Modeling narrow gauge: Myths, clichés, and stereotypes

[Scottl]

I like the funky mining and logging lines that were popularized in MR- I still have all of the Furlow articles from his various project layouts, along with Olsen's and some others.  They didn't take themselves too seriously, and I feel they were more artists than modelers. I know they generate a lot of push back in certain circles, but I like what I like. 

There were a lot of interesting mining lines in Mexico, New Mexico and Arizona that were desert-barren, high-relief, crazy bridges, tunnels and other things: Morenci, Mogollon, Silver City, the list goes on and on.  These are documented in some great books and I find them inspiring, compared to the familiar ground of the Colorado lines, which I dare suggest, is rather cliche in the frequency it is modeled (however well, in many cases). There are some great lines in BC and the Yukon as well, the Dolly Varden mine is my favorite (the book "Steel Rails and Silver Dreams" is a must read).  I'm also a big fan of the Klondike railways in their various forms, including a neat coal hauler downstream of Dawson. I find the most interesting and crazy era coincided with the silver boom and faded almost as fast, but carried on wherever the next strike was.

There is lots of inspiration in this Alaskan summary, including some electric narrow gauge lines:  https://saveitforparts.wordpress.com/projects/lesser-known-and-obscure-railroads-of-alaska/

The forest lines of the Pacific NW and BC are also great sources of inspiration with a feel much like the logging lines in Australia that are often modeled so well.  I have a book about steam donkeys and the material is fantastic inspiration for modeling. 

So yes, there are lots of myths, cliches and stereotypes, but much of it is rooted in some kind of prototype.

[narrowminded]

That is an excellent link chock full of interesting tidbits.   I've saved it and will burn many hours going through it all.  Thanks.

[p51]

The primary thing about NG that annoys me is that for so many people, NG for the USA starts and ends at the borders of Colorado and New Mexico. They don't realize the massive numbers of NG lines in most of the states (including Alaska and Hawaii, as I've ridden them in both those states, too). I've had a lifetime goal of seeing every NG line in the US that existed in my lifetime and I'm very close to that goal now, so I don't default to D&RGW/CS in my thinking in that regard.
I model the ET&WNC, a line that breaks a great many stereotypes about NG lines...

[peteski]

While this is a bit outside the area of this discussion, Poland had an extensive narrow gauge railroad network. Some are still active as tourist RRs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrow-gauge_railways_in_Poland
https://www.narrowrail.net/poland/
I figured that I would mention it if someone wants to really get outside of the box. 

[chicken45]

I took a trip up Mann's Creek once.

It was magical.

 

[Ed Kapuscinski]

This is an awesome post.

I want to add something else... there's a lot of what I've come to term "basic model railroading" out there. I think there's a narrow gauge equivalent.

The way I define this is basically being a model of other models. Instead of trying to recreate reality, people tend to recreate other model railroads. This tends to result in stuff that's a copy of a copy of a copy, and you know how well that works out.

It may sound rather elitist, but well... I guess sometimes I'm a bit elitist.

I think narrow gauge modeling has its own version of this. While it's not the same "puffball tree and figure eight" thing, I think the pattern still holds.

One person sees something of one genre published and then, instead of looking at prototype pictures, looks at that. Then, another person sees that and the cycle continues.

It's why I think it's important in all pursuits to not try and follow another modeler's lead, but to follow reality's.

[p51]

The way I define this is basically being a model of other models. Instead of trying to recreate reality, people tend to recreate other model railroads. This tends to result in stuff that's a copy of a copy of a copy, and you know how well that works out.

Amen. I got out of the hobby for several years (sue to a horrible experience with a HO modular club that made me think nobody in the hobby was worth a darn, something I found not to be the case after many years once I started finally meeting decent folks) but in that time, I kept seeing the same things over and over again and I'd come to that conclusion as well.

It's why I think it's important in all pursuits to not try and follow another modeler's lead, but to follow reality's.

That's what I tried doing. Sure, new techniques came up and I used them for the construction of my layout, but I tried to copy the place and time I was trying to model instead of what other people were doing (nobody was modeling the place and time I was anyway that I knew of, so that made it easier).
I made a point to read as many Brit and European model train magazines as I could to get 'out of the box' ideas, but I'm not sure how much of that shows up in the layout itself.
I've been told my layout is different for how I designed it, the track plan and how it looks. I take that as a compliment, even though like most people, I don't see the layout I wanted, only the best version of it that I could make.

[CBQ Fan]

Dave, this is a fantastic topic and I find your summary fascinating. As a Burlington fan I have not spent a lot of time diving into the Colorado & Southern narrow gauge roots. I am now inspired to dig more into that history and see what turns up.

[davefoxx]

The primary thing about NG that annoys me is that for so many people, NG for the USA starts and ends at the borders of Colorado and New Mexico. They don't realize the massive numbers of NG lines in most of the states (including Alaska and Hawaii, as I've ridden them in both those states, too). I've had a lifetime goal of seeing every NG line in the US that existed in my lifetime and I'm very close to that goal now, so I don't default to D&RGW/CS in my thinking in that regard.
I model the ET&WNC, a line that breaks a great many stereotypes about NG lines...

You know that I love the ET&WNC, too.  Eat Taters and Wear No Clothes! YeeHaw!

DFF

[CNscale]

Not to mention the Newfoundland Railway, which (as part of CN) was a Class 1 narrow guage railway that ran until 1988.

[nkalanaga]

And, like the EBT, carried standard gauge cars on replacement trucks.

[Santa Fe Guy]

Lots of narrow gauge guys are modelling the Puffing Billy line here in Melbourne.
Not to much has been available however that is gradually changing.
Here is a Garrett one type of loco that runs on this very popular tourist line. In fact it is so popular that it has been running on a timetable seven days a week 364 days a year.
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
Rod.

[S Class]

although I find modern Australian narrow gauge to be fascinating... and puzzled why it hasn't been "standard"-ized.

If you mean the Cane railways of Qld there isn't much to gain in going from 2" to 3"6' and deregulation means that some of those systems and mills may not be long for this world.

Other Narrow gauge systems either don't have the traffic volumes, are seasonal or are simply at the mercy of political forces to destroy justification.


For those who might be interested Australian timber tramways were noted for being very lax and unAmerican in their approach to standards that are probably more in tune with keeping with the presumptions of model railroaders.
http://www.lrrsa.org.au/log_diff.pdf
http://www.lrrsa.org.au/Lr_ttvaa.htm

[squirrelhunter]

S Class, the Queensland sugar railways have always seemed like an interesting prototype. Do many folks down under model them? N scale track is close (I think) to 2'6" gague in HO...

[nkalanaga]

N gauge, 9 mm, is commonly used for 2'6"/30 inch gauge worldwide, as HOn30, and there is a fair amount of equipment, as well as HOn30 track, available.  Whether many Australians model their sugar railways in HO I have no idea.