Some things don’t change - an article from the 1980s

[Paddy]

Train sets are great fun - just look at Poppingham and the link to Barrie's YouTube channel below.  There are some wonderfully detailed layouts out there in all scales but very few of them are "model railways".  Just because something looks "real" does not a model of a real railway make.

I refer people to Barrie's layout in a shed.  There is next to no scenic development bar some classic Hornby buildings and a few Dinky cars.  Even the rolling stock is a mismatch of eras yet Barrie (an ex Signal man) runs his railway to authentic practice.  Which is more real?

We complain about "train set" curves, yet in reality how many of us have the space to mimic the real railway?  It all comes down to the level of compromise that each of us are willing to accept.

I can admire and appreciate skilled modelling as much as the next person but sometimes it is great to see something "normal".  I stopped subscribing to all the railway magazines as I got bored by the similar looking layouts they detail.  Most of them are wonderfully modelled but in most cases they look/feel the same.

Personally, as I get older I find myself drawn to things like Hornby Dublo, Tri-Ang etc. A simpler time and possibly a wee bit more fun in the mix.

Today's N gauge models are amazing and I agree that prices should reflect the quality and detail supplied.  I fear though that there is a line where ever increasing demands could run the risk of killing off the market.

For me, I think this could all be addressed by making PECO R2 the minimum and PECO backing this up by releasing an R2 Setrack point.  This would remove the need for anyone to use R1 unless they chose to do so.

Kind regards

Paddy

[NGS-PO]

I don't think that there is anything at all wrong with train sets, far from it, they are an invaluable concept, and I wouldn't begin to deride them.

But my point, and what I think the OP's quoted author was alluding to, was that train sets and a model railways are not the same thing.  A model railway, by definition, is a representation of a real railway on a smaller scale.  Train sets with 9 - 12 inch curves on display in the visible scenic area do not mimic the real railway in that sense.  Just as importantly, trains hurtling around a train set layout do not mimic the operation of the real railway.

There are a number of threads on here and RMWeb concerning n gauge round and round layouts on a 4ft by 2ft board.  That's not a model railway, it just isn't.

To grow its popularity and market share, N Gauge needs good quality model railway layouts, in my opinion; and again I suspect that is what Ted Broadhurst is suggesting.

Sorry, I disagree.

N gauge needs layouts where the "average enthusiast" (to borrow a phrase from the Railway Modeller of my youth) can look at them and say "hey, that looks nice, I could make one of those".

Then we shall agree to disagree.

Best

Scott.

[silly moo]

The original letter that prompted the sending of the quoted article went along the lines of me expressing utter frustration at my inability to get Graham Farish locos to go round a layout built with Atlas track. The Atlas points were dreadful and combined with Farish pizza cutter wheels meant that locos derailed at every point. I couldn't understand why the different makes weren't compatible, after all they were all N!

Added to that was my 'train-set mentality' and ignorance of the precision required to lay track properly. I learned fast and the Atlas points were swiftly changed for Peco ones. The layout worked for years after that. I now spend a lot of time on careful track laying which has paid dividends.

Unfortunately despite the passing of the years I still have a bit of that 'trainset mentality' and as space is limited, am building a circular, roundy-roundy micro layout. I also have some Lone Star and 3 rail Dublo. So I'm probably beyond help. 

Apart from the ever recurring problem of 1st radius track and points that 'train-set mentality' can still crop up when beginners go from 00 to N and don't pay enough attention to track laying. I expect the locos are blamed and sent back to the retailers and someone else  gives up N gauge.

[PLD]

To grow its popularity and market share, N Gauge needs good quality model railway layouts, in my opinion; and again I suspect that is what Ted Broadhurst is suggesting.

Sorry, I disagree.

N gauge needs layouts where the "average enthusiast" (to borrow a phrase from the Railway Modeller of my youth) can look at them and say "hey, that looks nice, I could make one of those".

Then we shall agree to disagree.

And I will disagree (or perhaps agree) with you both!!

Surely there is a place and a need for both the "achievable" and the "aspirational" layout...

"Achievable" however doesn't mean deliberately done down to the lowest practical standards of reality, rather in the sense of showing that given a little thought at the planning stage something with a degree of prototype fidelity can be done with basic tools and readily available materials without needing higher level skills and knowledge.

"Aspirational" is those layouts with the 'wow-factor' that most could never achieve but we still like to stand and watch and admire.

[NGS-PO]

To grow its popularity and market share, N Gauge needs good quality model railway layouts, in my opinion; and again I suspect that is what Ted Broadhurst is suggesting.

Sorry, I disagree.

N gauge needs layouts where the "average enthusiast" (to borrow a phrase from the Railway Modeller of my youth) can look at them and say "hey, that looks nice, I could make one of those".

Then we shall agree to disagree.

And I will disagree (or perhaps agree) with you both!!

Surely there is a place and a need for both the "achievable" and the "aspirational" layout...

"Achievable" however doesn't mean deliberately done down to the lowest practical standards of reality, rather in the sense of showing that given a little thought at the planning stage something with a degree of prototype fidelity can be done with basic tools and readily available materials without needing higher level skills and knowledge.

"Aspirational" is those layouts with the 'wow-factor' that most could never achieve but we still like to stand and watch and admire.

I agree. I never said there wasn't room for both.  But for me, there is plenty of the lower end but not enough of the higher end.

To take things forward we need more of the higher end, in my opinion.

Best

Scott.

[Bealman]

I used to love that Railway Modeller slogan, For the average modeller. Grew up with it. 

[Train Waiting]

I used to love that Railway Modeller slogan, For the average modeller. Grew up with it. 

Me too!

And the one from Model Railroader - 'Model Railroading is Fun'.

Taken together, these 'straplines' neatly describe my present attitude to model railways.

I'm off to the Train Set Room with a cup of Yorkshire tea...

Best wishes.

John

[Bealman]

Exactly!

Yeah, the Americans used to have it....

Model railroading is fun!

Great stuff. The days of Cyril Freezer and Linn Wescott.

I think they actually met each other.

Enjoy your cup of tea! I'll finish this VB.