Re: Why model 1926?

Eric Hansmann



Long ago I had considered 1929, too. But many timber operations closer to Elkins, WV, were done by then, as were a couple of large coke operations. Coal was strong but I was looking for more diversity in the traffic mix and 1926 seemed to fit that demand a little better for the locale. Plus, the WM had moved all of the Russian Decapods out of Elkins by 1929. Having them all stationed in Elkins in 1926 enabled easier modeling of the WM loco fleet as Spectrum had released their model about the same time I was plotting my time period.


It’s always interesting sifting through the historical record for industrial trends that affect rail traffic movements.






Eric Hansmann

El Paso, TX




From: STMFC@... [mailto:STMFC@...]
Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2016 1:17 PM
To: STMFC@...
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Why model 1926?


Hi Eric and List Members,


Thanks Eric for your fascinating write-up. I elected to model 1929, only three years ‘into the future’ from your era. This decision was mostly arrived at by my love of steam – I definitely wanted to do the pre-diesel era. To refine the decision a bit further, I realized that the late 1920’s were a boom time, with high levels of both traffic and innovation in the railroading industry. This boom came to an abrupt end on ‘Black Tuesday’ October 29, 1929. Since I like to railfan during the summer, I quickly settled on Summer 1929 as the logical choice.


Claus Schlund





From: 'Eric Hansmann' eric@... [STMFC]

Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2016 11:53 AM

To: 1914to1940rring@... ; stmfc@... ; proto-layouts@...

Subject: [STMFC] Why model 1926?


A frequent question in emails and person conversations asks why I model 1926. It's not easy to answer as there are many different components that attract my interest. The latest DesignBuildOp blog post covers many of the elements that I've found fascinating about the 1920s. Follow th elink for more!



Eric Hansmann

El Paso, TX

Join to automatically receive all group messages.