Jump to content
 

The Leaky Bucket List and the Rule of Two


Keith Addenbrooke

604 views

Note: This final instalment of my Introduction and Background has been split into two episodes, to keep the suspense up (???) a little longer.  Some content has been discussed in other RMweb Forums / threads:

 

Episode 4 - The Leaky Bucket List and the Rule of Two

 

In this double episode I’m looking at possible project options, to draw this first series of posts to a close.  I don’t have a permanent modelling space, but I do have use of a room that has become spare, with the proviso that I can clear it out when the house is full (once or twice a year).  I need to build a removable layout, though it doesn’t need the full flexibility of an exhibition layout.  So let’s go…

 

Project A - Workbench

 

The first piece of advice I often share with folk wanting to build their first layout is to start modelling.  Make a kit or a small diorama while planning the dream layout.  Build some experience.  It’s something I wish I’d known years ago, and is something I do now.  So I’ve learnt that the first thing I must have is a workbench, not a baseboard.  This is the space (the 31.5” arrow bottom right is the door):

 

0A822466-8858-4DF5-A41C-D66136BC1424.jpeg.28775535f82997f5c1059ea8b8f41a42.jpeg

 

…and this is the easiest way to fit in a workbench by the window and a layout - the baseboard can cantilever over the bed (which is not moveable).  A layout space of 9’ x 4’4” isn’t huge, particularly for a continuous run layout, but is more than I’ve had to play with before:

 

1CB1429B-3BF1-4356-92C9-F0E245BA493A.jpeg.154ef5ada15ddf9d3ea978d85584a574.jpeg

 

The IKEA Kallax storage unit is not mine and access is not required.  The sink is useful, but could be blocked off (or reached from the operating well).  Other arrangements can be considered, but permanent shelves / wall fixings are not an option (several reasons).

 

Project B - Layout Options (the Leaky Bucket List and the Rule of Two)

 

A second piece of advice is to look more closely at prototype railways (important, as my primary influences were other model railways).  Once I stepped back from the idea of an OO Gauge GWR Branch Line, I had complete freedom to explore any prototype in any scale or gauge.  Through 2021 and 2022 I had great fun trying new things.  Each time I thought I’d cracked it something changed: my bucket list of layout ideas leaks!  The gift of this space means I can now settle down.  So I’ll tackle my possible projects list in prototype order.

 

One final thing before I start - what is my Rule of Two?  It refers to how many locomotives I have for a potential project, and is something I’ve established to show my level of interest in an idea: while I have one locomotive an idea can be classed as a novelty, but buying a second one means I have a relief engine as insurance against loco failure / maintenance.  From this point on it can start to feel like I’m running a small railway.  So, what are my options:

 

Project B1.1 - British Outline Standard Gauge

 

In my case this would still mean a GWR Branch Line.  Other than a couple of items of sentimental value, I’ve finished selling off my OO Gauge collection, and only have these incomplete Ratio kits for a country station (Castle Cary) and platform awning (Generic):

 

3606DFC3-336E-4ACB-B6B9-233998DFD031.jpeg.56c937be65f980b7e284722514a9994c.jpeg


AC5E3AB9-09E6-4F38-B546-B261A7CE33EF.jpeg.bde7a4626e88d0ad9fc8bf6fca35b9ed.jpeg

 

I started it in 2020.  Close up, I was making a decent job of it until I left some trademark glue marks on the awning glazing, something I’d now feel confident I could fix.  But with nothing else in my stash, I can’t see me returning to British OO Gauge for a layout.  Until Peco announced their TT:120 range I wasn’t sure I’d return to British outline modelling at all, but I was taken by their range of kits and have bought a set (I also have more Flextrack in storage, not shown):

 

2224DFE0-11C9-46D4-BD86-F45CEA6E8A9F.jpeg.2b1ac1b688a7993f1cdfab01d3184859.jpeg

 

My plan is for this to be a future project, once suitable rolling stock is available, so it’s not the layout I want to build now.  With TT:120 now an option, I can’t see me going back to British outline N Gauge.

 

Project B1.2 - British Outline Narrow Gauge

 

As a Member of the 009 Society, I’ve seen the delightful models now being produced by Peco, Heljan, Kato and (especially) Bachmann close up and running.  With the promise of more to come, r-t-r 009 is becoming an established commercial option.  While I’ve modified some 009 items for my American HOn30 layout however, I’m not tempted to build a British Outline Narrow Gauge layout at present.

 

Project B2.1 - American Outline Standard Gauge

 

The American influence on my modelling is clear.  With my Dad still modelling in American HO, it’s a natural option for me to consider, and I made a fresh start around the turn of the year.  I have some building kits ready and waiting:

 

06850AA7-C132-4227-BF8E-6D1DE1AC178A.jpeg.b2f5697b1590a6d138ac82fb156bca78.jpeg

 

And a selection of pre-painted freight car kits to build too:

 

49BB13D2-0892-43D7-AABD-7C5C70C15089.jpeg.fe7f7c55d0d511897c256bd3f2b704ae.jpeg

 

A couple of diesel locomotives (plus one awaiting repair) and a total of around 40 freight cars (including these kits and some needing new couplers) means I have all I need for a c.1970 freight based layout.  What’s the catch?  American HO Scale needs space - I’ve looked at small switching layouts, and while I enjoy watching them, have never quite persuaded myself to follow through on the layouts I’ve designed to actually build one.  I’d like to run trains at least 15 cars long, but with the four car train in my header photo measuring 44” my space and my ambitions don’t meet. I’m going to keep American outline modelling, but will it be this first layout?  Not sure at the moment.

 

I have looked at North American N-Scale.  This KATO ‘Gevo’ was the smoothest and most impressive locomotive I’ve ever owned:

 

3ACBD5AE-3FE2-4FC0-AB10-A47777351C38.jpeg.206eb31a77596751915b54d9f6d131de.jpeg

 

F318640E-34A9-4870-B653-B48C97D5705E.jpeg.66b806228c8e6b2c4c6e6e42951cce12.jpeg

 

(I like lights - this is DC too).  For test running it was superlative, but I found I could no longer read some of the detail on freight cars, and couldn’t properly see the couplings (far right in the photo below):

 

21CA937A-E2F5-4203-964F-8CB00C1B26E1.jpeg.0385d09c13f9fc9e3f86637bd5d43801.jpeg

 

Not a problem on an unscenicked test circuit, but I think I’d find it too fiddly / frustrating when anything broke / fell off on a layout, so I went back to HO.  I didn’t buy a second locomotive.

 

American TT (also 1:120 or 1/10th of an inch scale) is impressive but has little commercial support, and modellers also seem to prefer the same N-Scale couplings.  A variant of these is used for North American Z-Scale, so I think HO is the smallest viable scale for me.

 

One advantage of North American modelling worth noting before moving on: depending on the choice of prototype, it’s possible to dispense with station platforms (certainly high level ones).  This can save a lot of space on a model layout, something I’ve learned over many years while trying to convert American plans into impossible British outline layouts!

 

Project B2.2 - American Outline Narrow Gauge

 

One of my favourite all-time magazine articles was in the November 1981 issue of Model Railroader magazine.  Modeller Bob Hayden was designing a new basement-sized freelance 1940s HOn2 1/2 (now called HOn30) Carabasset and Dead River Railway.  It was my inspiration for returning to Narrow Gauge modelling in early 2021.  My modelling space at the time had moved up into our attic room, and I didn’t fancy carrying large Standard Gauge stock boxes (and buildings) up and down steep stairs when visitors needed the room.

 

But HOn30 hasn’t really taken off.  On30 became popular when Bachmann introduced a range, and every On30 layout I’ve seen is wonderful.  But with limited space I’m not sure I’d want to move up to O-Scale, and with the Bachmann range now rarely seen on sale, a more realistic option would be to extend my existing HOn30 CAL.  I could do this of course, but with just a few freight car scratch-aid kits left to build I’ve found I’m content with what I have.  I have the two locos I’m happy with, and am not planning a bigger layout.

 

to be continued.

 

In the next and final part of this blog post, I’ll look at the Continental European prototypes and models I’m interested in, then draw my conclusions for this section of my journey towards a model railway layout.  Until next time, thank you for your patience, Keith.

 

Edited by Keith Addenbrooke

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1

5 Comments


Recommended Comments

Hi Keith. 

I'm late to your blog but have enjoyed reading it very much; looking forward to further installments.

 

I think one of rhe most important points you make is:

"Through 2021 and 2022 I had great fun trying new things."

 

Well, if you achieve nothing else you've done the most important thing. 👍

 

All the best. Andy

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
  • RMweb Premium
32 minutes ago, AndyB said:

Hi Keith. 

I'm late to your blog but have enjoyed reading it very much; looking forward to further installments.

 

I think one of rhe most important points you make is:

"Through 2021 and 2022 I had great fun trying new things."

 

Well, if you achieve nothing else you've done the most important thing. 👍

 

All the best. Andy


Thanks Andy, part of the enjoyment comes from sharing the journey too.  The next instalment wont’t be too long now, although a long sequence of wet days here has prevented baseboard building.  Instead I’ve been refining both my H0e and HO standard gauge collections, selling on some items I no longer need and building a small fund for new purchases as I look towards a layout again.  I also have a number of builds on the go (six narrow gauge freight cars and two building kits as of today).  All good stuff, Keith.

  • Like 1
Link to comment

The other takeaway I get is that you've gained experience over many gauge and scale combinations. 

 

In particular you've found N gauge too small for your eyesight but seem to gravitate towards narrow gauge in larger scales. 

 

So I wanted to ask how you've found working with track that I'm guessing is on a par with N gauge? 

 

My likely direction of travel is eventually to move from N gauge up to 009*, so I'd be interested to hear your thoughts. 

 

* the recent r-t-r locos are very hard to resist!!

Link to comment
  • RMweb Premium

Hi Andy, good question.  I’ve shared some of my response elsewhere, but I’ll put it all here for reference if that’s OK:  

 

I feel N Scale has two clear advantages over H0e / HOn30 which I observed:

  • Narrower bodies on rolling stock (less overhang) meant getting everything on the rails was easier and quicker.
  • And a sense of distance is easier to maintain (obviously).  Your Nantford Spinney layout is a great example.

My two issues were:

  • Couplings - scale is more of a defining criteria than gauge, and while I can manage the traditional chunky Arnold N-Scale couplings (and Märklin Z-Scale ones), I couldn’t properly see Micro-Trains US couplers to work with. 
  • The issue with eyesight means a) I couldn’t read all the impressive finely printed detail on modern r-t-r rolling stock, even under magnification, and b) the proportion of modelling / kit building that may involve smaller, fiddly bits I can’t really see is higher (eg: on structures - there may be fine detail in larger scales, but other parts of the task are easier, and I like at least some of the job to be straightforward).  A comment I remember from your own thread concerning detail on your laser cut N-Gauge station building is that digital photography means the level of expected detail is now much higher.  Full credit to the manufacturers for responding to this: I’m not that patient.

As for track, some things may be identical between N Scale and 9mm HO / OO narrow gauge track (eg: fishplates, wiring), but this comparison photo also shows a visual difference - both are Peco Code 80 products:

 

IMG_5167.jpeg.db8b25a464bbf26fa8b91581d91b52eb.jpeg

 

When it comes to ballasting, the larger scale track has more room (and ballast stones can be bigger).  It can also be argued of course that Code 80 N-Scale track is over-sized, and Code 55 or Code 40 may be preferred, whereas for the larger scale, Narrow Gauge modeller @Hobby calculated that the Code 80 of this ‘mainline’ narrow gauge track (Peco SL-404) is actually in line with the prototype rail used by some Austrian Narrow Gauge lines (eg: the Zillertalbahn).

 

Hope that helps - I certainly agree that the current 009 r-t-r models are superb - and very hard to resist, Keith.

 

  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to comment

Thanks Keith. A very intesting perspective; thank-you for sharing. 

 

As you know I'm currently working on a new layout and, like you, I currently favour the roundy-roundy approach. Nantford Spinney BLT had about an 18' run FY to station throat. But even with that it would have been nice to settle back and watch the scene for longer without having to intervene.  Hence the new N gauge layout will allow that.

 

But eventually I may conclude that I can do that in a larger scale (OO9). And in a few years time that may be easier to work with. 

 

I sympathise with you struggling to see the very fine detail; I'll confess that when track laying I have to run my finger over joints to double check alignment.  

 

As ever I'll be interested to see where your layout planning takes you. 

Andy 

  • Like 1
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...