Scaleforum 2012

[Kenton]

But it perpetuates an image of P4 modellers that I don't accept and is, in reality, quite inaccurate. But then, I are one of those P4 modellers.

 

Is it that those that don't model to those finer 4mm standards, produce better observed/different models or claim to be modellers yet only buy their models feel inadequate and cope with that by deriding those that tread a different path?

 

From the opposite side of the fence this statement is all round the wrong way!

One of the things that puts me off P4 is the aloof air which seems to pervade the them and us. The claim that is always there in the background that P4 is better and that those that indulge are a more superior modeller.

 

There are some very fine models around in OO as well as EM and those that are quite happy with this are not simply ready to plonk or open a box. In fact I would hazard a guess that many now P4 virtuosos started off in OO before they moved on to a different belief system.

 

This debate has been around a long time and will never go away until we all respect the other.

[Tim V]

I'll stand by my comment...

[Guest jim s-w]

I dunno Kenton

 

Theres a very definate anti-doing stuff for yourself attitude these days. If you dont have the latest helbachby sound fitted whatever it is that lights up like a christmas tree then you are some sort of pleb. It doesnt matter if 99% of the layout is scratchbuilt or not.

 

Like Tim says its only a train set, thats not to say the person building doesnt think thats its important to them.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Kenton]

Theres a very definate anti-doing stuff for yourself attitude these days.  If you dont have the latest helbachby sound fitted whatever it is that lights up like a christmas tree then you are some sort of pleb.  It doesnt matter if 99% of the layout is scratchbuilt or not.

 

Translation please - or do I detect a touch of sarcasm?

I'm not sure I have ever been a "latest helbachby sound fitted whatever it is that lights up like a christmas tree" sort. I even dabbled in EM till I decided it was doing nothing for me and I couldn't take the political infighting seriously. So I am not anti-fine scale or even anti-P4 (though as I have said before I cannot see the difference between P4 and EM).

 

I don't care what people model in, as long as it gives them some excitement from the hobby. I can admire any scale and any gauge and appreciate the skill and effort behind it. I just wish all others could do the same.

 

As for anti-doing stuff. Well I suppose in some respects yes. The desire to model something that cannot be seen has always puzzled me. I like my life to be fairly simple and if helbachby are going to produce something as good as I can (probably) then I am going to use that. There s not enough time in the day to get worked up about if that makes me a "pleb", or in Andy's words a "snob".

[Captain Kernow]

Gentlemen,

 

I model in 4mm:1ft. Only the track/wheels are P4. So why would people think that P4 modelling is a hair shirt activity as it isn't much different?

I'm not disagreeing with that notion, but there remains the fact that to 'go P4' (let's say from a starting point that is OO R-T-R), there are some tasks that are not optional, namely converting locos and stock, and I respect the fact that for some people, this can be seen as a 'challenge' (full marks to manufacturers like Ultrascale and the Society itself for making even this as easy as it just about could be now).

 

Otherwise, even in trackwork to an extent, the amount of work/level of detail/density of hairs on the back of the shirt is as much, or as little, as you want to make it, regardless of gauge. And yes, Tim V, we are talking about our train sets at the end of the day, but some folk have damned fine train sets, such as your good self!

 

And should you doubt whether I have a sense of humour, please make yourself known at stand 24 at S4um where I'll be pleased to indulge in some light hearted banter, in exchange for emptying your wallett.

And by the same token, if you come by Quai 87 any time, Jol, we'll also be happy to indulge in more light hearted banter, only this time we won't even empty your wallet!!

[Jon020]

I feel responsible for starting something that has taken on a life of it's own and taken this thread in the wrong direction. So, I'll make one more comment and then get my coat.

 

 

Time for me to possibly apologise to anyone my comment offended, and to anyone else that’s got caught up in this issue.

I returned to the hobby about 4 years ago, partly to satisfy a growing interest, but also to try to provide for my two boys what my father had provided for me and my brother when we were young: a trainset to play trains on.

At first, I was interested in running full length trains and I seriously contemplated starting in “n”. However, my two boys were quite young and I envisaged the frustration they might experience is putting the trains on their track. Therefore, I opted for OO. I think it was the right choice, for them certainly... and with the dramatic change in detail, and DCC and sound, I saw options for me too.

 

Whilst a few of the RTR locos I bought seemed “nice”, it soon became apparent that the detail and accuracy levels were not equal; remember, I was a new returnee to the hobby. As I looked further and started to read up on the real locos, the issues became even more apparent and I decided that the only thing for it was to try and add some extra details myself, and to have a go at weathering. It was at about this time that I found RMWeb, and I have never looked back.

 

Some of my first attempts (at class 55s) were ok... I did one, then two more, and then one for my brother. For some details, some new etch components were acquired. They looked ok to me... but they weren’t finescale.

 

Then I set about a much bigger project, correcting the loco body shape and improving on many details that were a) evident as being able to be improved upon, and B) once observed, really needed improving (to my eye). I spent many (many) months on this project and I was getting towards the end of the modification when I attended Scaleforum for the first time. Up to this point, I think I’d been venturing down the finescale route... aiming to achieve a level of detail and accuracy that I’d not seen on a RTR model... and I was happy with what I was doing.

However, what was on show swept me away. The fidelity of the trackwork was amazing; I’d been bowled over by Colin Craig’s crossings ... and suddenly I noticed what a variety of modelling directions there were under the S4 banner. As I left the show, I realised that having gone to the lengths I’d already gone to with my 55, putting it on some correctly gauged wheels , with scale flanges etc... sat on some 4mm 18.83 track, would probably take it that little bit further to (near to) perfection without too much extra effort.

Ok, so the new wheel set was easy... yes. The permanent way is a skill I’ve still to master; but I’m trying.

 

I need to mention something else. Since my time in the S4 society, everyone that I’ve contacted, either by e-mail or in person, has been so helpful. It’s a big society, but it seems that there is a mutual recognition (amongst those I’ve encountered) that each of us is just trying to push the hobby (and it is a hobby) a little bit further. There’s no need to push P4 in S4... if the issue is with building the permanent way, the issues are pretty much the same whether its OO, OOFS, EM or P4... although yes the tolerances aren’t always the same... but there’s always someone around to help. It’s been a joy to be a member of S4.

 

For any finescale super-detaled conversion I now undertake, I will probably include a conversion to P4 for the reason of completeness. Are all my models P4, oh no! My friend has a OO loft layout, and much pleasure is gained from running our sound locos around it on the occasional evening that we get to do this (Dad’s getting spare time in the evening to play trains is tricky sometimes... Dad’s taxis’ need a night off now and then). His layout is still a work in progress... it’s massive and his electrics are amazing... I have a Powercab and he has the full power pro... with about 6 plug in sockets to chose from.... it’s a multi layered layout with stations with 5 and 2 platforms, each of which can accommodate 6 coach loads... large storage sidings, loco yard, sidings, and a spiral to a large lower storage area. It’s all peco 75 with streamline (or finescale?) pointwork. Scenic work is staring... but above all, we enjoy running trains. I’m quite looking forward to hooking my rake of Bach Mk1s up to the Dapol Western and giving it a run. For these, I will strive for my locos to be finescale... but they won’t be P4.

My plans include ideas for small diorama type P4 layouts; I lack the space for a proper layout upon which to exercise my locos fully... but as I strive for visual correctness, and the ability to withstand relatively close scrutiny, I’m happy to not have a massive layout as well.

 

There are many OO layouts that look totally superb. The quality of track available today, even if slightly modifying peco code 75, is superb. My first photo plank used OO C&L bullhead; and I liked the image it presented. This is finescale... regardless of gauge. Some of the layouts on here, do wonders to show what can be achieved in OO when finescale track is used. AND, you can still use finescale Peco points – look what Chris N achieves (superb). The advantage is a much simpler route to a really good finescale representation.

However, I know that if you put it next to P4 gauge track, the difference is obvious, I did and wished I hadn’t... so my advice is “don’t”.

 

My view is this... I strive for finescale. Some of my models will be P4, some won’t. P4 can be finescale, but finescale does not need to be P4.

 

Sorry for any offence that has been unintentionally caused. I hope that everyone has a really good show next week... as I will try to too.

 

Jon

[Guest jim s-w]

Sorry kenton

 

I was speaking generally not about you specifically

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Captain Kernow]

My view is this... I strive for finescale. Some of my models will be P4, some won’t. P4 can be finescale, but finescale does not need to be P4.

 

Sorry for any offence that has been unintentionally caused. I hope that everyone has a really good show next week... as I will try to too.

 

 

Hi Jon, very eloquently put and explained. I personally don't think anyone on here has really taken serious offence, though, and I for one don't think that any kind of apology should be required.

[Horsetan]

I will be there both days....

 

Lucky you. I will not be there.

 

Attending a client on the Saturday; attending to my horse on Sunday.

[Brian Harrap]

 

I've some On30 small side-tippers under my desk, perhaps they can get a run before I sell them !

 

Sure, bring em along. Flanges need to pass through a 0.5mm gap though. (yes that's smaller than P4) Brian

[10800]

One of the things that puts me off P4 is the aloof air which seems to pervade the them and us.

 

I suppose if you keep looking for it you will keep finding it (there are some still around like that, but we are now in the second decade of the 21st century!).

 

This debate has been around a long time and will never go away until we all respect the other.

 

Most of us have done for a long time, and there's not many really interested in perpetuating the debate.

[Guest jim s-w]

In one of the early MRJ I think was a photo of 2 steam engines of the same class one to OO and the other one to EM or S4. The OO one was a lot better detailed than the EM/S4 one, and was put into the mag to show that you don't have to get the gauge correct to build high quality stock for your layout.

 

A better detailed loco is nicer than a less well detailed loco irrespective of the wheels?

 

Seems to me most MRJ readers wouldnt really need that showing to them if I am honest due to the fact that its blindingly obvious.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Guest oldlugger]

Lucky you. I will not be there.

 

Attending a client on the Saturday; attending to my horse on Sunday.

 

Maybe the horse likes P4 too so you could kill two birds with one stone?

[Guest oldlugger]

In 1585 when P4 was first invented by Sir Oswald Codpiece Fynescalle, there was a popular ditty that could be heard in most boozers and houses of disrepute up and down the country and it went something like this:-

 

"There are many good reasons for P4ing and one has just entered my head

if a man can't build a P4 layout when he's living

how the hell can he build one when he's dead?"

 

The origins of the aforementioned are unknown but legend has it that the poem was in fact older than the 1500's and dated back to Arthurian times. So one has to ask the obvious question; was Merlin into fine scale, or more precisely... practising fine scale? The Domesday Book makes brief reference (translated into modern English for those not familiar with old English) to a "miniature creation that verily captures reality that could only be from the hand of some magic person or demon. The Marcher Lords have decreed that the said piece will be taxed accordingly". Makes you think eh?

 

Simon

[Guest jim s-w]

Makes me think, what the hell are you on about Simon?

 

Cheers

 

Jim

 

[Horsetan]

Maybe the horse likes P4 too so you could kill two birds with one stone?

 

No, the horse likes peeing over expensive real estate. That's quite a different thing altogether.

[Guest oldlugger]

Makes me think, what the hell are you on about Simon?

 

Cheers

 

Jim

 

Something called humour, and using one's imagination. Sadly two things that are a becoming rapidly redundant in this dull zombified world of ours.

 

Simon

[Guest jim s-w]

is not humour supposed to be linked to 'funny' then? (JOKE!)

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[Kenton]

is not humour supposed to be linked to 'funny' then?  

 

Depends on what you define as funny

 

humour

origin : [from Latin humor liquid; related to Latin ūmēre to be wet, Old Norse vökr moist, Greek hugros wet] definition : any of the four bodily fluids (blood, phlegm, choler or yellow bile, melancholy or black bile) formerly thought to determine emotional and physical disposition; any of various fluids in the body, esp the aqueous humour and vitreous humour.

 

which may or may not be a laughing matter

[Guest oldlugger]

is not humour supposed to be linked to 'funny' then? (JOKE!)

 

Cheers

 

Jim

 

I give up Jim. Take it or leave it.

 

I presume that you're the life and sole of any party that you attend with people queuing up to hear your laugh a minute anecdotes about life around Wolverhampton? I'm surprised that the BBC haven't discovered you yet...

 

All the best

Simon

[Guest jim s-w]

Nah - my world is redundant, dull and zombified!

 

I must say though thats the second time you have completely missed 2 light hearted comments. I guess humour is getting redundant aint it? I admit my sense of humour is a bit odd in a Ross Noble/Eddie Izzard/Rhod Gilbert kind of way but thats the sort of stuff I like. I genuinely didn't mean to offend and I am sorry if you took it that way.

 

Cheers

 

Jim

[chrisf]

"There are many good reasons for P4ing and one has just entered my head

if a man can't build a P4 layout when he's living

how the hell can he build one when he's dead?"

 

Simon

 

The origins of this saying lie in Arnold Silcock's anthology of humorous poetry "Verse and Worse" which includes an anonymous piece that goes like this:

 

"There are many good reasons for drinking and one has just entered my head

If a man cannot drink when he's living how the hell can he drink when he's dead?"

 

Clearly the inference to be drawn is that modelling in P4 is enough to drive one to drink. There are times when I agree.

 

Chris

[martin_wynne]

Hey, it's only a train set....

 

And this one is 00:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGQ6XyWckvA

 

See: http://www.rmweb.co....600#entry794037

[Enterprisingwestern]

Lucky you. I will not be there.

 

Attending a client on the Saturday; attending to my horse on Sunday.

 

That's quite enough euphemisms to be going on with thanks!

[Captain Kernow]

Clearly the inference to be drawn is that modelling in P4 is enough to drive one to drink. There are times when I agree.

 

We should be asking the Committee of the Scalefour Society to put on a tutorial in one of the lecture halls at Leatherhead, something like 'Humour and the P4 modeller - is it enough to drive you to drink?' Everyone will have to take notes and pass a test to retain their membership (or buy the tutor a double brandy afterwards)...

 

 

On the other hand, if anyone would like to buy me a double brandy this weekend, come and see me afterwards!