--- In [email protected], "ctxmf74" <ctxm@...> wrote:
>
>
>
I might have to build less track in some spots.
>....Dave Branum
_________________________________________________
Dave:
Key thought, there! Rather than "critique" your plan, I'd like to offer some
observations on SHABBONA RR.
First, my eyes were (are?) a lot bigger than my ambition or ability, even
though SHABBONA is by no means an extravagant layout. I could have done without
Bonaparte, for instance, and used the space to develop my rural long running
theme. It's there now, however, and isn't going anywhere. Mt. Zion with its
passing siding and one or two industrial spurs would be sufficient - as planned
even it is too ambitious for my circumstances, and the Keosauqua branch? Maybe
in my lifetime!
Years ago, I had a plan published in Model Railroader called "IOWA CENTRAL" It
was a very simple secondary main line theme with light density train movements.
I designed it as an out-and-back plan with a continuous running provision for
five Locomotive Workshop locomotives I had up and running. Guess what? Even
that was too much motive power, although I could have swapped out the FA-FB-2
set with the two RS-1's for road power.
About the same time, S began to enjoy an exponential explosion of availability,
and I began accumulating locomotives and rolling stock and exponentially
increasing my layout plans to accommodate them. Being an "operating man" at
heart, many times I have looked back at the potential of the simple IOWA
CENTRAL with envy.
I tended to collect (justify) equipment and then increase layout complexity to
accommodate it. I have a lot more motive power than I need, for instance, and a
lot of space in the two yards is simply for storing it. I do rotate it in
operation, prototypically making up and breaking up locomotive consists. Like
Bonaparte, the locomotives are here and aren't going anywhere soon.
Rolling stock is basically the same story. If it wasn't glued to the hobby shop
shelf, it was in my collection. Now, I'm currently trying to thin out road
names that don't quite meet my "plausibility scale" in an attempt to
"regionalize" my rolling stock. "Super detailing" has taken a back seat to
operation. Although I did try to do both early on, it's just not feasible, to
say nothing of possible, in my circumstances. I had to set priorities and
compromise somewhere.
I was fortunate, though, in that by the time I began construction, I had an
operating concept firmly in mind, and was able to design the layout, especially
the terminals, around it. For many years, though, I was under the influence of
massive model railroads, in any scale, like any kid on the cold side of a candy
store window.
I realize now that those railroads are completely out of my league, as they
were for their builders. Those things just don't appear overnight, except in
our dreams! SHABBONA continues to be an "in progress" work of art
Hope this helps
Bob Nicholson ___________________________________________________
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
