marknewton wrote: And again, I ask - why must everything be geared to the newbie? Accuracy, or operations, will frighten off newbies, so therefore we shouldn't practice either?
That would be absurd. But clearly, without newbies the hobby dies when we do. It may anyway. Just seeing real trains is becoming increasingly difficult. So it is the magazines that put the hobby's foot forward. If the mags stress operations and realism, will that bring in the newbies?
For that matter, is it important to bring in the newbies? Some say it is.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
Midnight Railroader wrote:True. We're going to end up with a bunch of newbies who become bored with the hobby (because there's no challenge) and quit down the road. That's not helpful either.
Not only that but all of our layouts will all be essentially the same because we will all have the same RTR products as our neighbors.
Check out the Deming Sub by clicking on the pics:
I'm sorry, but this is a pretty superficial argument.
Anyone will pretty much figure out that running laps is not where the hobby is. When they do they will follow a path that leads somewhere between total fantasy & scenery and operations on plywood empire. It is only, the first contact we are speaking of.
SpaceMouse wrote: So it is the magazines that put the hobby's foot forward. If the mags stress operations and realism, will that bring in the newbies?
So it is the magazines that put the hobby's foot forward. If the mags stress operations and realism, will that bring in the newbies?
Well, that's what MR used to do...and we're all in the hobby now.
And now they don't. And their circulation is down.
SpaceMouse wrote: Midnight Railroader wrote:True. We're going to end up with a bunch of newbies who become bored with the hobby (because there's no challenge) and quit down the road. That's not helpful either.I'm sorry, but this is a pretty superficial argument. Anyone will pretty much figure out that running laps is not where the hobby is. When they do they will follow a path that leads somewhere between total fantasy & scenery and operations on plywood empire. It is only, the first contact we are speaking of.
It's pretty clear that you want to build a layout that's not 100% rooted in reality. That's fine for you.
But please, stop trying to justify why others should do the same.
If they want to, they will.
And if I want to emulate the prototype, I will, whether you think I should, Furlow thinks I'm wrong, if it's "killing the hobby," or whatever other reasons you can provide.
But I am not doing anything wrong.
SpaceMouse wrote: marknewton wrote: And again, I ask - why must everything be geared to the newbie? Accuracy, or operations, will frighten off newbies, so therefore we shouldn't practice either?That would be absurd. But clearly, without newbies the hobby dies when we do. It may anyway.
That would be absurd. But clearly, without newbies the hobby dies when we do. It may anyway.
Just seeing real trains is becoming increasingly difficult.
pastorbob wrote: Been in the hobby many years, starting in college in the late 50's with a 4 by 8 in HO. Now own a layout, 3 decks, started in the 80's, now pretty much complete. I model ATSF, 1989, in Oklahoma, enjoy being accurate as much as possible, but still have slipped in a connecting freelance short line railroad, I enjoy operating sessions, I enjoy working on scenery, I enjoy just "piddlin around" on the layout. I don't worry so much about what others think, although have been on tours many times and get good reviews.In short, life is too short, to hard, too frustrating to try to police my hobby to be what Furlow wants, or what Koester wants, or any of the other "great thinkers (in their own mind at least", I just enjoy the hobby. Suggest we all should do the same.Bob
Been in the hobby many years, starting in college in the late 50's with a 4 by 8 in HO. Now own a layout, 3 decks, started in the 80's, now pretty much complete. I model ATSF, 1989, in Oklahoma, enjoy being accurate as much as possible, but still have slipped in a connecting freelance short line railroad, I enjoy operating sessions, I enjoy working on scenery, I enjoy just "piddlin around" on the layout. I don't worry so much about what others think, although have been on tours many times and get good reviews.
In short, life is too short, to hard, too frustrating to try to police my hobby to be what Furlow wants, or what Koester wants, or any of the other "great thinkers (in their own mind at least", I just enjoy the hobby. Suggest we all should do the same.
Bob
And a hearty AMEN. The Umpteenth iteration of my grand scheme is less than a year old and a lot farther from completion, but if you substitute Nihon Kokutetsu for ATSF and 1964 for 1989 you have a pretty accurate description of where I'm going. Whether others like or dislike the idea is THEIR problem, not mine. I'm just having fun.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
I suppose taken to some exteme, your right, however, the point Chip is making, and I agree with him, is that the advice to the Newb would be better received if it was tempered more from his/her perspective than that of a very narrowly focused expert who only models May 13, 1948 in Kansas City.
The point, it seems to me, is help people get their trains working with very few derailments and start them to thinking about next steps, scenery, operating two trains at once, getting a layout that doesn't have 5% grades and 18" curves.
Someone said, when I was a child, I thought like a child and I needed milk,
Save the handlaid turnout and fast clock discussion until after you get them into a club where your personal charm will overcome their fear to run for the door!
As a newb myself, I really try hard to build a railroad that guys like yourself, when you visit and inspect will walk away thinking I have done some good work. Work that could be made better by this and that. Inspection tours are very valuable to us. Some messages are better delivered with your hand on his shoulder assuring him he is making good progress. I have four friends who visit my layout every couple or three months. Their critical eye is way important to me.
Yes, I do it my own way, but I try to do it in a way that my peers can and will respect and appreciate, not laugh at me on the way home. Same with every hobby I've ever been involved with. Peer acceptance is important to most of us. Lack of acceptance is the reason gangs are so successful and luring fine young boys and girls away from their parents.
Just my
Joe
Don Gibson wrote: WHEN does a 'Fetish' become a "Crutch"?
WHEN does a 'Fetish' become a "Crutch"?
When your Dominatrix is beating you with it.....
Wow, I'm glad I stayed the hell out of this one....till now.
There are no absolute "rules" in model RRing, no one will show up to arrest you for breaking any of them. The only "rules" are those we impose on ourselves and are dependant on what we bring to the layout, based on our intentions and ultimate goals of what we want to depict on our layout and what we personally get out of building our model RR.
Its very different for every modeler, some are more inclined to similar aspects and goals, while others might take a very different path.
Koester vs Furlow, whos right? whos wrong?, niether are wrong and both are right. Just different sides of the same coin, or if you will, different sides of a dice that could have 20 sides to it. No matter how you roll it, no matter which side is face up, its still a dice. Its still a model RR. If it has trains, track, and scenery, ITS STILL A MODEL RAILROAD.
Whether you like it or not is PURELY a personal viewpoint.
Anyway thats my take on all this...
Have fun with your trains
Although, Joe, to be true to the analogy, gangs are coercive and require conformity and the overt expression of each member's embracing their ideals, dogma, and culture. When you think about it, it is not unlike what some folks are lamenting in the hobby, the insistence by some, a few thankfully, that the newbs conform to some regression to the mean.
I don't personally think there is anything wrong with coaching newcomers about the culture in the hobby, the terminology, the numerous pitfalls that so many of us lament and confess to with charming regularity on this forum. At some point, Rembrandt, Michelangelo, and all other stalwarts of the Guild begin to push their adoring fans away...or at least, they should, to encourage them to develop a new approach. It is in this practice that the hobby finds relief from the oppressions of conformity and rigidity, and it finds evolution and growth.
Midnight Railroader wrote: SpaceMouse wrote: Midnight Railroader wrote:True. We're going to end up with a bunch of newbies who become bored with the hobby (because there's no challenge) and quit down the road. That's not helpful either.I'm sorry, but this is a pretty superficial argument. Anyone will pretty much figure out that running laps is not where the hobby is. When they do they will follow a path that leads somewhere between total fantasy & scenery and operations on plywood empire. It is only, the first contact we are speaking of. It's pretty clear that you want to build a layout that's not 100% rooted in reality. That's fine for you.But please, stop trying to justify why others should do the same.If they want to, they will. And if I want to emulate the prototype, I will, whether you think I should, Furlow thinks I'm wrong, if it's "killing the hobby," or whatever other reasons you can provide.But I am not doing anything wrong.
Whoa! I'm not sure where you got the idea that I'm trying to shove my ideals down your throat.
No one said you were doing anything wrong. In fact, the only time I would really care what you are doing in your basement is if you invited me over to run, I might consider if I should bring an engine, a throttle, a walkie-talkie or nothing.
As to justifying myself to others, I might think about it for a second if I raise my hourly rates from $45 to $60 an hour, but I've got better things to do with my time than to justify my tastes in layouts. I'm going to do it my way and you are going to do it your way and both are good.
Do I respect what Furlow has done? Yes. Do I respect what Koester has done? Yes. Do I fit somewhere between? Yes. Do I buy what Furlow is saying hook line and sinker? No, but it works for him. In the grand scheme of things, I'd be closer to Koester, but I doubt if I'll ever run a fast clock on my layout. I do plan to find a group of guys for a round-robin type op group.
selector wrote:Although, Joe, to be true to the analogy, gangs are coercive and require conformity and the overt expression of each member's embracing their ideals, dogma, and culture. When you think about it, it is not unlike what some folks are lamenting in the hobby, the insistence by some, a few thankfully, that the newbs conform to some regression to the mean.I don't personally think there is anything wrong with coaching newcomers about the culture in the hobby, the terminology, the numerous pitfalls that so many of us lament and confess to with charming regularity on this forum. At some point, Rembrandt, Michelangelo, and all other stalwarts of the Guild begin to push their adoring fans away...or at least, they should, to encourage them to develop a new approach. It is in this practice that the hobby finds relief from the oppressions of conformity and rigidity, and it finds evolution and growth.
Morning Crandall,
Coaching yes! But please, not the Bobby Knights of this world.
Good points and thoughts!
tangerine-jack wrote:I've got nothing to say on this topic, I model pseudo non-standard compliant G scale in a garden 1:1 real world environment where a small bird is 20ft tall.I don't believe any facet of the hobby is killing any other. In the world of garden RR there is a gentlemen's understanding that whatever YOU do is the right and proper thing. No two railroads can ever be identical and each builder imparts their own philosophy on the final design, and when dealing with real world outside building, what works in Arizona may or may not work in Maine. If you want to count rivets, the by all means do so! If you want escapism in fantasy, then brother help yourself! Nobody is wrong with what they do, so long as they enjoy what they are doing.
I've got nothing to say on this topic, I model pseudo non-standard compliant G scale in a garden 1:1 real world environment where a small bird is 20ft tall.
I don't believe any facet of the hobby is killing any other. In the world of garden RR there is a gentlemen's understanding that whatever YOU do is the right and proper thing. No two railroads can ever be identical and each builder imparts their own philosophy on the final design, and when dealing with real world outside building, what works in Arizona may or may not work in Maine. If you want to count rivets, the by all means do so! If you want escapism in fantasy, then brother help yourself! Nobody is wrong with what they do, so long as they enjoy what they are doing.
Although I model freelance narrow gauge Large Scale indoors from a model railroader's perspective and am a stickler for details, I noticed that the people in the Large Scale community who post in forums such as My Large Scale, are very open-minded, laid-back, and gregarious when it comes to modeling choices or the way you decide to do it. I've noticed very few rivet counters or criticism directed toward people who choose to model in ways that are different than the norm (whatever that is).
SpaceMouse wrote: el-capitan wrote: SpaceMouse wrote: To the newbie, operations are intimidating--they just want to run trains. Dating is intimidating the first time. Yet people are still having kids. Seems like a trend that is not going anywhere soon.To make your analogy work, there would have to be something pheromone like to draw the newbie into the hobby. That would be the fantasy.
el-capitan wrote: SpaceMouse wrote: To the newbie, operations are intimidating--they just want to run trains. Dating is intimidating the first time. Yet people are still having kids. Seems like a trend that is not going anywhere soon.
SpaceMouse wrote: To the newbie, operations are intimidating--they just want to run trains.
To the newbie, operations are intimidating--they just want to run trains.
Dating is intimidating the first time. Yet people are still having kids. Seems like a trend that is not going anywhere soon.
To make your analogy work, there would have to be something pheromone like to draw the newbie into the hobby. That would be the fantasy.
Hey, now there's a product line...a set of canned Railroad Aromas! (TM) Comes in Wood Smoke, Coal Smoke, Diesel Fumes, and Ozone (for us juice jacks.) Add background scents like Creosote, Lumber Mill Pine, Slaughterhouse Stench and Grimy Track. Spray 'em on by hand, or sell them with a line of DCC-controlled aroma dispensers around the layout. Your layout has sight and sound--now add smells!
el-capitan,You stated that you thought of one way that realism could hurt the hobby was that one couldn't run extremely large steam engines on tight radius curves. To be honest, that would also apply to almost any prototype equipment except for trolleys and 19th Century equipment as most any layout is still too tight and too small for totally realistic equipment (for brake rigging, traction motor cables, etc.). For example, South Station in Boston had No. 8 double slips, and these were considered way too tight to safely get a 8-coupled steam engine through the terminal via a diverging route. Therefore, as in all modeling hobbies (R/C airplanes, boats, etc), compromises must be made or it just won't work at all.
But I don't know if that constitutes "ruining the hobby". That seems more like common sense to me (don't buy giant steam to run unless you have a layout that it can run on). The New Haven's largest steam were 50 2-10-2's (one brass model of which I have). I carefully tested my loco to see what kind of clearances I needed to get it over the road without hitting other trains or wayside obstructions. I then built my layout accordingly. If I was going to model the UP and Big Boys, I would have changed my layout design to reflect that. Now, I can't run Big Boys on my layout (the overhang would hit a passing train), but I don't consider my hobby "ruined" because of it.
I will concede that if "extreme realism" (way beyond Proto87 standards) became the standard and the only available models for sale, then yes, it could ruin the hobby for real. Why? Because it wouldn't work. But who would even try to sell something that wouldn't work at all? Nobody would buy it. I don't think it's something we have to worry about.
joe-daddy,If my saying Code 100 track is to me like Lionel tinplate track was chipping away at the hobby, then this hobby was chipped completely away a long, long time ago. Go back and read the letters to the editor in MR from the 1950's and see those railing against that flimsy junk called "plastic". Or what about the great "Penn Central steam engine decals from Walthers" controversy? My point is that disagreements of what is and isn't realistic in this hobby are not "ruining" it for anybody. If anything, it's educational. It airs out the issue and allows others to make a decision based on the discussion or not at all.
Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
Jetrock wrote: Hey, now there's a product line...a set of canned Railroad Aromas! (TM) Comes in Wood Smoke, Coal Smoke, Diesel Fumes, and Ozone (for us juice jacks.) Add background scents like Creosote, Lumber Mill Pine, Slaughterhouse Stench and Grimy Track. Spray 'em on by hand, or sell them with a line of DCC-controlled aroma dispensers around the layout. Your layout has sight and sound--now add smells!
ooh, I love it when you talk dirty!
Jetrock wrote:Hey, now there's a product line...a set of canned Railroad Aromas! (TM) Comes in Wood Smoke, Coal Smoke, Diesel Fumes, and Ozone (for us juice jacks.) Add background scents like Creosote, Lumber Mill Pine, Slaughterhouse Stench and Grimy Track. Spray 'em on by hand, or sell them with a line of DCC-controlled aroma dispensers around the layout. Your layout has sight and sound--now add smells!
Pretty close to a product I invented for Cowboy Shooters. Trail dirt in a can.
Paul3 wrote: el-capitan,You stated that you thought of one way that realism could hurt the hobby was that one couldn't run extremely large steam engines on tight radius curves. To be honest, that would also apply to almost any prototype equipment except for trolleys and 19th Century equipment as most any layout is still too tight and too small for totally realistic equipment (for brake rigging, traction motor cables, etc.). For example, South Station in Boston had No. 8 double slips, and these were considered way too tight to safely get a 8-coupled steam engine through the terminal via a diverging route. Therefore, as in all modeling hobbies (R/C airplanes, boats, etc), compromises must be made or it just won't work at all.But I don't know if that constitutes "ruining the hobby". That seems more like common sense to me (don't buy giant steam to run unless you have a layout that it can run on). The New Haven's largest steam were 50 2-10-2's (one brass model of which I have). I carefully tested my loco to see what kind of clearances I needed to get it over the road without hitting other trains or wayside obstructions. I then built my layout accordingly. If I was going to model the UP and Big Boys, I would have changed my layout design to reflect that. Now, I can't run Big Boys on my layout (the overhang would hit a passing train), but I don't consider my hobby "ruined" because of it.I will concede that if "extreme realism" (way beyond Proto87 standards) became the standard and the only available models for sale, then yes, it could ruin the hobby for real. Why? Because it wouldn't work. But who would even try to sell something that wouldn't work at all? Nobody would buy it. I don't think it's something we have to worry about.joe-daddy,If my saying Code 100 track is to me like Lionel tinplate track was chipping away at the hobby, then this hobby was chipped completely away a long, long time ago. Go back and read the letters to the editor in MR from the 1950's and see those railing against that flimsy junk called "plastic". Or what about the great "Penn Central steam engine decals from Walthers" controversy? My point is that disagreements of what is and isn't realistic in this hobby are not "ruining" it for anybody. If anything, it's educational. It airs out the issue and allows others to make a decision based on the discussion or not at all.Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
I agree with you entirely. I was trying to play devil's advocate and think of a way that the hobby could be "destroyed by realism" from one person's point of view. Not mine. For the most part, I like where the hobby is at right now.
Paul3 wrote:joe-daddy,If my saying Code 100 track is to me like Lionel tinplate track was chipping away at the hobby, then this hobby was chipped completely away a long, long time ago. Go back and read the letters to the editor in MR from the 1950's and see those railing against that flimsy junk called "plastic". Or what about the great "Penn Central steam engine decals from Walthers" controversy? My point is that disagreements of what is and isn't realistic in this hobby are not "ruining" it for anybody. If anything, it's educational. It airs out the issue and allows others to make a decision based on the discussion or not at all.Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
Paul,
You equate a letter to the editor with a response to a Newb? Sir, that is giving beer to the baby! In the example thread where you called Code 100 tinplate, you experts chewed on a Newb until he fell in line with 'your' expert advice, only to then have the same experts pounce upon his being so overly obsessed with authenticity. That thread is a perfect example of the issue here. It eliminates any legitmacy to your arguement and it hurts the hobby, destroy it certainly not. But the internet authenticity police do not help the hobby when the confuse and confound the Newb.
Joe Daddy
Paul3 wrote: Mailman,So far, you haven't posted any experiences, only your opinion. Please tell us exactly how any hobby has been ruined by more realism or greater expectation of realism.Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************
Mailman,So far, you haven't posted any experiences, only your opinion. Please tell us exactly how any hobby has been ruined by more realism or greater expectation of realism.
I already have.
Mailman wrote: Paul3 wrote: Mailman,So far, you haven't posted any experiences, only your opinion. Please tell us exactly how any hobby has been ruined by more realism or greater expectation of realism.Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************ I already have.
No, you gave an example where flight sims have changed into something you don't like.
But that doesn't mean the hobby's been "ruined," because other people keep buying the sims, despite the fact that you don't like them.
Midnight Railroader wrote: Mailman wrote: Paul3 wrote: Mailman,So far, you haven't posted any experiences, only your opinion. Please tell us exactly how any hobby has been ruined by more realism or greater expectation of realism.Paul A. Cutler III************Weather Or No Go New Haven************ I already have. No, you gave an example where flight sims have changed into something you don't like.But that doesn't mean the hobby's been "ruined," because other people keep buying the sims, despite the fact that you don't like them.
Fine. I'm completely incorrect.
How's that ?
Midnight Railroader wrote:Okay, but rather than become defensive, you might give the examples Paul asked about.
I don't imagine a hobby that has been RUINED by the authenticity police, but that was not the intent of this thread IMHO. It is how the rivit counters with their rail height micrometers are not doing the hobby a good deed, when they blast away at Newb's like we frequently see.
What good does it do the hobby when someone belittles and chides a user of code 100, especially when some of the nicest layouts around have huge amounts of it working just fine.
Modeling is a contininum, we hopefully get better as we learn to crawl, walk, run then dance. Forcing everyone to lean the tango when crawling is difficult is counter productive and leads to discouraged individuals. I contend discouraged individuals don't hang around, spend money on their hobby, they start thinking about another one.
joe-daddy wrote:I don't imagine a hobby that has been RUINED by the authenticity police, but that was not the intent of this thread IMHO. It is how the rivit counters with their rail height micrometers are not doing the hobby a good deed, when they blast away at Newb's like we frequently see.
So, Joe, do you have any recent examples where this has happened to a newbie on the forum? I rarely, if ever, see this happen here. Or, are you talking out in the real world?
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
Ah good, the rivet counter battle is joined. I love this argument, everyone resolutely refuses to understand anyone else's definition of a "rivet counter". So we get page after page of wonderful cross purpose argument.
Can the "Who is a real model railroader" argument be far behind?
Where is my popcorn?
Irreverently
Paul
IRONROOSTER wrote: Can the "Who is a real model railroader" argument be far behind? Where is my popcorn?
I'm waiting for the "MR layouts are works of art and thus can only be judged by one's emotional response, not the number of rivets." argument.
Mind if I grab some of that popcorn. I bought a 6pack on my way over if you want one. We may be here for a while."
IRONROOSTER wrote: Ah good, the rivet counter battle is joined. I love this argument, everyone resolutely refuses to understand anyone else's definition of a "rivet counter". So we get page after page of wonderful cross purpose argument. Can the "Who is a real model railroader" argument be far behind? Where is my popcorn? IrreverentlyPaul
All right, cool! I too love this argument! What is more realistic, a miniature HO loco with each and every detail of the original reproduced in exact scale down in a basement or attic, or my 10ft stand off scale garden railroad that actually runs OUTSIDE like real trains? Both are equally correct! That's my story and I'm sticking with it.
I must say that I do understand that forcing uber-correctness on a newb can, and has been, counterproductive to keeping somebody in the hobby. This happens all the time in garden scale, a newb buys a B'mann starter set, somebody chimes in about LGB and DCC wireless, next thing you know the newb think he (or she) needs 20K in gizmos to break into the hobby. Simply not true! I say let the newb start with whatever they have now, then as they learn what they really want, THEN they can decide what style of railroading they want to do. Run what you brung, learn what you can, then grow naturally as your abilities and desires dictate. That is what we need to encourage newbs to do!
Mind if I bring some chip and dip to go with the popcorn?
The Dixie D Short Line "Lux Lucet In Tenebris Nihil Igitur Mors Est Ad Nos 2001"
tstage wrote: joe-daddy wrote:I don't imagine a hobby that has been RUINED by the authenticity police, but that was not the intent of this thread IMHO. It is how the rivit counters with their rail height micrometers are not doing the hobby a good deed, when they blast away at Newb's like we frequently see.So, Joe, do you have any recent examples where this has happened to a newbie on the forum? I rarely, if ever, see this happen here. Or, are you talking out in the real world? Tom
Tom,
I already gave the example, a direct quote, this past week here on Trains.com, but lets be clear, by no means is it only an issue here, it is everywhere, trainboard, yahoo forums.
I particularly like the you better use 12 gauge wire to drive your switch machines too, it prevents voltage drop.