Phil Copleston

I'm with Jerry on this one - Queens Square sounds so much less prosaic than Green Park, although the locals were delightfully pragmatic by simply referring to it as 'the Midland station'. Frustratingly, English Heritage have it Grade II Listed as 'Green Park Railway Station, Bath' http://www.imagesofengland.org.uk/Details/Default.aspx?id=442586 and Wikipedia as 'Bath Green Park' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_Green_Park_railway_station . But hey, what do they know, ha ha! Phil

Frank, I believe you only need three coaches to replicate a 'typical' coast passenger train - a brake second, open tourist second, and a compo (or similar). My observations from many dated photos from the mid-50s to the mid-60s is that the basic Cambrian passenger formation for ordinary summer/winter trains between Shrewsbury/Welshpool and Machynlleth was a six coach formation, made up of two sets of the above (usually with brakes outermost), plus stengtheners tacked on as required in the summer months. The formation would then split at Mach or Dovey Jnc with the two three-coach sets (plus any strengtheners) going forward to Aber and Pwllheli respectively. The set with the Mark 1 choc-cream "auto buffet" going forward to Aber. These sets can be seen made up of either BR Mark 1s, or ex-GWR/LMS coaches (but rarely mixed, due to incompatibilities with corridor connections). Maybe this is a well-known fact, but I've never seen an explicit description of this formation written down before. However, you can consistently see this in photos of the late steam period. (Not sure if this applies to the CCE.) Has anyone else observed this "standard" Cambrian train formation make-up? So Frank, maybe you don't need all six coaches after all - you can get away with an authentic coast "stopper" hauled by a Manor at the head of just three coaches. Wasn't the Cambrian a delight! Phil

I'm not a great fan of backscenes - especially if they compete for attention rather than compliment the forescene - but they can work on small scenes. I like your plan for Morfa Bach of a simple backdrop showing just a blue sky and clouds. Neil (Rushby) just about had it right on 'Shell Island', methinks. Inspiring Cambrian modelling, Frank! Phil

This layout just gets better and better - captures the essence of the Cambrian to a 'T'! Well done, Frank. Phil

Delightful, Frank - it's veritably the Cambrian Coast in microcosm! Keep it coming, I'm enjoying your posts.

The Gronk in the video's looking good Tim, and sounds subtly like one too (or maybe that's me!). I'm enjoying following progress with the layout and am loving the muted brick paper colours - those Howard Scenics terraces look fab! Phil

Hello all, sorry for my late reply. I'm sorry if my earlier comments saddened you Tiptonian, and if I annoyed anyone else. I didn't mean to offend. I'm a 3mm Society member too and believe 3-mil is a great scale. My only reason for bringing up the subject of Scale Three is that I think it's a great concept worth reconsidering, and therefore a valid topic for discussion in this forum. Proto standards are proven to work well in 4mm scale and in 3mm the absolute measurements are no smaller than the established 2mmSF dimensions, so Scale Three should be quite workable, I think. Just to clarify, I'm not suggesting we add another gauge to 3mm modelling, as Scale Three is not specifically a 'gauge' as such, but a set of standards derived from prototype practice that can be applied to modelling any prototype gauge. I have nothing against the other 3mm standards or gauges (although seeing it from the perspective of the rest of the hobby, 13.5 feels like a retrograde step to me), if that is what you choose to suit your modelling, but I see a lot of good reasons to have a positive debate about moving 3mm modelling closer to the prototype by exploring the possibilities of Scale Three. Phil

I hope not, whart57. I'm sure your explanation of how 3mm scale ended up with three gauges and various standards is correct. But the 3mm scale scene is still a mess! The 3mm Society, bless it, panders to its membership's perceived 'broad church' by supporting 12, 13.5 and 14.2mm gauges, but its scatter-gun approach to new products somehow satisfies neither with a really comprehensive and co-ordinated product range. I can't think of any other scale support society which tries to back three different horses at once! In some ways, there exists within the 3mm Society three distinct sub-genres, a 'Triang TT Collector's Society', a 'TT-3/12mm-gauge Society' and a '3mm Finescale Society', all competing for attention and limited financial resources. One wonders whether they might not be happier going their own ways? You imply in your post that a laissez-faire approach to evolving wheel profiles and track components in 3mm model railways is somehow acceptable, yet earlier you berated the fact that our hobby lacks guidance in standards because "we don't have a powerful national model railway association that everyone is prepared to follow behind". I agree with the latter, but I don't think you can't have it both ways! As for the future of 3mm scale, I reckon newcomers will not be beginners but are likely mainly to be experienced modellers over-spilling from other scales looking for something different, and hoping for something better than just a ¾ scale version of coarse OO. Promoting 14.2 therefore makes a lot of sense and I hope the Society will investment more in that direction to secure the scale's future. However, the only drawback is not the width between the tracks but the muddled of track and wheel standards, which is why I think it's worth revisiting the concept of Scale Three with standards rooted in prototype practice, as per the case with P4 or S7 which are very successful. Perhaps John Delany and Stewart Hine were prescient in their early promotion of Scale Three as a 'P4 for 3mm scale' and it's time may have come at last. Phil

Hello all, Thanks Nigel, your synopsis of the development of 3mm gauges is most helpful. But in answer to John E's (Allegheny1600) earlier question, not only are there currently three gauges in 3mm scale (discounting broad and narrow gauge variants), more to the point, there are three (originally four) published standards! The 3mm Society's website http://www.3mmsociet...uk/TechData.htm lists 'Triang Standard' (for 12mm gauge), 'Intermediate Standard' (for 12mm gauge) and 'Fine Standards' (for 12mm, 13.5mm and 14.2mm gauges). Apart from the gauge-dependant dimensions, wheel tyre profiles and flangeway clearances appear to be the same for all three Fine Standards. However, the Society's continuing support for these conflicting published standards (and redundant or odd gauges) has always rather baffled me. The one 3mm scale standard not mentioned on the Society website is Scale Three, originally promoted by John Delany and Stewart Hine and published in the Society's 'Mixed Traffic' magazine issue No.29 (July 1972), pp3-11, and reprinted in 'Model Railways', January 1973, pp38-41. This was 3-mil's attempt at a 'Proto' standard. For various reasons, this excellent attempt to break away from the old Triang toy image and lift 3mm modelling into the realms of modern finescale modelling never gained popularity. Instead, we have ended up with a mixed measure of standards in the form of the current 'Fine Standards' and the new Society wheels, which sort of work but continue to be a compromise. I can understand why the Society continued to support the old 12mm gauge as many members at the time were committed to that standard. And although the current 14.2mm gauge standards has the right width between the rails and look reasonable and more or less work, somehow it just ain't right and still creates problems with over-width tyre dimensions and wider than necessary flangeways. As for 13.5mm, well this just seems like an evolutionary blind alley to me, which once the tiny handful of proponents eventually give up we will wonder why anyone actually bothered! (no offence, just my opinion) I still think Scale Three is worth revisiting, and I know of some Society members who'd like to give it a go and a main supplier of 3-mil components who has offered to produce batches of rolling stock wheelsets and track gauges. So for what it's worth, attached below is my own drafting of the S3 standards based on the original Delany and Hine figures (but converted to metric). Having satisfied my curiosity over what these standards looked like on paper for standard gauge, I then went on to prepare S3 standards for 9.0mm (3ft 0ins), 7.5mm (2ft 6ins) and 5.875mm (1ft 11½ins) gauges (not attached here). Hopefully, these may stimulate some discussion. For those who might argue that Scale Three won't work, also attached below is a 'Comparison Table' showing the dimensional differences between S3, 2mmFS, 3mm (14.2), P87 and P4 standards in two sub-tables. This table hopefully counters the argument that Scale 3 may be too fine for practical application by demonstrating that: In Comparison 1: Scale 3 standards are roughly comparable in measurement with established and proven standards in 2mmFS, so clearly they are achievable and physically workable; and In Comparison 2: Existing 3mm 14.2 standards are roughly comparable in tolerance with P87 and P4 and therefore many 3mm modellers already work to such fine modelling tolerances without seemingly worrying about the actual numbers. Anyway, I'd be interested to know what you all think of the practicality of Scale Three. Phil Scale 3 - 14.125mm (4ft 8½ins) gauge .doc Scale 3 - Comparison Table - Comparison between Scale 3, 14.2.doc

Hi Ian, Jim has already made a good summary of modelling 3' 6" 'Cape Gauge' in S scale. But if you'd like to see some Sn3½ models, check these links: Ian Hammond's NZR layout 'Kopikopiko' layout http://www.s-scale.o...k/gallery21.htm Ian Hammond's NZR 'Modeling in the UK' blog http://uknzrmodeling.blogspot.com/ Andy May's WAGR modelling http://homepage.ntlw...2002/models.htm Richard Stallard's WAGR layout ‘Marbelup’ http://members.iinet...chard/marbelup/ Western Australian Sn3½ modelling group http://wasnmodeller.blogspot.com/ Sorry, couldn't find any South African Sn3½, but I know of some people do... as we have an SSMRS member who does! I've seen his locos; scratchbuilt bodies on commercial HO mechs. Really nice models. And here's some Sn3½ commercial help: http://www.nzfinescale.com/index2.htm http://www.railmaste...ailway/loco.htm (mostly US Sn3, but they have a kit for a SAR GE Class 34 Co-Co diesel) Hope this helps. Phil

Thanks for the support Andy, Thanks for posting some evocative and excellent photos of a classic S scale layout, and your well said and inspiring words. I know our modest Trevor Nunn will be blushing! Phil

Hello everybody - welcome to the S scale forum! I thought I'd start an S scale group on RMweb as a place to share our ideas, comments, techniques and photos about 1:64th scale modelling. I know there are already some S Scale Model Railway Society members on this list, and I'm pretty sure others modelling in different scales will be interested in what we do too. By way of introduction to anyone interested in S scale modelling, here is a brief summary of its attractions: For those unfamiliar with S scale, models are built to a uniform 1:64 ratio, where 3/16" or 4.76mm represents 1 foot, with standard gauge track working out as 0.884" or 22.45mm. Track and wheel standards are to exactly one sixty-fourth of the prototype. Brunel and Irish broad gauges and various narrow gauges are modelled too, all to the same standards. Nice and simple really. In the UK, S scale is essentially a scratchbuilder's scale, which for me represents a healthy return to the core values of our hobby employing craft-skills for the sheer pleasure of designing and building it yourself. It has never had any serious commercial support in Britain, but has some commercial products and following in North America, Australia and New Zealand, particularly the narrow gauge variants. Surprisingly, S scale is also not unknown in Germany (the firm Stadtilm marketed 'Spur S' in the 1950s/60s), and in Scandinavia and Japan (as a scratchbuilder's scale). For that reason, S scale is also a bit 'different' from other scales, with little temptation to buy the latest trade offerings. It's also a very attractive size, is 19% larger than 4mm scale, thus providing a bit more reliability, 'heft' and realistic roll than in the smaller scales with plenty of room for mechanisms, motors and decoders, yet not so bulky or space-consuming as 7mm scale. We use widely available commercial 4mm motors, gearboxes, axles and bearings as standard; indeed, many components intended for 4mm scale are suitable, or if a tad over-scale for 4mm are perfect for S scale! From the Society there is a decent range of scratchbuilding parts and some kits available to help members achieve their aims, and some kits and parts are produced by a few specialist suppliers too. The Society offers a comprehensive range of jigs and gauges, track components, rolling stock and some loco wheels, etchings and castings, buffers, springs, axleboxes etc. and scenic items, so it's not all hard slog! Newcomers find most of the techniques and components familiar to them from other scales like 4mm, are also utilised in S scale modelling, much to their reassurance. Of course, if you're going to scratchbuild anyway, then you might as well build a model or layout of something you really want (as opposed to being based around what is commercially available), an approach which engenders following more esoteric prototypes like light railways or some of the more bucolic railway backwaters, and often results in very individualistic models and layouts. As a result, many of the well known S scale layouts currently on the exhibition circuit exude character and individualism in buckets, that is the essence of much modelling inspiration which, coincidentally, is what RMWeb is all about too. Any ideas you have, S scale layouts or models you are building, comments or just information you would like to share in this forum please feel free to do so, you are most welcome. I hope you enjoy reading and contributing, whether you are an S scale modeller or not, as it's all good modelling inspiration! Please use this thread to introduce yourself, if you wish. Or start a new topic about 1:64 modelling within this S scale forum. Phil If you'd like to find out more about S scale modelling, please visit: S Scale Model Railway Society (UK organisation): http://www.s-scale.org.uk/ National Association of S Gaugers (US organisation): http://www.nasg.org/ Proto 64 (US finescale group): http://www.trainweb.org/proto64/ Wikipedia on S scale: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_scale Also, here's proof of vintage German Stadtilm 'S spur' in operation

Hi everyone, I'm new to RMWeb and this group, but I bought my first T-gauge stock and starter-set back in July 2009. No proper layout yet, but I've demonstrated the basic oval and stock at shows and the interest in the scale seems phenomenal. Not sure what I want to do in T-gauge yet, so I'm hoping to learn something from you guys and be inspired! Prototype-wise, I'm happy to follow Japanese and American or even some British. I've often tinkered with my oval of track and toyed with ideas for something grander, but so far have not done anything serious with it. I mainly model in another scale (S scale and N), so T-gauge is just an interesting diversion at present, but I am fascinated by 1:450th scale's wonderful scenic potential. The use of T-gauge mechs and track for narrow gauge in a 'larger scale' like Z or N (I never thought I'd ever say that!) is also attractive. Personally, I'm hoping for improved drive mechanisms and more realistic track in T-gauge in the near future. That would be a great boon to help promote the scale, I'm sure. And some proper locos with real pulling power too! My current wish list is for a JNR Class DE10 Co-Bo or a C11 2-6-4T, C57 4-6-2 or D51 2-8-2. Well, we can all hope! So... I'd be interested to know what is on your (realistic) T-gauge wish list? Phil