Deliberately Old-Fashioned 0 Scale - Chapter 1

[TT3]

This layout is far too inspiring for someone with way too much vintage TT and whose only 4mm stock is either triang or dublo. I know what I have to do, get it out of boxes and go deliberately old fashioned, I have resisted the temptation and tried to do 'proper' modelling but course scale will never be right and needs to be in the right context.

 

And yes reminds me alot of the 'Sherwood Section' and much better unballasted or just with cork as it keeps that old fashioned feel so perfectly.

[Nearholmer]

Phil

 

If you ferret about this website, there are several mentions of blue boulder picking, although I don't think that is what the photo with a n.g. skip in it actually shows! http://www.ournewhaven.org.uk/page_id__1322.aspx?path=0p69p18p

 

One thing mentioned is a "pumice works", where boulders were ground to make abrasive powder, giving all the workers terminal lung disease in the process.

 

K

[Edwardian]

Not convinced that ballast is either necessary or desirable for the DOF.

 

More pictures, please.

[BG John]

AR Walkley laid his "OO" (aka HO) track on sandpaper in the mid 1920s.

[Donw]

 

Regarding the question of shingle ballast this is Havenstreet on the IOW steam Railway.

 

Don

[81A Oldoak]

This layout is far too inspiring for someone with way too much vintage TT and whose only 4mm stock is either triang or dublo. I know what I have to do, get it out of boxes and go deliberately old fashioned, I have resisted the temptation and tried to do 'proper' modelling but course scale will never be right and needs to be in the right context.

 

And yes reminds me alot of the 'Sherwood Section' and much better unballasted or just with cork as it keeps that old fashioned feel so perfectly.

I recall reading somewhere that Norman Eagles didn't apply ballast to the "Sherwood Section" because of its excessive weight.

[Nearholmer]

Very possibly. If you use batten track, with longitudinal battens below what are overscale depth sleepers, the ballast depth gets up to c1", so that stone ballast might amount to (gross approximation coming up) 25kg/m^2, which is non-trivial.

 

It also comes out hugely expensive, and, assuming no glue, because the track is so expensive that you always want to be able to re-use it, it can become a blooming nuisance, getting into flange-ways, and between switch and stock rails.

 

I've had a lot of ballast trouble on outdoor tracks, where I've used potting grit (<3mm granite). It looks absolutely stunning when in good order, but is very maintenance intensive, and a b.......r around point-work. My current small outdoor line (45mm gauge) is presently sans-ballast for that very reason!

 

K

[Donw]

Yacht varnish poured on is one way to hold ballast in place on a garden line. Used for track on a concrete base it does give quite a hard ride. I think once Norman Eagles could run trains they were having too much fun to bother with ballasting.

If the layout was out in a shed I would be tempted to just spread a bit of sharp sand over the tracks. It would be easy to lift them if desired. Indoors one could imagine being banished from the house for bringing all that sand in.

I was in enough trouble with the granite ballast that proved not to be firmly stuck when carrying a portable layout out to go to a show.

Don

[Nearholmer]

Yes, a former colleague of mine, a track engineer by profession, has built a very high-quality garden railway (Gauge 1, IIRC), and has used the form of resin that is employed for gravel driveways, and in some circumstances the ballast on real railways, to bond the ballast.

 

It looks absolutely pin-perfect (he is a high-precision chap), but I know that the industrial resin is very expensive. I've heard it likened to pouring whisky over the track!

 

K

 

PS: my railway is the utility room, and sand would, inevitably, get into the tumble-drying in winter, as well as the mechanisms of locos.

Edited March 15, 2017 by Nearholmer

[Northroader]

We had some of that two part resin mix on the drive, and one aspect besides cost is that it does go off very quickly. The boys doing it were going fast, and on a flat job they just got there, but with something as fiddly as ballast round track you would have to do small quantities at a time.

[Nearholmer]

From ballast to signals .......

 

There is a discussion of the signalling of an HD layoutgoing on in another thread, so I thought I'd illustrate my intent at Birlstone. For the track plan, see Post 1.

 

Helps take my mind off the 'discomfort' from another bout of heavyweight dentistry!

 

Photo 1: The Signal Farm, where multi-armed signals are grown from seed, or from cuttings taken from ....... Well, no, actually this is just a parking place for signals, some of which I've bought, but several of which were given to me by a very generous RMWebber. These are mostly post-WW2 Bassett Lowke upper quadrant signals, but the lower-quadrant ones are pre-WW2 BIng.

 

Photo 2: Down Starter. This controls entry to a single line section, the track curving away to the left being the loco depot.

 

Photo 3: Up Starters. The left most and central ones are single arms, but the right one has a second arm, to give authority for movements into the 'branch' to Paltry Circus.

 

Photo 4: Down Home. This controls entry to three platform roads, one through, the others terminal. I've put the big old BIng signal here for the photo, but it isn't quite appropriate: the taller 'doll' should be on the left, not in the middle, to indicate the higher status of the route to the through platform road. Some of the distant signals in the farm will, one day, get mated together, and given new arms, to create a more appropriate array.

 

Much as I'd love to create a central lever frame, with interlocking, realism says that all my points and signals will remain locally operated, with interlocking in mind, rather than actuality.

 

Kevin

Edited March 16, 2017 by Nearholmer

[Edwardian]

Wonderful signals.

 

With your approach, consistency seems as vital as it is with the finescale modeller, and these signals certainly look the part.  I love the patina.

 

My best wishes for a full recovery from dental trauma!

[Guest Isambarduk]

This is an interesting thread.  Even though I have modelled in 7mm FS for over forty years now, I did start off as a small boy with 0 gauge tinplate and I continued it as a bigger boy - I never did have an 00 'train set' like most boys at the time. 

 

As a teenager, I started to modify the unrealistic offerings that could be had for 1/-, or maybe 1/3, at jumble sales.  Here is one of my early efforts:

 

 

I suspect that most people will recognise the provenance of the front part of the loco but the rear part and the tender I made from scratch from flattened out bean tins, no interfering corrugations rolled into them in those days.  If anybody wished to know more, or 'what happened next', I can elaborate ...

 

David

Edited June 8, 2017 by Isambarduk

[Nearholmer]

Recharging the old-fashiondness batteries this afternoon, at a TCS gathering.

 

Here a 'Sir Sam Fay' of uncertain, but possibly Steadman, origin on the big 0 gauge layout, and a shot that emphasises the "love it or hate it" feelings that old trains seem to bring forth in railway modellers.

 

One of the signals in the first shot seems to be suffering a degree of patination sufficient to cause it to collapse!

Edited March 18, 2017 by Nearholmer

[phil_sutters]

Clearly tinplate types enjoy a more relaxed time when operating their layouts.

 

This opportunity to see them is no more as the Brighton Modelworld event ceased after the 2016 show, due to 'poor attendance' - not when I was there!

 

Ah well! There's still the Brighton Toy Museum to have a drool in. I can always take the grandchildren as an excuse for a visit. (NB The logo-like labels are mine, as are the photos. The logos have been used to tie groups of photos together, without constant repetition in the captions. I hope no-one thinks that I am trying to pass them off as 'official' photos)

Edited March 19, 2017 by phil_sutters

[Edwardian]

Wonderful pictures, Kevin, and wonderful pictures, Phil.

 

All this Coarse Standard/Tinplate stuff is currently eliciting more of an excited emotional response from Yours Truly than 'realistic' layouts. Oh dear!

 

They are so solid, colourful and shiny, and I can almost hear them rattling along.

 

Part of the joy of your pictures, Phil and Kevin, for me, anyway, is their crowded, busy nature.  It reminds me of the days when, armed with a plan from CJ Freezer, modellers thought nothing of cramming a double-track mainline, station, extensive MPD and goods facilities and a branch line in the average box room of a Semi!   Though admittedly in the junior gauge of OO.

 

Having grown up with my Father's 1950s RMs, I rather miss that sort of layout.  That is one of the reasons why I like John Dew's Granby Junction, because he has created a sort of CJ Freezer layout with absolutely everything on it in a way that works, and has done so to modern scenic standards, to produce a very convincing and satisfying whole.

 

Anyway, back to Tinplate; it is Glorious.

[Northroader]

I think part of the joy of tinplate is it tends to be in a circuit, as they're made to go round very tight curves, so ovals can be fitt ed in easier. The only two of my layouts that saw serious running were both roundy roundys. Terminus to fiddle yard jobs have been very much here today, gone tomorrow, and I'm still striving to get a decent one. Some folks never learn!

The other plus is they started off to be laid on the floor, and retain the ability to run on uneven surfaces, so you're guaranteed bomb proof running, although the British standards look far better than the American standards, which are way o.t.t.

Then they do have a bright and cheerful look, always plenty of colour.

Besides looking in on Kevin, you can always get your fix here: http://meccano.magazines.free.fr/

[Nearholmer]

Yes, although I really enjoy "operating", which is why I'm trying to get the ability to run terminus-to-terminus, and terminus-to-FY, into my layout, I think it's essential to have the ability to circulate ....... at home it is a great tonic to let a train rumble round, while trying to listen to the radio (these trains are very noisy!), and enjoy a coffee, and at gatherings, the main focus tends to be social anyway, the trains being a shared obsession and point of departure for conversation. And, getting a circuit in finescale 0 is perceived to need a great deal more space (if you are cunning, it actually needs only c38" radius).

 

Brighton .......... I miss it, Phil. I used to treat myself to a day off work on the Friday of Modelworld, get there for opening, then visit the museum on the way back to the station in late afternoon. The great thing about that show was its sheer eclecticism ....... I can't remember when it started (1978, I just checked, and I think there was a predecessor, at Queen's Square, from maybe 1976), but I was operating layouts there with Uckfield club in the 1970s, certainly before 1982, when I moved away. In fact, I miss Brighton more generally, living so far away. There is nowhere like it for general "indy-ness", although there are a lot of problems with schools, so a difficult place with young children - one of my ex-colleagues lives there, and he and his wife home-schooled their children because it was so difficult to get into the very few good schools.

 

PS: if you look just to the left of your granddaughter's shoulder, you can see one of the most interesting tinplate trains ever ....... the SECR steam railcar, which I mentioned in another of Edwardian's threads. They are mega-rare, the Brighton one being about the only one that is both in captivity, and not carefully stashed in a collector's most secure cupboard!

 

K

Edited March 19, 2017 by Nearholmer

[Donw]

I think part of the appeal of 0 gauge tinplate is the fact that it is big enough to have a bit of weight and feels more suited to replicate big trains than little plastic 00 ones. I had a a clockwork set and received extra bits from my Dads cousin. When I was about 8 I received an electric 00 set for Christmas. Soon after the 0 gauge Hornby went off to the Cousin's sons. The 00 never quite had the same play value as the 0 gauge.

It is quite feasible to have a sort of cross between finescale and the tinplate. Careful choice of models or a bit of adaptation can facilitate using tight curves. You do not have to weather everything especially if you adopt pre-grouping with colourful liveries. Pre-grouping also looks better with short trains. Perhaps the best example was Frank Roomes who had a through station with a branch terminus and a bit of industrial tramway plus a fiddle yard in a space of about 12.5ft x 8.5ft using 3.5ft curves. He had locos with all flanges and brake gear but he was a good engineer. It was fully signalled and operated to a timetable.

 

Don 

[phil_sutters]

I have now set up a album with pictures from a couple of visits to the Brighton Toy and Model Museum, including all sorts of exhibits, not just railways, at http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/gallery/album/4193-brighton-toy-and-model-museum/

[Nearholmer]

Don

 

Do you know what the layout was called? Lutton, Lufford, something like that, with a midland theme?

 

Generally, worth bearing in mind that "tinplate" is a bit of a catch-all term, and that there are distinctions:

 

- genuine tinplate track, the design dating back into the C19th and pretty much unchanged since, which has a 3mm radius rail head, and demands fairly deep flanges;

 

- Greenly 1909 standard track and wheels, which are a very cunning and effective set of compromises, which allow trains to run on tinplate, AND on solid rail, with properly arranged points and crossings, by the simple expedient of adopting wide treads, a narrow b-t-b and wide (1/8") checkrail clearances;

 

- "coarse", which is a direct descendant of the above, and, after a great deal of wrangling, was finally standardised by GOG. It uses a wider b-t-b, narrower flangeways, and a slightly narrower tread, but the trains will usually run on very good tinplate track - they will derail if there are kinks and bumps that the Greenly wheels would ride over;

 

- "fine", which is actually still pretty coarse in prototype-fidelity terms, which was again standardised by GOG, after earlier versions by firms such as LMC in the 1930s, and by individual practitioners;

 

- Scale 7 or similar.

 

The track/wheel standards don't dictate the quality of workmanship or fidelity to prototype of the rest of the train .......,. There were stunning pieces of commercial and hobbyist modelling on Greenly wheels, and still are on "coarse" wheels (look at the 9F that I showed in a previous post). The big difference in practical, as compared to visual, terms, is that the closer to prototype fidelity the wheel/track interface, the larger must be the radius of curvature ........ although clever commercial and hobbyist makers can work miracles, often by allowing wheelsets great side-play, by omitting some flanges, or by using sub-standard flanges on the middle axle in a six-coupled loco.

 

Modern "tinplate" makers use something close to GOG "coarse" for their three-rail trains, but again there are tricks to be used, like increasing the b-t-b by using wafer-thin flanges.

 

It's all potentially very confusing to the newbie, because, on track that uses "proper" points and crossings, there is not compatibility between Greenly, "coarse", and "fine" ......... if you have track dimensioned to one of these, the wheels must also be dimensioned to the same, otherwise ........ clonk, bang, clunk, and sometimes derailment, at point-work. Personally, I use "coarse", but that does mean that there are a lot of pre-WW2 things that I can't run very well, because they need Greenly track. Pre-WW2 Bassett Lowke is a no-no unless the b-t-b is altered, but, oddly, old Hornby locos seem just about OK (they clonk a bit, but not too much!).

 

Any of these standards, except perhaps pressed tinplate wheels ("toy" practice) on tinplate track, will produce smooth running, if the track and wheels are to the same standard ....... rough running is a product of incompatibility or maladjustment.

 

Anyone confused yet?

 

Kevin

Edited March 19, 2017 by Nearholmer

[Argos]

I believe the layout is "Lutton".
 
There is a chapter on the layout in a book I have from my youth, The Encyclopedia of Model Railways":-
 
http://biblio.co.uk/book/encyclopaedia-model-railways-terry-allen/d/636730885?aid=frg&utm_source=google&utm_medium=product&utm_campaign=feed-details&gclid=CNaKr6GY49ICFYoQ0wodCa4OQA

 

The layout has two terminus station (Lutton and Kenbrennan Castle), an industrial tramway and a motive power depot all in 0 Gauge located in a 12' square room.

The line was fully signalled with operating block instruments, but then the builder was a signalling instructor by trade.

 

It is funny but I never considered it to be "course scale". The layout has always been an inspiration, packing so much into a small space whilst maintaining a believable pre-grouping atmosphere.

 

Even now I regularly re-read the piece and it is certainly the inspiration behind my wanting to incorporate working interlocking and signals on my Taddington layout.

Edited March 19, 2017 by Argos

[Nearholmer]

Many thanks.

 

There are photos of one of his locos in this thread http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/67526-older-inspirational-layouts/page-10 and it looks to me as if it has corparse-scale flanges on the Luther axles, with vestigial flanges on the middle axles.

 

K

[Guest Isambarduk]

This is what happened next:

 

 

Again, the provenance of the front part of the loco is likely obvious but the rear and the tender I scratch-built in salvaged tinplate.

 

David

[uax6]

Many thanks.

 

There are photos of one of his locos in this thread http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/67526-older-inspirational-layouts/page-10 and it looks to me as if it has corparse-scale flanges on the Luther axles, with vestigial flanges on the middle axles.

 

K

That Loco is in a cabinet in my Dads living room, and is very old. It dates from when Frank was doing 4mm, which I believe was in the 50's and 60's.

 

Frank was one of the nicest men I have ever met, and incredibly modest as well. Thursday night once a month was 'our' allocated operating session, Dad, my brother and I would herd into the operating well along with Frank, and have a very enjoyable two or three hours operating time. It introduced me to proper railway signalling (and look where that's made me end up!) and the joys of stud collection, where it was almost unheard of for a loco to stall, along with the squeals that the stake would make as the loco went around curves (very realistic).

 

My only regret is that I was too young to be able to spend time learning how to build things the way he did.

 

In my telephone collection I have Franks signalbox phone with the 'candlestick' style mouthpiece on the door and the bell receiver on the side, which features in those photos of Lutton.

 

Andy G