Model Railroad Economy

[railohio]

I was doodling layout plans this week and put together decidedly retro model railroad concept - the self-contained home layout. You remember them from the magazines up through the 1970s, layouts where every industry had another paired with it for traffic routing and where interchanges were a foreign concept. I started listing industry pairs that could play off each other and here's what I came up with:

Bakery
In: Flour, Boxes
Box Factory
In: Pulpwood, Coal
Out: Boxes
Brewery
In: Coal, Grain
Out: Beer
Concrete Plant
In: Stone
Coal Tipple
Out: Coal
Creamery
Out: Milks, Butter
Flour Mill
In: Grain
Out: Flour
Furniture Factory
In: Lumber, Boxes
Out: Furniture
Grain Elevator
Out: Grain
Lumber Yard
In: Lumber, Coal
Quarry
Out: Stone
Sawmill
Out: Lumber, Pulpwood
Warehouse
In: Lumber, Furniture, Flour, Milks, Butter

I've tried to keep industries to a manageable model size. A steel mill could supply an auto plant that ships finished cars, but both of those are generally HUGE facilities that would overwhelm a home layout. Anything else to add to a retro-styled model railroad economy?

[e-paw]

cool idea.. I think this one is the most important

Brewery
In: Coal, Grain
Out: Beer

[Justinmiller171]

Depending on what Beer company it is, you may need to have a stockyard on the layout to get "Natural flavor enhancer" from.

[steinjr]

I was doodling layout plans this week and put together decidedly retro model railroad concept - the self-contained home layout. You remember them from the magazines up through the 1970s, layouts where every industry had another paired with it for traffic routing and where interchanges were a foreign concept. I started listing industry pairs that could play off each other and here's what I came up with:

Bakery
In: Flour, Boxes
Box Factory
In: Pulpwood, Coal
Out: Boxes
Brewery
In: Coal, Grain
Out: Beer
Concrete Plant
In: Stone
Coal Tipple
Out: Coal
Creamery
Out: Milks, Butter
Flour Mill
In: Grain
Out: Flour
Furniture Factory
In: Lumber, Boxes
Out: Furniture
Grain Elevator
Out: Grain
Lumber Yard
In: Lumber, Coal
Quarry
Out: Stone
Sawmill
Out: Lumber, Pulpwood
Warehouse
In: Lumber, Furniture, Flour, Milks, Butter

I've tried to keep industries to a manageable model size. A steel mill could supply an auto plant that ships finished cars, but both of those are generally HUGE facilities that would overwhelm a home layout. Anything else to add to a retro-styled model railroad economy?

Leaving aside the question of whether it is smart to have paired industries, or whether it would have created more interesting traffic to have traffic sources and destinations off layout, I am not sure I see your actual pairs in the list above? To me it looks more like just a list of industries with some inbound and some outbound loads?

The classic paired industries on a model railroad layout is where cars would be running back and forth between the two industries - like a coal mine and a powerplant, or a mine and an ore processing plant - where you typically would try to place em back to back with a backdrop in between, so you pull loads from the mine, and pushes in empties, and then run around to the opposite side of the backdropand pull empties from the power plant, before pushing in the loads. Repeat as many times as desired.

You could of course also model e.g. a chemical plant of some kind somewhere on the layout and a barge terminal elsewhere. The barge terminal then functions more or less as a team track - it is a general source and destination for tank cars, which you cannot tell whether are empty or loaded.

Lots of options here.

Smile,
Stein

[Justinmiller171]

The classic paired industries on a model railroad layout is where cars would be running back and forth between the two industries - like a coal mine and a powerplant, or a mine and an ore processing plant - where you typically would try to place em back to back with a backdrop in between

There were many 4x8 track plans back in the day where 2 or more separate industries would ship freight cars to each other instead of to an interchange, for example: a lumber mill and a furniture maker. since 4x8s rarely had any interchanges they would simply make all of the industries ship cars to each-other.

[Brakie]

The classic paired industries on a model railroad layout is where cars would be running back and forth between the two industries - like a coal mine and a powerplant, or a mine and an ore processing plant - where you typically would try to place em back to back with a backdrop in between

There were many 4x8 track plans back in the day where 2 or more separate industries would ship freight cars to each other instead of to an interchange, for example: a lumber mill and a furniture maker. since 4x8s rarely had any interchanges they would simply make all of the industries ship cars to each-other.

That was back in the day when we thought that was a hip idea and spent more time building models then as life got easier and we started to understand how a railroad operates we decided that wasn't a hip idea after all..I mean gee whiz without a interchange how did that Santa Fe boxcar get on our line?

Another gee whiz was those two industries are so close together a trucking line could shuttle the lumber to our furniture factory.Our eyes could no longer see these industries being "miles apart" regardless how many lap miles we made-the basic back then one lap equals one mile.

We kept the mine and power plant as a load in/empties out operation and rethought our operation goals.

[nachoman]

Brakie - I wonder if it wasn't a better understanding of how real railroads worked, but instead the focus and philosophy of our hobby changed. Model railroading grew from "toy trains", both as a hobby in general and in our individual lives. We started out with basic ovals on our floor, and as we grew we gained more interest in our trains actually doing something. As I read old Model Railroader magazines, I see the same thing. In the 40s-60s I see a sense of the "toy train" roots in many of the layouts and articles. Freelancing was much more common, whimsical names and fantastic track plans were in vogue.

[Brakie]

Brakie - I wonder if it wasn't a better understanding of how real railroads worked, but instead the focus and philosophy of our hobby changed. Model railroading grew from "toy trains", both as a hobby in general and in our individual lives. We started out with basic ovals on our floor, and as we grew we gained more interest in our trains actually doing something. As I read old Model Railroader magazines, I see the same thing. In the 40s-60s I see a sense of the "toy train" roots in many of the layouts and articles. Freelancing was much more common, whimsical names and fantastic track plans were in vogue.

Kevin,I agree we advanced as modelers and the hobby grew up over the years-even the 4x8' has fallen from grace as a practical layout and ISLs has gain more acceptance over the past few years.

[Justinmiller171]

I agree we advanced as modelers and the hobby grew up over the years-even the 4x8' has fallen from grace as a practical layout and ISLs has gain more acceptance over the past few years.

One thing that has bothered me is that people have lost interest in "Having fun" and are now more concerned with making everything as realistic as possible.

It seems now days if you build an "old-school" layout you are considered to not be a "Real" model railroader. I happen to like building ISls, but there are lots of people who like to build model railroads just to see trains run, and there is nothing wrong with that, I wouldn't say that the hobby has "Grown up", I just think that people such as Lance Mindheim have made building ISLs more acceptable.

There were switching layouts in hobby mags going back to the 70's, but these were for people who had small spaces, and they were treated the same way we treat 4x8 layouts now, back then if you had a switching layout you weren't a "Real" model railroader, Since back then model railroading was all about making trains go in circles, and if you couldn't do that it wasn't a "Real" layout. I am sure in another 10 years there will be another new trend in model railroading, and ISLs will not longer be "Real" layouts.

[Brakie]

Justin,Even Ben King's fantastic Timber City & Northwestern RR wasn't thought as a switching layout even though it had some industries..The majority saw as a out and back layout since Ben had a train length turntable that he turn short trains on.

Many of us saw it as a switching layout since a lot of switching was require.

[Justinmiller171]

Justin,Even Ben King's fantastic Timber City & Northwestern RR wasn't thought as a switching layout even though it had some industries..The majority saw as a out and back layout since Ben had a train length turntable that he turn short trains on.

Many of us saw it as a switching layout since a lot of switching was require.

I agree, I was just trying to say that our hobby hasn't "Grown Up", it is just different .

[Brakie]

Justin,I agree..Its different in many ways now and if that's good,bad or ugly only time will tell.

[Ralph]

One thing that has bothered me is that people have lost interest in "Having fun" and are now more concerned with making everything as realistic as possible.

It seems now days if you build an "old-school" layout you are considered to not be a "Real" model railroader. I happen to like building ISls, but there are lots of people who like to build model railroads just to see trains run, and there is nothing wrong with that, I wouldn't say that the hobby has "Grown up", I just think that people such as Lance Mindheim have made building ISLs more acceptable.

There were switching layouts in hobby mags going back to the 70's, but these were for people who had small spaces, and they were treated the same way we treat 4x8 layouts now, back then if you had a switching layout you weren't a "Real" model railroader, Since back then model railroading was all about making trains go in circles, and if you couldn't do that it wasn't a "Real" layout. I am sure in another 10 years there will be another new trend in model railroading, and ISLs will not longer be "Real" layouts.

Some very good points that resonate with me as the owner of a folded dogbone track plan designed to allow two trains to run continuously over a long main line...ducking into tunnels that momentarily confound new viewers ("where does the train come out?"). Sure, over the last several years the hobby publications seem to reflect a standard for layouts that tends to be more "realistic"...i.e. trains only go through a scene once, there aren't often more than one level of track in a scene, plans are often point to point with off-layout staging, and switching opportunities reflect real world practices. Like Justin I'm curious to see what the future trends in model railroad design might be, and I wonder if there will be room for layouts designed to be "fun". Maybe we just need to develop some sort of language to describe what we're doing in the hobby so there won't be perceptions that one isn't a "real" model railroader. Certainly referring to oneself as a prototypical or realistic modeler might convey the idea of trying to capture the real world as closely as possible. I respect that but its not where the enjoyment for me lies. I've tended to call myself an "impressionist" in the hobby. I try to convey railroading but am not bound to representing it as realistically as some other modelers might be. I'm not sure what other self-describing labels might be appropriate and maybe I shouldn't even bring up the idea!

As for the idea originally brought up by Brain above, I recall several layouts that had compatible industries; certainly the coal mine and power plant being a classic example. I think the "loads in/loads out with a backdrop wall or view blocking scenic mountain in between the two industries was a way of trying to make that idea more "realistic". The ultimate criteria of "who are you building the layout for?' (i.e. your satisfaction or other's) really determines what's right for you.

Ralph

[steinjr]

Guys --

Everybody (including the original poster) knows that it is not modern with paired industries on a modest sized layout - which is why the original posted called it a "decidedly retro model railroad concept". He asked for suggestions for pairs, not for a discussion of why the concept has fallen out of favor (at least to a large degree). Or for an explanation of what paired industries are - he probably (quite reasonably) assumed that most of us knew the concept already.

Which is why I mentioned some such pairs: coal mine - powerplant, other mine - ore processing plant, and (as an example of an industry which use closed cars and perhaps is a little less common) : transload from river barge to RR tank car and delivery to industry (or the other way around).

Other "pairs" (or more accurately - intra-layout moves) which is not necessarily quite as unconvincing as the ye olde "transport chains" on a 4x8 - transporting grain from elevator to mill, flour from mill to bakery and then bread from bakery to local grocery store (all by train ...) , or logs from logging camp to sawmill, planks from saw mill to furniture plant and then furniture from the furniture plant to local furniture dealer:

- From interchange to municipal road salt transload (just takes two plain tracks - the the road salt transload can even be just a part of another spur).
- Empty old style refrigerator car from yard to pre-cooling plant to produce warehouse to icing rack
- Taking a car to a cleanout track before loading, or after unloading

There are lots of ways to generate some intra-layout moves :-)

Smile,
Stein

[nachoman]

If I recall, Malcolm Furlow's San Juan Central had a few paired industries, and his card operating scheme took advantage of them. I'll have to dig up the book.