Dual-era modeling is what I'm starting to call my own approach: when I started out modeling Sacramento Northern nearly 20 years ago, I was primarily interested in later diesel operation of the 1950s-60s. Over the following decade I got more interested in electric freight motors, eventually purchasing and remotoring some, so decided my modeling would focus on the early 1950s era when the area I model had both electric freight motors and diesels operating on the same route. But then I started buying passenger interurban equipment that stopped running in 1940! My official excuse was that passenger runs on my nominally freight-only line were fan trips of the late 1940s. But as my skills, interest in interurban modeling, and, frankly, my disposable income grew, I built up more equipment appropriate to a 1920s-30s interurban line.
So my latest concept is "dual era" as you mention, with the ability to alternate between 1930s and 1960s eras (and nominally a middle era of early 1950s); fortunately, things didn't change that much architecturally in much of the area I'm modeling, so a lot of my layout's buildings are just as appropriate for 1920 as 1970 (many of them still exist today!) which means all I have to do to convincingly switch eras is swap out the motive power, and if I want, the autos on the layout, substituting 1920s-30s cars for 1940s-50s models. I may eventually come up with a couple of "drop-in" buildings for a more complete era switch.
Part of the appeal of dual-era modeling: it's an excuse to purchase more rolling stock, motive power, etc., than can ordinarily fit on the layout, because obviously I don't want your 1960s diesels pulling around 1920s wooden billboard reefers, or a box motor retired in 1940 with a string of 1960s covered hoppers! Not that I needed an excuse to buy more trains than can fit on the layout, but now there's an official justification for buying more stuff...at least until I run out of shelf space.
Steam is still prevalent on my layout in the early to mid 1960s. Because i like steam engines. And, in n scale, i now have more choices in steam power then i did say 15-20 years ago.
My proto-lance concept bends the timeline in 1987. AWTEC outbids G&W for the ex-BR&P when CSX puts it up for sale, giving the Pittsburg & Shawmut control over what would have become the BPRR. The P&S main is never abandoned, except the Brookville to Dellwood segment, and the BR&P third sub remains as the Buffalo connection. The low grade and Piney Branch purchase goes through as it did in reality. The A&E acquisition as well.
As history developed after:
-In '93 a small segment of the defunct LEF&C is purchased, servicing Glen Gary Brick in Summerville
-the Knox & Kane is purchased after the Kinzua bridge collapse in '03, with the Piney Branch being rebuilt the rest of the way to Clarion Jct. to tie in from the south (IRL a large chemical plant wanted to locate on the line in the early 2000's) The later natural gas boom saw the line become busy with frac sand traffic as well. The line between Kane and Mt. Jewett is used as a short cut for petroleum traffic moving north off the A&E.(another real discussion in the mid 2010's)
-the B&LE is purchased as a sister road in '04 instead of CN taking over. Coal still moves north to the lakes. As a pet project, some big steam makes its way into the restored Greenville roundhouse.
- The Winfield Railroad is rebuilt in 2008, along with a short stretch of the Butler Branch down to NS, with trackage rights a short distance to the P&S Freeport terminus, to service the large Armstrong Cement plant.
-the C&M is rebuilt to connect to RJC's Clearfield Cluster as a joint effort between the railroads and the state in 2016 (another real life proposal)
- The regulatory noose tightening on coal fired plants in the late 2000s-early 2010s never happens, coal fired plants and steam coal loadouts served by the railroad remain healthy.
PRR8259 ...some of perhaps the most scenic portions of the LV are at this late date a ghost railroad: tracks torn up and gone such that people who knew where the trackage was cannot even find the roadbed today, due to Pennsylvania forests taking back the right-of-way.
At least the LV mainline thru Pennsylvania is intact, including the CNJ segments that the LV migrated to. I was lucky to ride the line between Pittston and Jim Thorp in 2010 during an NRHS convention.
Speaking of Alcos, there are plenty running on the nearby ex-Lackawanna.
LV C628s were my favorite locomotive for a while...but you're leaving out the Northeastern railroads with the most businesslike C636s: PRR and then PC. I still remember one coming through Trenton Station in the mid-Seventies, exhaust rap so loud it hurt the ears.
And then there is the Alco 'alternative' to the E44s -- low cab, either 6000 or 6400hp -- to be numbered in the horsepower series. All I've seen is a scaled elevation drawing, but for 'alternative history of the finest Century kind -- there you are.
Well I cannot escape my love for Alco Century series diesels. If I want to model a railroad that had a high percentage of Centuries, and for various reasons that won't be SP&S or GB&W or Cartier, then I am kinda left with Lehigh Valley and D&H in the northeast
Both LV and D&H were essentially bridge lines by the 1970's, and some of perhaps the most scenic portions of the LV are at this late date a ghost railroad: tracks torn up and gone such that people who knew where the trackage was cannot even find the roadbed today, due to Pennsylvania forests taking back the right-of-way.
So modeling portions of what is now a ghost railroad allows lots of room for creative license. There are books about the LV, but plenty of room exists for fantasy.
Very interesting topic.
My freelanced fictional road as most of you know is the ATLANTIC CENTRAL, a major carrier in the Mid Atlantic region. The time is September 1954.
The modeled section of the ATLANTIC CENTRAL covers areas of central and western Maryland, northern West Virginia and Virginia, and south central Pennsylvania.
The place names are mostly real, but not in their correct geographic location or relationship to each other. The track plan makes no effort to fit into a real map of the region, but rather to simply capture typical features and scenery of the region.
There are some scenes which capture the spirit of specific prototype places, but again they are not exact, not named the same, and lack geographic sequence to real life.
Within the modeled portions are interchanges and trackage rights sharing with the B&O, C&O and WESTERN MARYLAND.
I am pretty fussy about only having locomotives that the three prototype lines had.
And all ATLANTIC CENTRAL power are locos that both exisited in 1954 and that would have been typical for a Class I in this region - there are no ATLANTIC CENTRAL Big Boys........., or 80" driver Northerns like a GS4.
Rolling stock is similarly pretty correct for the period. But "close enough" and "generic" rollng stock is fine as long as it looks the part.
My one big history cheat is this - The government was smarter than they were in real life - and deregulated both trucking and railroads in 1953 rather than 1983.
WHY? Because I like early piggyback and wanted to model piggyback equipment from all over the country. Full interchange of piggyback simply did not happen that early for a list of complex reasons, most relating to the slow and gradual changes in regulations.
So I run piggyback trains with equipment from all over the country. here are just a few examples of the fleet of over 150 piggyback cars.
Another one of my little history changes invlove these cars:
In real life only a few of these were built and tested, but in my world they proved successful and we have a small fleet that serve the COMMONWEALTH MOTORS assembly plant. COMMONWEALTH MOTORS is another fictional change to history where a renamed CHECKER MOTORS absorbs several other small makes to become one of the big "four" auto makers.
As much as I appreciate prototype accuracy in models, I have never been able to model just one, or even a few, actual prototype railroads. I never had much interest in trying to model the scenery of a specific place, or limiting the trains to those that would be seen there.
So this is what works for me.
It has been a busy summer with work, but layout construction is progressing and is about to speed up. One factor has been having many of my tools on a long term project an hour from here, not practical to keep dragging them back and forth too much. That project is done, working on smaller jobs close to home, makes layout time much easier.
Sheldon
allegedlynerdy But, what of compromises made to history?
But, what of compromises made to history?
I would consider mine fairlly big. My time frame is primarily 1983. That has been stretched a little to accommodate rolling stock, but the big change in history has to do with the sale of Conrail.
I have Sante Fe motive power but I didn't want to do western scenery, so on my railroad the Sante Fe bought a chunk of Conrail including trackage in Pennsylvania a little earlier than the deal that was struck with NS and CSX. That allows me to run through Allegeheny mountain scenery and an east coast style city.
Rick
BEAUSABRE Overmod The point was that very serious westbound traffic from the industrial Northeast could be expected as wartime provisioning and logistics shifted from Atlantic to Pacific. Among other things this could be expected to make much additional work for the Q2s right up to their capacity west of Pittsburgh, but clearly an extension of electric capability from Enola to Conway would have been a significant benefit in that respect. (Note that traffic from Pittsburgh west, and from what has now become the Rust Belt, was likely a significant factor in assessing the electrification up to 1943, but wouldn't have benefited much from it after whatever date VE would fall...) As a retired career military officer, I am well aware of the logistics demands Downfall would impose (in the railroad context, that's why SP and ATSF bought a) obsolete steam power (SP) ex-B&M 2-8-4's and machines not well suited to their operations (ATSF) slow ex-N&W compounds on a high speed railroad, maybe UP's second purchase of Big Boys). And the demands on the "transcontinentals" were going to get even worse Perhaps the largest impediment to wartime PRR electrification over the Hill to Pittsburgh was the massive amount of copper needed. This vital material was needed for production huge quantities of electronics, armored fighting vehicles, ships and aircraft - demand that was expected in 1943 only to vastly increase in 1944 and 1945. So the WPB would cast a dubious eye on that project and tell the PRR 1) to buy more steam (which used little copper) 2) start buying diesels (PRR wouldn't let EMD's FT demonstrator #103 on the railroad on its coast to coast barnstorming tour) - by comparison, diesel-electrics used less copper than full electrification. Plus, where was the manpower to erect the electrification going to come from in a war time economy? Rosie the Riveter, bringing retirees back into the work force, importing labor from Mexico, etc only went so far in making up for men (16 million of them would be mobilized) called up to fight. So much as I like the idea of GG1's and DD2's on Horseshoe Curve, sadly, it must just be a dream.
Overmod The point was that very serious westbound traffic from the industrial Northeast could be expected as wartime provisioning and logistics shifted from Atlantic to Pacific. Among other things this could be expected to make much additional work for the Q2s right up to their capacity west of Pittsburgh, but clearly an extension of electric capability from Enola to Conway would have been a significant benefit in that respect. (Note that traffic from Pittsburgh west, and from what has now become the Rust Belt, was likely a significant factor in assessing the electrification up to 1943, but wouldn't have benefited much from it after whatever date VE would fall...)
As a retired career military officer, I am well aware of the logistics demands Downfall would impose (in the railroad context, that's why SP and ATSF bought a) obsolete steam power (SP) ex-B&M 2-8-4's and machines not well suited to their operations (ATSF) slow ex-N&W compounds on a high speed railroad, maybe UP's second purchase of Big Boys). And the demands on the "transcontinentals" were going to get even worse
Perhaps the largest impediment to wartime PRR electrification over the Hill to Pittsburgh was the massive amount of copper needed. This vital material was needed for production huge quantities of electronics, armored fighting vehicles, ships and aircraft - demand that was expected in 1943 only to vastly increase in 1944 and 1945. So the WPB would cast a dubious eye on that project and tell the PRR 1) to buy more steam (which used little copper) 2) start buying diesels (PRR wouldn't let EMD's FT demonstrator #103 on the railroad on its coast to coast barnstorming tour) - by comparison, diesel-electrics used less copper than full electrification. Plus, where was the manpower to erect the electrification going to come from in a war time economy? Rosie the Riveter, bringing retirees back into the work force, importing labor from Mexico, etc only went so far in making up for men (16 million of them would be mobilized) called up to fight.
So much as I like the idea of GG1's and DD2's on Horseshoe Curve, sadly, it must just be a dream.
That copper demand gave the last big push to the big copper producers in Michigan's Copper Mines - Quincy, Calumet and Hecla, and Copper Range Consolidated all expanded operations for the first time since the last war's copper boom. It was all pretty short lived and most operations were shuttered by the end of the war. The industry puttered on until the 60s, though one mine stuck around in various forms until the 90s. Australian Copper in particular was far more cost effective, despite the higher level of processing needed.
OvermodThe point was that very serious westbound traffic from the industrial Northeast could be expected as wartime provisioning and logistics shifted from Atlantic to Pacific. Among other things this could be expected to make much additional work for the Q2s right up to their capacity west of Pittsburgh, but clearly an extension of electric capability from Enola to Conway would have been a significant benefit in that respect. (Note that traffic from Pittsburgh west, and from what has now become the Rust Belt, was likely a significant factor in assessing the electrification up to 1943, but wouldn't have benefited much from it after whatever date VE would fall...)
Yeah, I've got my massive invasion of the home islands confused with... well, conspiracies, I guess. See the history.navy.mil "H-Gram" 057 for a good account of the historical details, including factors that would have stretched the time out past the anticipated 18-month window.
The point was that very serious westbound traffic from the industrial Northeast could be expected as wartime provisioning and logistics shifted from Atlantic to Pacific. Among other things this could be expected to make much additional work for the Q2s right up to their capacity west of Pittsburgh, but clearly an extension of electric capability from Enola to Conway would have been a significant benefit in that respect. (Note that traffic from Pittsburgh west, and from what has now become the Rust Belt, was likely a significant factor in assessing the electrification up to 1943, but wouldn't have benefited much from it after whatever date VE would fall...)
Something I don't know, but one of the PRR enthusiasts in a group like PRR-FAX might, is whether the 1943 electrification scheme did have massive Pacific invasion planning involved in its scope.
BEAUSABRE2) The idea of "rip out the diesel and install a rectifier bank and pantographs" proved to be VERY simplistic when the railroads and manufacturers examined the idea from the Fifties on.
See this reference for the original Garrett project summary (the detailed technical report is available, but it's painfully dated now) where you can see some of the principles involved.
https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/15203/PB81191314%5B1%5D.pdf
Notably, the operating paradigm was to size 'run-through' trains to what the lower diesel-generated horsepower could sustain, with the catenary used for helping/snapping on grades or to permit the diesel engines to be idled or stopped as desired in fully-electrified territory. This provides a useful transition for buildout of an electrification project (several examples are demonstrated) and there are certain other inherent advantages still valuable today.
Modelers may want to examine volume 4 (which was nominally a 'wayside storage' examination but doesn't seem to take that up in proper detail) for the 'revised arrangement' that accommodated the cab changes in the late Seventies (it looks a little funny but would have been preferable).
https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/8794/dot_8794_DS1.pdf
It would not involve rocket-science levels of analysis to apply the idea to S580 and later improvements, or to higher-horsepower diesel units...
BEAUSABRE Overmod ad the electrification been extended to Pittsburgh on the 1943 plan (very likely had Majestic been required against Japan!) there would be even more impetus to adopt the Garrett AiResearch 'dual-mode-lite' proposal -- which includes very detailed kitbash instructions that are not much more involved externally than sticking a Brecknell-Willis pan and some other stuff on six-motor dash-2s. This just operates diesel west of Conway instead of Enola. 1) The plan for the invasion of Japan was Downfall - consisting of Olympic (Nov 45) to secure bases on Kyushu by 6th Army and Coronet (Mar 46) to invade the Kanto Plain by 1st and 8th Army Operation Downfall - Wikipedia 2) The idea of "rip out the diesel and install a rectifier bank and pantographs" proved to be VERY simplistic when the railroads and manufacturers examined the idea from the Fifties on.
Overmod ad the electrification been extended to Pittsburgh on the 1943 plan (very likely had Majestic been required against Japan!) there would be even more impetus to adopt the Garrett AiResearch 'dual-mode-lite' proposal -- which includes very detailed kitbash instructions that are not much more involved externally than sticking a Brecknell-Willis pan and some other stuff on six-motor dash-2s. This just operates diesel west of Conway instead of Enola.
1) The plan for the invasion of Japan was Downfall - consisting of Olympic (Nov 45) to secure bases on Kyushu by 6th Army and Coronet (Mar 46) to invade the Kanto Plain by 1st and 8th Army Operation Downfall - Wikipedia
2) The idea of "rip out the diesel and install a rectifier bank and pantographs" proved to be VERY simplistic when the railroads and manufacturers examined the idea from the Fifties on.
it would definitely make a good point to kitbash from - EMD's GM6C from the mid 70s is visually similar to the road diesels of the time, besides around the cab.
It isn't all that different from an SD40-2
Overmodad the electrification been extended to Pittsburgh on the 1943 plan (very likely had Majestic been required against Japan!) there would be even more impetus to adopt the Garrett AiResearch 'dual-mode-lite' proposal -- which includes very detailed kitbash instructions that are not much more involved externally than sticking a Brecknell-Willis pan and some other stuff on six-motor dash-2s. This just operates diesel west of Conway instead of Enola.
MidlandMikeThere were a number of US railroads that ran from the Appalachians to the Great Lakes, especially to Lake Erie and less to Lake Ontario, that carried coal to the lake boats. Some of them used car ferries to take the coal cars to Canada.
Pennsy RR Elmira Branch (historicsoduspoint.com)
NorthBrit I have the three small railways running under the umbrella of a real one.
There was a prototype, all proudly painted as the herald on the tenders of every locomotive - "The railroads that fell under the control and common management of the Muskogee Company were colloquially referred to as the Muskogee Roads. The Muskogee Roads were made up of the Midland Valley Railroad, the Kansas, Oklahoma and Gulf Railway, the Oklahoma City-Ada-Atoka Railway, and indirectly, the Osage Railway."
Had the electrification been extended to Pittsburgh on the 1943 plan (very likely had Majestic been required against Japan!) there would be even more impetus to adopt the Garrett AiResearch 'dual-mode-lite' proposal -- which includes very detailed kitbash instructions that are not much more involved externally than sticking a Brecknell-Willis pan and some other stuff on six-motor dash-2s. This just operates diesel west of Conway instead of Enola... and gives you the option to give the treatment to later power from other builders. A significant point is that the GE rebuilt E-44, which had no 'future' after Amtrak got the electrified NEC, would have extensive potential application in straight-electric service with the line not being as high-speed-sensitive as the Corridor (particularly after Chase in 1987).
For even more fun, imagine the Sam Rea line built with its connections west through Ohio and east directly to Manhattan, re-electrified with opened-up tunnels and catenary...
Little TimmyI don't know how this applies to me but, ... Somehow 1923 Mack trucks are still operational in my 1970s towns...
Somehow 1923 Mack trucks are still operational in my 1970s towns...
I'm in the middle of developing a scenario by which some of my favorite cars and locos can run together. I want an ex Family Lines GP38 pulling athearn shorty pulpwood and wood chip cars.
No big deal, I'm changing history to where the Family Lines paint scheme came into existance in the 1970s instead of the 80s and the shorty cars lasted until about 1979. Just a few years of changing reality on both sides.
- Douglas
allegedlynerdyWorth noting as well that many earlier billboard reefers were for alcohol companies, so most of them went out of service due to prohibition anyways.
True...sort of. When Prohibition started, the cars themselves weren't taken out of service, just repainted or leased to some other company. Pabst for example began making Pabst-ett cheese and had billboard reefers decorated for that. Prohibition ended in 1933, I believe the billboard car restrictions came in the next year.
MisterBeasley I have allowed the electrification from the end of the Pennsylvania to the end of the Milwaukee, just to let me run my GG1 to "somewhere" to drop off the GG1 and connect Milwaukee diesel power. The passenger cars and express reefers continue west, while the GG1 picks up its waiting passenger train and heads back east. And, the prohibition against "billboard" advertising on boxcars never happened, so my string of ice-bunker reefers with beer and meat advertising on them are still allowed in interchange service.
I have allowed the electrification from the end of the Pennsylvania to the end of the Milwaukee, just to let me run my GG1 to "somewhere" to drop off the GG1 and connect Milwaukee diesel power. The passenger cars and express reefers continue west, while the GG1 picks up its waiting passenger train and heads back east.
And, the prohibition against "billboard" advertising on boxcars never happened, so my string of ice-bunker reefers with beer and meat advertising on them are still allowed in interchange service.
Both of these seem like common ones - the GG1 is an iconic locomotive. If I were to do my "dream" electrification layout, it'd be the interchange between Milwaukee Road electric and PRR Electric, as well as some interurban stuff. That's not what I am actually doing, but it would be interesting to see.
drgwcs History sometimes if you are modeling a specific prototype is a bit hard to pin down. Photos of towns are not all taken on the same date. I have a couple of buildings in my Black Hawk Colorado scene for example that were demolished a little bit before my chosen year. It would have perhaps helped had that info surfaced before I built them but they are staying. I also have a bit of a time warp as my narrow gauge scenes are set about 1930 and my standard gauge is set about 1945 to 1946.
History sometimes if you are modeling a specific prototype is a bit hard to pin down. Photos of towns are not all taken on the same date. I have a couple of buildings in my Black Hawk Colorado scene for example that were demolished a little bit before my chosen year. It would have perhaps helped had that info surfaced before I built them but they are staying. I also have a bit of a time warp as my narrow gauge scenes are set about 1930 and my standard gauge is set about 1945 to 1946.
This is definitely part of why I brought the topic up - even the most hardcore prototype modeller is likely to do some amount of wiggling.
NorthBrit What I model, when I run steam engines, is ficticious. I have the three small railways running under the umbrella of a real one. The rail yard is a real one as is one of the stations. Having real mixed with fiction has some people believing it is all real. When I run diesels the layout is the same, but the timeframe jumps 50 or so years ahead. Trains still serve the same places. Once again bringing the real to the unreal. David
What I model, when I run steam engines, is ficticious. I have the three small railways running under the umbrella of a real one. The rail yard is a real one as is one of the stations.
Having real mixed with fiction has some people believing it is all real.
When I run diesels the layout is the same, but the timeframe jumps 50 or so years ahead. Trains still serve the same places.
Once again bringing the real to the unreal.
David
I think being good enough that people believe that it is real is the goal of every model railroader - especially prototype and proto-lance modellers!
Ah, a topic reminiscent of the past “Philosophy Friday” threads. Thank you!
That was the goal!
As a foreigner, I thought that modelling a US prototype was not for me, yes there is the internet but I reckon being able to actually visit the prototype is important.
Even in the US that can prove to be a difficulty - if I were to model, say, the Sierra Railroad, as a midwesterner, it'd take me quite a long time to visit. Not to mention other minor, remote railroads that once scattered the country. I find out new railroads existed even in my home state a few times a year!
kasskaboose Curious about some factor(s) which drive us to make compromises to history? Is it supply/demand? Nostalgia? Lack of suitable funds, etc.? No question about tastes and preferences change of what we want to do. Sometimes, reality is a factor too. Just other stuff to consider I suppose.
Curious about some factor(s) which drive us to make compromises to history? Is it supply/demand? Nostalgia? Lack of suitable funds, etc.?
No question about tastes and preferences change of what we want to do. Sometimes, reality is a factor too. Just other stuff to consider I suppose.
That's definitely a good question - obviously stuff like radius, turnout size, etc. is modified by desires.
As I said, I protolance because everything I "want" to see didn't exist at one point in time, and there's some not-prototypical equipment I want. The make believe land also makes me feel better about using commercially available rolling stock that isn't an exact match for the prototype - after all, if it is a different timeline maybe they did get a second order of steel ore cars that actually worked in ore service. That's just my thoughts on it though.
wjstix Billboard reefers actually were never banned. Ideally, railroads wanted a car to carry a load both ways, as the railroad got paid more for hauling freight than hauling air. However, company A, B and C wouldn't ship their products in a billboard reefer lettered for their competitor, company D. So company D's car was sent back to them empty. Basically the 1930s change was that, if the lettering on a private reefer was over a certain height (something like 16-24" IIRC), the owner/lessor of the car had to pay for it to be sent back empty at the rate it would have gotten if full. So a company could continue to have large 'billboard' lettering on their car, but it was more expensive than most companies wanted to pay. BTW railroad-owned boxcars could still have whatever lettering the railroad wanted, so about the same time railroads started lettering cars with large railroad names, heralds, and slogans advertising their service and their top passenger trains.
Billboard reefers actually were never banned.
Ideally, railroads wanted a car to carry a load both ways, as the railroad got paid more for hauling freight than hauling air. However, company A, B and C wouldn't ship their products in a billboard reefer lettered for their competitor, company D. So company D's car was sent back to them empty.
Basically the 1930s change was that, if the lettering on a private reefer was over a certain height (something like 16-24" IIRC), the owner/lessor of the car had to pay for it to be sent back empty at the rate it would have gotten if full. So a company could continue to have large 'billboard' lettering on their car, but it was more expensive than most companies wanted to pay.
BTW railroad-owned boxcars could still have whatever lettering the railroad wanted, so about the same time railroads started lettering cars with large railroad names, heralds, and slogans advertising their service and their top passenger trains.
Worth noting as well that many earlier billboard reefers were for alcohol companies, so most of them went out of service due to prohibition anyways.
I have one locomotive that I can assure you that it's historically accurate for pre 1937. It's a Westside brass PRR K5s #5698. It took me several years to acquire as many photos, parts, hand make grabs, keystone number plate, builders plates, trust plaques, paint and decals. I modeled it for pre 1937 before the stoker, shroud around the exhaust stack and front end throttle and smoke box mounted turbo generator. I'll never do it again.
I don't really care if I'm running a mix of high mount headlights with low mount ones. Lines West with Lines East. Sometimes I'll run a coal drag with my NS SD60 that supports the troops on the head end of a consist of ALCO RS and RSD locomotives.
Pete.
MisterBeasleyAnd, the prohibition against "billboard" advertising on boxcars never happened, so my string of ice-bunker reefers with beer and meat advertising on them are still allowed in interchange service.
I don't 'model'. I protolance, sort of, but I essentially run what I like. I try to create a realistic setting here and there on the layout, and then just enjoy watching steamers churn their valve gear. That suffices for me. However, I do, very sincerely, appreciate what others put themselves through in order to research, to acquire, to conceptualize, and then to create highly realistic scale representations of places and operations that happen, or that happened, there. Deep respect. I just don't want to do it.
My freelance "St.Paul Route" is based on two real railroads. The St.Paul and Duluth RR was bought by the Northern Pacific Ry in 1900. A few months later, Canadian Northern (later to be come Canadian National) bought the Port Arthur, Duluth & Western Ry. (Port Arthur and Ft. William Ontario merged in 1970 to become Thunder Bay.)
In my "alternate reality", neither purchase happened. Instead the two railroads merged and built a line up the north shore of Lake Superior to connect the two. In reality, such a line was proposed many times, but was never built.
MidlandMikeThere were a number of US railroads that ran from the Appalachians to the Great Lakes, especially to Lake Erie...
"One difference between pessimists and optimists is that while pessimists are more often right, optimists have far more fun."
As a foreigner, I thought that modelling a US prototype was not for me, yes there is the internet but I reckon being able to actually visit the prototype is important. So, after a fair amount of dithering, I decided that because coal and cement were going to be the “big” commodities on my free-lanced railroad that it would be loosely based on an amalgam of the Clinchfield and to a lesser degree, the Delaware & Hudson. However, I was driven to scratch build a car ferry based on the Wabash RR Detroit River car ferry, Windsor, so my biggest dilemma is how can I justify the extra 450 mile, or thereabouts, trackage from the Appalachians to Detroit. Secondly my freelanced railroad, with a mid 1950s cutoff date, (yes, the 58 Chevy Belaire is another minor issue) has also still too many steam locomotives in service! All in all though, I can happily live with my decisions. Having Fun, Cheers, the Bear.
There were a number of US railroads that ran from the Appalachians to the Great Lakes, especially to Lake Erie and less to Lake Ontario, that carried coal to the lake boats. Some of them used car ferries to take the coal cars to Canada. The last of these (car ferry) lasted until 1958.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashtabula_(ferry)#:~:text=Ashtabula%20was%20built%20in%201906,with%20the%20steamer%20Ben%20Moreell.
I very nearly went with a version of history where the PRR extended their electrification to Pittsburgh. I decided against it because I'm a contemporary era person. I'd wanted to do it to justify running Amtrak electrics on a Pittsburgh layout, but the freight issue was too much. I'd be starting from scratch on freight motors.
I presumed if the PRR had electrified that much territory, then Conrail would have retained it, and NS would have likely kept it too. I'd either have to invent locomotives, run everything behind freight versions of AEM-7s, ALP-46s, and ACS-64s, or import pricey Euro equipment.
I suppose I mess with the space-time continuum a bit. I have a dual-era layout, mid 1930s and mid 1960s. Now and then, I stop time, pull the steamers into hidden staging and bring out the diesels. I go around with the 0-5-0 and remove the vehicles and replace them with older ones. One of these days I'll get around to building the old dance hall to replace the modern movie theater. I replace the gas price signs and the pumps.
It all lets me run what I want with a bit of happiness.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.