoppers.
Ideas, failed or not, to compete with highways and airlines, like the RDC.
And, the last and best of steam trying to hold its own against the diesel.
Roller bearings, better trucks, better brakes, longer trains, faster trains, radios, bigger freight cars, and more.
Did they know how it would all play out in 1954 as Chevrolet debuted the 265 Small Block V8 at the Detroit Auto Show? No.
But the railroads were optimistic. So was most of the country about most everything.
Was it some sort of utopian paradise? No, no period of time ever is.
But if you pretend in your head that it is 1954 so you can built this little model world, you don't know yet what is going to happen in 1963.
Here is what should have happened in 1954.
They should have de-regulated the trucks and the trains then rather than three decades later. And by doing so they would have fostered intergration of trucks and trains from the beginning of that technolgy.
They should have held the line with tractor trailer length and weight just on the basis of safety.
They should have compelled the air line industry to build their own infrastructure - the government never built the train stations?
But who cares? It was an interesting time for railroading, and one with a hopeful, outlook.
azrail Most of vestiges of 50s railroading were with us all the way up until the late 60s..most of the freight car fleet was still 40-50 ft, the paint jobs of the 50s were still visible, we still had the REA and its green trucks everywhere, mail (until 1968) still moved by train, we had rr operated passenger service (ableit less of it), there were still depots and freight houses, except for the dime stores and dept stores, small towns had mostly local businesses, the design of large trucks didn't change much from the 50s (Kenworths, Macks, Whites). So even if you model the 60s you can still have things from the 50s. (except for steam)
In some cases even longer - Carolina Freight was still using early 50's Mack B models for local deliveries in the late 70's..........
ATLANTIC CENTRAL You call it the modern era, but most readers on here are not going to understand. They will, think you are talking about present day.
You are correct. But misuse of the word "modern" is really jarring to me.
Shock Control ATLANTIC CENTRAL You call it the modern era, but most readers on here are not going to understand. They will, think you are talking about present day. You are correct. But misuse of the word "modern" is really jarring to me.
Well, the first definition in the dictionary is:
1 : of or characteristic of the present time or times not long past modern machinery.
So that is how people not trained in Architecture read that word.
Lastspikemike Many people believe railroads were not paid for by government but in many if not most cases that is illusory. Subsidization of railroad construction was widespread. Ubiquitous up here in Canada. The extent of subsidization is staggering up here. I have just finished "The Last Spike" and the descriptions of the financing are amazing. Then of course there is the public utility case supporting such subsidization which is very easy to defend. Competing airport locations funded by competing entrepreneurs are not even advantageous theoretically. Neither are train stations. Regulated interstate commerce was a subsidy system. It worked for railroads. It did not work for road freight. Reason? Roads were the subsidy. Road freight did not need the additional subsidy provided by operating authorities. That was pork barrelling taken to the extreme. Ditto taxi licensing. Uber's greatest contribution to our economy was to illuminate just how corrupt the taxi licensing schemes became. Doubt that? Check out the pricing of sales of taxi businesses. Historically, the sums exchanged for trucking outfits just to acquire their operating authorities were staggering. So, I suspect that the popularity of modelling the transition era is unconnected to the economics of the times. Many of us were born during that era. Travel by train was still not only feasible, economic and relatively pleasant it was still in many ways superior to plane travel and way better than a Greyhound bus. It still is in Europe. The private car is the main competition to passenger rail in Europe. Freight by rail still competed with road haulage leading to interesting short trains with short cars, small classification yards and repair and service shops everywhere and the ubiquitos branch line so beloved of current hobbyists.
Many people believe railroads were not paid for by government but in many if not most cases that is illusory. Subsidization of railroad construction was widespread. Ubiquitous up here in Canada. The extent of subsidization is staggering up here. I have just finished "The Last Spike" and the descriptions of the financing are amazing.
Then of course there is the public utility case supporting such subsidization which is very easy to defend. Competing airport locations funded by competing entrepreneurs are not even advantageous theoretically. Neither are train stations.
Regulated interstate commerce was a subsidy system. It worked for railroads. It did not work for road freight. Reason? Roads were the subsidy. Road freight did not need the additional subsidy provided by operating authorities. That was pork barrelling taken to the extreme. Ditto taxi licensing. Uber's greatest contribution to our economy was to illuminate just how corrupt the taxi licensing schemes became. Doubt that? Check out the pricing of sales of taxi businesses. Historically, the sums exchanged for trucking outfits just to acquire their operating authorities were staggering.
So, I suspect that the popularity of modelling the transition era is unconnected to the economics of the times. Many of us were born during that era. Travel by train was still not only feasible, economic and relatively pleasant it was still in many ways superior to plane travel and way better than a Greyhound bus. It still is in Europe. The private car is the main competition to passenger rail in Europe.
Freight by rail still competed with road haulage leading to interesting short trains with short cars, small classification yards and repair and service shops everywhere and the ubiquitos branch line so beloved of current hobbyists.
I agree with how Sheldon put it at let me explain my take on it.
True, government gets into the subsidy/regulation business when it feels that any privately owned company deserves to have a monopoly in a market. Example: A utility company gets awarded an area....and in turn is highly regulated....because its not a good idea to have three purely capitalist companies string three different sets of power lines on three different towers down city streets.
We don't want United, Delta, America, etc, building three different airports, so the government gets involved in building, managing, and sometimes propping up the airlines.
My beef, and I think what Sheldon was saying, was how are those things are paid for. Airports, control towers, pilot training (military), aircraft evolution (military reasons too), IOW, general tax dollars; all go to support the airlines, allowing ticket prices to be artificially low.
OTOH, railroads own everything they run, and run on, and AFAIK, are solely supported by the fees they charge. Not by tax dollars.
Could you imagine if the airline industry had to fund their airports, airplanes, air control systems as they do their employees, extremely high safety measures, pollution controls, noise controls; solely by airline ticket prices? My guess is that the minimum fare would be about $2,000 for any flight anywhere.
Cargo flights could not compete with railroads.
So if we never had the subtle assistance that went into the airline industry, I think railroads today would look different.
DoughlessCould you imagine if the airline industry had to fund their airports, airplanes, air control systems as they do their employees, extremely high safety measures, pollution controls, noise controls; solely by airline ticket prices?
I could point out just as easily 'could you imagine if the railroads didn't have to fund their tracks, maintenance, dispatching, local taxation, etc.?' (I leave trains out, but 'airplanes' are only indirectly subsidized insofar as military considerations apply to civilian product)
That was the probable situation right up to passage of the Esch Act in the early '20s, the decision to return the railroads to private control. It would have been relatively easy to have 'split' the industry along the lines Kneiling would later advocate, with the track infrastructure treated just as airlines treat 'the sky' -- not exactly open access, but an 'iron ocean' devoid of property-rights and huge stranded-capital concerns. Since civil seems always at war with mechanical T&E this might allow more sensible allocation of expansion (or resist expedient contraction like all that unfortunate Conrail double-track shucking) without the issue of contributing national tax-based revenue to the sole benefit of 'owning' railroads...
OvermodI could point out just as easily 'could you imagine if the railroads didn't have to fund their tracks, maintenance, dispatching, local taxation, etc.?' (I leave trains out, but 'airplanes' are only indirectly subsidized insofar as military considerations apply to civilian product)
Perhaps I don't understand railroad funding like I thought, but its my assumption that signals, crossing gates, steel for the rails, (okay the land for the ROW was initially stolen from Native Americans by our military, so to speak), bridges over hiways, locomotive and conductor training, etc, are not funded by general tax payer dollars; compared to the bond issues for airports, military training of pilots, the FAA paid air traffic controllers, etc. all of which factor into the rates UPS and Fed Ex can charge to fly cargo across the country as opposed to what BNSF might have to charge.
LastspikemikeWe all pay for everything. Business pays nothing, including no taxes. It's all paid for by the individual consumer. Only money losing businesses contribute to their cost and we all know how that works out over the long haul. The taxpayer picks up that tab too to some degree when the losses are claimed by the business against income.
Please be careful.
This is a thread about why people model the transition era.
Now it is drifting into politics, which is forbidden. We do not discuss general tax policy in here at all.
Sure, I model the Transition Era, plus or minus. I'm not particular. I was born in 1947 so it matches me. It's a time I liked and I still remember well.
I like the engines and the rolling stock. I like roofwalks and I LIKE CABOOSES. I like the buildings and the vehicles. To be honest, I really think many of the visual aspects of railroading have deteriorated since then. Railroads evolve, and in ways they became better, but at a cost. The Transition Era, to me, was perhaps the high point where the rich history of the railroads that developed our nation gave way to today's more commercialized and dollar-oriented lines.
Lastspikemike We all pay for everything. Business pays nothing, including no taxes. It's all paid for by the individual consumer. Only money losing businesses contribute to their cost and we all know how that works out over the long haul. The taxpayer picks up that tab too to some degree when the losses are claimed by the business against income. So, given a rational business plan it really makes no difference whether the consumer funds business development by purchases or taxes. Really it doesn't. The only difference is who decides what gets built. Public expenditures made for what one might think are private capital interests are not fundamentally different. Business has notoriously short sight and requires much faster returns on capital. Leave some stuff to the private sector and it doesn't get built. Government investment can be very remunerative for the consumer. I estimate that all modern railroads were originally built using a combination of tax payer funding and investment losses suffered by many of those tax payers who invested their after tax dollars in uneconomic railroads. Those failed railroads did not disappear, they're still being used today.
We all pay for everything. Business pays nothing, including no taxes. It's all paid for by the individual consumer. Only money losing businesses contribute to their cost and we all know how that works out over the long haul. The taxpayer picks up that tab too to some degree when the losses are claimed by the business against income.
So, given a rational business plan it really makes no difference whether the consumer funds business development by purchases or taxes. Really it doesn't.
The only difference is who decides what gets built.
Public expenditures made for what one might think are private capital interests are not fundamentally different. Business has notoriously short sight and requires much faster returns on capital. Leave some stuff to the private sector and it doesn't get built. Government investment can be very remunerative for the consumer.
I estimate that all modern railroads were originally built using a combination of tax payer funding and investment losses suffered by many of those tax payers who invested their after tax dollars in uneconomic railroads. Those failed railroads did not disappear, they're still being used today.
If you're talking about the funding of an entire society's needs, treating them like schools of fish to be managed as a group, then yes, the funding all washes. Going further, if every person in the world owned shares of stock in all 50 companies that owned everything in the world, then there would be no distinction between shareholder, taxpayer, and voter. It's then simply up to somebody somewhere who thinks they're smarter than the collective to manage the whole thing. But when you measure it on an individual basis, individual liberties compared to other individual's liberties, the school of fish approach with the so-called smart guy at the top calling the shots tends to get in the way of free decisions, causing individual companies to squabble with others over special treatment. In academic terms, the free market is the collective. In theory, the free market tells the school of fish managers what the collective actually wants, and then produces it. The managers at the top don't have to do much decision making at all.
We're talking about the 40s and 50s era, and mildly introducing how it compares to more modern eras. Government picking winners and losers for what ever non-free market motivations it had/has does impact what we see today, and what we can model.
I'm going for more popcorn and another Coke...........
One of the most successful, single post - drive by threads I have seen. We have Jim Crow, prohibition and playboy centerfolds all in one thread and the OP is no where to be seen.
Lastspikemike I'm not sure what readers expect when the topic is about why a particular historical era of railroading is popular to model. If you are a toy train runner (basically what I like to do) then the why is only marginally interesting. I just like the look of the transition era stuff a bit more than the very old stuff and a lot more than the very new stuff. I mean I can still see the current and recent real stuff. If you are a real modeller then all the background reasons the railroads were the way they were is pretty compelling stuff. Interesting way to learn a little history. Maybe even gain an understanding of the economic forces driving what we model. The why, not just the what, when and where. Economics is very interesting stuff. 99% human psychology and 1% statistics.
I'm not sure what readers expect when the topic is about why a particular historical era of railroading is popular to model.
If you are a toy train runner (basically what I like to do) then the why is only marginally interesting. I just like the look of the transition era stuff a bit more than the very old stuff and a lot more than the very new stuff. I mean I can still see the current and recent real stuff.
If you are a real modeller then all the background reasons the railroads were the way they were is pretty compelling stuff.
Interesting way to learn a little history. Maybe even gain an understanding of the economic forces driving what we model. The why, not just the what, when and where.
Economics is very interesting stuff. 99% human psychology and 1% statistics.
But that is not an all or nothing choice. I model the 50's because it was an interesting time in RAILROAD history, and in industrial history in general. Yes those factors where driven by a recent war, social change, economic recovery and list of other factors.
I'm not modeling those invisable factors, I'm modeling the trains, buildings, automobiles, landscapes and such that you see with your eyes.
So yes, I too find the trains of that time interesting and visually pleasing. And yes they seem to lend themselves to more visually realistic selective compresson than newer prototypes - that is a plus.
I'm not really interested in getting too deep into the 99% human psychology part. If I want that I will go talk to my wife, the retired addictions counselor.
And, since they could not see the future, it was a relatively positive time in railroad history.
So some of the "why" plays into what I model, or how I model it. But I also model a little bit of what "could" have been a little different.
Like if the government had gotten out of the way of Piggyback sooner.
It's all about finding what is fun for you - there are no airports or Interstates on my layout........
BigDaddyOne of the most successful, single post - drive by threads I have seen. We have Jim Crow, prohibition and playboy centerfolds all in one thread and the OP is no where to be seen.
It seems like there is a strong underlying desire to discuss forbidden subjects in an obscure way... I am sure Jim Slade had no idea what would happen.
LastspikemikeIf you are a real modeller then...
Why not? We might as well add "real" model railroaders to the discussion as well.
I am going to join Sheldon and make some popcorn.
New York Central is the railroad I like in this era because I always wanted to go New York State to see this railroad in action until I realized it ended in 1968. Then it was controlled under Conrail now CSX.
Although I'm modeling a small 40's with two steam locomotives. I have also planned a medium sized 50's for my NYC 20th Century Limited train set. Most of cars are mid 50s and very few are 40s to completely make a 1950 or 1953 timeframe.
I don't have that problem when I'm modeling the 1980s-1990s expect for tank cars, SOU boxcar, reefer, 48' Maxi Well cars, Auto racks and others.
BigDaddy One of the most successful, single post - drive by threads I have seen. We have Jim Crow, prohibition and playboy centerfolds all in one thread and the OP is no where to be seen.
Well, I do have a Playboy centerfold on my layout. She's a bit out of era, and I printed the image a bit oversized. She's hanging over a workbench inside the roundhouse. Centerfolds were a fixture of male-dominated workplaces back then. It's a simple historical reality, like an Edsel or a caboose.
MisterBeasley BigDaddy One of the most successful, single post - drive by threads I have seen. We have Jim Crow, prohibition and playboy centerfolds all in one thread and the OP is no where to be seen. Well, I do have a Playboy centerfold on my layout. She's a bit out of era, and I printed the image a bit oversized. She's hanging over a workbench inside the roundhouse. Centerfolds were a fixture of male-dominated workplaces back then. It's a simple historical reality, like an Edsel or a caboose.
angelob6660New York Central is the railroad I like in this era because I always wanted to go New York State to see this railroad in action until I realized it ended in 1968
I love NEW YORK CENTRAL steam locomotives, and not just the Hudson. These locomotives had a unique lean yet brutish look. I imagine that the tunnel clearance requirments had something to do with this. NYC locomotives just look like they are there for business.
This thread has jumped the shark multiple times. Still nothing from the OP.
I'm full of popcorn.
My main thing has been the PRR in the '50s since my teenage years. Sometimes I got into N&W, and B&O, but the '40s-'50s era for railroading has always been my favorite. Mainly because I always liked looking at photographs of railroading in those eras and seeing the "changing of the guard" as one poster put it of steam being replaced by diesels. I've no desire to have lived in that era and have read much on how society had been at the time. I hadn't been alive then either as I was born in 1983. My memories are mainly of Norfolk Southern and some Conrail depending on where I have travelled too. But spending time looking at Don Ball's Trackside Pennsylvania Railroad 1940s-1950s, O. Winston Link photography books, and others showing trains and railroading from that era has always captivated me. The aesthetic of the cars and trucks is always a plus to for me.
Alvie
SeeYou190 angelob6660 New York Central is the railroad I like in this era because I always wanted to go New York State to see this railroad in action until I realized it ended in 1968 I love NEW YORK CENTRAL steam locomotives, and not just the Hudson. These locomotives had a unique lean yet brutish look. I imagine that the tunnel clearance requirments had something to do with this. NYC locomotives just look like they are there for business. -Kevin
angelob6660 New York Central is the railroad I like in this era because I always wanted to go New York State to see this railroad in action until I realized it ended in 1968
angelob6660 Basically the reason why I loved the railroad.
Unfortunately, the NYC steam locomotives in brass command a premium price. Otherwise, the STRATTON AND GILLETTE locomotive fleet would be based on NEW YORK CENTRAL prototypes.
I decided to go with USRA standard designs instead. I can get 3 or 4 USRA Mikados in brass for the price of one NYC Mikado.
My opinion is it covers the transition from steam engines to diesel, so moderlers can have both on the layout at the same time. Filthy black steamers working out their final days and shiny new streamline diesels and early switchers from various builders make for interesting modeling. From Big Boys to the classic EMD E and F units with the bulldog nose and Alco PA/FA series. Mike
Silly NT's, I have Asperger's Syndrome
mbinsewi This thread has jumped the shark multiple times. Still nothing from the OP. I'm full of popcorn. Mike.
Is there a rule that once you start a thread that's really just asking a question, you have to respond again?
I came to read this thread late, or I might've chimed in on a few things. IMO, the original post was a question that the OP probably didn't expect to get answers and comments that go on for multiple pages. Reading them, he may not wish to comment further, or has nothing really to say.
For the record, while my modelling is in a state of hiatus, I model the Rock Island in 1978. I have some era creep by allowing passenger service on the section that I model that ended in 1970. I model it because it was my teen years when I hung out at the local depot that was still a train order office. Time Table and Train Order operation is one of the things of that era that appeals to me.
Jeff
jeffhergertIs there a rule that once you start a thread that's really just asking a question, you have to respond again?
Many is the thread I started to read answers or wisdom, not to post (except for clarification or expansion). Any new thread asking purely for readers' opinions or experience would be in that category. Now there are plenty of posters who promptly jump into such a thread to deny the idea that the era is the one to model, or to go off on some more or less chestbeating tangent about why they model something else, or to drift the thread into the politics, racism, etc. of the era as perceived by the poster... but thise are occupational hazards of posting almost anywhere on the Internet, and really have been as long as the Internet has been 'open to the public'.
I also think alot of it, is you model what you were exposed to as a child, for many in the hobby that would be the early diesel years and not that long ago was the transition time frame. Locally we still have a few guys that are active that can remember the end of steam, but they are in their 80's age wise. This opinion will vet itself out in the coming years as the younger generate that did not see steam in regular use, or even F units/early diesels, chose their era to model. The 1970s and forward might become the new focus, only time will tell. Atleast the ATSF modelers cannot claim "Warbonnets" for a layout stuck in the 1950s era as that paint scheme returned in the modern era for the "Super Fleet" engines that handled the crack stack trains, UPS TOFC and most anything else that was "hot", a few still roam the BNSF on whatever train they get stuck on. But I still stick to the ablity to run both steam and diesel being the main reason for transition era modeling if one wants to keep to some sense of realism. Mike