provided updates of their work. Many of those original people
still frequent the forums today. As MRH moved from a quarterly
to bi-monthly to monthly publication, the forums grew and more
people were finding what a great resource the MRH website is,
not just the publication. Unfortunately, this was where it all went
terribly wrong for my hobby.
The more I learned from the forums and MRH itself, whether it
was in the questions I asked, articles I read or just reading other
peoples' questions or comments, the more I realized where my
layout lacked. Where once I saw a great CP loco with the Action
Red and Multimark, I began to see a loco with the incorrect head-
light, bell and horn placement. Where once I saw some nice dou-
ble stack cars, I now saw cars that didn't fit my chosen era.
In fact, after my recent switch back to HO, I pulled out a few locos
I had stored and instead of seeing the nicely detailed, smooth
running locos, I now saw a foobie and three others that needed a
number of modifications to bring them up to standards. In fact, I
sold the foobie and one of the other locos, and bought two newer
offerings that were much closer to standard. The other two await
a promised article on detailing them from a MRH member.
I also used to enjoy “designing” track plans that would fit in my
desired space. My main requirements in those designs years ago
was trying to get the longest mainline run, have a tunnel, at least
a couple bridges and a couple passing sidings to run two trains
opposite directions.
Now I have to figure out ways to make the layout a plausible
depiction of a real railroad, including operational plans and deter-
mining what rolling stock and locos I will need to meet these
objectives. Now I have to really work hard at getting a good plan.
Thanks, MRH. Look at how you've ruined my hobby!
