When TT3 was the next Big Thing

[Golden Fleece 30]

Garry,

I have one tucked away for the class 22 as it has spoked wheels ! A good chassis for a class 29 as well due the spokes But your right about a 76 - the chassis in total might be a bit long and while possibly a box on wheels the DC electrics has some gentle curving and complex shapes, I look forward to where this takes you !

Robert   

I am looking for an old body to smooth out as I may get new sides etched with grills in the correct place as overlays, or, I may just smooth out the bottom ribs and just repaint and line out most likely in BR green.  Dimension wise I will accept it as it is.

 

Unfortunately the body is so good I am keeping it so it could be re used if necessary although at the moment I do not know where.

 

Garry

[muir]

Never heard of TT-25. International TT (1:120) seems always to have been known simply as TT. It originated in the US with Hal Joyce and his company HP Products which was formed in 1945. TT stood for Table Top railway. Rokal started a couple of years later,  and from there the Eastern Europe TT companies developed. Some individuals were building TT layouts in this country before Triang got started with TT-3; they largely scratch-built their own components, including wheels.

 

Re the reference to "fine-scale" above, think it was to do with the use of hand-built track with rail soldered to copper-clad sleepers, which looked rather more realistic than the Triang product. Some 3mm/ft modellers currently use 12mm gauge finescale track and standards, which is essentially near-scale code 60 bullhead rail, using soldered construction or plastic chairs, as with 14.2mm gauge but built to the narrower gauge. Done well it's hard to tell it's a narrower gauge.

I'm sure that Hal Joyce came up with the name "TT", but when you consider Wesa in '45 (yes I'm aware of their 13mm gauge) and Lytax again in '45, I get the impression that the size that we know as TT was coming to fruition in a variety of places, bit like "S" which seems to have been looked at and used by a lot of manufacturers in a lot of different countries but never really took off commercially, AF exempted.

[NCB]

Yep, like most model railway innovations things were in a bit of a melting pot. As I understand it Wesa started about 1:110 then switched to 1:100 for things like their UP Turbine. But I think Joyce was the one who really laid down what the scale was.

[Robert Shrives]

Hi , well to bump this a bit having seen some recent eye watering prices on E bay I think it is still the next big thing - a castle for over a ton and a std 5 for £150 makes me gasp and a wallet tremble!!

 

This year at Warley show there will be a showcase of a 1960s shop so yellow boxes will make a showing !

 

Robert  

[Golden Fleece 30]

And I bought some nameplates that originally had £4.50 postage on and the description mentioned a combined postage with anything else bought.  As I also won a renamed and boxed Castle with a £4.50 postage I was quite surprised to be charged 50p for the nameplate postage when a little flat pack fits easily inside the box. The 50p does not worry me it is the principal as the loco/tender parcel is not going to be increased.

 

Hi , well to bump this a bit having seen some recent eye watering prices on E bay I think it is still the next big thing - a castle for over a ton and a std 5 for £150 makes me gasp and a wallet tremble!!

 

Not only those but £87 for a 57xx, £100+ for a part built GEM A4 kit without chassis and £58 for an unmade Gem Scot, again without chassis.  As Robert says a few eye watering prices on Sunday.

 

Garry

Edited November 7, 2017 by Golden Fleece 30

[Golden Fleece 30]

Here are a couple of pieces of modified Type A track for a project I am doing.  2 half straights made to approximate quarter straights of slightly different lengths.

 

Garry

[5050]

There was a nice Triang TT layout on show at Leeds the other week with some interesting stock on show - including a Gold Merchant Navy set.  It all worked very well.

[Golden Fleece 30]

There was a nice Triang TT layout on show at Leeds the other week with some interesting stock on show - including a Gold Merchant Navy set.  It all worked very well.

It belonged to Alex Garfield and I was helping look after it for a short while and our little girl spent a while "running" the trains (I have no idea who the boy is though). We were with it nearly all day at Shildon a few months ago.  Alex has quite a variety of stock for it including a French pacific that had its smokebox door changed for what looked like a South African one.  There was also a Tri-ang 2-6-2 modified to a 66xx class.

 

The Blue diesel and red Hogwarts were from Shildon but the same layout.

 

Garry

[rodshaw]

That blue diesel is very nice, as was the whole layout.

 

There was also a 'proper' 3mm scale layout at the Leeds show, it has been doing the rounds for some time. For sheer play value though, you can't beat the Tri-ang!

[Il Grifone]

And I bought some nameplates that originally had £4.50 postage on and the description mentioned a combined postage with anything else bought.  As I also won a renamed and boxed Castle with a £4.50 postage I was quite surprised to be charged 50p for the nameplate postage when a little flat pack fits easily inside the box. The 50p does not worry me it is the principal as the loco/tender parcel is not going to be increased.

 

Not only those but £87 for a 57xx, £100+ for a part built GEM A4 kit without chassis and £58 for an unmade Gem Scot, again without chassis.  As Robert says a few eye watering prices on Sunday.

 

Garry

 

Hi Garry,

 

Normal pratice I'm afraid. I bought two lots of parts the other day and was charged for small packet though with careful packing they could have gone large letter. Not complaining, I always total the individual postages 'just in case', but it does make the deal less of a bargain.

 

David

[Golden Fleece 30]

That blue diesel is very nice, as was the whole layout.

 

There was also a 'proper' 3mm scale layout at the Leeds show, it has been doing the rounds for some time. For sheer play value though, you can't beat the Tri-ang!

The other layout was Everingham which is owned and built by Alan Smith who did Lydney Town in 1963/4 time.  Lydney was exhibited a lot of times and in 3 different guises as extra sections were added.  It is still one of my favourite layouts from all those years ago.  It was mainly Tri-ang with the usual kits from Gem and BEC. Here is a copy from RM.  Alan was telling me at the show that it was to be Everingham's last show, I had asked for it to appear next year on behalf of a friend.

 

Garry

[5050]

That blue diesel is very nice, as was the whole layout.

 

There was also a 'proper' 3mm scale layout at the Leeds show, it has been doing the rounds for some time. For sheer play value though, you can't beat the Tri-ang!

One of Alan Smith's layouts, he's been exhibiting 3mm layouts for more years that I care to remember!  Regarding the Prairie tank in the photo - I thought it was just missing the front pony truck, I didn't realise it was supposed to be representing a 66xx!  The Continental stock on the high level was interesting for me as I can't recall having seen these actual models before, only adverts and photos.

[Golden Fleece 30]

One of Alan Smith's layouts, he's been exhibiting 3mm layouts for more years that I care to remember!  Regarding the Prairie tank in the photo - I thought it was just missing the front pony truck, I didn't realise it was supposed to be representing a 66xx!  The Continental stock on the high level was interesting for me as I can't recall having seen these actual models before, only adverts and photos.

Alex had the continental tank with wagons running and the pacific with silver coaches. They don't actually appeal to me so I have never bothered looking for any.  I do own a couple of the pacific tenders though which I got cheap, £8.00 the pair, the idea being so I could cut them down to make a King Arthur 8 wheel tender with some overlays on one day.

 

The "66xx" has had its front footplate reduced and the smokebox shortened, the rest is what was the 2-6-2. 

 

Garry

[Golden Fleece 30]

I forgot to put the photos of Alan Smith's Lydney up earlier so here they are from RM April 1963.

 

Garry

[sagaguy]

There was a simplicity to these layouts of yesteryear unlike today’s photographic quality.

Ray.

[Dava]

When TT-3 was for playing trains, not an investment asset class in yellow boxes for collectors!

 

Dava

[Golden Fleece 30]

When TT-3 was for playing trains, not an investment asset class in yellow boxes for collectors!

 

Dava

That's so true Dava.

 

I have submitted an article to RM about how I feel exhibitions of the 60's and 70's were so much better than todays boring shows. In those days we had layouts of decent sizes not like modern ones of 4 foot long with one loco shunting two wagons all day, we had trains that ran all the time not every 10 minutes (if that quick), we had layouts that ran without everything stopping for half an hour or more because of a DCC short, and so on. Most likely it will not get published though.

 

Garry

Edited November 9, 2017 by Golden Fleece 30

[Dava]

We used to do just that with the Macclesfield MRG 'North Rode' TT layout in the late 70's, all Triang TT technology, featured in the 'Constructor'. Happy days. When I have time I'll scan the article.

 

Dava

[detheridge]

That's so true Dava.

 

I have submitted an article to RM about how I feel exhibitions of the 60's and 70's were so much better than todays boring shows. In those days we had layouts of decent sizes not like modern ones of 4 foot long with one loco shunting two wagons all day, we had trains that ran all the time not every 10 minutes (if that quick), we had layouts that ran without everything stopping for half an hour or more because of a DCC short, and so on. Most likely it will not get published though.

 

Garry

That's a very cogent point Garry

 

Many years ago, I read in MRJ a thought provoking article about layout design -sorry, I can't remember the actual article, but I'll try and find more details. The thrust of the argument was basically that, in the 60s, modellers built model railways, rather than a model OF a railway. As a hobby, it was for entertainment, relaxation and creativity.

You designed your station with the idea of having points of interest that drew the eye to a particular section. You might have one siding that originally was planned with a loco shed, but then you could change your mind and put a dairy there to add operational interest. So your layout wasn't 'prototypical' (as in the modern sense) but it encapsulated the essence of a railway, had bags of operating potential, and expressed your own personal approach to modelling. Even a relatively small layout like Berrow or Derek Naylor's 00n3 Aire Valley Railway could and did exhibit these qualities -although obviously the former was one of the first to be railway/site specific rather than a general one. Alan Smith's Lydney was a wonderful example of this approach in TT.

It also could result in both home and exhibition layouts that were entertaining and fun. That sort of approach now seems only to be the property of some of the more fun based 009 layouts.

An 009 friend's wife said many years ago 'You can always tell narrow gauge modellers at an exhibition - they're the ones with smiles on their faces'.

 

Regards,

 

David.

Edited November 9, 2017 by detheridge

[APOLLO]

There is an interesting Rmweb thread about the Lydney layouts here.

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/43203-1971-lydney-tt-layout/

 

And some affordable TT for sale from Elaine's Trains. I buy the odd (OO) item from Elaine - a very good postal service and items are reasonably priced and always as described.

 

https://elaines-trains.co.uk/index.php

 

I agree re the "sameness" of modern layouts, especially at exhibitions and I also miss the "simple" 60's 70's layouts as exhibited at the Manchester show, which I attended yearly back then.

 

My own loft layout is a bit of a throwback - It's more of a collection of model railway items than a scale layout. I especially like the old Hornby Dublo, Crescent Ratio and Trix illuminated semaphore signals, none of which you see today at exhibitions. I also run my old tri-ang & 2 rail Hornby Dublo along with my new stuff. Too much emphasis (for me) is based on ever more expensive "super detail" these days. Hornby Railroad is fine for me !!

 

 

 

Brit15

[detheridge]

Okay folks,

I've done some hunting through my papers and found details of the article about a 'back to the 60s' approach.

 

Here's the general gist of the original article, paraphrased by me for a narrow gauge newsletter in 2004:

 

Way back in 1989, MRJ featured Wickham LMS, an EM gauge layout. Now what's different about this layout is that it's classified by the builder as a MODEL RAILWAY, as opposed to a model OF a railway. Again the author quotes a previous article: "Real places
have real characters and their own special atmospheres - a 'feel' that has to be captured for authenticity". So the author agrees with this and states that it's experiencing this 'feel' that differentiates a railway enthusiast from anyone else.Is it possible to capture that feel in a model? He doesn't think so. Railway enthusiasts are not necessarily model railway enthusiasts, and vice versa. Prototype atmosphere is very different from model railway atmosphere.

To get the 'feel' of a place you have to be there and experience it. However the author of the MRJ article postulates the idea that the model itself must generate atmosphere rather than trying to recreate the prototype's. Proof can be found in dead scale mini
layouts that are examples of exquisite modelling, but ultimately boring as layouts: the 'run round loop and a siding' beloved of some modellers. In order to get a models atmosphere there must be some personal input from the modeller -something of his or her
character, which gets less and less in scope the more faithful to a prototype you go. So you end up with superb, but perhaps ultimately lifeless models.

When planning a model, what do you want to do? Remember that we want to produce a model railway and have fun and satisfaction, not a model of a railway where we're bound by the constraints of the prototype. So you might want to have something that's
consistently interesting to operate, has enough visual impact and features to keep both yourself and the punters at an exhibition happy, and also some personal atmosphere that in a tangible way says 'this is part of me and who I am.'
So: do you want a goods yard as well as passenger facilities, with a headshunt for simultaneous operation of two trains so there's always something happening? Do you want coach sidings and/or a shed, and do you want a loco siding or a fully fledged shed to add interest and scope?

In the case of Wickham, the station building this was a direct crib from a design in the Feb 1964 issue of Model Railway Constructor, even down to varying canopy styles. Where would you put the buildings? As the preliminary design for your layout would not be cast in stone, you can decide whether, say and engine shed would be at the very end of the station limits, or half way along to act as a scenic break, in which case you might want to change it from and end on shed to a through shed for more operating potential. An otherwise boring siding may have interest added with a factory building or lading dock for anything you care to imagine, from livestock to flour to machinery. It's entirely up to you, and there are no wrong methods, which is the most encouraging point here.

In the case of Wickham, the builder made up a full size track plan on a roll of wallpaper with paper mock-ups of buildings which were then shunted around until, the plan began to gel. A factory building was moved so that it masked the control panel, and a loading bank opposite the cattle dock added balance to one end of the layout. With this approach, you can draw up and modify everything from operating sequences to section breaks and wiring before you start construction on the layout itself.

 

This is a 'back to the 60s' approach to modelling. The author describes the 60s and early 70s for him as the halcyon years of railway modelling, when every layout was an individual take on modelling by its builder, not a rehash of the same formula after the scale and prototype revolution that came later. The prototype was an INSPIRATION for the models, not a slavish copy. The motto of the day was 'If it looks right, it is right', not the other way around as in some of today's approaches. In fact you can come unstuck very quickly with the 'if it is right, it looks right' approach in several ways, one of the most obvious being liveries translated into modelling scales.

 

The author's feelings at the end of the article were 'I don't care if it's right or wrong, as long as it feels right. And to me, Wickham feels okay. Can you say the same?'.
So, can you?

 

Discuss. Sorry if it's wandered away a little from the original subject of TT, but this principle applies to all scales.

 

Regards,

 

David.

 

[Golden Fleece 30]

And some affordable TT for sale from Elaine's Trains. I buy the odd (OO) item from Elaine - a very good postal service and items are reasonably priced and always as described.

 

I have had a few items from Elaines trains, and Dave Angel which have been nicely priced and good quality.

 

I do like the Dublo signals too.

 

Your write up is exactly what I have said for a long time David. The only modern concept I would endorse is static grass but the dyed sawdust etc of the old days was reasonable.

 

I know its my choice but at most shows I go to these days I just glance at a layout and walk on if there is nothing running or if it is a small "layout" of 2 sidings etc.  My main interest unfortunately these days is the second hand or sales stands.  Second hand is not up to much as very little if any TT.

 

I am building a small portable layout myself but it will have a lot on it for two operators and is based on Mike Bryant's 1958 A Quart in a Pint pot.  Baseboard made, some track modified so should not be long before some photos appear.

 

Garry

Edited November 9, 2017 by Golden Fleece 30

[sp1]

Okay folks,

I've done some hunting through my papers and found details of the article about a 'back to the 60s' approach.

 

Here's the general gist of the original article, paraphrased by me for a narrow gauge newsletter in 2004:

 

Way back in 1989, MRJ featured Wickham LMS, an EM gauge layout. Now what's different about this layout is that it's classified by the builder as a MODEL RAILWAY, as opposed to a model OF a railway. Again the author quotes a previous article: "Real places

have real characters and their own special atmospheres - a 'feel' that has to be captured for authenticity". So the author agrees with this and states that it's experiencing this 'feel' that differentiates a railway enthusiast from anyone else.Is it possible to capture that feel in a model? He doesn't think so. Railway enthusiasts are not necessarily model railway enthusiasts, and vice versa. Prototype atmosphere is very different from model railway atmosphere.

To get the 'feel' of a place you have to be there and experience it. However the author of the MRJ article postulates the idea that the model itself must generate atmosphere rather than trying to recreate the prototype's. Proof can be found in dead scale mini

layouts that are examples of exquisite modelling, but ultimately boring as layouts: the 'run round loop and a siding' beloved of some modellers. In order to get a models atmosphere there must be some personal input from the modeller -something of his or her

character, which gets less and less in scope the more faithful to a prototype you go. So you end up with superb, but perhaps ultimately lifeless models.

When planning a model, what do you want to do? Remember that we want to produce a model railway and have fun and satisfaction, not a model of a railway where we're bound by the constraints of the prototype. So you might want to have something that's

consistently interesting to operate, has enough visual impact and features to keep both yourself and the punters at an exhibition happy, and also some personal atmosphere that in a tangible way says 'this is part of me and who I am.'

So: do you want a goods yard as well as passenger facilities, with a headshunt for simultaneous operation of two trains so there's always something happening? Do you want coach sidings and/or a shed, and do you want a loco siding or a fully fledged shed to add interest and scope?

In the case of Wickham, the station building this was a direct crib from a design in the Feb 1964 issue of Model Railway Constructor, even down to varying canopy styles. Where would you put the buildings? As the preliminary design for your layout would not be cast in stone, you can decide whether, say and engine shed would be at the very end of the station limits, or half way along to act as a scenic break, in which case you might want to change it from and end on shed to a through shed for more operating potential. An otherwise boring siding may have interest added with a factory building or lading dock for anything you care to imagine, from livestock to flour to machinery. It's entirely up to you, and there are no wrong methods, which is the most encouraging point here.

In the case of Wickham, the builder made up a full size track plan on a roll of wallpaper with paper mock-ups of buildings which were then shunted around until, the plan began to gel. A factory building was moved so that it masked the control panel, and a loading bank opposite the cattle dock added balance to one end of the layout. With this approach, you can draw up and modify everything from operating sequences to section breaks and wiring before you start construction on the layout itself.

 

This is a 'back to the 60s' approach to modelling. The author describes the 60s and early 70s for him as the halcyon years of railway modelling, when every layout was an individual take on modelling by its builder, not a rehash of the same formula after the scale and prototype revolution that came later. The prototype was an INSPIRATION for the models, not a slavish copy. The motto of the day was 'If it looks right, it is right', not the other way around as in some of today's approaches. In fact you can come unstuck very quickly with the 'if it is right, it looks right' approach in several ways, one of the most obvious being liveries translated into modelling scales.

 

The author's feelings at the end of the article were 'I don't care if it's right or wrong, as long as it feels right. And to me, Wickham feels okay. Can you say the same?'.

So, can you?

 

Discuss. Sorry if it's wandered away a little from the original subject of TT, but this principle applies to all scales.

 

Regards,

 

David.

 

 

This post highlights something I have been thinking about- what I would call ‘system’ layouts: you build a terminus, add a branch, junction etc. The ‘Sherwood Section of the LMS’ springs to mind. The work of Peter Denny is another. Granted not all of us live in huge old vicarages which many of these layouts seem to have been housed in. Another example is ‘The Wardlesworth Lines Committee’ which appeared in Railway Modeller in the early 1970’s (I think the builder of this has posted on here about it in the past) - an N Gauge layout, which is more feasible for modern homes - by coincidence another vicar!

Sorry to digress from TT - I think it’s a shame the scale was abandoned by major manufacturers (yes I know about the 3mm society) as it seems an excellent compromise if there was still some RTR support.....

Edited November 9, 2017 by sp1

[Golden Fleece 30]

Here are some track plans of Lydney.  The first one shows how it started out with Lydney Town, then the extension to the side. The second plan is from RM 1965 showing its enlarged form.  I did see all three versions but do not remember it ever being developed into twin track main line although a photo on the RMweb page shows it double I could well have seen it.

 

Sorry for duplicating your photo Apollo, today is the first time I saw the page with Lydney on it.

 

Garry

[Golden Fleece 30]

Another fine TT layout from RM 1965.  This issue had Longacre (TT layout ) modernised in it.

 

Garry