The less you know, the more fun you have?

[Poggy1165]

Think of all the films ruined, for the likes of us, by inappropriate locos/rolling stock. On one programme a few weeks back Poirot travelled from Paddington to Weston-super-Mare by the Southern Railway, well, the loco and stock were certainly SR. This drove me mad, but my missus didn't give a damn.

 

I think it's easier to have fun if you are less discerning. As a child I had lots of fun with Hornby Dublo 3 rail, and I'm sure I could again if I could turn off my critical faculties. The more discerning you are, the more detail you have to add, the more accurate you have to try to be. It's still fun in its way, but it's harder work. Or you could say, same amount of fun, more effort to get it.

[Mallard60022]

My ignorance is truly blissful and renowned worldwide! However, I prefer to be given helpful advice or be corrected in a manner that is warm and friendly (just as everyone does on this Forum) but that's just me and my thin skin and really I'm too old to care.

Incidentally, I consider this to be one of the funniest discussions so far this year - congrats froobyone.

36E

[Waverley West]

I think for me, it depends on whether we are talking about before or after a modelling project. Before a modelling project, I want to find out as much as possible about something. And good fun it is too. Then, once I’ve finished a project, I’d rather remain in blissful ignorance of any errors that can’t be corrected easily.

 

 

Two examples:

 

 

Not long ago, I resprayed 37043 into Large Logo livery and was very pleased with it and ran it as often as I could. Then I found out that the numbers were a bit too large and ever since then whenever I look at the model, I look at the numbers first and think “hmmm, they are a bit too large, aren’t they?â€. Too late now though, short of another respray, it’s going to stay like for the foreseeable future.

 

 

I have also had a renumbered 47640 running on my layout for many years and a firm favourite it's been too. At least it was until I realised 47640 never had the black headcode that my version has. Now every time I look at it, I think, “hmm, that’s not right, I must get around to renumbering thatâ€.

 

 

I think finding out information is fun, but only while it’s not too late to correct it easily on your model.

 

 

Then, of course, there’s my appreciation of gentlemen’s literature. For years, I was in blissful ignorance of the importance of attaching suspenders correctly. Now those carefree days of joie de vivre are sadly gone for ever. Life can never be the same again for me now after reading this thread.

 

 

[froobyone]

... my girlfiend ...

 

Lol, I actualy refer to her as the girlFIEND in real life too. After accidentaly refering to her as such many years ago. It just kinda stuck.

 

She loves it. (Probably). Plus, she is in fact in league with the devil.

 

I'd like to point out, that I'm not championing ignorance over knowledge. Knowledge is always a good thing. Speaking as someone who worked as a school teacher for a couple of years. Knowledge is power, but it comes at a price.

 

It would be hard to be a member of a site such as this and not gain invaluable information.

 

Before the internet, the only place I would see model railways was maybe if I spent an hour leafing through the pictures in the "WH Smiths Reading Library". *cough* I didn't know anything about EM, P4, Finescale or code 75 rails. Now I do know about them and also know that I'll never in a million years be clever enough to create something in P4, it means that everything I'll ever do, will be wrong and I know it. Before the internet, I didn't know it. But in myself, I'm happy with my code 75 rail, because at least it stops my railway looking like a roller coaster.

 

@oldudders You refer to the very thing that prompted my musings. I'm glad I'm not alone with my thoughts on that.

 

@Mallard60022 Thanks

 

 

Thanks for reading.

 

Frooby

[Baby Deltic]

I think its horses for courses. Speaking a member of a small 'cabal' of urban grot modellers, we like to capture the atmosphere of the prototype and as far as the buildings and general surroundings are concerned, plus grotty stock that fits the location, but we aren't worried about the fact the track is 'narrow guage' 16.5mm code 100. As long as the model captures the essence and feel of what it represents, and we're happy with it, then that's good enough. If Joe Public likes it when they see it at shows - bonus.

[Talltim]

Before the internet, the only place I would see model railways was maybe if I spent an hour leafing through the pictures in the "WH Smiths Reading Library". *cough* I didn't know anything about EM, P4, Finescale or code 75 rails. Now I do know about them and also know that I'll never in a million years be clever enough to create something in P4, it means that everything I'll ever do, will be wrong and I know it. Before the internet, I didn't know it. But in myself, I'm happy with my code 75 rail, because at least it stops my railway looking like a roller coaster.

 

I know its not always the easiest to get hold of, but I'm sure they have MRJ in Smiths

 

Then, of course, there’s my appreciation of gentlemen’s literature. For years, I was in blissful ignorance of the importance of attaching suspenders correctly. Now those carefree days of joie de vivre are sadly gone for ever. Life can never be the same again for me now after reading this thread.

 

 

 

 

(really did) LOL

[Mike W]

Alot of these issues have been very much on my mind recently. My own aspirations for the hobby are turning more and more towards prototypical layouts but I don't see much point in being critical of others if that's not the case for them, especially over the internet.

 

Good points made there. My whole take on it is this: If the layout is going out in the public gaze at a show, especially a 'finescale' doober, then I'll make sure the stock fits the location and era.

If its set up at the place where it lives, or I'm on my own layout, I'll do as I please.

 

I agree completely with Baby Deltic - my home layout is a train set sort of affair, and while I'd like to replace it with a more advanced layout at some point, I'm happy to have something fictional so I can run what I want at home. Along with that, I'd like a prototypical layout to take to exhibitions.

 

Superb topic. As someone who hasn't posted too much here previously (solely due to embarrassment over my modelling efforts and the lack of a decent camera to actually show anything to anyone), it's nice to see everyone being so relaxed about all this. I've found some people in this hobby (a minority, thankfully) can take it far too seriously and are far too critical of other's efforts. Why be negative about such a wonderful, relaxing hobby?

[F-UnitMad]

A recent thread here began with a fine picture of a fine model scene - with much scaffolded housing in the backscene. "Wow!" I thought, as did plenty of others. Hardly had we done so, mind, when some knowledgeable soul pointed out that the scaffolding was all wrong, lacked this and that, would not be safe etc. Was he wrong to do so? Well, he might have been slightly more gentle in his writing, but if we are anoraks in the first place, presumably deep down we accept even unwelcome advice of this sort?

 

 

I have a sneaking suspicion that that thread might be what Frooby is referring to in the OP:- {EDIT: D'oh!! Just read Frooby's post (#29) above, confirming this!!}

Something happened recently on RMWeb, not directly to do with me and I'm not going to highlight here what it was, but it got me thinking about how knowledge can be detrimental to enjoyment.

... but I agree with you Olddudders; I too went "wow" at the sight of all that scaffold - the sheer amount of time it must've taken to build was impressive enough, but all that completely by-passed the Member who, being an Ex-Scaffolder, only saw all the faults. To some degree we will all do this; as a Truck Driver myself I tend to notice vehicle placement on layouts; the trick is trying to not let it spoil our appreciation of someone else's modelling. and dare I say, ignorance of some matter of which one might know a great deal.

Would the Rock Island layout you mentioned be "Hope, Illinois" perchance? (Or at least another from the same modeller?) No I didn't notice the Dynamic Brakes on the F-Unit, since I know nothing about the Rock Island, but if it had been a Soo Line loco you bet I would..!!! I'd still like the layout,though B)

[RhBBob]

I an amazed that no-one has spotted the obvious answer to the problem -sorry, opportunity

 

You take a reasonably unknown prototype, preferably in a country that either replaces or refurbishes rolling stock in equal proportions and off you go !

 

Just to the north of Italy and to the west of Austria

 

Bob

 

Edit to replace 'proporations' - I blame the grammar school education

[Jenny Emily]

There is an old film I think about the battle of the river plate. It seems that something American is standing in for the Admiral Graf Spee, and it used to drive my Father (who is very into his warships) nuts. As he said "They could have at least painted out the very obvious US Navy fleet number on the front".

 

As for underwear related errors in 'Gentleman's literature', they didn't seem to bother the blokes reading it, so I guess ignorance really is bliss.

 

For anybody who wants to look for them on 'Grove street yard' at the Nottingham exhibition, they can find a building that the occupants would have to climb in and out of through the windows, and a siding disappearing into one building at an angle that would logically bring it straight out of the side wall. I'm sure that there are other errors, but then there is a lot of leeway too in period for some of the stock used and I'm almost expecting some-one to gently explain that "X loco was scrapped before Y loco carried that livery".

 

As Terry Gilliam's character said in Monty Python and the Holy Grail: "It's only a model."

 

EDITED: to make my lousy grammar make sense

[coachmann]

I have 'fun' at the fair. With railway modelling I get satisfaction from a job well done and knowledge through research. That's why I model railways.

[Theakerr]

From Bob Seiger "I wish I didn't know know what I didn't know then" For the most part I am happy with what I have got until I find out it is wrong. Current case is the Pullman rake make up I run on my 60 to 65 ER layout.

[Penlan]

Bit of topic, but the jist of it makes sense to me.....

 

I remember the 'Yes, Prime Minister' episode 'the need to know' or similar

 

If he knew about certain details of, say why a war was declared, and somebody asked a question about the said war in 'Prime Ministers Question Time', he would have to answer because he knew the answer, if he lied it would come back to bit him (sound familiar in a 1:1 world?). If he didn't know any details then he could sail on in innocent bliss.... Humphrey guided him through the principles, or side stepped sometimes.

[GreenDiesel]

My current, main layout is a small roundy-roundy, two loops of track on a 5.5x3.5' board. I'm having to use 15" radius curves. I know that's extremely unrealistic but I simply have to tolerate it for now. One day, I hope to have a more realistic layout with nothing tighter than 22" curves, yet even that isn't prototypical.

 

I can balance tolerating such errors, but I do think added realism makes the layout look much better & enjoyable. I'm trying to be as realistic as I can within my limitations.

 

Rob

[Shamouti Ben Yafo]

Funny thing about Top Gun - in real life also F5s play at being MiGs; in exercises they are known as aggressor aircraft, IIRC.

 

Worst of all - worst of all! In the comedy series Dharma and Greg (New Age Yoga instructress daughter of two hippies marries New York lawyer on impulse) we see her old bed at home - it's circular! Who, with any awareness of Tibetan Buddhist Bardo tradition would fail to connect this with the Wheel of Existence and see it as emblematic of suffering and death? Not to mention rebirth, and by extension conception - thus possibly influencing the odds of her contraception not working (no method apart from abstinence being 100% effective)

 

It makes me want to revert to the face I had before I started laughing!

[Lady_Ava_Hay]

Ignorance is indeed bliss but only for the ignorant.

 

I also remember the other maxim that ###### baffles brains.

 

Memory plays funny tricks. In 1967 when steam finally left the SR, I was nineteen and not very interested in trains and railways anyway. My best memories of steam are when I was ten or eleven and they are mere flashes now. I certainly didn't know what I was looking at and have learnt all of my railway lore since.

 

So, for the steam era, this now means that anybody who was actually involved with steam is now retired and has had most of the memories erased by converting to and working diesels or being promoted away from the driving.

 

I think that running what you want to run on your layout is perfectly OK if that is what you want to do but, if your knowledge or research indicates that that class never ran in that area and that those coaches were never run in that era, then running that will grate on you and your enjoyment will be decreased.

 

You are not running a layout for the girlfiend (sic) and it is possible that she is humouring you by taking an interest at all.

[BR60103]

I remember being told, when I was just a novice in actuarial work, that it wasn't important to have the answer actually right -- because it wouldn't be -- but to have a good idea of how far off it might be (with an idea of making that as small as possible).

So you have to determine just how much you will tolerate. The old saw used to be that the last 10% of the information you need won't come out until you've built the model and written it up in a magazine.

 

 

(sorry about the movie name; I was mixing it up with a Jayne Austin novel)

[Guest Belgian]

As for underwear related errors in 'Gentleman's literature', they didn't seem to bother the blokes reading it, so I guess ignorance really is bliss.

 

For anybody who wants to look for them on 'Grove street yard' at the Nottingham exhibition, . . .

I imagine your layout is going to be very popular at the exhibition then!

 

JE

[Raffles]

What a thought-provoking thread.

 

I've been following it from the start and it's certainly got me to consider my own position with this issue. I'm with the idea that the less you know, the more you can, not so much enjoy, but appreciate others work. Steering clear of scaffolding but in a similar vein, I can look at some of the images on here and be very impressed but mostly because I am looking through eyes that cannot see the errors. The next man/woman may spot a number of errors and I guess they won't enjoy it as much as their mind focuses on what they see as 'wrong'.

 

That said, whenever I see a model of a 47 with the battery boxes on the wrong way round it drives me mad.... but only because I know, see? Not knowing would allow me to properly appreciate the work that went into it's painting/weathering/detailing.

 

As an aside, many thanks to Shamouti Ben Yafo, whose posts always manage to amuse and confuse me in equal measure.

[Oldddudders]

Would the Rock Island layout you mentioned be "Hope, Illinois" perchance? (Or at least another from the same modeller?) No I didn't notice the Dynamic Brakes on the F-Unit, since I know nothing about the Rock Island, but if it had been a Soo Line loco you bet I would..!!! I'd still like the layout,though B)

Yes, it was indeed Peter North's "Hope, Illinois", and I even went to the Twickenham show a few weeks later and filmed it. It was a fine and innovative model, with sound long before DCC made it easy for us. The jukebox in the cafe even belted out Del Shannon etc. The Rock Island had 8000 route miles of flat railway, with hardly even a tunnel in sight. Dynamic Brakes were never fitted to a diesel it bought new, but the otherwise-sumptuous Stewart Hobbies F3s in RI freight livery (which looked like RI's F2s after they'd had some upgrades) had dynamics, and that's that. At the time that Rock Island went bust & suspended operations, 31.3.1980, I believe it was the US's biggest corporate failure. They have surpassed it a few times since!

[Poggy1165]

We all change over time too, or most of us do. We learn more, we see more of others' work, we read MRJ and we grow discontent. As an adult modeller I started with coarse 00 (that is Peco old-style track). I could never get this to run properly because of differing wheel standards, and so I moved to 'fine-scale' SMP. (Had code 75 Peco been available I might have bought that instead, but it wasn't.) Things ran much more reliably after that, but some of the Hornby stuff I used to run for fun would not pass as the wheels were too coarse, so it had to go on the disposal line. Oh, did I mention I now had chaired, bull-head track? Oh the joy, the sophistication! What could be more accurate?

 

Any road, through reading the MRJ and seeing the layout of a certain top-grade P4 modeller at intimate quarters I slowly grew discontented with 00. So I started experimenting with EM and P4. Though I say so myself, some of the P4 wagons I produced were quite nice by my standards and I got a lot of pleasure out of building them, but the thought of converting all those locos and all those coaches was too daunting. Anyway, I had become aware of faults with quite a few of my items of stock, not least a Bec Director with cut-away valences! In the end I cut the gordian knot by selling the lot and moving into 7mm scale.

 

I loved 7mm at first. It seemed so realistic, so satisfying. A minor detail error on a loco scarcely mattered, the sheer bulk of the thing made it realistic. But slowly discontent crept back. 3 bolt chairs! This won't do at all, they must be 4 bolt, don't you know. Ideally some of the sidings should have inside keys. Those rail-joiners won't do. Get them off and replaced with something that looks like a fish-plate. And just look at those wagon interiors! Painting them black won't do. They must be detailed! And come to think of it, look at the brake gear. It's hideous! Rip that lot off and replace with brass etchings. And while you're at it spring or compensate. Yes, I know it's not strictly necessary, but it's the thing to do, state-of-the-art and it'll be handy if you ever decide to move to S7.

 

See what I mean folks? I have a theory that God doesn't want us to be content for too long, but wants us always to strive for better, and that's how human progress is made. But sometimes I do wish I'd been contented with Hornby-Dublo 3 rail.

[The Stationmaster]

 

Memory plays funny tricks. In 1967 when steam finally left the SR, I was nineteen and not very interested in trains and railways anyway. My best memories of steam are when I was ten or eleven and they are mere flashes now. I certainly didn't know what I was looking at and have learnt all of my railway lore since.

 

So, for the steam era, this now means that anybody who was actually involved with steam is now retired and has had most of the memories erased by converting to and working diesels or being promoted away from the driving.

 

 

On a point of pedantry (perhaps the wrong thread for that) time and memory can indeed play funny tricks. While most of them have retired or, more likely gone under redundancy or 'early retirement' it is sitil quite possible for men who worked with steam on BR to be still working and judging by many past examples I have come across their memories of that period are probably very healthy with much of what went in between wiped out of the databank; some one who started age 16 in, say, 1966 has another 5 years to go until retirement age. I started on the railway over 40 years ago and could still then occasionally come across men still at work who had started before the Grouping, the last of them would not have retired until the early 1970s and some who had started even earlier had come back after their first retirement into another job - e.g in 1969 I met a chap in Scotland who had started as an Engine Cleaner with the NBR in 1913. As I said this is perhaps not the right thread but there was, and to a much lesser extent still is a wealth of personal history lurking out there which can sometimes add to what we can learn.

 

 

 

[Rob Hayes]

im glad to read this topic, like anyone i appreciate high detail and i do like to model trains i remember and would love to recreate wigan springs branch as i remember it.

but im also happy to just enjoy what ever train i like when ever i like, after all no matter how good your model is, (its not ever going to be real)_ so whats wrong with just being happy,

i have old trains that are now below standard but i still love them and they look good to me, like wise i have many high detail newer models, my mate used to be obsessed with his region as he comes from the west mids and my region as i used to live in wigan, if i bought a loco i liked and wanted to run, he would say wat you bought that for its not your region, that loco had no reason to go were your region is,

to which i would reply and say yes but i like the loco and im interested in all british rail ways were ever and whats it matter to you anyways.

there is no law. ive always seen railways as more than just railways its about for me creating your own minature world that is exactly as you would like so you can escape the real world that is all to often not quite as we would like it to be.

one last example. i run bachman lima and vitrains class 37s they all have strenths weaknesses but all look like class 37s and i like them all, i do feel Bachmann is the best, then again the vi trains one is also fantastic and somtimes i feel a beter example. the lima one is a good old freind so sod it why not enjoy all of them.

peace

[Shamouti Ben Yafo]

I have a theory that God doesn't want us to be content for too long, but wants us always to strive for better, and that's how human progress is made.

 

 

Not God, but we ourselves are to blame.

Gautama Buddha wasn't right about everything, IMHO, but he had a point when he concluded that desire (born of attachment) was the root of all human suffering. HaQoheleth (author of Ecclesiastes) also had much to say about being content with what you have.

 

The balance between state-of-the-art and rock banging?

 

If I needed surgery, I'd want the former. If digging a hole, sometimes a handy stick will do if I can't find the keys to the shed. Modelling comes in between - I'd like something reasonably realistic, but let's not get carried away. I'd love to have the time, money and skill to be a rivet counter, but I don't. So I'll be happy with whatever I can achieve. And you know what's funny about that? You don't have to get frustrated to build skill, knowledge and expertise. I always learn best when I feel confident that the subject matter is in my grasp - it becomes more absorbing; worry impedes. Not what I'd look for in a leisure activity.

[coachmann]

If I took up golf and kept knocking the damn ball in the pond every day, I'd want to know why....B)