1. Back From The Dead.
Entry posted by Methuselah
257 views
The Accidental Modeller.
I only returned to model railways last January (2017), after a hiatus of over forty years…..so, a year on, and before I go further, that probably requires a passing explanation.
Back in the late 1960’s I moved from the RTR stuff into what, for that time, was ‘fine-scale’. The old K’s, Wills & Gem kits etc may seem very crude now – but they were all we had, and if you wanted anything outside of a very narrow band of prototypes, unlike today, you had to make it. At the time, I remember a small GWR branch line OO terminus model called ‘Porthleven’, which was featured in ‘Railway Modeller’ in about 1968 I think, and with which I was very taken. I actually found a copy of that issue last year, and it now all looks a bit crude, but P4 was unknown to me, and beyond my ken in those far-off days. I built my own archetypal made-up GWR branch terminus in OO, complete with 009 narrow-gauge feeder. Like you do….
It never had a name, but it all looked pretty enough. However, there were problems…. It had to be mobile, yet it was really waaaay too heavy – way too much timber…and plaster of Paris…! Worst of all, even using a new, at that time, CODAR PCM controller, five-pole motors and flywheels…and building carefully, none of my locos ran as well in reality as they did in my imagination……… The locos stuttered. They jerked. They stopped and started with a violence that would have liquidised the crew and passengers from G-forces in real life…. Added to all that, I had so many other interests, that something had to give……and it had to be the disappointing model railways.
I subsequently lived for around twenty years, within earshot of a preserved steam railway – so I never abandoned my fascination with the old railways. Then the worm turned…
Last year, having become interested in the history of certain disused rural branch-lines, I thought it might be nice to have a few ‘representative’ items to collect dust on the mantle…..maybe a little tank-engine and a couple of clerestories….. You can probably guess the rest…! At that point, I genuinely had NO intention of taking-up model railways again….. Honest…!
Shortly afterwards…. when I realised that I’d acquired rather too much to perch on the mantle…..well, twenty locos was pushing the original concept/excuse rather - I thought, oh well, I could just make a small branch station etc. Just a small simple wee diorama... Ahem… Now, the wiser readers will know what I had, in my dotage, forgotten, - which is that it is truly amazing just how much space you need to replicate a real station, - even a small one - without cheating…. Whilst I was in the process of realising that I didn’t really have space for this project, I settled on two ideas that were basically wholly mutually incompatible….! To wit ;-
1. The branch would be very nice in P4 (Don’t laugh – I had no idea how tricky P4 can be…!). &
2. That I’d like some sort of ‘roundy-roundy’ for the express-trains and long goods etc.
These are not normally compatible aspirations. Now, not exactly having my whole life before me, not having unlimited funds, time nor patience, it was clear that some sort of imaginative compromise was required, as there was no way I could create a huge fleet in P4. At the same time, I wanted to run some bulk scale-length trains, which really means RTR in OO.
The solution that I have come-up with may not be absolutely unique – I don’t claim it is, - but I have not thus far seen anyone else – possibly foolish enough to try it…. Please let me know if you have...!
My Solution ;- When I started buying items, I crossed an important Rubicon when I started acquiring main-line items, as it was clear that none of it would be suitable for a rural branch-line. What I am creating is really two railways that meet in the middle as it were. I will have a main line in OO, so that I can run all the bulk of my RTR OO. This will run through a junction, and will also have access to the garden, so I will be able to run scale length trains at will. The branch is planned to be P4 to satisfy my predilections for scale . The key is, of course, that it’s all the exact same 4mm scale. My plan is that the P4 will chart it’s own path through the junction, retaining the original accurate track plan without any need for deviation, since the branch had it’s own platform. I’ll have to make-up special crossings diamonds, but since these are all curved, I’d have had to do that anyway, even if it was all OO or all P4. Naturally, there will be a few ‘transition-sections’, where trains will not be able to run, but this is an inherent compromise that I have decided to live with. Will it look odd…? Not really – there is no change in scale – only a slight difference in gauge. In the fullness of time – I may regret this, but having drawn some examples out, it’s looking better than I expected – and in the final analysis – it’s only me that it has to satisfy. It may be anathema to some P4 purists, but I think that most will understand that you cannot realistically expect to run P4 outside with it’s microscopic flanges.
One of the reasons for the explosion of collected stock was that the main-line junction end of the branch was originally GWR – LNWR Joint, later GWR – LMS Joint. Being very much a GWR blokie, this has required something of a mental readjustment….! An old chap I know who has spent his life working on real trains and is an oracle on any railways history, joked that ‘the LNWR was created just to make the GWR look even better’…! A bit harsh maybe – but I do like the idea of some variety and contrast.
The good things then ;-
The bad things ;-
· I’m totally out of touch.
· I lack my former patience.
· DCC is all totally new to me.
· I like the new sound facility – but not the cost…..
· I have to keep my ambitions within something that is satisfying – yet achievable.
· I’m apt to overcomplicate projects. (At least I admit it…!).
One of the biggest issues was ‘Where the hell do I stick this thing…?’. My original plan was to rebuild an old outbuilding out in the front yard to look like a signal box. Great idea…but of course, once I realised just how much space I’d need….it’d have hidden my house……! Back to the drawing board then. The next option was to use the upstairs of an adjoining building. The room is pretty big. However, I’d already planned to make this into carpentry workshop…. Even worse, was the fact that to access the garden for the long expresses, would require a large and complex lift system. I started to design it – and then realised that it was a nonsense. Nor was I happy to fill the downstairs workshop with a layout. The solution that I have settled on is to rebuild and extend some old woodsheds at the rear of the house. This will give me the access to the garden when needed and avoid buggering-up my other work areas. OK, after all that agonising, I had a basic plan.
One of the other parameters for the project was rather unusual. I want to be able to sit outside in the garden when the weather is nice, and see a whole variety of different trains pass, without the need for an operator. Clearly, this predicates DCC and a PC running some sort of program – and although I know this can be done, in principle, I haven’t the foggiest how to actually do it….! Yet.
The layout itself will be on two/three levels. The top layer will be just the scenic shizzle. At the bottom will be an omnidirectional gyrus (Did I really just type that..?). This will serve to allow trains both from the scenic section above, and the garden outside to enter, leave or return, or for ‘shuffling’ to take place. There will be no shunting as such, but all the trains will be ready made-up, sat in a bank of loops. My idea is that it will operate like the music on a smart-phone or PC. Just as you can play the tunes in order – or at random – the PC will be able to call-out trains ‘into play’, then park them and replace them with something different, by a pre-set order, or at random. A set of gradients connect the top scenic-level with the gyrus below, to enable trains to be selected to go above, rather than outside. At the moment, I’m not sure as to the gap between the two main levels. Too big and I’ll create traction problems, too shallow, and I will not have enough room to reach in-between to sort out problems. My guess is 12” – 18”.
Oddly enough, all this tends to make for less, rather than more points, and about 90% of the points will be associated with the storage sidings (It’s not really a fiddle-yard as such.). How many storage loops…? As many as I can manage to fit-in…! There will be no points outside whatsoever, and remarkably few on the scenic area. Inside the gyrus on the lower-level will be the banks of trains stored, ready for action, and out of the dust etc. Although the track through the scenic area is just an Up & Down with a branch and small yard, the gyrus below will be four tracks, all going the same way – it’s a sorting system. A clever junction with fly-over sorts traffic to the outside and up to the scenic area into more realistic two-way traffic. This is to represent, outside a four-lane Up & Down fast and Up & Down Relief/Goods. There will be three types of track used. Hidden and outside will be all standard Peco Streamline Code 100. The scenic OO will be the new Peco Code 75 Bullhead, and of course the branch will be custom P4.
At the moment, I’m collecting items, probably rather too many, but I can easily thin them out later. Nearly all the OO will be RTR. The P4 will be nearly all kits and scratchbuilds. All the buildings will be scratchbuilt, but, mercifully, they are actually very few, with two stations and four road overbridges.
Once the outbuilding is erected, my plan is to make the baseboards in sections. One day I will keel-over, and having seen some very nice layouts ripped to shreds after someone dies or moves, I’d like to give the layout at least a fighting chance of survival. Thus – the ‘standard’ sections will probably be 3’ x 6’. Possibly smaller, as remember they are on two levels. I will make some test-sections and heft them to see if I need to reduce them further to cut weight. I will do the inside layout first, since the garden section is the icing on the cake for me, and a summer-only task.
All of the layout will be DCC, and all the OO points and signals DCC too. The P4 section will be manual DCC train, but have manual points and signals by rods and cables, just to keep it more ‘prototypical’ – and because it amuses me…..!
Compromise;- Compromise, some say, is odious, however, in modelling, everything is about compromise. Certainly OO is a compromise. It’s really something that should have been dropped years ago, when Hornby Dublo three-rail went out, but here we are, in 2018, still saddled with it. Of course – the manufacturers should have go their act together decades ago to either go HO or to the correct P4 gauge at least. In fact, I read somewhere that during the war – this was agreed, and I’m given to understand that they proposed what was effectively a P4 Coarse and P4 Fine as the way forwards, but like many things, it never happened. What a pity – so we have to live with what we have.
One of the subtle precipitants in my return to railway modelling was the most excellent aforementioned Peco Code 75 Bullhead. It really transforms OO, compared with the now very coarse-looking Peco Streamline FB Code 100. True, there is as yet a small availability of points/turnouts, but it’s still a huge leap for OO – and together with some of the excellent modern RTR, gives OO a new lease of life for UK modellers. Hats-off to Peco then. To my great surprise, on my little test section, any and all of my very eclectic collection of locos will run on it, some of which date back to the early 1960’s.
Almost all of my nasty tight curves will be hidden out of sight, but in order to shoehorn a real place into the space available, I’ve had to create a plan that ‘bends’ reality. I don’t like doing it, but it’s literally the ONLY way I can fit things in – and I don’t take such compromises lightly either. All the lengths and widths etc will be to correct 4mm scale, so no shortening of sidings, loops or stations etc.
*** Operationally, all the OO will be automatic – and the P4 manual. Since the actual infrastructure never changed until the branch was scrapped in the ghastly 1960’s, I can operate several time-periods. I have trains that will represent pre-Great War late Victorian – early Edwardian, then between wars, then lastly, the final period up to Nationalisation. I have also been creating collections of figures and vehicles etc, so that I can have a tray for each period, and swap those details when I run different eras of train. I’m not going to be ultra-slavish about this, but Armstrong 517’s and Metro Tanks with polished brass domes – and 1930’s – ‘40’s vehicles and figures would look really daft – as would a Hawkworth County with Victorian figures and all horse road traffic.
If I’m really honest, over the last twelve months some of my tastes have changed. There is WAY more variety of designs and liveries Pre-Grouping, by a huge margin. Added to that, everything was normally kept clean and tidy – so very little need to spoil good models with ‘weathering’. (Someone will make a living in years to come cleaning-up all these ‘Weathered’ models…!).
I have to plead almost complete ignorance to DCC, other than having learnt the basic principles. I have been collecting Lenz equipment. My original preference was for the Bachmann infra-red remote system - the display is large and informative. However, I started to see adverse comment on the web with regard to problems of IR range, and, given the type and size I planned, constantly losing connection would have rendered the system useless. Also – since DCC was originated by Lenz, I have presumed that it will offer the best shared compatibility. I have no idea if this theory will be born-out in practice however…! Some have commented that the Lenz hand-controls are a bit dated, but it’s not very relevant for me. None of it is new – but it does seem to be tried and tested. Please bear in mind that I will only be ‘driving’ trains on the smaller P4 branch, and the OO should run off a PC program - that's the theory at any rate...!
Sounds;- This is another one of the advances that attracted me back to have another go after so long. It’s not new. In the late 1960’s, a friend lent me an American ‘Big-Boy’ Garret-type loco to play with. This was superb, and had full sound – and it was as good as, if not better than some current UK models I’ve heard. I’m not a diesel fan, but I have to say that the model diesels have been transformed by sound. It works very well for them. I suspect more internal room allows for a bigger speaker – as well as a better resonant-chamber etc. Thus far, apart from some amazing German models, the UK steam locos with sound have left me greatly underwhelmed. Not that I’ve seen that many, but they seem quiet, scratchy and very tinny. To add insult to injury, DCC sound decoders are also insanely expensive. I have about 100 locos, so that equates to about £10,000.00 if I fitted them all with a DCC sound decoder/chip. For £10,000.00, I could hire a coterie of naked ladies to dance around making suitable noises for double the enjoyment and half the price. Ten Grand..? Naaa……some lateral thinking is required I think. (More anon.).
As for locos and stock – almost every item is used – some of it very well used. It ranges from ancient Triang to latest Hornby, Dapol, Heljan and Rapido. For the P4, it’s mostly kits. Most are used, that I will convert/rebuild. There wasn’t much choice with some items. For example – I have a collection of relatively rare and poorly made K’s LNWR six-wheeled coaches. I will strip and rebuild and repaint these. It’s fair to say that modern RTR looks better than any kit-built models, with very few exceptions. I have seen a few RTR with new chassis converted to P4 – so that’s another option. I have bought a fair number of old kit locos to ‘process’ in this way – mainly for the P4. To be honest however, I’m not very confident that I can get very close to some of the modern Bachmann….., but if one wants to run a few older Victorian items, it’s pretty-much Hobson’s choice…..
So there we have it. A first blog post – ever. I shan’t be blogging very often you may be relieved to hear, but I thought that, for those interested – and masochistic enough to read my verbiage, it’d provide a starting-point to understanding from whence this odd project sprang. It’s all an accident really – and an exercise in pragmatism. I'm still on a very steep learning curve - and will be for some time. Expect me to ask some really dumb questions - for which I'd like to apologise in advance....!
If any of you have dabbled in this dark and diabolical mixture of 4mm OO & P4 on the same layout, I’d be very interested to hear about it. Nor do I mind thoughts or comments, whether positive or negative. I hope that you have found the above interesting or at least amusing.
-
3
2 Comments
Recommended Comments
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now