My Modeling Goals

I recently was a guest operator on an operations oriented layout that used a C/MRI interface to manage the movement of trains via signaling and route selection. I have operated many layouts over the years and was very impressed with the prototypical operation. It's not surprising to learn the layout is owned by a railroad dispatcher. That visit made me realize that my traffic management and routing system was not only feasible, but not that difficult to make a reality.

I am interested in modeling the PRR's Panhandle Division in the late 1960's between the west portal of Gould tunnel near Mingo Jct. and just west of Frazeysburg, Ohio in the 1960's, a distance of 96 miles. There were 7 towers and 12 remote controlled locations plus numerous distant signals between those points. My "big plan" layout would have 4 towers and 6 remote controlled locations and distant signals as required between the interlockers. Each tower location would have a scaled down US&S styled panel to control the crossovers, sidings, and signals within that tower's segment of remote control and local appliances.

The N scale testbed layout represents 1 tower and the 3 locations it remote controlled (Morgan Run, Wally [WV], and Clow). Current sensing block detection is probably the easiest to implement, so i would have to chop the layout into blocks, which should prove rather easy since it's only 8'x5'. I intend to switch to metal wheels, so i could make the system foolproof by adding a resistor to each car to get accurate block detection.

The tower system eliminates the need for a dedicated dispatcher and puts control of the layout in the hands of the train operators - this makes 1,2, or 3 person operating sessions much less complicated. The biggest pitfall is not having a single person acting as the dispatcher governing all movements on the layout, but with a 2 track main and several sidings, I don't think it will lead to a mega-merger sized meltdown if several trains need to access the same location at once.

Each train operator would have to co-ordinate movements with the trains in advance and behind them - basically becoming the tower operator when their train is within a tower controlled segment. The problem of "pacing" could cause problems - if a train crew performs it's work at a given location rather quickly it could gridlock the layout by moving all the action to one area. I haven't quite worked out all the operations aspect of using tower control with "self governing" but with good operators and lots of communication and a few runs of the layout, it might prove a rather "lightweight" operating session system.

Measure Twice, Cut Once

Over the past year I have been transitioning from HO to N scale. I started with an N-Trak module, a locomotive, and a few freight cars to see if it would work out. I was pleased with the level of detail and function of the models enough to move ahead with the transition. In September I started to build from a hastily conceived track plan - I was eager to move forward and was happy to just have something in the works that was tangible and not just on paper.

After getting the track in place and running a few trains, I decided to make some changes. I knew I would do this, so I had affixed the track in a temporary manner. I had an idea of what I was after and being new to N scale, I needed to get a feel for car lengths and train lengths - I'm a visual learner but no amount of 3D CAD rendering could give me a sense of the space needed to operate the layout.

Once I had ironed out the annoyances in the design I began to make the layout permanent. I am modeling the Pennsylvania Railroad's Panhandle Division in eastern Ohio and until recent did not have up to date track charts for the segment I chose to model. Upon finding the missing resource and reviewing what I had built, I decided I had missed the mark and needed to make some revisions.

In my haste to get something built, I started with an adhoc layout plan I drew up in response to a plan posted on the Layout Design SIG reflector and then shaped it to my need. This would have worked fine if I had simply wanted a model railroad. Since I'm interested in a specific prototype in specific locations, that design quickly proved useless.

I have since modified the track layout to have it resemble the prototype in Coshocton, Ohio in 1967, but it's not an exact reproduction. Since this is still a scale model, I had to make several compromises to enable "operating" the layout in a prototypical manner within the confines of the limited space available.

I have also rethought the reasoning for the layout. It has now become a testbed for a future layout that will depict the 96 miles of right of way from near Mingo Jct to near Frazeysburg, Ohio. Had I started with that goal in mind from the outset, the past few months of revisions to the layout would not have happened since I would not have used a plan based on an industrial switching area in southern California as my starting point.

In the end, it will work out, but had I not have had an eye toward the future and a lengthy background in the hobby, I could very easily had used an off the shelf plan and quickly become frustrated with the outcome; a layout developed from a plan whose purpose was something other than mine.

Instead of cutting, I needed to consider what my ultimate objective was and than develop a layout that would take me in that direction. Instead, I mistook motion for growth without a clear focus. I knew I wanted to model the Panhandle, I just didn't know enough about the line at the time. Luckily my initial design was not too far off and was easily revised to better represent my chosen prototype.

This experience clearly shows that planning takes place on many levels. Simply planning out where one track will be in relation to another on a plywood plane does little to address the future needs or desires of the layout.

Everything I Know Is Because of Model Railroading

When I was eight years old I inherited my older brother's 4x8 HO model railroad. The track plan was pretty basic - a simple oval with a loop that crossed it's self in the middle. The entire 4x8 sheet of plywood was covered with a very ugly grass mat and that's all there was - the grass mat and the track. The 2 turnouts were controlled by built-in machines and the controls were right next to the power pack throttle. As simple as this was, I had a tremendous amount of fun running my very toy like Tyco trains around the loop.

I have a picture my mother took of me while I was running trains. I had this stupid grin, the kind that goes from ear to ear, it's quite an embarrassing picture, but shows how deep my love of the hobby runs. I started to add buildings to the layout, these came from the local toy store and I should emphasize toy. These kits were in the "Plasticville" series and looked, well, very plastic. I had a gas station, a church (with grave yard), a fire house, and a Cape Cod styled house.

The layout lasted like this until about 1983 when I met James. He and his father had train layouts, but they were much better than mine, but neither had scenery, so I had the upper hand (well, not really). James and I would work on each other's layouts. At one point, I tried to model the PRR's Horseshoe Curve on my 4x8 in HO - it was worth a try, right? The hubris of youth.

Since there were two of us running trains, I got the brilliant idea to add a second throttle so we could both run trains simultaneously. Neither of us knew a thing about electronics, I think we were eleven. I rode my bike to the library and borrowed a book on building model railroads and it had a section on wiring for two cabs (no one called them throttles). I had been mowing my neighbor's lawn that summer and had a few bucks so off I went to Belmont TV in the shopping plaza. I walked in, asked the guy for some toggle switches and came home with four or five. I proceeded to wire up the layout.

That simple act set in motion a career as an electronics technician and then a computer network specialist. Researching protoytpes and their histories fostered a love of history and geography. Wanting to better understand how trains were routed and managed, I started going trackside more and more. I purchased a scanner to listen to the dispatcher and train crews to aid in understanding the whys and hows of operations. This led to the pursuit of an FCC Amateur Radio license.

Even my interest in music can be linked back to model railroading. I became interested in electronic based music after an evening spent in south Baltimore watching trains. The former B&O's Baileys Wye is a bottleneck area for CSX and that means plenty of action happens there since many trains are stuck in the jam. It was there I discovered raves in the early 1990's - 2 locations in the area hosted some of the best there was in techno music. I would have never found those places had I not been chasing CSX trains at midnight. I would not have been out at midnight had the new GE's not been on the front.

I'm sure many people can cite a common reference point in their lives, mine just happens to be model railroading. Who knows what trouble I would have gotten into had I not been busy in the basement as a teenager running trains.

Confessions From Within

I worked at a rather large model railroad manufacturer for about a year, and in that time, I learned a few things about the business that saddened me. I have had a layout in some manner or shape since I was eight years old. My best friend from childhood introduced me to scale modeling, and modeling with a purpose. His father had a medium sized layout in the basement, and when we grew tired of our 4x8 based layouts, we'd operate his father's railroad.

When I hired on with the model railroad manufacturer, I was very excited to be a part of the hobby I loved so dearly. I was working with overseas vendors on multiple projects at a time and felt as though my voice mattered to the end product. Model railroading is a business and that fact struck me squarely on the last day of August, 2001 when I was fired. I had never been fired before and I knew I had done nothing to warrant my dismissal in such a manner (the unemployment agency agreed with me).

The reason I and many of my co-workers had lost our jobs was the result of many factors coming together at once, and something at our company had to give. An economic downturn caused many to cut out recreational spending, such as $500.00+ model locomotives. At the same time this was happening, a very large and misguided project had been stalled yet again and the bank called in the debt. To cover the debt, the payroll was robbed in the form of layoffs. The entire summer of 2001 was ugly at our company.

I knew I would eventually get the axe because I refused to work extra hours for no pay, call up previously laid off workers and ask them questions, and rubber stamp high dollar models to open a revenue stream. I thought getting it right was more important than to knowingly sell inferior products. So much for my career in the hobby that had played, and continues to play an important role in my life.

I had no idea what kind of money there is in the model railroading world. A successful manufacturer can make a ton of money, but that profit comes at a large price - the constant need to out do the competition requires some gutsy moves and sometimes those moves don't work in your favor. Betting the future of your company and the hobby on an unstructured idea is foolish, but that's what happened at our company. I could understand if the project had been well conceived but not embraced by the market, but the problem was one of failure to lock in what the product was going to be when delivered.

Model railroading, like other "classic" hobbies has lost ground as an American pastime. Computers and the internet are a much more attractive hobby for the pre-teens. Model railroading requires one to be an active participant, video games and the internet allow one to be rather passive. How does a toy train compete with the immediacy and ease of use of a video game. It requires zero space and is viewed as a cool thing by peers; admitting you like model trains might result in being beat up!

I have moved on in my career, but I can't help think of what could have been if I still worked within the industry. I openly wish the company I worked for to fail - I feel sorry for those who would loose their jobs, but the hobby would be better off in the end. It still bothers me when I walk around the train shows and see locomotive projects that I was a part of for sale and fetching outrageous sums. Some of them are ticking away, ready to fail the instant you remove them from the box. That was before the company went to 100% quality checks because they received so many complaints. Sorry collectors, your factory air is actually an exhaust cloud from I-95.

The Model Railroad Dilemma

I am a railroad modeler, not to be confused with model railroader. There is a difference and it creates a dilemma for manufacturers and modelers alike. When I worked in the model train industry developing models for a well known manufacturer, I was surprised at how few of my fellow employees had trains. I think I might have been the only operations oriented modeler in the entire building. It's not that difficult to believe since I worked for an O gauge company who produced very few "scale" models.

Manufacturers make models that will sell. The larger manufacturers need to make models that will sell many many units. They typically choose models that allow for multiple road names and paint schemes. The tooling costs are high, but they make that up with volume. Even for manufacturers that specialize in scale models there are compromises that have to be made to appeal to the largest audience to recover the initial costs of production.

When I started in the hobby as a pre-teen (I think the term now is tween) I had little money to spend on trains. Athearn, Like-Like and Roundhouse to the rescue! They had many bargain priced models to choose from and at less than $4.00 a freight car, after mowing a few lawns I could fill out my roster. The models weren't highly detailed, nor were many of them true to the prototype (or any prototype). But it didn't matter, I was able to run trains and enjoy the hobby. I was the target audience for those models.

As I progressed in the hobby, the purpose of my layout changed. I was no longer content with watching the train make endless loops on my 4x8. I added a passing track, a few sidings to spot cars, and the cou de gras, a second throttle to allow 2 trains to ply my 4x8 universe. I quickly graduated to operating my layout, not just blindly spotting cars here and there. Each siding had a purpose and that purpose required specific freight cars.

Here's where the dilemma kicks in. As I researched the locomotives and rolling stock in use by my chosen prototype in that time period those bargain models fast lost their appeal. My fleet of Athearn twin bay PRR hoppers were nothing like the H31a stenciled on their sides. The F-7 and GP7 when compared to the prototypes were all wrong. Having an incorrect model was worse than not having the model. Much like the transition from adolescence, my transition to scale railroad modeler was clumsy and uncoordinated.

It was difficult shedding the cocoon of my foundation in the hobby, but I emerged a scholar of the prototype and nothing less than an accurate model would suffice. In the late 1980's there was little to no ready to run rolling stock that was highly detailed. There were limited run kits, but my small budget and lack of skills stopped me dead in my tracks (no pun intended). I either had to shell out big money to get the level of detail I was after, or shelve my plans and take up some other pursuit. I ended up leaving the hobby in favor of bicycle racing.

Tens years later I returned to the hobby to find that the demand for affordable, high quality detailed models had created a tremendous amount of available models. Several manufacturers had created high end product lines, but was there more to the models than a Madison Ave make-over? The product was better, in details and running characteristics, enough so that I returned to the hobby. The compromises in product didn't seem so bad and the level of detail was an order of magnitude better.

The level of detail in the models has advanced at a tremendous pace, but the initial dilemma still exists. The product has to have a market, and 10,000 slobbering Pennsy fans might not be enough for a manufacturer to release a one of a kind freight car that is of sufficient quality to turn a profit, let alone break even. In the past 5 years, the level of detail in plastic models has improved due to the advancements in pad printing technologies, improvements in die tooling, and the reduced costs of manufacture in China. The result has been an explosion of limited runs by established vendors and hundreds of start up companies. There is almost an endless number of choices for the high end modeler.

But someone has to buy all these choices for them to continue to be offered. It's the same dilemma as always, make what will sell to the largest audience possible. How many modelers need an accurate model of Alto Tower?

Has the hobby grown that much since early this decade when several major manufacturers were scrambling to make payroll? It would appear so.

Overcoming Inertia

I have been wrestling with my model railroad demons as of late. My desires to build a layout have been overshadowed by my lack of space. I managed build an HO switching layout when I lived in a townhouse which I setup in our house when we moved 3 years ago. It allowed me to say I had a layout in progress.

The layout was built from the benchwork of a 1'x8' test layout saved from the trash when I worked at a large model railroad manfacturer. I basically added 4ft support legs to the 1x4 framing. It was a simple shelf covered with plywood and homasote. I quickly grew tired of moving the cars back and forth and it collected more dust than I thought humanly possible. I modified the layout a few times to add interest to the switching, but how many times can you move the same 12 cars before it gets old? I wanted more than I was able to do with that layout configuration.

In January 2006, I made the difficult decision to change scales from HO to N after a trip to the B&O museum and seeing the BANTRAK layout display. Suddenly my limited space had potential for much more than a simple shuffling of cars back and forth. I bought motive power and rolling stock, and managed to build an N-Trak module that fall.

I drew up several plans for possible N scale layouts, but every idea seemed to lack an essential ingredient to make the layout perfect. Then everything was put on hold while we contemplated relocating out of state. A few weeks ago I decided to move ahead with a switching layout that could be easily dismantled when we eventually move. Not having a layout is worse than building a layout which will have to be dismantled. I had an itch that needed scratching.

Over the Labor Day weekend, I moved furniture in the basement and procured wood, track and turnouts, and got started building the layout. I managed to get the bulk of the track in place and connected up a throttle. I was officially running trains in the basement.

I could have had this layout up and running for over a year had I not let inertia keep me from moving forward. Sometimes, the hardest part of this hobby is starting a project. Once started, the rest just falls into place. Isn't it time you stopped being a passive model railroader and starting building a layout? Something is better than nothing, but in N scale, you can have much more of that something...

Don't let inertia stop you from building a layout.

Internet Modeling

Think about what it means to be a model railroader (or railroad modeler). How much of your time is consumed following threads in forums, reading email lists, or picking apart blogs? Contrast that with the time spent building or researching a model (not surfing railpictures or the fallen flags image archives)? Some hobbies don't need an interactive component because they are interactive.

Model railroading is a 3 dimensional pursuit, and no matter how much you talk about the hobby on the internet, it will not make you a better modeler. I used to be able to weather cars, build scenery, and lay straight track, but those were skills honed with hours of trial and error. Practice makes perfect and that's what it takes to build a model railroad. Skills fade if not used, as mine have.

A recent editorial in a national magazine took model railroad internet forums to task, and rightfully so. I'm not interested in pandering, so have no problem admitting I agree with that editorial. It's time to stop logging on and flaming each other. Spend that time building models. It's easy to complain and attack others, but what do you have to show for your efforts? You would have a model railroad instead of a irritated bowel had you built models instead.

I friend of mine who departed this mortal coil just shy of his 32nd birthday sent me an email a few weeks before he passed from cancer. He told me to contribute more light and less heat. I still have that email and often find myself coming back to it's message when I'm faced with a flame war over some trivial thing. This blog is my light.