 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Railroads / July 2005On-topic posting.
Apologies for getting away from the current political debate on u.r.m.r but I thought people might like to know that Bachmann have actually confirmed their intention at this weekend's open event to produce a class 47 in OO-scale next year. John. > Apologies for getting away from the current political debate on u.r.m.r > but > I thought people might like to know that Bachmann have actually confirmed > their intention at this weekend's open event to produce a class 47 in > OO-scale next year. Any word on likely liveries?  Signature*** http://www.railwayscene.co.uk/ *** Rich Mackin (rich-at-richmackin-co-uk) MSN: richmackin-at-hotmail-dot-com >> Apologies for getting away from the current political debate on u.r.m.r >> but [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Any word on likely liveries? According to MREx Mag they are '47478' in BR blue http://windmilljunction.fotopic.net/p17353856.html and 'D1504' in two tone green. http://windmilljunction.fotopic.net/p17353855.html (kim) "kim" > and 'D1504' in two tone green. > > http://windmilljunction.fotopic.net/p17353855.html If you Really must have a diesel, at least this one's painted in the right colours as it doesn't look like it's trying to be an airliner. Why do they insist on painting trains and busses to look like airliners? -- Cheers Roger T. Home of the Great Eastern Railway http://www.highspeedplus.com/~rogertra/ So that will be 19mm gauge, then? :o)) Of course we all know that you really meant 00 Gauge. > Apologies for getting away from the current political debate on u.r.m.r but > I thought people might like to know that Bachmann have actually confirmed > their intention at this weekend's open event to produce a class 47 in > OO-scale next year. > > John. > Of course we all know that you really meant 00 Gauge. OO-scale is 4mm to 1 foot OO-gauge is 16.5mm I'm not sure what I meant! ;-) John. What amazes me is the photo of the Flying Pig. Marvellous, I could almost be back in Boston in 1960. I cant wish my life away, but October seems too far in the future. My dreams will come true. > What amazes me is the photo of the Flying Pig. Marvellous, I could > almost be back in Boston in 1960. Since no one else has mentioned it, whereabouts is the photo of the Flying Pig? Or did you mean it in the metaphorical sense as in "pigs will fly"? (kim) >> What amazes me is the photo of the Flying Pig. Marvellous, I could >> almost be back in Boston in 1960. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > (kim) http://windmilljunction.fotopic.net/p17353853.html Cheers, John. >>> What amazes me is the photo of the Flying Pig. Marvellous, I could >>> almost be back in Boston in 1960. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://windmilljunction.fotopic.net/p17353853.html So it really does fly, in the photo at least ? Glad now I didn't ask for a picture of a Mucky Duck :o) (kim) >>>> What amazes me is the photo of the Flying Pig. Marvellous, I could >>>> almost be back in Boston in 1960. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Glad now I didn't ask for a picture of a Mucky Duck :o) Too late! http://www.artbyelaine.co.uk/mediac/400_0/media/DIR_25177/Mucky~Duck.jpg ;o) Cheers, John. Hmm. 00 Scale is 4mm = 1ft on 19mm gauge. 00 Gauge is 4mm = 1 ft on 16.5mm gauge. Talk about anything with 'Scale' in its name then it implies the US version. Hence 0 Scale is 1:48 scale on 32mm gauge. 0 Gauge is most of the rest of the world and is 1:43.5 on 32mm gauge. By the way it's 00 not OO - even though it's usually spoken as 'oh-oh' or 'double O' and not 'nought-nought'. > > Of course we all know that you really meant 00 Gauge. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > John. Hi Dick, mind if I argue on this one as well? > Hmm. > > 00 Scale is 4mm = 1ft on 19mm gauge. "00 scale" is purely the _scale_, 4mm:1 foot or 1:76.2. The gauge is related to the prototype being modelled and therefore can be any dimension in proportion to the prototype (or not, as in the case of UK00) 3'6" gauge in 00 scale = 14mm, 2' gauge = 8mm, monorail = 0mm etc. > 00 Gauge is 4mm = 1 ft on 16.5mm gauge. > > Talk about anything with 'Scale' in its name then it implies the US > version. Hence 0 Scale is 1:48 scale on 32mm gauge. 0 Gauge is most of > the rest of the world and is 1:43.5 on 32mm gauge. The scale is the apparent ratio between prototype and model. > By the way it's 00 not OO - even though it's usually spoken as 'oh-oh' > or 'double O' and not 'nought-nought'. The name was derived by Marklin in their diminishing sequence of gauges 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 (1891) and 0 (1900) Regards. Greg.P. Not at all. Of course I know that scale is the ratio of the model to the full size and that gauge is the distance between the rails. Unfortunately in the dimm and distant past things were confused by someone's decision to name the various 'whatevers' as a series of numbers followed by the word Gauge. So '0 Gauge' means 7mm = 1ft on 32mm track gauge - unless you happen to be in the USA where it means something quite different. 00 Gauge means 4mm = 1ft on 16.5mm track gauge. In the USA they at some point changed from using 'Gauge' to using 'Scale' and this is, in fact, useful in determining where a model comes from. So, 0 Scale implies 1:48 scale on 32mm track gauge, rather than 1:43.5 on 32mm track gauge. Likewise, 00 Scale implies 4mm = 1ft scale on 19mm track gauge rather than 00 Gauge (4mm = 1ft on 16.5mm track gauge). Interestingly, why did the US change from 1:43.5 (7mm = 1ft) for 0 Gauge to 1:48? Makes it difficult to explain to an American why H0 is Half 0 but is not 1:97 but 1:87.1. Of course, it all stems from the fact that H0 originated in the UK - even more intriguing as the UK later rejected H0 in favour of 00. I wouldn't object so much if people just refered to their modelling as being 00, 0, H0, P4, S7, N, 000, etc. leaving off the words 'Gauge' or 'Scale'. On your last point I did state that 'it's 00 and not OO' - 0 being a zero and O an uppercase o. > Hi Dick, > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Regards. > Greg.P. >Not at all. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >So '0 Gauge' means 7mm = 1ft on 32mm track gauge - unless you happen to be in >the USA where it means something quite different. It seems to mean three different things in the latest MRJ also! > 00 Gauge means 4mm = 1ft on >16.5mm track gauge. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Interestingly, why did the US change from 1:43.5 (7mm = 1ft) for 0 Gauge to >1:48? I'd have thought because 1:48 is 1/4" to the foot. Apart from in scientific subjects, the USA is still firmly feet and inches, not to mention differently-sized pints, quarts and gallons. >Makes it difficult to explain to an American why H0 is Half 0 but is >not 1:97 but 1:87.1. Of course, it all stems from the fact that H0 originated >in the UK - even more intriguing as the UK later rejected H0 in favour of 00. You could always point them to the FAQ for rec.model.railroad: http://users.rcn.com/weyand/tractronics/faq/page1.htm >I wouldn't object so much if people just refered to their modelling as being >00, 0, H0, P4, S7, N, 000, etc. leaving off the words 'Gauge' or 'Scale'. [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >> Regards. >> Greg.P. SignatureJane OO in the garden http://www.yddraiggoch.demon.co.uk/railway/railway.html So why didn't they change from 3.5mm = 1ft (1:87.1) to 1/8" = 1ft (1:96) for H0? > snip > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >not 1:97 but 1:87.1. Of course, it all stems from the fact that H0 originated > >in the UK - even more intriguing as the UK later rejected H0 in favour of 00. snip > So why didn't they change from 3.5mm = 1ft (1:87.1) to 1/8" = 1ft (1:96) > for H0? 'Cause that would have screwed up the scale gauge ratio and you'd have a dogs dinner of scales and gauges like you do in the UK. Something I hope North America was desperately trying to avoid at least in 16.5mm gauge. -- Cheers Roger T. Home of the Great Eastern Railway http://www.highspeedplus.com/~rogertra/ > So why didn't they change from 3.5mm = 1ft (1:87.1) to 1/8" = 1ft (1:96) for H0? There was such a scale/Gauge for a longish period (1940s). No proprietry manufacturer (AFAIK) ever took it up. > > snip > > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > snip >So why didn't they change from 3.5mm = 1ft (1:87.1) to 1/8" = 1ft >(1:96) for H0? Don't ask me. I don't know. I was only making a suggestion. Maybe because there was a bigger trade in HO between Europe and the US than there was in O. SignatureJane OO in the garden http://www.yddraiggoch.demon.co.uk/railway/railway.html > Not at all. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > decision to name the various 'whatevers' as a series of numbers followed by > the word Gauge. That was Maerklin - they made the track to a specific gauge and then made tinplate trains to run on them - scale didn't come into the equation. > So '0 Gauge' means 7mm = 1ft on 32mm track gauge - unless you happen to be in > the USA where it means something quite different. 00 Gauge means 4mm = 1ft on > 16.5mm track gauge. This millimeter to the foot thing is a UK peculiarity, where it extends beyond your shores it only does so due to exporting. > In the USA they at some point changed from using 'Gauge' to using 'Scale' and > this is, in fact, useful in determining where a model comes from. So, 0 Scale [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Interestingly, why did the US change from 1:43.5 (7mm = 1ft) for 0 Gauge to > 1:48? They only had imperial rulers and 1:48 could be worked out using the 1/4" markings. > Makes it difficult to explain to an American why H0 is Half 0 but is > not 1:97 but 1:87.1. Of course, it all stems from the fact that H0 originated > in the UK - even more intriguing as the UK later rejected H0 in favour of 00. Half 0 originated with Bing in Germany - it was a halving of "0 gauge" and had nothing to do with scale :-) > I wouldn't object so much if people just refered to their modelling as being > 00, 0, H0, P4, S7, N, 000, etc. leaving off the words 'Gauge' or 'Scale'. You live in a country where there is only one gauge, here in NZ we have a different gauge and modellers who model different prototype gauges NZR S scale runs on H0 track,UK 00 on H0 track, US H0 on H0 track, NZ H0 on TT track etc etc. so the distinction between scales and gauges becomes very relevant. > On your last point I did state that 'it's 00 and not OO' - 0 being a zero and > O an uppercase o. English speakers tend to say "Ohh" when they mean "Zero" or "Nil". The distinction doesn't bother me :-) > > Hi Dick, > > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Regards. > > Greg.P. > This millimeter to the foot thing is a UK peculiarity, where it extends > beyond > your shores it only does so due to exporting. Why would that be though? It makes no sense to mix and match imperial with metric measurements to produce a scake, but it's been that way as long as I can remember - and that's back into the 50s. John. > > This millimeter to the foot thing is a UK peculiarity, where it extends > > beyond [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > metric measurements to produce a scake, but it's been that way as long as I > can remember - and that's back into the 50s. European HO has always been 1:87 or 1:82 or 1:80 or 1:85 or 1:90 - they moved to the metric system because the "Imperial" dimensions varied from state to state and town to town. For example. a Wuerttemberg mile was defined as the distance a man could walk in a day. A foot in Europe was anything from about 8 English inches to 14 English inches. One of the first early models I built came out a very odd size because I built it from a French diagram using the feet and inch measurements scaled. Afterwards I found out the feet were about 9.5 English inches. Regards, Greg.P. Was it really Bing? Didn't it originate in the 1920s with a British modeller whose name I have forgotten? Only one gauge? We have 15", 2', 2' 6", 3', 4' 8.5", 5' and 7' 0.25". There are naming conventions to cover models of the non-standard gauge railways. We may say 'Oh' instead of 'zero' when speaking - that's no problem as the listener can always ask the speaker for clarification. It's when it's written that it becomes important to get it correct. You cannot ask a page of text to clarify what is meant. It's the same with punctuation and grammar. > snip > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > English speakers tend to say "Ohh" when they mean "Zero" or "Nil". The > distinction doesn't bother me :-) > Was it really Bing? Didn't it originate in the 1920s with a British > modeller whose > name I have forgotten? > > Only one gauge? We have 15", 2', 2' 6", 3', 4' 8.5", 5' and 7' 0.25". Many tramways in Britain were 3' 6" gauge. (kim) >> Was it really Bing? Didn't it originate in the 1920s with a British >> modeller whose [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Many tramways in Britain were 3' 6" gauge. As was the Nantlle. There were other gauges, too - a fair bit of 18" at one time, there were the Padarn and the Redruth and Chasewater on 4' gauge (almost exactly right for 00 ;), the Dundee and Newtyle on 4'6".... SignatureAndy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/ Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair) >>> Was it really Bing? Didn't it originate in the 1920s with a British >>> modeller whose >>> name I have forgotten? >>> >>> Only one gauge? We have 15", 2', 2' 6", 3', 4' 8.5", 5' and 7' 0.25". http://parovoz.com/spravka/gauges-e.html should cover it. N gauge should therefore be perfect for early Scottish railways and 00 for the Saundersfoot ;) SignatureAndy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/ "Who dies with the most toys wins" (Gary Barnes) > We may say 'Oh' instead of 'zero' when speaking - that's no problem as the > listener can always ask the speaker for clarification. It's when it's > written that > it becomes important to get it correct. You cannot ask a page of text to > clarify > what is meant. It's the same with punctuation and grammar. I've a significant collection of prewar Hornby O or 0-gauge which I'd considered selling on eBay and that was just one of the issues which has stopped me listing it. John. >> We may say 'Oh' instead of 'zero' when speaking - that's no problem as >> the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > considered selling on eBay and that was just one of the issues which has > stopped me listing it. How come? There's a dedicated section on eBay for 0-Gauge, most of it Hornby. I would rather there was a separate section for Hornby 0-gauge as well as it would make it easier to search for the non-Hornby items. (kim) > Was it really Bing? Didn't it originate in the 1920s with a British modeller whose > name I have forgotten? Henry Greenly or (?) Walkley (sp) Bing produced 16mm gauge tinplate for the UK market at the behest of Henry Greenly from 1922/23. (I have one :-) In fact, the first "models" were produced immediately pre-WWI > Only one gauge? We have 15", 2', 2' 6", 3', 4' 8.5", 5' and 7' 0.25". LOL. > There are naming conventions to cover models of the non-standard gauge railways. Sure, but _our_ standard gauge is 3'6". When we answer the standard question we tend not to reel off a string of 27 or so letters and numbers and just quote either the scale or the gauge depending on our assessment of the questioner's railway savvy. > We may say 'Oh' instead of 'zero' when speaking - that's no problem as the > listener can always ask the speaker for clarification. It's when it's written that > it becomes important to get it correct. You cannot ask a page of text to clarify > what is meant. It's the same with punctuation and grammar. If you have to ask for clarification the speaker hasn't got it together. I'm normally counted as a pedant, but in the case of scale names I go with the flow as it's the trains that are important :-)))) > > snip > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > English speakers tend to say "Ohh" when they mean "Zero" or "Nil". The > > distinction doesn't bother me :-) >Sure, but _our_ standard gauge is 3'6". When we answer the standard >question we tend >not to reel off a string of 27 or so letters and numbers and just quote >either the >scale or the gauge depending on our assessment of the questioner's >railway savvy. I was about to ask about that Greg. What gauge track do NZ modellers run their stock on? Is it 16.5 mm? I rather fancy a model of a Kb and a Ww. Is there any kits available? SignatureRegards, James Christie "Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." > >Sure, but _our_ standard gauge is 3'6". When we answer the standard > >question we tend [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I was about to ask about that Greg. What gauge track do NZ modellers run > their stock on? Is it 16.5 mm? 00/H0 British/US/European is the most common, followed by NZR 3/16":1 foot on H0 track. To model NZR generally requires a fair amount of kit building, although in recent years there has been a fair amount of semi "ready to run" on the market. > I rather fancy a model of a Kb and a Ww. Is there any kits available? John Gardner (Christchurch) builds a Kb (4-8-4 with trailing bogie booster, as used on the Chch-West Coast line) For a long time they were only produced as kits, but last time I looked he was only offering built up models. (a problem with that model is that it will only run on large radius curves, although with modification it will take a 2' curve) The Ww must be available somewhere as it's a popular prototype and I've seen models. They tend to come and go, batch by batch. If you like I could do some checking up. Regards, Greg.P. > -- > Regards, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly. > "Mind you, my first name is Bad." >00/H0 British/US/European is the most common, followed by NZR 3/16":1 foot >on H0 track. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >Regards, >Greg.P. If you could do that Greg, it'd be much appreciated. I doubt I have the skill to tackle a kit of a Kb, so it'd be better if her offers them built up. I might, however manage a Ww, that and the colour scheme is nice and simple... :-) Have you seen the NZFU 'The Ride of Ww480'? Marvellous film, and the machine and the train would be exactly what I'd like to model. I also have 'Kb' country kicking around somewhere. I'm just pissed off that when I was in Christchurch 3 years ago, well, Lytellton actually, that I didn't think and track this guy down, always the way though. SignatureRegards, James Christie "Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." > >00/H0 British/US/European is the most common, followed by NZR 3/16":1 foot > >on H0 track. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > built up. I might, however manage a Ww, that and the colour scheme is > nice and simple... Black on black! John isn't internet savvy but I'm sure I can get hold of him. > :-) > > Have you seen the NZFU 'The Ride of Ww480'? Marvellous film, and the > machine and the train would be exactly what I'd like to model. Ouch, never heard of it! > I also > have 'Kb' country kicking around somewhere. No sympathy for you! ;-) > I'm just pissed off that when I was in Christchurch 3 years ago, well, > Lytellton actually, that I didn't think and track this guy down, always > the way though. I lived there then - if you'd only asked! If all else fails (ie me) then Iron Horse Hobbies in Christchurch is one of the main retail outlets, but he charges like the proverbial wounded bull. > -- > Regards, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly. > "Mind you, my first name is Bad." > So that will be 19mm gauge, then? :o)) > > Of course we all know that you really meant 00 Gauge. OO (in Britain) is a _scale_. The gauge is HO. > > Apologies for getting away from the current political debate on u.r.m.r but > > I thought people might like to know that Bachmann have actually confirmed > > their intention at this weekend's open event to produce a class 47 in > > OO-scale next year. > > > > John. > OO (in Britain) is a _scale_. The gauge is HO. Both OO and HO are scales. Both OO and HO can refer to gauges (both being notionally the same). John. > > OO (in Britain) is a _scale_. The gauge is HO. > > Both OO and HO are scales. Agreed. > Both OO and HO can refer to gauges (both being notionally the same). If you mention "OO gauge" you bring out the "That's 19mm" chorus! :-) Regards, Greg.P. > If you mention "OO gauge" you bring out the "That's 19mm" chorus! :-) Not in the UK. 99.9% of UK modellers wouldn't even know that OO-gauge exists in the USA, and the number over there wouldn't be much lower. John. > Apologies for getting away from the current political debate on u.r.m.r but > I thought people might like to know that Bachmann have actually confirmed > their intention at this weekend's open event to produce a class 47 in > OO-scale next year. They have been in contact with at least one Class 47 preservation group for assistance, so they are showing signs of going about it the right way. Let's see if the ethic makes it all the way to the moulds! Cheers, Francis K. Signature[Remove Trailing'Z' from mail address to reply.] > They have been in contact with at least one Class 47 preservation > group for assistance, so they are showing signs of going about it > the right way. Let's see if the ethic makes it all the way to the > moulds! What like they were in contact (and crawling all over!) the preserved deltic ..... > What like they were in contact (and crawling all over!) the preserved > deltic ..... You're a cynic Jeff, they got the 66 something like, but then didn't someone else do the drawings for that? ;-) John. >> What like they were in contact (and crawling all over!) the preserved >> deltic ..... > > You're a cynic Jeff, they got the 66 something like, but then didn't > someone else do the drawings for that? ;-) Indeed, I've said many times that in cases where Bachmann (and no doubt Hornby as well) are handed a CAD drawing then the resulting model is - 9 out of 10 times - as near to spot on as possible. It's only when they've got to actually measure something that problems come in. I hope that their 57's and 47's are up to scratch but I've no plans on getting rid of any of the Heljan examples yet. Cheers Jeff. >>> What like they were in contact (and crawling all over!) the preserved >>> deltic ..... [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > out of 10 times - as near to spot on as possible. It's only when they've > got to actually measure something that problems come in. There's a very good reason for that. I was driving my open top cabriolet along a dirt track close to Barwell when I came to a duck pond in the middle of the road. The chief draftsman from Bachmann was sitting on a nearby fence with a straw in his mouth. I said: "Excuse me my good fellow, how deep is the water in this pond?". He said: "No worries guv'nor, it be only a couple of inches" (because that's how they speak in Leicestershire). So I continued driving and my car plunged into the water up to it's windscreen level and was completely ruined. "You silly fool!" I shouted (or words to that effect), "I thought you said the water was only a couple of inches?". "That be funny?" he replied, "It only ever came half-way up them ducks?". (kim) > There's a very good reason for that. I was driving my open top cabriolet > along a dirt track close to Barwell when I came to a duck pond in the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > "That > be funny?" he replied, "It only ever came half-way up them ducks?". The old ones are the best - well at least they are when you hear them for the first time! ;-) John. |
Reply to this Message |
 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.