HSB Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 Or somebody changing from another scale. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
garethashenden Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Coming back to the original question; I think the ideal target for P87 will be a person coming into the hobby from another area, say military models or the like, with a bit of skill and an eye for detail or someone returning to railways after a break of a few years. Here's the reasoning, both will have a minimal investment in stock but an interest in doing things well. The investment is stock is key as few people want to go to the expense of mass conversion of existing equipment and track to say nothing of the time involved. There, I've said it. Cheers, David I think this is true. I started EM gauge modelling when a friend started an EM layout. I had only done American N before that so as I had no stock to convert the conversion costs could be spread out more gradually as I acquired things. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 If you can get your head around how much stock you need then it sounds less like the "I have 527 locos, how am I going to convert them to DCC...?" argument. But as I mentioned before, I did want some degree of sideways compatability with existing and future modellers, which is why I went for HO and ended up with about 70 freight cars in the collection when the current layout can only handle about 7. Even though only a small proportion of these are layout ready with #58's with the trip pins removed and scale air hoses added, I still can't get my head around anything but the concept that they're a fleet and the average small layout could manage with a couple of locos and 10 freight cars or so. I think the ideal entrant in the UK would be an educated modeller with EM or P4 experience, but looking at moving into North American HO. But they have to want to do P87, some often see moving to HO as a bit of a relaxation away from the fastidious approach to scale modelling as you can get away with more in front of an uneducated audience and the models out of the box have better details, running qualities, and don't have the wrong gauge issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave1905 Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 If you can get your head around how much stock you need then it sounds less like the "I have 527 locos, how am I going to convert them to DCC...?" argument. A friend of mine is building a roughly 2000 sq ft double decked layout with handlaid track in codes 40 to 83. He actually looked at buying the detailed frogs and switch hardware but considered that he would need so many of them that it would be impossible from a financial or time constraint. So that is a barrier to adoption in the US where the layouts are larger. For a smaller layout with a handful of switches not so much. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 John Wright's "Federal Street", then? I'm not sure what his prior modelling history is, but that is the only P87 layout I've seen. I'm certain he's gone back to regular HO, and agreed with my decision to stick to regular HO (although that might say more for his interpretation of my modelling than his own general recommendations). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Reichert Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 I'm not sure what his prior modelling history is, but that is the only P87 layout I've seen. I'm certain he's gone back to regular HO, and agreed with my decision to stick to regular HO (although that might say more for his interpretation of my modelling than his own general recommendations). Actually John Wright was working on a larger Proto:87 layout, with several construction photos published, but sadly his messages to me some years back, indicated that his progress was slowed (and apparently now stopped), bysome internmittent heart ailments. I have not heard back since and am not sure of his current status. The Newcastle club has had a standard HO layout construction or expansion project running as well during that time. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
298 Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Actually John Wright was working on a larger Proto:87 layout, with several construction photos published, but sadly his messages to me some years back, indicated that his progress was slowed (and apparently now stopped), bysome internmittent heart ailments. I have not heard back since and am not sure of his current status. The Newcastle club has had a standard HO layout construction or expansion project running as well during that time. Andy I did see that he was demo'ing at a show I was at last month, but he wasn't at his table when I stopped by. Just a thought- do P87 modellers hear the same "it's only HO" comments that are usually reserved for other finescale gauges...? (although someone did ask me last month if my HO layout was 009....). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSB Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Brian Harrap displayed some of my British P87 models alongside his Continental stuff at Scaleforum a few years ago and people kept asking if it was 3mm scale! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trevorsmith3489 Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Actually John Wright was working on a larger Proto:87 layout, with several construction photos published, but sadly his messages to me some years back, indicated that his progress was slowed (and apparently now stopped), bysome internmittent heart ailments. I have not heard back since and am not sure of his current status. The Newcastle club has had a standard HO layout construction or expansion project running as well during that time. Andy I don't think John is on RMWeb - but I will ask him in the morning when I see him. Federal Street was probably one of the best layouts I have ever seen. His most recent project has stalled. The layout he was working on at the Newcastle Club,(Westmoreland Road is the name I believe) had to be removed from the club and is possibly the reason why John is no longer a member there. And just to add my 2 cents worth to the debate. I am involved with an EM layout and we have used P87 frogs to achieve greater realism. http://roundtreessidings.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/pict0741.jpg Further pictures of track-work here, http://roundtreessidings.wordpress.com/trackwork/ We have used a number of different construction techniques, but the most realistic by far is the trackwork with the P87 element. Andy, who made the castings? Trevor Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Reichert Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 I don't think John is on RMWeb - but I will ask him in the morning when I see him. Federal Street was probably one of the best layouts I have ever seen. His most recent project has stalled. The layout he was working on at the Newcastle Club,(Westmoreland Road is the name I believe) had to be removed from the club and is possibly the reason why John is no longer a member there. And just to add my 2 cents worth to the debate. I am involved with an EM layout and we have used P87 frogs to achieve greater realism. http://roundtreessidings.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/pict0741.jpg Further pictures of track-work here, http://roundtreessidings.wordpress.com/trackwork/ We have used a number of different construction techniques, but the most realistic by far is the trackwork with the P87 element. Andy, who made the castings? Trevor The castings were originated by Details West specifically for CV turnouts, and re-sold by me while they were still available. Due to the low sales volume, and the need for masters for each different rail size, tooling for the most common #6's never happened. Subsequently the retirement of the low volume casting sub-contractor, meant that they are no longer made. Apart for the very limited range of sizes, I had two other issues that caused me to switch to the etched "88-safe" versions. 1. Without being so documnented, the cast frogs had the 0.040" flangeway that normally belongs to the HO-Fine Standard. This caused many RTR wheels to jam on the guard rails, as the guard rail dimensions need to be changed to allow for the HO B-B min. 2. The variations in the process of casting left many frogs with randomely curved rail ends and they ended up being insufficiently accurate for reliable running. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.