Howdy
This question has been running around on a couple groups that I read, and I figured Id post it here, too.
When you model your RR, are you going for a complete, to-scale, nothing-out-of-scale experience, or are you more into the ‘art’ of model railroading, where the look is more important than the exactness. Or something in between?
Myself, I fall in between. I like a wide range of prototypes, but they’re all NG, so what my RR is loosely based on is a shortline-style bridge RR, that has a variety of on and off layout industries. I have 1900’s style wood cars, up to more modern steel cars. Steam and diesel. But dont think I’ve thrown ‘reality’ out the window, I DONT have Dash-9s doubleheading with Shays, but Ive gone for a more “if steam had lasted another 15 years in mainline service” what-if, which would give the shortlines a longer lease on life with their steam motive power.
How about you?
) Get things to look right (to my eye), without getting bogged down in the minutiae. Since the RhB always runs reasonably clean equipment, I don’t need to “muck-up everything” with layers of grunge. Also means that I rather have several typical items, instead of going for a wild assortment of the strictly “exotic”; (benefit = as above). Keeping the running distance between stations at least more realistic than having the engine in one station and the last car still in the previous one. Running shorter trains sure helps! Capture the essence of the area: landscape adjacent to track, structures, buildings etc. etc. Landscape is always the toughest on a mountain railway - building 10’000ft mountains just isn’t practical. And of course: less is more. For instance I won’t need hordes of people standing around at all the stations. Same goes for road vehicles etc. 
