How much to Proto, or not to Proto, THAT is the question…..

(Author's note: updated as of 1/9)

      So, first off, let me welcome you all to the new 2013 season of the Lehigh Valley Harbor Terminal Railway Blog. While there are no “New Years resolutions revelations" to be made here, I do promise to keep things updated and fresh at LEAST once a month, if not more. Not only do I want to, but I know the Sherriff of Bloggingham (aka my pal Ted DiIorio of http://maparr1943.blogspot.com fame) is watching, ready to “delete” my blog just like that if I slack with the posts! Anywho, there’s a lot in store for the layout this year, and I’d like for those of you who regularly check in, or at the very least stumble upon it occasionally from other websites or blogs, to join me on that journey.

      OK, ‘nuff said about that, let’s get on with the real topic of the first post of 2013, and that’s about a lonely little freight car (yes, A freight car) that I just last month posted about when I added it to my layout roster.

      As you can see in the above photo, it’s a nice car, an Accurail model of a URA Double-Sheathed wood car, lettered for none other than the LV. Now, as I have alluded to in past posts, I am not a stickler for details or am I one to be obsessed to the point that everything must be “just so” as it was in 1951. I am not nearly disciplined (nor do I feel a good enough modeler) to pull that level of modeling off, nor do I want to…..I’m happy with me AND my layout, and I wanna have fun with my trains, dammit! While I do certainly consider myself to be a prototype modeler, if you take the time to look around, and/or are a knowledgeable LVRR modeler in particular, you’ll see that there are some trains and equipment that are “out of time and space” on my layout. And that’s OK – I’m OK with it, so anyone visiting my layout should be OK with that, too, and I make a point of telling people that - I'm not trying to skate under the wire! While picking a prototype to model has certainly helped focus (or is that curb?) my model purchases, there is just too much stuff that is available out there that’s too cool NOT to have, and I just can’t help myself sometimes, I'll admit it. I guess you could say that I subscribe to the Allen McClelland “good enough” philosophy, and then some! After all, my time, money and especially my patience are too short to model everything in exacting detail like it “should” be.

     
      But yet again, I digress……Just this morning, I received an e-mail from my friend Eric Hansmann (http://designbuildop.hansmanns.org/), who after reading my last blog post, wanted to “help a fellow post war modeling era brother out” by letting me know some more about USRA cars, and USRA cars on the LVRR in particular. Or as we’ll soon see, the LACK of USRA cars.

The following is original Eric’s e-mail to me -

Hey Ralph!

I read your recent blog posts and have enjoyed your progress. Something struck me concerning the Lehigh Valley USRA box cars.
I found my primary source on the USRA allocations and assignments and checked the details.
Please take this as a point of information to broaden your prototype understanding.

The Lehigh Valley was originally allocated 3300 USRA cars - 

1000 50-ton single-sheathed box cars

500 50-ton composite gondolas

500 70-ton mill gondolas

500 55-ton hoppers

In the final assignments, the Lehigh Valley was assigned zero USRA freight cars.

It has often been noted among hobbyists that the Lehigh Valley refused their USRA allocations. The primary source I have does not indicate any specific note of refusal, only that the LV was one of several railroads who were allocated cars but were not assigned cars under USRA control. FYI, the NKP returned their USRA double-sheathed box cars after USRA control was lifted.

These details come from the James E. Lane article, “USRA Freight Cars: An Experiment in Standardization”, published in Railroad History No. 128, by the Railway & Locomotive Historical Society in the Spring of 1973.

I suspect Accurail painted up the USRA double-sheathed models to represent the LV ’s “wrong way” door, double-sheathed cars.

Again, I wanted to share this as a point of information. This is not meant as a criticism, just sharing prototype detail on a pretty interesting railroad. 

Eric

       Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing, Eric! It must be said that if Eric hadn’t pointed it out, there's a real good chance I wouldn’t have ever known, which while certainly notable, is neither good nor bad from where I sit. I’m not saying I never, EVER wouldn’t have known, mind you, because maybe someday, somebody else might have came along (and have also been a lot LESS helpful than Eric was, by angrily pointing and wagging the “finger of modeling shame”, while decreeing in a loud voice, “That car is WRONG!!!!”), and could have left it at that! Luckily, I seem to have nice, helpful friends, LOL! And true, some day I just might have been so moved to learn more about USRA cars, and come to the same realization all by myself through research. But I guess I got off easy this time, since somebody was nice enough to share the info with me. As I explained to Eric in another e-mail, if somebody wants to start looking over my layout with a magnifying glass, I say be my guest! I mean, I really do try to be good about sticking to the year I model, and the LV in particular, I swaer! Problem is, we all like what we like, and some things (cars, engines, buildings) creep in when they quote/unquote “shouldn't”, usually due to a "timeline error" as I like to call it. I know some very astute modelers who have cars and engines that aren't 100% "right" for their chosen modeling era, but they run them anyway. I mean, it’s a hobby, right? And more importantly, supposed to be fun, right? I know, some people just don’t get it, but that’s their problem I guess....

      Now before we go any further, here's a photo of a REAL "wrong-way boxcar" that the LV had running around in the dozens for your visual reference. This fine example is preserved at the Pennsylvania State Railroad Museum, and you can not only clearly see why it's called a "wrong-way" boxcar, but how similar it is to the Accurail car, or at least similar enough.

       These cars are available in HO scale, through Funaro & Camerlengo -(http://www.fandckits.com/ho_frtlistbyroad.html)

in at LEAST 10 different variations, if I'm reading things right. While I certainly could have these on my layout (and who knows, maybe one day I will), I have no desire to build a resin kit. I've seen these things hit the floor on a friend's layout, and I don't enjoy the prospect of "re-kitting" said models! Moving on...............

      Now if I may say so, on a small layout, I would think that it's not only easier to achieve this "perfect model" status, and also if you don’t, it would be more noticeable, or so it seems to me that it certainly would be so. I know (or at least I think I do) that if I had a small to medium shelf layout like a Tom Johnson -
(http://www.railroad-line.com/forum/pop_printer_friendly.asp?TOPIC_ID=33352)
or for that matter, a  Lance Mindheim -
(http://www.lancemindheim.com/downtown_spur2.htm),
I’d probably make the effort to strive for that “perfect” benchmark. Of course, "perfect" is a relative term. I mean, let’s for a minute forget that both Tom and Lance are incredibly talented modelers, and that what would take me a year and a day to do, is easy for them to recreate, and that they enjoy the challenge, too.  I know, they weren’t born with the ability to be good modelers, but it is a certain level of inate talent involved, and I personally would like to spend my time doing other things, if you catch my drift. Besides, if EVERYBODY could model that well, what would there be left to go “ooooh!” to in the magazines and on the Internet, am I right? Then there's also the whole "how strict - or good - of a modeler are you?” debate. I know I have no patience to model a particular year, day and season, or to super detail a car or loco, nor do I have the desire to gain the skills needed to, quite frankly. I certainly admire those who do, and that's what makes the hobby great, otherwise we'd all be happy with "Blue Box" stuff....And that wouldn't be any fun, now would it?

      So now that I’ve “philosophized poetic” about how I feel about, and how I approach prototype modeling, in the end, I’m keeping the car, at least for now. I’m at the point where every car counts, and someday, hopefully soon, I can sit back and start “cherry picking” the roster to weed out those “undesireables” from the roster! Active staging-style layouts take up a LOT of cars apparently.....

      So this marks twice now that a response from a fellow modeler has inspired a blog topic, so thank you Eric for helping me become a better, more knowledgeable modeler. And to everyone else, thank you for reading!

Ralph