Am I mistaken, or wasn't this layout featured in MR several years ago? Seems to me there was an article about a very large layout in Hamburg. I think I remember the Soccer field, which at the time was in the process of being built. And at the time, some plans to include some US prototype modeling in the future.
I've seen several rather nice European layouts, and for me at least, the trains are not necessarily the 'focal' point, as much as they are part of the entire miniature world. I think it's a difference in perspective, not better or worse, but just different. And let's face it, if any of us had access to a space the size of a warehouse, wouldn't we want our trains to operate through at least SOME interesting scenic places? For myself--wow, I could do the ENTIRE Sierra Nevada's. Plus, a couple of really BIG yards!
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!
After reading all these posts before I looked at the pictures, I must say I was surprised. I was expecting some really toy like junk. While it was no where close to some of the wonderful layouts I've seen, it is certainly better than most I've seen.
I was very disapointed that it seemed to have all the cliché scenes - building on fire, "working" drive in theater, animals excapting from the zoo, splendor in the grass (or sunflowers in this case), etc.
Wow, is it the phase of the moon? Maybe we've all got cabin fever? Did the early switch to Daylight Savings Time throw our internal clocks out of sync?
I just thought it was interesting. Not good, bad or ugly, just interesting.
If it was mine, I'd have put John, Paul, George and Ringo on Mount Rushmore. And it would have been American football, Pats 52, Colts 3. Sorry, Peyton. That's what you get for runnin' down your Mom like that.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
Bill H. wrote: briandugas wrote:Did anyone catch that last picture in the series? What were those people doing in that field of flowers?I was wondering that myself, as the effort has "no basis in reality", or so it's been said.
briandugas wrote:Did anyone catch that last picture in the series? What were those people doing in that field of flowers?
I was wondering that myself, as the effort has "no basis in reality", or so it's been said.
Rather looks like they're picking the sunflowers. A couple of weeks from now you'll be able to buy the seeds (the black spot in the middle of the flower,) shelled or unshelled, at your favorite convenience store...
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Fascinating layout, Mr B, with plenty to fire the imagination of modellers and non-modellers alike. Thanks for showing it. I'd certainly like to see it.
Mike
Modelling the UK in 00, and New England - MEC, B&M, D&H and Guilford - in H0
"It is not what goes into your mouth that defiles you, but what comes out of it."
Bye, folks.
lvanhen wrote: IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH THE CONCEPT - TOO BAD!! - IT'S THEIR LAYOUT!!
IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH THE CONCEPT - TOO BAD!! - IT'S THEIR LAYOUT!!
If you don't agree with my opinion of the display - too bad! - it's my opinion and I'll still express it.
I TOO HAVE BEEN STAYING OUT OF THIS "CRITIQUE" BY THOSE WHO OFTEN HAVE NOTHING GOOD TO SAY ABOUT MOST OF THE POSTS. THIS LAYOUT WAS NOT CREATED FOR "PURISTS" TO NIT PICK, IT WAS CREATED TO BE A DISPLAY FOR THE ENJOYMENT OF MANY. IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH THE CONCEPT - TOO BAD!! - IT'S THEIR LAYOUT!! MODEL RAILROADING IS A VAST HOBBY. MANY OF THE POSTERS HERE ARE SUPERB MODELERS, AND A FEW, LIKE ME, DON'T HAVE THE TIME OR EYESIGHT TO COUNT RIVITS. IF YOU LIKE TO COUNT RIVITS, GOOD, I'LL NOT TELL YOU NOT TO MAKE THE PERFECT MODEL OF "WHATEVER", BUT DON'T TELL ME THE BOTTLE BRUSH CHRISTMAS TREES I PUT ON THE LAYOUT FOR MY GRANDSONS AT CHRISTMAS TIME ARE NOT "CORRECT" - I DO NOT CARE WHAT YOU THINK, I DO IT FOR MY GRANDSONS' AND MY ENJOYMENT!!!
TOO MANY THREADS DIGRESS INTO PERSONAL DISAGREEMENTS - I WAS IN ONE SOME MONTHS AGO UNTILL I REMOVED MY HEAD FROM MY AND STOPPED THE BACK & FORTH WITH AN APOLOGY.
MAYBE BERGIE SHOULD ADD A RULE ABOUT BEING PLAIN UNPLEASANT!!
IT'S MY (OUR) RAILROAD & I'LL (WE'LL) RUN IT THE WAY WWE DARN PLEASE!!!
All I gotta say is...that's ONE high scorin' soccer (football) game!
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
on30francisco wrote: SunsetLimited wrote:I agree with the above post, its a great example of what can be accomplished. Just because its not another dingy steam era layout or some lame shelf switching job that if taken to a show most of the crowd would pass right by or fall asleep looking at, doesn't mean its not a model railroad if thats what they designed it to be, if they designed it to be a model world of transportation thats cool to. Its a great example of both, and thats what the crowds want.I think this public display layout will draw more people into the hobby because this layout is as much a model railroad as the ones that strive for perfect realism. As for it being "another dingy steam era railroad," VIVA STEAM!!
SunsetLimited wrote:I agree with the above post, its a great example of what can be accomplished. Just because its not another dingy steam era layout or some lame shelf switching job that if taken to a show most of the crowd would pass right by or fall asleep looking at, doesn't mean its not a model railroad if thats what they designed it to be, if they designed it to be a model world of transportation thats cool to. Its a great example of both, and thats what the crowds want.
I think this public display layout will draw more people into the hobby because this layout is as much a model railroad as the ones that strive for perfect realism. As for it being "another dingy steam era railroad," VIVA STEAM!!
Midnight Railroader wrote: SunsetLimited wrote: the goal is to build a believable display If that's the goal, then they failed to achieve it. Which was my point in the first place. Thanks for helping me make it.
SunsetLimited wrote: the goal is to build a believable display
I didn't mean believable in that Las Vegas is going to be right next to the alps, i meant believable in that bridge looking like it belongs there, its not just a useless bridge on the layout, or the roads blending well with the sidewalks and terrain. Even with several different locales, they blend well into a nice display, that was my meaning. Sorry for the confusion.
Midnight Railroader wrote: SteamFreak wrote: Anyone truly secure about their own talents wouldn't feel compelled to bash the work of others.That's quite a leap you've taken. It means that NO ONE can critique the work of anyone else, because if he does, why, then, he's insecure.
SteamFreak wrote: Anyone truly secure about their own talents wouldn't feel compelled to bash the work of others.
Anyone truly secure about their own talents wouldn't feel compelled to bash the work of others.
It means that NO ONE can critique the work of anyone else, because if he does, why, then, he's insecure.
He said "bash", not "critique". There's a big difference between the two IMO.
I guess this board (and the world in general) is now relegated to people giving each other "attaboys," no matter what they think of the modeling they see.
Perhaps the "if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all" concept is what you want?
Nope. I have an opinion and the fact that it is critical does not make me insecure nor does it mean I will refrain from expressing it.
selector wrote:...and do nothing about it! Envy can be a great motivator, but it brings a huge cost and that is usually a loathing...of one's own unmet aspirations and of the standard to which you aspire.So, yes, I agree with you, Dave. It is a shame to fret endlessly and take no steps to rectify...if the other standard is worthy. And that begs the question, don't it.
...and do nothing about it! Envy can be a great motivator, but it brings a huge cost and that is usually a loathing...of one's own unmet aspirations and of the standard to which you aspire.
So, yes, I agree with you, Dave. It is a shame to fret endlessly and take no steps to rectify...if the other standard is worthy. And that begs the question, don't it.
I was staying out of this controversy, but you just took the words from my mouth, Selector. Anyone truly secure about their own talents wouldn't feel compelled to bash the work of others.
How many of today's top model railroaders were inspired in childhood by 3 rails, 27 inch radii, and foreshortened locomotives? More than a few. Darn that unprototypical Lionel.
Nelson
Ex-Southern 385 Being Hoisted
Dave Vollmer wrote: The only source of shame in this game is the kind we bring upon ourselves if we fret endlessly over how someone else's layout is bigger, better, farther along, etc., ...
The only source of shame in this game is the kind we bring upon ourselves if we fret endlessly over how someone else's layout is bigger, better, farther along, etc., ...
Wow! Did I just see all the buildings from Faller and Vollmer catalogue combined?! LOL
Can't imagine how much time it would take to build all those buildings...I am building a 8X5 now in N and I am struggleing to do a couple of buidlings a week. I am now at leat 4 weeks behind with just track laying! LOL
Shame? Not hardly... I think its just a plain layout that would be a little fun, not much I liked. If someone did a detailing overhaul and added some personality, it would be much better...
-beegle55
Quoth Charlie Brown: "Good grief!"
It doesn't put me to shame at all. That's not what I was trying to achieve.
Nevertheless, I think it's silly to debate the merits/demerits of this. If it helps people get interested in model railroading I'm all for it, professionally built or whatever. But it's not meant either to appeal to seasoned model railroaders nor is it meant to be the standard by which we hold ourselves.
The only source of shame in this game is the kind we bring upon ourselves if we fret endlessly over how someone else's layout is bigger, better, farther along, etc., or worse yet, how someone else's modeling goals differ from ours.
Modeling the Rio Grande Southern First District circa 1938-1946 in HOn3.
Midnight Railroader wrote: vsmith wrote: Midnight Railroader wrote: SunsetLimited wrote:when you go and call a setup like this a low standard just because it is a well rounded display that is just not setup for operations or modeled after a real world railroad, thats just not right.So if the buildings were all cardboard with windows and doors drawn-on with crayon, that would be just as good for you? Because someone would have had to do all the drawing and cutting, right?Theres no wrong way to build a model RR. Just ways others dont like.If it works for the modeler, whats wrong with that? Wheres the harm?It always cracks me up how some people will look at a nicely done model RR like this that just happens to different from what they like and so have to poop on it. I notice you replied to my post but didn't answer my question.And to address your point, this isn't someone's home layout, built to their desires. It's a public display. Fair game for anyone to critique.
vsmith wrote: Midnight Railroader wrote: SunsetLimited wrote:when you go and call a setup like this a low standard just because it is a well rounded display that is just not setup for operations or modeled after a real world railroad, thats just not right.So if the buildings were all cardboard with windows and doors drawn-on with crayon, that would be just as good for you? Because someone would have had to do all the drawing and cutting, right?Theres no wrong way to build a model RR. Just ways others dont like.If it works for the modeler, whats wrong with that? Wheres the harm?It always cracks me up how some people will look at a nicely done model RR like this that just happens to different from what they like and so have to poop on it.
Midnight Railroader wrote: SunsetLimited wrote:when you go and call a setup like this a low standard just because it is a well rounded display that is just not setup for operations or modeled after a real world railroad, thats just not right.So if the buildings were all cardboard with windows and doors drawn-on with crayon, that would be just as good for you? Because someone would have had to do all the drawing and cutting, right?
SunsetLimited wrote:when you go and call a setup like this a low standard just because it is a well rounded display that is just not setup for operations or modeled after a real world railroad, thats just not right.
So if the buildings were all cardboard with windows and doors drawn-on with crayon, that would be just as good for you? Because someone would have had to do all the drawing and cutting, right?
Theres no wrong way to build a model RR. Just ways others dont like.
If it works for the modeler, whats wrong with that? Wheres the harm?
It always cracks me up how some people will look at a nicely done model RR like this that just happens to different from what they like and so have to poop on it.
And to address your point, this isn't someone's home layout, built to their desires. It's a public display. Fair game for anyone to critique.
Ahhem..in red, was my answer. What if it was snap-track on Life-like grass paper and sceniced with cardbaord and crayon buildings, what they were made by kids with cancer as a public display to raise charity funding, would you still gripe about it? Its still a model RR, and it works for what its ment to be.
Home or public doesnt make a difference in my eye, and true, because its on public display means that while you or I may offer an opinion over it, that it just that, an opinion, and is no more right or wrong that the next guys. It was built by someone for someone, and if the the guy or guys who built it and the guy or guys or corporate or public entity loves the results, who gives a what you or I or anyone else says about it. Its just us pissing our opinions into the wind. I just try to accept things on their own accord and leave out the judgement calls of right or wrong.
I've been to certain club model RRs that have never been completed simply because all the overlords of holy judgement couldnt decide amonst themselves just what the correct solution would be since they were all adament in their belief that only thier opinion was correct. So they fight and squabble over whos correct for YEARS, and it never gets done. I learned that kind of mindset was more damaging to the hobby than any circle of track on lifelike paper with cardboard & crayon buildings ever could be.
Have fun with your trains
What do cardboard buildings have to do with my statement? Your calling a nice display low because it contains plastic kits and some fantasy aspect, which some of those buildings were not. It would take someone a very long time to scratch build all those buildings and since the goal is to build a believable display that people can come see without needing two lifetimes to do it kits are a great choice. Could they have done some stuff better or different? Of course they could, no layout is perfect (sorry to break that to all you type A people out there). I appreciate layouts of all types, prototype, fantasy (no dinosaurs), anything in between so don't think im biased towards one type of style. If that makes me a cardboard building type, tough.
(sigh).
Did anyone else notice that fabulous bridge that had one rivet missing just under the support arch? Tsk!