The Night Mail

[jamie92208]

17 hours ago, Tony_S said:

We were in Rugen and there was a huge rusty railway marshalling yard on the coast. It looked standard gauge but the tour guide said it was Russian gauge. Apparently the Soviet army  used to ship supplies loaded on railway wagons and unload them at what was then an East German port rather do the transfer at the Russian Polish border and then transfer by standard gauge to Germany. 

IIRC that port was constructed after the Solidarity movement got going in Poland, so that their military traffic could avoid a politically 'unreliable'  area.  I think that it has been used relatively recently to ship new rolling stock to Russia. Obviously not since February 2022.

 

Jamie

Edited November 28, 2023 by jamie92208

[AndyID]

7 hours ago, polybear said:

 

But what would the strength of the chairs be like in 3mm - I believe Martin uses Resin(?) Printers for the chairs for that very reason.

 

Other way round. Martin uses resin for detail but resin is quite fragile. Filament is quite robust and even slightly flexible depending on the type of filament. The snag with it is the resolution is limited by the extruded diameter.

 

I've also used a trick where the chairs are quite loose on the rail but the jaws on alternate chairs are offset slightly so that the rail is effectively woven between the chairs. That means that the rail is providing the elasticity rather the chairs. All highly non-prototypical of course but after all it is theater 😄

[SM42]

53 minutes ago, Tony_S said:

Our tour guide suggested that the Soviets thought the East Germans were more enthusiastic partners than the Poles and it was less risky to transfer stuff across the Baltic than through Poland. I have no idea, just reporting what was said. 

 

They were probably right. 

 

Andy

[iL Dottore]

17 hours ago, AndyID said:

 

If you are unsure of your track making skills it's entirely possible to print the sleepers and chairs on a 3-D printer. If you are determined to reproduce the chairs in super detail you might consider the combination of FDM printed timbers with resin printed chairs being developed by Martin Wynne on his Templot website but if you are more interested in the overall appearance and getting things moving fairly quickly it's quite practical to print timbers and chairs in one pass on a FDM printer.

 

I would advise caution regarding 14.2mm gauge. Unless you go to extremely fine wheel standards with the associated requirement that the track and points are almost perfect you will have to accommodate overscale wheels and other running gear by distorting elements of the equipment running on the track from dimensions scaled from the prototype.

 

edit:

 

And, if you were to print your own track there is no law I am aware of that says all the elements of the track have to be constructed to the same scale as the stuff that runs on the track :)

 

That means that all the elements of the track could be a perfect scale representation of standard gauge track and it would look exactly as it should in terms of sleeper size and spacing relative to the gauge. Of course the snag is that it might appear underscale relative to the equipment on the track, or would it? But as the thespians among us are fully aware model railways are just as much about theatre as engineering, and maybe even more so.

 

Personally I wouldn't go quite that far but the point is if you make your own track you can design it to your own rules to produce a representation that pleases you even if some of the scales employed drive the purists completely bananas 

😂

All good points to ponder, Andy.

 

Actually, I'm think along the lines of having only the rail spacing at 14.2mm (so prototypical) but use a rather coarser rail - allowing me to avoid the whole fine flanges, check rails & frogs etc. bizness.

[Compound2632]

10 minutes ago, iL Dottore said:

Actually, I'm think along the lines of having only the rail spacing at 14.2mm (so prototypical) but use a rather coarser rail - allowing me to avoid the whole fine flanges, check rails & frogs etc. bizness.

 

Ah, so a 3 mm scale analogue of HO, rather that the full P100 (or S100; or is it P3 / S3?). 

[AndyID]

7 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Ah, so you're of the sideways-on-looking school of thought, with which as an 00 bodger myself I have a lot of sympathy. Those who subscribe to the end-on-looking school are much better off with true-to-scale gauge. There's nothing lets down Tony Wright's 00-gauge Little Bytham so much as his penchant for end-on photography.

 

Not so much side or end-on. More about external outline dimensions of the things running on the track. One example was the comparison between a Trix A3 and a Tri-ang A3. The Tri-ang version looks right. The proportions of the running gear on the Trix version seem much too "heavy" compared to its superstructure. Of course it's all highly subjective but that's what I see.

[J. S. Bach]

1 hour ago, SM42 said:

 

Quite possibly. 

 

One of the reasons for the wider gauge is to make it harder for invading armies to move stuff by rail.

 

Andy

As the Germans found out some years back.

[AndyID]

21 minutes ago, iL Dottore said:

All good points to ponder, Andy.

 

Actually, I'm think along the lines of having only the rail spacing at 14.2mm (so prototypical) but use a rather coarser rail - allowing me to avoid the whole fine flanges, check rails & frogs etc. bizness.

 

So coarser wheel profiles to simplify things? That can work but it you might end up with the "Trix effect" I just mentioned. You might also have to do some serious kit hacking to get the wheels to fit but that would depend a lot on the particular models.

 

Before you get too far you might want to knock out some static samples to see how it looks to your eye. Whatever you do it boils down to making the compromises that work best for you. It's not about engineering. It's much more about art.

[AndyID]

There's another trick that tends to drive some folks a bit bonkers. The X and Y dimensions can be to different scales 🤣

[iL Dottore]

24 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Ah, so a 3 mm scale analogue of HO, rather that the full P100 (or S100; or is it P3 / S3?). 

More or less.

I want to keep things as accurate as possible (and as far as my skills allow), but I won't loose  much sleep if it isn't 100% accurate.

2 minutes ago, AndyID said:

 

So coarser wheel profiles to simplify things? That can work but it you might end up with the "Trix effect" I just mentioned. You might also have to do some serious kit hacking to get the wheels to fit but that would depend a lot on the particular models.

 

Before you get too far you might want to knock out some static samples to see how it looks to your eye. Whatever you do it boils down to making the compromises that work best for you . It's not about engineering. It's much more about art.

I couldn't agree more with your last point. One of my (far too) many hobbies is theatre (acting, producing, directing) and one of the things that has to happen for a play, any play, to work is the "suspension of disbelief" - which often means getting certain small details right to create a convincing "big picture". 
 

I've seen a number of (usually finescale) layouts that claim to be 100% prototypical, but which fail to convince. Conversely, I've seen layout that were more "impressions of" than accurate replicas that nonetheless convinced. Primarily because the layout got certain small details "right".

 

The art of course (also for theatre) is on judging which of those many small details need to be right.

[TheQ]

One thing to remember looking at real railways end on, is the loading gauge. The russian loading gauge is considerably larger than the UKs, giving the illusion of a smaller track gauge.

[iL Dottore]

One of the "small details" that far too many layouts get wrong is....

....shiny vehicles (especially if pre-1980s)

 

There are three considerations, I think. 1: even the most lovingly and thoroughly highly polished ministerial car will not gleam when viewed (in real life) from the distance equivalent to "normal viewing distance" for a model railway; 2: modern paint technology has created paints that fade or dull much less than paints from previous decades; 3: apart from the above mentioned ministerial car, most "working" vehicles were not polished to within an inch of their lives (many working vehicles barely got washed).

 

So a 50s Corporation Dustcart that gleams is just wrong.

 

A variation on the above is the vehicle that has been beautifully weathered on the bottom half of the vehicle and the top half shines.

 

TBH, I don't think I've painted anything gloss for a long, long time (not even "freshflour")

[Northmoor]

28 minutes ago, iL Dottore said:

I've seen a number of (usually finescale) layouts that claim to be 100% prototypical, but which fail to convince. Conversely, I've seen layout that were more "impressions of" than accurate replicas that nonetheless convinced. Primarily because the layout got certain small details "right".

Seconded, I've seen a few (only a few though) "finescale" layouts that left me cold.  As Tony says, too many don't work well but perhaps what the builder wanted was a perfect diorama for still images, rather than a moving "train set" (which draws attention to all the things which should move, but don't)?  Which is fine, but probably misses the point for most exhibition visitors.  

 

"Finescale" for me is about many things, all of them being in balance and gauge is just one factor.  To be honest if OO track with scale sleepers is used instead of OO/HO it hides a lot.  And you can build the most dimensionally perfect railway in the world, but if there is nothing beyond the railway fence to help me imagine how it fits into a wider landscape, it's as good as a 6x4 roundy-roundy to me.

[SM42]

49 minutes ago, iL Dottore said:

 

 

TBH, I don't think I've painted anything gloss for a long, long time (not even "freshflour")

 

Fresh Flour is naturally matt

 

Andy

[Happy Hippo]

1 hour ago, Northmoor said:

Seconded, I've seen a few (only a few though) "finescale" layouts that left me cold.  As Tony says, too many don't work well but perhaps what the builder wanted was a perfect diorama for still images, rather than a moving "train set" (which draws attention to all the things which should move, but don't)?  Which is fine, but probably misses the point for most exhibition visitors.  

 

"Finescale" for me is about many things, all of them being in balance and gauge is just one factor.  To be honest if OO track with scale sleepers is used instead of OO/HO it hides a lot.  And you can build the most dimensionally perfect railway in the world, but if there is nothing beyond the railway fence to help me imagine how it fits into a wider landscape, it's as good as a 6x4 roundy-roundy to me.

I think it was the late, and much missed Iain Rice, who once stated that there is no such thing as Finescale, it is either to scale or it is not.

 

The term Finescale is really about an overall concept where the builder is striving for detailing to a high standard and care is taken into the positioning and siting of various parts of the railway infrastructure, and the buildings and scenic detail being as close to the vernacular of the area being modelled.  The main point being that above all, the overall effect has to be consistent. 

 

To my mind it is the attention to detail that marks the better model railways apart.  The jogger who is suspended on one leg at a street corner, or the county set charging across a field following a pack of hounds, fails in the realism stakes.  The trains, and sometimes road vehicles can move but not much else, so surely it is better for the signalman to be standing in the open window of his signal box, or inside sitting on a chair, than standing in perpetuity, handing over the single line token.  Certain things we can do when modelling, will suspend the reality and limitations of the model and allow that dip into the miniature fantasy world we have created, but equally something that is badly thought out can completely destroy that image.

 

As an example, my pet hate are mineral wagons that are never filled/emptied. In one respect there is little that can be done to hide this fact, especially if you are modelling a wayside station, but for me it really grates, so all the layouts I've ever built have featured loads in/empties out.  Either two trains are running in opposite directions to represent the difference, or I have had two separate rakes that shuttle in and out of the fiddle yard.

 

We all know of the lamp saga, for which I will add, we are still awaiting a video, but it is just as pertinent to that individual as my loads in/out.  We'd best not start demanding working headcode boxes for early diesels!

 

So, once we decide to claim our Hi Fidelity and High Definition modelling is Finescale, and then have the courage to put your model onto the exhibition circuit, remember you have volunteered to poke your head well above the top of the parapet.

 

As a result I don't use the term.

 

Probably just as well as I have plans for a Welsh hillside with houses  climbing the valley side to diminishing scales to force perspective.

Edited November 27, 2023 by Happy Hippo

[SM42]

I've been in the office this evening. 

 

I opened a box to see what was in it. 

 

It was full of part built wagons. 

 

I closed the lid and gently put it back lest I should wake them. 

 

Andy

[New Haven Neil]

2 hours ago, Happy Hippo said:

working headcode boxes for early diesels!

 

Done by my mate Tony Lambert (he does a lot of the photos of South Pelaw) 50 years ago, Kitmaster Deltic made into.....errr  IIRC Pinza.  he's a very, very skilled modeller.

[AndyID]

2 hours ago, Happy Hippo said:

I think it was the late, and much missed Iain Rice, who once stated that there is no such thing as Finescale, it is either to scale or it is not.

 

 

Maybe "finer scale" would work. In the smaller scales, 1:76.2 for example (scales never have units in my book, they are simply ratios) it's impossible to build a working layout "to scale". Even P4 makes compromises and deviates from "to scale".

[iL Dottore]

1 hour ago, Happy Hippo said:

The term Finescale is really about an overall concept where the builder is striving for detailing to a high standard and care is taken into the positioning and siting of various parts of the railway infrastructure, and the buildings and scenic detail being as close to the vernacular of the area being modelled.  The main point being that above all, the overall effect has to be consistent. 

Which underscores my point: the totality has to be greater than the sum of the parts. There's no point in having a station building that is prototypical down to the last brick when the paintwork colour scheme is wrong and the posters are of the wrong era (or even of the wrong part of the country).

1 hour ago, Happy Hippo said:

...The jogger who is suspended on one leg at a street corner, or the county set charging across a field following a pack of hounds, fails in the realism stakes. 

Definitely a pet hate of mine. Yes, in real life there'd be people standing place for a long time (like a soldier on guard duty or a passenger waiting in line for a bus replacement service 🤣), but not many. People are either in motion or in repose and until someone comes up with convincing moving figurines, the best - as you say HH - is to have people in positions of convincing repose/inaction.

 

Another pet hate of mine are all those (and forgive me if I tread on any toes) tacky lighting effects. Not only are they used to excess, but nearly always are far too bright (I reckon the poor s*d doing the welding must have had his retina burnt out in seconds, despite a protective welding mask).

 

Even "regular" lighting (houses, street lights, station lamps, signals) is usually too bright - especially for layouts set before the-1970s. I've seen more than a few rural branchline layouts whose lighting could rival that of The Ginza in Tokyo.

 

And don't get me started on rocking caravans, busses on bridges and so on.....

[Dave Hunt]

On 25/11/2023 at 20:14, Happy Hippo said:

OK.

 

Originally, I'd have brought them over later, but sadly, I am not not going to be attending tomorrow.

 

This is good news for all those panicking about how much Tribute was required.  On this one occasion I suggest you can share it amongst yourselves.

 

We kept the Tribute from startex to 1600 then decided you had defaulted and ate it ourselves.

 

Dave

[J. S. Bach]

On 18/11/2023 at 15:58, Happy Hippo said:

The Water tower is by LCut.  It is a laser cut card kit:

 

https://www.lcut.co.uk/index.php?product=B 70-05&title=B 70-05

 

Pantmawr North is to 7mm scale (UK 0 Gauge).

 

On 18/11/2023 at 17:27, J. S. Bach said:

Thank you. I just ordered one. I already had one in OO (card kit) that I had planned to scan and enlarge, but this one makes the whole process simpler.

It arrived today. Now to learn how to put it together; I have never done a laser-cut wood kit before.

[Tony_S]

4 hours ago, TheQ said:

One thing to remember looking at real railways end on, is the loading gauge. The russian loading gauge is considerably larger than the UKs, giving the illusion of a smaller track gauge.

When I was looking end on at the Russian tracks I wasn’t really aware of the loading gauge. I was hoping the minibus driver wasn’t planning to stay too long on the level crossing.  

Edited November 27, 2023 by Tony_S

[Dave Hunt]

On 26/11/2023 at 20:48, AndyID said:

There seems to be a bit of an obsession with "true to scale gauge" but I happen to prefer the running gear, valve gear, cylinders, splashers, wheel faces, axle-boxes, running boards to be true to scale relative to the rest of the model.

 

But that is exactly what the "true to scale gauge" standards achieve. The bastardised OO/OF etc. standards result in splashers, wheel faces etc. being non-scale.

 

Dave 

[Dave Hunt]

On 26/11/2023 at 22:21, AndyID said:

One for Mr Hunt

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/travelscotlandgoals/permalink/7849955141698257/?mibextid=Nif5oz

 

Wonder why they're using obsolete Swedish Saab Draakens? Maybe the SNP are trying to set up their own air force?

 

Dave 

[J. S. Bach]

Night Owl from the Piedmont.