Protoype modeling

[Mr Ron]

I see there are modelers, both live steam and riding scale that put a lot of effort, time and money to build miniature replicas of full size locomotives. Then they team them up with riding cars with very non-prototype trucks. Additionally they omit many details such as brakes and other items usually found on the real thing. If one were working in the smaller scales (HO, O, S), equal attention would be given to all rolling stock, not just locomotives. I understand how big an effort it would be to build rolling stock that replicates the original. It probably is not practical, but it still bothers me to see something that is nothing more than a box on wheels being towed behind a magnificent locomotive. I guess using flat steel bars for rails also bothers me. Fine scale modelers will devote as much time to all their models and not just the engine. I wonder if there are any large scale modelers who follow the "fine" scale regime. Does this bother anyone else, or is it just me?

[Harold_V]

It is my opinion that there's no fewer than two types of people involved in this hobby, with diametrically opposed objectives. One of them has the journey (of bulding) as a goal, while the other has the destination in mind, that of "playing trains".

While I have yet to jump in by building, my objective is, and always has been, to build a faithful reproduction, in miniature, of a prototype engine, including fine details. In my mind, all features should be operational, with none of them dummies, created for looks alone. More or less, a display of my ability on machine tools, by which I made a living for many years of my life. The problem here is, not all things can be scaled, such as steam and soot deposits. One does not build a scale boiler, for example, so there must be compromises in construction.

Many are content to be out on the track, even if it is flat bar. They may or may not be interested in expending the amount of energy and money required to build in fine detail. They must derive their pleasure by other means, as that makes little sense to me, although I see nothing wrong with their preferred method.

Simply stated, there is no right or wrong. What ever brings pleasure to each individual is what really matters. There's room for all of them.

Harold

[RONALD]

We ordered a Cow & Calf from the now defunct Rail Systems. If you read the letter I sent them, you can read that at first we were impressed, but after reasearch we realized there was a lot to be desired about their creation as far as appearance is concerned; mechanically it is excellent.

[RONALD]

Here is a more recent example. Tho Mountain Car makes sturdy cars of the best material, they lack many details. Here is a MCC Tank Car as received, and then detailed.

[reggie_obe]

What the engine looks like is important. It should be an accurate scale model of the real thing. The rolling stock exists just to give the engine a purpose, something to do. Especially if the rolling stock is expected to haul passengers, then compromises in scale and appearance would probably made made for reasons of sturdiness.

[steamin10]

Protoyikes!
Mr RON: I hold the opinion that as long as you wish to join the hobby, you have the options to enjoy the track people, and their constructs within the framework of society. With few exceptions, this works famously. One exception I remember was a steamer of odd proportions, built over a used water heater. It was ugly, but disallowed for construction. There has always been the (snobby) turf war over gas critters, and electric engines of all descriptions, and steam outline with batteries.

I know of some sturdy models that have the wheels run off of them, and then there are the museum jewels, that are fragile around the real world, as their fine details are subject to dirt and mayhem of the public. (The public being ignorant in general of the time and committed emotions to bring such models to life.) I have seen engines tested out with a plywood tender, with no attempt to hide what the engineers car was. At the same time, cars of fine detail ravaged by the riding public with broken and bent handrails, ladder grab irons, and such dainty parts. As for trucks, it is the least seen part of a car. Most think brakes are a problem, and can pull the trucks to stack gons and flats for travel, without the problems of scale brake rods and bits getting damage.

Thusly I consider the practical side, and dont care that wheels dont have the ribbing on the inside, plain works fine. Or maybe a tender only has single rows of rivets, instead of a thousand in double rows, and on and on. Or outscale section cars.
Are they fun? Do they look like something more than just plywood and a motor? I like the fun factor, and support it totally. I ogle at the details some wish to put forward, museum quality. I have no problem with either, or the non steam rant, when wild fires have consumed millions of acres in some places.

You are not alone, a I see some things that could be better in detail, that is what I control. So I may use some non scale or look alike parts to get down the rails with a limited budget. Ya, a plywood box with wheels, is not a scale boxcar. But that is not me. I tend to agree, that railroad things should look like they belong. How many rivets to count, well, I count a few but thats me.

[Mr Ron]

Thanks for chiming in. I understand that "whatever turns you on" is OK. I mentioned "fine scale" in reference only to museum quality models. Museum quality locos and cars would not stand up to operational use on a club track. They are not intended to be. Although I appreciate the work that goes into a museum quality piece of rolling stock (that includes locomotives), I am no where close to making them myself. When I build, I strive for as much realism as possible. I don't go overboard. "Keep it simple" is more my motto. I do like to have some rivets, but I don't count rivets; just not practical. I'm looking for an overall good look. Generally what I do is to make sure the model conforms to the overall dimensions in scale. I use everything from metal to wood to plastics in my builds. This is just modelers license. If I can make a driving wheel out of wood and make it look like metal, that satisfies me. I have done this and it is operational, although not for actual use on a club track or hauling passengers. I make my models to be operable, but intended for display only. I have a thumb drive video from a friend in Australia who makes operational models of farm machinery in wood. His work is fantastic. Everything is made of wood; even pipes that actually work as pipes to carry air for operation. He also has made models of locomotives and hay bailing machines, all working. If I can figure out how to post it to U-tube, I will; to showcase his artistry.