Do you fudge the truth?

[Iain]

Def fudging things with this collection of projects.

However, if I'm not at a train show, I only run what was seen in Edenton, NC in August of 1948, or as close to that as possible.  I admit, I don't strictly check dates on all my rolling stock like I probably should, so this leads to sometimes running cars that were built a couple years late or have reweigh dates and the like too new.

[rschaffter]

Sure.  A bit of extra weathering on the Build Dates cures a multitude of sins...

[Dave Schneider]

I probably don't fudge enough. I have a hard time with "selective compression" and "layout design elements".  I stooge endlessly at times trying to figure out how to make something just right, while deluding myself that it matters. I admire those who pull all the compromises together to make something that looks right. As Lee once said (and I paraphrase), you are building a model railroad, not a museum display on which there will be a test (or some such).

Best wishes, Dave

[wcfn100]

Stay the course Dave. 

Jason

[bbussey]

... As an example of not fudging- It is so disappointing how often Kato has gotten CSX locos wrong.  I love their products, but I just can't run (for example) a CSX Transportation SD40 with the wrong road number (why couldn't they have just gotten the number correct?)...

We are going to have to revoke your Master Modeler certification if you can't alter the road number. 

[Mike Madonna]

Hmmm...this is easy, no. Focus on April, 1953. One railroad, one sub division...actually makes modeling and purchases SO much simpler.

[cfritschle]

I will definitely need to do some fudging.

I model southwest Idaho/eastern Oregon in 2006.  UP 3985 came through in September of 2005, and UP 844 came through in May of 2007. 

I plan on running either one or both of them on my 2006 era layout, even though neither passed through the area that year.   

Carter

[ChrisKLAS]

All of my equipment is era-specific (1994 Tehachapi; at least until I can't take it any more and buy a couple cab forwards and a whole bunch of 40' reefers) but my layout has some time-warping going on as far as track arrangements and signals.

Bena has a standard right-diverging switch and color light signals, where my era should still have the old wye switch and searchlights that were removed in 2004. One signal west at the Bena helper pocket, I'm including the signal bridge that was wiped out (and replaced by standard searchlights) in the great 1983 flood. Ilmon and Caliente sidings are joined as 2MT CTC, which is prototypical for '94, but the second siding at Caliente, which was removed when the two sidings were joined, is also included as an eastbound-only siding.

Why? A mixture of enhanced operational complexity, my love of signal bridges, a lack of interest in hand-laying the 50mph wye switch at Bena, and because it'll look cooler. Mostly though, because it's my layout, because this is how I want to do it, and if anyone doesn't like it, they can take their throttle (or give mine back) and go home. 

[ntrakia]

while i can appreciate those who are era-specific i just can't confine myself in that manner--so i run what i want.  it is a hobby and as an earlier poster mentioned we are not doing a museum piece and are not being graded--so just enjoy what i like.

[mmagliaro]

Yes, I fudge, but not enough to drift out of my historic era.
I am modeling "somewhere" in the Pacific Northwest in approximately 1948 - 1955.  I use that span of years, instead
of a single year, because it allows me to build and run some of the really nice late-era SP&S steam that was still around in the late 40's but was gone by the early 50's and it allows me to run first gen diesel trains like the NP North Coast Limited that only got the showy Loewy paint scheme in 1954.

The "fudge" is that those two pieces of equipment shouldn't exist in the same world, but they do in mine.

[nkalanaga]

"those two pieces of equipment shouldn't exist in the same world"

But just like mine, there's no reason they COULDN'T have existed at the same time, if history had been a little different.  All you need to do is come up with a plausible alternate history.  In my case, besides the freelanced routes themselves, I looked at the transportation politics of the 1950s.  The big thing was Eisenhower's Interstate Highway system.  Since they were built largely for defense purposes, to make military movements easier, suppose that the railroads had shared in the Pentagon's planning.  Strategic lines, especially those with bottlenecks that turned up during WW II and Korea, would have been improved. 

One of the reasons railroads dieselized so quickly was labor unrest in the coal industry, but even in the 50s, the military was concerned about increasing reliance on foreign oil.  The only railroad to the west coast that didn't need either oil or coal was the Milwaukee Road, but the electrification had never been completed, and was showing its age.  In my history, the Interstate-like rail program completed the job by filling the gap between Avery and Othello, extended the wires to the NP interchange at Miles City(?), and electrified the branch from Harlowton to Great Falls to serve the air and missile base there, as well as the Hanford branch, to serve the nuclear project there.  The MILW also electrified a few other branches, largely eliminating steam and diesel road power west of the Dakotas.  The idea was that Midwest coal and oil could power the railroads there, and the MILW would be sufficient for critical transportation to the Northwest.  It had the economic disadvantage, and military advantage, of avoiding many of the population centers, making it more likely to survive a Soviet attack, as well as using locally produced electricity.

This also required more motors, meaning that by the 1970s the surviving boxcabs were relegated to branchline duty, with newer units on the mainline, and the entire system was good for another half century at least.

A minor political difference, the MILW remained a viable railroad, the BN had both competition and interchange opportunities, and the trains still looked much the same as in our world.

[robert3985]

"those two pieces of equipment shouldn't exist in the same world"

But just like mine, there's no reason they COULDN'T have existed at the same time, if history had been a little different.  All you need to do is come up with a plausible alternate history.  In my case, besides the freelanced routes themselves, I looked at the transportation politics of the 1950s.  The big thing was Eisenhower's Interstate Highway system.  Since they were built largely for defense purposes, to make military movements easier, suppose that the railroads had shared in the Pentagon's planning.  Strategic lines, especially those with bottlenecks that turned up during WW II and Korea, would have been improved. 

One of the reasons railroads dieselized so quickly was labor unrest in the coal industry, but even in the 50s, the military was concerned about increasing reliance on foreign oil.  The only railroad to the west coast that didn't need either oil or coal was the Milwaukee Road, but the electrification had never been completed, and was showing its age.  In my history, the Interstate-like rail program completed the job by filling the gap between Avery and Othello, extended the wires to the NP interchange at Miles City(?), and electrified the branch from Harlowton to Great Falls to serve the air and missile base there, as well as the Hanford branch, to serve the nuclear project there.  The MILW also electrified a few other branches, largely eliminating steam and diesel road power west of the Dakotas.  The idea was that Midwest coal and oil could power the railroads there, and the MILW would be sufficient for critical transportation to the Northwest.  It had the economic disadvantage, and military advantage, of avoiding many of the population centers, making it more likely to survive a Soviet attack, as well as using locally produced electricity.

This also required more motors, meaning that by the 1970s the surviving boxcabs were relegated to branchline duty, with newer units on the mainline, and the entire system was good for another half century at least.

A minor political difference, the MILW remained a viable railroad, the BN had both competition and interchange opportunities, and the trains still looked much the same as in our world.

I really like this alternate history, having been born and raised in the Tri-Cities and worked at Battelle Labs and out in the Areas at the Hanford Atomic Reservation for several years both before my enlistment in the USN and afterwards.

Very cool!!

[CBQ Fan]

I model the classic diesel era for the CB&Q.  I have a few hidden exceptions around the layout. I have some mid era BN, think SD-40, SD45, C-30-7 and U30C.  This is from my early years of train watching.  I also have an Amtrak  train or two.  One for me that I rode in college, the other Superliner for my boys because that is what the see when we train watch now.  That also includes the Metra train as well.

[craigolio1]

Do I ever!  My railroad is based on the E&N on Vancouver Island, but as though BC Rail took over operations in 1985. I practically grew up on the Island but think CP is boring. I've always loved BCR. My models are very detailed to match the prototype but the scenario is completely imaginary. I've used actual history and operations to justify why all of my equipment that will be used has shown up on the island but none of it actually happened (or at least never happened more than once). It suits my needs and gives me what I want out of the hobby but to say I fudge the truth is an understatement. Doesn't bother me one bit.

Craig

[thomasjmdavis]

"the other Superliner for my boys because that is what the see when we train watch now. "

That is a really important point.  I didn't think about it when I gave my response the other day, but of course I do from time to time run every birthday and Christmas present I ever received from my kids.  Purists who want to complain about one of those anachronistic boxcars have the throttle taken away, are given an N scale broom, and can clean up after the N scale circus elephants.

- although I will confess to touching up some of the buildings they helped me paint when they were 6 or 8.