In April's 2021 MR on page 9 is an ad by Hatton's, a well known British Hobby store. The ad proposes their idea of an era system for US railroads.
What are your thoughts to such a system?
I quite like the idea as a quick easy reference when in a model store and questioning to myself whether or not a cool looking model actually looks correct on my layout. I think for newcomers to the hobby it would be helpful. For those who enjoy the historical research this may be of little value.
There no doubt would be disagreement on when the changeover from one era to the next would be most correct, but in general I quite like the idea.
I can think of one downside and that is models that are not based on a prototype, or in an incorrect paint scheme etc. Manufacturers obviously have to support such a system and if such a system brought to light their inaccuracies then it could hurt sales of said model.
Your thoughts?
This has been done in Europe for a long time, seems like a good idea. But it would take some work to be sure a 1940's boxcar repainted in the 1960's was in the right era.
What about models that span several "eras" - e.g. EMD SW1s? It's considered an early diesel (40s) but some made it into the 80s or even 90s. I'd rather know what "years" the particular locomotive scheme was used in. Or, maybe that's what you or the ad are proposing?
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 felt there were too many different eras, as many models can cross many of their proposed eras.
Then get your oddball shortline still using 40+ odd year old locomotives currently in everyday service and really throw a monkey wrench into their proposed era scheme......
Ricky W.
HO scale Proto-freelancer.
My Railroad rules:
1: It's my railroad, my rules.
2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.
3: Any objections, consult above rules.
I've seen references to the UK concept of era that says a particular loco was used across some rnage of eras, so when it was used is not really out of the picture with the era system. You have the eroa it was introduced, ie, it would be out of place in an earlier era, as well as an era it was generally in service until, so you have the range of eras where it fits.
It's a finer range than typically used to describe US railroading, and worth considering. Like anything, there are crossovers, especially at the era boundaries - but there are with the way we try to describe things today, with "transition era" and so forth as well. You could go on forever and never reach a firm concensus. Well, yes, XYZ railroad bought the first "Model G" loco in 1941, but it was built in early 1940 and tested on the ABC railroad in revenue service during that year - so when do you set the cutoff date between eras? It HAS to be a bit loose.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
I do not model an era, I model a specific point in time.
I don't know who is credited with this, but a prominent model railroader once said something to the effect that people who say they are modeling the ever popular "transition era" are actually doing a poor job of modelling 1959.
Eras have proven to be pointless for my needs. 1954 is in the transtion era, but a lot of product that fits the "transition era" is useless to me.
So, as stated by a previous poster, information on the paint scheme, repaint information, reweigh/service data, etc. are more useful.
Back when I had prototype freight cars, it was frustrating to find out that my boxcar built in 1952 has reweigh data from 1963 stencilled on the side, or, maybe the paint scheme had a herald that was not used until 1957 repaints.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
I agree Randy, I understand the concept is that if you were to model the 1980's then a locomotive or rail car from and earlier era would be very appropriate, go too early and maybe not so much.
I quite like the idea when i think of myself in my LHS deciding if a particular railcar would fit the era I model. I struggle the most with early covered hoppers and tank cars.
Kevin, I appreciate the frustration you mention with repaint / stencil schemes and dates etc. Very interesting.
One issue with the era system proposed is it is locomotive centric (sorta) and doesn't really take into account changes in technology, rolling stock or the industry as a whole.
Era 2 could be redefined to 1880-1910. In 1880 cars were mostly 30-34 ft long, wood underframe, link and pin couplers and no air brakes. By 1915 most cars were in the 34-40 ft range, steel underframes were common, all cars had knuckly couplers and air brakes. In 1906 air brakes and knuckle couplers were required and in 1910 the lettering and grab iron requirements changed so the cars looked significantly different, I would propose backing the end of the era to 1910. That would keep the rolling stock physically looking the same as far as grab irons and lettering goes and lessen the number of steel and steel underframe cars.
Era 4 and 5 should break at 1960. That is half way between the introduction of the U25b and RS27, and the GP30, when locomotives really changed from the boxy hood design to a more modern shape.
Era 5 should break at about 1971. 1970 was when the BN was formed and 1971 is when Amtrak was formed. Putting the break there would provide a clear delination in the look of passenger and freight trains.
As for era 9, please, please don't name it the "Modern Era", unlesss of course you think railroads will never change or anything new will happen. Name it the "6th Generation" or the "Big 6 era" or something like that. There will be eras after this one and the current era is always the "modern" era.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
dehusmanThere will be eras after this one and the current era is always the "modern" era.
It is fun to read Model Railroader magazines from the 1950s where the Transaition Era was being called the Modern Era.
Hatton's eras are way too broad, every 10 years, more or less, is a different era.
We discussed this on this forum not all that long ago before Hatton's.
People in the UK and Europe have a different view because railroading has largely been a regulated, standardized and government run enterprise there.
The US is different and way more diverse, both because of the size and nature of this country, and the private enterprise nature of railroading here.
This makes places in time more specific and broad ranges simply have too many exceptions and anachronisms.
1915 to 1945? - come on, that puts truss rod wooden passenger cars in the same era as second generation streamlined cars? Or the earliest Pacifics in the same era as the last great 4-8-4's?
And 1958 to 1975 is even more rediculous.
The wide ranges of the older eras shows a clear bias or lack of understanding of history, thinking the "past" can just be lumped together.
Just becuse that sort of thing works over there, does not mean it will work here.
In a perfect world, maybe manufacturers could put a date range on each product?
Some are already doing that in their product info.
One more thought, that might not make me popular with some. Hatton's add comes across with that "exclusive collector" vibe to it. That alone turns me off to them.
The add offering to buy stuff just drips with that "we know you bought this stuff as an investment, now we will help you cash out". Well no, my stuff is not all factory pristine in its original boxes.....
Sheldon
I like the basic concept of having the manufacturers identify when a particular piece of rolling stock came into use, and when it went out of use. The issue with that is how do you define 'came into use' or 'went out of use'? Is that when the locomotive/car was first built or when it was scrapped, or is it when it was updated or renumbered? I think the latter would be the best option.
Quite frankly, I think that the manufacturers have been quite remiss in not providing that information all along. However, perhaps it is naive to expect them to provide information which might negate a purchase.
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
I like the idea. Surely not everything fits into neat little decade long boxes, but I think a general timeframe suggestion would be very helpful. I sometimes struggle with if a piece of rolling stock would be appropriate for my 1940s-ish to 1950s-ish era. Woops, turns out it's from the 1970s.
As for Hattons, as a yank who is currently having a love affair with OO gauge steam (and who doesn't pay attention to the eras in this instance of British motive power - full disclosure) they are some of the friendliest people to deal with in the hobby as far as shops go in my experience, either in the US or the UK. Don't judge a book by its cover.
The Backshops - A blog dedicated to modeling projects
micktropolisI like the idea. Surely not everything fits into neat little decade long boxes, but I think a general timeframe suggestion would be very helpful. I sometimes struggle with if a piece of rolling stock would be appropriate for my 1940s-ish to 1950s-ish era. Woops, turns out it's from the 1970s.
Well said!
Personally, I think defined eras by year are kind of a waste of time for hobbyists. IMHO, we should have a number of mileposts to watch for. If everyone knew (or could easily find out) when certain things happened, we'd be better shoppers.For example, when did the following happen?Air brakesKnuckle couplersElectric headlightsSteel underframesAll-Steel carsStreamlinersACI tagsCOTS lablesNo roofwalksNo caboosesConspicuously stripes25', 32', 35', 40', 45' and 53' trailersAnd so on...So I model pre-1969. I could have a few ACI tags as they were mandated to be used starting in 1967, but I can't have anything with COTS because they didn't go into use until the 1970s.BTW, for more freight car info, this is pretty good: http://vanderheide.ca/blog/2017/09/29/dating-via-the-details/Going back to the original point, I think eras are a hopeless idea in the US. The NH's last steam engine ran in revenue service in 1952; other railroads were still building new steam engines after that.
hon30critterI like the basic concept of having the manufacturers identify when a particular piece of rolling stock came into use, and when it went out of use....
Tangent does a pretty good job at that, and probably Rapido, too, and I'm sure that there must be others.
I chose to set my layout's era in the "late '30s". This was a time when the Depression was waning, and carbuilders were coming up with new innovations. There were still lots of cars from the '20s and even earlier, still in service, but also new designs being introduced, too. A few years later, the world would be at war, with production diverted to that more-pressing issue.I have a pretty good collection of books on freight cars, and while I generally follow along keeping my locos and rolling stock in the proper era, I am unapologetic when including some cars which are a decade-or-so too modern, but have a strong appeal to me. Most of these anomalies are lettered for my various freelanced roads, whose management was always on the cutting edge...well, that's my excuse anyways, and I'm stickin' to it.
I would guess that about 90% (or more) of my rolling stock is is not wearing factory paint and lettering, and I try to ensure that the lettering reflects the timeframe in which it's operating, not only in BLT. dates, but especially in re-weigh dates. This, of course, eliminates billboard reefers, and most lettering schemes which include slogans...I re-painted and re-lettered many such cars which would have used those slogans a few years later.
I'm satisfied with my decision on choosing this era, and not at all bothered by the handful of somewhat too-modern cars that periodically show up in some of my photos
Wayne.
doctorwayneI'm satisfied with my decision on choosing this era, and not at all bothered by the handful of somewhat too-modern cars that periodically show up in some of my photos
Hi Wayne,
I think that there are precious few of us who could identify any cars in your photos that don't quite fit your era.
For me, the issue is about helping me identify rolling stock that does not belong in my era when I am making a purchase. For example, I love the billboard reefers but I believe that they were defunct prior to the mid 1950s (I could be wrong - please correct me). If the manufacturers had labelled them in the manner of which we are speaking, i.e. with specific run dates, then I wouldn't be looking at the dozen or so that I have on my shelves in my workshop.
I am glad to hear that some manufacturers are already dating their products. It only makes sense.
Paul3Conspicuously stripes
This one has been a stickler for me.
I have seen some references that said Scotchlight and conspicuity items (stripes, dashes, diamonds, or dots) were used on some cars in the 1950s. Other references have said they did not exist until the 1960s.
doctorwayneTangent does a pretty good job at that, and probably Rapido, too, and I'm sure that there must be others.
Micro-Trains used to be the best with this information. They printed a monthly newsletter with detailed information on all new releases. They included (usually) when the car was made, when it was painted into the decorated paint scheme, when it was repainted again, and what it was used for.
SeeYou190This one has been a stickler for me. I have seen some references that said Scotchlight and conspicuity items (stripes, dashes, diamonds, or dots) were used on some cars in the 1950s. Other references have said they did not exist until the 1960s.
Hi Kevin,
I'm sorry if my following comment will offend you, but I think that getting concerned about the presence or absense of individual data reporting marks detracts from the basic discussion. I'm going to go out onto a limb here by suggesting that for the majority of average modelers that sort of fine detail is not very important. Rather, they would like to know that, for example, does a billboard reefer fit on their late 50s layout, or does an outside braced 40' boxcar belong there too.
Just my worth,
Cheers!!
When the idea of Eras was first mentioned in the UK it was met with a mixed reaction. Now it is accepted and is a neccessity. A large number of modelers have their layouts set in timeframes. Being able to know what model locomotives, carriages etc are available and fit in that timeframe is very useful. Young modelers like it a lot as they model the modern eras.
To answer that. The model would say the Eras it ran. For example Model X ran in Eras 5,6, and 7.
This is at the beginning of the Hornby catalog. https://uk.hornby.com/catalogue/era
Other UK Manufacturers follow the same system.
Off course those not following a timeframe follow Rule 1.
David
To the world you are someone. To someone you are the world
I cannot afford the luxury of a negative thought
I model what I enjoy, not a timeframe. I like billboard reefers and openended passenger cars. If how I model, or what I model, bothers someone, they can leave my house. If you enjoy the models you have good there is not, nor should there ever be an era police.
Off course knowing which Era/s X. Y or Z ran helps modelers (who want to know) without having to ask on a Forum. I find it is generally the younger modelers who want to know. They want to know the information there and then when seeing a plethora of new models, without having to do the research.
That's my 2 cents worth.
Here's a link to the Marklin website where it discusses the European / Continental version of "eras" (or "epoches" depending on your language):
https://www.maerklin.de/en/products/product-information/eras-overview/
Just to clarify, the idea isn't that you necessarily have to model an "era" instead of a specific year (or month, or day) but just is kind of a shortcut to put on the box of an engine or piece of rolling stock to tell you approximately the time frame it's appropriate for. So if you model 1955, an "era 4" (1970-90) freight car wouldn't be right. I would think this would be a great aid, especially to newer modellers who might be confused by all the products that are out there.
wjstix Here's a link to the Marklin website where it discusses the European / Continental version of "eras" (or "epoches" depending on your language): https://www.maerklin.de/en/products/product-information/eras-overview/ Just to clarify, the idea isn't that you necessarily have to model an "era" instead of a specific year (or month, or day) but just is kind of a shortcut to put on the box of an engine or piece of rolling stock to tell you approximately the time frame it's appropriate for. So if you model 1955, an "era 4" (1970-90) freight car wouldn't be right. I would think this would be a great aid, especially to newer modellers who might be confused by all the products that are out there.
I get all that, I still think it would just make way more sense to put the range of years for each item on that item.
I model September 1954, the newest model locomotive I own are EMD SD9's, the first of which were built just few months before my cutoff date.
If I modeled December 1953 they would not have existed yet.
But almost any such system of eras would just lump them in with the "transition era".
Just one in an endless list of examples.
wjstixA shortcut to put on the box of an engine or piece of rolling stock to tell you approximately the time frame it's appropriate for. So if you model 1955, an "era 4" (1970-90) freight car wouldn't be right. I would think this would be a great aid, especially to newer modellers who might be confused by all the products that are out there.
I can see this. It would be a helpful aid to the new person trying to make correct choices.
Information the rest of us would find useful should be easy to find on the manufacturers website. Rapido does a great job on their site.
Hatton's idea is more or less a rehash of something John Armstrong set forth in his book Creative Layout Design. Of course we have now come one or two "eras" beyond Armstrong's end point decades ago!
I agree with the above poster who pointed out that in countries with a totally regulated railroad system it is easier to declare sharp delineations in equipment and paint schemes. In this country things are less disciplined. Hence one saw GP30s on the Santa Fe, and even into the BNSF, long after they were banished from the Union Pacific. One sees freight cars with reporting marks from railroads long dissolved (CMO for example) and gone but the marks are still owned by somebody.
Remote outposts of a railroad like the C&NW had locomotives with paint schemes and slogans such as "Route of the 400s" long after there was any 400 to be the Route of. You never saw engines with those slogans on the main lines but they were out there in the boonies.
But there are indicia of era -- K brakes, arch bar trucks, truss rods, solid bearing trucks, chilled (ribbed) wheels all had fairly precise dates when they were no longer permitted in interchange (which is not the same thing as saying the rules were always obeyed -- the FRA seems to find plenty to do!).
ACI labels, COTS stencils (but they changed over time), the yellow dot for the defective wheel review, running boads (so-called "roof walks) and full height ladders - all had dates associated with them. And yet I was just scanning slides showing cars with running boards in 1986. Lesson: there is no substitute Hatton can offer for a modeler actually doing the heavy lifting about prototype. Yet some guidance would be in order and could be helpful. Whether it uses the Hatton proposal or not may be less important. I have bought some things in error, mill gondolas and waffle sided boxcars that looked plausible for 1968 that were products of the 1970s. Would Hatton have saved me from my error? Not sure.
Dave Nelson
dknelson...But there are indicia of era -- K brakes, arch bar trucks, truss rods, solid bearing trucks, chilled (ribbed) wheels all had fairly precise dates when they were no longer permitted in interchange (which is not the same thing as saying the rules were always obeyed -- the FRA seems to find plenty to do!)....
Good points, Dave, and ones which I neglected to mention. My chosen era of the late '30s was a time when airbrake systems were being upgraded, trucks and wheels were changing, and regulations regarding safety appliances were also shifting.Many of my freight cars use K-type brakes, but many ones with fairly recent built dates (September 1, 1933) have the more modern AB-type. Some of the older cars have that updated brake gear, too. This was also the time period when the ARA (later, the AAR, in 1934) had mandated use of an additional grabiron on the car's sides at the left end....some of my cars have had them added...
...and some others, not yet...
...as there was a fairly generous timeframe allowed for this upgrade to be done.As you can see in the photos above, one car has its original wooden doors, while the other has CRECo (Chicago Railway Equipment Company) steel doors. I have several such cars with upgrades that would have been common in my chosen era, and also some cars with non-matching doors and/or non-matching trucks, both very common in a time when many companies were coming out with new and improved equipment....
Wayne
I'm surprised that no one has mentioned that Hatton's might be better served by worrying about Brexit or tea-partying rather than meddling in our hobby, where more than 1 person in a room results in a disagreement
Don't get me wrong, I get the wanting to know "does it fit?" within what I am modeling.
But too many variables come into play when you change from one railroad to another, and even in some cases what division of said railroad you are modeling.
Take right now, if you were modeling anything but a small handful of locations, modern day, your main model locomotives would be ES44 and SD70ACe variants for mainline freights, with some older GE AC, Dash 9, and EMD recent SD and GP power mixed in. But vast majority are those first two.
Model a shortline, main power will be older GP, SD, and earlier U, 7, 8 series GE's.
Model one of those small handful of locations?
Well, you could have steam on a tourist line, ALCO Centuries on WNYP Family & DL Family, GP9 rebuilds on other shortlines, with ES44 and SD70ACe units on a mainline freight passing the interchange point. (WNYP now has both ALCO Century 4 & 6 axle, MLW variants included, and GE AC44C6M rebuilds {ex CSX GE AC6000 units} operating on the same division, sometimes on the same train!)
How can you account for those oddball situations that only occur in select locations because of the fact the railroads are all privately owned? It works in the UK because it's all really tightly controlled, and almost universally uniform across the board. North American railroading is the exact opposite of this.
So, let's have manufacturers include "use dates" on those MLW/ALCO Century units. PRR, NYC, etc all have one set of dates, PC another, CR another yet, CN & CP another still, and DL, WNYP, LAL, B&H all yet another set of dates.
Your $225 DCC & Sound locomotives just shot up to $335 only because of all the extra work that had to go into "correct run date" package labeling.
NO THANK YOU!!!!!!!!
ATLANTIC CENTRAL wjstix Here's a link to the Marklin website where it discusses the European / Continental version of "eras" (or "epoches" depending on your language): https://www.maerklin.de/en/products/product-information/eras-overview/ Just to clarify, the idea isn't that you necessarily have to model an "era" instead of a specific year (or month, or day) but just is kind of a shortcut to put on the box of an engine or piece of rolling stock to tell you approximately the time frame it's appropriate for. So if you model 1955, an "era 4" (1970-90) freight car wouldn't be right. I would think this would be a great aid, especially to newer modellers who might be confused by all the products that are out there. I get all that, I still think it would just make way more sense to put the range of years for each item on that item. I model September 1954, the newest model locomotive I own are EMD SD9's, the first of which were built just few months before my cutoff date. If I modeled December 1953 they would not have existed yet. But almost any such system of eras would just lump them in with the "transition era". Just one in an endless list of examples. Sheldon
wjstix
Here's a link to the Marklin website where it discusses the European / Continental version of "eras" (or "epoches" depending on your language): https://www.maerklin.de/en/products/product-information/eras-overview/ Just to clarify, the idea isn't that you necessarily have to model an "era" instead of a specific year (or month, or day) but just is kind of a shortcut to put on the box of an engine or piece of rolling stock to tell you approximately the time frame it's appropriate for. So if you model 1955, an "era 4" (1970-90) freight car wouldn't be right. I would think this would be a great aid, especially to newer modellers who might be confused by all the products that are out there.
dknelsonI have bought some things in error, mill gondolas and waffle sided boxcars that looked plausible for 1968 that were products of the 1970s.
I have been fooled by gondolas. I can tell the reasonable era of most other types of freight cars, but gondolas are sneaky gremlins.