Period modelling - Pre 1900s

[John_Miles]

The secret is to take your time, and not try to bodge it and cut corners. In 4mm scale the rail is tiny compared to code 75 and above, so easy to work and solder. Just plan and prepare well, and don't have a deadline. Oh, and don't even consider doing it to any standards other than P4/S4, as otherwise it really will drive you nuts trying to make everything fit, and work!

 

I would go for EM. A trip to Scaleforum will reveal lots of layouts that don't run very well and quite often a number of the exhibits are unfinished and not even working.  I stopped going to Scaleforum because the layouts were so bad. P4 requires a high level of skill and dedication that is beyond many modellers. If you read the P4 newsletter, it has over the past 18 months had a number of letters and articles about the problems they face getting things to run well. EM is a sensible compromise.

[Londontram]

Could I justify a Stirling Single on a back-water passenger service in the 1900s? Probably. Whether or not I could face making obvious cosmetic changes to a £200 model is another question! 

Bit of rule No. 1 there I think. That's why I always say 1900 for my period but I actually work to about 5 years either side which gives me a bit of a buffer as to be honest there are one or two items of stock that in reality most likely wouldn't have met but its my railway so there we are.

[BG John]

I would go for EM. A trip to Scaleforum will reveal lots of layouts that don't run very well and quite often a number of the exhibits are unfinished and not even working.  I stopped going to Scaleforum because the layouts were so bad. P4 requires a high level of skill and dedication that is beyond many modellers. If you read the P4 newsletter, it has over the past 18 months had a number of letters and articles about the problems they face getting things to run well. EM is a sensible compromise.

Have you tried building mixed gauge track? The wider flangeways in EM makes it difficult to get everything in, and it's far easier to build the track in P4. EM flanges and wider wheels are also a problem on some broad gauge locos and rolling stock. That's why P4/S7 is recommended by the Broad Gauge Society over EM or OF.

[Penlan]

Alternatively, I can take anyone interested to a wooded dell ......

I'm wondering what B&D stands for now.... 

Edited September 8, 2017 by Penlan

[Poggy1165]

Depends on how early you want to go. For really early trains 7mm scale is ideal. At least two suppliers. SER kits. Parliamentary Trains. Both very good products. Or if the GW floats your boat, look at the Broad Gauge Society.

 

Early railways need less space. The trains are inherently shorter. So 7mm scale is more practicable.

Edited September 8, 2017 by Poggy1165

[John_Miles]

Have you tried building mixed gauge track? The wider flangeways in EM makes it difficult to get everything in, and it's far easier to build the track in P4. EM flanges and wider wheels are also a problem on some broad gauge locos and rolling stock. That's why P4/S7 is recommended by the Broad Gauge Society over EM or OF.

 

That answer is no. I have seen Brian Arman's efforts and just marvelled at his standards (but of course that is 7mm) but I am strictly 4' 8" (well in EM it's a bit less). I can appreciate that mixed gauge does have it's own set of problems.

[BG John]

That answer is no. I have seen Brian Arman's efforts and just marvelled at his standards (but of course that is 7mm) but I am strictly 4' 8" (well in EM it's a bit less). I can appreciate that mixed gauge does have it's own set of problems.

I do P4 mixed gauge, and EM (but not on the same layout!), so have a bit of experience of both.

[Edwardian]

Bit of rule No. 1 there I think. That's why I always say 1900 for my period but I actually work to about 5 years either side which gives me a bit of a buffer as to be honest there are one or two items of stock that in reality most likely wouldn't have met but its my railway so there we are.

 

Fair enough, but the extent to which the characteristic appearance of the prototype seems affected by the chosen compromises has put me right off this particular release; the manufacturer's choices in that regard just don't work for me.

 

Honestly, RTR manufacturers seem intent on saving me a fortune these days.  If only Hornby would stop announcing new Pecketts, I might achieve solvency at this rate. 

[Dave John]

But back to the op. If someone is going to produce a rtr single it will be OO . So its going to be popular and creating a scene or mini layout around it is a good entry into pre-group modelling. Ok, we might snipe at rtr, but it will give a new modeller a feeling for the overall size and look of pre grouping stock. So again Vicza I'd go for it.

 

We all started with OO and got fussy later.

[jcm@gwr]

Hello Victor,

 

Welcome to the forum.

 

Good luck, with whichever choice you make!

 

Jeff

[Penlan]

..... I am strictly 4' 8" ...

What happened to the 1/2" ?

[John_Miles]

What happened to the 1/2" ?

 

Men always get things involving size wrong.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...I was looking at potentially modelling something (small to start with) around the Stirling Single ... (may be too ambitious for a beginner)

It is ambitious in respect of being a Main Line express locomotive. The RTR manufacturers have happily provided some alternatives in recent years, and by virtue of being fairly recent introductions they are both decently accurate and have good mechanisms, worthwhile starting points for further improvement and modification to restore them to a pre-1900 condition. My 'hot picks' that entered service a clear decade or more before 1900 and were little changed externally thereafter and have a good model which is thus a simple starting point for backdating: GER J15 0-6-0, LBSCR E4 0-6-2T, LNWR Coal Tank 0-6-2T, L&Y class 5 2-4-2T. All of these much more 'at home' in modest surroundings with a few wagons; and also significantly cheaper options than the Single.

[wagonman]

I would go for EM. A trip to Scaleforum will reveal lots of layouts that don't run very well and quite often a number of the exhibits are unfinished and not even working.  I stopped going to Scaleforum because the layouts were so bad. P4 requires a high level of skill and dedication that is beyond many modellers. If you read the P4 newsletter, it has over the past 18 months had a number of letters and articles about the problems they face getting things to run well. EM is a sensible compromise.

 

 

You must have gone to different Scaleforums to the ones I've attended; a few 'works in progress' yes, but generally the running was good. But you're right to say that P4 demands rather more care and attention.

[VicZA]

Does anyone know where I could get images of Alexandra Palace in the 1930s ... I am looking at modelling the station and platform but cannot find very good images and material online .... or I haven't tried hard enough. Can anyone assist?

[Edwardian]

It is ambitious in respect of being a Main Line express locomotive. The RTR manufacturers have happily provided some alternatives in recent years, and by virtue of being fairly recent introductions they are both decently accurate and have good mechanisms, worthwhile starting points for further improvement and modification to restore them to a pre-1900 condition. My 'hot picks' that entered service a clear decade or more before 1900 and were little changed externally thereafter and have a good model which is thus a simple starting point for backdating: GER J15 0-6-0, LBSCR E4 0-6-2T, LNWR Coal Tank 0-6-2T, L&Y class 5 2-4-2T. All of these much more 'at home' in modest surroundings with a few wagons; and also significantly cheaper options than the Single.

 

The J15 is probably readily back-datable to a Y14 - new chimney and safety valves - the main chore for the customiser is not in the back-dating, but in correcting the non-radial boiler handrails.

 

The E4 would need a whole new boiler etc to take it earlier than 1911, so a rather more involved task.

[Nearholmer]

VicZA

 

First ports of call are always the 'disused stations' site, and NLS.maps.

 

Both have good stuff on Ally Pally.

 

Kevin

Edited October 19, 2017 by Nearholmer

[VicZA]

VicZA

 

First ports of call are always the 'disused stations' site, and NLS.maps.

 

Both have good stuff on Ally Pally.

 

Kevin

sorry for the ignorance ....

 

I have discovered Disused Stations but not sure what NLS.maps is?

 

Please explain

 

Thanks

Victor

[Nearholmer]

The national library of Scotland maps site. They have done us all a massive service by putting vast numbers of very detailed maps on-line.

 

Here is a direct line to the one that will interest you most http://maps.nls.uk/view/103657970

[N15class]

Reading this the track is not the same all over the country. Points were the sleepers interlaced, perpendicular to straight stock rail, or on an angle to all the rails. I model ex LSWR plain rail was 30' later 45' with different sleeper spacings with different rail weights and sleeper lengths. Then of course there's getting the right signals for the period you wish to cover.

Getting the rail right sets the scene as much the same as the right buildings and stock.

I would join the society of the company you wish to model. They will have much of the information that you require.

All in all its great fun and very educational. It's hard to get it perfect but it gives the layout the right character.

[VicZA]

I have looked all over the internet and have sent email etc to the GNR Society ... but I thought I would try here: does anyone have some photos that would show more detail of this sign post and the bench below it? Doesn't have to be from Alexandra Palace (as this is) .... but maybe from another similar station ?!