How realistic are your models? Photo challenge.

[mullie]

It might be a bit cheesy to post black and white photos but I hope these are worthy. They were taken with a Windows phone and simply desaturated, no trickery. The whole layout is only about  5X1. I hope to gain some exhibition experience with the layout although not belonging to a club makes it more of a challenge to get the layout out there.

 

Layout is set in West London, immediately post steam and is still in the building process. I do like a bit of urban decay!

 

 

Edited July 17, 2015 by mullie

[gwrrob]

GWR period Brent in the summer of '47.

 

[Killybegs]

[gwrrob]

A C54 all third corridor composite sits alone in the siding at Tigley Junction.

 

[gwrrob]

A small prairie 4540 arrives at Brent in the summer of 1947 with its single coach in tow.The glorious South Hams has never looked so beautiful.

 

 

[jessy1692]

Harrogate Gas Works Spencer leaving Bilton with another load of coal for New Park Gas Works

Edited July 19, 2015 by jessy1692

[john flann]

 

                                                         HIntock c1937

[Killybegs]

Ex GWR Large Prairie 5173 crosses the Worcester & Birmingham Canal with an empty stock working in the summer of 1959.

 

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Some wonderful modelling, very inspirational in fact, thanks for Posting, it keeps me inspired!

 

One observation - with the smaller scales - how many of you have thought of using SMP track instead of the standard HO types?

[john flann]

First, thanks gentlemen for your like of my previous Hintock post. That scene is no more as the water tank is in a new location and not so scenic. But it's more practical.

 

Second, CME so far asyour comment is directed to me the reasons for using Atlas,HO code 100 track is that I am resident in the USA and  a sight and appreciation of any  qualities of SMP track or other type beyond Peco is not available to me. More to the point importing any form of track from  the UK is, to my pocket, prohibitively costly. Whatever I let the results speak for themselves, as below and with which I am entirely satisfied.

 

Judging by the lack of other comment on my Hintock thread I think most other viewers are too.

 

Technical hitch: failure to post the required image. I'll get it sorted.

[john flann]

 

This is the sharper image that had gone missing. Again, a right click improves the images clarity.

Edited July 22, 2015 by john flann

[class"66"]

Banks road (Modern image) class 37s passing through the railway cutting...

[Aberbrothock]

Re replacing track with Scaleway,etc., when you've spent years laying and ballasting about 150 yards of Peco Streamline track, you're not inclined to rip it all up and start again...........

The bulk of my points/turnouts are bullhead on pcb sleepers, so they're OK, I think.

 

The general effect is what we aim to please ourselves and others with, so here's a shot of my interpretation of Arbroath North 'box and part of the main goods yard set about 1960, not yet finished, but still quite evocative of that era.

 

 

I also like the way you can see through the steps on the footbridge to see the supporting framework.

 

 

[CME and Bottlewasher]

First, thanks gentlemen for your like of my previous Hintock post. That scene is no more as the water tank is in a new location and not so scenic. But it's more practical.

 

Second, CME so far asyour comment is directed to me the reasons for using Atlas,HO code 100 track is that I am resident in the USA and  a sight and appreciation of any  qualities of SMP track or other type beyond Peco is not available to me. More to the point importing any form of track from  the UK is, to my pocket, prohibitively costly. Whatever I let the results speak for themselves, as below and with which I am entirely satisfied.

 

Judging by the lack of other comment on my Hintock thread I think most other viewers are too.

 

Technical hitch: failure to post the required image. I'll get it sorted.

Nice work BTW.

 

I empathise, importing and exporting items is costly, so much for 'free-trade' between to English speaking countries.

 

I think that '00' SMP track by and large looks the part, if one isnt concerned about the issue of the number of chair-bolts relative to the pre-nationalisation company concerned - I also like the way that Andy York et al have tweaked and modified Peco et al 'HO' track to look more British outline (ie sleeper spacing) - also, even if not tweaked, clever weathering can hide the sleeper spacing issues etc. The Tillig points range look ripe for some Anglicisation - not sure if they are available state-side though. 

 

Re replacing track with Scaleway,etc., when you've spent years laying and ballasting about 150 yards of Peco Streamline track, you're not inclined to rip it all up and start again...........

The bulk of my points/turnouts are bullhead on pcb sleepers, so they're OK, I think.

 

The general effect is what we aim to please ourselves and others with, so here's a shot of my interpretation of Arbroath North 'box and part of the main goods yard set about 1960, not yet finished, but still quite evocative of that era.

 

Main box and yard 2.jpg

 

I also like the way you can see through the steps on the footbridge to see the supporting framework.

Again, nice work.

 

I wouldnt suggest that ripping up a layout is a good idea - especially if the layout is enjoyed and brings pleasure.

 

My question was merely, as a modeller of the larger scales, observational, in terms of the wonderful quality of buildings, locos, stock etc. now being manufactured, fettled and weathered in '00', if starting a new layout then, '00' SMP track, perhaps, with Tillig switches and crossings may be an easy route to scale looking trackwork - if one doesnt wish to build track that is.

 

PCB - although without 'chairs' is a good strong alternative and looks nice with the prototypical sleeper-spacings.

 

ATVB to one and all,

 

CME

[Aberbrothock]

Nice work BTW.

 

I empathise, importing and exporting items is costly, so much for 'free-trade' between to English speaking countries.

 

I think that '00' SMP track by and large looks the part, if one isnt concerned about the issue of the number of chair-bolts relative to the pre-nationalisation company concerned - I also like the way that Andy York et al have tweaked and modified Peco et al 'HO' track to look more British outline (ie sleeper spacing) - also, even if not tweaked, clever weathering can hide the sleeper spacing issues etc. The Tillig points range look ripe for some Anglicisation - not sure if they are available state-side though. 

 

Again, nice work.

 

I wouldnt suggest that ripping up a layout is a good idea - especially if the layout is enjoyed and brings pleasure.

 

My question was merely, as a modeller of the larger scales, observational, in terms of the wonderful quality of buildings, locos, stock etc. now being manufactured, fettled and weathered in '00', if starting a new layout then, '00' SMP track, perhaps, with Tillig switches and crossings may be an easy route to scale looking trackwork - if one doesnt wish to build track that is.

 

PCB - although without 'chairs' is a good strong alternative and looks nice with the prototypical sleeper-spacings.

 

ATVB to one and all,

 

CME

It's always struck me as odd, to say the least that Peco introduced their code 75 track, which must have involved expensive tooling up and left the sleeper size and spacing basically the as the older code 100.

If us modellers can open up the sleeper spacing, then could this not have been done as part of the manufacturing process, as "the finescale, longer look," doesn't really do the business....

I'll now get hauled over the coals by Peco for subversion!

[CME and Bottlewasher]

It's always struck me as odd, to say the least that Peco introduced their code 75 track, which must have involved expensive tooling up and left the sleeper size and spacing basically the as the older code 100.

If us modellers can open up the sleeper spacing, then could this not have been done as part of the manufacturing process, as "the finescale, longer look," doesn't really do the business....

I'll now get hauled over the coals by Peco for subversion!

I know what you mean - they will have us under observation LOL!

 

In terms of HO/OO track the markets are much bigger than British outline, for whichever manufacturer makes the stuff, yet I would have thought that there was a big enough market now for decent 'OO' RTL flexi track for the British Outline market - when I have seen, eg. SMP's version on a layout it is hard to tell, at a glance, if its EM, P4 or not, when it's 'OO' as we are all so used to looking at Hornby or Peco 'OO' track.

 

The likes of Stoke Summit et al. really pushed the boundaries of realism, using just (not my judgement or emphasis) 'OO' - even if the track was hand-made - Stoke Summit has appeared in MRJ.

 

As mentioned it isnt just sleeper spacing, its sleeper length too - yet widening the gap as Andy York and skilled modellers such as Marc Smith have done, does help visually.

 

The standard of locos, rolling stock, buildings et al. has improved beyond measure over the recent years, yet the RTL track has hardly improved in the past 20-30 years - or more.

 

ATVB

 

CME

Edited July 23, 2015 by CME and Bottlewasher

[Mark Forrest]

Without wishing to detract in any way from the excellent modelling in this thread, I'd agree that it's certainly true that the first thing to leap out and shout "model!" is more often than not the track.

[PaternosterRow]

Couple of more Station pics.  

 

 

A second hand A4 'Seagull'  picked up minus a front buffer from Hattons.  Now rectified with additional lamps.

 

 

Class 26.  Somewhere in Scotland maybe?  The station was made to accommodate my across many era and livery RTR collection so that's why there is no signage to pin it down to anywhere etc.

 

Agree about sleeper spacing in Code 75 - I tried to cut them out once and completely hashed it all up.  So I've just put up with it since.

[john flann]

This is all very interesting about "track". Long ago I experimented wit opening up the sleeper spacing and used both Firmway and Chairway (?) track. However I reverted to Peco and was satisfied with that. Today I'm happy with what I now have, code 100, Peco points and HO Atlas track.

 

What I get it is what I want and that is trouble free and reliable running. As to appearance I don't see (says he looking through to some, no doubt, my rose coloured glasses) much wrong with my results.

[Mark Forrest]

To some extent it's a necessary compromise that comes with running 1:76 trains on 1:87 track. Use scale width and spaced sleepers and they can look odd relative to the track gauge. At least with Peco (etc) all the track is in one scale and the everything else is in the other.

[Andy Reichert]

First, thanks gentlemen for your like of my previous Hintock post. That scene is no more as the water tank is in a new location and not so scenic. But it's more practical.

 

Second, CME so far asyour comment is directed to me the reasons for using Atlas,HO code 100 track is that I am resident in the USA and  a sight and appreciation of any  qualities of SMP track or other type beyond Peco is not available to me. More to the point importing any form of track from  the UK is, to my pocket, prohibitively costly. Whatever I let the results speak for themselves, as below and with which I am entirely satisfied.

 

Judging by the lack of other comment on my Hintock thread I think most other viewers are too.

 

Technical hitch: failure to post the required image. I'll get it sorted.

 

This is in the US.

 

http://www.proto87.com/4mm-00-turnouts-track.html

 

Andy

[BoD]

Discussions about different scales/gauges/standards/track etc etc. have been done to death elsewhere and often.

 

I visit this topic to see the photographs of excellent models and just accept that in some the track will never look like the real thing. I can put up with that for the sake of this topic.

[Mark Forrest]

Discussions about different scales/gauges/standards/track etc etc. have been done to death elsewhere and often.

 

Maybe so and I was reluctant to mention it for that very reason, but what's the point of a "how realistic" thread if constructive criticism of how a scene could be made more realistic isn't offered up?

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Without wishing to detract in any way from the excellent modelling in this thread, I'd agree that it's certainly true that the first thing to leap out and shout "model!" is more often than not the track.

I agree entirely.

 

Couple of more Station pics.  

 

P1060108 - Copy (FILEminimizer).JPG

 

A second hand A4 'Seagull'  picked up minus a front buffer from Hattons.  Now rectified with additional lamps.

 

P1060483 (FILEminimizer).JPG

 

Class 26.  Somewhere in Scotland maybe?  The station was made to accommodate my across many era and livery RTR collection so that's why there is no signage to pin it down to anywhere etc.

 

Agree about sleeper spacing in Code 75 - I tried to cut them out once and completely hashed it all up.  So I've just put up with it since.

Wonderful work - could you show us how you have achieved the photo-and/or trainshed please.

 

This is all very interesting about "track". Long ago I experimented wit opening up the sleeper spacing and used both Firmway and Chairway (?) track. However I reverted to Peco and was satisfied with that. Today I'm happy with what I now have, code 100, Peco points and HO Atlas track.

 

What I get it is what I want and that is trouble free and reliable running. As to appearance I don't see (says he looking through to some, no doubt, my rose coloured glasses) much wrong with my results.

Its in the eye of the beholder, as long as you are happy thats all that matters.

 

To some extent it's a necessary compromise that comes with running 1:76 trains on 1:87 track. Use scale width and spaced sleepers and they can look odd relative to the track gauge. At least with Peco (etc) all the track is in one scale and the everything else is in the other.

That's true, however even if the track is a 'fudge' (to quote Tony Wright et al) with eg. SMP 'OO' (sic) track then such still often looks better - does it not?

 

Discussions about different scales/gauges/standards/track etc etc. have been done to death elsewhere and often.

 

I visit this topic to see the photographs of excellent models and just accept that in some the track will never look like the real thing. I can put up with that for the sake of this topic.

Up to a point - the thread is indeed photographic and that's part of its appeal (thanks Martin for starting it) - yet it's entitled 'How realistic are your models'. I was, as in effect, an outsider, merely musing over the realism of 'OO' track relative to the wonderful models of buildings and rolling stock.

 

Maybe so and I was reluctant to mention it for that very reason, but what's the point of a "how realistic" thread if constructive criticism of how a scene could be made more realistic isn't offered up?

I agree, I prefer the, somewhat incorrect term, of critique and as I say I was musing, as an outsider, what others thought on the matter as the standard of modelling is so high, yet RTL track is, in effect, not correct for British outline models.

 

Back on topic now and thanks, one and all, for your comments.

 

ATVB

 

CME

[37114]

45132 pulls away through the Bristol suburbs in the early evening: