A garden railway OR a railway in a garden

[andymctractor]

I apologise as I'm sure this has been asked more than once before.
I thought I understood the difference between a garden railway and a railway in a garden.
As this is a fundamental question apparently needing to be asked in the early stages of a railway's design I thoght it would be interesting to see if members had similar opinions as to what the difference was.
What do members think?

[Narrow Minded]

According to a recent poll held on here Andy, many members regard any railway in the garden as a garden railway - this was in response to a photo of someone wearing a "layout-on-a-hat" in the garden
http://gardenrails.myfreeforum.org/about6656.html

[steamie1]

The emphasis is your choice. If your with a partner its a collective decision for success

[Narrow Minded]

I'm currently writing a thesis on the subject

[MDLR]

It all depends.......................

If you want your railway to "disappear" into the garden, build a garden railway.

If this is not a consideration, and you don't mind seeing the construction (like this)



then build a railway in a garden!

[steamie1]

As a specie the male engineer likes to push things. I pushed things with the volume of the build in the garden and the domestic authorities frowned during the build. BUT afterwards it was approved. Later nature took over and now it is only just seen because the ground cover has worked its magic. So much so, I fancy another PUSH! BUT I have to negotiate carefully.

[Peter L]

What's important is what you want. Some people want to fill every square inch with track and some people (like me) want the railway to be there - but almost lost in the garden. The great thing about our hobby is that you get to make what you want, not what some cabal of know-it-alls want.

The perfect garden railroad is the one that make you happy.
Correction: the perfect garden railroad is the one that make the Mrs. happy!

[Narrow Minded]

I think the art of compromise is alive and well within the world of garden railways

I would also even go as far as to say that the raised layout in MDLRs example should be labelled "Garden Railway", for exactly the reason that it is a "railway in a garden" . Confused?

The railway was specifically designed, planned and built to exist in the garden.
This would apply to any gauge, any scale. Scenic or non-scenic, permanent or temporary.

On the other hand, a layout designed, planned and built to be portable (ie as a whole - baseboard, track, scenery etc) which just happens to be taken out and operated in the garden, is NOT a "garden railway" IMHO.

Sorry to carp on, this was all dragged out in the aforementioned thread, but, you did ask the question, and although I know I'm in the minority (from the result of the poll), I still stand by my own opinion.
If your definition differs, does it matter? Of course not! It doesn't matter what anyone else thinks - even if there is "some cabal of know-it-alls" what they want shouldn't matter to you!

The important thing is that you get some fresh air, and have fun playing trains, with either a garden railway, railway in a garden or just drag the old Hornby baseboard out there if it's not raining!

[TommyDodd]

In theory It boils down to a question of approach. I would say a "garden railway" goes around and through the the garden, blends with it and makes use of the greenery for scenery. A balance is struck between scale realism and real-world aesthetic considerations. A "Railway in the garden" would be more like an indoor model railway outside. Probably on raised baseboards, and equally likely with scenics restricted to "within the railway fence" buildings and bits and bobs. The railway is separate from the garden and doesn't use living scenery. The choice of the modeller resorting to "the big blue room" for space for length of run or the complexities of system operation.

Out in the real world I don't think it matters quite so much. The terms define two polar opposite approaches to design, construction and operation but 99% of people fall somewhere in between. The totally integrated "garden railway" would be beautiful to look at but if the aesthetics are not compromised anywhere for practical reasons probably a pig to operate and maintain. Equally, the owner of a pure "indoor railway outdoors" run with no interest in the blue-sky world will soon discover that even if he ignores nature, nature is not going to ignore him!

[andymctractor]

Thanks to all for replying.
I didn't intend the question to rekindle any hostility between followers of either type of 'garden' railway.

I understand why the original users of the terms might want someone to decide early in the garden railway design process which way they wished to go, in a general sense at least. I don't think they were trying to categorise all 'garden' railways into one group or the other and they were even less likely to intend to suggest one way was better than the other.

In conclusion it would appear that terms originally used loosely have been interpreted by some in much more detail than intended.

[Si]

I think that mine might be classed as a 'railway in the garden', but to me it's just a gurt big train set that I have loads of fun with. And what anyone else thinks matters not a jot

[Boustrophedon]

For me the appeal is for a railway that wends its way through the garden and being a part of the garden, whilst not taking over the garden. Mine, still in the planning stage will have to negotiate the garden pretty much as it is, whilst giving some shape to the long neglected flower beds.

I suppose what I am  trying to say is that I like the bits of track between the stations, the railway in a landscape, rather than going the full Bekonscot