Atlantic's works: Portable layout - Scenic details next

[Atlantic 3279]

Well, would you believe it, I've managed to put the beer glass down for long enough to build up another half dozen Appleby Frodingham ironstone hoppers over the break, as well as developing some useful ideas on track construction, specifically pointwork, maybe on couplings too. I've also reminded myself of which on-line environments are actually of any use for positive discussion of specific ideas. More about track may appear on here in due course.

In the meantime, Happy New Year to you all!

[Hatfield Shed]

'Twas a good effort on better OO RTR track. As I posted very early on, in my opinion it needs an 'outside disruptor' to enter the market.

Essentially a business - probably Chinese - intent on seizing Peco and other existing track supplier's market share outright. I have no doubt it could be done, as there is a large opportunity in offering much better technology, particularly to make track genuinely 'plug and play' with DCC and other potential control systems. Whether this technical possibility translates into a viable commercial opportunity, as compared to investing similar effort in another field: that is the question! That no such thing happened during the little boom in RTR OO model railway product we saw 2000 - 2010, rather indicates to me that it's a no hoper. Although I will be happy to be surprised.

A return of the wish for a happy and entertaining New Year. I look forward to your thoughts on couplings. I too am having thoughts on something more 3 link/screwlink like, but with the autocoupling performance of the Kadee as benchmark. (It is just thoughts though as pressing matters relating to care of elderly relatives must take priority.)

[LNER4479]

I've also reminded myself of which on-line environments are actually of any use for positive discussion of specific ideas. More about track may appear on here in due course.

Welcome back - the water's lovely and warm (compared to the Piranha pool you've come from).

I find 'the other place' great for the simple joy of sharing your modelling - but whenever a discussion starts turning into a heated debate then best retreat to a safe distance away. For reasons I find difficult to fathom, OO track seems to be one of the most contentious subjects.

[Atlantic 3279]

One idea I already have developing relates to a practical approach to realistic steam era OO pointwork, without spending a fortune on professionally built track, or C & L components plus a load of building time, or wasting months on anal discussion of the minutiae of blade and crossing geometry, or deliberately (for some reason that seems very trivial to me) making track that is doomed to look like narrow gauge. I'm currently inclined to believe that there's a low cost, low effort route to points with some usefully varied shapes, combining the point-bending philosophy that you've exploited on Grantham, parts from SMP plastic based "3 foot radius only" point kits, a bit of careful substitution of copperclad timbers in certain places, and a few home-brewed resin chair copies.
I won't get any further with this idea until I've visited Marcway in Sheffield in the mid January, but I am at least hopeful.......

[James Harrison]

One idea I already have developing relates to a practical approach to realistic steam era OO pointwork, without spending a fortune on professionally built track, or C & L components plus a load of building time, or wasting months on anal discussion of the minutiae of blade and crossing geometry, or deliberately (for some reason that seems very trivial to me) making track that is doomed to look like narrow gauge. I'm currently inclined to believe that there's a low cost, low effort route to points with some usefully varied shapes, combining the point-bending philosophy that you've exploited on Grantham, parts from SMP plastic based "3 foot radius only" point kits, a bit of careful substitution of copperclad timbers in certain places, and a few home-brewed resin chair copies.
I won't get any further with this idea until I've visited Marcway in Sheffield in the mid January, but I am at least hopeful.......

I'll be watching with interest; the discussion on the other place now resembles the course of a dreadnought with a broken rudder- large, slow and sadly pointless circles.

[60526]

Graeme, this is an abridged version of what I was going to write, I'm not sure if you are aware but for my sins I was once at the bottom of this pyramid trying to prop up DOGA and I made a mistake of issuing out track standards for consideration. Slight parallel there? Moving forward many years now, apart from your brilliant casting of trackwork etc I deliberately did not follow the topics on the dark side nor the ever ending diatribe on OOSF or whatever they want to call it these days. Suddenly all these experts come out of the woodwork, some you could work with, others you'd rather not work with, some behind the scenes have commercial aspirations for you to fail, others trying to tell you that 16.5mm isn't really the gauge, it's smaller than that, it's madness. Sleeper spacing and length can be numerous things in OO, but point clearances can only be standardised if the geometry matches the wheel parameters. One thing that came out of this years ago was in the adoption by the UK RTR manufacturers and Romford/Markits of RP25 wheels from the assortment we had then. The joke was that they had different back to back or if you prefer back to front dimensions. but that is all history now. Ok I'm associated with Borchester Market, this is a layout where the original concept was soldered copper clad trackwork built to a Frank Dyer standard that had a matching set of wheel standards to go with it, having access to a lathe certainly helped. It's even got gauge widening in OO. The whole concept was that it worked. The point I'm trying to make is, you’ve come along and decided like you have with your loco conversions to have a go yourself, your up for making some OO track and pointwork to your standard to match whatever wheels you are using, so why don't you just carry on developing your own system, if it is ok to you then just do it, you’re the one with the magic touch, there are more than a few sensible people on here who could give advise. Don’t worry I haven’t been drinking, did I renew you fan club membership, I can’t find the certificate?

[Atlantic 3279]

Very interesting input, many thanks, and Happy New Year. I've pretty much concluded that the best thing is simply to get on with my own ideas on track, as far as my own needs are concerned.

It now occurs to me that I missed out some vital information when I attempted to define the goals and limits of the pointwork thread I've since abandoned on the other channel. As well as specifying that it was to be about steam era pointwork, in 16.5mm OO gauge only, I should also have specified that it was to be about the kind of practical model track that could either be built by, or which might realistically be manufactured for railway modellers who have only reasonable budgets and who do NOT make track study / theory / construction their 24/7 obsessive interest, that the thread was NOT to include discussion / argument relating to the detailed theory and terminology of track / point geometry, nor was it to be used as a platform for showing off "ad nauseam" one's capabilities in CAD, 3D printing, Templot or graphic display/manipulation programmes!

We live and learn.....

[john coffin]

many years ago, I was reminded that Colman's Mustard made their profit, not from the Mustard they sold, but rather that that was left on the plate
after the meal.

The same seems to apply to any discussion about improving one's own modelling, too many people research, but very few undertake.

The important thing is Graeme that you have proved you have a mind that is open to innovation, and risk taking, but for historical reasons,
are "trapped" within the 00 demands, you have too much stuff,and too little time, to move to one of the "more prototypical" gauges, so you are wishing to do the best within those parameters, the fact that you are prepared to share is a bonus for those of us on the outside, because it offers a different
viewpoint on the subject. Frankly, the "PUBLIC" rarely can tell which gauge you model as soon as your rails reduce in size, and the trackwork has
larger radius curves, particularly if it is a big layout. If you have only the space for a small layout, with a little stock, then there is an argument for
moving up a gauge.

From memory, there are very few practical large 4mm travelling exhibitions so it is clearly diverting the attention of many people from enjoying their hobby, which surely is the point of what we are doing, aiming for FUN.

Offering others who feel less capable, the opportunity to improve their trackwork at a limited cost is a worthwhile aim, which does not deserve being treated as more than it really is, improving one's abilities.

Paul

[S.A.C. Martin]

Not seen the discussion in question but if it's where I think it is then I'm not entirely surprised.

Some very good advice there but may I add that it only ever seems to be practical and actual modellers who lose out on the discussion needed to talk through ideas and find solutions to problems. The ever present box openers and brown nosers seem to come out in force to stop all discussion of: here is a problem, here is my solution, what do you think and can it be improved?

I'm very interested in what you're doing with the track by the way Graeme. I agree with the cut of your jibe regarding a useable and satisfactory looking alternative to Peco's track. I think what you are doing with moulding and casting the chairs and sleepers is rather good and a good solution which seems to work for you. Without wishing to turn the discussion too commercial, this is the sort of project where you might find financial backing and support from a larger number of like minded modellers than you'd think. Particularly those like me who'd prefer to be working on the trains and scenery than the track and would happily compromise for a viable, better looking alternative to Peco.

It's worth putting the idea out there as you've got the right idea, done some test pieces, and shows it looks the part and works.

[deltico12]

Evening all. Regarding the discussion on OO gauge track and pointwork, DCC concepts have said a range of point kits will be launched by them this year. Has anyone thought about looking into this new product to see what it has to offer? The rail is supposedly going to be made of stainless steel that will not rust. Have we or have we not heard this one before? Will these kits be simple enough for any modeller no matter their ability or skill level to assemble I wonder? Comments please.Thanks.

[Atlantic 3279]

Anything "good" would be most welcome, if reasonably priced and arranged to suit modellers who may not have the length of a stadium in which to portray a scene. Stainless steel rail may not be the best idea since sliced bread. I know somebody who is no novice who found that soldering neatly to stainless steel rail is all but impossible.....

[john coffin]

Why would any sane man use Stainless Steel for something of this size and scale?

It is a b****** to join with solder or glue, due to many of its elements and the temperatures needed.

I can see that it is possible that it will be cheaper in this market than nickel or german silver, but really for someone to create proper electrical contact, let alone modify them. The Science does not seem to make sense. Also I would have thought the die to mould the shape would be pretty expensive and not particularly long lived, so would add to the cost quite dramatically.

Whilst there is the need for a "hobby" 00 gauge track with a finer scale appearance, but that means not offering it as HO too, but also making
points with a greater radius, to allow the locos to move in a more prototypical way, but there will be major cost implications if anyone is to stock it,
and how will it get to those who might want it unless they can see it operating?

I realise that for instance Retford might be a good public display site, but it does not reach that many people at anyone time. Even in the internet age,
almost every potential buyer will want to feel, touch and see in real life before they buy, which is the initial problem, but your work Greame could well be the initial answer, so good luck.

Paul

[teaky]

As a few people have mentioned DCC Concepts I thought I'd have a look at their website to see where things are up to. The following may duplicate what you already know but just in case...

The DCC Concepts track is already available in kit form. It uses stainless steel rail but the sleepers are fibreglass with "pre-tinned copper pads ready to solder to". There is no mention of electrical connection but it is possible they have thought of this and put pre-tinned pads in the appropriate places.

http://www.dccconcepts.com/catalogue/g/ ... king-parts

Prices are in Australian Dollars. The exchange rate is roughly $2=£1. I cannot see what the actual delivery cost would be. It looks like it is calculated for each order based on actual cost.

Gaugemaster also supply DCC Concepts track but at something of a price premium.

At present there are only sleeper bases and rails available, so as far as I can see they don't add anything to what is already available from the likes of C&L.

As someone who has never built track I find the idea daunting. Graeme's idea of modified Peco is much less scary. I gave up on following Graeme's thread on the other side fairly early on when it went off down the usual route and duplicated previous threads on track building.

[52D]

Hi I don't know if you have seen RM Feb 2015 page 62a, but there is an advert from Peco selling items for hand building track. if you don't have it I can scan the add for you.

[MikeTrice]

I am almost reluctant to put these up knowing the issues on t'other site. One of the considerations was to have a turnout to Peco geometry but with more UK style timbering. Just to prove a point (pun intended) I have knocked up a sample from copperclad and bullhead to give an idea of what it might look like (currently without chairs). I do not have samples of SMP, C&L or Exactoscale OO track to hand but I would be very surprised if these would not look right alongside it. Sample shown with Peco large radius point for comparison: