Deliberately Old-Fashioned 0 Scale - Chapter 1

[Nearholmer]

Thinking of Mr Horovitz made me search this out http://sidestreet.info/Windup11.html

 

It is serious entertainment, especially the final clip.

 

On levels of steam "tech", I've got a 15 or 16mm/ft 2-4-0T made by a now defunct firm called Locobox, and that is more or less the 1930s Bowman design of oscillating-cylinder loco, but with a gas-fired boiler. It is best run so that it is producing very cool, wet steam, a process aided by the long exposed steam-line runs underneath from the cab regulator to the cylinders, with the boiler pressure really low. It will plod away, barely slowing down uphill, and barely accelerating downhill, and provided the gas doesn't go out (a strong wind will blow it out when set to "gentle simmer"), it will go on like that for ages. Its a sort of cross-breed between ancient and modern practice, and it is really good!

Edited October 31, 2020 by Nearholmer

[sncf231e]

7 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Now, the one I'd really like to see in the flesh is the Bassett-Lowke 3¼" gauge Smith-Johnson compound:

But perhaps that does count as a model engineering rather than model railway scale?

I think 3¼" was considered a model railway scale by Bassett Lowke. They made rolling stock and scenery as can be seen in these pages from the 1911 catalogue:

 

Regards

Fred

 

[Compound2632]

I see there was a GNR large-boilered atlantic too. Is the scale 1/16? 

[Nearholmer]

3.25” seems to have been “model”, and I’m sure I’ve seen pictures of a ‘scenified’ outdoor layout, very definitely to be operated as a model railway. Here is an electric mechanism for such a thing:

 

 

Whereas, the gauge that survived was 3.5”, which was “passenger carrying miniature”.

 

[Donw]

There was some excelllent articles by Jack Wheldon on live steam engines. Jack came up with his 'procupine' idea. copper rods which were fixed half in the fire the other half in the boiler getting extra heat transfer. He found the thermal efficiency o small pot boilers could match fire tube boilers in a small scales. However the advantage of fire tubes is the boiler output increases as the loco works harder drawing the fire more.

Roundhouse make some excellent live steam models. 16mm NG is particularly suited the combination of the bigger size particularly boiler and cylinders compared to gauge and the smaller wheels tend to produce powerful controllable locos.  

These days you can get some good coal fired ones too. 

Don

[Florence Locomotive Works]

I wonder if I should write a history on BL moguls/low pressure steam then. I wonder how hard that would be. Sadly the replacement fittings and fixing for my mogul have been delayed in the Mail, and hopefully haven’t been lost. With regards to 3.75 inch gauge, it was often used for both passenger carrying and model railways. I’ll try to post some photos of 3.75 engines from Fuller’s book, unless someone beats me to it.

Edited November 1, 2020 by Florence Locomotive Works

[PatB]

1 hour ago, Florence Locomotive Works said:

I wonder if I should write a history on BL moguls/low pressure steam then. I wonder how hard that would be. Sadly the replacement fittings and fixing for my mogul have been delayed in the Mail, and hopefully haven’t been lost. With regards to 3.75 inch gauge, it was often used for both passenger carrying and model railways. I’ll try to post some photos of 3.75 engines from Fuller’s book, unless someone beats me to it.

It's notable that North America seems to have stuck with 31/4" and 43/4" as its "standard" small model engineering gauges, rather than following the British lead and adding 1/4".

 

I suspect that B-L et al regarded gauges up to 31/2" as model because they were firmly rooted in the pre-WW1 era, when such things were largely the preserve of the wealthy, with space and money for big models, or bigger miniatures. I get the impression that the smaller model engineering scales only really started to gain favour in the 1920s, when small lathes, for example, came within the financial reach of the middle class, or even senior blue-collar worker, and the 8 hour working day meant such men (let's be honest, it would have been overwhelmingly men) had the leisure to spend on such pursuits. At that point, it's noticeable that the most popular (certainly the most comprehensively covered) ME gauge seems to have been 21/2", with 31/2" only really starting to make inroads in the run up to WW2. 

 

Similarly, in the model field, I get the impression that 0 gauge saw a major expansion post WW1, again as equipment prices fell and middle class incomes rose to meet them, with the larger model gauges remaining too expensive for most, in both cost and space. Presumably space was a pretty major driver, as early H0 and 00 equipment seems to have been on a par in cost with 0 (maybe more, as much of it needed to be professionally built in small volumes) and yet 16.5 mm gauge was pretty well established and growing well by 1939. 

 

Again, we have seen a resurgence in the larger, model scales as incomes (and, particularly, retirement incomes) of the middle class have grown. I suspect we may be seeing "peak large scale" though, as, from my layman's perspective, those now reaching retirement have, perhaps, lived under the most advantageous set of economic circumstances we're likely to see for the foreseeable future.

 

The reasons for that are many, varied, and a subject for another place and time, but, at bottom, I predict that there will be fewer people than now with the wherewithal to plonk down a grand or two for Roundhouse's latest, or a G3 pannier and B-set, or a Heljan diesel and some Mk1s, or the privately owned space to run them at will.

[Simond]

It is indeed strange that the British didn’t see any necessity or advantage even, in maintaining the scale-gauge relationship.  I suspect Henry Greenly was a key player in this, and of course scale-gauge issues have plagued models  in just about every popular scale, indeed, I believe the G1MRA is still troubled by it.  0 gauge has its S7 enthusiasts, and the fights between 00, EM, S4 & P4 seemed to be a major contributor to global warming.

 

it really can’t have been difficult to say “we’re building a model to 1/12 th scale, the track will be 4.708” (or more likely 23/32, or round it up by just over 1/32” to 3/4”) given these guys were building steam engines to a decent degree of accuracy, and with fits that actually worked.  By the same principle, a 1/16 scale loco running on 3.5” gauge track is only out by 1/32”.

 

very curious.

Simon

Edited November 1, 2020 by Simond

[Keith Addenbrooke]

11 minutes ago, Simond said:

It is indeed strange that the British didn’t see any necessity or advantage even, in maintaining the scale-gauge relationship.  I suspect Henry Greenly was a key player in this,

 

very curious.

Simon

I’d not looked at it like this before - but it’s a good point: it would only take one (or a few) people who happened to be in positions of influence at a key time to set the course, and if (for example) the scale / Gauge relationship just didn’t happen to be that important to them at that time, the rest becomes history.

 

On the plus side, could it perhaps also be said that it introduces a flexibility and freedom for collectors and enthusiasts today to continue to mix and match whatever catches the eye, or is available, or affordable, which opens up opportunities and possibilities?

Edited November 1, 2020 by Keith Addenbrooke

[Nearholmer]

Pat,

 

I think you’d be surprised how popular 0 was before WW1, judging by the articles in MR&L and by the volume of surviving material. It was a ‘toy gauge’, which I perceive helped it become popular with hobbyists - many of the articles are by young men who started out with tin track and trains, and are in the process of changing to scale track and better stock. That seems to have been the equivalent of moving from 00 to EM or P4. Of course, G1 was also popular, as was to a fading extent  G2, and both were sometimes used on ferocious corners, so didn’t always need as much space as you might think, but 0 was definitely the ascendant gauge before WW1 and was definitely affordable to quite wide cross section of white-collar workers.

 

Your point about now being possibly the end of “peak large scale” I think could be right. Model railways reached a peak before WW1, to be knocked-back by that conflict, another peak was reached just before WW2, and if the economic and social repercussions of the plague are going to be as great as those from a war, which I reckon they will be, then logically we must have just passed another peak.

 

Kevin

[sncf231e]

11 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

I see there was a GNR large-boilered atlantic too. Is the scale 1/16? 

The BL GNR atlantic is 1:17 scale. I ordered some 3.5" GNR transfers for the one that is being restored and I assume that the difference will not be noticeable:

 

 

 

 

Regards

Fred

[sncf231e]

On gauge and scale. I wrote a free to read or download e-book on the history of gauge and scale for toy and model trains. It might be interesting to have a look at and of course any remarks on it are welcomed. It can be found here: 

http://sncf231e.nl/gauge-and-scale/

 

Regards

Fred

[Nearholmer]

Which suggests to me that 3.25” and 3.5” originated somewhere in the British model engineering tradition, rather than the German toy tradition. But, I’m at a loss to conceive of why, unless they were convenient rounding from 1:16.

 

They are not a million miles from 1:19, i.e. 16mm/ft, so maybe there is something in the psyche that likes miniatures of this size - maybe that’s how big elves are.

 

 

Edited November 1, 2020 by Nearholmer

[goldfish]

13 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

On levels of steam "tech", I've got a 15 or 16mm/ft 2-4-0T made by a now defunct firm called Locobox, and that is more or less the 1930s Bowman design of oscillating-cylinder loco, but with a gas-fired boiler. It is best run so that it is producing very cool, wet steam, a process aided by the long exposed steam-line runs underneath from the cab regulator to the cylinders, with the boiler pressure really low. It will plod away, barely slowing down uphill, and barely accelerating downhill, and provided the gas doesn't go out (a strong wind will blow it out when set to "gentle simmer"), it will go on like that for ages. Its a sort of cross-breed between ancient and modern practice, and it is really good!

 

Is the run of the steam-line underneath routed so that it passes through or very close to the flames? Acting as a sort of crude "super-heater".  A similar idea is used in the Hornby 00 live steam locos that use two heater elements, one in the tender to produce steam, and a second in the loco body superheat the steam.

[Simond]

Fred,

 

thanks for a very interesting, and comprehensive, article.  
 

atb

Simon

[Keith Addenbrooke]

40 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Which suggests to me that 3.25” and 3.5” originated somewhere in the British model engineering tradition, rather than the German toy tradition. But, I’m at a loss to conceive of why, unless they were convenient rounding from 1:16.

 

They are not a million miles from 1:19, i.e. 16mm/ft, so maybe there is something in the psyche that likes miniatures of this size - maybe that’s how big elves are.

 

 

I think I understand 3 1/2” gauge as a rounding from 3/4” scale.  3 1/4” gauge from 11/16” scale seems less logical - though I note that’s how it’s stated on the B-L instructions shown in @sncf231e ‘s video (it all looks to be in fractions).  I don’t know enough about Imperial measurement systems to know if 11/16ths was significant in any way that we no longer appreciate?
 

To me, it does all seem to fit the idea that our forebears saw scale more like a variable, rather than a start point - I wonder what they would make of our interest in it?

[Nearholmer]

32 minutes ago, goldfish said:

Is the run of the steam-line underneath routed so that it passes through or very close to the flames? Acting as a sort of crude "super-heater"

No, and as I say this one works best on super-saturated steam, rather than superheated. Oscillators seem to follow different rules, and a very long-stroke oscillator like this one different rules again.

[Nearholmer]

5 minutes ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

To me, it does all seem to fit the idea that our forebears saw scale more like a variable, rather than a start point - I wonder what they would make of our interest in it?

Nicholas Oddy wrote a very good article in the TCS magazine called something like “Gauge First, Scale After”, which showed how much of a time-lag there was between setting a standard set of gauges, and doing the same for scales. 0 in Britain wasn’t definitively settled as between 1/4”-1ft and 7mm-1ft in Britain until c1910 at the earliest,   and even after that there was a lot of “make it big enough to fit a decent spring” going on by the r-t-r suppliers. Gauge 1 still seems to be trying to decide.

[Metropolitan H]

Just remember that when you get to 3.5 inch gauge "Atlantics" "Curly" Lawrence's (LBSC) "Maisie" design you are at the limit of a one-man lift for the loco but they don't half steam and go well - much more a live load passenger hauler than the B-L 3 1/4 gauge meths fired locos which were intended for free running large scale model railway use.

 

I have driven "Maisies" and brother started building one at school - it was much more substantial than the B-L offering.

 

There was a lot of antipathy between LBSC and WJB-L / Henry Greenley which culmanated in the 1924 ‘Battle of The Boilers’ at the Model Engineer Exhibition, between LBSC's 2 1/2 inch gauge coal fired and superheated "Ayesha" - based on a LB&SCR H2 Atlantic - and a huge meths fired "Challenger" from WJB-L / Greenley. "Ayesha" won hands down.

 

I am interested in the LBSC designs and in the past have half built an "0" gauge  4-4-0 to his "Bat" design - the chassis did work on air, but I never finished the boiler. However, with the discussion of the large (Gauge 5 ???) B-L models and their better performing Model Engineering cousins, we are straying a long way from "Deliberately-old-fashioned" 0 scale! - So I will desist before I get my knuckles rapt.

 

Hope that helps.

 

Regards

Chris H

 

P.S. - Anyone interested in improving the B-L "0" gauge live-steam "Mogul" is recommended to get and read carefully a copy of the GOG publication "7mm live steam : the Eddie Cooke articles". Another book I have put somewhere - but will have to search for??

 

Chris H

 

P.P.S. - Have a look at https://www.gaugeoguild.com/virtual2020/livesteam.aspx and especially spend time on the video at the end of the page.

 

CH

Edited November 1, 2020 by Metropolitan H

[Metropolitan H]

Chaps & Chapesses,

 

I'm pleased to report that following a half-hour hunt I have found my copies of both:

- FC Hambleton's "Locomotives worth Modelling", and

- The GOG publication "7mm live steam : the Eddie Cooke articles".

 

Asmay be expected, both were near therir proper locations - but the former was lying down on the shelf and the other was hiding among some similar slim volumes!

 

Going back to the interest in "0" gauge live steam locomotives, another recommendation is Norman Dewhirst's "A Steam Locomotive for 'O' gauge" - my current copy is the 1992 TEE Publishing reprint - ISBN 1 85761 011 3.

It comes with a set of A3 printed, full-size drawings.

 

If you can find a full set of the Model Railway Constructor from the late 1940s / 1950s there was a series of articles entitled "A Gauge O Steam Loco for Beginners" by "1121" - which describes the construction of a single cylinder model of a ex GWR 48xx / 58xx 0-4-2T. Whether any were successfully made I don't know, and I don't know exactly how many parts there were in the series (I've not seen them all) but I do know "Part 20" appeared in the November 1954 edition.

 

Regards

Chris H

 

Edited November 1, 2020 by Metropolitan H

[Donw]

I had the pleasure of visiting David Meyrick on a live steam day.  Among the visitors were Rafe Shirley, Clary Edwards, John Shawe and Bob Lovell a sort of who's who of the 0 gauge live steam world. The picture I took of John Shawe's coal fired GN Atlantic I used on the cover of the Gazette. I remember us printing the book of Eddies Articles and discovered that he had been living a mile away from me before he died. 

 

Don

[brianusa]

3 hours ago, Metropolitan H said:

Chaps & Chapesses,

Surely thats Chapettes?

      Brian.

[Annie]

I recently purchased the 1977 facsimile reissue of the 1925 volume of Model Railway News and it's a brilliant snapshot of where the hobby was at in 1925.  The second hand copy I purchased was in almost 'as new' condition and it wasn't expensive either.  It's my favourite read at the moment.

 

[rockershovel]

19 hours ago, Metropolitan H said:

Just remember that when you get to 3.5 inch gauge "Atlantics" "Curly" Lawrence's (LBSC) "Maisie" design you are at the limit of a one-man lift for the loco but they don't half steam and go well - much more a live load passenger hauler than the B-L 3 1/4 gauge meths fired locos which were intended for free running large scale model railway use.

 

I have driven "Maisies" and brother started building one at school - it was much more substantial than the B-L offering.

 

There was a lot of antipathy between LBSC and WJB-L / Henry Greenley which culmanated in the 1924 ‘Battle of The Boilers’ at the Model Engineer Exhibition, between LBSC's 2 1/2 inch gauge coal fired and superheated "Ayesha" - based on a LB&SCR H2 Atlantic - and a huge meths fired "Challenger" from WJB-L / Greenley. "Ayesha" won hands down.

 

I am interested in the LBSC designs and in the past have half built an "0" gauge  4-4-0 to his "Bat" design - the chassis did work on air, but I never finished the boiler. However, with the discussion of the large (Gauge 5 ???) B-L models and their better performing Model Engineering cousins, we are straying a long way from "Deliberately-old-fashioned" 0 scale! - So I will desist before I get my knuckles rapt.

 

Hope that helps.

 

Regards

Chris H

 

P.S. - Anyone interested in improving the B-L "0" gauge live-steam "Mogul" is recommended to get and read carefully a copy of the GOG publication "7mm live steam : the Eddie Cooke articles". Another book I have put somewhere - but will have to search for??

 

Chris H

 

P.P.S. - Have a look at https://www.gaugeoguild.com/virtual2020/livesteam.aspx and especially spend time on the video at the end of the page.

 

CH

 

Interesting observation about the locos. One of the things that appear in engineering from time to time, is that the operation of the “cube law” (something twice the size, is nine times the volume) produces “step changes” in design - something slightly larger, demonstrates a significantly different character. Sounds as though that is operating here? 

[Donw]

If you halve the scale say 1: 16 rather than 1:32 the volume will increase eightfold.  However the cross sectional area will only increase fourfold  So on a boiler you could either increase the size of the boiler tube or put in four times as many.  Hence what works at 1/16th may need to be changed at 1/32  so things like boiler tubes are often reduced in mumber rather than in size because the airflow can be too restricted in a small tube.

Even when the scales are very close descisions about the firebars the numbers of tubes and the draughting arrangements can greatly affect the steaming ability. Also the design and execution of the steam passages in the cylinders can make a difference.

I suspect in was the design details rather than the scale difference that matter in this case.  Also the fuel and water consumption may not have been considered. You may get extra power at the expense of higher fuel consumtion.

 

Don