History and the art of compromise

One of the fascinating aspects of model railways is establishing a sense of history. This is usually accomplished by setting a time and a place. However, if you read layout articles in any of the major model railway magazines, you will invariably come across the introductory "history" of the layout that sets both the time and place, but most importantly, the history and thus the rationale for the layout. 

 

The layout owner is providing an historical context from which the layout comes to life. Modeller's license is a broad registration of bending or recreating history to give credence to the model railway.  Indeed, creating a believable history (accurate or otherwise) is almost as important as creating the layout itself.

There are some layouts that have a very distinct and specific history, (including Jack Burgess and his Yosemite Valley layout, Tony Koester's Nickel Plate St. Louis Division, and Tony Wright's wonderful Little Bytham in rural Lincolnshire (check out Tony's book Modelling the East Coast Main Line in the British Railways Era). 

There are other layouts with a prototype history based on real railroads (such as the Rock Island Lines,  and Everard Junction) or fictitious railroads (such as Allen McClelland's Virginian and Ohio Railroad). In that broad category there are proto-freelancers and plain ol' freelancers. What unites them is a shared view of creating a history for their layouts encompassing time and place.

The combination of time and place has always been important to me which is why I love the historical context in model railway layout articles. Studying maps and researching towns and industries is great fun. I have taken considerable time and research to establish the historical bona fides of my US prototype layout set in southern Minnesota but which includes some significant "what ifs" just the same. That said, recent changes to my home layout have forced me to reconsider some of this history. 

For example, the new simplified layout has changed direction. The previous version had east to the left and west to the right (which therefore had some intrinsic problems) but now direction is reversed, with east to the right and west to the left. As a result, the traffic pattern has also changed. And, because the main line is much shorter with less towns, the sense of "going somewhere else" is somewhat reduced as a train has only three towns to traverse instead of seven.

All this has meant a slightly different story to the previous version of history I had so assiduously developed over time. At first, this irked me a lot. I had done all this research and now it was being compromised. But hang on - I'd already "compromised history" with my "what if" scenario. My layout is based on a "what if" the CNW had not abandoned a particular branchline and had actually maintained it until purchase by the DME in 1986. 

I'd already compromised history by extending my layout period from 1995-96 to 1995-2000. That's a five year gap in which a lot happened in the real world with consequences for my layout. CNW joined Union Pacific, and Burlington Northern and Santa Fe merged. There were also some locomotive lettering changes - DME became Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern. If I was modelling a later period, I'd have to include the addition of the Iowa, Chicago and Eastern (ICE) with the DME in 2002 allowing for a new combination of locomotives. I'd been running unit trains out of Marshall (MN) from the Minnesota Soy Co-operative (MSC) complex with Archer Daniel Midland (ADM) and MSC tank cars despite the fact that ADM didn't purchase MSC until 2002, albeit with a 30% stake in MSC in 1997. And Vera Sun (founded in 2001) with its ethanol facility at Aurora (SD) hadn't been built yet but I run a few of those cars as well.

So where does that leave things?

I think where this leads to is the fact that railway modelling is a set of compromises. Even prototype purists have had to compromise somewhat. No matter what, there are compromises. What is different, however, is to what extent is the compromise and does it make sense to both the layout builder and the operators? And it is here where the historical context for the layout becomes critical.

I confess that creating a believable history within the geography and economics of railroading in model form is one of the most encompassing aspects of the hobby for me. Perhaps it's more in the "thinking space" than the "doing space" (something that close railway modeller friends will chide me for), but it also gives me a greater sense of realism (in my mind) and purpose to what I am doing. And this is what adds to the enjoyment of model railways more than anything else.

How important is "history" to your layout?

Are we mad?

The start of a new year brings forth hopes for the future and a review of the preceding twelve months. In that context, I want to look at model railways and ask the question: "are we mad"?

If I review the past twelve months I can see that I spent quite a bit of money on the hobby of model railways. It was in the thousands of dollars rather than the tens of thousands but nevertheless it was a sizeable proportion of disposable income that I could have perhaps spent more wisely elsewhere (or not spent it all and saved it for my future retirement). Moreover, I have even been contemplating some home renovations with a model railway purpose shimmering away in the not too distant playground of my mind - utter madness surely!

In addition, in 2017 I spent money going to exhibitions (all but one being in another state) and a model railway convention in the United States. Sure, in the US, I caught up with friends and new acquaintances but funnily enough they were all largely associated with the hobby of model railways. I saw some prototype rail action as well as I followed a section of line between small midwest rural towns in southern Minnesota.

During the past year, my leisure time comprised of many things but model railways was not far from the action. This included actually working on the model railway; thinking, planning, researching and making adjustments to the model railway; running trains and the odd op. session on the model railway; and spending countless hours over the course of the year just staring at the model railway. I am also involved with the local NMRA Division and a member of two Special Interest Groups (SIGs), plus a couple of prototype railway associations. Sadly, the amount of time spent on my blogs in 2017 was almost non-existent so I don't need to worry about time spent there.

Naturally, there was plenty of reading and viewing of model railway and prototype railway subjects. This took the form of magazines; blogs; several disparate book chapters (and maybe a whole book every now and then); and countless Youtube videos (including video subscription services such as Model Railroader's Video Plus) and DVDs. I even got train DVDs for Christmas.

Throughout the year, conversations were also littered with talk about model railways; about trains; DCC and op. sessions; industries and history; and the usual banter about model railway personalities. Most of these conversations were positive, but some were just plain frustrating (DCC in particular).

Finally, there was all that time and money spent in actually buying things for the model railway. Some times this took the form of need, but many times it took the form of "just in case" (the "strike while the iron is hot" mentality many of us grew up with in the days of low run production of kits). And when I say "need", I don't mean it in the economic sense that distinguishes between wants and needs; I mean it in the sense of I need that item (often a locomotive) for the model railway as I just can't get by without it. And in keeping with the view that well-worn sayings originate in truth, then "whoever has the most locomotives wins" must surely be right!

In conclusion, upon looking at the evidence and weighing up the facts of the matter, there can be no other answer to the question: "Are we mad"? - the answer is definitively YES.

Opinion

In my role of armchair modeller, I tend to spend quite a bit of time reading model railway magazines and blogs on model railway topics. They all pretty much give an opinion or two on some aspect of the hobby or on life in general. For example, you can see some of the blog sites in my blog roll that I will often refer to, even if the updates are as slow as my own! What amazes me, however, is how worked up some people can be in their derision of people's modelling preferences and their modelling efforts, and in some cases, the person as well. Model railroading is supposed to be fun, is it not?

Recently, I was going through the blog of US modeller Lance Mindheim. Lance had his layout featured in the December 2013 issue of Model Railroader. The layout is a great example of taking inspiration from the prototype (Miami, Florida, in this case) and building a really nice model railroad. The composition and scenic elements of the layout are superb. There really should be no doubt that Lance is darn good modeller with a quality model railroad. And, as an aside, I hear Lance is to be a guest speaker next Easter at the New Zealand Model Railway Convention in Hamilton, New Zealand (home of the Chiefs rugby union team).

In Lance's blog entry for 30th November 2013, entitled "Live by the sword, die by the sword", Lance has compiled a number of derogatory comments from a UK forum about his layout and his layout article in Model Railroader. It seems that there are some people who don't like the dimensions of Lance's layouts. Building layouts using a standard 6' by 1' baseboard size irks some people. Other comments are critical of Lance's views about model railroading, particularly his expression about "modelling the ordinary". One US commentator didn't like the fact that an image of Lance's layout in Model Railroader had been digitally enhanced with the addition of a photo backdrop instead of showing the basement plumbing!

Lance shrugs off these comments and so he should. Lance is a very good modeller; one who thinks seriously about his modelling while at the same time enjoying the hobby as well. One of the greatest ironies from the criticisms is the fact that the UK model railroad magazines regularly feature micro-layouts which gives pause for thought for those who don't like shunty-plank designs!

The other interesting observation from these criticisms is the comment about Lance's personal views that he expresses sometimes in his model railroad blog and in his other blogs. Personally, I don't know why this is a problem when millions of bloggers around the world are just airing their opinion on pretty much everything. Blogs, by their very nature, are opinion pieces. I could go on, but I don't want to offend anyone with a lecture on the impact of social media on contemporary society...

Whatever ones opinion and whatever the way one chooses to express it, the model railway hobby includes people with umpteen different views on everything from layout planning to scenic detail and operational preferences. Note that I am talking about opinion, not fact. HO scale is 3.5mm to the foot - that's a fact without too much argument. Opinions about a layout in HO scale is another matter. The variety in what modellers do in HO scale (and other scales) is enormous and something we should cherish no matter what our own selective interests may be.

Variety and newness can help instigate our own thinking, whether it emanates from some feature we dislike on a layout or something we find fresh and appealing. Sometimes something that didn't interest us last year is now of immense importance as it now coincides with some modelling work we are doing now, rather than previously when we had just a passing interest. Newness can thus mean relevance at a certain point in time.

People are in the hobby for a range of different reasons and with a range of different skill sets. Individual preferences will abound but we are all part of our common hobby. Like humanity itself, essentially we are all the same. Where we differ in our preferences and approaches in doing things, we should take the opportunity to enhance our knowledge rather than simply deride those who take a different path to our own. It would be a boring hobby and a boring Australia if it were any other way.

That said, may you all have a safe and enjoyable festive season and New Year.

2012 - Happy New Year

Happy New Year to all our readers of Armchair Modeller Down Under.

I am looking forward to a productive 2012 for both my blogging and model railway layout construction. I also hope to visit a few exhibitions this year, as well as reporting more frequently on some of the more interesting articles in the model railway press.

And I will be looking for opportunities to start some discussion from time to time on some of the significant issues facing model railways and building model railway layouts.

I trust 2012 will be a good year for you as well.