2 thoughts on “Delaware and Hudson update

  1. andym86

    Thanks, Simon.

    That was really inspirational. It takes an artist to be able to capture things so well. It also depends on one’s focus.

    I read your comments about not getting too hung up on minutia and getting things done. I was planning on covering that topic in a segment I am going to call Prototype Paralysis as a warning to all that good enough is sometimes better than having exactly the same number of louvers on both sides of a diesel panel.


    Andy Malette

    On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 5:59 AM The Erratic and Wandering Journey wrote:

    > Simon posted: “I have already mentioned Ken Karlewicz’s D&H layout. He has > a Facebook page. Well worth an enjoyable visit!” >

    1. Simon Post author

      Hi Andy,

      Thanks for the comment. With respect to minutia, I think is a balancing point to be struck, based on aims and resources, and no one modeller can tell another where that lies. Also, unless one really enjoys research for its own sake, then there comes a time to accept that not everything may have been recorded, and that further effort is counterproductive to getting on with building a model. If the information does eventually turn up, then the original model can always be modified. Otherwise, who will know?

      I understand what “good enough” meant in terms of the V&O, which reflected Allan’s interest in creating an operations-focused model railway. He would rather accept moulded-on details, which after all would be neat and square, than remove them and replace them with wire, as this would have taken him many hours per freight car (involving getting things neat and square, and either re-touching or repainting) and he had an awful lot of cars. In that context, “good enough” represented his own allocation of a specific resource (time) against competing priorities (building and operating a large layout). Unfortunately the phrase is sometimes misappropriated as an excuse for not bothering!

      There is an additional important point, namely that as a consequence of the Finescale Movement demanding better fidelity to the prototype, models have become more and more refined – just compare the American models 50’ rib-sided boxcar with the S Scale America version, and the latter is a big step forward (also in price!) The newer models can make the previous generation no longer “good enough”!

      To anyone reading this, Andy has a superb blog on his CNR branchline; there is a link in the S scale section of the sidebar.


Comments are closed.