Jump to content
Users will currently see a stripped down version of the site until an advertising issue is fixed. If you are seeing any suspect adverts please go to the bottom of the page and click on Themes and select IPS Default. ×
RMweb
 

Great British Locomotives

EddieB

By EddieB
in Other Magazines

 Share

Recommended Posts

Hroth

Hroth

Posted
Posted

I thought about getting one just as a display model but I couldn't live with that chimney.

You could always take the chimney off and model one with a more correct appearance!

 

However, at layout-viewing distances, why bother.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Il Grifone

Il Grifone

Posted
Posted (edited)

Really? For gauge, it seems like a pretty good way of describing track that is the right gauge for 00 and HO, and is indeed how Peco describe their track.

 

And for scale, there are plenty of objects such as trees where the same item could quite reasonably be used as both 00 and HO.

 

It doesn't matter what Peco call their track, it is H0 scale and to American sleeper size and spacing as well (I understand that is their major market). The fact that 00 models run on it is incidental.

 

As regards trees, the real thing varies in size considerably, so scale is not very important. They usually need modelling well underscale (part grown if you prefer). For example a full grown oak can be well over 100 foot tall.

Edited by Il Grifone
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Premium
Coryton

Coryton

Posted
  • RMweb Premium
Posted

It doesn't matter what Peco call their track, it is H0 scale and to American sleeper size and spacing as well (I understand that is their major market). The fact that 00 models run on it is incidental

 

I wouldn't call it incidental given that - whichever market is larger - it is extensively marketed for 00 gauge use, by the (UK) company that makes it. I've also seen it argued that given that the rails are too close together, it looks more "right" to also increase the sleeper spacing rather than have the sleepers as 00 *scale* on HO *gauge* track.

 

I've never bought the idea that the UK market isn't large enough for proprietary "true" 00 gauge track - it has to be much larger than that for 009 and HOm and they appear to be worth making track for. 

 

And is the US really the main market for code 100 Peco track? From what I've read it isn't as readily available over there as it is here...and they do have a separate range of (code 83) US style points and track to match.

 

Anyway - how about a 00/HO track gauge? Can we agree that in this case we can sensibly say 00/HO?

 

As regards trees, the real thing varies in size considerably, so scale is not very important. They usually need modelling well underscale (part grown if you prefer). For example a full grown oak can be well over 100 foot tall.

 

Yes - it is a rare treat to see trees towering over the rolling stock on a model railway in the way they tend to in real life.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Il Grifone

Il Grifone

Posted
Posted

I was merely quoting the excuse given for marketing a 3.5mm/foot scale product* as suitable for 4mm/foot when it isn't really. In the distant past (40s/50s), Peco sold track to 4mm scale, but with the introduction of 'Streamline' in the 60s switched to 3.5mm (presumably to sell in the U.S.). Other firms marketed 00 track (Formoway and Gem to name two), but both are no longer available, other than second hand.

 

I have seen the argument regarding appearance. 00 track usually has the sleepers reduced in length to compensate for the underscale length, which personally I think is sufficient. Setting the sleeper spacing to American standards (most use 2 foot) rather spoils the illusion in any case for a UK layout especially when a train is running over it. Even the Formoway track has the sleepers too close to each other (9mm - 2' 3") (I think the idea is to make the track long longer - it doesn't.). I find cutting the web and resetting the sleeper spacing to the correct value improves the appearance tremendously, at least to my eyes, but it is rather a hassle and doesn't work with pointwork.

 

* I'm ignoring the overscale height of code 100 of course (though it isn't too far out for the heaviest American rail).

 

:offtopic:   (Waffle warning!)

 

I intend to build a layout (one day.......) set in Italy (somewhere to run all my Rivarossi stock). Here there are two problems: 1/80 scale (though the buffers are set to H0 spacing for some strange reason) and Italian track does not have the nice even sleepers portrayed by all the manufacturers. It looks like I'm going to have to build my own. I did consider 17.5mm gauge, but life's too short... Since it will sit opposite my U.S. layout with each serving as fiddle yard for the other, it will have to be 16.5mm gauge anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Il Grifone

Il Grifone

Posted
Posted (edited)

Back on topic,

 

I have measured up my 'Locomotion' (using a ruler, as both my vernier and digital calipers have 'gone walkabout' *).

 

Wheel diameter         12.5mm (4 feet)

Boiler diameter          14mm (4 feet) (over flange - actual boiler diameter (quoted) is about 1mm less

Wheelbase                16.5mm (5 feet 4 inches)

Length overall (loco) 41mm  (12 feet)

Gauge                       15.5mm (4 foot 8½ inches)

 

Prototype dimensions from 1½" drawing found on web search (Locomotion No 1 drawings) and rounded off slightly.

 

Allowing for error, the scale would appear to be 1:96, which would tie in with an American 0 scale (1:48) model.

 

* Interpret as "I can't find/remember where I put them!"

Edited by Il Grifone
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steamport Southport

Steamport Southport

Posted
Posted

Subscription has just turned up. Pity it's the end.

 

Now I know what everyone meant when they said Locomotion is small. I've seen bigger 009 models. :O

 

The 47 has a lot of excess glue on one of the cab sides, as if somebody has split a jar of the stuff on it. Good job it's due for a repaint. No idea what livery yet but diesels aren't a priority at the moment.

 

 

Jason

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smiffy2

Smiffy2

Posted
Posted

Just got my last subscription issues, so I can send off the 47. May be the end of the week as I'm looking after Daisy this afternoon and heading off for a few days by the (real) seaside early tomorrow.

 

Does anyone want a Locomotion? I'm disappointed in it and would like it to go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Il Grifone

Il Grifone

Posted
Posted (edited)

Ex-Greenly drawings?

 

It could well be. I can't quite make out the signature, but it does look like "Henry Greenly", but seeing it's the only dimensioned drawing I could find.....

It's this one

 

http://www.maidstone-engineering.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/l/o/locomotion-no1.jpg

Edited by Il Grifone
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Il Grifone

Il Grifone

Posted
Posted (edited)

I don't know how accurate it is, but it can't be too far out - near enough to scale the model anyway. Somewhere around 1/100 looks right. Does anyone know the scale of the Bachmann original?

 

EDIT for bad keyboard aim.

Edited by Il Grifone
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RJS1977

RJS1977

Posted
Posted

I was merely quoting the excuse given for marketing a 3.5mm/foot scale product* as suitable for 4mm/foot when it isn't really. In the distant past (40s/50s), Peco sold track to 4mm scale, but with the introduction of 'Streamline' in the 60s switched to 3.5mm (presumably to sell in the U.S.). Other firms marketed 00 track (Formoway and Gem to name two), but both are no longer available, other than second hand.

 

I have seen the argument regarding appearance. 00 track usually has the sleepers reduced in length to compensate for the underscale length, which personally I think is sufficient. Setting the sleeper spacing to American standards (most use 2 foot) rather spoils the illusion in any case for a UK layout especially when a train is running over it. Even the Formoway track has the sleepers too close to each other (9mm - 2' 3") (I think the idea is to make the track long longer - it doesn't.). I find cutting the web and resetting the sleeper spacing to the correct value improves the appearance tremendously, at least to my eyes, but it is rather a hassle and doesn't work with pointwork.

 

* I'm ignoring the overscale height of code 100 of course (though it isn't too far out for the heaviest American rail).

 

:offtopic:   (Waffle warning!)

 

I intend to build a layout (one day.......) set in Italy (somewhere to run all my Rivarossi stock). Here there are two problems: 1/80 scale (though the buffers are set to H0 spacing for some strange reason) and Italian track does not have the nice even sleepers portrayed by all the manufacturers. It looks like I'm going to have to build my own. I did consider 17.5mm gauge, but life's too short... Since it will sit opposite my U.S. layout with each serving as fiddle yard for the other, it will have to be 16.5mm gauge anyway.

 

I guess track appearance like most things is subjective. One of our club layouts has hand-made track with 4mm/ft sleeper spacings and - to my eyes at least - it doesn't look right! I don't know whether that's just because I'm so used to Streamline or because the sleeper spacings on the hand-made track aren't in proportion to the track gauge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Il Grifone

Il Grifone

Posted
Posted (edited)

It can't look right because it clearly isn't - the gauge is 2.33mm undersize - an error of over 10%. It really is a question of compromise, but side on, where the gauge error is less apparent, the 4mm train looks best on 4mm track IMHO.

 

Probably the close spacing of Formoway (and others) was an attempt to compensate for the gauge, but personally I don't think it works.

 

(The real answer of course is EM or P4..........)

Edited by Il Grifone
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TRAILRAGE

TRAILRAGE

Posted
Posted

Been thinking what to do with the Gbl 47. Reckon its gonna have to be 47901 in construction. New Cab front/ side windows courtesy of Shawplans excellent extreme etchings range and maybe adapt the cast chassis to fit  a couple of Hornby's motor bogies.  Roof details might be a problem as will the cantrail grilles. As I only ever saw it twice. Once at Readig on ARC PTA (ex tippers) and then again at Bescot open day after it was withdrawn It would be nice to have something different. Seem to Remember there was an article in a Railway Modeller some time ago but I  don't appear to have a copy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hroth

Hroth

Posted
Posted

And so it begins.

 

A GBL Mallard on ebay for £27.50, and never any mention that it doesn't run...

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/A-Polish-built-Class-A4-Mallard-locomotive-00-guage-for-display-only-/301740108114?hash=item46411ca952

Not so far away from the pricing quoted by those happy souls offering back issues for "only" £19.99, and at least those include the mag....  But Polish?  I thought the models winged their way from the far Orient!

 

Its the usual blend of the "like for like" ebay pricing spiral, opportunism and Del Boy misrepresentation.

 

Truely Buyer Beware!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
APOLLO

APOLLO

Posted
Posted

I'd like to see a new magazine "Great British Railway Wagons"

 

Issue 1 - The ex LNER 4 wheel Plate Wagon - 2 models included with issue 1.

 

I would buy all the copies in WH Smith Wigan (and more) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Brit15

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...