What is the definition of a "layout?" Certainly portability is not a disqualifier. I can understand that loose NTrak modules might not comprise a layout as such, but when assembled, they certainly are a layout.
the Sugarland N-Track layout IS a layout to me. Winchester by the Reid Brothers, in all 2x4 splendor is a layout to me...
For me, a "layout" is something more or less permanent and set up all the time. I have a good friend who has an awesome permanent layout made up of NTRAK modules that has been set up for over 20 years. I suppose I would consider my stuff as components of what could be called "temporary layouts." I spent all this last weekend running trains on a temporary layout in San Antonio. Had a great time of it too. Thanks to Flash and the club he belongs to for providing the opportunity.
Not dogging on the poll at all, but it's frustrating to me this trend of judging everyone based on how they enjoy the hobby. The way I see it, if you are into trains at whatever level....welcome! Basement size super-layout? Great! Hundreds of super-detailed locos and freight cars? Super! Mostly a railfan that has a few RTR pieces and a loop of track? Awesome! Railroad research junkie? I love it! There are too many interesting facets of model railroading for most folks to be experts in all of them, and yet there are too many great model railroaders that are truly experts in a few areas to exclude them just because "subject x or skill y or budget z" isn't their thing. Obviously, the discussion about "layout or not" versus "model railroader or not" are different, but they tend to blur together. I think the "model railroader or not" discussion is just asinine, and the credibility of most of those discussion is suspect, IMHO. Now, don't get me wrong...I'm absolutely NOT one of the "let's give everybody a participation trophy" types, and I do agree there should be a bit of prestige and sense of pride if someone is able to build a layout. Absolutely...it's a great accomplishment! So, as a positive, congratulatory type of message, then yes let's tally everyone up...I'm sure those that don't have one are probably wishing they could at some level, and hopefully they can get past whatever hurdles are in place and get their pike rolling soon. And I get some of the issues. For example...guys that "know it all" and are constantly criticizing and telling others how they can "fix" or "improve" their layouts. I agree if you're gonna do that you'd better have "skins on the wall"....documented experience and/or photos of a layout that is either published (or obviously worthy of it) or photodocumented online somewhere. I think anyone receiving that kind of criticism (solicited or not) from a "peer" should have the right to know that it is truly a peer...someone that has "been there, done that". Regarding what constitutes a layout, well...I would consider Russell as a layout wielding member of the model railroading community, no doubt. But I respect his evaluation as well and if he thinks "NO", then that's that. I like the definition someone mentioned about...if you can make a locomotive move on a track, you got a model railroad! Now, I would probably say it should be progressing towards some bit of "completion" but other than that I'm good with you saying you have a layout. I suppose I would probably add another category along the lines of "presentation worthy layout"...be it a module or home layout or whatever. In other words...would a train show add your setup to a layout tour? (keeping in mind that many I've seen added are at various states of completion...I appreciate that becuase it's still nice to see how they're doing things and watch the trains run, even if it is on bare plywood.) Anyway, I do have a layout. It's certainly not what I would consider my "dream" layout by any means but I've gotten some compliments on it and it's fun to have for now. Let's me improve my skills, work on superdetailing and weathering my loco/freight car fleet, build structures that can be included on that future dream layout, and just generally enjoy the hobby of model railroading. Hope all you guys are having as much fun as I am!
This is what my "layout" looks like normally. With the two dog bone end loops and 10 four foot modules, I can make a 50 foot long layout. Not many places I have access to where I can do that. I suppose I could run it down the street in front of my house.
Doug, I agree....I left the rail wire due to that elitist attitude, and I am happy about that! Russell, your Sugarland layout was groundbreaking, and made a huge impression on me. another option for you would be to make some 90 degree corners and run your layout in a square in the garage! a 15'x15' is doable that way!
Essentially, this is how I view it. A module by itself can usually see some bit of operation, regardless of how brief. Such a scene, diorama or whatever, becomes it's own stand alone layout. When added to further sections, it becomes a larger layout, even if only temporarily. Which is actually very much like someone bulding a "permanent" layout, completing a portion at a time.
Probably not the place to debate/compare boards, but I find the two exactly opposite of what you are saying....much more elitists here, and generally for no good reason. Versus some guys over there that actually walk the walk. And either place, I'm just the waterboy...
Yup, I have a layout. It's modular (4', 6' & 8' "modules"), portable and I can set it up in a couple of different configurations at present. It will eventually fill a 30'X30' space and will represent the Union Pacific helper district between Ogden and Wahsatch Utah, a 63 mile run. I break it down two to three times a year and take portions of it to various local shows along with my fellow crazy Gregg Cudworth. I have several fellow model railroaders who are also building their layouts using my modular protocol who will participate with their own LDE's in the future. I am able to set up, work on, run and replace each LDE as I work on it. Each LDE is comprised of at least a single 6'X3' "module" or "section". Some of them are interchangeable, some are not as my goal was not total flexibility, and there is a "preferred" set up as space and completion of LDE's allow. As to whether you think what I have is a "layout" or not, I really don't give a rat's wienie what you think. I am building this for myself and it's only portable because I have designed the benchwork so that sections and modules can be removed, replaced, and transported extremely easily because I move often, and I also enjoy attending the train shows with portions of my layout on display. Basic standard "module" is 6'X3', "zero" track railhead height is 52" above the floor, skyboards are required as is lighting on each "module". Prototype-derived LDE's are mandatory and operational LDE's are running about 24' in length, whereas scenic LDE's are a minimum of 6'...so, at the present time, this layout is not small by any means, with two main LDE's set up in what normally would be a media room consisting of Echo Utah and Devil's Slide Utah, connected by scenic LDE's representing Emory Siding and Wilhemina Pass. When set up at shows, the layout is bigger and consists of what I've described plus a 6' Taggarts LDE "adapter module" which joins up to 24' of D&RGW LDE's my compatriot Gregg has constructed. Future LDE's under construction are the center siding and station at Henefer and the angled, double Warren truss bridges crossing the Weber River entering the upper Weber Canyon at Mountain Green. So again, yup...I have a layout.
I wanted a check bubble that said "it's complicated." I don't have what most people would consider a layout. I have modules in both N and On30 scales, in various stages of incompleteness. The more I think about it the more I want to make an around the room N scale layout that has places I can "plug in" modules.
Thanks. I do have access to the club corners but most of my modules do not work as stand alone four footers. They combine to make an eight foot unit, a 12 foot unit and a 20 footer. And my wife does not want to give up her parking space in the garage. Years ago we took over the down stairs of the house, moved furniture and ran modules around the living room, through the dining room, kitchen, family room and back to the living room. Was fun to run trains but hard to live in the house at that point.
I see you have a helper, too! Actually, I should say that I've had layouts before while being a member, but this is the first to get to a point that I could run trains. My layout is small because I don't have much room in my apartment for anything bigger, and as it is, it takes up a lot of room in my bedroom. The important thing for me is, it gets my trains out of their boxes and running. And that's a WIN in my book!
Can someone explain why after 25 or so perfectly reasonable posts, we're suddenly on about elitism and telling people they aren't model railroaders, because one poster applied a limited definition to himself and no one else?
Well that's fine, it just seemed the...hostility was undeserved. The implication of Doug's post was that this thread had some sort of elitism and judgementalism as its impetus. That's not fair nor by all evidence true.
The thread started out defending against that. I was just reinforcing that fact that it really shouldn't have to be a qualifier. I quit following all of the "you aren't a model railroader" threads so I don't know where they've gone, but I assume from that opening statement that it's still getting airplay. I guess in my mind, given the recent threads, I am just expecting the "that's not really a layout" comments...of the negative nature. Russell's comment was more along the lines of not having an actual static layout versus trying to be condescending about it. Russell is a stand-up guy of the highest order and I wasn't suggesting anything about his comment being elitist or anything but humble. If it came across that way, I offer my apologies.
For the record, i didn't read you as judging Russell, Honestly, I read the OP as CYAing against those that take offense. Personally, I see a lot less elitism and a lot more taking offense for nothing on this board and elsewhere. I mean, to expand you said that we should include anyone with track and some rolling stock as a model railroader even if they have no intention of doing more. Well why should we do that? Why? Why can't we call those people model collectors? What's wrong with that. It's not like the name is what causes jerks to act elitist toward people. Always rule number one is more important than useful discussion. Well, I've decided to paint my car gray and scarlet, put Southern pacific on the side and make the town's streets my layout. There, I'm a model railroader.
Why should we call them "model collectors"? It's clearly (no longer) a collector hobby for the most part from the definition of "buying something rare, displaying it, and perhaps speculating that value will increase". So, it's not like anyone is clamoring for a different name. Calling folks model railroaders is still appropriate...they're still scale models of railroad equipment, in contrast to collecting baseball cards or autographs or seashells, for example. So why divide a group that otherwise coexists quite well...and coexists with other groups like railfans, too! I just think the whole concept accomplishes nothing and alienates many. The strength of our hobby can be debated but I think most would agree that it's not a great idea that we are alienating ANY segment of the hobby...and especially from the industry's point-of-view. So, we go back to apparently folks think they're better model railroaders than most...and that's fine if you think that. Call yourself a "great model railroader" or an "elite model railroader" or an "expert model railroader" or steal from the NMRA and call yourself a MASTER model railroader. Everybody, at some point, had only a handful of freight cars and a locomotive with a loop of track. I agree with your point here. (I think) You can't ask for help or suggestions for improving your model railroad or your skills and then hide behind "rule number one" when you don't get an answer you like. I don't see people using that as an excuse for being a "gatherer of model railroad products". I'm not sure the number of folks that are truly buying model railroad products and PURPOSEFULLY doing nothing with them is very large. Now, given circumstance I know a LOT of them may not have an opportunity in the short term--or ever--to build a model railroad. I was one of them for a while, and I have a 70-year-old uncle who has tons of HO stuff and has for 35+ years and as far as I know never has and likely never will have a layout. THAT, I would like to see...
