Deliberately Old-Fashioned 0 Scale - Chapter 1

[sncf231e]

These loco's have an extra control knob and using a special track (ramp rail) you can control start and stop:

 

The running distance is given rather low; it runs more on my track:

 

And about the detail; it does not look bad compared to a fine scale model:

 

But if you are not into "Deliberately old fashioned 0 scale" you will not agree (and should not read this thread ).

 

Regards

Fred

[Nearholmer]

120ft run sounds impressive, and it is certainly better by some distance than the few 4-4-0 clockwork locos that I have, but it still isn’t really “ sit back and watch the train go by” stuff.

I’m never surprised that clockwork lost out to electric so decisively.

[Donw]

I knew you realised about the traps but mentioned them in case you were thinking of dirfferent ones, like the one that would be linked to the turnout at the end of the Paltry Circus line although in practice I suspect there would be a bit more than just a trap.  The rules would probably insist there was a clear  1/4 mile ahead of the signal before a train was allowed to leave Paltry Circus.  Sometimes one has to fudge things a bit.

Regarding the Signals it would be fairly simple to make them electrically operated with out damage. My choice would be an under baseboard servo which would push a rod upwards with a U shaped bit at the top of the rod which could lift the end of the counterweight. It might be necessary to hold the signal down a couple of drawing pins over the edge of the base would do the job. If the rod wasn't too rigid excessive movement could cause it to slip past the end of the counterweight. Using the Megapoint Servo unit and cheap servos would be around £80-90 for twelve operating arms and would only need simple on off switches. The is an even cheaper way use the cheap servos ( less than £2 each) disconnect the fancy electronics then using a centre off changerover biased both ways  to operate the servo manually just releasing the switch when I has reached the right position.

You will note I have assumed the conterweight will return the signal but they may be balanced to stay in either position if that is the case rather than a U shaped end the rod needs a loop round the end of the counterweight to push or pull the counterweight.

Simple interlocking can be done electrically if felt it was needed.

 

Don

 

[Donw]

47 minutes ago, sncf231e said:

These loco's have an extra control knob and using a special track (ramp rail) you can control start and stop:

 

The running distance is given rather low; it runs more on my track:

 

And about the detail; it does not look bad compared to a fine scale model:

 

But if you are not into "Deliberately old fashioned 0 scale" you will not agree (and should not read this thread ).

 

Regards

Fred

 

Well Fred I am definitely on the finescale side and have modelled in EM and 2mm finescale as well as 0 finescale, but I can appreciate an old fashioned 0 scale layout (particularly a good one). Which is one reason I was able to please both camps when editor of the Guild Gazette.  I would suggest it is worth reading things outside of your particular interest there is plenty to learn from others.

 

Don 

[The Evil Bus Driver]

On 04/02/2019 at 15:03, Nearholmer said:

Reminded me of this, in a Mister Men book (you can tell what I spent the past ten years reading!).

That just reminded me of Nice 'n' Tidy as devised by a certain Vivian Stanshall

[Nearholmer]

I had to google that - yes, very.

 

Almost wonder if one inspired the other, because the lyrics have a very similar tone to the words in the book, which has two characters: Mr Neat, and Mr Tidy.

Edited November 5, 2019 by Nearholmer

[rockershovel]

1 hour ago, sncf231e said:

These loco's have an extra control knob and using a special track (ramp rail) you can control start and stop:

 

The running distance is given rather low; it runs more on my track:

 

And about the detail; it does not look bad compared to a fine scale model:

 

But if you are not into "Deliberately old fashioned 0 scale" you will not agree (and should not read this thread ).

 

Regards

Fred

 

That video is a classic demonstration of the “three foot rule”! It looks the part in action, doesn’t it? 

[sncf231e]

1 hour ago, Donw said:

 

Well Fred I am definitely on the finescale side and have modelled in EM and 2mm finescale as well as 0 finescale, but I can appreciate an old fashioned 0 scale layout (particularly a good one). Which is one reason I was able to please both camps when editor of the Guild Gazette.  I would suggest it is worth reading things outside of your particular interest there is plenty to learn from others.

 

Don 

 

Don, I agree. By looking and reading outside I could compile an e-book on gauge and scale (where the photo of the 2 Flying Scotsmen was made for). It can be read here: http://sncf231e.nl/gauge-and-scale/

Regards

Fred

[Northroader]

If folks haven’t spotted it, Fred has a really nice feature on Continental Pacific’s, and mixed in with some very classy finescale models, you’ll find some rather good 0-4-0 Pacific’s and the like.

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/147450-models-of-continental-pacifics/

 

[Nearholmer]

We might as well take this short BL-fest as far as we can ......

 

The other locos in the less-unaffordable range during the 1950s were the Compound, which appears here regularly, because I like it’s balance of scale-ness and robustness.

 

 

And ‘Prince Charles’, which changed livery and number over the years, blue at the back, then green lined b&w, and, finally, proper BR express passenger livery.

 

Beyond that came the Flying Scotsman, as shown by Fred, also in BR blue or green, then a four-fold leap in catalogue price to get to the Stanier 2-6–4T and Royal Scot (has anyone here present got either that they can show?), before the locos that I think were only built to order.

 

To end, here is a slightly lurid picture of their showroom layout, nicked from a contemporary ‘how to do it’ book about railway modelling. The wagons in it (brake, open, covered) were all they made in tinplate post-WW2, except for bare chassis with loads tied to them ..... a real come-down from their 1930s range.

 

 

Apart from the 'blood and custard' coaches, nothing in the basic range was new post-WW2, it was just available in new (and duller!) liveries, and I think that the coaches were probably already in development when hostilities commenced. 0-gauge as a popular scale was almost on its last legs, the Hornby range had retrenched to the toy market, and Precision Models, the factory that made the basic BL range and the contemporary Trix range folded because of starvation of materials and starvation of orders as Trix first-generation trains became outmoded. Quite a contrast to the vibrancy of the US-scene that Rocker is showing us in his thread.

 

Interesting point is that Precision Models was bought by a photographic company, I believe because it had all the skills and tooling to make the innards of high quality cameras, which were also precisely cut and formed sheet steel, and I was told by a man who knows these things that it eventually ended-up as part of a French food canning company.

Edited November 5, 2019 by Nearholmer

[rockershovel]

I do like the circumlocutory advertising, circling the point that the model is basically freelance and built down to a price! You can almost smell the St Bruno smoke, and hear the avuncular, Alvar Liddell tones.... 

 

I rather like the 0-6-0 goods locomotive, it does reflect a generic and ubiquitous type, still be seen everywhere at the time.. but inside cylinder 4-4-0 had long since had their day, by then. 

 

More than anything, though, tinplate simply wasn’t versatile enough. Hornby Dublo were blazing a whole new trail with die casting and subsequently, injection moulding; Lionel and American Flyer were doing something similar in O and S in the States.

[Nearholmer]

What British 0 gauge needed c1950 if it was to survive, or even thrive, was, as you say, investment in new methods, and it had already withered to a degree that couldn’t support that ...... there weren’t enough customers.

 

Your point about devaluation made me attempt to check relative spending powers of the UK and US markets c1950, and, even allowing for error, the contrast is stark.

 

US Average salary $3210/year = £1146

A family car in the US cost c6 months salary.

 

UK average wage (see subsequent post for how figure has been “guesstimated”)= c£400

A family car in the UK cost c11 months wages.

 

And, the UK had severe material shortages, rationing, a foreign-earnings policy that deprived the home market of goods, and (presumably) only a few hundred thousand families at most with large disposable incomes.

 

Data for the US is much better, and they had roundly 5 Million families with roundly double the national average income or more, so presumably large disposable.

 

I can’t lay hands on Hornby Dublo prices right now, but they were definitely lower than BL, so better access to the difficult market.

 

Put simply, The British were too skint for 0 gauge in the early 1950s, and for a long time thereafter.

 

[Edited to use what is probably a more accurate earnings figure for the UK]
 

 

Edited November 6, 2019 by Nearholmer

[rockershovel]

9 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

What British 0 gauge needed c1950 if it was to survive, or even thrive, was, as you say, investment in new methods, and it had already withered to a degree that couldn’t support that ...... there weren’t enough customers.

 

Your point about devaluation made me attempt to check relative spending powers of the UK and US markets c1950, and, even allowing for error, the contrast is stark.

 

US Average salary $3210/year = £1146

A family car in the US cost c6 months salary.

 

UK average industrial wage (full spectrum across all jobs seems not to have been recorded) = £110

A family car in the UK cost c36 months wages.

 

And, the UK had severe material shortages, rationing, and (presumably) only a few hundred thousand families with large disposable incomes.

 

Data for the US is much better, and they had roundly 5 Million families with roundly double the national average income or more, so presumably large disposable.

 

I can’t lay hands on Hornby Dublo prices right now, but they were definitely lower than BL, so better access to the difficult market.

 

Put simply, The British were too skint for 0 gauge in the early 1950s, and for a long time thereafter.

 

 

 

Not only that. I remember the chronic housing shortages - which continued well into the 1960s - and the cramped tower blocks which were a large part of the solution. I also remember letters and photos from family members who had emigrated to the USA and Canada between 1900 and 1950, and the sense of space and prosperity they gave. 

 

However.... there’s a photo of my late mother, driving a car in Canada in the 1930s, aged 13. She had been amazed that Uncle Bill’s household of 6 including his married son possessed two cars, but quickly realised that with their isolated location - nearest neighbours two miles away, a trip to town for shopping occupying most of the day, twice a month, life was almost insupportable any other way. Her older cousin left before dawn to drive 60 miles to his job at an oil terminal, her younger cousins were picked up by the school bus at 6am and returned at 6pm. 

 

[Hroth]

51 minutes ago, rockershovel said:

Hornby Dublo were blazing a whole new trail with die casting and subsequently, injection moulding;

 

Only for the locos.

Tinplate (with with solid windows!) Dublo carriages and wagons were still being sold in the mid-late 50s and even the superdetailed carriages with real windows and interiors had tinplate bodies. It took the move to 2-rail to try and compete with Triang for injection moulded rolling stock to become the norm at Hornby and by then it was too late.

 

Compared with the relative "fidelity" of Hornby Dublo, and the compact nature of a Dublo layout, tinplate clockwork O gauge had become an irrelevance by the 50s.  Even if more realistic injection moulded bodies for O had been introduced, the zeitgeist had moved on and Hornby would have gone bust even earlier.

 

I might have to get out my clockwork 0-4-0 tinplate goods set and watch it rocket around the oval of track this evening...

 

[rockershovel]

Tri-Ang also realised that 12v DC 2-Rail was the way ahead. They circumvented the increasingly elaborate electro-mechanical system favoured by Lionel, too - look at the iconic Hornby TPO, which works simply by springs and motion, as an example. The tension-lock coupling was also a piece of design genius; it worked, reliably and simply; uncoupled using a simple plastic ramp. The isolating, dead-frog points were ingenious, giving a version of “block control” simply by changing direction. 

 

It’s interesting to compare Tri-Ang and Lionel. Both essentially represent the same approach - a robust, reliable toy train, simple to operate and with plenty of features in a similar space. Both made a lot of use of injection moulding. The Lionel O27 range includes self-contained uncoupler tracks running from track voltage, “dead block” points and other features much like Tri-Ang - even a TPO. There was a “prestige” loco - the O27 version of the NYC Hudson, compared to the Tri-Ang “Princess Elizabeth”. The 031 range was much more of an update of “traditional O Gauge”. 

Edited November 6, 2019 by rockershovel

[Nearholmer]

And, Triang licensed some ‘car concepts’ from Lionel, giraffes, battle-space etc, so they must have been in dialogue.

[St Enodoc]

21 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

And, Triang licensed some ‘car concepts’ from Lionel, giraffes, battle-space etc, so they must have been in dialogue.

They certainly were.:

 

https://www.brightontoymuseum.co.uk/index/Category:Tri-ang_Lionel

[Nearholmer]

This, from what I think is a semi-official G0G  website says it all really:

 

“In 1956 a group of, then, young people founded the Gauge 0 Guild to try to breath life into what was fast becoming a moribund scale/gauge save for a few diehard scratch builders.”

[Northroader]

I’d query your average earnings for 1950 figure, what I recall, dad was coming home with a net annual of about £350 plus without overtime, and he wasn’t a skilled tradesman, so must have been near average or just below. It’s still very low compared with America, but it did place trainsets as unaffordable luxuries compared with kids school clothes, say.

[rockershovel]

1 hour ago, St Enodoc said:

They certainly were.:

 

https://www.brightontoymuseum.co.uk/index/Category:Tri-ang_Lionel

 

I didn’t realise they were actually connected, but the resemblances (giraffe cars, missile launchers, helicopters and even the egregious “exploding boxcar”) are strong. 

[Nearholmer]

Northroader

 

earnings data for the UK in the 1950s (and even up to the 1970s) are frustratingly difficult to source, especially compared with the US, where great tables of statistics can be found easily. One thing I did find was a contemporary report in Hansard of MPs at the time bemoaning the fact that they themselves couldn’t get meaningful data upon which to base their decisions ...... seems very strange in retrospect. So, I took a figure that seems widely cited in things like retrospective newspaper articles, but cited without source.

 

In short, I can quite believe that my figure is wrong, and if anyone can point me to a better one, I’d be really interested.

 

Thinking about it, I might be able to source wage rates for railway grades, which were on the low side of average at the time (deliberate policy of holding down wages to control costs, because BTC/BR couldn’t think of a better way to do it, or could, but couldn’t enact the logic fast enough, leading to a huge strike in 1955).

 

Kevin

 

PS: I have just found a few that give a “ranging shot”

 

civil service male clerical officer £350pa in 1939 and £789pa in 1960

 

civil service executive officer £525pa in 1939 and £1140 in 1960.

 

male manual workers  £195pa in 1939 and £737pa in 1960.

 

Average earnings, adult male British Railways staff, 1950, 141s 9d (=£369pa), In Gourvish, where detailed sources are cited.

 

I will revise my previous post to £400pa in 1950, which is probably a little on the low side.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 6, 2019 by Nearholmer

[Donw]

I dont think there was much improvement between 1939 and 1950. My father as an insurance clerk in the city was earning £32 pound a month  in 1951, not sure if that was before or after tax etc. Fortunately for us he did start getting promotion. I think I was about 5 (1954) when I was given a brand new Hornby 0 gauge clockwork set.  Family transport then was a Motorcycle and sidecar. A couple of years later Dad upgraded to a Ford Popular and my train set was replaced with a Triang Electric one.

 

Don 

[Nearholmer]

Counting postwar Hornby clockwork as ‘toy’ rather than ‘model’, I think it would be fair to date the end of the first wave of commercial 0 gauge model railways to the date of end of production by Precision Models, if only I could work out Exactly when that was.

 

After that, the only model railway items that BL were selling seem to have been things they already had in their warehouse (far too much for good business, judging by how long stocks eked out for), and short-run or commissioned models, made by hand.

 

I’ve heard various dates for the end of PM production, some people say as early as 1956, but I think it possibly folded with the passing of its head, Robert Bindon-Blood, in 1958, although the company wasn’t formally wound-up until the early 1970s. He was the man who had led the design and production of things like the Flying Scotsman in the very late 1920s, when they set new standards of excellence for British made “mass production’” models, but the troubles of the business got too much for him, and Fuller, who worked with him, effectively says in his history of BL that he drank himself to death through stress at age fifty-seven. Very sad ending indeed.

 

Probably best to enjoy playing with the trains, rather than dwell too much on the foregoing.

Edited November 6, 2019 by Nearholmer

[brianusa]

Back in the early sixties, I left for the US to seek my fortune and got a job which paid about three times what I made in the UK.  I was able to rent a flat at $90 a month, buy a used Plymouth and save enough to go back home for a holiday in a year and still have money in the bank.  The next year I got a $50 raise so the savings rose quite rapidly; previous deductions to my Mother were three Pounds for my keep, three for savings and three for me, or something like that!  At this time I was exposed to Lionel trains but then I had nowhere to run them!

     Brian.

[Guest Isambarduk]

1 hour ago, brianusa said:

Back in the early sixties, I left for the US to seek my fortune ...

I did the same in the Bicentennial Year, 1976, which was at an interesting time to be going there ... and a very good time to be leaving the UK.  Nevertheless, in 1983, I returned to the UK more knowledgeable, rather wiser, somewhat better off and with some great memories.  I wouldn't change any of it :-)   David