Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
ModelsRailroadsRockets
Radio Controlled
Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater Models
ModelGeeks.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Model Forum / General / Railroads / June 2004



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Different Scale Dimensions & Use

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Tim Soderstrom - 29 May 2004 23:18 GMT
So I've been pondering the idea of writing a simple include file for Pov-Ray (www.povray.org for those who are curious) which will allow one to more easily build model train scenes. It serves many purposes, one is that I want to get back into Pov-Ray more, another is the capability to make models railroads and put the viewer in certain perspectives, and lastly it serves as sort of a rudamentary mock up for when I want to build a real model. The latter is a ways off becuase I'm stuck in an apartament right now and there is no space for such a feat (which is perhaps another reason for writing the file so I can sort of enjoy a model
railroad without having one :).

In any case, I need to know the dimensions of the track. I was probably going to use HO scale as it is what I used to use when I did have a small train set. Unfortuantely, I no longer have the track to measure myself. Also, what is the difference and pros and cons of different scales? I had intended on using HO since I can more directly use the raytraced model to make the real model; but
I noticed in looking around on the Internet that there are many more scales
than I last remembered.

Is HO still even popular? Has it been superceaded by something else?

Thanks!

Tim S.

Signature

/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\

| Tim Soderstrom                                                       |
| MightyTim@mail.utexas.edu                                            |
| http://www.moocowproductions.org                                     |
|                                                                      |
| "Life is like a box of chocolates - never know what you gonna get"   |
|                                                    -Forrest Gump     |
\                                                                      /
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Will@Credit.Valley.Railway - 30 May 2004 02:56 GMT
> Is HO still even popular? Has it been superceaded by something else?

Two popular ones now are N Scale and On30 (O Scale rolling stock on HO scale
track.
Signature

Will
N Scale - Credit Valley Railway
www.muskokacomputes.com/CVR_Home.htm

Woodard R. Springstube - 30 May 2004 03:23 GMT
>> Is HO still even popular? Has it been superceaded by
>> something else?
>
> Two popular ones now are N Scale and On30 (O Scale rolling
> stock on HO scale track.

Comparing the sizes of the Walther's Catalogs, HO (1/87) still
seems to be the dominant gauge, with the largest selection of
merchandise available.  I would suspect (but don't know for
certain) that N is second, O or large-scale (G, etc.) is third
and everything else is following.

As Will pointed out, On30 is coming on strong, but the major
amount of product is still HO, and it is probably a pretty safe
assumption that the amount of stuff on the market reflects
demand in the market.
Tim Soderstrom - 30 May 2004 05:11 GMT
> As Will pointed out, On30 is coming on strong, but the major
> amount of product is still HO, and it is probably a pretty safe
> assumption that the amount of stuff on the market reflects
> demand in the market.

Well if the track is the same then I can just use HO for at least the rails for my modelling. As far as On30 itself; why is it popular exactly? Are the trains themselves more to scale than HO trains? I always liked HO because it seemed to be just the right size, at least in terms of the track, to be somewhat compact but still eye-catching.

Anyways thanks to the both of you for the info!

Tim

Signature

/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\

| Tim Soderstrom                                                       |
| MightyTim@mail.utexas.edu                                            |
| http://www.moocowproductions.org                                     |
|                                                                      |
| "Life is like a box of chocolates - never know what you gonna get"   |
|                                                    -Forrest Gump     |
\                                                                      /
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bruce Favinger - 30 May 2004 06:46 GMT
Tim,
On30 (O scale 30 inches between the rails) is popular mainly due to the
excellent  On30 products made and marketed by Bachmann. Prior to Bachmanns
entry to this scale/gauge On30 was a scratchbuilder / basher scale that
offered a cheap way to model O scale narrow gauge and industrial railroads
using HO mechanisms. Up until a few years ago there was no ready to run
On30. Expensive On3 ( O scale 36" between the rails) brass locomotives,
limited products and scratchbuilding were the only options if one wanted to
model O scale narrow gauge. Over the years it appears that large numbers of
people developed an interest in narrow gauge but were put off by the cost,
possibly by the few craftsmen type kits available, scratch building
required, or the reputation of problems in the still expensive but smaller
HOn3 scale. Sn3 equipment is much the same as On3 in being expensive, with a
limited number of products available. Until recently if you wanted to model
narrow gauge in any scale you basically had to be an extreme scratchbuilder
or a craftsman with deep pockets. Now with Bachmann and BLI providing
excellent running locomotives and some very nice RTR rolling stock along
with a number of companies offering kits parts and details anyone can model
narrow gauge, have stuff that looks good and runs well but is no more
expensive than HO. It looks On30 has been very well received. Another factor
is that  O scale narrow gauge track arrangements and equipment don't need
much more space than HO. At least until you starting adding structures.
That's when you discover how much space O scale can really take narrow gauge
or not. Bruce

> > As Will pointed out, On30 is coming on strong, but the major
> > amount of product is still HO, and it is probably a pretty safe
> > assumption that the amount of stuff on the market reflects
> > demand in the market.
> >
> Well if the track is the same then I can just use HO for at least the rails for my modelling. As far as On30 itself; why is it popular exactly?
Are the trains themselves more to scale than HO trains? I always liked HO
because it seemed to be just the right size, at least in terms of the track,
to be somewhat compact but still eye-catching.

> Anyways thanks to the both of you for the info!
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> \                                                                      /
>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tim Soderstrom - 30 May 2004 08:07 GMT
*OH* ok. That cleared things up quite a bit, thanks! I hadn't expected that much depth, but it certainly was quite interesting to read. I didn't know model railroading was that varied, to be honest. So in a nutshell, On30 is HO but for narrow gauge railroad models?

Well in any case, I put up an extremely rough example of what I'm trying to do (and why I have been asking about scale sizes) at http://www.moocowproductions.org/test.jpg. Very rough but should give anyone curious an idea. A few things are arbitrary (such as the dimensions of the ties and the width of the rails, for example) but I tried to be as true to the HO spec as I could. And once I get my hands on real track again, I'll refine it further. I am modelling the track after Atlas Code 83 Track.

Anyways, thanks again for all the info everyone! It cleared things up immensely! Can't wait to jump back into it again!

Tim

> Tim,
> On30 (O scale 30 inches between the rails) is popular mainly due to the
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
> > \                                                                      /
> >  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Signature

/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\

| Tim Soderstrom                                                       |
| MightyTim@mail.utexas.edu                                            |
| http://www.moocowproductions.org                                     |
|                                                                      |
| "Life is like a box of chocolates - never know what you gonna get"   |
|                                                    -Forrest Gump     |
\                                                                      /
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Geezer - 30 May 2004 10:50 GMT
> *OH* ok. That cleared things up quite a bit, thanks! I hadn't expected that much depth, but it certainly was quite interesting to read. I didn't
know model railroading was that varied, to be honest. So in a nutshell, On30
is HO but for narrow gauge railroad models?

No!
You must separate scale (the proportion to real full size) and gauge (space
between the rails).  HO, O, S, N etc. all refer to Scale.  HO scale is 3.5
mm = 1 foot, or 1:87.1 proportion.  HO with no following symbols means
standard gauge (56.5 real inches between the rails) for HO scale, which is
16.5 mm gauge.  HO followed by an "n" and a number indicates HO proportion
but modeling a narrow gauge prototype.  "...HO for narrow gauge railroad
models" would be HOn3 or HOn30 or HOn2.
So your correct statement should have been:
"So in a nutshell, On30 is O scale but for 30" narrow gauge railroad models,
using HO track for convenience."

In your earlier post, you also asked, "As far as On30 itself; why is it
popular exactly? Are the trains themselves more to scale than HO trains?"
Bruce's very good reply addressed the first part.  The answer to the second
part is that On30 is actually less to scale than most HO.  First, most of
the prototypes used by Bachmann and others for On30 are of 3' gauge
equipment (since 30" narrow gauge was not very common in the US, but people
are familiar with the Durango & Silverton, Cumbres & Toltec, and East Broad
Top), so they are "less to scale" in that they have the wrong gauge trucks
to be accurate models.  Bachmann also slightly reduced the width of many of
their models, I believe so that the trains would clear each other side to
side on commercial HO track passing siding geometries.  And track made for
HO has incorrect tie size and tie spacing for 1:48 proportion (although Peco
makes 16.5 mm gauge track with 1:48 proportion ties).  But for all of that,
On30 looks good, runs very well, and has more of the "heft" that makes O
scale popular.  Gary Q
Tim Soderstrom - 30 May 2004 17:31 GMT
Oh ok. Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up!

Tim

> > *OH* ok. That cleared things up quite a bit, thanks! I hadn't expected
> that much depth, but it certainly was quite interesting to read. I didn't
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> On30 looks good, runs very well, and has more of the "heft" that makes O
> scale popular.  Gary Q

Signature

/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\

| Tim Soderstrom                                                       |
| MightyTim@mail.utexas.edu                                            |
| http://www.moocowproductions.org                                     |
|                                                                      |
| "Life is like a box of chocolates - never know what you gonna get"   |
|                                                    -Forrest Gump     |
\                                                                      /
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tim Soderstrom - 30 May 2004 18:10 GMT
Actually I may have spoken too soon :) Digging out some good 'ole Trig I was able to figure out how to make a very nice looking curve using splines. The problem is, I want to basically extrude a spline, or complex CSG object (which serve as the rails on the track) along a splined path assuring that it does not distort along the curve. The examples from the link squashed the isosurface as it moved along.

The code I have thus far is this (modified from an example in the Pov-Ray docs):
camera { location <0,4,0> look_at 0 }
                                                                               
light_source { <-5,30,-10> 1 }
#declare MySpline =
 spline {
//    cubic_spline
//    quadratic_spline
   natural_spline
   #declare counter = 0;
   #while (counter < 2*pi/6)
       counter, <sin(counter), 0, cos(counter)>
       #declare counter = counter + pi/16;
   #end
 }
                                                                               
#declare ctr = 0;
#while (ctr < 10)
 sphere{
       MySpline(ctr),0.05
       pigment{ color<ctr, 1-ctr, 0> }
 }
 #declare ctr = ctr + 0.01;
#end
                                                                               

The sphere is of course the item I want to convert into a CSG object or a spline to extrude along the path. The reason, by the way, that I want to use CSG or a spline for the rails is that I can use that same definition for other track as well - of course using the technique for the curves I want to use I could do the same for the straight peices as well I suppose. In any case, I tried playing around with boxes and things but that produced screwy results :) I'm not quite sure how the spline fits in with the object definition, since you can just change 'sphere' to 'box' and it works.

Any ideas about how to do that?
Tim

> Oh ok. Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up!
>
[quoted text clipped - 41 lines]
> \                                                                      /
>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Signature

/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\

| Tim Soderstrom                                                       |
| MightyTim@mail.utexas.edu                                            |
| http://www.moocowproductions.org                                     |
|                                                                      |
| "Life is like a box of chocolates - never know what you gonna get"   |
|                                                    -Forrest Gump     |
\                                                                      /
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tim Soderstrom - 30 May 2004 20:00 GMT
Gah...sorry again. I'm trying to learn Sylpheed (News Reader - it's kinda gacky for some things). This was supposed to go elsewhere, obviously.

> Actually I may have spoken too soon :) Digging out some good 'ole Trig I was able to figure out how to make a very nice looking curve using splines. The problem is, I want to basically extrude a spline, or complex CSG object (which serve as the rails on the track) along a splined path assuring that it does not distort along the curve. The examples from the link squashed the isosurface as it moved along.
>
[quoted text clipped - 83 lines]
> \                                                                      /
>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Signature

/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\

| Tim Soderstrom                                                       |
| MightyTim@mail.utexas.edu                                            |
| http://www.moocowproductions.org                                     |
|                                                                      |
| "Life is like a box of chocolates - never know what you gonna get"   |
|                                                    -Forrest Gump     |
\                                                                      /
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mark Mathu - 03 Jun 2004 08:18 GMT
> So I've been pondering the idea of writing a simple include file for Pov-Ray (www.povray.org for those who are curious) which will allow one to
more easily build model train scenes. It serves many purposes, one is that I
want to get back into Pov-Ray more, another is the capability to make models
railroads and put the viewer in certain perspectives, and lastly it serves as
sort of a rudamentary mock up for when I want to build a real model. The
latter is a ways off becuase I'm stuck in an apartament right now and there
is no space for such a feat (which is perhaps another reason for writing the
file so I can sort of enjoy a model
> railroad without having one :).
>
> In any case, I need to know the dimensions of the track. I was probably going to use HO scale as it is what I used to use when I did have a small
train set. Unfortuantely, I no longer have the track to measure myself. Also,
what is the difference and pros and cons of different scales? I had intended
on using HO since I can more directly use the raytraced model to make the
real model; but
> I noticed in looking around on the Internet that there are many more scales
> than I last remembered.

Be careful - there are some things that don't scale down -- fingers (the
width between tracks), table width (maximum arm reach) and aisle width, for
examples.  You need to have a scle in mind when establishing these things.

I'd be interested in seeing follow-ups of how this progresses.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2012 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.