Some of us tend to think George Sello's over does things in the scenery department but at least his railway has some operating potential.
However, he's not a patch on the latest Furlow creation.
What the heck is it supposed to be?
There's no "track plan" just a bunch of lines that run and duck through various tunnels with no "plan to them. Now this really is a live diorama or display "layout" as there's absolutely no operating potential in the plan at all.
Once again, fantastic modelling, with the emphasis on "fantastic", as in fantasy.
I hear this all the time, "You need to have a realistic trackplan or else you'll get bored with just watching your trains run through the scenery when it's all finished". It's only boring IF you like to operate your trains in a realistic fashion. I could not give a hoot whether I can operate my trains in a realistic manner. I like to build scenes and scenery (structures included), turn it on and let the trains roll slowly through it for hours. That's what I like. For years I always "felt guilty" that I wasn't "playing with my trains" in the proper, accepted way. That I "would be missing something" if I didn't plan for operations down the road. You know what? I never, ever did get into operating my trains in any sort of realistic fashion. Never did, and I don't plan to any time soon. It's my hobby & I can enjoy it in my own way without someone insinuating that I'm doing it "wrong". By the way, I really like Malcolms latest effort, even if it's not something I would want to do myself.
Yep, I find the Furlow plan too boring, as is the other feature article in the Sept MR, and Furlow's scenery, as usual, over the top. Both articles feature great model work BTW, so don't misunderstand, just not my kettle of fish in track design and, in Furlow's case, scenic design. Waaaaay to Disney.
Right now, I'm unhappy with my GER and plan to rip it all out and start over again and my GER is considered to be an operations oriented railway and is, to all intents and purposes, fully sceniced. However, it has design and construction flaws that are difficult if not impossible to correct. It was built with steepish grades designed for two powered diesels and 16 cars, now a single kettle can't pull a 16 car train out of the main staging yard. So, time to start over again.
I was going to design a track plan based on Allendale in Ontario that featured yard limits only operation. However, I was so impressed with the Housatonic RR plan in the May 2003 MR (pp 88/89) that I'm reconsidering those plans and may base the new GER on the MR track plan, with modifications for steam of and my givens and druthers of course. The 12 x
16 foot design is just perfect for my space and although similar to the existing GER, it's a much better design than my own.
My thoughts on looking through the article was it looked like the backdrop of a Betty Boop cartoon. On in particular, "I Heard" (With Don Redman and his orchestra) set in a mining camp. Great cartoon BTW, like all of the B&W bop Bettys.
Malcolm... like Sellios, is a virtuoso artist, but that doesn't mean everybody likes the tunes they are playing. I can't play like Kenny G on the soprano sax, nor do I have his money... but I don't buy Kenny G CDs nor do I aspire to sound like him when I pick up the horn. It takes tremendous skills to produce what these fantasy modelers do, even if it's wacky. If I had those skills, no telling what I'd do (at least after I finished modeling the missing 3 miles of Duck Creek Road). But since I don't have the desire to model Betty Boop - just watch the videos once in a while - I will hone my skills in the direction of prototype modeling in the 1970s, big city flatland junctions, industrial grit, and black and blue diesels.
I believe it was John Olson who (still) works for Disney. John had several small funky layouts in MR many years ago.
One thing about Malcolm's latest layout that hasn't been pointed out is that he also had an article on it in a recent issue of the "Narrow Gauge & Shortline Gazette". I always thought it was a no-no to submit the same material to more than one magazine. In MR's article acceptance form they require authors to sign before getting paid it states that similar material must not be submitted elsewhere.
But that's still "operating"! I don't think Furlow's layouts were ever tied into any kind of operation. They seem to be nothing more than dioramas that have locomotives running back and forth to get them into position for the next fantastic photo.
Perhaps the Gazette has no similar restrictions. It seems to me that if they are able to get a Furlow article published well before it appears in a magazine like MR, that would be good for their image. After all, they were "the first", and MR looks like an also-ran.
Exactally! I think it's fair to say that the vast majority of track of any real railroad has trains just passing through. Passing through lots of non-railroad property, with all kinds of non-railroad stuff. In other words, if you stand at a randomly-selected point along a railroad's track you would most likely only see trains passing through with no operations. People who like operations conciously choose to focus on point A and/or point B, but all of the track in between is the bulk of what constitutes the "railroad".
And another thing. Even if we could succeed in catagorizing everyone's layout as a "model railroad", "railroad model", "diorama" or something else, what's the point? What would you do with that information? Does being a "model railroader" define your entire life? Oh, maybe it does. Nevermind....
Depends on how you want to parse words. His Children's Hospital LGB layout is constantly in motion. OK, operating diorama.
His last project layout in Model Railroader (15 years ago?) was an urban diesel layout built in several issues. Including an entire article devoted to track. And an issue/article devoted to operation in the more common sense. He /can/ do conventional stuff. He /chooses/ to satisfy his /own/ hopes/dreams/desires.
Agreed! But it is art! And art is very subjective. I think I'll go look at my Escher prints for a while............ Hey! Now there's a model railorading challenge!.......First I build some Escher benchwork.... I can have the trains running downhill in either direction!...
=>I don't think Furlow's layouts were ever tied =>into any kind of operation. They seem to be nothing more than dioramas that =>have locomotives running back and forth to get them into position for the =>next fantastic photo.
Despite all the trackwork & turnouts (about 90 of them) my own layout will probably be never "operated"... I've felt -guilty- enough to employ not one, but three Digitrax Chief systems, set-up car-cards, and even have an operating computer system with Ship-It installed in my layout room... figuring the time would come when the "crowning" achievement of the layout would be "full-operation"... no can do, my friend. One of the reasons this hobby may be on the downside is that with the population shift many "Americans" don't much give a damned about the history of this country... model railroading is... by & large... an historical hobby. (regardless of what region/country you choose to model) Some of us prefer the actual rolling stock & motive power, others (me included) embrace the re-creation of an old Frank Capra set, or a childhood memory. (note: my M&PC is themed around spending summers at my Grandmother's house in Brooklyn, NY). While I'm uncomfortable with the Furlow (and to lesser extent) the Sellios approach... we all have our own "psyche" to deal with... and THAT is what keep the hobby creative. Like Tiny Tim said... and God bless everyone... no kiddin' on this!