Excellent topic Chad! I'm

Excellent topic Chad!

I'm revisiting the theme of my layout to something a bit closer to prototype: I've been researching the CSX [formerly B&O] CL&W subdivision, that's short for Cleveland-Lorain and Wheeling.  I'm not quite ready to do an exact replication of the trackwork -- nowhere near enough space for that! --  I just want to capture the general "feel" of the branch between Clark Avenue Yard in Cleveland, and the town of Lester, OH.  A single-track mainline with plenty of trackside industries to switch, and LTV Steel at the northern end.  My staging yard will represent the next major division point to the south: Willard, OH. 

I've found that basing my town names on prototype places, and numbering my trains the same as those that actually run on the CL&W sub, gives my layout a greater feel of authenticity.

Couldn't agree more

I couldn't agree more on the joys of modeling the prototype. In the 1980s while designing a proto-freelanced layout, I started toying with adding an interchange to the SP on the freelanced layout. I got off-the-charts excited about the idea of having the SP on the layout ...

That's when it dawned on me - if I was so darned excited to have the SP just make a cameo appearance on my freelanced layout, why didn't I just model the SP - more specifically, the SP that I grew up with as a kid?

In the process of doing my historical research, I found out about an alternative that almost happened but didn't - and the freelance bug bit again - why not freelance that part of the prototype history to become a what-if scenario that DID happen!

The resulting combination gave me a layout that's the perfect mix of prototype and freelancing for me, and I'm having a ball!

Creativity

I'm proto lancing (albeit more lance than proto) because I like the idea of CREATING my own world. I will readily admit it's a big challenge to create a plausible railroad out of thin air (or maybe thin plywood). I think perhaps it's that challenge that appeals to me now.

And if I feel like running something totally out of place for a prototype, who's to tell me that my railroad didn't do such a thing (not that I am interested in having tunnel motors pull truss rod box cars but during a motive power crises the management acquired a XXX from the YYY railroad sort of thing). It's also fun to come up with consistent paint schemes for motive power, rolling stock, and structures plus a coherent style of operation.

Sigh. I suppose I've not necessarily succeeded at all this, but it's close enough for my purposes at this point.

But hey, I have a lot of respect for prototype guys (Jack Burgess comes to mind!).

So each to their own.

Regards,

Charlie Comstock

The best laid plans etc....

My original intention was to model B & O's Sand Patch from Hyndman to Myersdale, Pa. I had a chance to railfan this area in the late 70s and was amazed at the density of the foliage in this part of the country during the summer. I had a railfan map of the area from a Trains article and I still had a tough time finding the tracks even when I was within a few yards of the right of way. It was kind of reminiscent of the scene in Deliverance when Burt Reynolds is trying to find the river.

I finally found Hyndman, Fairhope, Mance and Myersdale and spent a very enjoyable couple of hours visiting with the operator in the tower at the top of the grade. There was a constant parade of trains buit unless a modeler has a "railfan" perspective there isn't much to do except watch trains go by. No switching (100 car trains on a 1+% grade pretty much preclude this activity) and the rocks and dirt are RED.

So I then had the intention of modeling M & K Junction on the B & O at Rowelsburg, WV in the 1940s. Big Steam, helper engines constantly pushing long freights upgrade in both directions, interchange with the Morgantown and Kingswood Railroad, West Virginia vertical scenery etc. etc.

When I was on vacation I stood on the bridge that spans the yard at Rowelsburg and sketched the track arrangement with the intention of duplicating it when I got home. It just never worked for me - I always wanted another track in the yard, a building that I liked but never existed etc.

So, for the last 12 years I've been working on an "M&K area" railroad. The B&O runs from Cumberland, MD to Parkersburg, WV and interchanges with my own Pennsylvania Midland at Robinson, WV. Cumberland and Parkersburg are not modeled but rather are side by side 6 track staging yards. The Midland serves a 3 mile branch to coal tipples in New Island, WV. The scheme seems to be working and we're about ready to begin operations.

Creativity...

I have to agree with Charlie.  I like the freedom that freelancing offers.  So far I mainly enjoy trying to create a believable scene.  It's not terribly important to me if it is prototypical or not.  No one can ever tell me that a given area should have 6 rivets not 5!

Lately I have become more concerned with laying realistic trackwork but in my case that is just another step towards the ever ellusive "bullet proof" track.

Maybe one day I'll get serious about a prototype but for now I'll just model what my imagination sees.

Freelancing, Prototype or Protolancing a Model Railroad.

I think everyone does various variations of all three of the title topics. Why? Freelancing a model railroad is beyond most of us since we know enough about real railroading to be dangerous but not enough to do it right. Prototype gives us a target to reach for but to do that correctly may require that we obtain title to a small county or private uninhabited island.

So I think everyone really does protolancing regardless of whether you are following a prototype or making it all up from scratch. We try to borrow the practices of the real thing and most of us get away with by inventing or imagining what would happen if...

To tell you the truth, if we are trying to create a plausible transportation system that is economically viable in the sense that of this was real it would be profitable, then most of us end up with bankrupt railroads. The fact is we have to start making compromises from the very start based on available space, knowledge, money and time. We also have to pay attention to our families, jobs and social responsibilities as well. Each of these puts a constraint on what we do and how we do it.

So, compromises have to made and we must invent some kind of logic for those compromises. If your object is to have fun, we can often overlook inaccuracies, false assumptions and what not. Just realize that no matter which approach you choose to follow it  will all end up as a version of protolancing eventually.

Irv

Proto, the only way to go

Glad to hear it Chad,

I never have liked freelancing, Disney railroads as I call them, But thats just me. I like the idea of recreating a moment in time, a specific place in a specific time (as closly as I can make it anyway).

           For me  its the Penn Central in Richmond, In on the former PRR pan handle in the 1972-74 time frame. I tell people that if you dont like my track plan, blame the PRR, theyre the ones that came up with it, as I follow prototype very closely. What really brings the whole thing to life is recreating the actual operations at that time. the yard at Richmond was a hump yard under PRR, but under PC it was a block swap yard. Add to that the early Amtrak operations and it has everything I want from an operational stand point.

           There was also a two and a half mile branch line that was retained to service local industry ( which will be represented by an upper level). The other interesting thing about this area is that the C&O interchanged at two different locations. Northern cars went up the half way up the branch, which was the old Ft. Wayne Branch before the abandonment. And before that was the old G R & I. Southern cars were dropped off at Newman tower (which is where the turnout is for the Ft. Wayne branch).

Cons can be anothers pros !!!

 What some may see as cons in modeling I see as Pros. I enjoy the research and digging around to see how things were long ago. I also enjoy the aspect of scratch building buildings or whatever the scene calls for. It is my plan to model the Frisco Railroad in my little slice of America. My home town of Fort Scott, KS has a very rich railroading past. I am going to model the Fort Scott area in August of 1929, during that period there was an incredible amount of railroading happening here. The Frisco had a very big set up here as well as the Missouri Pacific, the Katy (MKT) also had a big presence here as well. Not much of the railroad is left these days here, but the the history is very rich. Myself, like alot of modelers I don't have huge spaces to build a model rail empire, I only have a space that is 9' x 11' 6" so I will have to compress things to get the right "feel" for the area.

 I really like western scenery and tall mountains and pine trees, steep grades, vertical scenery and tunnels etc. But, it seems that alot of modelers either model Western or Eastern railroads as they live close to these areas. I live in the midwest and have decided to model what I know and see everyday. So I guess that I would be a Proto-Lancer only in the distant past. Now that my track plan is finished it does come close to the "feel" of the real Frisco in 1929 but doesn't come close to replicating the real yard here in Fort Scott. Back in the day the yard could hold over 1000 railcars, a full circle round house and a full fledged car shop as well. There is just no way I could even come close to modeling that. So I just make full use of modelers license and roll on with a head of steam. Model Railroading is supposed to be fun and I'm having alot of fun with the research and planning but will have more fun when construction finally begins and the trains are rolling.

Some of the cons are pros for me too

It's not that I don't like research and scratchbuilding, I enjoy them it's just that they take large ammounts of time.  I enjoy research and building structures, but the time spent on them doesn't go far in physical finishing the layout.

To help with the problem I hae decided to build the layout in sections.  The first one being the Yorklyn water stop.  It is one of the simpler sections with one turnout, two grade crossings, and the water tower comprising most of it, however it progress is taking a while.  For now the section is in the roadbed stage and has been since July since research and scratchbuilding the water tower will take a while.

Freelance Modeling is just as complex as Prototype Modeling

The items you listed as cons apply just as much to Freelance railroads as they do to prototype railroads.  The more realism you require, the more research you have to do.  If you are Freelancing, then you are really Being the Railroad CEO President, so to speak, which means you are calling the shots.  If you are following a prototype, you're quite a bit further removed form the inner workings of the railroad- you are replicating the world it once was.

There's no problem with either, however, I do find the prototype modelers push the envelope on price and on the ceiling of the hobby in their strive for more things they don't have to build themselves - there are many in the RTR Crowd would love to be satisfied Prototype modelers and who choose due to circomstances to not become craftsmen - which is fine.

So while I am building my railroad, I keep a close eye on my region and regional practices.  And I maintain Both SP and AT&SF [and probably D&RGW in the future] within this portrait of a home railroad I created to keep the whole thing in context, because that in itself lends credibility.  These local regional carriers provide a glimpse at practical solutions to real problems.

For example, would my railroad run Camelbacks?  To answer this question I first have to review the entire history ofcamelbacks, and I have concluded that yes, in the timeframe I have chosen, if it was as commercially developed as my railroad would require to exist, they would have used camelbacks - but only on the coal mine routes and not much further out.

So it gets fun.  Details are important, and realism only comes by following a general practice.

  There's no problem with

  There's no problem with either, however, I do find the prototype modelers push the envelope on price and on the  ceiling of the hobby in their strive for more things they don't have to build themselves - there are many in the RTR Crowd would love to be satisfied Prototype modelers and who choose due to circomstances to not become craftsmen - which is fine.

That applies in many cases but I don't think Jack Burgess has many RTR models available for the Yosemite Valley RR in 1939 (did I get that date right?) and in my book he just about defines the term 'prototype modeler'.

Regards,

Charlie

Jack's RTR Models

http://www.yosemitevalleyrr.com/protomdl.htm

It appears that Jack has 71% of all the locomotives ever run on this route ready and available in RTR form - that's more then most!  But then it Does help that his railroad only ever had 7 locomotives in all.  And he does have some prototype specific cars available to him in kit form as well.  But otherwise it appears Jack is one of the Craftsmen in our hobby who will build what they want before they call their favorite manufacturer.

There are some important notes.  These locomotives are in brass, these rolling stock kits are craftsmen kits.  It is here that we have long expected to find accuracy and high prototype fidelity and with it higher prices.  The problems start when the nitpickers attack any rogue mainstream manufacturer who goes and issues more then one decal set on the side of a mainstream value car - whether or not the car is prototypicical or not - and cry about how these mainstream manufacturers are somehow eroding Model Railroading values by doing this.  The N scale Con-Cor Notherns a few years back come to mind.

Benny

I am shooting for prototype versimilitude rather then accuarcy

A subject thats been on my mind too..

I don't pretend that my modeling skills are up to true prototype modeling. Likewise, I don't want to be completely constrained operationally.. when one is modeling diesel era in Nortern New England, a period of railroad decline, one must at times sprinkle in a little salt to get the flavor you want.. So, I seek to model my prototype but not be bound to it. I want to create a sense of versimilitude, or what I think of as "protypical impressionism".

My layout in planning will be built in a few phases, but in phase II I model the Canadian Pacific/B&M route in Northern Vermont between Wells River (staged) and Newport (staged until future expansion..). I am shooting for 1965-1966. I may move some industries about in time. Other then getting the general feel, I have no intention of modeling precision. Its neither my skill set or my interest. I will probably add a few small industries here and there to emphasize the 3-4 towns I am choosing. Scenery will follow the general profile of the prototype. Fortunately, a hodge podge of early diesel equipment will fit right in.

What I plan to model more faithfully is the operation over the subdivision. The paper mill may not be quite right.. the granite business may have petered out.. and the scale company may not have been rail served during this time.. but I will run the same general schedule of trains. My wife really likes classic passenger service so at some point the RDC passenger service (ended in 1965) may be replaced by less realistic but more fun coaches.

I guess my point is that protype modeling is just one end of a spectrum.. and we all need to find our comfort zone in it. For instance.. Joe (if I remember the DVD) is following prototype modeling for the most part but has freelanced the route his Coos Bay branch takes.. these sort of small liberties help make our model railroad fun while still giving us the feel of authenticity. I enjoy research and like having a real place and time for my railroad, I just feel that close is good enough.

Regards,

Chris

as a note- its a lot easier to be "close" with diesel then steam when running N..

Proto Freelancing?

I'm trying to model a Santa Fe branchline in Kansas, nothing actually prototypical but ideas from various branches that I've seen / researched. Relying on photos etc, as having never been anywhere near Kansas, the idea is so that someone doesn't say it looks like California or New England!!

I think the 'con' of actually prototype modeling is space, for me, only having part of a room 13' 6" x 6', hence why its loosely based. However, as I like Operations, I name 'off stage' places on actual locations relevant to the area.

Brian

Sounds like your approach and

Sounds like your approach and mine are essentially the same!

My version of the B&O's Cleveland/Lorain & Wheeling subdivision will be a single-track mainline with passing sidings and trackside industries, and have the same town names and general terrain found in north central Ohio.  But that's where the similarity ends; the industries won't be exact duplicates, and there will be certain types of trains [like coal drags and container jets] on my main line that never actually ran over the CL&W sub.  As long as 95% of visitors - i.e., those who have never actually lived in that specific area - think it looks like metropolitan Cleveland, I'll be satisfied.

I agree with both the Pros and Cons

The beauty of modeling a prototype or a particular area is that it presents a challenge -- can I duplicate this in miniature. It can be a rewarding accomplishment. The research can also be a lot of fun as you learn quite a bit. The down side is spare requirements can be unreasonable even for a model.

It can be particularly troubling in the scale I'm modeling -- O scale -- because the space required goes up by a factor of four to accomplish the same track/industry space used for H.O. I've been researching a long-gone area near my home -- The Redlands Loop in San Bernardino County, California and one particular area (Highland,) while simple, would require a 20' by 4' space to do a fairly accurate representation of the industries, the track, and the depot in the area. A scale model of the Redlands Depot itself would ba over six feet long. Obviously, selective compression really comes into play.

Matt Jackson

San Bernardino, CA

I would love to have the

I would love to have the space to model some appalachain Coal hauling and some passenger service in O or even in S representing C&O and B&O,Chessie and CSX but do not have the space for it, so for now I will be working on a blatently toy non-prototypical layout untill I get more space, or possibly make some modules and join a modular club.

Brian, I plan to model

Brian,

I plan to model Kansas, particularly Southeast Kansas ( I live there) It really depends alot on where in Kansas you want to model. Western Kansas I as flat as a board. But, from the Flint Hills to the east it is hilly. The Santa Fe used to run through to the west of me but now the BNSF is a stones throw from my house. I used to be able to watch the trains go by from my easy chair until they built a new house across the street from me. You could model Kansas City as it is the busiest rail city in the United States (number of trains) (tonnage wise 2nd to Chicago). So there is alot of variety in Kansas, Just no mountains and pine forests.

I'm not sure space hasa whole

I'm not sure space hasa whole lot to do with it. Finding space for a scene in big scales is the same problem whether you're prototyping or rolling your own.

PRM = Minimized Selective COmpression

In my experience so far, I have seen that most Prototype layouts and such seek to work in a way that minimizes overall selective compression.  This gets to be very expensive int eh realestate department, as it gets to the point of modeling the dead space between towns, the parking lots, the exact road widths, and other things that simply take up a whole lot of space.  In short, this is the minimilism modeling approah, which does look nice, but overall you have to realize jsut how much is accomplished inteh space.  When 2x4 feet can only accomodate a single track mainline, then I consider that to be a bit expensive in the realestate department.  But it would look nice for a small area, for pictures, of course.  But I would not be caught dead trying to d o a whole layout with such a scope of landscaping.

The thing I consider is that my railroad will look good moving around, but the more important part is that the railroad has purpose first, which in my case is serving industries.  And all industries are simple faxsimiles of the real thing, compressed down to the simplest compnents becasue in reality; I don't have 100 arces for each one of my industries!!!

It's STILL up to the individual

Howdy all -

This topic can bog down quickly.  It reminds me of steam vs. diesel and TT&TO operations vs. radio track warrants.  Since we all have different interests and are looking for different things out of the hobby, there is no one-size-fits-all answer.  That being said, let me tell you what I am doing.

My railroad, still in the beginning stages, is kind of the proto-lance type.  It will model Fort Collins, Colorado (where I live) in the late 1970s.  The BN mainline that runs north-south from Denver to Cheyenne runs through here on the old C&S track.  A UP branchline from Greeley also runs through and interchanges with the BN branchline that runs to the southeast over to Windsor and Greeley.  There was another BN branch that shut down by the time I am modeling that ran northwest to a quarry at Rex.

Here is my set of freelance assumptions.  First, that the Colorado & Southern was spun off from the Burlington at the time of the BN merger (1970).  The C&S adopted the blackbird paint scheme that the Q abandoned in 1959.  I also use  the Rex branch as active track, and also have trains from my friend Chuck Hagemeister's Rio Pasado & Western (RPW) access the Front Range along that branch through trackage rights.  The BN will still run through town, but mostly with coal and intermodal unit trains that will not stop very often.

If you can't tell, the operations thrust will be interchange and switching rather than mainline running.  But that is what I enjoy.  I operate on some pretty good mainline railroads as well (mainly George Booth's C&S and Doug Geiger's Granite Mountain).  Sometimes I take mainline runs, sometimes switching locals, and sometimes will serve as yardmaster.  I probably like the locals best, but all are fun in their own way.

I would recommend visiting other layouts.  See what you like best about the different layouts.  If what you would like to do is not something that fits a particular prototype, then by all means work your way down that continuum towards freelancing.  All of our efforts involve compromise when compared to the real thing.  It is up to the individual to determine where those compromises will fall.

Best of luck in your planning and building.

Yep, it can become the holy wars

I agree this discussion can turn into holy wars - I've seen it on other forums.

The wars usually start when someone posts that if you're not modeling the prototype properly, then you're just playing with trains like you did when you were a kid. In other words, freelancing or proto-freelancing is not serious model railroading - and that's how the posting flame wars start.

I have to grin when I see the "precise prototype modeling or forget it" posts. First of all, the hobby doesn't need self-appointed thought police. And second, I'd like to see the precise-to-the-foot model of a prototype route these modelers have in their aircraft hanger. And thirdly, if modeling the prototype accurately is king, then what's with using little plastic toys filled with air to model equipment made of steel and filled with real products going to market?

This last point is key, I think - modeling something always involves a certain amount of compromise and agreement that pretending is okay. The only question is how much compromise and pretending is okay for each person - and no one has any right to dictate the answer to another.

Jack's RTR Models

I've never seen a brass engine that was truly "ready to run" !!

Also, I've never heard of any "prototype modeler" complain about the use of non-prototypical roadnames on a certain piece of equipment (some of them do ask for some sort of "Secret code" that will reveal which of the schemes is accurate and which isn't - I'll reveal this secret code later).

A lot of modelers wanted a plastic Fruit Growers Express reefer - so, when I was at Intermountain we made one. We chose a rebuilt a wood car, making the model noticeably taller than most wooden refrigerator cars. Frankly, the prototype was a small portion of a very large fleet of very diverse cars. So, why did we choose it? Because the fellow who paid for a lot of the tooling was selling car custom decorated with fruit crate packing labels on the side! Obviously not prototype, but all the prototype guys loved the fact they had an FGE reefer in plastic.

Oh yes, the "secret" code - it's called research!

Marty

So Dave,

How's that layout coming along? When can I come operate? 

Marty