Jump to content
Pixie

Any Question Answered

Recommended Posts

I usually use 0.45mm copper wire.

I leave mine plain rather than winding wire round to represent the ribbing.

 

If you have access to the 2mm Magazine archive, you really ought to read Pete Wright's article "The Skirl O'The Pipes" in the August 1992 issue.

 

Below is a wagon with the first vacuum pipe I ever made - exactly according to Pete's "recipe". (Ignore the horribly applied transfers on the wagon sides - I was young and didn't know what I was doing)

 

P1010521.JPG.a481a117e2aa174a3d8ff6c8df0982e5.JPG

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks for all of the suggestions - plenty to experiment with! I just had a look through eBay guitar string listings, but its all a bit impenetrable, but it certainly seems difficult to find wound wires in the smaller sizes - even if the manufacturers tables suggest they do exist. Reading Pete Wright's article does seem to put paid to that idea though - a salutary reminder to look at prototype photos - the ribbing on the pipes does indeed seem to be invisible from "viewing distance".

 

26 minutes ago, Nick Mitchell said:

I usually use 0.45mm copper wire.

I leave mine plain rather than winding wire round to represent the ribbing.

 

If you have access to the 2mm Magazine archive, you really ought to read Pete Wright's article "The Skirl O'The Pipes" in the August 1992 issue.

 

Below is a wagon with the first vacuum pipe I ever made - exactly according to Pete's "recipe". (Ignore the horribly applied transfers on the wagon sides - I was young and didn't know what I was doing)

 

Who'd have thought an article on something so mundane could be so entertainingly written? I'll give Pete's method a try this evening.

 

Great weathering on the BR van!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Must admit I rarely bother with vac pipes as, unless they are connected up I think they look a bit daft. I rely on the various bits of wire from our non-prototypical couplings to give an impression of something going on there. If I had a fixed rake of vac-fitted stock I think I'd be tempted by the very effective dodge Ian Smith uses on his gorgeous four wheel coaches.

 

Regarding guitar strings, the bottom E, A and D strings are the fat strings and tend to be the wound ones. The G, B and top E strings are the thinner ones and unwound. If you want thin wound strings it might be worth looking at Mandolin strings or similar but I'm not sure you would find anything thin enough.

 

Regarding the late, and much missed Pete Wright. He was one of the nicest and most helpful chaps you could wish to meet. His articles and loco bits book are some of the most useful stuff in the archive. When I started in 2mm in the early 1980s Pete ran what became shop three and I would often ring him for help and advice. Any orders from him had a little note in addressed to 'Jerry in Wiltshire' (we had contrasting accents!), explaining how to use the bits. A lovely man who certainly helped me with my early fumblings in the scale.

 

Jerry 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want a use for guitar strings in 2mm, try a shock absorbing wagon from the time before the springs were covered over in the mid '50s...

This one has springs made from brass wound steel bottom E string. The vac pipe for comparison doesn't look like a spring(!)

 

023.JPG.0baa69307cbd568bebdb06d169648860.JPG

  • Like 7
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, justin1985 said:

 - the ribbing on the pipes does indeed seem to be invisible from "viewing distance".

Which is why I flood them with solder.431569092_newhorsebox.JPG.84ecb2ba8162e0995c5890bf4fb3f251.JPG

This is the horsebox of Neil Ballantyne's which the Grampian group presented me with.  I added the couplings and pipes.

 

Jim

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a replacement chassis etch available for the old farish four wheeled coaches? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is possible some of the David Eveleigh etches might suit. What are the required dimensions?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, 

 

Has anyone got an old Farish Mk.1 (the type with printed on sides or the window-insert type) and a set of callipers please? I’m after the below measurement if possible... and hoping it’ll be around 13.1mm!

 

50112995437_bd87ba1af3_k.jpgUntitled by Schtebe, on Flickr

 

Cheers,

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I’ve measured a couple of mine and they are 13.30mm

 

Cheers

 

Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great, thanks Paul!

 

Cheers,

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I'm normally an OO modeller, but am looking at the potential for a layout done in N. I read the 2mm Scale Association standards and beginners page, and they said that RTR N gauge is like the OO scale of 2mm (which they compared to EM). The confusing thing is that they say that 2mm and the RTR stuff is to different scales, being 1:152 and 1:148 respectively. My question is that, if I were to do buildings in 2mm and kept more to the RTR standards for track and trains, would it look jarring? I think I've seen a few pictures of people using RTR stock with their layouts on here, and I can't really tell, but the Association makes it seem like it's a really big difference. Thanks for any opinions you can provide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TrainMan2001 said:

My question is that, if I were to do buildings in 2mm and kept more to the RTR standards for track and trains, would it look jarring?

 

I very much doubt it. The two scales are so similar that you really do have to measure things with a ruler to be able to tell the difference.

 

There are very few instances, that I can think of, where the differences in scale would be obvious. For instance, running Farish Mk1 coaches and 2mm scale kit-built Mk1s together would look odd. That said, many of us do run converted N gauge stock and locos on 2mm scale layouts.

 

David

  • Agree 3
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As David said, the difference is only really noticeable when two similar things, but to different scales, are next to each other.

 

I moved to 2mm Scale Association standards 30 years ago for the improved look of the trackwork, and the (back then) more reliable running qualities. I have not rigorously kept to 1/152 scale for rolling stock and scenic items.  Since then, RTR N models have improved greatly in detail and reliability, but the track is still disappointing. There are a few N gauge layouts that have carefully laid and painted trackwork that look much better than most, but they still do not quite compare with 2mmFS trackwork, especially around the 'frog' area of pointwork.

 

 

  • Agree 3
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/03/2018 at 11:37, 2mmMark said:

I've come up with a Mk2 version which uses a small cheesehead screw to provide a fulcrum against which the rail can be worked.

 

post-7249-0-14633600-1522405987_thumb.jpg

 

This small mod makes it much easier to control the curve of the rail as it holds it flat against the MDF so you're only working in the vertical dimension. I thought it might need a washer but the width of the screw head is sufficient. Depending on the direction of the curvature, the rail can pass to the left or right of the screw.  The screw just needs to be tight enough so the rail slides easily underneath it.

 

I've done about 6 feet of code 30 rail with it this morning and it works very well.  Should also work with the code 40 strip rail too.

 

It's also occured to me that a rubber polishing block could be substituted for the eraser, thereby cleaning the rail at the same time.

 

Mark

 

Update 13/5 - I tried the polishing block, it isn't as good as the rubber eraser as it's too slippery.  There needs to be some resistance against the pull of the rail.

 

This works so well, it made me get another three coils of code 30 plain rail. I use a cork instead of the eraser.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good morning gentlemen. I'm penciling ideas about for my next 2mm layout - and thinking that my study might be a good place to home it. A consideration are  curves around the room's corners. The general advice (at least I can remember reading it in a few places) is that any curve radius above 22"-24" for bulletproof curves. Can I get away with an 18" radius 90 degree curve, assuming gauge widening and transition curves - and the use of 0-6-0 tender and tank locos (or those with properly set up leading and trailing trucks) and trains of five or six bogie coaches at maximum?

 

I would of course like to build some large tender locos at some point in the future - but for now my sights are set firmly on two and six-coupled, inside valve-gear locos. I imagine this layout will long be consigned to the dust heap before my skills are sufficient enough to build a Britannia or 9F to make their provision a meaningful design consideration.

 

This sounds silly, but that kind or radius will allow me to utilise right-angled baseboard and joins rather than complex angled geometry and support structures, and allow the main layout to 'slot in' directly and in theory be moved or removed to a new home should my home situation change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Connerburh I got away with an 18"radius curve, in fact a small part of it went down to c15" through an error in aligning the bridge deck. I operated 0-4-4Ts, a 2-4-0, an 0-4-2 and 6 coupled locos round it, the latter with some sideplay on the centre axle. It did have superelevation, gauge widening and also a check rail. 6 wheeled coaches needed a Cleminson underframe to go round reliably, but 45ft bogie coaches had no problem. 

 

Jim 

  • Craftsmanship/clever 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you could manage to incorporate a bit of transition that would make quite a bit of difference . A coach length at 24inches tightening to 18 would make it look and work better.  Vehicles with a short wheelbase compared to their length will swing out on corners. I have an 0 gauge King that can go round a 1m curve but the bogie looks divorced from the front end. 

Don

  • Craftsmanship/clever 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Not so much a question but an answer (possibly to an unasked question here, but it has been asked on the VAG so...).

 

The ZAG (Zoom Area Group) meets via Zoom (obviously) on the Second and Fourth Saturdays of the Month at 0900hours GMT (to allow for everyone around the globe to workout what time it is locally - I know it isn't friendly for the North Americans but it is run from the East Coast of Australia and takes into consideration the Land of the Long White Cloud as well as the multiplicity of time zones Out Here).

 

The link to join, should be you interested is:

 

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85830030701?pwd=WmdJbmRBdTh6cktnSU01cFMwaHo4QT09

Meeting ID: 858 3003 0701
Passcode: 048177
 

As this is set up as a regular meeting, the link doesn't change from meeting to meeting.  

 

 

Edited by Sithlord75
Got the time wrong!!!
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/07/2020 at 08:35, Valentin said:

 

This works so well, it made me get another three coils of code 30 plain rail. I use a cork instead of the eraser.

 

Pleased to hear that you've been successful, Valentin.  Cork should work well, I'm going to try it myself.  It needs to be a material that gives just enough friction to pull against.  Cork should also clean the rail as well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the most appropriate place is to ask this but here goes,

 

I note the change to the annual modelling competition at the AGM to a virtual format.

The categories broadly align to the trophies, are the entry conditions the same?

 

e.g. the wagons category, previously rolling stock required a minimum of 6 axles, is it just single wagons this year?

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably better to email the chairman or secretary direct tbh - email addresses are in the recent newsletter. As far as I know there aren't many current committee members who post on here or who might read it.

 

When you get the answer it would be useful to post it here though.

 

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there,  I am quite a way through the plans of a new N gauge layout which only consists of double track plain line in the viewing area.  I hope to use finetrax flexi bullhead on wooden sleepers for that part.  I just wanted to check that its compatable with standard peco track which I intend to use on the non scenic storage section.

 

The second question relates around the DN distant signal for Gleneagles in the picture below.  How on earth would i go about getting a working version of that?

 

469463497_GleneaglesDNdistant.jpg.10e3279d919b575e62960173df8d8518.jpg

 

 

 

Thank you in advance

 

Claggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Clagmeister said:

The second question relates around the DN distant signal for Gleneagles in the picture below.  How on earth would i go about getting a working version of that?

You design an etch for it and run the operating wire up the centre of the post, crank it out at right angles under the bracket and then up the doll.  At the top bring it forward and into a hole in the signal arm.

 

That's what I did for the up inner home for Kirkallanmuir.  Seemples, Igor!!

 

Jim 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Clagmeister said:

Hello there,  I am quite a way through the plans of a new N gauge layout which only consists of double track plain line in the viewing area.  I hope to use finetrax flexi bullhead on wooden sleepers for that part.  I just wanted to check that its compatable with standard peco track which I intend to use on the non scenic storage section.

 

The second question relates around the DN distant signal for Gleneagles in the picture below.  How on earth would i go about getting a working version of that?

 

469463497_GleneaglesDNdistant.jpg.10e3279d919b575e62960173df8d8518.jpg

 

 

 

Thank you in advance

 

Claggy

 

I'm sure other people are using the track combination you describe. However, as the depth of the track, both in terms of rail and sleeper heights is significantly higher on the Peco, you are going to need to use a thicker underlay on the Finetrax parts and step it where the two meet.

 

Chris

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.