Perhaps the "last frontier" would be the ability to accurately model with less obstacles is to model an actual prototype, but other than that, where can this hobby go?  If the prototype is the benchmark, it just seems John and Allen were taking us in the direction of simulating the prototype.  Technology will improve so it will make that job much easier, and more and more functions that are not considered "prototypical" being done by mechanical devices and electronics will get us even closer to that goal, but honestly I don't see what the next great "leap" would be. 

Now it's a matter of improving our skills, developing better techniques to accomplish the goals.  I suppose I see this as Strategy vs. Tactics.  John Allen, Allen McClelland (and we really should include at the very least John Armstrong as well) have given us the Innovations in terms of Strategy.  Now we need to develop the tactics to fullfill that strategy, which is where more innovation will help us.  But in terms of this awestruck and major paradigm shift in the hobby in terms of strategy the likes of Allen and McClelland, I just don't see it.

Then again, I could be wrong.

Ken L

"Good enough" the chainsaw layout and three foot rule mentality have killed innovation. If everything is good enough with regard to the practice of the hobby and there's no or little commitment to doing anything of excellence, expecting innovation of any kind is wishful thinking. The modelers mentioned in the editorial didn't set out to innovate anything, they were just modeling in a way that seemed obvious to them, whether the rest of the community "got it" or not. Further, when people who do think outside the box or express an original opinion are labeled as snobs or elitists by those who are fat and happy with mediocrity (as so often happens in many segments of this hobby), then where's the incentive to share? In my view, this hobby has been digging its own grave for the last 10-15 years because it hasn't innovated its approach to modern day realities such as greatly increased demands from work that is more abstract in nature than ever, a much more mobile, and hence less stable, lifestyle; plus the nearly invisible nature of real trains to people's everyday lives. Say what you want about the advances of technology, I'm talking about a shift in fundamentals and paradigms, which haven't changed in a half century. Michael Cougill

Guys like Allen and McClelland popularized "big picture" types of concepts (shelf layouts with peninsulas, realistic operation, staging, weathering, "good enough," model what's typical, etc.).  Once those ideas are out there, they don't need to be reinvented, but we still need to fill in the details of how to make layouts better, and this is where many of the subsequent innovations have occurred. 

How about replacing lichen for trees with poly fiber, and then "Super Trees?" Installing flex track with adhesives instead of spikes or nails?  Static grass instead of dyed sawdust? Proto-realistic track like the P:87 and :48 guys are doing. Looking at the G&D and V&O today, there are numerous areas of execution where today's cutting edge modelers have passed them by.  Just as with something like the automobile, the basic concepts were established long ago, so the remaining innovation takes place in more subtle, but still significant, ways.

For the rest of us, there's still tons of innovation left.  There's still much more to be done - and when it comes to lichen, you can make some incredible trees with it if you know what you're doing!!!
 

And in the event you MISSED it, the great innovator of the 21st century is by and far Minatur Wunderland.  NOBODY has attempted a layout of this caliber, ever - and now it has a full operating airport as well.  Fully automated train schedules, ship schedules - the ships navigate their course in a real pool of water using ground stations and onboard transponders -, automobile schedules - the cars even have routines they follow, such as the firehouse responding to a fire!  THAT"S innovative!!!

My observation is that most model railroaders in this country build the railroad, but have little regard for the roads and other elements around the scene - I've even observed a highway overpass directly terminate in a gas station.  It's all an afterthought.  My personal philosophy aims to keep roads connected or not present at all, so that even though there aren't vehicles in the scene moving, you can mentally follow where the vehicles might go and how they might get there.

The public has responded to minatur wunderland by making it one of the top tourist attractions in Europe.  A train layout is now Europe's top tourist destination!!  Take THAT!!

"Good enough" the chainsaw layout and three foot rule mentality have killed innovation. If everything is good enough with regard to the practice of the hobby and there's no or little commitment to doing anything of excellence..."

The basic idea of "good enough" is that every component of the layout has a level of detail or quality at which it is good enough to fulfill its role.  The philosophy was never intended to be that crappy work is acceptable.  I have no problem subscribing to the idea.

Here's an example of a "good enough" model:

This car was kitbashed to copy a specific prototype, and was completed before the current crop of high-quality PS-1 boxcars was available commercially.  It started with a Con-Cor HO PS-1, receiving a new side sill, etched running board, separate grabs, new stirrups, modified doors, different trucks, plus paint and weathering to duplicate the real car as closely as possible.  What it didn't receive... ANY underbody detail (I used a frame from and Athearn blue box car with no modifications; the metal weight isn't even painted and is visible if you pick the car up), separate ladders, or a completely full-height door, since the Con-Cor door was a bit too short and I didn't feel the effort to re-do the door would be worth it.  I decided the point at which the car was good enough to fulfill its role, and stopped there.

The point of the above is that, if I want to have any hope of finishing a layout, I have to draw the line somewhere on each project or I'll never get the railroad operational.  I think this is pretty much in keeping with what McClelland intended.  It doesn't mean you don't have standards, it means you know when to say when.

The problem is that too many hobbyists pervert the concept as an excuse to do poor work or to ignore setting personal goals to improve.  As with any innovation, it doesn't sink in with everybody.  Applied as the original innovator intended, it's a help to the hobby, not a hindrance to future innovation.

As for the "chainsaw railroad," I haven't built one myself but am fully on board with that too.  Everybody needs to learn.  If you know the layout isn't going to be permanent, I'd think you'd be MORE likely to take risks and learn from them than if you think it'll be there forever and leave you stuck with bad decisions.  I think the chainsaw idea will spur more innovation in the long run as people take chances and some of them work out.

I don't see much issue with "good enough."  It's mostly an issue with physical ability, which in this RTR era is a bit remiss.  It makes sense.  I don't think there is anyway to revitalize craftsmanship other than brute practice.

There are of course the laser cutters and the upandcoming 3D printers.  Building windows will never be difficult again!!!

There's a couple arenas not yet touched.  The first is Remote Uncoupling - where the car has onboard means to manipulate the coupler.  Following this device, we'll be able to use JMRI or similar programs to set up train schedules for more complicated routes and operations, and perhaps even run our operational settings completely automatically - which might be nice for an open house where interacting with the public is the main point.  The real benefit I see is that it will allow layouts to operate with fewer than the optimum number of operators desired without removing any trains from the schedule.

innovator.  John Allen and Allen McClelland were innovative with "big picture" model railroading.  I think Lance has been innovative with a fresh look at the concept of a small industrial switching layout as an alternative to the basement sized pike concept that John Allen started, and Allen McClelland continued.  In addition if you combine the fine scale movement (proto 87, proto 48, etc) with detailed small industrial switching layouts, we may be seeing a wave of future innovation, particularly for either apartment dwellers, condo or town house owners, or even those with a small to medium sized house on a small lot in the Southwestern U. S. without any sort of basement to utilize for a large layout.  

Dear MRH'ers,

If we want to talk about Innovators in terms of

- bringing modelling to those who "have no room for a layout"
(and opening up the minds of those who _do_ have room as to how they may widen their viewpoints, interests, and ability to encourage others)

- encouraging "Aiming to Improve" in every facet of one's modelling

- service to the hobby in terms of promotion both INside and OUTside regular "modeller's channels"

- encouraging _optimising_ of every element of a model scene

- encouraging and actively investigating proto-inspired operations for _all_ sizes of layout, even "sub apartment sized" ones

- Alternative (some might say "Innovative") deployments of practical and theoretic staging to increase the capabilities for proto-accurate ops on tiny layouts

- and covering most everything from "dinky" sub 2' gauge "minimum gauge" modelling up thru to hardcore Mainline modelling, from extreme whimsy to "inch-perfect" prototype modelling, in scales from T thru to 12"/1'

- and presenting all of the above in a readable, engaging format and style for all-comers

then surely we've got to include the late Carl Arendt as a contender...

http://www.carendt.us/

Happy Modelling,
Aim to Improve,
Prof Klyzlr

Answer:  Here, on the MRH forum & the authors that contribute to the MRH magazine!

There may not be single "famous" individuals that are innovators as the great names of the past, but cumulatively we can find much the same here when it comes to innovation.  I constantly discover new / better ways to do things and improve layouts here that I've never seen before.

I believe one of the reasons that we don't see the "innovators of the past" is not that innovation is waning, but that the way information is shared is changing........and evolving.

One man's opinion....

Rick

What kind of innovation are we talking here???? This is why I made a distinction between "strategy" and "tactics".

From the context of what Joe was writing about, it seemed to me the kinds of innovation was how do we address the overall theme for our railroad and how it functions. I.e. Linear Design being the innovation where it was a spaghetti bowl before.  Or John Allen bringing more realism to scenery and presentation to a model railroad. 

So far what I have read, is more techniques and how to accomplish the objectives, that are still framed in the "box" John Allen, Allen McClelland, and the other "innovators" made. 

My question would be, is there any "innovation" that is going to really change the "box", that these others changed?

Ken L.

 

One definition of innovation is being willing to turn conventional wisdom on its head or chuck it out the window entirely in favor of a new concept. Both modelers mentioned did exactly that by foregoing the conventional design language of their day (i.e. tabletop designs that were little more than fancy toy train ovals.) John Allen developed his concept of the G&D as a progressive series of layouts in stages, each one moving the common concept further along.

A. McClelland abandoned the concept of isolated, self-contained train layouts for the radical idea (at the time) of modeling a portion of a transportation system, one that was part of an even larger national system. This was unheard of in his day and didn't become part of the lexicon until the RMC series in the 1970s by which time it was at least ten years old if not older.

Here's a point: given an alotted space, the vast majority of modelers will automatically begin their design process using time worn ideas and concepts, most likely some sort of mainline scenario with as much layout as is possible to stuff into the given area. I suspect that not one in five hundred would consider a different paradigm such as a single industry modeled close to full scale or something even more off the wall like an engine terminal fed by simple staging in a larger scale with long turnouts, say no.10s, in the approach trackage. 

The prevailing bias toward mainline, distance running regardless of the era modeled prevents concepts like these from even being considered by the many. I certainly agree with the Prof. about the influence of the late Carl Arendt's site. It was and is innovative in terms of what constituted a layout.

Michael Cougill

A. McClelland may have been on the forefront of railroads connected to other railroads, but this isn't that great of a stretch from John Allen's G&D, which started somewhere and went somewhere.  The only different is, "Somewhere" is off layout thus allowing Somewhere to interchange with "anywhere."  This mode of thought though, still does nothing different with the trains.

Here's where once more I have to put Minatur Wunderlan up as the leading innovator of this era.  While most of us still think of vehicles as scenic details and ships as structures or scenery [Ships are listed under structures by the NMRA MMR AP Certificate, for example], they have built a TRUE transportation SYSTEM.  It's not just a railroad, even though it may have started as such.

Imagine for a moment if your freight car goes into the team track, and the truck not only pulls the freight off the truck, but delivers it as well.  Right now, all we see is the laden car pull into a "scenicked" teamtrack where everything but the railroad cars are static.  This opens all sorts of cans of worms...

Obviously these ideas make some modelers very uncomfortable, because it suggests that the really GREAT model railroads of the future will feature moving vehicles, running water, moving ships and yes, even airports where the planes "take off' and "land."  Well, YES, the really great model railroads WILL incorporate these features!

If you think of the box as what you see now and only put the things in it that you want out of the present era, obviously there's no need to expand the box.  However, there are many who are expanding the box - and it's happening with or without your approval!

Last great innovation before Minature Wunderland would be DCC.  Hands done, it provides the means to start running railroads by computer to a degree of fidelity never imagined before.  Which means Remote Operators are not much further off!

Mon, 2011-06-06 05:22 — rtw3rd

I believe one of the reasons that we don't see the "innovators of the past" is not that innovation is waning, but that the way information is shared is changing........and evolving.

One man's opinion....

Not just one, Rich, not just one. I agree with you whole heartedly - it may have been actually easier for someone in the past to be seen as innovative, as folks wouldn't hear about the process until it was basically well formed and established. Now, we often  get to see it evolve.

With modern communications, the paradigm has changed significantly - ask your self, if you have a great idea, are you more inclined to post it up to share as soon as possible, or to sit and guard it jealously until you can have an article published, months later?  I think the fact that most folks go for the first option is a good thing, and healthier for the hobby community as a whole.

I'd also like to point out that the selection of these two examples are very American-specific; certainly there have been similar players in the hobby outside of the USA.

Finally, while not innovative in the same way that Joe has meant in his article, I'd agree with Lance Mindheim, but also include Tim Warris.  I think what Tim has done through his tools and videos to help enable hobbyists is amazing, and worth noting.

Now Benny came up with something new: Remote Operators. It is not impossible and farfetched to have a loco with a camera in the cab connected to the internet. Add remote uncoupling ( is in the oven right now) and a layout plan where the trains can be plotted in real time. A few cameras showing bigger parts of the layout, everything connected to the internet. Now with a remote throttle ( internet connected also ) it would be possible for a crew scattered over the world to have an operating night at one layout. Most, if not all, of the above is available right now, just has to be miniaturized and put together in a package. Something DCC based probably.

in the form of Tim Warris, as Scarpia suggests, I think we have to look at a lot of others, too, many of which just happen to be sponsors of MRH.  Coincidence?

I honestly never, EVER thought I would ever try to build my own turnouts as it was beyond not only my skill level but my desire to do so.  After seeing Fast Tracks as a sponsor and reading Tim's articles, then watching his videos on how to make it, I believed I could do it.  And I did.  Yes, he made money off of it, but I think I've not only saved money, but it got me started into doing a number of other things I never thought I would attempt.  

How about manufacturers, such as Rapido, BLMA and True Line Trains?  Some may not regard them as innovative, but I sure do.  The attention to detail these companies put into their products (and service, I might add) is innovative to the hobby and have raised the bar of what a plastic model can be.  If you haven't yet seen Rapido's Canadian tour, you need to check it out.  How many other manufacturers would do a cross Canada tour with the pre-production samples of their upcoming offerings?  These companies raise the bar of what a detailed model can be.

How about Duncan McRee's Tam Valley Depot with the frog juicers?  Is it a sea change for the hobby?  No, but a simple thing that makes wiring turnouts idiot proof with very little work.  

And I do agree with Miniatur Wunderland as the most innovative when it comes to developing technology.  If you haven't seen Gerrits Tagebuch's video blog on youtube, you are missing out on incredible technology and attention to detail.  

I guess the thing is, innovation takes many forms - from the spectacular layout of Miniatur Wunderland to the simplification of constructing bullet proof trackwork with jigs.

Great discussion so far!

As to what kind of innovators, I'm speaking of innovators who inspire the hobby and inject a new sense of energy and direction. As to inspiring modelers, the hobby seems a bit lost right now, like it's wandering, looking for someone who will lead us into the 21st century in this hobby - for the next couple decades at least.

As to the innovations themselves, I'm speaking mostly of micro-innovations - but someone who seems to be a Thomas Edison-type - providing us with one micro-innovation after another. Again it's a type of person I'm looking for, not the innovations themselves.

If there is such a person still out there, we'll never quite look at the hobby the same after we see it through their eyes.

The era of individuals like Edison taking the forefront and leading the entire hobby [much more, the world] is by and far over.  As previously mentioned, the only reason the "greats" are given so much credit is because in their time, the ease of access to publishing was so prohibitive that only some people were allowed to present their ideas through the press.  John Allen's Operations was not his idea - he got it from an earlier article published back in the 1940s-1950s by a man who has been largely forgotten.  What John did was create an entire scene prepackaged in mind for publication - don't forget, the man was a photographer first, an artist second, and a modeler third!  Further, he has his life pretty well dedicated to the pursuit of model railroading.  As such, he had the upper arm in creating his legacy.

No matter how fantastic the little layouts get, they will never attract the attention the big layouts get.  It's simple human nature.  A Honda Civic will NEVER be a Bugatti Super Car.  The big name smalltime layouts will be those that are trolled out on the forums of the internet - and not the side forums, but in the main shooting galleries such as Atlas.  Atlas itself is one of the greatest innovators of our current era, they're the ones who started putting "see our forum!" in their magazine ads where all of us sit and read!!!  You want a fantastic layout tour, do a search on Jon Grant.  ANY of his threads should yield as much delight as an article out of the G&D files.

At this point, the innovations of tomorrow are being developed not by individuals but by teams.  Looking through "great model railroads" you'll find what some say are far too many commercially built layouts.  Welcome to our era!  Many people are now the answer!

I started trolling out my "Remote Operations" idea back around 2007, I do believe, in the midst of starting a rather toasty discussion about remote uncoupling.  I discovered then that most model railroaders are staunchly against innovative revolutions especially if it means all their old equipment is suddenly "obsolete" due to the upgrade - and not because one would HAVE to have the upgrade, but because these individuals like to think of themselves as being on the forefront of the hobby, and such an upgrade would bean they're now on the waning edge!!  MY speculation, of course!

It was not one man who mad DCC what it is now.  It was many people together, who created a market, and thus led to manufacturers pushing the envelope on development.  the great ideas today may be thought up by you and me, but it takes engineers to put it all together anymore.  and engineers want lots of money, which means a deep pocket has to contract them - and that deep pocket expects a return on investment!!

My idea of remote operations came about when I suddenly realized a way in which model railroad clubs could GENERATE MONEY!!!   Yes, believe it or not, people turn to the internet to PLAY GAMES.  And they pay LOTS OF MONEY to do so!!!  So why not add a Reallife mode railroad layout game?  Charge $1 or $5 a run, and see how the market fluctuates!

I ask you this, if La Mesa made a couple Remote trains available [at this time they'd be through freights, with all car handling done by local crews at the yards. - "All right motive power, you're clear to enter the yard; pull up to the white post and stop there." "Motive Power, I've disconnected your train; pull forward to the yard tower up ahead and wait until I tell you to come back" " motive power, your train is ready for pickup.  Please back up slowly and stop on my command" "3 car lengths, 2 car lengths, 1 car length, that'll do." "Motive power, I've reconnected your train, you're clear to leave the yard; proceed to your staging point and leave when your schedule say so unless the dispatcher says otherwise."], - How much would YOU pay to take a train up over Tehachapi?  $5 a layout run?  $25 a layout run?  If the run takes 2 hours if you keep the time table...would you pay $100 for the privilege???!!  

Obviously there's a breaking point in this market, but until we try it, we won't know where it is!!  But could you imagine, if a layout like La Mesa has a new train every 5 minutes, that's 12 trains an hour - we'll take off two to make the schedule lighter - and over an 8 hour day you have a 6 full hours of trains, so that 60 trains for a total gross revenue of $6000 if you find 60 people willing to pay $100 for the run.  We'll pay our ten hapless volunteers a generous $10 an hour [To play trains??!!!] so we lose $1000...$5000 gross income?  Heck, we can get 20 employees at this point, or pay the ten $20 an hour, OR give them really good benefits on top of that measily $10 an hour!! 

And if we added a profile to your account, made records of your runs, and gave you awards for you accomplishments [and demerit for your errors!] on those routes...would YOU play "model railroad MMORPG" until you had a gold star from every layout on the World Model Train tour?  Obviously we'd want to manage the riffraff, so there's be a couple "trainer" layouts across the country, where users remote in and go through "model railroad driver school."  We'd put a coupe scenarios in front of the user to test not only his reaction to different scenes, but to also help him get a feel for the potential lag between his throttle at home and the throttle on board the locomotive.  And if he's a real Locomotive affectionado, his preferred "operating stand" could be everything from a keyboard to a real functional replica of a cab interior, with all the important levers hooked up to electronic buttons to provide the correct output when they are manipulated...hey, I've seen one too many locomotive cabs in people's trainrooms in model railraod magazines, what say you to hooking that cab up to the model railroad and DRIVING IT??? [yes, we'd need cameras and flat screen monitors in the cab windows to see where we're going - why not!!!

Innovation is sitting here right in front of us - there's so much available nowadays, the only great crime is the fact that I have a day job - I like it, of course, because otherwise I would not eat or have a roof over my head, but to be honest, that's what keeps many a good idea back from reality.  But that's perfectly fine, we have the team now, we can do anything!

All I have to ask, Joe, is this: why are you of all people sitting around waiting for the next great innovator???  You;ve already gone and made a name for yourself, I don't think you should be too concerned...although I HAVE heard it's pretty lonely up there at the top!  Looking for a couple friends?!! :P

 

 

 

Lance Mindheim is Ace Number One in my book for the top model railroad innovator on the scene today!  Having lived in Florida I can feel the sweat forming on my face just looking at his layouts that feature the CSX in a Miami industrial district environment.

John Allen pioneered the approach of showing model railroaders that they could take their layouts and bring them up to a state of art instead of just running trains on a sheet of plywood with basic scenery.

With so many modelers desiring to construct a layout but with a lack of space due to apartment living, his shelf layout concept has started a new trend encouraging guys and gals alike to bring their dream of a model railroad to reality.

This has not only helped boost sales of model railroad products but insures a continued steady growth of the hobby in general and gives the manufacturers the incentive required to continue to develop and market new products and improve those already being provided to model railroaders.

His website is one of the most professional, providing advice and tips to help beginners as well as experienced modelers alike.

He most certainly has earned a Golden Spike Award!

Joseph Toth, Jr.

 

Benny: remote operations can be a major breakthrough, but please do not prostitute it by seeing it just as just another money-making opportunity. What happened to grand old friendship and chance to meet some more buddies?. I see it like a regular operating session at somebody's house, just happens that the house got a lot bigger. Do you charge admission to your friends to operate at your layout?.

Regarding your comment about John Allen probably you were thinking about Frank Ellison ( who was properly credited by Allen in his own writings).

Frank Ellison's original articles about his Delta Lines can be found at scanned Model Builder magazines at:

http://www.trainlife.com/magazines/browse/page/10?search=&title=5&year=0...

you will have to go over all of them but there is A LOT of good reading in them.

I was recently in San Diego and got to run a couple of trains during an op session (funny, all the way from Portland Oregon to San Diego and who walks in? A crowd of folks I know from Salem Oregon...).

I could be wrong, but it's my impression that the pace of operations on La Mesa is such that a train out of Bakersfield every 15 minutes might be pushing it. Trains on the La Mesa club layout tend toward the long side. Long trains take longer to assemble, to switch, to get out of yard or to enter a yard. The first train I was on (helper engineer) was 100 reefers. It took Bakersfield about 10 minutes (while we sat on the mainline) to give us permission to enter the yard. Then we needed to triple into the yard!

The other trains I was involved with were short in comparison - no doubling in or out of the yard. But I think a train every 15 minutes is excessively optimistic. Perhaps I'm wrong.

When it comes to remote operations, if frequency of trains is a requirement then I don't think it will fly. Remember that in an internet game environment, all it takes to add a new player is more electrons. A simulation of Tehachapi can host 100,000 different train crews crawling up or down the mountain on 20,000 different simulation instances (with enough computer horsepower that is...).  With physical model railroading someone would have to build 20,000 more layouts...

I think that remote operation of model railroads is likely to remain a side venue for another reason -- the need for the other members of the train crew to be physically present to rerail, throw turnouts (unless they're all computer operated), uncouple/couple, cut in or drop off helpers, etc.  I question how much fun it would be for the men-on-the-ground to do this. After the first few times the novelty might well wear off and leave the men-on-the-ground feeling like it was work rather than fun.

FWIW

Charlie

"I think that remote operation of model railroads is likely to remain a side venue for another reason -- the need for the other members of the train crew to be physically present to rerail, throw turnouts (unless they're all computer operated), uncouple/couple, cut in or drop off helpers, etc.  I question how much fun it would be for the men-on-the-ground to do this. After the first few times the novelty might well wear off and leave the men-on-the-ground feeling like it was work rather than fun.

FWIW

Charlie"

Could be, who knows. But remember all the things that originally were dismissed for a lot of valid reasons and then took off big time, included but not limited to the computer you are using right now. But I have been wrong before. Just ask my wife.

 

OK, I know these columns are mostly to generate controversy and thus traffic, but Joe, I just find it hard to accept that you really believe this. There are dozens and dozens of people expanding the edges of the envelope in many different areas in the recent past to the present day.

Because the hobby is less monolithic and homogenous than in John Allen's day, every new innovation doesn't apply to every modeler. Not like the old days when many did the same thing until a new thing came along and then everybody did that new thing. (Many people were doing funky western like John Allen until they all started doing Appalachian coal hauling like McClelland/Koester.)

And because of better communication fostered through the Internet, innovation today tends to come from collaboration or coop-etition among multiple people and groups. Here's a very incomplete list off the top of my head:

Freight car and loco modeling and weathering: Mike Rose, Jim Six, the RPM movement, et al

Prototype modeling to a previously unheard-of degree: Jack Burgess at the forefront, but a number of others including John Nehrich

Building ops-specific layouts (e.g. for TT&TO): Bill Darnaby, Tony Koester, Steve King, many others

Computer integration and enhancements of model railroading: Bob Jacobsen and the JMRI crew

More accessible alternatives to standard trackwork components: FastTracks, Proto:87, Central Valley, et al

Specialized groups like the Operations SIG and Layout Design SIG are much more than one individual, but they've each had a tremendous impact on the way we model and enjoy our layouts today versus even just 10-15 years ago (credit is due to the late Bill Jewett and Doug Gurin, respectively). Likewise modular railroading, which is a huge innovation but doesn't have one "creator" (NTRAK was really the innovator, but even it was a group).

The "Innovators for All" may not be as common, because we all don't model the same things in the same way any longer!

OK, so I got suckered in, too -- but just for this one post ...

It's called Train Simulator and its brethren...

I am aware of the existing software, I wrote about running real trains on a real layout.

Byron, I think that's a VERY nice list and speaks well of your knowledge about other modelers - one thing I find to be almost lacking.  We all know about the national figures, but how about those local heroes such as Jeff Kraker?  He's not local to my area, but his work is nonetheless incredible!!  And he made some waves there when he started talking about "less is more"...

Chris, Train Simulator is not the same and never will be.  For starters real live people cannot be present in the railroad while operators are running the trains.  Not even close.  This isn't about eliminating the physical layout - it's about bringing the physical layout to people who are in remote locations [or geographically isolated from the layout in question, aka over 200 miles away] where only a good Internet connection is available.

======================================

Charlie, your concerns about floor operators are right in step.  Hence why I suggest these floor operators are Employees and not just volunteers!!!  In this down economy where unemployment is rampant and in my area minimum wage is $7.35, $10.00 an hour would be Great!!  And they'd just have to monitor the layout...perhaps even make up trains or work on the staging yard between stewardship runs. 

Yes, for these people the hobby would be WORK - and guess what, if the hobby in it's end form [the layout] gainfully employed people on top of just being fun for the rest of us, how much traction will the hobby gain with the general public?  I have no doubt that Minatur Wunderland is getting attention - and not just from the train enthusiasts of the world, but from the capital venturist as well!

It would have to be a pretty phenomenal layout, though, to get the price per run where people will keep paying and keep running.  Perhaps $10 or $20 will be more appropriate, but then that's all a matter of accounting...And keep in mind what a fantastic layout can do in terms of revenue - Look at what Minatur Wunderland brings in each year, and it began in 2000.  That's just for SEEING the layout!!

========================================================

In concerns to La Mesa, these are valid points.  It may even be necessary to establish a couple "revenue" days each week, where the trains are almost all remotely operated and the lengths are about 20-40 cars each.  The point of this schedule would be to get as many train in an hour as possible.  Remotely operated trains during the Real ops sessions that are longer and require more time for setup could then be effectively sold at a higher price since these sessions will include more value added benefits.  And of course, there'd likely be some way in the system to get the lowly MRR who can't afford such expensive ticket prices the opportunity to run too, once in a while...who knows!!

Pipopak, I understand your concern in regards to my angle.  However, I personally recognize that it is Capitalism that made DCC what it is today.  If not for the manufacturers who saw a way to make money out of the venture, our decoders would still be huge, ugly, and capable of only a few functions.  DCC is big in the hobby today BECAUsE a couple wise individuals saw the potential, and CAPITALIZED on it!! 

Commercial layouts are GREAT for the model railroad market.  MSI has already proven that locomotives wear out over time.  This is good for the secondhand market; the locomotives coming off these commercial layouts may be cooked on the inside, but the shells can be resold - hence, you could get that unit you always wanted if you only have the mechanism but the wrong shell.  But the BIG part is, these commercial layouts will need a steady supply of quality locomotives to remain functional.  And that means companies like Atlas will have a GOOD customer for their products!!!  These commercial layouts would likely purchase at MSRP - ~15% and in mass quantities, between 100 and 500 locomotives at a time.  GOOD business! 

And as a hobbyist, I see the growth of Commercial layouts in favor of not just the manufacturers but to YOU too!!!  You see, if the manufacturers have this market for their locomotives, they’ll have more capital available for all the little “side” projects that don’t have much profit potential but what you and I would love to see – strange things like obscure locomotives, structures, and more rolling stock.  Runs might be a little bigger too.

And now here's where we get to that big shift Joe wants to see - Big shifts in thought.  It’s worthy to note that if this idea caught on, you might see more people in the general public building layouts.  Perhaps they won’t be in it for the same reason you and I are in it, but in the pursuit of money they may discover for themselves that they like the hobby for reasons beyond what got them into it.  And more people will have a passing interest in the hobby - they will see it as a potentially worthwhile endeavor.  Of course, people will then be asking you when you’re going to get your railroad “online,” or ask you how much you make off your world famous layout, and then chide and scoff at you when you say you don’t make any!!

The point is...Add a carrot to the hobby, and it may become mainstream once more!

I hate to sound like I'm lecturing my kids, but back in the day all I had for railroad hobby information was a few magazine publications, a yearly train show, and the Walthers catalog. When Bell labs developed the transistor junction we entered the silicon age, when the first internet node was powered up we left the industrial revolution and became members of the information revolution. Like it or not Joe you and any one else who has posted anything on the internet regarding this hobby has helped inspire others to get involved in this hobby. The neat thing is your Idea whatever it is from super detailing a loco or how I used common household items to make my layout work better will be recorded forever! But if you want I nominate Charlie Comstock because of the South Jackson Gazette and  Horace Fithers the first model railroad that publishes a newspaper. I cant get enough of that and it keeps me coming back for more 

OK Byron, I eat crow.

I am not trying to single out Lance Mindheim nor make a plug for his business or books and indeed I envy the other great model railroaders, past and present, who have strived to bring the hobby up to an art form that John Allen helped pioneer.

Lance offers several books and  combined with his web site can be very effective for a potential model railroader to aid in helping him or her decide which type of layout provides the most interest before investing time and money in equipment and scenery material in our cost effective society in which we live today.

Lance has even encouraged modelers in Z scale to consider constructing an industrial style layout not unlike his Miami area layouts.  This was unheard of several years ago.  While Märklin pioneered Z scale, MicroTrains and other innovative manufacturers have brought Z scale trains up to fine scale standards.  Despite the fact that Märklin´s Z scale trains are still quality orientated some of the models still retain their crude details.  Item:  Their F7 is mounted on a frame designed for a Deutsche Bundesbahn electric locomotive.  The Blomberg truck frames were lengthened to fit the electrics trucks.  American Flyer did the same thing when they introduced their GP7 in lenghening the Blomberg truck side frames to fit the PA trucks!  Likewise, the caboose is mounted on a German passenger car frame.  Check out the weird grabirons!  A modeler desiring an FP7 can most certainly use the lengthened F7 since it is longer than the MicroTrains F7.  The addition of steam generator detailing on the rear of the roof will help the overall appearance of course.

We are living in the golden age of model railroading.  Never in the history of our hobby has there been such a wealth of information, books and CDs and the "must have" Walthers Model Railroad Reference Books in both HO as well as N and Z scale.

Model railroading is still fun!

Joseph Toth, Jr.

 

 

 

 

OK Byron, I eat crow.

I am not trying to single out Lance Mindheim nor make a plug for his business or books and indeed I envy the other great model railroaders, past and present, who have strived to bring the hobby up to an art form that John Allen helped pioneer.

 

My comment to "Joe" was directed to MRH publisher Joe Fugate, not to you, Joseph. Sorry that wasn't clear -- I should have been more specific.

In any case, no need to apologize, I've visited Lance Mindheim's earlier N scale layout (which IMHO was even better than his current layouts, if that's possible) and have nothing but respect and admiration for him and his work.

There's a lot of interesting work being done right now with urban switching layouts in a variety of scales, eras, and modeled locales by a number of people. Jim Senese, Keith Jordan, John Pryke, and now Chuck Hitchcock and Paul Dolkos have all expanded the hobby's understanding of the potential for dense industrial switching layouts by popularizing them in the hobby press. Less well-known innovators such as Tom Flagg and the Rail-Marine Information Group are exploring the interesting interactions of railroads and over-water shipping.

It's often been true in the hobby's history that those who are the most prolific and are skilled photographers are more widely recognized than those who are less so. Certainly John Allen is a good example, as we know a lot more about him today than we do about some of his innovative contemporaries such as Whit Towers (taking nothing away from John Allen).

Thanks to the Internet, it's not only those who are published a lot who can be inspiring Innovators.

Thanks to the internet anyone can put their "dog and pony show" out to the public:

http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/

The internet makes more people accessible but less people can find the ideas because the ideas tend to get buried in a long string of blather in threads.

Harold

 

First I would like to comment that Dean Freytag should be part of the list you have in the article. While his layout may have been more centered around the steel industry, he did with steel what John and Allen have done on a larger scale with beyond the basement layouts. I would also like to mention that www.ScaleRailsOnline.com also has a couple cars that travel around the continent, nicknamed little Puddy: http://scalerailsonline.com/lp.aspx so someone is still thinking beyond the basement.

That said, I don't think major innovators are around anymore as we see it, because so much has been done already. Today's innovators are guys who still think outside the box, but more in the aspect of scenes than the whole layout. One good example is a steel buddy, Dave Ayers' use of various plastics and shapes to build blast furnaces: http://todengine.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=5245301&trail=25#4

Other examples are www.KenRayModels.com ; St Charles ModelWorks http://stores.ebay.com/Saint-Charles-Model-Works ; Chuck Pravlik Models http://www.cmpshopsmodels.com/ and others who wanted a particular model and realized they could make more than one and sell them to others who want the same thing. These guys have a vision and have found places in the market that are not fully realized by major manufacturers.

While one might say that today's technology allows anyone to start a similar company, but being the market and knowing the market are two different things. Having worked with the three companies mentioned, and knowing others, I think many of today's innovators are really the small companies finding and filling model niches with what we want when the big boys ignore the same niches. All the while strapped for operating capital and time as they continue their regular jobs.

Stogie