A landscapers view on 'finescale'

[Ramblin Rich]

'Chad would like to eply to this thead howeve he has been taken into custody afte the appeaance of the Blue Kestel on the Teviotbank layout ecently.

 

Bail is set at 6 Heljan Claytons.

 

Yous

The WM Layout Secet Police

 

PS: We have his coat in custody as well

 

'CHARD - someone appears to have stolen the "R" key from your computer - or "R" you just "R"-sing around?

[Russ (mines a pint)]

This is an interesting question Russ - I'm definitely of the "landscape" preference, but does that mean there can be compromises in track standards as the track won't be such a large part of the whole effect? I still prefer the look of scale track but the time / effort / money involved versus "plonk it down" Peco is difficult to justify in my situation. I would stress that having the time / money / skills I would prefer better looking track - but then we're back into the "what would better OO track actually mean" debate

I think you have a fair point there (pardon the pun) I think I went head on into EM because I thought if I'm going to have to build all my own points then I might as well have it a bit nearer the correct width,

My own thoughts on the track being a 'large part' of the effect is because the type of modelling I prefer would include largely bullhead/chaired track.

 

In my own mind (and agiain I'm careful to point out that this is purely my own feelings)

you have a spectrum (I deliberatley avoided using the word hierachy!!) from:

 

RTR track (ie Peco Hornby Bachmann etc)

Hybrid of RTR points (ie Peco Tillig) and 'better' ie C&L Scaleway etc. track

PCB points and 'better' ie C&L Scaleway etc. track

completely handbuilt chair/sleeper/rail track

 

I'm largely happy with the middle 2 in either gauge (you couldnt do that in P4)

- though of course theres no RTR points in EM unless you buy Marcway ones of course.

 

I think one thing EM has pushed me into is a narrow choice of prototype,

- whilst on my favourite 4 axle diesels it is largely very simple it has limited me more than I initially thought. People mutter 'drop in wheelsets' but for a lot of the stuff I like they are simply not available and/or prohibitively expensive (DMU's), there is the whole nightmare of the old split chassis loco's too. I'm not saying it can't be done, but largely by the time I've thought about it I've lost interest!

 

Looking at the stuff proved possible by others on here, Chris Nevard is the most obvious but there are plenty others, I wonder sometimes how much of the time/money spent on rewheeling could be put to better use on other things?

 

I wont be doing much layout-wise till after the house move, but having a rumination like this just helps clarify whether to take the layouts with me, or dump them and have a clean slate as much as anything,

 

-at the moment I'm thinking OO with 'pretty track' Yes N scale is coming on with leaps and bounds but the OO range for Scottish region is still difficult in places, and I think N would be even more restrictive (for now). Though it partly depends on how much space there is at the new place. There should be more as long as it is powered up!!

[Russ (mines a pint)]

'CHARD - someone appears to have stolen the "R" key from your computer - or "R" you just "R"-sing around?

possibly a finger chopped off in the torture process!!

[James]

Why is it you'd be bothered about the size or type of the brake blocks on wagons, whether the bufferbeam pipes are in the correct place on a loco etc?

 

I think it's because 'finescale' is more a state of mind so it becomes desirable and rewarding to raise your own standards across the board (pun not wholly intended). From what I've seen Russ, this is precisely what you achieved with your layout!

 

 

I think it's the P4 people, in particular, who try to 'sell' the complete package - that is getting everything right.

 

However, it aint compulsory. I don't see why, in principle, one can't use P4 and EM track with re-wheeled out of the box locos and Airfix and Superquick buildings. It really is up to the individual and what he/she wants.

 

But what would be the point?!

[Jamie]

It all comes down to two things in my book - 1. consistency, 2. the laws of diminishing return. I need to put a certain amount of effort into item X to make it align with the rest of the layout standards, but after I go beyond a certain point the improvements aren't IMO worth the time, expense, effort. It generally confines me to the aesthetic scope of work, which suits me fine.

 

Others have said it Russ, but I'll maybe put it a bit blunter. It is/will be your layout to which you must apply only your own desires and standards. Have the backbone to brush off anyone else trying to impose their desires and standards on you, whether they are of the "finescale" mindset or otherwise.

[Poggy1165]

[

 

 

But what would be the point?!

 

 

The point James is that someone might want to do it. I wouldn't and obviously you wouldn't. But if it floated someone's boat who are we to condemn?

 

What is the point in railway modelling of any kind? It's to give satisfaction to the person doing it.

[Bloodnok]

In my own mind (and agiain I'm careful to point out that this is purely my own feelings) you have a spectrum (I deliberately avoided using the word hierarchy!!) from:

 

RTR track (ie Peco Hornby Bachmann etc)

Hybrid of RTR points (ie Peco Tillig) and 'better' ie C&L Scaleway etc. track

PCB points and 'better' ie C&L Scaleway etc. track

completely handbuilt chair/sleeper/rail track

 

I'll assume for the purposes of this the first one means something like Peco streamline - RTR points and flex intended for HO, in roughly 3.5mm/ft scale, rather than settrack fixed pieces. This would leave option 2 using products intended to reproduce 4mm/ft british appearance (but without being gauge specific) - SMP, C&L, Exactoscale, etc, etc.

 

I'm largely happy with the middle 2 in either gauge (you couldnt do that in P4)

 

I'm sure people have made PCB points in P4 - and I know you can buy P4 flex from a number of different sources, so option 3 does seem to be valid in P4. Option 2 isn't available in P4, and is rather difficult in EM...

 

though of course theres no RTR points in EM unless you buy Marcway ones of course.

 

Are Marcway really RTR, or are they (as I thought) a bespoke / made to order product?

 

Looking at the stuff proved possible by others on here, Chris Nevard is the most obvious but there are plenty others, I wonder sometimes how much of the time/money spent on rewheeling could be put to better use on other things?

 

There are some inspirational OO layouts out there - things you wouldn't immediately call as OO because the track looks so good. What I've noticed though, is that all of the OO layouts I've spotted with (to me) really good looking track have been option 3 layouts...

 

-at the moment I'm thinking OO with 'pretty track'

 

(Is that Option 2 or Option 3?)

 

I'm sitting on this fence myself at the moment - unhappy with the appearance of Peco et al, but still wanting RTR, so looking at option 2. The concern I have is that HO scale points are likely to look out of place adjacent to closer to scale plain line.

 

Maybe I should be considering Marcway points...

[James]

The point James is that someone might want to do it. I wouldn't and obviously you wouldn't. But if it floated someone's boat who are we to condemn?

 

It's not for us to condemn at all! But it would seem strange to make an effort with track and and not with other items!

 

What is the point in railway modelling of any kind? It's to give satisfaction to the person doing it.

 

Very true, but I sometimes feel, as pompus (sp?) as it may seem, that advising people and broadening their outlook could lead to them getting much more out of the hobby and finding it more satisfying.

[APOLLO]

In summer I open my velux window in my loft, which has a fleeting view of the West Coast main line & landscape north of Wigan.

 

Sometimes I shake my head in disbeleif at some of the "things" that fly / amble by. We do get the occasional steam, and a few old diesels that don't go ying. Some liveries though are awfull - pink & purple, and it's not the royal train ??

 

I turn round and carry on with my "out of the box" 1960's layout. Not finescale by any means.

 

Each to his own though. Modern image or earlier. No two layouts are the same, and there is allways some compromise or other. I've rarely seen an awfull layout, but have seen many excellent ones. My efforts are somewhere in beween

 

I occasionly buy the Model Railway Journal, for inspiration. This months is a very good issue - the Christmas Parcels feature excellent. One guy is even doing Kings Cross in P4, and by the photos a damm good job he is doing also - Imagine how many P4 wheelsets HE will need !!! (and how many perfectly alligned brake blocks also). I marvel at some models shown & described in this mag. Full, working suspension on a P4 deltic a while ago. Not for me, out of the box is more than good enough for me these days, but for those skilled, patient and able to do these things, well, I applaud them, they make the hobby alot richer.

 

Brit15

[Bloodnok]

No, Marcway are available off the shelf in the shop so they are RTR i suppose.

 

Ooh, now that's interesting. I guess they aren't widely stocked (just at the one shop in Sheffield?) - but they do appear to ship, although no online communication method appears to be available.

 

And the range contains standard, Y, curved, diamond and slip points - albeit getting way more expensive as things go forward.

 

Now my dilemma is does this tempt me to try EM gauge?

[melmoth]

Marcway website here:

 

http://www.marcway.co.uk/

 

Currently being updated, as they say.

[Bloodnok]

Currently being updated, as they say.

 

Yep - like a lot of the web, currently being updated, yet copyright date set to 2004...

[R A Watson]

Surely the point is the landscape was there first then someone built the railway through it! If you follow this maxim and think through the consequences beyond the board edge, not just up to the fence line, a more convincing layout will appear. This in turn will make you overlook the minor close up faults or at least accomodate them.

 

Wally

[Russ (mines a pint)]

Surely the point is the landscape was there first then someone built the railway through it! If you follow this maxim and think through the consequences beyond the board edge, not just up to the fence line, a more convincing layout will appear. This in turn will make you overlook the minor close up faults or at least accomodate them.

 

Wally

Aha, someone else talking my language! this is the most fundamental thing to me and so much more important than the type of brake blocks on a wagon or even whether it had disc or spoked wheels!

 

In my exploration of modelling since re-joining the hobby as an adult I've identified some things that are worth doing:

 

Open top board to allow countours above and below track level

Going as far as possible to create good looking track as time and finances will allow:

 

- I think having thought about it further I do really want to continue making my own track, its one of those things that is worth the time to me and an enjoyable excercise in its own right, the track is an essential part of the view of the railway.

 

-EM gauge, yes even as I look at and operate the railway from the side there are occassions when I want to photo things from the front or front 3 quarters. PLus I've already got most of the gear, I maybe just need to be more adventurous and try doing a steam loco or shunter?

 

-Improve weak points, that I feel are getting in the way:

buy in windows for buildings rather than trying to make them my self.

stick to Bachmann wagons and conversion/improvement of rather than wasting time/money on kit stuff that never gets finished!

 

And stuff which isnt, mostly getting bogged down in prototype detail of stock, which partly makes me glaze over and lose interest?

 

I still cant see myself going for the 'P4 mindset' the track looking about the right width will do for me, and I still cant get excited about finer flanges (oo-er missus!) or the appearance of point frogs and checkrails?

[Guest Max Stafford]

Marcway pre-assembled points in 00? This is a revelation, and at prices not far off Peco either. I think I know whose track I'll be using for Inchkennet!

 

Dave.

[Guest Max Stafford]

Link's not working Mickey!

 

Dave.

[Russ (mines a pint)]

Marcway pre-assembled points in 00? This is a revelation, and at prices not far off Peco either. I think I know whose track I'll be using for Inchkennet!

 

Dave.

Especially if you get them in batches of four? is that offer still on? Marcway points page-with pics!

 

4 points for ??60 OO/EM Tempted, but do actually find trackbuilding thereputic

[Guest Max Stafford]

I noticed that Russ.

Bargain!

[Bloodnok]

Bargain!

 

Does seem to be quite a bargain. Now I'll have to wait until the middle of the night and call them. Unless in the intervening five years the new website has been under construction for they've managed to get themselves an email address?

 

(I'm going to want a set of their planning templates anyway. Or preferably an xtrkcad compatible definition file of their standard range...)

[ChrisB]

Russ

 

I think you've arrived at a place that's hard to define, or, more specifically, hard to figure out how you got there, but let me have a go.

 

If you imagine being a trainspotter sat comfortably in your favourite place, you can soak up the finer details of the landscape around you. You notice tiny details like the staining on the track and ballast etc, etc. In this instance, the track IS part of the landscape. (Regardless of timescales ie what came first etc). You notice how everything sits relative to everything else. From what you've said, this seems to be where your interest lies. A landscape that happens to have a railway line running through it. If you look at it like that then the proportions of the railway need to be balanced and in harmony with everything else.

 

Now, back to being a trainspotter again. The rails start to sing, you hear the rumble. The rumble turns to a roar. For a minute or so your senses are overwhelmed before, in a flash, you're back to where you were. Peace, quiet, the landscape. The train has gone but the railway line is still there looking at you and you at it.

 

How deep were the flanges on those wheels? Which pipes were where on the buffer beams? How were the wagons coupled together? If the brake blocks had fallen off half the wagons, would you have noticed?

 

As others have said, it's your railway and all that matters is what's important to you.

[Guest Max Stafford]

Thanks Chris, that was wonderfully put and you appear to have nailed my own perspective to the right spot as an unintended consequence! I could smell the sun-warmed oil and creosote while I read that little scenario through...

 

Dave.

[ChrisB]

I think this has something to do with why the hobby has been so big for so long despite the fact that, until recently, relatively crude representations of rolling stock have been acceptable to the masses. I think that most people, myself included, wouldn't actually know if a model Cl 47 had the wrong grill pattern or whatever, let alone how many rivets there should be around the windows.

 

Whilst there will always be people who are happy and able to model in exquisitely fine detail, and I admire their results immensely, I find that, as a 40 something returnee to the hobby, the level of detail on a lot of modern rolling stock is amazing and good enough for me. I do love weathering though!

 

On another thread on the old RMWeb about a newly released diesel model, there seemed to be a queue of people who couldn't wait to find out what had been reproduced wrongly. What I found particularly distasteful was, following a comment along the lines of "We'll only find out if they've got **** right when I get the micrometer out", one person posted several replies asking "Well did they, did they?" Surely, if you can't tell by looking at it, then it's as good as it needs to be.

 

Sorry to go off on one a bit there but I do believe that this is a brilliant hobby and it's really sad to hear someone say" I'd really like to run a ***** but it's not my era" or "not my region"

 

For heaven's sake, all any of us are doing is playing make believe!

 

I think there is a huge lesson to be learned from the likes of Chris Nevard. His locations are fictional, although sometimes based on a particular area. His time periods are generally flexible and his layouts, despite being modest in size and using off the shelf Peco track, are universally admired. Way to go Chris

[Dave777]

Gah, there goes next week's blog entry!

 

I totally agree - I just can't understand modellers who say 'The model looked brilliant... but then I measured it and found it to be a scale 6 inches overlength. Why can't Hornby get things right? I have returned my model to the shop'.

 

Sometimes ignorance really is bliss.

 

 

['CHARD]

What Dave said. ChrisB nailed this for me. And while I'd been away from the web, the first of my 47s arrived at the W/B reception siding for windscreen rivet and bogie pipework removal. Oh sweet irony.

[ChrisB]

Dave

just read the last entry in your diary. Substitute Great Western Mainline for ECML and that could be me........and, like you, I sometimes feel pangs of guilt for not doing certain things as others might have you do them. They don't last for long though!