The Carolina Sandhills Lines in HO Scale

[Ed Kapuscinski]

I do enjoy stirring the pot.

Dave(s), I think you'll do just fine. But I do enjoy being the little devil on your shoulder from time to time.

I think the thing that always sticks in my head while working on my layout, or helping someone with theirs, is "am I making a model railroad, or a model of the real world?".

It's possible to build a very nicely done model railroad that bears only glancing semblance to the real world (of the large, well known layouts in my area comes to mind). If that's the goal, then make the decisions you need to to fulfill that vision.

If the goal is making something that makes you sit there and think, "damn, that looks real", then you might have to make different decisions.

This is not an admonition, nor instruction, but merely provided as food for thought.

[OldEastRR]

I think the thing that always sticks in my head while working on my layout, or helping someone with theirs, is "am I making a model railroad, or a model of the real world?".

It's possible to build a very nicely done model railroad that bears only glancing semblance to the real world (of the large, well known layouts in my area comes to mind). If that's the goal, then make the decisions you need to to fulfill that vision.

If the goal is making something that makes you sit there and think, "damn, that looks real", then you might have to make different decisions.

Excellent. My philosophy is the same: build a railroad model, not a model railroad. There is a difference (Neither one is better than the other, BTW). It's not as simple as just making an LDE scene. For instance, real railroads love uncomplicated trackwork, hate S-curves, and want grades as gentle as possible. Thus even the layout track plan by itself can look "realistic" or "modelistic". But I like the "that looks real" reaction when somebody says a scene you made of a completely fictional place "looks exactly like such and such" to them.

[jpec]

[quote ]  I'll add more freight cars as I find good deals.

DFF
[/quote]

Keep an eye on  TrainLife.com

They have pretty good deals on ExactRail and other nicely detailed cars.

Jeff

[Blazeman]

One thing about "starting over" is that you only acquire the cars and locos that are pertinent to what you are doing. One doesn't have money tied up in equipment that sits in a box.

[seusscaboose]

I do enjoy stirring the pot.

Dave(s), I think you'll do just fine. But I do enjoy being the little cherub on your shoulder from time to time.

I think the thing that always sticks in my head while working on my layout, or helping someone with theirs, is "am I making a model railroad, or a model of the real world?".

It's possible to build a very nicely done model railroad that bears only glancing semblance to the real world (of the large, well known layouts in my area comes to mind). If that's the goal, then make the decisions you need to to fulfill that vision.

If the goal is making something that makes you sit there and think, "damn, that looks real", then you might have to make different decisions.

This is not an admonition, nor instruction, but merely provided as food for thought.

FIFY

[davefoxx]

One thing about "starting over" is that you only acquire the cars and locos that are pertinent to what you are doing. One doesn't have money tied up in equipment that sits in a box.

^This.  So much this.  Since I'm essentially building a similar layout (as far as ops goes), I know exactly what I can use and what would end up sitting in its box.  This will offset the increased costs of HO scale rolling stock, because I bought way too much N scale to ever use on the layout, especially after the downsizing.  With extremely limited exception, e.g., SCL U36B No. 1776 (bicentennial unit), I will stick to the Seaboard System (1983-86) and do no alternative eras, e.g., ACL in the late 1950s.  The less I cheat, the less I spend. 

Oh, and so I won't miss certain things that I have in N scale and not HO, I'll probably use the Kato N scale Unitrack that I have lying around somewhere and build a loop, so my daughter and I can still run her Kato North Pole Express train and so I can still run my ACL passenger train.

DFF

[davefoxx]

I do enjoy stirring the pot.

Dave(s), I think you'll do just fine. But I do enjoy being the little devil on your shoulder from time to time.

I think the thing that always sticks in my head while working on my layout, or helping someone with theirs, is "am I making a model railroad, or a model of the real world?".

It's possible to build a very nicely done model railroad that bears only glancing semblance to the real world (of the large, well known layouts in my area comes to mind). If that's the goal, then make the decisions you need to to fulfill that vision.

If the goal is making something that makes you sit there and think, "damn, that looks real", then you might have to make different decisions.

This is not an admonition, nor instruction, but merely provided as food for thought.

@Ed Kapuscinski,

And very much appreciated food for thought.  I will admit that this time, I'm building a layout to enjoy, so that may mean that I lean more towards a model railroad rather than modeling the real world.  But, I will strive to capture the feeling of the area that I'm modeling, and I will stick to the proper era.  Hopefully, people will still think it looks and feels like the mid-1980s in the Carolinas.  I've decided that the more prototype you attempt to go, the more stressful this hobby becomes.  Perhaps I'm just looking for "realistic-looking" rather than looks real (if that makes sense).

Thanks,
DFF

[Dave V]

@Ed Kapuscinski,
I've decided that the more prototype you attempt to go, the more stressful this hobby becomes.

Thanks,
DFF

To a point...  OTOH as stressful as, say, making sure my version of Rico has the north end of the yard facing railroad-north and having the grade go up, rather than down, heading north out of town will be stress well-spent...because some day in the future when I want to double head a freight leaving Rico for Ridgway, it'll be facing the right way and climbing out of town for Lizard Head as God and Otto Mears intended.  To have it go any other way would cause me long-term stress from cognitive dissonance. 

[p51]

@Perhaps I'm just looking for "realistic-looking" rather than looks real (if that makes sense).

Makes plenty of sense to me.
In my own case, I made a layout that looked 'right' for the time and place (or as close as I could do, anyway) with little regard to making it an exact representation of the real place.
Someday, I might rebuilt sections to be exact representations of the real-life places I modeled, but without good photos of the structures I'd like to have, I don't think that'll happen.

[pdx1955]

The most important thing is just to establish the "feel" of where you are modeling regardless of how much of the prototype that you follow. The most successful efforts usually have some sort of proto-freelancing going on, i.e. is it plausible? Is there a vision for the layout/line that is being shown? Achieve that and a lot of the "model-railroadiness" is overlooked. I follow a prototype and there are elements that are close, a few that are exact, a lot is inspired/based on actual practice, and some is literally filler done to tie scenes together in the most realistic manner possible. We all have to make some sort of compromise otherwise we will end up in "analysis-paralysis" and never build anything. I've never been to the Carolinas, but if v3.0 is done to the same scenic level as v2.0, it will look right to me comparing to pictures that I've seen.

[davefoxx]

Makes plenty of sense to me.
In my own case, I made a layout that looked 'right' for the time and place (or as close as I could do, anyway) with little regard to making it an exact representation of the real place.
Someday, I might rebuilt sections to be exact representations of the real-life places I modeled, but without good photos of the structures I'd like to have, I don't think that'll happen.

And I think you did capture that look and feel.  I hope I can do the same.  I think when I get going on my On30 layout, I'm going to build a mere loop, disguised in a shadow box display, and model one scene, e.g., the covered deck bridge/tunnel scene near Hampton, N.C.

DFF

[davefoxx]

The most important thing is just to establish the "feel" of where you are modeling regardless of how much of the prototype that you follow. The most successful efforts usually have some sort of proto-freelancing going on, i.e. is it plausible? Is there a vision for the layout/line that is being shown? Achieve that and a lot of the "model-railroadiness" is overlooked. I follow a prototype and there are elements that are close, a few that are exact, a lot is inspired/based on actual practice, and some is literally filler done to tie scenes together in the most realistic manner possible. We all have to make some sort of compromise otherwise we will end up in "analysis-paralysis" and never build anything. I've never been to the Carolinas, but if v3.0 is done to the same scenic level as v2.0, it will look right to me comparing to pictures that I've seen.

Thankfully, more than one person has said v2.0 made them think of the Carolinas, so, using the same scenery techniques, I should be able to pull it off again in HO.  I really look forward to modeling kudzu in HO scale.  Kudzu Jesus in HO will be much easier. 

DFF

[basementcalling]

Thankfully, more than one person has said v2.0 made them think of the Carolinas, so, using the same scenery techniques, I should be able to pull it off again in HO.  I really look forward to modeling kudzu in HO scale.  Kudzu Jesus in HO will be much easier. 

DFF

So you say now. Don't count the same techniques before you try them. 

[davefoxx]

Sound or it didn't happen 

It happened.

As you can see, the fleet is growing with the addition of an Atlas GP40 decorated for the SCL, an Atlas Railbox box car, and an Atlas SCL extended vision caboose.  The sound on this Atlas locomotive (ESU Loksound) is even better than the Athearn unit I bought last week.  I need to speed-match the two locomotives, though.

DFF

[Philip H]

So are the north/south markings true magnetic, or just railroad?