Alternative to the NMRA Master Model Railroader?

[steinjr]

OTOH, the modeler who made that first engine (a modeler who is great at producing rustic looking backwoods locomotives) makes landscapes that to me looks like amusement park ride style old west layouts, while the second modeler makes great realistic looking scenes, with thoroughly researched scenes, nice kitbashed buildings, realistic tracks, engines, cars, and so on and so forth.

It all depends on what aspect of the modeling you look at, and what your personal preferences are.

Exactly, which is why it should be skills based. Skills have no "preferences". If you have the skill construct a drive train, then it doesn't matter whether its in a freelanced logger or a modern diesel. If you have to have the skill to construct a scene, then it doesn't matter whether somebody thinks its an amusement park ride or a near photgraphic scene. By making it skills based it takes the prejudices of the evaluator out of the picture.

In principle, I agree with you - if you want to have some kind of official certification program, the criteria for good (or good enough) probably ought to not to be based (wholly, or in large part) on the individual preferences of the reviewer/evaluator.

But the fact still remains that the everybody has preferences, and those preferences will make it hard to judge something on "skill" alone. Our preferences and experiences do enter into our evaluations.

For instance - in category B (railroad setting) of the NMRA MMR program, there are three APs: Structures, Scenery and Prototype models. You have to choose at least one of the three. All three has judging factors that will tend to have a preference for prototype based/prototype inspired over more whimsical layouts.

For structures, one factor on the judges form (worth 25 points) is "conformity" - how well the structure adheres to prototype practices. For scenery and prototype models, key phrases on the judges form is things like "prototypical suitability" and "believable miniature representation of prototype railroad". A whimsical layout may still be ably constructed - in it's choice of construction techniques, but it is probably not going to score very high in category B.

But be that as it may. If people want some kind of formal recognition of their skills, then by all means let them enter some certification program and add some letters after their name.

However, I suspect I still will continue to form my own personal opinions about who is a master model railroader in those aspects of the hobby I care about, and who I want to continue to try to learn from in those aspects of the hobby. For instance, I have no idea if you have an MMR, but I expect I will continue to read with great interest your posts on operations - since you combine a wide knowledge of the prototype with an ability to be pragmatical about what is practical on a model railroad, and you have the ability and patience to explain and continue to teach. To me, that makes you a master at least in this aspect of the hobby.

Smile,
Stein