Enlarging a Scalescenes box file kit to 0

[Ian Holmes]

As editor of the Micro Model Railway Dispatch I have received a couple of layouts for inclusion in the magazine using the Scalescenes industrial box file layout kit enlarged to O scale. That got me thinking about a long dormant idea of mine to use the Scalescenes Canal basin box file kit and how it would enlarge up.

To that end I’ve been experimenting with how it would work. These pictures show the Scalescenes kit as made and my blocking in to gauge the size of the O scale version. I think it would fit in an area approximately 3’ - 3’6” x 18” (915mm -1075mm x 450mm)

I've wanted to build one of the Scalescenes box file layout kits since they came out. Now I'm retired from work, I have the time to get on with things. I have even cleared out space in the model railway room to take it. 

 

I think it would work pretty well. (Yes, that's a lot of beer in the box in the background 😀...)

 

Ian

 

[harris0169]

Hi Ian

I'm glad you're doing this.

@brossard was working on this in O as well...here's the link. Looking forward to following progress!

 

All the best

 

Andy

 

[Ian Holmes]

3 hours ago, harris0169 said:

Hi Ian

I'm glad you're doing this.

@brossard was working on this in O as well...here's the link. Looking forward to following progress!

 

All the best

 

Andy

 

Thanks for the link.

There’s some good information there. I’m thinking that rather than do an exact blow up of the plan to 0 scale, (which appears to be how that project started). I’m planning to let the buildings fit the geometry of the PECO track I have.

We’ll see how things progress.

 

Ian

[harris0169]

5 hours ago, Ian Holmes said:

Thanks for the link.

There’s some good information there. I’m thinking that rather than do an exact blow up of the plan to 0 scale, (which appears to be how that project started). I’m planning to let the buildings fit the geometry of the PECO track I have.

We’ll see how things progress.

 

Ian

 

Sounds like a plan 😊

 

Will be interesting to see what mods to the standard design you might make to do this.  

 

 Should be good fun...

 

All the best

 

Andy

[Ian Holmes]

Today I measured if the structures on the boxfile layout and enlarged them to O scale. Not having the correct handed point work, and fitting the plan to the PECO geometry makes a surprising difference. There will be quite a bit of building modifications to do. 

 

Even rearranging the track doesn’t help things. All three tracks should still go under/into the left hand side building. The track plan was originally designed for 00/H0 or 4mm scale narrow gauge, so I figured it wouldn’t enlarge -perfectly, but I didn’t think it’s be that far off.

On reflection I don’t mind the single track running along the front (probably a quayside line) I could also find a building to fit between the two tracks exiting to the right.

The trackplan is a 5-3-3 inglenook, so plenty of operational capability there.

Carry on thinking.

 

Ian

 

[alant]

I also think the line at the front adds more to the layout than the original plan.

 

[harris0169]

Hi @Ian Holmes

That's a bit weird...Possibly two things...

1. I measured the kit part I have - Structure C page 21 of the parts.  Is this what you get (approx) for the width and height of openings?:

Large opening....81.5mm 4mm scale -> 142.6mm O scale ( by multiplying 7/4)

Smaller opening....42.5 in 4mm scale -> 74.4mm in O scale

Height of opening 54mm in 4mm -> 98mm in O scale

2, Secondly in the suggesting in the kit the point is a Y (Which might make a difference) and probably more impacting, the second line into the large opening comes off the front track.  This allows the tracks to converge before going into the large opening. It seems that with the point on the rails feeding the large opening the tracks diverge too much.

You could also reverse the buildings so the large opening is to the left side and then the Left hand point would be straight through down the canal at the front into  the small opening and then diverge off to  the left to feed one side of the large opening...hope that makes sense...probably need a diagram....here's a mashup...I don't have photoshop...this is mangled with Powepoint!

 

The back track then could be curved towards the exit of the Fiddle yard to make it less boring  (actually on second thought I like it - could even be a separate feeder line - with/without running rights over the other lines etc etc)...

All the best 

 

Andy

Edited February 9, 2023 by harris0169
editorial dubries. and extra thing

[Ian Holmes]

@harris0169 My dimensions were near enough to yours but not quite. I also had to consider that my printer is printing on letter sized paper as opposed to A4, (flipping Americans and their ignoring of the metric system) before I enlarged it by 176%.   Add to that my Dyscalculia and it’s a wonder I was anywhere near.

 

Ian

Edited February 9, 2023 by Ian Holmes

[harris0169]

Hi Ian. 

Good calculatin'! Nothing like some good old brain training! Love a bit of Legal paper 😊

 

Thing is, that just makes it plain weird. 

I don't understand how 2 tracks don't make it through the opening. Perhaps because the 7mm track is approx double the width of 4mm track and the opening is only 7/4 bigger?

 

I think that's possibly it. 

 

Anyway, it is what it is. 

 

Thanks Ian for the reply. 

 

Edit....

Aha!  @brossardnoticed the same and reduced the width of the central pillar....

 

All the best.

Andy

Edited February 10, 2023 by harris0169

[GER_Jon]

I'm enjoying following both these rescale canal wharfs but I think you have to remember the original OO kit is effectively narrow gauge, if the kit had been EM it should have been directly rescaleable. I'm slowly doing a 3mm scale version and decided on a tuning fork design due to the 14.2mm gauge track I use whereas a 12mm gauge 3mm would probably work for inglenook.

Jon

[Ian Holmes]

It’ll probably look something like this in the end…