PECO Announces Bullhead Track for OO

[Derekstuart]

The other solution (probably only of use to British modellers) is to rip up all the tracks and build model supermarkets or blocks of flats instead.

 

No worrying about gauges then.

[BlackRat]

Seems it's all going to be academic anyway!

 

Just been listening on the radio and if we stay in Europe, it will be illegal as from 1st April 2018 to mix metric and imperial measurements, so 4mm to the Foot will be illegal.

 

Apparently the German gvt via the European Central Bank will be subsidising Fleishmann and Roco to allow part exchange of ALL 4mm rolling stock.

 

Frau Fanni Schmelling said, "For years the English have gone their own funny way, but OO, along with Morris dancing and warm beer will be a thing of the past!"

 

Following the announcement shares in Hornby, its international subsidiary Roco and Fleishchman have soared.

 

No one from the relevant societies was available for comment.

 

Who'd have thought that eh!?

Edited April 1, 2016 by BlackRat

[Craigw]

Seems it's all going to be academic anyway!

 

Just been listening on the radio and if we stay in Europe, it will be illegal as from 1st April 2018 to mix metric and imperial measurements, so 4mm to the Foot will be illegal.

 

Apparently the German gvt via the European Central Bank will be subsidising Fleishmann and Roco to allow part exchange of ALL 4mm rolling stock.

 

Frau Fanny Schmelling said, "For years the English have gone their own funny way, but OO, along with Morris dancing and warm beer will be a thing of the past!"

 

Following the announcement shares in Hornby, its international subsidiary Roco and Fleishchman have soared.

 

No one from the relevant societies was available for comment.

 

Who'd have thought that eh!?

 

The above looks like it will save everyone a great deal of money.

 

If anybody is interested, I have a bridge I am trying to sell.

 

Please contact me via PM 

 

Regards,

 

Craigw

[BG John]

This means that the track looks to scale at 4mm to foot, but when the loco/train runs over it, it can be made to shrink to 00 gauge (but only out of sight beneath said train), provided the correct temperature is applied as the train passes.

If only there was trade support for pre-grouping and early grouping periods, Peco could produce baulk road for Great Western layouts, as it survived long after the end of the broad gauge. The transoms, the bits that hold the baulks apart instead of sleepers, could be made telescopic, and each motorised with a tiny servo. As the train passes over, the track could be narrowed mechanically, and widened again after it passed. I think doing this with conventional cross sleepers would make the track very expensive, but the much wider spaced transoms would make it more affordable. For other railways, a lot of track was ballasted over the sleepers in the early 20th century, so maybe steel rails could be moved by magnets hidden under a built in layer of ballast, making the mechanism entirely invisible.

[Edwardian]

If only there was trade support for pre-grouping and early grouping periods, Peco could produce baulk road for Great Western layouts, as it survived long after the end of the broad gauge. The transoms, the bits that hold the baulks apart instead of sleepers, could be made telescopic, and each motorised with a tiny servo. As the train passes over, the track could be narrowed mechanically, and widened again after it passed. I think doing this with conventional cross sleepers would make the track very expensive, but the much wider spaced transoms would make it more affordable. For other railways, a lot of track was ballasted over the sleepers in the early 20th century, so maybe steel rails could be moved by magnets hidden under a built in layer of ballast, making the mechanism entirely invisible.

 

You may have to wait for baulk road, but I notice that today Peco has announced a comprehensive ready-to-lay bullhead track system feature two-bolt chairs, thus being the first RTL representation of Great Western track.  All down to me, too, because last week I asked them to make some.  They were very obliging, but when I asked them if they were also taking on board points raised in this forum, they just said "RMWeb, what's that?" 

[Bernard Lamb]

All the recent posts are purely academic as if we do leave the EU our new masters will prohibit all but the true imperial way.

S rules OK.

Bernard

[BG John]

You may have to wait for baulk road, but I notice that today Peco has announced a comprehensive ready-to-lay bullhead track system feature two-bolt chairs, thus being the first RTL representation of Great Western track.  All down to me, too, because last week I asked them to make some.  They were very obliging, but when I asked them if they were also taking on board points raised in this forum, they just said "RMWeb, what's that?" 

Too late for me though. I've got all the toy like Peco track I need for my OO layout, enough SMP for the EM one, and hopefully I won't be building anything other than broad gauge in 4mm in the future.

[caradoc]

Given the amount of interest shown on RMWeb in their OO bullhead track, Peco will announce today that they are to produce a left hand medium radius bullhead point. If demand is sufficient, they will produce the right hand equivalent in a year's time.

[Edwardian]

I heard that they would produce track for the down side, but nothing for the up.

['CHARD]

4SF+2 might work!

 

FFS might work.

[Jeff Smith]

BlackRat said,

 

"Just been listening on the radio and if we stay in Europe, it will be illegal as from 1st April 2018 to mix metric and imperial measurements, so 4mm to the Foot will be illegal."

 

Presumably so will 3.5mm/ft.......well, it's not midday here yet!

Edited April 1, 2016 by Jeff Smith

[lochlongside]

There is a solution on the horizon (if you look in the right direction).

 

Many years ago, Raychem, a very successful USA company, with offices in Swindon (UK), provided heat shrink plastic insulation to the leccy supply industry and others. The shrinking was a one way process, it could not easily be stretched back to the supplied size. However, processes have now evolved so that by applying the correct temperature, plastics can be stretched or shrunk as desired. We could, therefore lay track to 18.0 mm gauge, say, with plastic sleepers, then apply heat, and the gauge shrinks to 16.5mm, and when it cools to normal room temperature -i.e. 22deg C - it reverts back to 18.00 mm gauge.

 

This means that the track looks to scale at 4mm to foot, but when the loco/train runs over it, it can be made to shrink to 00 gauge (but only out of sight beneath said train), provided the correct temperature is applied as the train passes.

 

There are a couple of snags, however. The ballast has to be flexible, else it piles up under the wheels. I had thought the flexible foam Peco ballst strip would be fine, but it tends to melt.

 

You won't be able to lay the track in the loft, due to temperature variations, nor in cold sheds, since at near freezing temperature it sort of becomes gauge 1, and once it 'over stretches', it needs a very high temperature to reset it back to normal working range, so to speak.

 

However, I've currently 3d printed a short length of track for experimental purposes, but I'm stuck on how to generate enough instantaneous heat below the train, without either melting said train or setting fire to the surrounding area. The setting of fire could be quite realistic, for passing steam locos, but maybe not so realistic for other motive power.

 

Unfortunately, I do not think I will be able to make pointwork based on this principle. There is a fundamental problem with 4mm scale pointwork, in that as the gauge narrows, so the checkrail gap widens.

 

I feel a neater solution would be to make the axles of the train from thick 'memory wire', then by applying the correct current through the axles, the axle would change length and the train could be run on virtually any gauge track. The current could be supplied via the track/wheels, of course, and it would work with a ddccc signal superimposed on top of it. I've estimated that about 15A per axle at 1V would do the job, and experiments with a couple of welding transformers may follow.

 

Anyone got a decent loco/train I could borrow, one of those fancy bendy Rapido jobbies would most likely be OK?

 

Best wishes,

Ray

Ray I think you and AndyID may be over engineering solutions when they already exist.

I am told by the some magazine writers that latex adhesive has some expansionary capability. There also used to be a very clever guy who wrote in RM around a century ago (when I were a lad) who implemented a meths burner live steamer in OO gauge. You could turn the burners to point down, and then if Kernow reintroduced their water/weedkiller train then it could follow on behind to restore the track to its normal gauge. Of course this means that you could only run steam engines followed by freight diesel trains but steam followed by diesel is very evocative of historical real life, and if you left a reasonable gap (which did happen in real life as the prototype diesels kept falling apart then you would also simulate the scorched earth embankments of the steam era thus saving on expensive electrostatic grass devices, but with the diesel coming  along to save the day. Of course as a qualified engineering consultant rather than an expert there are probably one or two teething snags to overcome but I am sure the gathered minds of RMWeb will be able to resolve them (.....d*** missed the 1200 deadline)

[Derekstuart]

I do hate those April fools jokes that are so close to truth that you really aren't sure.

 

I do of course mean the sale of the Brooklyn Bridge, not the joke about the eu as that is almost half a thou away from the truth.

 

 

EDIT: Look, on a windoze [sic] screen, both bridges look very similar. In fact so does the QE2 bridge, the Humber crossing and the plank of wood across the stream at the end of my garden.

 

I KNEW that whatever one I chose it was guaranteed to be the wrong one. Thanks to AndyID for correcting me.

Edited April 1, 2016 by Derekstuart

[Joseph_Pestell]

Well why do we have these absurd mixed measurements at all? When I worked in France, I never heard any modeller refer to HO as 11.49mm to the metre.

[AndyID]

I do of course mean the sale of the Brooklyn Bridge, not the joke about the eu as that is almost half a thou away from the truth.

 

Er, I think he's trying to flog a certain antipodean bridge 

 

EDIT: Either that or the UK has annexed New York again and stuck a flag that's got a Union Jack on it on top of the bridge (visible if you click on the image).

Edited April 1, 2016 by AndyID

[AndyID]

All joking aside, I have it on very good authority from my contacts here that, as Hornby is currently on the ropes, Bachmann has finally decided to "get the boot in" and migrate its UK products to 1:87 scale. But don't panic. All the existing stuff will remain 1:76.2, but over the next twenty years, models based on new prototypes will be phased in at progressively smaller scales until they get to 1:87.

 

I see this as a very positive step as it means we will no longer have to deceive ourselves into believing 16.5 mm represents 1435 mm 'cos it actually will. Mind you, I have to admit I will miss all the friendly banter on the topic.

 

Almost time for my elevenses now.

 

Toodle Pip!

[Derekstuart]

Thanks Andy. I was looking on a windoze [sic] 'phone screen and it could have been the Dartford Crossing for all I knew.

 

As for annexing New York- perhaps as your President is so keen on the eu, perhaps it would be appropriate to surrender at least part of your territory to European control again.

Er, I think he's trying to flog a certain antipodean bridge 

 

EDIT: Either that or the UK has annexed New York again and stuck a flag that's got a Union Jack on it on top of the bridge (visible if you click on the image).

[Derekstuart]

It wouldn't surprise me if that did actually happen. Design convergence means there will be fewer and fewer designs of real trains in the future. Perhaps one or two locals, one or two expresses and so on. Subject to local conditions (ie platform height or clearances) these might well be Continental wide.

 

On that basis model makers will have SFA incentive to model "ze uber train" in Germany at 3.5 and "so, like the train, innit" in Britain at 4.0 and so on. They will just make the same mould and have different boxes to stick them in.

 

We are already seeing a gradual move towards that (in the real world) and have for decades now. though the change will be exponential. However given that most of their "imminent" releases were announced when pterodactyls were still around- I wouldn't worry overly.

All joking aside, I have it on very good authority from my contacts here that, as Hornby is currently on the ropes, Bachmann has finally decided to "get the boot in" and migrate its UK products to 1:87 scale. But don't panic. All the existing stuff will remain 1:76.2, but over the next twenty years, models based on new prototypes will be phased in at progressively smaller scales until they get to 1:87.

 

I see this as a very positive step as it means we will no longer have to deceive ourselves into believing 16.5 mm represents 1435 mm 'cos it actually will. Mind you, I have to admit I will miss all the friendly banter on the topic.

 

Almost time for my elevenses now.

 

Toodle Pip!

[Pacific231G]

Well why do we have these absurd mixed measurements at all? When I worked in France, I never heard any modeller refer to HO as 11.49mm to the metre.

Funny you should mention that Joseph. I've just been looking at some French books from the late 1940s and they do refer to the most popular scales as " 'O' 23mm par metre & 'HO' 11.5 par metre". (The French adopted the British scale for O unlike the German 1:45  or American 1:48 though often rationalised it to 1:43)  I think though that simply using the scale ratio caught on very quickly there though some manufacturers and drawings used 1:86 and others 1:87 scale and it was quite often referred to as OO.

 

The reason for it in Britain, particularly in 4mm/ft scale, was surely that rulers marked in both inches and cm/mm have long been very common so it is very easy to produce scale drawings simply by multiplying the prototype feet by four to give the scale length in millimetres For 4mm/ft it's very simple to turn a ruler with a metric scale into a scale ruler marked in feet and quarter feet.

 

The odd combination of feet and millimetres also shows very clearly that H0 did indeed originate in Britain and is not a 'furrin' scale.   Americans would surely have stuck to an all imperial scale as they did with O scale at 1:48 (¹/₄ inch to the foot) or indeed S scale. Without the British lead, Europe would surely have adopted purely metric scales, perhaps 1:50 and 1:100 or perhaps 1:80 as the Germans did for a while.    

 

This has led to one little known anomaly: American HO, defined by the NMRA from 3.5mm/ft, is strictly 1:87.1 but European H0 scale was fixed as 1:87 in the mid 1950s. They are slightly different.

Edited April 1, 2016 by Pacific231G

[AndyID]

I admit it was a bit tongue in cheek, but I actually think it would be a good direction to follow. (Perturbation among reactionary elements is just a bonus.)

 

I did send a letter to BRM a few years back proposing just such a scheme. The response was, shall we say, underwhelming?

[AndyID]

Funny you should mention that Joseph. I've just been looking at some French books from the late 1940s and they do refer to the most populat scales as " O 23mm par metre & HO 11.5 par metre". (The French adopted the British scale for O unlike the German 1:45  or American 1:48 though often rationalised it to 1:43)  I think though that simply using the scale ratio caught on very quickly there though some manufacturers and drawings used 1:86 and others 1:87 scale and it was quite often referred to as OO.

 

The reason for it in Britain, particularly in 4mm/ft scale, was surely that rulers marked in both inches and cm/mm have long been very common makling it very easy to produce scale drawings simply by multiplying the prototype feet by four to give the scale length in millimetres For 4mm/ft it's very simple to turn a ruler with a metric scale into a scale ruler marked in feet and quarter feet.

 

The odd combination of feet and millimetres also shows very clearly that H0 did indeed originate in Britain and is not a 'furrin' scale.   Americans would surely have stuck to an all imperial scale as they did with O scale at 1:48 (¹/₄ inch to the foot) or indeed S scale. Without the British lead, Europe would surely have adopted purely metric scales, perhaps 1:50 and 1:100 or perhaps 1:80 as the Germans did for a while.    

 

This has led to one little known anomaly: American HO, defined by the NMRA from 3.5mm/ft, is strictly 1:87.1 but European H0 scale was fixed as 1:87 in the mid 1950s. They are slightly different.

 

The Metrication Board in the UK (or whatever it was called) actually had an ad printed in the papers that basically said converting to the metric system was quite easy. They gave the fact that railway modellers in the UK had been using 4mm to the foot for many years as an example   (No, this is not an April Fool.)

 

I've tried to find the ad on the web with no success. IIRC this was around 1971/72.

[martin_wynne]

This has led to one little known anomaly: American HO, defined by the NMRA from 3.5mm/ft, is strictly 1:87.1 but European H0 scale was fixed as 1:87 in the mid 1950s. They are slightly different.

 

Hi David,

 

Not little-known to users of Templot:

 

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[edcayton]

I like Andy's plan. We could call it 00/H0.

 

Ed

[edcayton]

Or get Peco to increase the gauge of Streamline a bit each year until it gets to 18.83 mm.

 

Ed

[BG John]

Or get Peco to increase the gauge of Streamline a bit each year until it gets to 18.83 mm.

 

Ed

It happened with EM in the 70s, but they seemed to give up when they got to 18.2mm! But OO seems to be going in the opposite direction for some strange reason (16.5 to 16.2)!