The State of Things

Unless you're living under a rock you've likely heard all about tariffs, and the effect they're likely to have on the model railroad industry. Several companies have even combined their resources to produce THIS VIDEO. 

First things first. Tariffs are inherently political - and you don't make it non-political simply by stating it is. The primary issue in this case is the 145% "additional" tariff on imports from China - and as most modelers know the majority of model railroad product is made in China and exported to the US and Europe. 

Some claim the "major" importers of model railroad product brought this situation on themselves by not planning for a rainy day, or by sending production "off shore" in the first place. 

But the consumer - yes the "model railroader" - has some blame to shoulder here. First of all - there's no "bringing production back to the US" because it was never here in the first place. At least not product at the level of detail and finish that apparently everyone demands with their dollars. 

How many of the same people who pine longingly on the chat lists for the days of Athearn Blue Box and $25.00 diesel locomotives are the same ones who categorially rip apart a newly released SD98-7 because  it doesn't have removable blades in the windshield wipers?  

We've gotten to a point where "mass produced" plastic models have road number (not road name!) specific details. Frankly these are amazing creations and I'm shocked they sell as cheap as they do! 

Could production be brought back to the US? In theory, of course it can. But there are a ton of logistical, personnel, and financial hurdles to clear first - and most of these companies aren't built to do business any way other than their current business model. 

And even if it should happen, I doubt these domestically produced models will come with road specific details separately applied. I'll also be shocked if no one leaves a comment referencing Micro-Trains, Kadee, and/or Accurail.  All three of these companies have retained production within the U.S. for the most part. So when I say production could be returned to the U.S. I think it will be at the level of detail Accurail and Micro-Trains offer (molded on grabs, simplified brake rigging, and in the case off Accurail in kit form). Or nicely detailed models but very limited variety (as in the case of Kadee). And notice none of three offer domestically produced locomotives.

I gave some thought over the last few weeks to how this might affect the hobby as a whole, and my enjoyment of the hobby in particular. Having been in the model railroad industry I can't see anything good coming from this situation unless it's resolved quickly. Most of these companies simply don't have the resources to weather a situation where they don't have a steady flow of new product. 

We're already seeing that - Athearn is not announcing any releases for May, several companies have put shipments from China on hold, and we're starting to see warehouse "clearance" sales - an obvious effort to quickly convert inventory into cash.  These are all defensive postures and an attempt to weather the storm. Next step will be a hold on developing future releases. Without product to sell there will be no need to advertise - so the magazines - already in a tenuous situation - will loose a large percentage of their revenue. 

I don't have a crystal ball so I don't know what the timeline for this is - but it's a matter of months unless there's some resolution to this. Frankly I think we'll all be more concerned about how much everything else costs - to the point that not having a sexy new diesel to add to the stack of stuff in the closet will be the least of our worries. 

I had a feeling I'd written a blog post similar to the above - and it turns out I had - THIS ONE back in March 2020 (and we all remember that month!). 

Are tariffs the event that will finally kill the model railroad industry? There will certainly be an impact, some significant. Some model train manufacturing facilities overseas may not survive. Some model railroad companies in the US might not survive. 

So, how will this impact my enjoyment of the hobby? Honestly I don't think it impacts it at all. While the model railroad industry may evolve and change - the hobby will go on. Yes, we might lose some collectors and "retail model railroaders" to a lack of inventory and price resistance - or both. 

There's little or nothing commercially available in the RTR market suitable for modeling the Central Vermont that I don't already have, and it would take me three or four life times to build my accumulated "stash" - so I'm not worried!    

More Backdrop Painting and Why "Social Media" Ain't all that ....

I started adding the next layer of texture to the backdrop - this time I'm trying to get the look of distant pastureland. I'd tried this without a lot of success on my previous railroad - the fields just didn't look "right." The trick, if there is one, seems to be keeping the distant painted pastures from looking like they're on the side of a cliff. You can do that by making the angles of the sides of the open land relatively sharp. It also helps to keep those angles somewhat consistent when one or more open areas are directly above and below each other. 
The trees you see here are really the shadows and forms of distant trees. Next I want to try adding just a little bit of additional foliage matched to the modeled trees. I may wait until some of the three-dimensional trees are in place. 
Overall, I'd give this  effort a C+. Good thing most of it will be screened by trees!
Which leads to the second part of this post, which I'm going to try avoid turning into a rant. Longtime readers of this blog, all three of you, know that I really don't succumb to the temptation to editorialize about any aspect of the hobby - but this one thing just kind of stuck in my craw. 
Since the current health crisis started it's been interesting to watch the impact it had on the hobby. Suddenly everyone was staying home, meaning they finally were able to work on their layouts and burn through some portion of the basement hobbyshop. Others, of course, complained endlessly about the fact all their shows and conventions were being cancelled. 
One thing that was suggested to me was to post some photos on Facebook - " . . . that's where a lot of model railroaders are going - it's really great!" would be a summary of what I'd been hearing. 
I have a Facebook account - I don't really post anything on my feed, or wall, or whatever it's called. I use Facebook primarily to stay in touch with my college classmates, a couple of Navy buddies, and yes, even a few model railroaders. But I'm hardly a regular user of Facebook. 
"What the heck," thought I, "maybe I should post some photos just to share what I'm doing."
I do know enough about Facebook to know to limit my involvement to groups and the like - otherwise you can get quickly overwhelmed with, well, bullshit. (Sorry, I can't think of a better term for it). 
So I posted the photo below to the NMRA Facebook page, as well as the NMRA Achievement Program Page - since my goal in building the scene I've been working on is to see if I can finally get my Scenery AP Certificate. 

I know the photo is nothing to write home about. I was really posting a progress shot on the background. Within minutes, if not seconds, (isn't social media "truly wonderful?") I got a comment. It wasn't a platitude like "good job" or even a constructive criticism like "How are you going to handle the relatively steep hillside behind the track?" 
In those examples, the former would have been fine, but entirely unnecessary; the latter appreciated as a fellow modeler offering some help, or at least some warning about a potential trip wire. 
No, the first comment I got was:
 "Is that rock outcropping the stain from a couch?" <Smiley Face/ crying and laughing emoji>."
Now, I've gotten some weird comments in the past - see the last comment in this post HERE for one that, seven years later, remains the oddest comment I've gotten on this blog. 
The Facebook comment wasn't on this blog, of course, but was just as weird. 
The rock casting is exactly as it comes out of the Cripplebush Casting package - I like it because it's flexible and can be bent to fit the space. 
Maybe this guy didn't like the color of the casting? I admit the lighting in the photo is lousy, since it's a grap shot with my phone, and my focus wasn't the rock outcropping, although for some weird reason he was fixated on it, and seemed to think it was funny that it looked like a stain to him. 
I explained that I plan to do some additional coloration and drybrushing on the thing - which he didn't seem to understand or acknowledge. 
I think moving forward I'll stick to my little corner of the internet - right here. 

"Surround" or "Screened" Staging - Inspiration for CP staging

If you study the track plan in the link above you'll note the Staging and Feed mill, both of which represent the Canadian Pacific "side" of Richford, are somewhat underdeveloped. 
At the same time, the Central Vermont Richford branch, which originates in St. Albans, also needs to be factored in (those CV trains will end their run - actually they'll turn - in Richford - but the CV branchline trains need a place to go to/come from. 
I toyed with several arrangements - some of which started getting ever more complicated. 

Inspiration for how I'm planning to address all this is coming from an article in, of all places, the January 1987 issue of Railroad Model Craftsman. While I shared several of my early influences HERE, in a post that is among the most read on this blog, I likely didn't encounter the January 1987 issue of RMC until several years after it was published (I was in Navy Main Propulsion school in January 1987 and up to my eyeballs learning the inner workings of ALCo diesels, so I didn't get do any model railroading or rail fanning at the time).  
But when I did see this issue one article did make an immediate impression on me. I was on the Model Railroader staff and looking for a design for a layout to fill a spare bedroom when Andy Sperandeo referred me to this article: 

This is a Christian Day design for a layout depicting the Grand Trunk's operations in and around South Paris, ME.  What was most intriguing about the design was the way he handled the staging. In fact, it was an early version of what has come to be called "Surround Staging" - rather than me typing a long description, a quick study of the track plan makes the concept pretty obvious. 
I actually used a slightly modified variant - with the staging tracks placed behind a low 2-D and some 3-D scenery in what I called "screened" staging in a previous layout - so I know the idea works and is quite effective - and is certainly a heck of lot easier than placing staging tracks below the scenicked level on a model railroad. 

"Screened Staging" on a prior railroad. 

I suspect if you tried to build Christian's plan in the size room he shows in this piece I think you'd be disappointed at the results. But I know I'm not the only one who's been inspired by the concepts demonstrated on this seemingly simple track plan. Andy once lamented to me that he couldn't get Christian to do any layout design articles for MR! 
In fact, combine the South Paris Switcher with Andy Sperandeo's San Jacinto branch, a design that was completely misinterpreted as underwhelming at the time it was published, and you have the acorn from which many of today's "achievable" layout designs have sprouted. 
I'm going to hold off sharing the specifics of how all this is (hopefully) going to work on the track plan until I have a chance to draw it out to scale. 

Think Layout’s Lifetime, not Lifetime Layout?

Imagine the outcry if the U. S. Navy announced it was going to start building a ship that it had no intention of finishing. Or if you hired a contractor to build a house only to be told “I’m not planning to complete this house - ever.” 
But a project without a defined end point and clearly stated goals is often the most lauded of model railroad brass rings – the “lifetime layout.” 
As best as I can tell, the concept of a “lifetime layout” is unique to North American model railroading. Normally perceived as a huge “basement filler” such projects are at once the envy and source of ridicule by our British cousins. 
Here’s the rub. While they certainly can take decades to “complete” I make no direct correlation between lifetime layout and “basement filler.” If you’re determined, work at a reasonable pace, know precisely what you want, have the desire and perhaps an army of friends at the ready, then yes, a massive “basement filler” can be constructed. I’ve seen it done many, many times so to discount it as “impossible” is simply not realistic. 
The flaw with the concept of the lifetime layout is the way it’s often espoused as the never ending project. There’s no destination for this journey, no definition of “finis.” 
Maybe instead of striving to start construction of a lifetime layout we should instead define the layout’s lifetime?
If you plan to live in your current residence for five years, does it make any sense to start a project that realistically will take 15 years to finish? I’d argue if you’re going to be in that house for five years plan a project you can finish in two. That way there’s a finished model railroad that the whole family can be proud of in the house for a couple of years – rather than a perpetual construction site. 
For my new layout I'm assuming a lifespan of 8-10 years. That number isn’t something I pulled out of thin air. Based on a variety of factors, I hope to retire in 8-10 years. Here’s the caveat – at that point we will either opt to stay in this new house (that would be our preference) or we will sell the house and move … to ??? Either way, it would seem to be a logical time to start a new layout. 
What about getting the railroad finished? I want to have the basic layout infrastructure (not all the buildings and scenery mind you but things like the benchwork, track, wiring) complete in 2-3 years. 
What I have done is bounded the project with some parameters. I have a pretty good sense of how much layout I can build in a year – keeping my 2-3 year timeline in mind defines the scope of the project. 
Disclaimer – the new basement is certainly large enough that I could embark on construction of a “basement filler” – but other factors besides available square footage should also considered as part of the planning process. 

Avoid getting caught in the detail trap

Recently I attended a corporate retreat day where one of presentations that stuck in my head was titled “How to Measure Progress: Moving Forward Toward the Big Picture vs. Getting Caught up in the Details.” Quite a mouthful, but I immediately thought of model railroading. The instructor opened with a quote – not from a business tycoon or marketing giant, but an artist:

 “Nothing is less real than realism. Details are confusing. It is only by selection, by elimination, by emphasis, that we get at the real meaning of things.” ― Georgia O’Keeffe

This is often described as a golden age for model railroading. Never have we had it so good. We get detailed models, fresh out of the factory that reflect even the most minor differences between prototypes. 
I’ll never forget when I was at Intermountain and we released the D&RGW version of the N scale SD40T-2. (Yes, some N scalers will recall the first run of the model had some teething pains, but that’s not the point of the story). 
I’ll never forget the phone call I received a couple of weeks later from an irate (I mean really ticked off) modeler who sounded like he was about to have a coronary on the phone as he described the source of his angst: 
“The jacking pads are the wrong shape on the SP tunnel motors. I’ve bought six of them, now I have to return them. And you <expletive deleted> SOB… now that you’ve ruined them no one will ever make them.”
“Excuse me,” I said, “the jacking pads?” 
“Yes, the <f@#$ing> jacking pads. On the SP the tops are rounded – you <f@#%ers> did the Rio Grande ones and they’re squared off but you’re selling them as prototypical for the SP!!!”
This went on for what seemed like an eternity – I knew nothing was going to make this guy happy. At first I decided maybe he just needed to vent. After a while I almost started hoping for the aforementioned coronary to put him out of my, and what was clearly his, misery. For the record what he was referring to was the representation the metal stamping on the ends of the jacking pads located above the trucks of the sides of the jacking pads – the shape was less than 1/64” of inch. No one, and I mean not one person, ever commented on the shape of the jacking pads after that. But clearly it was important to him. 
If that guy – who never mentioned his name – is reading this I’m sorry I ruined your enjoyment of the hobby. (And I almost mean that seriously.)
I bring this up to illustrate how we need to pick and choose which details we emphasize.  
Models are, at their very essence, representations of a real object. Locomotives are big, heavy objects. Shape or form, color, and perhaps some use of light and shadow (“weathering”) to impact a sense of mass can be far more important to create the impression of a hard working piece of machinery than fretting over any individual minor detail.   
In the context of a model railroad layout that entire locomotive is just another element. Just as a painting is made up of numerous brush strokes, the layout is comprised of numerous "micro details." That locomotive, the track, and each car, structure and trees, are each “micro” details – that combine to create the “macro” item – a model railroad layout. 
True artists have the ability to capture the essence of a subject in their chosen medium. And in some cases, less is more. 

The Design Questions We Should Be Asking

The weekend before Thanksgiving I was able to join in two model railroad social events. Saturday evening we had a nice dinner at Grafton Street Pub in Gainesville. Friday night Mat Thompson hosted what seemed to be just over 50,000 model railroaders* at a BBQ buffet at his house – Mat just became Master Model Railroader #595 – so an appropriate cake was on hand to mark the occasion. 

Along with this second cake featuring some of Mat’s scratchbuilt models… (okay, not really!) 
Some folks – the vast majority of the out of town folks who were at these events – hadn’t heard my layout had been torn down. Once they got over the initial shock the inevitable questions about the “next” layout started. 
At dinner I shared a table with a number of well known – some very well known – model railroad authors, operators, and layout owners. The conversation went something like this:

“So Marty, how big is the new basement?” 
Well, the basement is pretty big, but we want to use the space for purposes other than model railroading – but there’s still a decent size layout area. 

“Oh, so how big is this “land grant” that your wife is giving up (wink, wink!)? 
I wouldn’t say “giving up." Chris is perfectly fine with the hobby. But the layout area I’m looking at is about a third of the basement - 16 x 44 feet – completely open on one long side. Seems to be a logical place for the layout that won’t interfere with the other uses for the room.

“Oh… Okay, 1/3rd of the basement … so 16 x 44 – guess that’s not too bad.”
While I’m going to come up with a design for the “complete” layout in the entire space I’m seriously considering starting with one “interest area” and completely finishing it before starting the next town. So next time you guys are down here the layout might be no larger than, say, an 8 x 12 foot L-shape in one corner of the room.

“Huh?” 
Mind you, this was accompanied by a look that made me check the large wall of mirrors on the other side of the room to verify that yes, indeed, a third arm had appeared out the side of my head. 

Yeah, but it will be finished, operational, and completely scenicked. And, if that proves sufficient to meet my needs I may not ever fill the rest of the space with model railroad.

“Oh. I see. Pass the salt.” 

I relay this tale not to single anyone out. In fairness, with one exception, everyone at that table has built one or more large basement filling layouts – and their main interest in the hobby is operating said layouts (after all, they'd braved D. C. traffic to go operating the weekend before Thanksgiving). 

I mention this discussion to illustrate how we, as model railroaders, very often ask the wrong questions – especially in the early stages of designing a new layout. Consider the very first questions most of us often ask: 

• How big is the space?
• What are you modeling? (this can be broken down into subcomponents such as era, prototype, etc)
• How many levels?
• What locomotives do you need? Who makes them?
• How many staging tracks will you have?
• How many operators? 

Some of these are perfectly fine, but it's far too deep of a dive into specifics far too early in the design process. 
Let me suggest the following questions the next time one of your model railroad buddies announces he’s planning a new layout: 

• How much time, energy, and money do you want to devote to this project?
• How long will you be living in this house? Really, another way of asking “How long will this layout be around?” 
• Are you going to have formal op sessions?**

See the difference? 

I plan to offer my answers to the second set of questions on this blog. Frankly, if the other dinner guests had asked those type of questions my planned approach would have made a lot more sense to them. Instead, it came across as I was squandering a wonderful opportunity to fill yet another basement with lumber. 

* The attendance numbers may be off, but there were a lot of people there. Great fun though!
* *I know it's heresy to say so, but there are some model railroaders who simply have no interest in hosting formal, multi-person op sessions. And if that's the case, it can significantly impact the layout design. 

Lessons Learned

An important lesson all sailors learn in bootcamp - ways to stop water from getting into the people tank.

Lessons Learned are a big thing in my work life.  We’re perpetually looking at things that didn’t go as planned (and even those that did) in an effort to identify and repeat the things that worked and to avoid repeating those times, as one of my old bosses was fond of saying “The water got into the people tank.”*

So, although I was pleased with the layout’s scenery and performance (once the initial teething pains were worked through) I find myself asking if the layout was “successful?”

The stated purpose of the railroad was to “model the equipment, structures, operations and setting of the Central Vermont Railway in the late steam-to-diesel transition era.” 
Measured against that standard, I’m not sure the railroad didn't fall short.
Here's just a few of the lessons learned:

Focus: I need more of it, and I need to stick with something once I drive the stake in the ground. "Modeling the Central Vermont of the 1950s..." is a large canvas. As I've relayed in this blog, I started modeling the Southern Division of the railroad on a double deck layout, then tried to shoehorn White River Junction and the Northern Division (with it's larger engines) into a single-deck railroad, only to later remove WRJ and install Essex in its place. The basic footprint of the layout never really changed all that much, but I think we built, and rebuilt, every section of the layout at least twice. 

My approach to layout design?

In essence, I was chasing the ever illusive squirrel - the hope of a "perfect" layout design to overlay on my theme. In the end, "perfection" became the enemy of decisiveness. That's all on me, and I truly appreciate the grace and tolerance shown by my friends throughout all this! 

Modeling the Operations:  In general, the individual operating sessions were a success (I always had a good time).  But let’s look at it from the viewpoint of return on investment.
I started construction of the layout in December, 2008.  It took several years of building (and yes, rebuilding) the layout.  In total, I ended up hosting 17 “official” operating sessions throughout the railroad’s 8.5 years of existence.  That’s averages out to a session about every 7 months.  An aside, if you really want to depress yourself, consider the following formula:

Total Cost of the Layout (in $) / Total # of Sessions = Cost/per session ($) 

No matter how it's broken down, it doesn’t seem like the time, effort, and money to build the layout was worth it when you consider the total time spent performing its main function was a fraction of the time it existed.

We didn't operate as much as I'd hoped, but Christine made sure no one left hungry!

Modeling the Equipment:  It’s great fun to tell yourself you’re going to model the railroad’s operations, six or seven towns, complete with scratchbuilt replicas of all the buildings, and run through them trains populated by accurate, detailed cars pulled by equally accurately detailed locomotives.

If you asked me what my favorite part of the hobby is I’d tell you it's building detailed freight cars. 

The one resin car I've gotten built in the last 24 months...and it's not even lettered yet!

If that's the case then why I have gotten exactly one – that’s one – resin car kit built in the last two years?
 Instead of doing what I wanted to do when I wanted to do it, I’ve been stuck in a do-loop of sorts - “feeding the monster” – that large layout looming in the basement that required track, wiring, static grass, structures, trees (my God, the trees!), in massive quantities.  I kept telling myself I’d get the thing to “looking finished” and then turn my attention to the projects I wanted to work on.  But there was always another bunch of trees to install – or some piece of track to ballast.

I'll conclude with this. I'm not "down" on large layouts. I'm also not "down" on small layouts, or anything really. I don't think  the layout was an absolute failure. I had fun, shared some good times with friends, perfected some techniques and learned a lot about myself. My purpose in writing this is not discourage anyone else from pursuing their approach to the hobby (Lord knows, the above isn’t going to encourage anyone to do anything other than take up knitting!). Instead, I'm trying to quantify the good and bad and hopefully apply those lessons learned to the next railroad. 
 *To get the joke it helps to understand he was a submariner. And the #1 rule of all submariners is to keep the water out of the people tank…(Hey, it’s not my line, submariners are weird, everyone knows it.)

What If?

With all the neat new stuff coming out in what one friend of mine described once as "designer plastic" - especially in HO scale - it's easy to feel like a kid in a candy store.

Impulse buying is not necessarily a bad thing - after all this is a hobby and as long as you're not taking food away from the table for indulges like model railroading no harm no foul.

One of my favorite prototype locomotives because they're just cool is the Union Pacific's turbines. Besides, what railroad other than the UP could get away with calling a locomotive the "Big Blow." (I actually prefer the N&W's "Jawn Henry" - but come on, no one will EVER make that in plastic, will they???).

Enter the Scale Trains Union Pacific Turbine. I saw these announced a few months ago and immediately passed since well, you know they aren't really a "fit" for the Central Vermont.  

What if, just maybe, my prototype freelanced subsidiary of the CV, the Southern New England, acquired a few turbine sets???? I mean, someone made GG-1's painted for the SP Daylight and I've even seen an RGS Galloping Goose painted in a Santa Fe Warbonnet!
Imagine if you will a set of Big Blows painted green and yellow ... what a wonderful sight they would make winding (and screaming!) their way through my depiction of the tranquil New England countryside.

There might be some, uh, "operational challenges" to overcome. Consider the wood overpasses and covered bridge over the tracks just south of Everett....the equivalent of jet exhaust might take it's toll on the century+ old wood?  

On second thought, maybe not. Perhaps Bernie should get a set to switch the LAPT?

Putting trolls in their place

Several times I've started typing, deleted, and re-started a post expressing my reaction to an email I received via the Model Rail Radio mailing list from Jim Gore earlier this week.
I can't begin to describe how angry this email made me - (posted as I received it):

Dear All,
First, I want to thank so many of you who have said nice things about my layout feature in Model Railroader. Never intended that to be one of my goals in model railroading – it just happened because a friend of a friend talked with Lou Sassi who needed some place to visit in Florida during the winter.
I have always believed that this hobby of ours is exactly that … a hobby. It is something that gives us individual satisfaction and a certain amount of contentment. Ultimately, there is only one person that has to be satisfied, the owner of the model railroad; the rest being “gravy”.
It seems that my fictionalized railroad, as a branch-line of the Chili Lines, has sparked outright hatred and animosity among a group of prototype modelers, presumably who are strict Chili Line adherents. If you know any of these persons, can you tell them to stop sending me nasty emails and phone calls. Good gravy … it’s a hobby !!!!
Jim

As I blogged in my post on Clinic Etiquette, most model railroaders - the overwhelming majority - are well adjusted people who appreciate good modeling and a good story. They also know to appreciate a layout - I still remember some sage words I first heard years ago "Learn something from every layout you see - every modeler has a story to tell, and it's worthwhile even if it's not the layout you'd build."
Sadly there area few  (thankfully only a few) "model railroaders" for whom the hobby is more about badgering others than any worthwhile efforts -
My friend Trevor Marshall has expressed it better than I could, so I'll simply provide a link to his excellent post -
http://themodelrailwayshow.com/cn1950s/?p=5428

As far as the Trolls go - I've decided I'm not going to tolerate them any more.

Useful addition to the shop....or paperweight?

I suspect that like many readers of this blog I'm somewhat of a tool-a-holic. I really try to limit my excursions through things like the Micro-Mark catalog (and a bunch of other tool catalogs) to things I'll actually use. But more often than not I'll find something I just have to have. I do have one rule though - I like tools that are of a decent "hobby" quality. (I know enough about milling machines, CNCs, and the like from my time at Intermountain to know I don't need a $20,000 Bridgeport...)
As the layout moves away from the "woodworking" stage I'm looking seriously at a few true modeling projects that are very high on my "bucket" list - building a CV Ten Wheeler is one that leaps to mind, as well as a few other scratchbulding projects.
As I was flipping through the Micro-Mark catalog last night I mentioned to Christine that I'd might, perhaps, maybe, like to get a milling machine someday....
Usually she just rolls her eyes and asks what I'm going to with that, besides hurting myself or perhaps blowing up the house.*
This time she said, "Well, if you really want one and think you'll use it go ahead." In fairness, she's a little bit of the tool-a-holic as well since the next words out of her mouth were "I wonder if I can use it for any jewelry projects????"
So, the questions I pose to you, gentle reader, are simple -
1. Should I pull the trigger and realize the decade plus goal of getting this thing?
2. Any advice on what accessories/bits etc... to get with it?

*In all honesty, I can't conceive a situation where I could blow something up with a milling machine...but where there's a will there's a way... I think she was remembering the cut on Bernie's forehead from his then-new lathe...or the blood stain on our garage floor from the time Bernie dropped a drill on his foot....

Clinic Etiquette

I usually don't delve into editorializing on this blog, but this subject is near and dear to my heart. Clinics are a large part of many model railroad conventions and meetings. The overwhelming majority of people I've met through model railroading have been polite, well adjusted folks who have always offered me their sincere thanks for taking the time to prepare and present a clinic.  And, whether you agree or disagree with what a clinician is saying, I think it's important to remember a little common courtesy will go a long way towards making the event a more pleasant experience for everyone.
An ongoing discussion on the Steam Era Freight Cars Yahoo Group centers on clinic etiquette, specifically the tendency of some individuals to, for lack of a better term, "hijack" another presenter's clinic. Apparently several attendees noticed this during the recently concluded Cocoa Beach RPM meet.
I wasn't at Cocoa this year but it is a phenomenon I've noticed at numerous NMRA and RPM events. I've given, and attended, my share of clinics over the years - some I think have been pretty good, others, well, let's say anyone can have a bad day and leave it at that. I certainly do not make, and have never made, claims of perfection (just ask anyone who knows me....) but I've learned a lot since I stood trembling at the front of the room to give my very first clinic back in 1985 or so.

I'm basically a reserved person who does not relish speaking to large groups. I’ll do clinics when invited but I have never actively sought out speaking engagements of any type. Over the years I've had some wonderful feedback after and even during my clinics and I'd like to think my presentations have been better for it. And I have no issue whatsoever with someone asking a question during a clinic.  I find questions are usually easily dealt with in real time without unduly impacting the flow of the clinic.
It’s important to be sensitive to the fact that attendees at any clinic range from those who know more than the clinician, to those with a passing interest in the topic (such as the area served by the railroad, the time period etc...), up to and including those who fell asleep during the previous presentation! 

Let’s face it, over time in some subsets of the hobby (such as steam era freight cars) we’ve learned "more and more about less and less." Trying to judge where to draw the line on information presented during a clinic is a tightrope - how much is too much, or too little information? You can't assume the same level of interest or prior knowledge of the subject matter.
You have to consider the audience. While the nuances of New England geography may be obvious to you, or me, you have to remember that's not the case for everyone. I'll never forget getting through an entire talk on Essex Junction only to have someone ask "Now, where exactly is Vermont? Somewhere around Pennsylvania, right?"  So now every CV-related clinic I give includes a slide showing a map of New England in context with the rest of the country. "The six little states in the upper right-hand corner..." is how I typically introduce this slide. Is such a slide redundant at the New England Prototype Meet? I hope so. But it certainly isn't when I'm giving that same clinic in Santa Fe, N.M.   
A number of years ago I attended a clinic on SP&S freight cars (a topic I know less than a little about). The clinician had done a good job outlining the various types of cars, paint schemes, etc… stuff a non-modeler of the SP&S might want to know but he failed to get through all his slides thanks in no small part to the stream of drivel, factoids, and other minutia from one buffoon who felt the need to share everything he’d ever heard, read, or otherwise could regurgitate on the subject.
In other words, a clinic hijacker.
I believe that's what the fellow on the Steam Era Freight Car list was referring to – loud mouths who, in my experience, fit one of three broad categories:
(1) Those who feel the need to comment and joke on everything. Usually they think they’re being funny. Mostly they're not. Stand-up comedy is a profession. Leave it to the professionals. 
(2) Those who feel they are having a one-on-one conversation with the clinician; and
(3) Those who seem to feel they should be giving the clinic, but they weren’t asked – so they simply try to give the clinic “ad hoc” (such as with the aforementioned SP&S clinic). 
I've found the easiest way to deal with all of these characters as a clinician is to politely tell them "We have a lot to cover, and we haven't gotten through the information yet. Please hold your comments to the end.”
This seems to placate the vast majority of them. On only one occasion that I can recall that didn’t work. This was back in my early clinic giving career, before I'd learned some other ways of dealing with disruptive audience members. This individual was fairly belligerent – an unfriendly tone with extensive comments on what he felt was important about each slide - and his constant interruption caused me to lose my train of thought completely. Not knowing what else to do, I turned off the projector, sat down in the front of the room, and asked him to let me know when he was finished talking. Some other audience members took over at that point and that individual wasn’t a problem after that.

 

 

"Hoarding," "Collecting" or Savvy Buying?

The following is a little unusual for this blog, since I tend not to engage in "opinion" pieces. It's also fairly long for a blog post, but I thought with the colder months arriving all too soon (for some of you they're already here!) and the associated "Train Show" season this might be a good topic for this time of year. I promise, I'll be back with a layout/modeling update shortly!

I haven’t posted in a couple of weeks since frankly autumn yard chores, medical issues (nothing serious), and acting on a promise to at long last get my wife’s dollhouse wired, have taken most of my attention.

I'm heading to the Fine Scale Expo in Pittsfield, Mass., at the end of the week. Don’t know what I’ll buy at the show, but it will likely not be too much. About three years ago, when I started the layout rework, I came to the conclusion that I had too much model railroad stuff. I have less now than I did then but that’s because I’ve been on a focused, long term (seemingly endless) effort to downsize. Like most model railroaders, I found it way too easy to end up with lots of stuff. Some of the causes of this were:

1. The manufacturers themselves. The limited run approach to producing model trains means if you don’t buy it now, it may not be available when you do want it. This leads to the idea that you “need” 10 or 15 of the latest freight car when it comes out – even if there’s no layout to run them on. The result seems to be a version of a well-stocked hobbyshop in every model railroader’s basement. Of course, this is really a form of “Checkbook” modeling (“Chequebook Modelling” to my Canadian friends…..) and can lead directly to that tendency to over accumulate.

2. Model railroading is somewhat unique in the sheer volume of published hobby material. At one time I subscribed to 5 or 6 monthly model railroad and prototype magazines – and had literally a hundred or more railroad books. Want a Railroad Model Craftsman from 1974? Or Model Railroader? Or Narrow Gauge Gazette? Or Trains?  I had them all, and more. And every issue published. All stored in magazine sleeves or stacked in very, very heavy boxes. 

3. The tendency of model railroaders to find a variety of scales/gauges/prototypes/eras etc…. appealing. In other words, “Rubber gauging” – known in our house as the “shiny object syndrome.” A neat article would appear on an On30 layout, and I’d figure “I’d like to build one of those someday” – (see #1 above).
4. Model trains are (mostly) plastic and/or metal – and they have an almost infinite shelf life, meaning they don’t go bad. They just sit there.
5. For the decade or so I worked in the model train industry a trip to shows or visits to manufacturers would produce all kinds of “samples” – and like a kid in a candy store I found it hard to say “no.” So, I ended up with lots of stuff, most of which I’ve never opened.

You'd think modeling a somewhat obscure prototype like the Central Vermont would make finding something to buy almost impossible. You'd be wrong. Most model railroaders I know, myself included, have enough items stashed aside under the layout and in closets that we rival a well-stocked hobby shop. Is this hoarding? Or is it simply being a knowledgeable collector who knows what he/she needs for the layout, and is buying it now for future use?
What brought this to mind was an ongoing discussion on the Model Rail Radio podcast, hosted by Tom Barbalet. As an aside, if you’ve never listened to the show I encourage you to give it a try.
The question of what to do with no longer wanted/needed model railroad “stuff” comes up from time to time on the show.
Hoarding has been publicized in recent times thanks to reality television programs featured on A&E, TLC and Animal Planet.  Perhaps more in common with model railroading is a show on SyFy called “Collection Intervention” (http://www.syfy.com/collectionintervention/about) that features collectors (usually comic book or toy collectors) whose collections have come to completely dominate their homes and their lives.
Without sounding like Dr. Phil I will offer the following. From everything I’ve read Hoarding and Collecting are two different things. Hoarding IS A DISEASE, and not a very fun one at that. It is a form of obsessive compulsive disorder where the person assigns a value to everything that passes through their hands. There are very excessive forms of hoarding – where everything, including what any sane person would consider refuse – is saved.
To me, a hoarder is someone who doesn't know what they have, never intends on selling anything, and is actually damaging what they do have with neglect, improper storage, etc.
So I would say no, model railroaders are not “Hoarders,” at least not in the clinical sense.
True collectors tend to buy and sell things to get to their definition of the best collection of their chosen field. They tend to be focused The buying and selling keeps things moving around, and they eventually end up in the 'right ' hands.
But wait – while there is certainly a valid part of the model railroading hobby that is “Collecting” – be it Hornby, LGB, Lionel, or even vintage HO rolling stock - that’s not what most scale model railroaders envision themselves doing. We’re not trying to build a “collection,” we’re trying to recreate a vision of the world. Which means we’re all about using the stuff we acquire – albeit at some point in the future! And while using it does provide us with enjoyment and satisfaction it also, by definition, “ruins” the collector’s value.  

A Long Road

So, secure in the knowledge that I’m NOT a hoarder I set about “right sizing” the assortment of model railroad stuff residing in our basement. This has been an ongoing process – taking close to three years of effort.  In my case, focus became the key. Focus on one scale, one prototype railroad, and one era.

First, I completely cut out purchasing new model railroad items until I’d finished my inventory/purge process. eBay and swap meets mean the stuff will be there if and when I want it at some point in the future.  I did make an exception for specific Central Vermont items that I know were needed for the railroad and I knew to be rare. 

 Second, I ditched the paper – almost completely. I did keep most of the books - for now. As far as the magazines go, Prototype Modeler, Model Railroading, and Rail Model Journal are all available for free on line. So they were the first to go. Kalmbach released a complete set of Model Railroader on DVD – so all the MRs went to the recycling center next (I kept the bound volumes for the years I was on the staff). The Narrow Gauge Gazette is a wonderful magazine with inspirational photography – but I’m not a narrow gauger, and frankly while the pictures are inspiring I can’t recall the last time I used a modeling tip or technique from the Gazette that required me to save boxes of these things. So, off they went. N Scale Railroading and N Scale are very nice magazines, that aren’t applicable to my current modeling. They went to a friend who is into N scale – along with a couple of large boxes of N scale stuff. I also reduced the number of Mainline Modeler magazines from virtually all of them to a small selection of issues that had drawings of structures, cars, and locomotives I might want to build someday.

Where did these magazines go? Our local library has a magazine drop off system where you can bring old copies of magazines for other patrons to pick up and read at their leisure. At some point, I’m not sure when, the older materials are cleared out and taken to the recycling center. I’d like to think that most of the model train magazines went to someone who was interested in trains and has either created, or rekindled the once latent interest, of another model railroader or two.
Third – a real commitment to focus on one scale and gauge meant that all the extraneous stuff – including HO stuff for other eras and prototypes, and all that oddball stuff of different scales and gauges – went up for sale. The $ generated from the sales actually financed the purchase of a few specific CV pieces. eBay, several model train “Yard Sale” Yahoo Groups, and the like became the best ways to move the items. I found the key is to realize that the vast majority of this stuff doesn’t “hold its value” – and you better be prepared to take pennies on the dollars in most cases. The goal is to get the layout room cleared out, not beat the S&P Index…..but take solace in the fact that it will be out from under foot.
At train meets when I was selling this stuff if a young person seemed interested in a particular item I “significantly” discounted it. You might think this was “cutting into my profits.” There are no profits, remember?
And finally, what of all that stuff that I had been given over the years? Most of it has found its way to new homes – I try to give it to friends based on their specific interest. When my friends got tired of seeing me coming with more stuff (remember, most of them had their own boxes of stuff!)  I’ve been known to give it away at swap meets. My goal with going to a swap meet is not to bring anything home.
I’m finally at the point where I have so little “extra” left that I don’t need to go sell at swap meets anymore. I still have plenty of stuff left – more than enough for a few modeling lifetimes, but my checkbook modeling days are at an end.

A glimpse into my modeling past

Both models in the lead photo are posed on the layout I had in my parent’s basement. This is also the only picture I have of that layout, which remained in my folks basement for many years after I moved out.

I stumbled across this photo (actually, a 35mm slide that I scanned) the other day when searching for some other images. The two cars in the foreground are nothing to write home about except they represent several “firsts” in my modeling and writing careers.

As a rule I don't get emotionally attached to models that no longer meet my needs or those I feel don’t live up to my current standards. Years of frequent moves have made me pretty brutal when it comes to deciding whether to keep, sell, or even pitch old models. But for some reason I’ve kept both the NH boxcar and the milkcar. I doubt I’ll run them on the layout in regular service,  but I couldn't resist taking them out of the display case and posing them on the current layout. 

About those "firsts." The New Haven boxcar, most likely a New Haven Historical Society kit made by Funaro & Camerlengo, was the first resin house car kit I’d built. Interestingly, F&C has just recently re-released these cars, this time with one-piece bodies. When I built this one I didn’t realize you should always verify the lengths of the two sides are the same, and sand them if necessary – so the car is somewhat out of kilter. Also, I didn’t quite get the grab irons on straight. Finally, since I didn’t brace the inside of the car over time one of the side walls has developed a slight bow along its length.

The Central Vermont milkcar is also a first. It’s the first piece of rolling stock I ever scratchbuilt. I’m not positive, but I believe I built this model when home for the summer between my sophomore and junior years in college. I based the model on measurements I took of a car sitting outside Barre, Vermont. The underframe is from a cut-down Athearn express reefer that I shortened by cutting 10 or so feet out of the center and gluing back together. The car body is constructed entirely of styrene. The roof is tissue paper held in place using a heavy coat of Floquil paint. It melted the paper into the plastic. I’m not sure, but I believe the hardware came from a Grandt Line – likely a narrow gauge reefer set. The car was brush-painted using SMP Accu-paint since I didn't have an airbrush at the time. Accu-paint was as thin as printers ink, so it probably took 10 coats to get decent coverage, although there are still some "holidays" visible in the paint finish. 

The trickiest part of the milk car was the lettering – I used a New England Rail Service steam locomotive and milk car decal set for most of the car, although the “Milk” lettering in the NERS decal sheet didn’t match the prototype photo I followed. So I pieced the “Milk” lettering together from an alphabet set of dry transfers.

Both models in the lead photo are posed on the layout I had in my parent’s basement. This is also the only picture I have of that layout, which remained in my folks basement for many years after I moved out. The backdrop was hand-painted, and the trees (I was modeling autumn even then!) were made using several types of weeds with ground foam applied and colored using some of the tips and techniques in an RMC article by Les Jordan that appeared in the October 1979 issue of RMC. 

About that publishing first… I wrote an article on how I built the milkcar and submitted it to RMC. Editor Bill Schamburg, a good friend to this day, expressed an interest in it, but said I needed better photos.  Believe it or not, the photo at the top of this post represented my best effort at the time.  Bill looked it over and sent it,and the article, back to me. My old camera and equipment weren't up to the task of taking publishable model photos. 

In looking at the old photo, I’d give the technical aspects of the picture a D-. However, the scenery, although crude, wasn’t that bad. Say a C+. I won’t attempt to grade my efforts at the two cars, but it sure was fun finding this photo.