Hi all. Not sure how you folks feel about it, but I'm personally no longer interested in modern day trains. I bet it's been six months or longer since I've even had a modern train on my layout... I find that I prefer the steam era between the late 1920s to the late 1940s, and sometimes the diesel era of the 1950s more than any others. Like many members have stated in the past, the great thing about modelling the 1950s is that one can have the best of both worlds...
Tracklayer
Tracklayer wrote:Hi all. Not sure how you folks feel about it, but I'm personally no longer interested in modern day trains. I bet it's been six months or longer since I've even had a modern train on my layout... I find that I prefer the steam era between the late 1920s to the late 1940s, and sometimes the diesel era of the 1950s more than any others. Like many members have stated in the past, the great thing about modelling the 1950s is that one can have the best of both worlds...Tracklayer
It's all up to the modeler. I love modern trains because I like the challenge of "keeping up" with the real world. I railfan or just watch trains and want to have a version of what I see running on my layout. If you like the 50s, good for you, and more power to you. Many modelers like that period because it reminds them of their childhood or a certain period in their lives. I wasn't around back then so I have no emotional connection with that era.
The '50s rule. Steam engines are my raison d'etre in model railroading. And the current selection of non-brass for an N&W/VGN fan is pretty darned good. Now, we just need a 4-8-0 M Class...
But, I am all for everyone doing whatever turns them on. I went back to Virginia last week and did see a consist of big NS diseasels pounding up a mountain with a big load of coal and it was okay. Not nearly as dramatic as a Y6b and an A on the point, but still okay.
Yeah, I'm modelling the 1960's, because that's when I started my first HO layout, and I still have all my old rolling stock. It's also the "Wonder Years" for me, so there's a certain amount of nostalgia involved, too.
But now I'm buying steam engines, and sometime over the next year I'll begin the process of back-dating my layout to the 1930's so they will fit in.
For me, though, there's nothing particularly "wrong" with the modern era. I prefer earlier times, though.
But there is another issue - space and minimum radius. The 50's and 60's are the "sweet-spot" for small-layout modellers, because the engines and rolling stock were all short. Us 18-inch types can appreciate that.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
I too model the 1950s because I love steam and first generation diesels. Part of the reason is because that is the decade I grew up in but that only partly explains it. Even though I was born in the middle of the transition era, I really have few memories of steam locomotives. Other than excursions several decades later, I only once saw a steam locomotive running in service and that was from a distance. F-units is what I remember most because that was the most common diesel I saw on the MoPac in Omaha. When I first got back into the hobby as an adult in the 1970s, my intention was to run first generation diesels but then I got my first steamer and I was hooked. Now two thirds of my fleet is steam. Passenger trains were still the way lots of people traveled in the 1950s and they also play a prominent role on my layout.
While I agree with you that the modern era has no appeal for me, I can understand why others choose to model it. Younger modelers have no recollection of the motive power and rolling stock from the transition era so it's only natural they want to model what they are familiar with. Older modelers as well might choose to stay current because change keeps it interesting for them. For myself, I'll probably remain stuck in the 1950s until I tip over. If I ever did shift eras, it would probably be back to the pre WWII steam era.
Well, just wait untill they phase trains out all together. Personally, I hope it never happens, but if it did, a surviving diesel would be looked at just as we look at old steamers now.
You have Have your cake and eat it too. If you like the Modern and Steam eras, then perhaps a modern Layout with a museum and several 'operating' steam locomotives would be appropriate. I plan on doing this on my next layout as I have a couple GS4s as well as some older ALCOs.
I also read in the July 1987 issue of MR about having two different sessions in two different eras. One of them is set in the mid 1938 and the other one in 1973. Both eras had different locale representations, but you can change that. Good Luck
-Brian
SD40T-2 wrote: Well, just wait untill they phase trains out all together. Personally, I hope it never happens, but if it did, a surviving diesel would be looked at just as we look at old steamers now.You have Have your cake and eat it too. If you like the Modern and Steam eras, then perhaps a modern Layout with a museum and several 'operating' steam locomotives would be appropriate. I plan on doing this on my next layout as I have a couple GS4s as well as some older ALCOs. I also read in the July 1987 issue of MR about having two different sessions in two different eras. One of them is set in the mid 1938 and the other one in 1973. Both eras had different locale representations, but you can change that. Good Luck-Brian
Phasing out railroads? I don't see that anytime soon. Rail remains the most efficient way to move heavy cargo in bulk and I don't see that changing. There is too much heavy industry with voracious appetites for raw materials as well as heavy amounts of output to allow railroads to disappear. Can you imagine moving that freight by truck?
In the 1960s and 1970s, the railroading industry was in dire straits financially because of overregulation but that has largely been remedied. Consolidation and streamlining have also helped the cause. Railroads are an integral part of our economy and should remain so for a long time.
I second that... With energy issues coming back to the forefront of concern, you can't deny how much more fuel efficient per ton mile railroads are than trucks. Trucks are also tearing up our highway system. It's to everyone's (but the truckers') interest to put more tonnage on trains.
The same could be argued for Amtrak. Instead of cutting funding, we should be paying more for Amtrak. Think of how much the government dumped on the airlines to bail them out when they went backrupt. The skies are packed just like the highways (I know, I'm also a private pilot). More Amtrak routes would mean less crowded skies and less government spending overall.
Many people would consider riding Amtrak if only Amtrak ran near them. The current structure is designed to fail, because the current government doesn't want to be in the railroad business. I like that states like North Carolina, California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, etc. are stepping in with much-needed dollars.
I like modern trains with one excetion... Trains look wrong without a caboose. Conrail and the Long Island Rail Road were still using cabooses (cabin cars) when I was growing up, and I miss them. Modern trains are like a sentence without a period. Otherwise, I'm very impressed with the massive diesels and huge cars of today's trains.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Have fun with your trains
vsmith wrote:I personally cannot tell the difference between a -9 and an SD70, put it infront of a stack train and...yawn.......I...just....lose.....int...rest.....................zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
To bad that..You are missing some exciting railroading.
BRAKIE wrote: vsmith wrote:I personally cannot tell the difference between a -9 and an SD70, put it infront of a stack train and...yawn.......I...just....lose.....int...rest.....................zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz To bad that..You are missing some exciting railroading.
Sorry about your bad luck..I really am..I guess I am spoiled by coal drags to hot shot pig stack trains..The only Amtrak train we have runs on the CSX at Willard or the NS at Sandusky.
I live 45 minutes from Frostoria..There I can see many types of trains there as well.
Since you are choked with stacks and Metrolink commuter train it sound more like you live in the middle of no where junction as far as railfanning regardless how "busy" you say it is..There is a lot more to railroading then Stack/pig trains and Metro trains...
Let's face it, aside from some very large and very costly earth moving machines, modern locomotives are it when talking about raw power applied to a revenue service. No truck or airplane has the power to move as much tonnage over distance in a given time, and no where near as economically...period...end of argument. Steam locomotives butt to nose in quantities of four, five, or six, as we do with diesels, are unthinkable now. Modern diesels are sleek the way a Ferrari is sleek, or the way a chunky 500 SL is sleek. Well designed, raw power, purposeful, noisy...effective. Cool table-top radiators, angular cabs, wide and narrow, ...what's not to appreciate or like?
However, they are not steam engines, and will not be appearing on my layout any time soon. I won't say never because I have lived too many months to say such fatuous things. Steamers are like the windmilling fat propellar blades on older aircraft with their noisy, smokey radial engines. You can see the works, and the working, too. Not just the heavy flashing siderods on a Northern, but the expansion links nodding back and forth on its pivot, the union link sliding back and forth, parallel to the ground like a Drill Sergeant's pace stick, seemingly lengthening and then shortening valve stems and piston rods, crossheads ever slowing and then accelerating in the opposite direction down their guides, turbine whine, airpump thumps and whistles, the heat one feels when leaning in to get a closer look, the concussion of the shock waves emanating from the firebox...
Diesels growl and purr, a bit too catlike for me. I'm a dog lover.
BRAKIE wrote: Sorry about your bad luck..I really am..I guess I am spoiled by coal drags to hot shot pig stack trains..The only Amtrak train we have runs on the CSX at Willard or the NS at Sandusky. I live 45 minutes from Frostoria..There I can see many types of trains there as well.Since you are choked with stacks and Metrolink commuter train it sound more like you live in the middle of no where junction as far as railfanning regardless how "busy" you say it is..There is a lot more to railroading then Stack/pig trains and Metro trains...
Though I have no interest in modeling today's trains, it certainly doesn't stop me from watching them every chance I get. On my model railroad, however, part of the charm of modeling a bygone era (in my case, WWII-through 1952), is the tremenduous amount of railroad NAMES involved. Out here in California, these days, the freight cars are usually BNSF or UP, with a smattering of other big lines, whereas when I was a kid, I could see freight cars from as far away as Pennsy, C&O, NYC, Boston and Maine, Southern--I could go on, but I think you get the idea.
But even though I've decided upon a certain era--which I admit helps to bring back my childhood--it hasn't stopped me from rubbernecking everytime a UP or BNSF freight comes rolling by. I may have NO idea what the diesel model or manufacturer is, pulling the train, but the train itself is the fascination for me.
Besides, I just bought a pair of Rio Grande F-3's for my BLI CALIFORNIA ZEPHYR, so I guess I'm dragging myself into another generation, kicking and screaming, LOL!
Tom
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
vsmith wrote: Its just the sheer monotony of the traffic here that gets to you after a while. I miss the old days before stacks became the only thing here.
You'd like it here. We have a Z train (the stacker) or two, but most of it is manifests. I remember when they used to run the swift train (roadrailer) through Salem here but I think their contract got sold to BNSF.
Tracklayer wrote: Hi all. Not sure how you folks feel about it, but I'm personally no longer interested in modern day trains. I bet it's been six months or longer since I've even had a modern train on my layout... I find that I prefer the steam era between the late 1920s to the late 1940s, and sometimes the diesel era of the 1950s more than any others. Like many members have stated in the past, the great thing about modelling the 1950s is that one can have the best of both worlds...Tracklayer
You're right on: modern railroading sucks. All the engines look the same, the number of roadnames is down, the ROW is devoid of depots, section houses and water tanks, and the days of the small town, FRIENDLY rail agent are long dead. Even classy shortlines like Wisconsin Central have been gobbled up by one of the five Borgs and purged of all their personality.
About the only modern railroading I take time to watch these days are commuter runs like Metra. At least they still have some style to them!
Once first generation diesels like F-units, E's, and GP's left the mainline (say, before 1990) I basically stopped going to watch mainlines except to test out a new camera. I live less than 40 miles away from either Chicago or Rochelle, and I just don't bother fanning.
Now, I'll gladly drive 600 miles to chase a steam excursion!
Ray Breyer
Modeling the NKP's Peoria Division, circa 1943
Dave Vollmer wrote:I second that... With energy issues coming back to the forefront of concern, you can't deny how much more fuel efficient per ton mile railroads are than trucks. Trucks are also tearing up our highway system. It's to everyone's (but the truckers') interest to put more tonnage on trains.The same could be argued for Amtrak. Instead of cutting funding, we should be paying more for Amtrak. Think of how much the government dumped on the airlines to bail them out when they went backrupt. The skies are packed just like the highways (I know, I'm also a private pilot). More Amtrak routes would mean less crowded skies and less government spending overall.
Not to mention the post 9/11 era airports are getting more and more and more inconvenient. You can't bring this, you can't bring that, why bother flying anymore? Take the train :)
There may be only 4 large roads but intermodal traffic has actually introduced Asian and European cargo companies into our railroads, so along with your UP/BNSF/NS/CSX you got Maersk, K-Line, NYK, Hanjin, MSC, Evergreen, Hapag-Lloyd, MOL, NOL, China Shipping, OOCL, etc...
On a modern railroad nothing can stop you from running steam or early diesels. Museums and the big railroads keep some heritage power around for posterity's sake and run specials all the time. But on an older-era layout, running an SD90 wil be totally alien since they hadn't been invented yet!
SunsetLimited wrote:...and drab, rundown wood and dirty brick buildings, lame looking automobiles, having to put up that old look to the layout ...
And that's what I love about the hobby. To me, very essence of model railroading is to catch that look, the dark, sooty appearance of buildings near the right of way, the way cities looked and felt before we ever heard of pollution controls and ecology.
And, there's a real magic to the Fallen Flags, too. The sheer variety of road names that we've lost since the steam era is amazing.
SunsetLimited wrote:Yeah to me the 30's-60's are boring and drab, rundown wood and dirty brick buildings, lame looking automobiles, having to put up that that old look to the layout is not worth the price of steam IMO, besides, its my layout, i can model modern and still run steam, UP 3985 comes to mind. I do like looking at old steam layouts and the people that model them do a great job, they just aren't for me.
Sunset--I can see your point, but back in the 30's-40's era, when railroads had a definite public image (they were pretty much the ONLY form of transportation), what you see as run-down or dirty didn't always exist. It really wasn't until the 'transition' era, when railroads were trying to get as much mileage out of their steamers as they replaced by diesels, that they stopped becoming 'good housekeepers' (and even then, a lot of railroads took a lot of pride in their steam locos even to the end). So don't judge the railroads by the old black and white photos you see--I grew up in the 'forties, and believe me, even the Southern Pacific--which was later maligned for their steamers looking like rolling junk-heaps as they were replaced by diesels-- took pride in their steamers and their railroad properties. By definition, railroading is a somewhat 'dirty' job--even witness the newer diesels on a great many lines--and nothing ever looks pristine.
One of the reasons I don't really heavily 'weather' the steamers on my layout is that I remember them as having been kept pretty good care of by the guys in the shops.
I've seen some newer UP diesels run through Roseville that would make an old SP steam man cringe at the 'weathering' on their paint jobs, LOL!
KlickyMobster wrote:I am a child of the Conrail era (1990's). I model what I know. I would see pictures of Conrail from my uncle (worked for Conrail) and that's all I ever knew besides what I saw when I went to the Steamtown Mall every couple of weeks. So I model what I grew up with. However, I must say that, after seeing a case of steam locomotives at my first ever trip to Trains and Lanes last week, I want one!
For a lot of those of us who grew up knowing only diesels, the steam engines just don't hold a lot of appeal. We don't remember what they looked or sounded like, cause the only time we've ever seen them is in a museum or on a tourist trip. For us, the big diesels, (particularly the SD90MAc in my case) are what gets us going.
In my part of the world, it's gotten down to 2 breeds of motive power, EMD and GE, but that doesn't mean there's no variety. On any given day, with a minimum of effort, I'll see an SD90-MAC or even a MAC-H, a bunch of AC4400s, SD40-2Fs, SD50Fs, Dash 7s, Dash 8s, ad infitum.
I guess what I'm saying is, you love what you know, and you know what you love. A lot of you folks love the steam era. To me, it's just history.......
Mike
Russell
Hmmm. I think I see a generation gap problem here...
Okay guys. I'm 43 years old, and though I grew up in the 1960s and 70s (mainly the 70s), the only trains I ever saw were diesels - mostly GP-38s and 40s. It was by choice that I went with the older steam eras that I did. The fact is, if I could get my hands on a time machine I'd go back to that era to live and not ever come back!. The younger generation has no idea how much simpler the world was at that time, and always seem so ready to run us older guys down and defend the rotten modern world of today... Back then, people didn't sue people ever chance they got, there were no terrorist, the crime rate was 90% lower than it is today and people had respect for one another. Any of you "older" folks remember that world ?... Oh well.
I don't model modern train, for a very simple reason. I work with them everyday. I'm much more intrigued by the era just before Conrail, when my father hired out.
Nick
Take a Ride on the Reading with the: Reading Company Technical & Historical Society http://www.readingrailroad.org/