Prototype fidelity
> Dave: I agree completely with your assessment ... [snip] ...
> Andy Carlson's writing is hardly productive ... [further slams omitted] ...
John I think it's possible to express your ideas without the need to put others
here down. Or at least put them down without naming names. I think the sheriff
already expressed his concern that this thread was headed in an unwelcome direction.
Tim O'Connor
Dave:
I agree completely with your assessment. I worked for one fallen flag railroad (merged into Union Pacific later) and retired from another now fallen flag railroad (merged into BN). The railroad in my home town was the Minneapolis & St. Louis, merged into the C&NW. I worked on that track but after the C&NW owned it so that wouldn’t count as a third. My children are not interested in railroad history so they will not follow me. My grandchildren like trains but not enough to be a member of one of the societies. They only know that the Union Pacific owns a lot of track and the old roads that constitute the UP are not part of their experience. My grandson is interested in being a Naval Aviator and wants to be a part of HMX-1 (USMC) at Quantico because I am a United States Marine (Once a Marine, always a Marine!).
I belong to a number of historical societies because I am interested in the history of railroads in general and some very specifically. I will maintain my membership as long as I am able. The internecine bickering about authenticity is counter-productive as you have explained. I like to have models that are as accurate as possible and I will go to the lengths I need to produce it for myself. As you know, some of the historical societies have very well done modeling groups, the PRR, B&O and C&NW come to mind at the moment.
Andy Carlson’s writing is hardly productive. I don’t believe he recognizes the role of fund raising in historical societies. One of them has a real challenge in bringing an articulated steam locomotive to life. The engine in question is a medium size locomotive and was housed in a museum. I do know that the fund raising is not always successful and grants are not always wisely used, an example of this is seen in the Pennsylvania K4s, the engine number 1371 (I believe if my memory has not turned to Gouda cheese). The engine has been in an unassembled state for at least a decade and perhaps even more. I gather Andy Carlson is a member of the Southern Pacific Historical Society which has in fact purchased some tooling from Red Caboose model company for two Southern Pacific cars. I know the kits are in the forty dollar range. He apparently has plenty of cash on hand to purchase these.
Tony Thompson’s remarks are not of much use either. I assume from his posting, I am likely “past my ‘sell by’ date’”. I have two Tyco refrigerator car bodies and some other parts with which to build a pair of PFE R-30-19 composite rebuilds. Not 100% accurate I think but in my opinion, enough so. What do these “totally accurate” people do. Run the cars to the RIP track to renew the bearings and repack the journals? How do they get the journal box lids open to repack the journals? I could make a counter-productive remark publically but I am going to resist the temptation! Metanoya (Biblical Greek for repent)!
Ah, well, enough of my rant! This drivel as you very accurately call It does irk me!
Cordially,
John L. Hodson
|
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
|
Interesting thread… I just can’t help but respond just a bit…
I have to say that today it is far easier to successfully scratchbuild a model than ever before. The range of supplies is staggering and the accuracy of those parts is so far beyond what we had when I started serious model building in the ‘70s. I think those of us who scratchbuild and accurately model equipment should do what we can to teach folks new to the hobby how to do what we do, and why we do what we do. The techniques we use to model 1920s-60s equipment is perfectly applicable to modern models. I may be flogging a dead horse, but I feel that Model Railroading is a builder’s hobby as anyone who has built a layout knows very well. The learning curve for building accurate and well running models is as long as one is in the hobby, I’m still learning and improving my modeling and I’ve been in this hobby since I was a boy. (Thanks, Dad!) Because of the materials available, even folks just starting out can produce really nice looking and running equipment with just a little bit of instruction. I feel that the more folks write up how they build things, we can all learn from each other. That’s how we got started and I have always felt this teaching, sharing and social interaction is a major part of the fun of this hobby. It really isn’t an “open the box and run the trains” kind of thing, never was. Even the tinplate stuff many of us started with as kids is a lot more than just open the box and run the trains. If folks think that scratchbuilders and detail oriented modelers are “disappearing” maybe it’s because we aren’t teaching the newcomers. Some of the hobby magazines have become little more than promoters of their advertiser’s goods which is Ok for the reviewer’s column, but having the whole thing with that orientation does a disservice to modelers. I think it’s really fun to be a cheerleader and help someone learn the skills to produce stuff they want to run that wasn’t available “out of the box”. Lots of folks taught me, some in person and some just through articles they wrote. I’m sure that’s your experience too. That’s what this hobby is about. Hopefully, I am able to pass on what I’ve learned to some folks just startin’ out.
Just my opinion…
Dave Vinci
O=='=::
Mason City Iowa
Ian Cranstone
Osgoode, Ontario, Canada
I feel some slight responsibility for setting off this conflagration – using the examples of mugs and tee shirts to make a point. Now that the burn rate has slowed down I want to add my own two cents worth of thoughts instead of gallon of gasoline.
First, for my own pleasure I choose a high degree of accuracy over good enough and so on that score I certainly do count myself among the hardcore – I think of myself very much more as a historian than as a modeler. But I do recognize others have their own perspective – Richard addressed that once when he said “They have a nice hobby but it’s not my hobby”. IMO that states one’s own position and grants leeway to others for their own.
Brings to mind Civil War Re-Inactors. Some are weekend “soldiers”. Others believe body lice as part of being truly hardcore about it. As some say, YMMV.
I think as far as Historical Societies go the same leeway should be given: Some HS are blessed with a broad range of real information and others just have scraps. Some have thousands of members, others just hundreds. I think we do the not-so-well-off groups a big disservice by expecting the same level of performance as their better off peers. They’re not all equal.
That said, it seems perfectly reasonable to expect any HS to point out whether their products are for fun or a serious attempt at a reproduction per the materials they have preserved. It’s not much too ask for and IMO not very hard for them to provide.
Dave Nelson
Who was that masked man who signed his name only "J" ?
T
As the Chair of the NYCSHS Modeling Committee, the editor of our e-zine, NYCentral Modeler and as a director in the Society I have a couple of remarks.
Our Society is growing at over 7% a year for the last three years. We attribute that to our added focus on modelers. We have added several new features to the membership benefits over that period of time and have focused our advertising for membership in modeling magazines, print and online.
We benefited from some of the activities that some of the other Societies had started focused on modelers and have expanded from there. The PRR and P&LE Societies helped us considerably as we began to focus more on modelers.
When it comes to offering models to members, we try to offer the most accurate models possible. But, we have found that in order to get a manufacturer to produce a truly unique and accurate model requires a huge amount of work and most manufacturers just aren't interested because the market for a particular car is too small for them.
We have done our best and that usually involves finding a car that a manufacturer has already developed that comes as close as possible to our prototype. That is why most Societies offer "almost" rolling stock.
When we offer such a car, we include comments about what isn't prototypical in our descriptions of the model in our store.
Most manufacturers want a very large minimum order for unique cars and most Societies don't have enough buying members to supprt that large minimum.
Another issue that makes offering models difficult is that most modelers today want to take the car from the box and put it on the rails and run it. Modelers who want to build kits are disappearing, just like scratch builders are disappearing.
Trying to grow a Society of a railroad that disappeared over 40 years ago is getting more and more difficult. Those who even saw the railroad run are disappearing.
While we put a huge amount of our effort into trying to preserve the artifacts that we posses from the NYCS, we are also beginning to focus more and more on the modeler as the future for us and all railroad historical societies.
You guys who continue to do truly prototypical modeling are a rare breed and you do a great job. But not everyone has your skills or your interest. Model railroading covers a wide range of activities and scratchbuilding prototypical models is just one part of the hobby.
Keep doing what you are doing and keep an open mind. Even better, join a historical society and get involved.
There are those who do and those who complain. Complaining never builds anything. We have a great membership and lots of volunteers and we are proud of what we do. Sometimes it may not meet your standards, but it must be pleasing our members because they keep complimenting us for what we do and we keep drawing new modelers to the Society.
J
Our Society is growing at over 7% a year for the last three years. We attribute that to our added focus on modelers. We have added several new features to the membership benefits over that period of time and have focused our advertising for membership in modeling magazines, print and online.
We benefited from some of the activities that some of the other Societies had started focused on modelers and have expanded from there. The PRR and P&LE Societies helped us considerably as we began to focus more on modelers.
When it comes to offering models to members, we try to offer the most accurate models possible. But, we have found that in order to get a manufacturer to produce a truly unique and accurate model requires a huge amount of work and most manufacturers just aren't interested because the market for a particular car is too small for them.
We have done our best and that usually involves finding a car that a manufacturer has already developed that comes as close as possible to our prototype. That is why most Societies offer "almost" rolling stock.
When we offer such a car, we include comments about what isn't prototypical in our descriptions of the model in our store.
Most manufacturers want a very large minimum order for unique cars and most Societies don't have enough buying members to supprt that large minimum.
Another issue that makes offering models difficult is that most modelers today want to take the car from the box and put it on the rails and run it. Modelers who want to build kits are disappearing, just like scratch builders are disappearing.
Trying to grow a Society of a railroad that disappeared over 40 years ago is getting more and more difficult. Those who even saw the railroad run are disappearing.
While we put a huge amount of our effort into trying to preserve the artifacts that we posses from the NYCS, we are also beginning to focus more and more on the modeler as the future for us and all railroad historical societies.
You guys who continue to do truly prototypical modeling are a rare breed and you do a great job. But not everyone has your skills or your interest. Model railroading covers a wide range of activities and scratchbuilding prototypical models is just one part of the hobby.
Keep doing what you are doing and keep an open mind. Even better, join a historical society and get involved.
There are those who do and those who complain. Complaining never builds anything. We have a great membership and lots of volunteers and we are proud of what we do. Sometimes it may not meet your standards, but it must be pleasing our members because they keep complimenting us for what we do and we keep drawing new modelers to the Society.
Just my $.02 worth from one of the lurkers on this forum. BTW, I also scratchbuild and build craftsman kits.
Thanks, Noel
Noel Widdifield
NYCSHS Director
---In STMFC@..., <hayden_tom@...> wrote :
"I'd like to chime in here. I agree with the “moderates” in this argument. RR Historical societies have their place, their own goals, skills, desires, funds, etc. This STMFC group and all us Prototype Modelers have our place, goals, skills desires, funds, etc. Even among us prototype modelers there is a very wide range of standards as to how accurate is accurate "enough". All of us try for "better" as we increase our skills and funds. But the range of accuracy each of us individuals accept is very wide, indeed. And keep in mind that even if we count every "prototype modeler" I would guess we are still way down in terms of percentage of total Railroad Modelers, and I would include all the Lionel and toy train fans. So who are we to decree that Historical Societies owe us special consideration and must adhere to OUR definition of an accurate model, even IF we could agree on some specific level of accuracy. If a society can earn some funding, and at the same time generate more interest in their society and their specific "fallen flag" more power to them- hurrah. Think of all the new young railfans and potential modelers,and ultimately potential Prototype modelers this helps create."
I couldn't agree more, and I've been involved with historical society fund raiser cars for close to 30 years now. Just for grins, I went all the way back to the first message that started this current round of discussion:
Any of these society projects I've even been involved with has always made a point to mention whose kit the car is produced on, if, for no other reason, than they see the reputation of the kit manufacturer as a selling point... people who know Accurail kits fit their skill level will be happy, and those that suspect that there are issues with prototype fidelity, however it is defined, can easily search the Accurail web site to see how close the model comes to their mark. No organization that I am aware of has ever advertised one of these offerings as the "last word in prototype fidelity - if you don't buy only these we are going to suspend your membership." None of the organizations that I am aware of have ever tried to "trick" some unsuspecting modeler into making a purchase he'd later regret. The worst that can happen is at some point, if the modeler gains the knowledge that the model makes compromises he can no longer live with, he either sells it or gives it away.
Any time one of the manufacturers actually makes a special body for some organization, that fact is prominently feature is the ads, reviews, whatever.
So, to sum up, I didn't see what the problem was years ago when the societies were running custom dcorated "blue box" cars, and I still don't see the problem, but the subject certainly can be relied upon to start a lively discussion to exclusion of everything else.
Dennis Storzek
To: "Steam Era Frt Car Group"
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 1:02:14 PM
Subject: [STMFC] Re: Prototype fidelity
I'd like to chime in here. I agree with the “moderates” in this argument. RR Historical societies have their place, their own goals, skills, desires, funds, etc. This STMFC group and all us Prototype Modelers have our place, goals, skills desires, funds, etc. Even among us prototype modelers there is a very wide range of standards as to how accurate is accurate "enough". All of us try for "better" as we increase our skills and funds. But the range of accuracy each of us individuals accept is very wide, indeed. And keep in mind that even if we count every "prototype modeler" I would guess we are still way down in terms of percentage of total Railroad Modelers, and I would include all the Lionel and toy train fans. So who are we to decree that Historical Societies owe us special consideration and must adhere to OUR definition of an accurate model, even IF we could agree on some specific level of accuracy. If a society can earn some funding, and at the same time generate more interest in their society and their specific "fallen flag" more power to them- hurrah. Think of all the new young railfans and potential modelers,and ultimately potential Prototype modelers this helps create.
So I find no fault in any Historical society selling any "model" lettered for their fallen flag. Even a Lionel car or "blue box" car is fair. And I don't think the car being sold needs any explanation as to its accuracy, any more than the society needs to explain the "accuracy" of the coffee mugs it sells. Those of us who care can make that determination and discuss it (undoubtedly at length) here or other appropriate places. And IF, due to the extra efforts of some society members or leadership or some manufacturer, we are so fortunate that the car does come close to an accurate model of a prototype car, THEN I would expect the society to make some additional notations in their promotions about the level of accuracy they were able to achieve. Hopefully the "accurate" car will still be priced so that others beyond us prototype modelers would still be interested in purchasing it. But we should understand that making an "accurate" model of a particular road's car may be quite difficult to achieve at a reasonable price. And the decision as to whether it's worth the effort will depend on the leadership's vision of the society's goals and interests.
As to INFORMATION for us prototype modelers, I absolutely agree that any historical society, virtually by definition, should be focused on accumulating and sharing historical information about locomotives, rolling stock, buildings, operations, etc.of their railroad.They should strive continually to make that information as accurate and accessible as possible. And to the extent that a "model" they are selling is a representation of that information, "some" level of effort toward accuracy makes sense. I would be disappointed if a society offered a model for sale that did not display "some" level of accuracy. Correct lettering style, logo, and correct color would be some minimal level of information transferred that seems easy enough to achieve without excess expense.
Tom Hayden
I'd like to chime in here. I agree with the “moderates” in this argument. RR Historical societies have their place, their own goals, skills, desires, funds, etc. This STMFC group and all us Prototype Modelers have our place, goals, skills desires, funds, etc. Even among us prototype modelers there is a very wide range of standards as to how accurate is accurate "enough". All of us try for "better" as we increase our skills and funds. But the range of accuracy each of us individuals accept is very wide, indeed. And keep in mind that even if we count every "prototype modeler" I would guess we are still way down in terms of percentage of total Railroad Modelers, and I would include all the Lionel and toy train fans. So who are we to decree that Historical Societies owe us special consideration and must adhere to OUR definition of an accurate model, even IF we could agree on some specific level of accuracy. If a society can earn some funding, and at the same time generate more interest in their society and their specific "fallen flag" more power to them- hurrah. Think of all the new young railfans and potential modelers,and ultimately potential Prototype modelers this helps create.
So I find no fault in any Historical society selling any "model" lettered for their fallen flag. Even a Lionel car or "blue box" car is fair. And I don't think the car being sold needs any explanation as to its accuracy, any more than the society needs to explain the "accuracy" of the coffee mugs it sells. Those of us who care can make that determination and discuss it (undoubtedly at length) here or other appropriate places. And IF, due to the extra efforts of some society members or leadership or some manufacturer, we are so fortunate that the car does come close to an accurate model of a prototype car, THEN I would expect the society to make some additional notations in their promotions about the level of accuracy they were able to achieve. Hopefully the "accurate" car will still be priced so that others beyond us prototype modelers would still be interested in purchasing it. But we should understand that making an "accurate" model of a particular road's car may be quite difficult to achieve at a reasonable price. And the decision as to whether it's worth the effort will depend on the leadership's vision of the society's goals and interests.
As to INFORMATION for us prototype modelers, I absolutely agree that any historical society, virtually by definition, should be focused on accumulating and sharing historical information about locomotives, rolling stock, buildings, operations, etc.of their railroad.They should strive continually to make that information as accurate and accessible as possible. And to the extent that a "model" they are selling is a representation of that information, "some" level of effort toward accuracy makes sense. I would be disappointed if a society offered a model for sale that did not display "some" level of accuracy. Correct lettering style, logo, and correct color would be some minimal level of information transferred that seems easy enough to achieve without excess expense.
Tom Hayden
The reality of all groups is that their direction is dictated by the varied personalities within, and those opinions are as varied as those on this list. The club with which I'm most involved has a dominating dramatic personality who wants to make mugs and T-shirts for every event, and since he works for a major corporation producing promotional trinkets he runs with the project. For our last event celebrating an anniversary, he took our coveted logo and lopped off details while changing the railroad herald that's part of it without telling anyone so that the stitching on the hat was simpler as he tried to get it under 3000 stitches. The hobby is full off this type of decision making, done by volunteers giving generously. As the group's leader I would never accept such compromise, but in keeping the group going the leaders have to pick their battles.
No rant or rules are going change any of that. I agree that the historical societies should keep a higher standard, and any project with which I'm involved will do that. I was part of the boxcar project that Schuyler mentioned, and I've been part of dozens of others that were all as accurate as was practical for the medium (brass, resin, RTR, etc.). I led the Lackawanna F3 project at Steamtown, painting our Bangor & Aroostook F3 into the Lackawanna freight scheme to tell the story deisels in the steam era. I personally cut off excess grab irons and moved, fashioned or added details to represent the real Lackawanna 662, since our fictitious Lackawanna 663 would have been of that class. We're not hiding the heritage, and yet we turned that catalog F3, the oldest operating and unaltered F-unit in the world, into a living model of a Lackawanna unit that today pulls trains on the Lackawanna main line and that we maintain in the actual Lackawanna shops designed to service F-units. That TRAINS Magazine readers voted that unit the "must see" diesel of 2014 shows that eaders get our message. And we're having fun with it. Our group has also rescued a 1944-AAR boxcar that was originally CNJ 24165 -- that car will get its steam-era lettering and number in the 22000-series. We may even commission an HO model of that car, and when we do it will be accurate in its appearance and details. I've been involved in the restoration and repatriation of more than a dozen steam-era freight cars, and so far all of them are correctly restored, or will be. Similarly, there are numerous steam-era freight cars around the country without in-service paint which is the choice of those doing the project.
The results of any group project is a compromise among all of the personalities involved. How do outsiders know before buying something? I wish the groups producing foobies would call them commemorative or some other word so that the piece isn't misrepresented. Sometimes the group producing the foobie doesn't know.
From: devans1@... [STMFC] <STMFC@...>
To: STMFC <STMFC@...>
Sent: Sun, Nov 23, 2014 10:34 pm
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Prototype fidelity
First - where are the moderators - I thought STMFC was NOT supposed to be a forum for attacking organizations business practices?
Second - talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Last I checked, the historical societies are supported by volunteers, and many, especially for long-fallen flags, are suffering from a significant drop in membership for the simple fact that most former employees have passed on. So we are to crucify a group that is still trying to promote their fallen flag while their membership drops?
Third - Does this mean a Historical Society that lacks resources to produce fine scale models (Who defines "fine scale" - perhaps only proto48 or proto87 cars need apply?) is no longer useful? I think the IRS has a different criteria (thankfully) for non-profit, educational organizations.
Fourth - A group that complains about the price of fine scale models and how they can not be afforded by many modelers , now finds it unconscionable that an HS produces "stand-in" or even "foobie" models that a much larger segment of the model railroad community can afford?
Here is a sad reality check - most Historical Societies are losing all of their former employee members. Members who worked side by side on the real railroad for decades - they joined the societies almost as a retirement club to preserve bonds and fellowship they had before they joined the society, and those members have provided all of us a very valuable service by preserving and disseminating important railroad history.
But now the HS's need to attract new members, and that will only happen by creating a sense of fellowship between mostly modelers (and a few historians) - who did NOT spend their careers working together.
This challenge is going to be very difficult - to get modelers to volunteer their time for their favorite prototype's historical society to try to keep the flag alive (instead of using that time to build more models for their layouts), and continue to preserve and publish the prototype's materials and historical information. Building a sense of fellowship between modelers so they join and volunteer their time to keep the historical societies viable will be much more difficult if members snipe at each other because they will not agree on the necessary level of fidelity in their models.
How can any of this drivel be considered a positive contribution to the core (and legally required) mission of the HS's to preserve railroad history?
If a car is too foobie for you - don't buy it.
If you want something better, volunteer to help the society produce a better product.
If they determine it can't be done, or will not do it - for whatever reason, then do it yourself - I am SURE the historical society will be happy to provide you the prototype information required for you to develop an ac curate model and sell it yourself.
This sort of intolerance needs to stop - or we will be burying the very organizations that help provide the data modelers on this list need for ANY level of model fidelity.
And you wonder why the commercial hobby press uses "rivet counters" in a derisive manner? This thread makes the case pretty convincingly.
This is a hobby guys - we are not developing flight control software that will kill someone if it does not meet all the requirements.
Sorry Mike, don't care about the food down below - this has reached a new low for intolerance.
Dave Evans
PRRT&HS
---In STMFC@..., wrote :
I find it odd that in this forum (STMFC) dedicated to promoting greater accuracy in modeling, we find several defenders of the practice of historical societies offering sham cars as fund raisers. First, fund raising should be a society lower priority of things to do, as the primary purpose of societies should be to promote the subject railroad's history. I don't believe the only way societies survive is by offering duds.
Richard Hendrickson's tiff with the Burlington society was based on the their inexcusable offering of bogus cars to the membership. Richard's strongest protest was that the mission of a society to provide ACCURATE info to the members was compromised when sham offerings are released. He felt that to many members, they look to the society for help with their own goal in acquiring useful information, and because the assumption of "If the society is offering this, it must be researched and produced to a higher level of accuracy", the society let them down.
I don't have any problem with that!
Others who seek interoperability with heritage equipment following those standards and recommended practices will have a lot of objection with models produced that are fully prototypical accurate.
Arved Grass
really ignores that many of the societies exist on the edge of financial
survival. I am not saying that justifies "duds, AKA foobies," but fund
raising is a critical element of their operations. It ENABLES, not the
"promotion,
Schuyler
I sure wish Richard was still with us to speak up on this issue.
"Tim O'Connor timboconnor@... [STMFC]" <STMFC@...> wrote:
Greg Martin wrote
- The sad reality is that most modelers are far more concerned about their locomotive fleets than their freight car fleets with the possible exception of signature cars. They can tell you every phase of a locomotive and it's respective differences, the oddities, the paint schemes and love to debate the color a locomotive builder chose to paint it, mostly making reference to DuPont colors when likely Rinshed Mason was the body color. They spend hundreds on their locomotives while they ignore the most basic details on their fright cars. They spend countless hours detailing them to the neath degree. MY My...
Greg, you're sure right about locos vs freight cars! Modelers, photographers,
railfans, and former employees alike -- it's all about the locomotives! Just
pick up any "history" book and see what is chosen to represent the railroad --
people, tracks, stations, bridges, locomotives, passenger trains... and buried
in there might be one or two freight car portraits. I have over 300 railroad
books (not counting any of the freight car books that have appeared) so I can
testify that this is largely true.
Oh well this whole discussion is exhausting... The Southern Pacific group on
Facebook now has almost 4,000 members. That greatly exceeds the number of people
who belong to the SPH&TS, which is a large and very healthy society. Many other
societies are much smaller and marginal. Yet I agree with those who think there
is a lot of untapped potential out there.
Let's recognize that we Prototype Modelers are a minority. We're an important
minority, and we've had HUGE SUCCESS in the last 20 years. I can't think of a
major manufacturer (or importer as is now mostly the case) that has not fully
embraced Prototype Models (with varying degrees of fidelity). Let's not spoil
our success by bashing what societies do. Get in there and roll up your sleeves
and try to make accurate models available, if you think that's what will help
your Historical Society to survive.
Tim O'Connor
P.S. The Facebook SP group is totally obsessed with locomotives, trains, and
telephoto photography! I think the ratio of locomotive to freight car photos is
at least 99 to 1. When I post a freight car photo I always try to include some
information about the car. Maybe I'll "hook" some unsuspecting fan and they'll
start taking a greater interest in freight cars.