Scale names

| What I really want is a new scale name.

Call it "Jack Gauge." Who's going to argue?

CTucker NY

At 3/4 scale, you are in the live steam/narrow gauge and might call it by what ever the track gauge comes out to.

Check out any amusement park tra> Greetings! You will probably think I'm mad, but I wish to build a copy

There is also Japanese N-scale: 1/150.

Thanks, that's an idea. One problem is that it's not going to be on rails but will be towed around on a trailer by a car.

And Japanese HO - HOj, 1/80 scale on 16.5mm track.

Yes. Just change your proportion a hair and call it 2 foot narrow gauge. You're well into prototype sizes here!

I suspect the "HZ" is a different kind of "scale"... the standard tuning for music calls for the "A" below middle "C" to be 440 Hertz (Hz).

Much of the duplication of names/designations is due to trying to run trains that have different gauge standards in the real world on the same track in the model world. This results in the "similar but not the same" numbers. There actually is a sort of logic behind some of the names. The numbered gauges somewhat follow archaic practices:

List condensed:

Note: This is NOT properly "O" (the letter) gauge, but rather 0 (the number) gauge. Common usage though is to use the letter name.

I've never seen the "65" ratio range of usage for "OO/HO", but this follows the numbering system. "OO" actually being "00" or "Double naught" or "double aught", just like James Bond, and "HO" actually being "H0/Half 0" or "Half Aught/Half Naught",

N 150 (Japan)

The "N" is for "Neun" (German) or "Nine" (English) for "Nine Millimeter", the actual track gauge. This has some rather nice side effects for those modelling N scale in 1:160 - 10 feet is exactly 3/4 of an inch, and 1 mile is exactly 33 feet. (Now I can FINALLY remember how many feet in a mile! 160*33=5280!) "OOO", of course is actually "000", or "treble aught/three aught" in the numbering system.

Not a problem. You stated that it was going to be a mock-up.

Just call it 9" to the foot scale. :-)

Actually, if you choose the right prototype, you can probably build it full size. Real locomotives varied a lot in size. Well, cabs didn't vary that much, since people need about the same amount of room no matter how large or small the engine is.

Example: an O scale (1:48) narow gauge (2ft) steam locomotive may be smaller than an HO scale (1:87) standard gauge (4ft 8-1/2") locomotive. So if you want your loco to be about 3/4 full size, you should be able to find a full size loco that will fit your space perfectly. I presume you want to build it smaller so that it will fit your space.

Have fun!

At your size/scale, you're up in the size where it really doesn't matter. Call it 3/4 scale and be happy. I'll also note that at that size, you are in the full size region for prototype locos. There have been a lot of locos built to 3' and smaller gauges that were in real woring service for logging and mining and other construction jobs. Look at the locos that were used to build the Panama Canal for one.

-- Why isn't there an Ozone Hole at the NORTH Pole?

Wolf Kirchmeir wrote in news:SYe4e.4096$ snipped-for-privacy@news20.bellglobal.com:

Interesting observation which brings up another interesting observation. Have you ever noticed that British steam engines seemed to all have extraordinarily shallow cabs compared to American prototypes? Was it simply British custom to leave the engineer and firemen's backsides hanging out in the breeze? Is this a refelection of the social class mentality that had chauffeur's sitting out in the elements in open seats while the lords and ladies rode in enclosed comfort?

Nah, it's just that British penchant for fresh air, and like that. Not like them namby-pamby colonials! :-)

Look at the very first motorcars - no weather protection for anybody, whether built over there or over here, chauffeurs or no. And in the good ole US of A when cars begaan to be closed in, the owners got a roof over them before the chauffeurs did. Class is just as bad in the USA - worse, actually, because there nobody admits to it, so everybody _pretends_ to be the same class, and everybody knows it ain't so. Same in Canada.

Before there were covered cabs on locos, there was just "spectacle plates", flat sheet steel walls with a couple of round windows in them. I suppose they kept the rain out the drivers' eyes. NB also that for a long time British sports cars had no tops whatsoever - just windscreens. I watched an old Poirot (one of the ones with David Suchet), and Hastings' car is a lovely dark green Bentley open top two seater, with a minuscule windshield, barely enough to keep the rain off your face when travelling at speed. But it has a luxury touch: _three_ wipers!

Have fun!

Why do you need any name? If you were building a model ship, automobile, plane, etc you wouldn't use a name for the scale; you'd just call it 9" scale. That's 9" to the foot if I follow you.

You'll have trouble with all the "0"s. First they are zeros rather than the letter O, the more zeros there are, the smaller the scale so you'd be at a high number rather than a large quantity of zeros, and since the numbers indicated gauges they don't translate to scale very well. # 0 is 1.25" gauge # 1 is 1.75" gauge then I lose track you're up to 56.5" * .75 = 42" gauge.

have fun ron

I have the prototype already. It's a bit big for my trailer :) Here it is:

What an enormous headlight! Did it slow the car down much when it was turned on?

It's not a trolleycar, it's a steam locomotive - they were known in the US as a "dummy". The headlamps on these were originally oilburning, some were later converted to acetylene, and later again electricity.

Excellent choice!

Want some drawings of it? :-)

All the best,

Mark.

I have drawings, and the prototype is right here thanks :) I think the lamp is still oilburning.

I just want a name!

So I'll have a decimal point in front of the zeroes so that the ratio becomes smaller, like this: