Large Scale Central

Future direction of Train Forums

General Discussion
#21

Many years ago all these sites started because Kalmbach tried to flex their muscle and force people to pay to participate. People do participate and pay or contribute for doing so. However, not all the people pay or contribute to the site Kalmbach controls. I think Kalmbach would have done far better advertising on many sites, instead of making enemies. However, hind site is always 20/20.

Does anybody remember the exact date of “the great melt down”? I showed write that down. We really need to celebrate that date each year. It opened so many avenues and friendships. :wink:

#22

Most modelers perfer to model 1/20 or 1/22.5 in the forums, because, as has been shown by poeple in this forum and other forums, what is considered standard guage in the US, due to the scale the manufacturers are making, is 1/29th… You mention 1/29th scale anywhere else, and all of a sudden, your an ““Outcast””… All you get are comments, like ""It’s not real scale, it’s not real modeling…

Until MTH started coming out with 1/32 guage again, the only other company that i can remember making 1/32 scale, was Lionel… All 1/32 scale engines that I saw, were all brass and cost prohibitive to most modelers…

I am one of those ““Outcasts””… I like running diesels. Diesels were only made by USA Trains and Aristo-Craft, both of whom have adopted 1/29th as their standard guage scale. LGB made diesels, but they never really conformed to a ““standard”” guage, when constructing american style engines…

I scratch build cars that I want on my trains, if they are not produced… Lately, trying to find a good set of plans for modern day cars, is not an easy thng to do… Most of my modeling now, is using HO train cars as the basis and tripling the dimensions, to make it 1/29th scale size…

I have kept all my old model railroad, model craftsman, railroad modeler, and numerous other magazines, so that I have a source of informatin and plans…

I also believe that there are a lot of model railroaders, that are ““personal”” model railroaders… They keep to themselves, run their own trains in their own way, without being critizied by fellow model railroaders, for ""Not enough detail, rivets in the wrong place, that’s not scale, there was never one of those made, etc, etc. “”

I think more modelers attitudes drive away more prospective modelers than anything else… There always seems to be more criticism than anything else in this hobby…

Look at the forums, lately, there’s more fighting and bickering and people picking on other people, just because they didn’t like a comment made… Deal with it, people all have different opinions, that’s what makes us different… People don’t have to ruin every forum topic with the bickering and argueing between a few people… That turns people off the websites, more than anything else…

just my 2 cents worth…

#23
Ric Golding said:
Many years ago all these sites started because Kalmbach tried to flex their muscle and force people to pay to participate. People do participate and pay or contribute for doing so. However, not all the people pay or contribute to the site Kalmbach controls. I think Kalmbach would have done far better advertising on many sites, instead of making enemies. However, hind site is always 20/20.

Does anybody remember the exact date of “the great melt down”? I showed write that down. We really need to celebrate that date each year. It opened so many avenues and friendships. :wink:


Late June or July 2000, maybe. I remember it was a big discussion at the Gr convention in San Diego with Russ Larsen agreeing to host a site.

#24

I agree with Andy, if you want more contributors people on this site might want to be all little less insulting to people who present different ideas. do you have a clue as to how offensive calling someone "Marvin " is to people who have lost family in world war2 or are Jewish. When I first read that I thought that you were bunch of racists.
I like building bridges(for trains not the PC kind) and I like posting the results for feedback and input. I stopped posting content on LSC because common discussions can get so ugly. You should look at G scale mad the English encourage each other attempts and have reasoned discussions that do not insult. And, telling someone to go some were else if they don’t like it is not a great way of developing a community.

#25
Tim Brien said:
Richard, I have been modelling for fifty years. My earliest trains were 'O' scale clockwork tinplate, on tinplate trackwork. I have memories of the Zamac-based kits with lots of timber and cardboard and lots of ingenuity/imagination needed to complete them. My early 'OO/h.o.' equipment was very crude, by today's standards and very poorly detailed. I could not afford the beautiful brass 'shelf queens'. I found that a bit of balsa wood, some wire, paint and glue could do wonders. Maybe it was the crudeness of the models that inspired my modelling? Today's modellor really has to do little to improve on what the manufacturer supplies and so further kitbashing is not mandatory, to have a well detailed model. Look to the current 1/20.3 scale equipment from Accucraft and Bachmann. These are true museum quality models, supplied ready to run. 
        Are today's modellors spoiled?</blockquote>

Hey I remember those ol’ clockworks! Mostly British prototypes as I recall except for some more toylike types in the U.S. There were scads of them in the old Polk’s “O” catalog circa 1950’s.

I started with Lionel and got my first train for Christmas, 1941. My dream RR as a young’un was the Roadside America display. Later I was wowed by pix of the NYSME layout and their incredibly realistic (to me) track with outside third rail instead of center third rail as I had.

Are modeler’s spoiled? I can’t speak for others but I am! hehe! :wink:

#26

I have a great deal of respect for all of you that can biuld your own cars, locos and buildings. I’am sorry to say I do not have that skill. I’m happy if I can get a kit to look right. RTR stuff lets me run trains and have a town now why I work on what I can do well. That is the garden end of it. There is a skill in picking the right plants and stuff so it looks good and works with the area you live in. Some day I will try a kits bash and maybe even doing something from scrach. I just hope that those of you that do make your own stuff keep posting it. I love to see what you do and when I try to do some things like thatI hope your all here to help me.

Geoff

#27
Ric Golding said:
Mike,

Not everything is Narrow Gauge. If you’ve seen AndyC’s auto racks, they aren’t narrow gauge. Neither is Bob Temper’ figures. Maybe you’ve got to look a little more to find the examples, but the principal of modeling is the same.


I can see your point, it’s just that I’m still pretty much a total novice and the master class would be a good way to learn. I think I may go down today and get back to work on the freight motor I started a while ago

#28
mike omalley said:
I would love to participate in one of the master classes at MLS, but it's always narrow gage and it's always earlier than we roughly model. I'm interested in standard gage from the late 40s or 50s. Modelers overwhelmingly seem to prefer 1:20. I'm not sure why that is--I've got no problems with it, but it's not my preference. Why the preference for narrow gage among modelers? Or am I wrong, and I just think most modelers work in narrow gage?
Mike,

I can only speak for myself of course but I perceive that there are a number of other people with similar if not exact feelings as to scale/gauge.

I consider the POC R.R. to be a steam era shortline first, narrow gauge second. While I love narrow gauge I have no less love for standard gauge steam and even moderate interest in diesel power.

If I wanted to model a diesel era shortline with plenty of switching it would be quite doable. A couple of GP-9’s or Alco RS-3’s, a switcher or two or even an old F unit would be appropriate. But what happens when you try to do it in standard gauge in the steam era. There are a couple of smallish tank locos for very small operations and a not-so-realistic 0-4-0 with tender. Otherwise I can have a 4-8-4, Challenger and Big Boy for road service and perhaps switch my yard with an Erie Triplex. While these are nice models they are hardly appropriate for the typical way freight service found on a branch or shortline serving small towns on route. Aristo’s 4-6-2 isn’t very appropriate eiither and the Mike infers a larger and heavier operation.

Thus if you want vintage small steam you are with rare exception directed to narrow gauge exclusively in largescale. This is one reason for so many narrow gaugers here.

Modelers in other scales are attracted to narrow gauge because of the neat character laden equipment and relative scarcity of RTR. Many of these modelers, now older, have immigrated to modeling outdoors in a larger scale and bringing their skills with them. This is another reason for the seeming plethora of narrow gauge afficionados.

If there were good models available of standard gauge 2-8-0’s, 2-6-0’s, 4-6-0’s, etc., you’d see a lot more interest amongst modelers for standard gauge I’m sure. Unfortunately the relatively small market for largescale in general makes any kind of variety like this unlikely in the forseeable future.

#29
mike omalley said:
Ric Golding said:
Mike,

Not everything is Narrow Gauge. If you’ve seen AndyC’s auto racks, they aren’t narrow gauge. Neither is Bob Temper’ figures. Maybe you’ve got to look a little more to find the examples, but the principal of modeling is the same.


I can see your point, it’s just that I’m still pretty much a total novice and the master class would be a good way to learn. I think I may go down today and get back to work on the freight motor I started a while ago

Cool,
I was wondering what happen to the freight motor.
Ralph

#30

Richard,

I agree that it would be nice to have more small steam available. That said, though, I am the proud owner of a mostly new Lionel 4-4-2 that I will probably bash into a 2-8-0. I understand that it is an easy thing to do. Also, I have a couple of Bug Maulers that, if I shorten the stack and the cab, will pass for standard gauge pretty easily from 10 feet. It can be done, and they are on my list of things to do.

Now, I just have to find the list… :lol: :stuck_out_tongue: :smiley:

#31
Geoff George said:
I have a great deal of respect for all of you that can biuld your own cars, locos and buildings. I'am sorry to say I do not have that skill. I'm happy if I can get a kit to look right. RTR stuff lets me run trains and have a town now why I work on what I can do well. That is the garden end of it. There is a skill in picking the right plants and stuff so it looks good and works with the area you live in. Some day I will try a kits bash and maybe even doing something from scrach. I just hope that those of you that do make your own stuff keep posting it. I love to see what you do and when I try to do some things like thatI hope your all here to help me.

Geoff


Geoff,

I think that I can state with surety that you have the skills to “roll your own”. All you need is the proper tools, motivation and practice. Try a single model sometime and see how you like it. There’s no timetable requirement so if it takes you two years off and on…so what?

However you are absolutely right that it takes no small amount of skill to landscape your railroad and populate it with the right plants. Additionally if RTR works for you then that’s all that matters. We all have varying skills and motivations and using those things to achieve our desired results is as legitimate one way as another.

I’ve never enjoyed digging in the garden as so many do and with my brown thumb I’d be buying replacement plants all the time. hehe! So I have a RR on raised benchwork as much to avoid gardening and weeding as to allow for easier switching ops. Not right or wrong, just my way. :slight_smile:

#32

I’m pretty new at large scale and narrow gauge having previous modeled in HO standard gauge so my ventures into narrow gauge, both 1:24 and 1:20 have been new to me. Its provided a whole bunch of new research and revelations to me.
While not being a rivet counter, I am very aware of scale and what things ought to look like in order to be a scale model. At first 1:29 scale seemed out of whack for me because it wasn’t 1:32 but when I look at my buddies’ layouts that are standard gauge 1:29 layouts the small discrepancy in track gauge doesn’t bother me at all. They look like standard gauge short lines.
The preponderance of RTR stuff just follows the “shake the box” stuff that has been available in other scales for a long time. In RC flying we call them ARF’s (almost ready to fly) and people don’t seem to be building in that hobby either. The state of the magazines have mirrored this idea of fast and quick also, being what I call the “USA Today syndrome” - 3 paragraphs and 5 glossy pictures tell you the news of the world. I remember spending tons of time reading MR and RMC when I got into model railroading in the early '70’s. There was real meat in the articles. RMC still has some good building articles but MR is really lacking them.
The one thing I have noticed is that the model rr forums really aren’t as active as some other hobbies. Take a look at RCGroups.com forums and you’ll see tons of activity. I’m not quite sure why this is the case as I always though the model rr hobby was bigger than rc flying. For a hobby junkie like me this is a bit of a bummer because I love hobby reading and can never get enough.
Hopefully the people who have contributed here and the other large scale forum will continue and others will join in and start contributing. The more the better and everyone seems to be able to come up with at least one idea worth showing off.
Dave

#33

Tim you have sure got them all going! A good topic to stir up the crew and our brains. Lets see, started in HO in the early 50’s, went to college and worked on kits in my last year due to boredum! I played at it for a number of years until I saw an LGB layout at a train show in Germany, instant lust - for G guage. Did not get into the garden until I returned home to the US. I used to build my own cars in HO and now do the same in G guage. Partly to save money but more because I like doing it! You generaly can not find Logging RR rolling stock on the dealers shelves! I generaly use wood with metal casting simmilar to the old NG RR’s. And, yes I do NG 1:20.3.

I have been asked to do a clinc for the 2010 GRR convention in Tacoma, but they have not confirmed it yet.

I to have about 30 years of MR and RMC mags on file plus a number of book to get ideas from.

Paul

#34

Paul,
I worked for an international airline for 35 years, that had a history dating back to 1920. In my time I would find myself talking to those from the wartime years and post-WW2 period (Catalinas, Lancasters, DC-3, DC-4, Constellations, Stratocruisers, DC-6, DC-7). My time started at the phasing out of the piston engine and the introduction of the gas turbine into international aviation (DC-8, B-707, VC-10, Electra). I found myself captivated by the tales that these men revealed of their experiences. Alas, most of these men have ‘moved on’ and their experiences are the memories of my generation. Who knows what will happen in the future, will all these experiences be forgotten?

  I do not want all our collective experiences forgotten in a rush to embrace the 'ready to run' revolution.  Today,  one is able to not just simply buy locomotives and rolling stock 'over the counter',  but also complete garden railroads.  My mentors started out in 'O' scale,  salvaging old tincans and steel nails to build their equipment.  My experiences do not go back that far,  but lack of suitable models always stirred my imagination to build.  These days what is there left to stimulate the newcomers to the hobby to actually build something.  Manufacturers have tapped into this 'lack of experience' market with tempting offerings 'out of the box'.  Very little forum content,  these days,  is devoted to actual construction.  While construction is only one facet of the hobby,  it does stimulate both the manual capabilities in us,  plus stimulates our mental capacity.  This then rubs off on the other sections of the hobby.
#35

Sadly I don’t do much modelling any more.

I used to do a lot. Firstly from aged 15 until 21 in flying R/C planes.
Then in 1980 in “N” Scale and then HOn2½ using “N” scale mechanisms under scratchbuilt bodies. Plus I dabbled a bit in 0n2½ as well.
I had a number of articles published in the Gazette and pix in Model RR’er & RMC.

As I couldn’t buy the Narrow Gauge models I wanted to have, in 1982 I started “Puffing Billy Models”, a small kit making business that was one of the first of its kind. The kits were all narrow gauge and a mixture of white metal castings, wood and injected styrene.
To promote this “backyard” business I built a highly detailed show layout that was controlled by an experimental R/C control system a friend and I developed. That morphed into an onboard R/C control system for LGB and I was hooked on Large Scale.
As an enthusiastic kit basher I ultimately wandered into 7/8" scale because I like small prototypes and being big models, that assisted my by now fading eyesight. I did a bit but not nearly as much as I intended to do.
Nowadays my hobby is designing and developing the R/C systems I make, and modelling has lapsed.
Hopefully one day I will get enthused enough to get started again.

#36

This whole thread is full of knowledge! I was gonna post last night and kept deleting what I wrote so I gave up.
Been into model RRing since dad got me my Lionel set (blah blah blah). Basically I felt like Kevin does and was gonna state as Andy did that he is of the few into modern diesel stuff here. Me personally I’m more into the infastructure as Bill S stated such as building bridges. Also being one of the few here under 40 I can say I have learned quite a bit more here than the club I was in a few years ago.

This site really has been my inspiration for trying scratchbuilding and I’m glad I did! I’m no expert but I do enjoy making something “NO ONE ELSE CAN HAVE” … I’m not fantastic with the camera or the internet so posting what I did can be more work than it’s worth. I probably own the only model of Lemo Tower in 1/24 scale, not to mention I figured out an easy way to replicate and not too difficult to make concrete viaduct. After seeing what can be done as posted here I feel the options are endless if you use the sponge swimming between your eyeball’s.
No look what I bought pictures on my end! (not being sarcastic either)

In final thought’s my RR will survive whether I have the internet or not, actually for that matter electricity or not !!
I have the sun and water and with these given element’s I will run trains through my garden and reap it’s sow.
If I have too I will figure out how to clockspring my diesels and tone down my train length. Either way I will play with my trains outside in the real elements
" frost heave is the work of the Devil "

Wheew…
I’ll pop another beer and go sit in my corner now.
:wink:

#37
TonyWalsham said:
Hopefully one day I will get enthused enough to get started again.
Tony, this is the problem. I am stimulated by other's activities and get enthused to carry on with my projects or start new ones. There are periods of stagnation, followed by feverish activity. When the modelling topics stagnate, I find my enthusiasm wanes. Possibly a bit 'parasitic', but I revel in others' endeavours and am inspired to carry on.
#38

I still have the enthusiasm just no time or money to do it anymore. I have dozens of projects that have been sitting around waiting to be finished. At some point they will get damaged (beyond repair I fear), lost or continue to sit because I don’t have the time or even space to complete them.

Jon.

#39

I understand Tim gripe personally, almost everything he has stated I too have experienced in the posting of my kitbashes over the years, one of my personal favorite bashes I am most proud of recieved a grand total of 6 replies! So if theirs no real apparent interest…why bother posting a lenthy building log?

Theres obviously a significant drop in interest in the actual “modeling” aspect of the hobby in the last 3-4 years, I’ve noticed it significantly, when I started posting bashes back in '04 there was a wealth of other modelers posting projects, many of them have sadly dropped off the radar for one reason or another, and it seams they have been backfilled with more of the RTR types who just want to open the box and run stuff.

I have also noticed a large general drop in participation online after LGB bite the big one. Dont know how related it is, maybe more to do with the sour economy than with EPL doing the big firework. As it is I’ve stopped doing building logs, I’ll take a few construction pics if I feeel like it now and then keep everything and just do one posts, its far easier for me than posting a detailed log that gets no replies. I’ll be doing the MLS class if it happens, or some form of it, but sadly I just dont see the point of doing logs anymore, I have one log on GR that I beleive to date hasnt got a single post other than my own, telling.

#40

I enjoy building logs. I think many others do to.
A lot of people look…and don’t respond.
I have 7000 hits on my RR construction log, even though only a handful of people posted.
In the past couple of months I have twice met people who have read my posts here on LSC.
I have never seen a post here from either. Many people lurk here that you never hear from.
Ralph