Maybe I am contrary as this

Maybe I am contrary as this has been my approach for many years. I initially considered two eras which were close enough to just interchange some equipment and be ready to go, eras were less than 10 years apart. Since I have been putting together a supply of rolling stock, and structure kits I have had very little waste in time or effort. The location to model has not changed for as long as I remember. Since this is the reverse running arena I am guessing this is not the norm. It just made sense to do it this way. I also suspect it is not the norm to remain interested in the same things in the hobby for several decades, according to the posts I read on the web site, as it is full of guys that change eras, scales, areas even continents for their model railroad focus.

Focusing on 1953 and 1963

The Intermediate P&A Layout is going to be only 1953, however, the Ultimate P&A Layout I have planed (with Construction tentatively planned 4 years from now if everything goes as expected - which it most likely won't but that is for another thread discussion) will have the P&A on one deck modeling 1953, and the NKP, on the opposite deck (in a mushroom configuration) will be 1963 and there will be transfer runs between the two railroads at one point.  Should be interesting.

Ken L.

And Scale???

Shouldn't you also limit yourself by scale as well as era and prototype?

I know, I know - there's ANOTHER scale other than HO? 

Well yes Virginia there is.  Quite a lot of them actually.  It's only that the hobby press forgets about Z, N, TT, S, O, OO, #1, G, F, etc.

Paul