On Sunday, I had the opportunity to share some layout design thoughts during a virtual presentation and discussion with several dozen members of the Layout Design Special Interest Group. My focus was modelling an obscure prototype (the Niagara St. Catharines & Toronto Railway) in a niche scale (S, or 1:64). But I also touched upon my adventures with the British Great Western Railway in the Edwardian Era, in 7mm scale.
I think it went well. At least, by the numbers, I didn’t seem to lose to many members over the course of my 60-minute blathering. I won’t recap the entire presentation, but here are a few of the takeaways.
When considering a niche prototype and/or scale, I’ve found it useful to determine the minimum requirements that must be met before committing. These include obvious things like whether key locomotives and other equipment are available, but also less obvious considerations such as skills that must be mastered. I first did this in earnest when I was trying to determine whether I could work in S scale – and the result, Port Rowan in 1:64, was very much influenced by this assessment. I undertook a similar exercise for the NS&T.
It’s useful to look at what others in the hobby are doing. Railway modelling is a “big tent” hobby, and it isn’t all pursued the same way. People working in different scales or modelling different prototypes have often developed unique sets of expertise. If we embrace those differences rather than dismiss them as “Not the thing that interests me”, we can often learn some neat stuff.
For example, several years ago I took soldering lessons from my friend and fellow S Scale Workshop member Andy Malette. But when it came time to tackle the brass photo-etched bodies for NS&T freight motors, I still didn’t feel comfortable enough to proceed. The photo-etches, from William Flatt, are beautiful but out of production and I knew I had no room for error. Fortunately, I also knew British modellers have a long tradition of building with photoetch – so I found some suitable 7mm wagon kits and honed my skills on those. (They are well designed kits with good instructions – and I knew if I really botched a wagon, I could always buy another kit and start over.)
I built about 20 of them before I felt truly confident with my soldering – and that’s reflected in the work I did on William’s kits for the NS&T freight motors.
When designing a model railway, we often start with considerations such as prototype, era, location, minimum track standards, features we want to include, and other things that will shape the final layout. However, my experience (including many false starts on layouts) has convinced me it’s more important to assess a design in terms of non-layout elements – including the projected time to build and maintain the layout, the budget required, and the availability of friends to work on it or take part in operating sessions.
When I assessed my initial designs for the NS&T, I realized I would require 8-10 people to bring it to life. For me, that’s too many. For starters, I don’t know that many like-minded modellers in my local community. But also: Even if I did, I don’t want that many people in the layout room at one time, because at that point my engagement with the layout would be more akin to project management and trouble-shooting, than actually participating in an operating session.
This is a lesson I learned from Port Rowan. It was designed to support solo operation with the occasional addition of one or two guests – and it worked well. Where it fell short was it had no ability to gainfully employ more people on those rare occasions when I had 4-6 people in the room.
My current design for the NS&T nicely supports solo operation, will really shine with four people, and can also provide jobs for five or six if needed.
When planning from a prototype, the ideal is to present signature scenes in proper order. But sometimes, that’s difficult. The NS&T is an example of this: The real railroad sprawled through its most interesting locations (St. Catharines, Thorold) like a Jackson Pollock painting: lines radiating everywhere. That’s difficult to wrestle into the linear benchwork that ensures we have good access to all areas of the layout for operation and maintenance.
As I’ve worked on trying to squeeze the NS&T’s sprawl into my linear space, I realized that what I see in my collection of prototype photographs is specific signature scenes – but not how they relate to each other. For example, when looking at photos of the Welland Avenue car barn, the Geneva Street terminal, and the Niagara Street freight shed, I know where they were in St. Catharines – but that’s not obvious in the pictures. And I realized I would rather have models of all of these, in the wrong order, than sacrifice some of them in order to remain faithful to the prototype.
When designing a model railway, it’s tempting to fill the available space – and there are some amazing, large layouts that do that really well. But I realized I have too many interests in the hobby to devote my basement to a single subject. So, I’m building two smaller layouts in the space (and am open to the idea of a third). What I lose in scope for one subject, I gain in variety.
The NS&T and GWR are definitely different visually – but also operationally. The differences include coupling technology, track arrangements, track switch control, train control, car forwarding systems, and more. Each of these influences layout design.
Finally, the most important takeaway: Your Milage May Vary. These observations are what works for me and while they might work for you as well, they also might not. It’s all good.
I’m grateful to the members of the LDSIG for joining me online yesterday. They asked some terrific questions after my presentation, and made some astute observations. Thanks also to Chris Mesa for inviting me to speak and arranging the event – and to my friend Cal Sexsmith for making the introduction.
The Model Railway Show 