The Scent Of Ozone...

Every page in that book is imprinted on my 72 year old mind. On the other hand I can’t remember what or where I ate yesterday. Trains must be important. Good luck.

Love that Bantam book!

petrifiedagg and Art:

I know what you mean. I wore out my original copy that I purchased back in '62. I kept up with it into the 70s (rubber band held it together), but alas my original got lost in one of our moves. Back in the mid-80s I was at a train meet, and lo and behold, there on the table was another copy... and for only a buck! I snatched it up, and though the binding is shot, and the pages are frayed... I still have it to this day. I love the smell of it when opened and I take a whiff of it.

I can't help but feel that through all these decades of being a "serious" modeler (primarily in HO scale), that little Bantam Book has kept me in touch with my memories of 3-rail, and in its own way, has contributed to my return to 3-rail.

Andre

I have the same copy of this book. Yes, I too love to open one of these books and get a whiff of that old smell. Ozone, old lubricant and the smell of smoke pellets keep me hooked on postwar.

I hear you loud and clear, Lenny.

I'm very much looking forward to getting my first whiff of ozone and hot grease in years via my little Marx set. AND, once I get a version of Lionel's Baldwin Hudson (2055, 2065, etc)... that smoke smell, too! I still have a third bottle of SP's!

All in good time, I suppose.

Andre

@laming posted:

I hear you loud and clear, Lenny.

I'm very much looking forward to getting my first whiff of ozone and hot grease in years via my little Marx set. AND, once I get a version of Lionel's Baldwin Hudson (2055, 2065, etc)... that smoke smell, too! I still have a third bottle of SP's!

All in good time, I suppose.

Andre

Andre, you mention the Lionel 2065 steamer in your above post. The 2065 was my 1st engine, included in a Lionel freight set I got as a Christmas gift in 1954 when I was 3 years old. I still have that locomotive and set, all in good working order. However, they have little exterior nicks and defects cause by the rough play of a child (me), including racing it on a plywood board layout when my 2065 took a dive onto the floor a few times.

Nothing in my collection has more sentimental value than that 2065 baby Hudson.

My heart nearly leaped out of my throat when I visited my LHS last week and saw another 2065 in mint condition. I bought it for a reasonable price, took it home, applied gear oil to the gears near the driving wheels, and ran it on my layout. It runs and smokes beautifully.

I love both of my 2065s. It is a fine, durable and affordable engine, and, IMO, ideal for starting out as an O Gauge model railroader. Arnold

Cont...

It fell to OGR's Marx enthusiasts to dangle the lure in front of me that caused me to go for the bait. With their help, after all these decades, I was able to learn exactly what Marx 3-rail "hand-me-down" train set I had been given as a youngster when I was 7 or 8 years of age (in 1959 or 1960): It was a Marx "25225" set.

Perhaps it was mere coincidence, or perhaps something more, but of all things, a very nice "25225" set was on the Bay that was an exact fit with my memories (or so close I don't know the difference)... so I went for it! With a point/click... the boxed set pictured below was on its way to me, complete with a Marx 50w Model 729 transformer and some track.

(Note: The above story is all told in detail in the "Marx Train Pictures" thread here at OGR.)

Alas, when received, there was not enough track that remained with the set in order to set up a loop or oval. So, I simply cleaned up the engine and cars, lubricating where needed, and fixed the transformer issue (broken wire connector). Now the little 999 engine purrs like a kitten when powered at the workbench!

When the Marx track bundle I purchased arrives, after right at 60 years, I will again see a very familiar Marx set racing around an oval of track, with it's little side rods in a blur. It will be doing exactly what Louis Marx en company designed it to do: Bring pleasure to its owner.

Oh, it should come as little surprise that additional Marx items have already arrived at my doorstep.

But Marx is not my only interest. No, Marx is just the mfg'er that is responsible for my return to 3-rail.

The other siren call for me has been Lionel Postwar. I have long admired select Lionel postwar items. I am already watching for reasonably priced items that I hope to eventually obtain. Though my most basic interest within the Postwar era are the products of Lionel and Marx (and possibly AF, Kusan, and such), in addition I will also be interested in "traditional sized" (similar to postwar) types of newer offerings, as time and opportunity afford.

The Scent Of Ozone...

Back in my Lionel collecting years (1990s), it all started with a humble little boxed Lionel 202 UP diesel set that I purchased for about $45. It was my intent to simply have a small oval of track running under the Christmas tree, for the Christmas season had arrived. I threw a white sheet down, placed the tree on it, and set up the oval of track around the base of the tree. There our the little pumpkin-colored Lionel Alco FA resumed its Christmas Tree duties that no doubt it had performed in the past. (We nicknamed the little 202 "Pumpkin"!)  No sooner had "Pumpkin" made a few circles, than that magical ozone smell began to drift into our nostrils. My daughter (I think she was 12 at the time?) noticed it too.

Like an aphrodisiac intoxicating us with the desire for more, we both laid down to get an eye-level view of our little Pumpkin, and as it neared we would raise our head up from eye level and sniff that wonderful sweet smell of ozone as it passed under our noses! She loved that aroma! Of course, so did I. With each whiff of that wondrous aroma, memories of childhood times gone by wafted through my mind! (Scenes of my little Marx set from my childhood... a friend's little Marx Monon FM set... some friend's and their Lionel sets... oh my!)

Within a day or so, I had the idea to get some of those cheap, illuminated, ceramic buildings at Walmart. We soon had a "Main Street" scene for Pumpkin to hum past, complete with snow-flocked spruce trees. This grew into a tradition that lasted for several years as our Christmas Tree trains grew in length and variety, and the town kept growing. By the next Christmas, I had some Postwar Hudson's to add to the mix for running. Much more 3-rail "stuff" followed over the ensuing years.

Those were special times, and to this day, my daughter (now in her early 40s), still talks of the fun we had laying on the floor during Christmas and enjoying the sights, sounds, and smells, of Lionel Postwar circling our Christmas tree.

Dare I hope to have that wonderful aroma of ozone to be filling my olfactory senses again after so long?

From that magical Bantam Book: "The Signal Tower operator watches as a mighty Hudson locomotive storms by on its way out of town, while behind him a hard pounding freight on a nearby track, also leaving for parts unknown. Soon, those Engineers will be pulling those throttles open and hooking their Johnson Bar's back... and the race will be on!"

To be continued...

Andre

Arnold:

2065's: I agree 100%!

Andre

Cont...



So why, you may ask, is an HO modeler of some 58 years (and "serious" since the early 1970s) that currently has a 20' x 16' out-building housing a 100% functional HO/DCC w/Sound layout, deciding to also return to 3-rail?

That's a good question.

If you noticed in my previous post above, I actually was quite into 3-rail during the 1990s as an adjunct to my primary interest of HO scale modeling. Though at the time I had an elaborate HO scale layout, I had no 3-rail layout. What I did happen to have was a growing collection of 3-rail equipment. Along the way I also acquired track, tons of it. Brand new "O gauge" tubular track purchased by the case, and excellent condition 022 switches, too. However, I had no permanent place to run such equipment.

Instead, I scratched my 3-rail itch by using a two wheel dolly to transport my stacks of storage boxes (engines and rolling stock) as well as cases of track, and on a Thursday evening, I would make several trips to/from the house across the paved parking lot of the church I pastored at the time, to our "Fellowship Hall". (That contained an unobstructed 35' x 50' or so of carpeted seating/table area.) Therein I would set up portable tables, pushing them together, and assemble a track layout. Lockons and jumper wires would serve as simplistic wiring. Upon that I would run trains for a couple/three evenings, running diesels or swapping out steam engines, same with the rolling stock. Often times, I would invite an O gauge 2-rail friend over that also had a past history and appreciation for 3-rail, to join in on the fun and we'd run my trains a couple evenings before I broke it down, packed it up, and back over to the house for storage until the next month or so for another night of 3-rail trains.

This was modus operandi until early 1998, when the opportunity to own our own home appeared. (Up to that time, our housing had been part of the pastoral packages provided by the churches I pastored.) The deal was extremely attractive, but the bank wanted a significant amount of "front" money to secure the deal. I didn't have a large bank account, but what I DID have was trains... lots of them.

SO, they went to market. I sold as much of my 3-rail as I could. (In the end I only had a couple pieces of rolling stock.) I raised about $6000-$7000 dollars in train sales, essentially liquidating my 3-rail and surplus HO in the process. (In fact, just about ANYTHING I could sell. Except the wife and daughter. I decided to keep them.  )

It paid off in spades, and the wife and I still live in that house we purchased (paid off long ago), and intend to continue to do so until assisted living may be required.

So, that was it for my 3-rail affliction until the early 2000's during The Great Scale Experiments when I dabbled in several different scales and themes on a small around-the-walls layout in this small computer room that I'm currently sitting in while typing this installment.

One of my more promising scales/themes was 3-rail. What I learned was with 3-rail, a small area can be quite effective when using traditional equipment. I also learned that by going to a "City" setting, cramped, track-filled scenes would much more acceptable to my eyes. (As opposed to trying to cram spacious mountain railroading into such a small room, a theme that most of my non-3-rail scales had reflected for the previous 20-30 years.) I settled on GarGraves track and switches, and that choice went even further to enhance the impact of the traditional trains. (They looked really good on it.)

In all, 3-rail was working for me. I had a "Kansas City" theme and was collecting equipment for KC roads of the 1950s/60s. I know I've shared the following picture many times before here at OGR, but it's about the best surviving picture of my KC Lines 3-rail experimental layout, and at least it illustrates where I was heading with my 3-rail:



Like I said, it was working. The traditional trains said to my mind: "You're playing with toy trains so don't take this too seriously", so my mind accepted the center rail as simply part of the toy train scene. Plus, the "Phantom" center rail of the GarGraves track system minimized the center rail (see above pic!), and over all, the visual impact of the traditional trains upon GarGraves "Phantom" track was quite pleasing to my eyes.

Then I made a fateful decision: I started migrating toward "Hi-Rail".

Big mistake for me. As soon as the scale equipment started appearing, all of my scale "givens n' druthers" kicked in: I wanted ALL the equipment to be scale, I wanted the engines to run as smooth and as slowly as my quality HO stuff had performed... and as I tried to migrate toward that goal something reared its head that I didn't anticipate: That center rail stuck out like a sore thumb to my eyes, as well as the deep flanges, large couplers, etc.

Then it hit me: IF I'm going to do "scale", I can't do it with 3 rails. So that was that. I went back to 2 rail scale modeling, sold off what 3-rail I had acquired, and aside from one minor 3-rail collecting spree several years ago, 3-rail was no longer on my radar.

But that was going to change.

More fodder for dreams and imagination from The Bantam Book...

To be continued...

Andre, I had totally forgotten about that book Model Railroading until your photo brought back vague memories of when I was about six and seeing the cover of that book.  Along with that memory was of running my two first Postwar engines, a 675 steam engine and a single motored GG1. I had the two next door neighbor boys over along with a girl across the street to look at my train setup. When I blew the air whistle of the 675, the youngest boy asked “what does that mean?”. At his question the girl said “it means to be quiet”. Even then I appreciated her response and it brought a smile to my face. The girl did not want the dumb question of that young boy to interfere with her concentration of the train operations!

N5CJonny:

LOL! That's a good response from that young lady! Did you end up marrying her?

Bantam Book:

It's very gratifying to read that this thread of mine, and my use of Bantam Book illustrations, has rekindled pleasant memories for you.

I can't begin to explain how many hundreds of hours my original, and this replacement, Bantam Book have rewarded me with. Over time, I think I've come to enjoy the artist renderings (such as I've been sharing) as much, or more, than the actual pictures therein. For some reason they seem to stir my imagination more, as well as spawn more daydreaming about what I would do with 3-rail if I had a lot of space, and could just cast care and $$ to the wind.

I have discovered, and continue to discover, that for me 3-rail is primarily about nostalgia. It transports me to simpler times, it retrieves memories of childhood fun, it draws forth images of Kansas City railroading, and has the potential to indulge me into childhood dreams about having a model railroading empire similar to the ones pictured and illustrated in The Bantam Book. Plus, I just like handling them. I like the size of the traditional rolling stock, I like the heft of the engines, I even like the smell of cold engines! (To say nothing of The Scent Of Ozone when they're running!)

Strangely, I just like having them around.

Ah well, I never claimed to be "normal".

Andre

@laming posted:

N5CJonny:

LOL! That's a good response from that young lady! Did you end up marrying her? “

No, I ended up marrying someone who loves trains and lets me buy what I want. Who knows what the girl across the street would become, she might have told me to be quiet.😉

 

Hey Laming/Andre....i feel your postwar addiction from WAY OVER HERE in Maryland!  Keep going, bro....

Got your fingers nice n greasy/oily yet from playing with trains? Us Forumites need to know!! 👌👌🙄

The scent of ozone is so heavy in my basement, my wife commented that our towels smell like my trains. My work here is done.

NC5Jonny:

Good for you! It helps to have a wife that's supportive of our silly obsessions!

redjimmy1955:

All the way over in MD? Wow... how's that for vibes? Yup, already got my fingers greasy when working on the Marx transformer and for sure the little Marx 999 steam engine. Also used sure 'nuf "hold-'em-in-yer-hand" screwdrivers and a small tack hammer! You know, "HE-man" stuff.

Clarence:

Wife says the towels smell like your trains?  So... where's the problem?

Andre

No problem I can see. I remind her how expensive my other hobbies were.

I do not remember the smell of ozone when running our Marx 999 set a kid at Christmas time in the 1950s. 

But the open frame electric motor, with small black transformer with a cloth covered wire from my Dads wooden box erector set, made lots of green sparks and really stunk the room up.  I do not believe the set was an official Erector set but an earlier make from the 1920s.  My brother and I built lots of gadgets powered by that motor and we remotely exploded lots of fire crackers at Halloween using steel wool as an igniter with that transformer to scare the younger kids trick or treating.

Charlie

CC Charlie...

You may be right. It's only been about 60 years since I've run a 999!

I received my track today, so I quickly cleaned an oval's worth, and after throwing down a furniture moving pad on the kitchen table, I slapped together an oval. I've been running my little 999 w/train off and on this evening, and there hasn't been that distinct smell of ozone, but more of a hot grease smell. Still quite good, though!

Now, I might be smelling a bit of ozone in the mix, for the aroma is very sweet smelling. Very pleasant.

However, it doesn't seem to have the strong scent of ozone like I remember from my Postwar Lionel back in the 1990s. SO, my memories of the 999 aroma may be a bit too distant to truly trust the recollection. No biggie... still has a great smelling aroma!

Andre

Welcome, back!

I'm just about sure I'm leaving HO now. I'm staring at it as I type. Wonderfully running equipment, but it has become so "fiddly" to me. I recently went to replace the decoder in a friends beautiful Rapido diesel ... I broke just about every detail on it trying to get the body off. I break lots of little stuff now. Enough.

I've had a little narrow O scale switching layout at home, just to play with sometimes. Time to sell the HO equipment and expand the O.

Ozone.

Happy railroading.

Cont...

Before embarking on building my current Wienie Train layout in my purpose-built out-building, I seriously considered just poop-canning HO and going directly to 3-rail, for I was dead certain that I could handle, and thus enjoy, the larger and more forgiving traditional 3-rail trains far longer than would be possible in HO. (This was discussed at length in my "The Tangled Webs We Weave" thread here at OGR.)

You see, I'm a "life planner" type. That is, I way overthink things. (That tendency can be good, or it can be bad.) So, in view of my "life planning" tendency, it should come as no surprise that I way overthink model trains, too, often times to the point of "analysis paralysis". Alas, it is what it is, and I've learned to make peace with my thought algorithms that I can't seem to change. (Hard coded, I suppose.)

So, even though I seriously considered going direct to 3-rail, when it came down to the nitty-gritty, for better or for worse, I decided to go for a "Last Hoo-rah" type HO train layout. The first plywood was cut in the middle of February, 2019, and by the middle of July of the same year, 100% of the track was in place and said track was 100% was functional. I now had a partial dual level layout on my hands with 132' of mainline in place, all yards, town tracks, etc, and all was fully operational. Layout up and running, I've been building and running Wienie Trains ever since.

But that 3-rail thing just hasn't gone away. It will not just silently sail off into the night. Which pretty much brings us to "now".

What, exactly, you may wonder, has caused this HO modeler for right at 58 years to decide to indulge in 3-rail again?

Well, it was more than one thing, really, but let's consider the most poignant:

* Over the decades I've been blessed with rock-steady and skilled hands. I can work with tiny .012" drills (and smaller), tiny files, etc, and produce models in smaller scales that I'm satisfied with. In the past, I have kit-bashed and scratch built contest winning models.

* Further, over those decades, I've been plenty fine with small trains and small rails, in fact, I preferred them over larger "scale" type trains.

But something has become apparent, and this has gotten my attention:

* At 68 years of age, I note that my hands aren't as steady and dexterous as they were, say, two years ago. Nothing I haven't been able to deal with and find ways to stabilize my hands for fine work, but this is something that is a bit disconcerting, nonetheless.

Because of that, my life planning nature reared its head with an eye toward my life long hobby of miniature trains. (I want to enjoy model trains for as long as I possibly can.) In view of the above, I began to wonder just how many more years would I be able to fully enjoy dealing with small, delicate, exacting, model trains? 10 years? 8? 6? Do you know?

Neither do I.

SO, I've decided to get a safety net under me: 3-rail. Therefore, I've made the decision to start acquiring the Postwar and PW-type trains that I have been thinking about acquiring "someday". However, instead of "someday", I've made the decision to start NOW. That way, if/when the above "small-trains-aren't-fun-anymore-but-instead-they're-frustrating" syndrome hits... I will have a good collection of 3-rail with which to re-imagine my model train future. Thus, you now see why the decision to allow myself the fun of 3-rail again.

Concurrent with this decision, as recently as a week or so ago, I intended to simply run my 3-rail trains on a small oval on the kitchen table for testing purposes (or relaxation running) when the need arose (or mood inclined), and call it good. I would face the "3-rail layout" issue if/when that time comes.

But that has changed. I now have a plan that is much more immediate for a 3-rail layout.

However, that is another installment for this thread that I'll eventually get to.

'Ya know... at 68 years of age (and counting), I really don't think floor running would be good idea!

(Above pic from "The Bantam Book".)

To be continued...

Andre

EBT Jim:

I hear 'ya loud and clear. I'm not breaking details off yet... but my HO is much more fiddly to get on the rails now that it used to be. Same with uncoupling/etc. Awful small stuff, and getting smaller each year!

Best of luck to 'ya in O!

Andre

Cont...

SO, I now am allowing myself the fun of shopping and acquiring select Postwar offerings. This will be a slow process, as I'm trying not to be in a big hurry. (Besides, I have several interests vying for my monthly hobby allowance.)

In the past, when in my "daydreaming" mode concerning how I would do 3-rail, I gave many aspects thought. With my unique "Givens 'n Druthers" concerning 3-rail, this is what I distilled from my thought processes...

The Trains:

* All will be "traditional sized". By that I mean literally. Specifically: There will be NO "traditional size" trains IF they are anywhere near close to 1/4" scale. (Such as the Lionel NW2 or their F3's, TM's, etc.) Reason? Those pieces overshadow the 6464 type boxcar. The 6464-type boxcar will be the largest boxcar in my fleet. (This will include cars from other Mfg'ers, too, such as K-Line's "Classic" series.) For operating purposes, Lionel-type "knuckle" couplers will be standard. (This will relegate Marx and other coupler styles for relaxation running only, not "operation" as in yard switching, industrial switching, etc. This is a decision I'm fine with.)

* I want the rolling stock to reflect the "look" of railroading in the late 1940s into the mid-1950s. That means shades of boxcar red, oxide red, Tuscan red, boxcar brown, Mineral brown, black, etc, will be the prevalent "colors" seen in the rolling stock. (And the silver of some tank cars, etc.) Intentionally, my era choice is before the "Splash Of Color" trend that began to appear on rolling stock in the mid-50s. I think making this decision will mean that the trains following along behind the steam engines will really look good and will compliment the steam engines nicely. I also feel that this choice will help the overall visual impact of any future layout I may attempt with 3-rail.

* Steam and early diesels will be in evidence. For steam, all of the Lionel "baby" Hudsons are up for grabs, as well as the Berkshire and a few others. As for the diesels, the road engines will be Lionel cast and stamped frame Alco FA's, and very likely the little Railking F3's. The early diesels will be where the "color" can appear. In keeping with prototype practice, the road diesels can be adorned in much more colorful schemes the prototype railroads were applying to much of their road power. For switching, I am intending to use an RMT "Bang" (or a pair) that I will custom paint/decal for my mythical "Kansas City Belt" railway. (Black w/yellow or white Railroad Roman "Kansas City Belt" on the sides and yellow or white hazard stripes on the ends and side sills.) Given the larger size of the trains, the larger decals, etc, I do feel that I can enjoy painting and decaling traditional-sized equipment for a lot longer than attempting to do the same in HO.

The Layout Theme:

* The layout's theme will be urban all the way. I think an urban setting brings with it an acceptable degree of "plausibility" to my mindset as to the layout being crammed with track and a crowded setting. I also like the "gritty" look of urban railroading with its yards, industrial tracks, and mainlines crowded among the brick structures. It will gives the option of using signals to add even more visual support for the theme.

The Layout Locale:

* Kansas City! (My home town where my love for railroading was birthed!) Specificaly, scenes similar to what could be seen over in KC's "West Bottoms" industrial area. This "feel" will be reinforced by the plentiful use of my "PhotoFlat" concept on the backdrop. It is my intent to let the backdrop carry the lion's share of the "scenic support" chores, saving precious layout space for the tracks and attendant elements (line side structures) that support the "railroad" scene. No non-railroading "luxury" scenes will exist, such as "burger stand" scenes, etc. Any space for foreground "mini-scenes" will be based on the railroading theme to reinforce the overall theme and locale: Heavy duty urban/industrial railroading. The accompanying picture of  the original PAL "yard" scene illustrates the general look that I envision. Namely, note the backdrop, note the cinder-based look of the yard, and such. (Note: My yard tracks will not use the same approach as PAL used.)




The Layout Itself:

Well, that aspect will likely be covered in my next installment.

SO, the above treatise shares the basic concept of how I could do 3-rail in a way that I can envision it being satisfying to my specific "Givens 'n Druthers". There are other aspects, but this covers the basic concept that I've long flirted with in regards to 3-rail and me.

To Be Continued...

Andre

Cont...

LAYOUT DRAWINGS

Ever since my failed experiment back in about 2000 or so, such a 3-rail layout as I have described in my "Concept" post has been relegated to the back recesses of my mind. During that early 2000s period of serious 3-rail experimentation, encouraged by my early findings, I actually did draw up a layout "concept" that could fill a proposed out-building that I was considering at the time. Though this layout will never be constructed by me verbatim, I do think the track plan and supporting cast illustrates just how far one could take this concept, and definitely serves as food for thought.

Even now, factoring in what I've learned about myself and about 3-rail in general, I still think with some minor changes, such an extravagant layout as this could be very promising for a long term 3-rail layout. I will try to share a photo of the taped sheets of scale drawings of that layout, then hung on the wall and photographed!

Specifics:

* Room 23' x 23'.

* Maximum bench work depth: 36".

* Aisle width minimum: 36".

Agreed: A layout such as the above large layout would be a significant undertaking in regards to required spaced, required finances, and required time resources. (Far more resources in space realm or the time realm than I now have.) Keep in mind that many of elements reflected in the above plan were included simply because I wanted such a scene and had the space to include said scene IF desired. Scenes such as the crossings w/bridge that's depicted at the lower left. (Though the poor access issue created by the bridge spanning the aisle is suspect, had this layout actually been undertaken, and had that feature been retained in the final version, it would no doubt have ended up being hinged to fold upward, thus negating the access issue.) In addition, the above was drawn before my discovery of the extensive line of GarGraves track and switches, so that too, would change the final track arrangement to accommodate any geometric changes such would entail. However, frankly, even if I did end up pulling down the HO layout and going back in with this 3-rail idea, I couldn't use the above layout plan, for my actual out-building is 20' x 16'.

Also during that time frame (2000 or so), I designed a much reduced and compacted KC Lines layout for this small computer room, and THAT layout drawing was actually used to guide me as I began building a layout upon which to enter the "layout" phase of my 3-rail experiment.

However, as covered extensively previously in this ongoing thread, my 3-rail experiment met with failure. So the small layout in this computer room was never completed to the extent illustrated on the plans for same. Therefore, the plans for both (the large and small) were archived, and that was that.

Or so I have thought for the following 20 years.

However, as we have now seen, 3-rail has returned to my modeling table! And, as also mentioned previously, I "assumed" that I would simply use a test track and a small oval on the kitchen table to appease my desire for 3-rail until the day arrives (IF it arrives) for me to  make a decision concerning HO and me.

Then I happened to think: Hey... I have the bench work... I have a track plan... hmmm.  What if?...

And this is an interesting "what if?" for me to ponder.

What if I retrieved the small KC Lines track plan from my archives that I had intended for this small room... and sequentially build it so I have a sincere outlet for my 3-rail interest until if/when the time comes to leave HO? That way, there would be no extended delay of gratification. As an added bonus, it would be a far better way to enjoy what I will be purchasing instead of a small train chasing its tail on a small oval on the kitchen table, no?

So I decided to give that idea serious consideration. Thus, I pulled out my old KC Lines track plan that was designed for this small room, looked it over, and figured... hey... this could work! AND, it will be up and going far quicker than however many years will pass while waiting to see what happens with me and HO.

Not a bad idea, eh?

That brings us to the track plan for this small room. So, here it is:



As you can see, it is quite compact. The entire room only measures about 12'6" by 9'6". However, I added an additional 2' to the layout width by annexing the closet as a continuous run connection. This bench work is already in place. It is ready for almost immediate use. However, I will need to clean off and organize the "stuff" that's currently stashed on top of the bench work, and I will need to re-install the hinged lift-up section. (Fortunately, I saved all the bridge parts!) Oh, and I'll want to repaint the Homasote a charcoal black. That done, it will be ready for occupancy!

Of course, there ARE elements on the above small track plan that may (probably will) be altered and/or omitted, but it's a "Start Here" point for me... and I have the existing bench work!

So, by using this small room approach to a layout, there you have it: I can do this if'n when I'm ready to take the layout plunge. However, it will be a while yet, for I need more equipment, and I'll need to purchase the track that the layout plan will require.

BUT... me thinks this is a viable option!

What say ye?

EDIT: The forum software greatly reduced the size of the above pictures, so details will likely be hard to read/etc. If you would like larger scans of the above, simply email me.

To Be Continued...

Andre

These layouts are awesome!  I think you're definitely "on the right track!"  I'm thrilled at the idea of a "scale-like," operations-oriented layout using Postwar.  I've wanted to do this myself for a long time, and it's totally doable!

As you're coming from the scale world, you might get a little frustrated that postwar O won't readily throttle down to scale speeds.  Series-AC motors are sensitive to changes in load, it's their nature.  Keeping the track dead level and a nice, even power distribution with no voltage drops is a must!  (I suggest a minimum of 14-gauge wire for power distribution.)

You'll probably find that dual-motored diesels like F3s and FMs are some of the best runners.  The early NW-2 switchers and Geeps are pretty good too, but plan on using them in pairs.  Since Lionel used a 3-pole motor, there's a fair amount of cogging at the slowest speeds.  Switching with two units works better, because the gears are back-drivable, and the motors can "help" each other.  You get twice as many power pulses per inch.

Can't wait to see progress as this develops!!

Hi Ted!

First off, thanks for your input. You bring up some interesting points. Let's look at them...

"These layouts are awesome!"

Thanks! I enjoyed creating them eons ago. Gotta' admit, that large room track plan would be the bomb, however, I would probably change a few things if constructing it it were to actually be attempted. However, that's simply not possible, so I offered it up to any that are interested.

The small room track plan will also likely be modified. For example, I don't think the closet switch area will survive. Instead, with GarGraves 072 switches, I may able to get 1 more yard track into the 12th St Yard. That so, I would be tempted to extend a couple the industrial track straight into the closet for more track capacity, and extend a yard track into the closet for much more yard capacity (illustrated with red lines on the plan below) and dispense with the scenic'd industrial scene in the closet.  That closet industrial area wouldn't be very user friendly to switch anyway, so no big loss.

Also, I'm not so sure the "Eng Service" area (lower left) will survive. I might be better served to develop that into more industrial switching. If you'll compare the small room layout in the previous post, I've added a tail track at the 12th St Yard area for an engine tie up track. Given the small scope of the layout, that ought to be sufficient. The eye-candy through trains will "fiddled" on/off the layout via the closet, as will the locals that will be stopping to set out/pick up blocks of cars at 12th St. Yard.

"I think you're definitely 'on the right track!' "

Ooo! Ted's feeling punny tonight!

"I'm thrilled at the idea of a "scale-like," operations-oriented layout using Postwar."

Well, love as I would to be able to take credit for that idea, it's not original. In fact, there's a fellow OGR forumite modeling that helped me to see the potential of traditional trains in realistic setting. His OGR nickname is "Christopher2035". Several years ago, Christopher's approach to 3-rail really piqued my interest in the idea... and thus I personalized the concept as per my own "Givens 'n Druthers".

Now, I know I've shared these "Christopher photos" before, but it is appropriate to do so again to illustrate what I'm hoping to accomplish, and to point out some of the reasons for the success of Christopher's efforts. (By the way, these photos are from a previous layout of Chirstopher's.)

When my eyes originally fell upon this first pic I'm sharing, I was gobsmacked by just how good those stamped frame FA's looked in that setting. Notice how the supporting elements are "scale", like the signal bridge overhead, the crossing signals, the clutter, etc. IMHO, all of that adds to the effect and really flatters the stamp frame FA's. The supporting cast really takes the stars of the show (the FA's) and makes them look better than they really do. (They are, after all, toy trains.)

Now lets look at what the same approach can do for the ubiquitous and quite toy-like Lionel 2-6-4 steam engine:

See? The supporting cast has once again taken a toy train and made it look better than it really is! Also, the smaller looking rail of FastTrack has helped the effect. I won't be using FastTrack, instead I will be using GarGraves "Phantom" line of sectional track, and once the rail is painted and ballast is even with the tops of the ties, it too, will have that "smaller rail" look that I feel really enhances the "realism" impression a traditional train makes.

Now, there is another subtle effect that I gleaned from studying Christopher's pics. (As well as others that also have that same approach. i.e. Traditional trains in a scale setting.) It's found in this "in process" pic that Christopher posted several years ago. Note that he was still painting rail and this scene has some rail that's painted, and some that's not. I immediately spotted something that I'll share after you view the picture:

Do you see it?

Let me point it out: Compare the difference between the rail/roadbed that Christopher has already painted to the foreground switch area that isn't completed as yet. See how the dark painted roadbed and rail sides goes a long way toward reducing the visual impact of same?

Once I distilled that small feature, it has stuck with me ever since. Thus, my decision to go with cinder ballast and painting the rails in shades of black ranging from weathered black to charcoal black... but for sure some shades of black. (As opposed to, say, rust, which actually draws my eye to the rail instead of helping the rail blend into the overall scene.) 

"I've wanted to do this myself for a long time, and it's totally doable!"

Go for it!

"As you're coming from the scale world, you might get a little frustrated that postwar O won't readily throttle down to scale speeds... <snip: some very good advice and experience>..."

That is very astute of you, Ted. You are absolutely, positively correct. Trying to make 3-rail into Hi-rail caused that very issue to raise it's head for me back during my 3-rail experiment. That's why I'm going to stay with traditional (under sized) trains, and avoid scale sized trains. Period. As long as they're toys, I'm more forgiving and accepting of the trains themselves, as well as that center rail. BUT... if start making the trains "scale"... them I want the track have 2 rails. Can't seem to shake that. Just my nature, so IF I'm going to do this, traditional, undersized trains seems to be a "given" for me. It must be there.

"Can't wait to see progress as this develops!!"

Well, it's going to take a while. I will need to at least amass enough equipment to have a couple or three complete trains and some extra rolling stock for industries. Then it will be time to start acquiring the needed GarGraves track products. All this means it won't be happening next week, or next month, even!

Thanks for your input, Ted, I enjoyed the chat!

Who's next?

Andre

Andre, I too think your track plan, especially the large one, is awesome.

One thing you mention intrigues me. You mention the possibility of extending your track into a closet for more track capacity. I actually considered doing that on my layout. 

My layout is essentially a long narrow one, approximately 35 feet long and the width ranges between 3 to 4 feet, in the playroom and laundry room in my basement. The layout is an "around 3 of the 4 walls layout" in both rooms. 

The 4th wall in the playroom is a wall of 3 closets. I store my trains that are not on the layout on O Gauge tubular tracks on shelves in those 3 closets. However, those tracks are not connected to the layout.

It would be awesome to build bridges connecting the tracks on the layout to the tracks in the closets, and electrify all those tracks in the closets so the trains can run from the layout onto sidings in the closets and be stored there. 

This was suggested to me years ago by a train buddy of mine who is a professional engineer that works for a construction company. 

I never attempted this closet project because I don't believe I have the skills to do it, especially by myself, and I do not have the inclination to do it at this time in my life. In my opinion, it would be very difficult for numerous reasons including that none of the shelves in the closets are anywhere near the same height as the layout. Also, I am very happy with my layout as it currently is, which I've had now for about 25 years. I like making little changes and improvements, which I find to be stimulating, but big changes like the closet project would be overwhelming.

Arnold

@laming posted:

Back in the mid-80s I was at a train meet, and lo and behold, there on the table was another copy... and for only a buck! I snatched it up, and though the binding is shot, and the pages are frayed... I still have it to this day. I love the smell of it when opened and I take a whiff of it.

You got ripped off, MSRP is only 75 cents!

OK, just kidding.   Nice to see something model train related go up in value.

John:

LOL! Well, I think I recall paying a buck... but that was back in the mid-80s... it might have been cheaper. I just can't remember for sure. One thing is for sure: That little Bantam Book has brought me so many enjoyable hours of browsing and reading, that I've got my money's worth out of it many hundreds of times over.

Arnold:

You said...

"Andre, I too think your track plan, especially the large one, is awesome."

Thanks Arnold! That plan turned out a bit better than I meant for it to. Just goes to show you that every now 'n then even a blind hog can root up an acorn. 

Back when I designed that, my very close model railroading friend at the time (he was in HO, too) looked it over (he's a fellow track plan freak as well as a fellow ops freak) and made the comment to the effect of:

"Well... that's the first time I've ever seen a Lionel-type layout that could be operated prototypically. That's a railroad."

I took that from him as an indication that he saw the operational potential of it.

It's operational potential was intentional. When I designed that one, I used the years of designing track plans for operation, as well as my railroading exposure and experience to that point to design into it needed elements for operation. Shame is... it will never be built! That layout requires more space* than I have available, and the shrinking necessary to fit it in the largest space I do have available (20' x 16'), would cost too much of its personality to be lost. So, essentially a new layout plan would be called for should I ever decide to fill my 20' x 16' out-building with 3-rail.

* Originally, I thought to build a 24' x 24' out-building for a layout. Unfortunately, shortly thereafter a financial reversal took place, and plans for such an elaborate out-building were scuttled for well over a decade. When the possibility for an out-building came onto the radar again, I scaled-back my ambitions and went with a modified pre-fab building (built in place) instead of a ground-up construction w/footing etc.

"One thing you mention intrigues me. You mention the possibility of extending your track into a closet for more track capacity. I actually considered doing that on my layout."

Well, you really gotta' be careful. You have to know where the wall studs are for track planning purposes, and you need to hit your marks when the time comes to cut the holes in the wall! I saved the sheet rock cut-outs so I can patch and smooth when/if the time ever arrives that I need to re-claim this room as an actual bedroom/whatever.  Plus, seeing as you've been pleased with your layout for 25 years... I'd say you've built yourself a winner.

Thanks for the input, fella's! I've got another installment to this thread to get typed up and posted.

All fer now!

Andre

Cont...

TOYS...

First off, I just blew the rest of my month's hobby allowance. In return, I have the first of the PW Lionel on its way to me. I didn't need to spend the $$ right now... but I thought it was a good price for a package deal, so I went for it and got it. What I purchased: A 2055 engine, a 2065 engine, and a 2046W tender. I got them all for less than most of the 2065 w/tender listings. I am SO looking forward to their arrival. I love handling and tinkering with Lionel's PW steam!

LAYOUT...

Okay... my toy train hoorah out of the way... back to the subject at hand...

So, I've got a "Start Here" track plan. I have a concept, theme, locale, era, all that jazz. Now, what about getting down to the nitty gritty in regards to some of the details? Great! Let's go!

Figures...

Well, first off, I'm deliberating about what to use for figures with my traditional stuff.

During those times over the years that I was active in 3-rail, I've never been pleased with 90% of the figures that are readily available for O scale. Most of them are way too big (1/43 scale?) and clunky, lacking "crispness".  Given that traditional trains are noticeably smaller than true 1/48 trains, then anything oversize from 1/48 is magnified even more. My modeling mind rebels at 1/43 figures standing beside my traditional equipment. (Some might call this tendency "anal". I prefer to call it "discriminating".   Whichever the case, it's that hard coding thing and I can't really change it.)

To illustrate, let me show you a pic of two applicants that applied for positions on the KC Lines:



In this pic, the gondola on the left is a Marx 3/16" (S scale, or 1/64 scale that runs on O 3-rail), and the boxcar on the right is a Lionel 6464. The figure on the left is true 1/64 (3/16") S scale and measures just under 5' in true 1/48 O scale. The chap on the right is God knows what scale. He measures right at 6' 6" but was sold as "O" scale by Bachmann. I'll be sending the chap on the right home... he didn't receive employment. The chap on the left may get a second interview, or may not. We shall see.

Frankly, I think I need figures that are in between the S scale figure, and Goliath's baby brother. SO, what to do?

Well, it turns out there's a lot of figures available IF one goes outside the model railroad "box". For example, there are extensive lines of 28mm figures that are aimed at the war gamers. There's also figures in the same range for the war model crowd. Shucks... let me just throw a link at you that gives a glimpse of what's available:

http://www.55n3.info/people/

Learning that there are "in betweener" figures that are usable for my "Givens 'n Druthers", I'm considering figures in the 1/55 scale range. Some of the western type folk can be modified (soft metal), or better yet, some of the Shapeways resin offerings (easier modified) for the war model crowd. I won't need tons of figures, but I would like for some figures to be present... but I want them to look proportionately good among my traditional stuff. SO, 1/55 or close to, may be what I aim for.

Vehicles...

This same malady extends to vehicles: Seems they're either too big or too small. Again, looking back at my previous 3-rail efforts, 1/43 vehicles sitting in close proximity to my traditional trains wasn't satisfying. The model train didn't tower over the vehicles as they do in real life. Given that traditional trains are smaller than 1/48 scale, and the 1/43 vehicles are larger than O scale 1/48... well... that just wasn't a good fit for me.

There isn't an ready answer for this vehicle question, though.

However, a quick experiment with a left over semi-truck I had from years ago has given me cause for a thoughtful "Hmmmm.".  Consider this:

What you're seeing: That's a 1/64 (S scale) die-cast semi-truck sitting in front of the 6464 boxcar. In proportion to the 6464, the truck looks pretty stinkin' good. I think this has potential with the following caveats:

* It doesn't need a 1/55 figure anywhere near it.

* It would best be used on a road or dock that is not directly next to trains.

That is, with adequate distance separating the 1/64 truck from direct contact with either figures or trains... it's do-able. (A form of social distancing???  ) For sure, 1/64 die-cast vehicles would be far more available than, say, 1/50th or 1/55th.

Though I'm not fully convinced as yet concerning my above musings, I at least have a "start here" point for experimentation for the cast of "extras" that a layout requires.

Input?

All fer this 'un!

Andre

Andre how do traditional Plasticville people size up?  Plasticville was marketed as being somewhere between O and S.  (Personally I think the structures were closer to S.)  But it looked great with "O27" without overwhelming the trains, and you could fit more in which added to the "busy" look.  I thought that the Plasticville people, at least the ones available in the 1970s, looked just fine on station platforms, etc.  I think the Marx people sold by K-Line are a little bigger, although the Marx structures are about the same size.

When it comes to vehicles, I feel you!  Common 1:43 look too big, even next to full O scale (because they are!)  Tootsietoy cars are also too big.  Hot Wheels are too small :-(  Plasticville cars might be the right general size, but they need a LOT of help in the detail department!  The last time I built an O27 layout, I found some 1:50 construction vehicles which were PERFECT, but I forget what brand they were.

You already have plenty to think about but I'm going to throw this idea out there... I love Plasticville!  But Lionel trains tend to tower over the buildings and vehicles, and this problem is made worse by the rail height of tinplate track.  I noticed it right away when we switched from O27 to tubular O.  It bothers me so much that I'm tempted to put only the beveled edges of HO-scale roadbed along either side of the ties, and no actual roadbed under the track to prevent the trains from standing taller than they already do.  Not sure how much this will increase the noise level.  Putting "concrete" pads under the structures helps equalize the height a little too.  Does this bother anyone else, and how did you deal with it?

Ted:

Thanks for your input!

Plasticville figures...

I don't think I realized that Plasticville made figures. That so, I took a look at some of the vintage figures. Looks like a mixed bag: Some figures look crisp and well proportioned, others appear larger and more "clunky" looking. Worth a shot, though?

1/43 vehicles...

I see we're on the same page about 1/43 vehicles!

Rail height...

All surfaces of this small layout in this computer room have plywood tops covered w/Homasote sheets thereon. That so, I would like for yard tracks to appear to be sitting in the ground, that is, the tops of the ties even with the terrain. I figured I would have to use "filler strips" the height of the ties between the tracks. Also, I think it's going to take TONS of ballast to fill between the GarGraves plastic ties.

Once the main's leave the yard, I will likely just let the height of the ties represent roadbed and taper the ballast off the ends of the ties to the Homasote. 

Experimentation will be in order when that time arrives. I think I already have two large jugs of Woodland Scenics "Cinder" ballast on hand, but I'll bet that won't go far!

EDIT:

Sound...

Forgot to say that Homasote has a sound deadening quality to it. As I did with my experimental layout decades ago, I will lay the track directly on the Homasote and call it good.

Andre

Cont...

STRUCTURES

Truth of the matter, there won't be very many. Seriously. Most of the "structures" will be my "PhotoFlats" mounted on matboard and attached to the wall. What few 3D structures there will be, will be small and typically railroad "line side" structure related.

PhotoFlats:

Back during my 3-rail experiments in 2000 or so, upon pricing what 3D "flats" were going to cost me, I about had a cardiac arrest. Using Design Preservation Models modular flats (or equivalent), the cost for one largish flat was going to be $70 and up! It would cost several hundred dollars just to do one 12' wall using such cast flats. That was not a good option, so kicked back, scratched my head... then had an idea...

I used the photo shop skills I had previously acquired and created my own flats using photos. Presto,  "PhotoFlats" were created! (Actually, I was going to package them up and offer them for sale under the "PhotoFlats" trademark, but, well... I never got the "Round Tuit" I needed to do so. That was almost 20 years ago! Still own the "PhotoFlats.net" domain, though. Maybe someday?)

Anyway, the three walls will extensively use my "PhotoFlats" to carry off the "look" of an urban industrial setting, such as this, continued on around the room:

However, I also intend to have a few 3D "cut and assemble" PhotoFlats for a few 3D structures to protrude away from the wall so not all of the PhotoFlats are truly "flat". This will afford some visual relief so not all the back drop will consist of just flats.

(FYI: That large structure in the photo above covers a window. It's attached with Velcro so I can easily remove to access the window if/when needed. Also, those PhotoFlats are actually S scale. They replaced the O scale PhotoFlats that were there previously, however, given that a lot of the traditional-sized equipment is in between O and S, I think I'll just leave them in place!)

 Conventional Structure Models...

As mentioned before, these will primarily be line side structures that are railroad-oriented, such things as a control tower, hand car shed, relay cabinets, telephone shanties, etc. These will NOT be craftsman kits, nor if at all possible, no scratch building. (Time consuming, and not worth the effort for what I want to do.) Instead, I will take a simple model, such as this Plasticville Switch Tower:



And with some distressing of the wood, and perhaps replacing some of the items that lend to its toy-like appearance, I'll then paint/weather it and call it good.

Here's an example of such a simplistic HO model to illustrate:

With some distressing, a bit of hacking and some paint/weather work, it can look like this:

And another example. Nothing spectacular, nothing difficult, just some cuts and hacks, paint/weather and I went from this:

To this:

So, as you can see, I'm not planning on making any effort whatsoever for "contest quality" structures and the like to be on the layout... just stuff that's "good enuf" for my eyes.

VISUAL IMPACT IN SMALL SPACES

It's really quite amazing what even a shallow bench work depth can provide in the way of portraying a busy yard and such. For example, this scene is only 24" in depth, and bear in mind that one of the double main lines is open. (So a "through" train could also pass through that scene if desired.)

In the above scene, the first two tracks are yard tracks, the MKT switcher sits on one of the double mains, the gap is where the other (open) main sits, and the Santa Fe NW2 is on the "Back Track" that serves industries.  Here's a different angle and further away to illustrate what I'm trying to explain:

In the other "industrial" areas of the small room layout plan, there won't be near that type of track density, but the above illustrates just how much layout you can have on 24" deep bench work IF you chose a theme that can portray such activity. (Which, in this case is "urban/industrial".)

SO... there you have it. Another Ozone Tale.

This is all fer tonight. Time to hit the "Post Reply" button on this one and take a breather!

Later gator!

Andre

Update...

As a follow up on my above findings concerning traditional 3-rail and S scale:

Touched base with my old friends on the S scale email list. They're being very helpful in giving me some tips on S scale supply lines and S products that would be useful in my "Traditional" modeling efforts.

Also relearned that many of them (over their S scale modeling years) have taken traditional 3-rail stuff and converted it to S scale. They also indicated that S scale decals will go right onto the sides of 6464 type cars and smaller (like 6454-type cars) and look fine. (I would not be aversive to picking up "basket case boxcars" at train meets, fixin' 'em up, repainting and decaling them and runnin' the wheels off 'em! Oh... that is WHEN we ever get to have train meets again!! )

Anyway...

Help from the S scale community: Just goes to show you that model railroading is a great big tent with room for everybody!

Say, would my use of S scale products in my "Traditional" 3-rail effort also make me a "sort-of-kind-of" S scale modeler, too? 

Andre

I’m a big fan of traditional sized equipment (probably due to my love of pre war):  let’s face it, until the scale Hudson rolled off the line, “scale” was something that existed in one’s mind — these were “toys” after all.  Folks looking at my collection are often dumbfounded that a 259E and a 256E are both designed to run on the same track; same with both the early, two-axle 800-series freights and their larger four-axle descendants.  At the end of the day, it’s all about what you prefer to run on “your” railroad... it’s supposed to be fun, right?  

I spent too many years rivet counting in the realm of HO that I began to lose sight of why I re-entered the hobby in the first place. And although I still buy HO trains on occasion, they’re mostly vintage — when things were meant to be played with, not programmed... and delicate trim pieces that broke off just by sneezing on them were rare.

There’s something for everyone in this hobby, and while I appreciate all approaches, for me keeping it simple is the key.

As an aside that last picture is a 700e and the two tank cars are scale size.

Steve:

Agreed! Fun is where we find it. Like a chap used to say here at OGR: "It's a great big tent with room for everybody!"

Dagg:

'Ya don't say! I did not know that. As you can see, when it comes to things Lionel, I ain't the sharpest Crayon in the box. Much to learn.

Great pic, really, but the size of the passenger cars and the tanks compared to that brute of an engine (it is a handsome son-of-a-gun, though) were a bit of a "??" to me as a lad.

Who knows, perhaps over time I'll mature/refine in my tastes, and be okay with such?

Andre

I get what you are saying, Andre'.  This is the reason I have either my 027 trains or the Scale trains on the layout at any one time but not together.  Now, there are crossovers, such as the tank cars mentioned above, because some types or cars came in many sizes.  But generally I have the scale Lionel/K-Line running OR the Lionel 027/8-wheel and Delux Marx running.  

Strangely, I don't have a problem with the adjacent On30 next to either one.

The Scent of Ozone ..... great topic Andre'!!   I've been enjoying the discussion everyone!

I agree with you, Andre, about proportion.  My young lad eyes always told me that seeing a diesel that was larger than a steamer was " not right." ( again " not right" is for me personally and I'm not projecting my view onto anyone else ... I certainly respect everyone's tastes in model railroading .... after all our hobby is about what brings us personal joy.)   And buildings that were oversized and out of proportion with trains and vice versa did't seem ' right' to my eye.    These things did bug me a just a tad, however, that's where my imagination took over. LOL!    I also had that Bantam Book .. Model Railroads.  Cost me $75cents brand new at the time.  Loved that book!

I basically shared this experience on another site previously, however,  I thought I'd share it here as well for " the scent of ozone" is what drove my creative juices and thus my falling in love all over again with post war trains.  I've been a scale guy for many years now, however, I'm going to begin running postwar and " traditional" size trains more often.   They look more proportional to the size of my layout and postwar has a charm all it's own, for sure.   

Last Friday evening I broke out my 2065 Lionel Hudson after it sat on the shelf for a couple years.  The 2065 came with my first Lionel train set that Santa brought me back in 1957.  Upon lubing it up, putting several drops of smoke fluid down the stack,  I set the 2065 and it's tender  on the mainline and fired  up the Z4000.  Upon hearing the first blast of the air whistle, the memories started pouring in as I grinned from ear to ear!  I marveled as I watched this little engine, which had brought me so much joy when I was a kid,  go through it's paces.   Once the engine had run around the layout long for a while, the scent of ozone wafted throughout the room thus having an intoxicating effect on me! 

Next thing I know, I'm seeing this little engine with all it's glory and beauty.  Probably akin to Chevy Chase discovering the "perfect" Christmas tree in the movie Christmas Vacation! LOL!  My imagination runs wild and I break out the cell phone to begin photographing it.  After many 2065 photos, I'm now totally high on ozone!  I find myself standing on the step stool and reaching high up onto my locomotive storage shelf and grasping the 216 FA Santa Fe Diesels, also a Lionel product,  Santa Clause ( not Fe ) brought me when in grade 5.  Then reaching for the Virginian Train Master in blue and yellow.... one of the two most beautiful engines ever produced as I recall the young lad version of me thinking in the 1950's ... the other being the the F3 Santa Fe units.  Although the Train Master is a Williams reproduction of the Lionel, it was close enough for me to begin creating some scenes with these three wonderful postwar icons.  Again, I've shared most of these pics on other thread, and some are new ...  above are some of those pics  taken last Friday evening which I call ... "Postwar Paradise"

Cont...

ROADNAMES

Hm... interesting topic to me, road names. Once again, my "Givens 'n Druthers" may come as a shock, or maybe not.

Steam...

I'm fine with all the steam tenders being adorned with "LIONEL LINES".  I also am fine with the engines all being basic black and carrying their OEM numbers on their sides. As a general rule, steam engines during my era were black, hulking, wheezing tons of steel. Small numbers or other on the cab sides, tenders like wise. So, "LIONEL LINES" on the sides of the tenders and numbers on the cab sides are fine and dandy with me.

While I'm at it, the same goes for cabooses: "LIONEL LINES" is fine. That way they can be mixed and matched and bring up the rear of any train. No problemo.

Diesel...

Here it gets more interesting to me. I fall into two camps:

Factory painted diesels...

IF it's a good example and IF it was a road name that could be seen in the KC area during my era choice... then I have zero problem running the scheme "as is", even if it's not accurate. (Did Lionel ever produce an accurate diesel scheme? Serious question, there.)

Custom painted diesels...

Yup, you read that right. I will not be averse to custom painting and decaling my own diesels using either a cast frame FA, or stamped frame FA, or even a Rail King "Stubby" F3. I will not aim for drop dead accuracy, for the models themselves aren't accurate. Instead, I will go after the "feel" of the KC area prototype that I want to reflect. A good example of such "impressionistic" representations can be seen in Kusan examples and their treatment of their FA line. Here's some examples of how Kusan painted some of their FA's that could be seen in the KC area:

Frisco freight FA's...

Katy freight FA's...

Burlington FA's (which never owned FA's... so don't know if I'd be inclined to paint some)...

Mop freight FA's...

And finally, Kusan's interpretation of the Mop passenger scheme (not bad, either)...

Yup, I could see some Lionel cast-frame FA's that were in "runner" (ratty) condition being stripped, fix any issues, and repainted into schemes such as the above. Ditto Rail King "Stubby" F3's.

Rolling stock...

Mentioned, but will quickly repeat: No mid-late 50's "bright" schemes. All will be in subdued "railroad-type" colors. Any custom painted? Yup. I would not have a bit of problem taking a ratty looking 6464-type (Lionel, K-Line Classic, etc) car and stripping it, fixing any significant issues, and repainting it and decaling it. In fact, I just re-discovered that I have a STACK of old Enhoning S scale boxcar decals and most of them fit within my era span and most will fit the side of a 6464 nicely!

Passenger cars

Modern...

"Lionel Lines" preferred. Their short "027" cars exclusively. You know, these cars:

Those will likely go behind any diesels appropriate for same that I may acquire or paint.

Heavyweight...

Modern "Baby Madison" cars in Pullman green will be preferred. I think those look GREAT behind the 2055/65 or 2046/56 type Hudsons! The shout "STEAM ERA!"

WAIT A MINUTE!!... HOLD THE PHONE!!!....

Yeee haw! USPS just delivered my box containing my 2055, 2065, 2046W!! 

Cutting this one off right here... and getting ready to unbox, get some pics, set up a loop, and...

Film at 11.

Andre