This is what I had in mind back in 1962 when I started an HO layout for my nephew (aw, but wasn't it also for me?). He soon lost interest in model railroads and I got busy finishing engineering school, so I never did complete it. The module concept has many advantages, but one must always be careful how the modularity influences the continuity of the scenery.

About the term "Chainsaw Railroad" - yes, Joe did introduce this in the Issue #1 Reverse Running column, but credit should be placed where credit is due. In the column, Joe states:

"While discussing this topic at this summer’s NMRA National Convention in Anaheim, my good friend and fellow modeler Dave Clemens introduced a fascinating new term: chainsaw railroads"

I just could not get this term out of my head. I have been working on a 4' x 4' N scale layout (would really like one larger, but I don't seem to have the space) that I started five years ago. I stopped working on it over two years ago, when I was going to move it elsewhere so I could do some wall painting. I never did do the wall painting (I'll probably get back to it some day soon). I decided to get back into the modeling groove about three months ago, before I had even found this wonderfaul E-zine (and more) - but I digress. I decided to go "full steam ahead" and just learn from mistakes, because I decided it was a Chainsaw Railroad after all.

In this spirit, I crafted my first scale model billboard to remind me that this is most likely not going to be my "finished project".

Keep on trackin'

Bill

@Bill,

Great billboard!  That pic would be fantastic to spread around - it that your actual friend?

@Scarpia -

Thanks for sharing your thoughts in this article.  When you moved it was pretty cryptic, and many of us were worried we'd never see much from you once the crates left.  I like the modular approach - do you plan another update article once the modeling starts?

I enjoyed your blogs on the chainsaw railroads that you made so much that I was afraid when you said you were moving overseas that we would lose contact with you.  Glad to see you are still here and contributing!  If I were in a position where I would need to move frequently and especially if the moves included moving out of the country from time to time, I would consider your article a much needed resource. 

The one clarification that I would make is that many people use the terms "modular" and "sectional" interchangeably.  If your plan is to put the track layout at each end of each section so that the sections can be interchanged in any order, then they are "modular."  If they will need to be put back together in the same order each time they are moved, then they are "sectional." 

Freemo, does allow the interchangeability of modules without the same level of "sameness" as found on N-track modules, for instance, but it still requires a common track spacing specification at each end to allow for that interchangeability.

So if I'm building an interim layout as modules, that I can take with me if I relocate and use them as is, does that still qualify as a "chainsaw" layout? Just curious.

Ken L.

@kcsphil1

Might be a friend of Joe. Checkout the Reverse Running article in MRH Mag issue 1. I took the "liberty" of snapshotting the pic to put on the billboard.

To answer Ken's question, I would say whenever you know the layout you're building is a stepping stone to something else and thus has a limited life, then it's a chainsaw layout.

But hey, if seeing it as a "chainsaw" gets you off the dime and doing the hobby instead of just thinking about doing the hobby, then hooray. Some people are afraid to start for fear of doing it wrong. Or they analyze things forever, burning up valuable time.in the process.

The theory is building something sooner rather than later and making mistakes in the process is faster than analyzing forever and a day until perfection is achieved in the planning process. You'll likely get to your answer quicker and isn't that the goal?

And if it turns out that doing the hobby with your chainsaw becomes so much fun you don't want to tear it out - well then that's just TOO BAD, now isn't it? (wink)

Thanks Joe.  the reason I am asking is, the more I design for the Interim P&A, the more concerns I have.  I am building it because, for the moment, it's the only space available to build one, but it will not have most of the features I am looking for in a layout, especially the limitations in operations. 

I am hoping for this railroad to be a testbed for construction/benchwork ideas and also to begin operations to begin teaching those who do not know TT&TO operations.  The Layout can accomplish that, but there are many things the Final P&A layout will have that the Interim P&A will not.  So I'm very concerned how the Interim P&A might effect how others think and feel about TT&TO as well as the P&A concept itself. The trackplan will not conform to any specific location on the map, though several scenes will be composed of modules based on actual locations  but the idea for the Interim Layout is finding where they might fit, while ensuring they are literally being cut and pasted from the "Final P&A" plan.  So I am thinking of posting a similar kind of sign as is in this thread, because I want the operators who are coming over to operate on the Interim P&A understand, this is not the entire "vision" I have, and that though there are MANY shortcommings to this layout, it's just a placeholder until the back garage can be expanded, hopefully 5 years from now if all goes as planned.   But if it's not really a proper use of the term, then I don't want to use it.  I already messed up Givens and Druthers before, and I don't want to make the same mistake again! 

Ken L.

Thanks for your comments, here are my thoughts on a couple of the points made.

@Bill - Thanks for the clarification on the source of term,  we've been using the term so commonly now that I hadn't considered it to be something that closely accredited to a single individual, but you're correct that credit is due.  Maybe I should use the term "Saws-all" layout instead (after all, that's how I tore out the other one).

@Phil - Once we accepted the invitation to move, our lives became very busy with the closing down of couple of properties, and the wholesale divestment of most of our belongings. The reality of this meant I couldn't spend time on hobbies, other than preparing for the shipment. Now that I have my things here with us, you'll see some progress in a new blog here I'm calling 22 Stories Up - Building the Barre Branch.

@Russ - I understand the difference in the terms as you have defined them, but I still prefer modular for this even though the tracks don't line up in a typical modular format.  Sectional to me rings as sectional track more than a sectional railroad, while this is more a modular configuration of the railroad base.  I don't think that modular is the best term for this, but truthfully I haven't been able to come up with a better one that most people can agree on.  Any thoughts?

@ken - The important thing about the chainsaw concept is as Joe said - the actual "doing" it part. I'm sure your operators will just be pleased to be able to work your railroad even though it's temporary and with all it's shortcomings.  I think it was Marty McGuirk who put pads of paper during his "shakedown" session on his Southern New England railroad recently, maybe you can adopt the idea and fix some to each area. As folks find issues, those notes may be very useful in resolving them long term.

@Tom (Scarpia)

Well, I thought you were doing Central Vermont, but if you are using a "Saws-all", that sounds more like Milwaukee