Saturday essay: Punting on the railroad |

Saturday essay: Punting on the railroad

Ah, the best-laid plans of mice and men often go astray. As do those of junior engineers working on model railroads.

The original plan for this year’s update to the eight-line N-scale train platform was expansive. Not only would a rubber-wheeled trolley bus (which takes its power from overhead lines) replace a light-rail vehicle that wends its way through a mountaintop village, a freight line cutting through those mountains would, instead of hugging the mountainside at one point, go peak to peak over a long and curved trestle bridge.

But getting the trolley bus to run with any consistency proved to be a daunting task; it will have to wait to be perfected in the “off-season.” And so much time was devoted to that project, too little time was left for the trestle build. That, however, does not mean there are no updates.

In the rush to complete the then-new platform in 2012, two tunnel faces were pushed forward and a shorter bridge was eliminated. Those faces have been pushed back and an exquisite Warren Truss bridge (circa 1957, found buried on a local hobby shop shelf in its original packaging) now spans the space just above the tunnel entrances.

Additionally, three new mountains were built, planted with scores of model trees.

And even though this year’s best-laid plans went awry, the updates that did make it from drawing board to platform will provide years of model railroading pleasure.

— Colin McNickle

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.