Garden railways

"International" here means "outside the UK".

Heh heh.

Reply to
Wolf K.
Loading thread data ...

99% of the world is outside the UK. (on a population basis) Any scale that relates two dimensions in different measuring systems (feet and mm) is going to lack appeal to most of the world's population.

Regards, Greg.P.

Reply to
Greg Procter

There really isn't any such thing as "G Scale". There is "G Gauge", which happens to be the same as "I gauge" but the wheel standards are different in only marginally compatible. Yes, I know lots of people and manufacturers talk about "G Scale", but that's just ignorance of the difference between scale and gauge.

Regards, Greg.P. (PS I know "G Scale" is claimed to be 1:22.5 on 45mm gauge track representing metre gauge, but LGB began with "Stainz" which is 760mm gauge which gives a scale of about 1:17)

Reply to
Greg Procter

1:32 is a good round scale - it works for metric or imperial measurements. It also matches fairly well with the gauge. It is also the accepted scale in Europe, where I scale is reasonably catered to.
Reply to
Greg Procter

Of course 99% of British outline models are sold in the UK, they are the wrong scale to go with the collections of the rest of the world! European modellers in particular like to buy models of a variety of nations' prototypes, but there is almost nothing on the market from Britain.

Real standards - "You're going to model 4'6" gauge or nothing in I scale." "You're going to model 4'6 1/2" gauge in O Scale." "You're going to model 4'1 1/2" gauge in OO Scale!" "You're going to model 4' gauge in TT3 Scale!" etc

Greg.P.

Reply to
Greg Procter

But since British outline models are 99% sold in the UK, who cares - as long they all stick to 10mm (which, for "indoor" models, they all do). Plus, of course, the Gauge One Model Railway Association set the real standards back in 1947 ;-)

Cheers Richard

Reply to
beamendsltd

I note there is little availability of British locos in G scale/gauge (whatever correct term is). What is the availability like for ready to run British locos (particularly steam) in Gauge 1?

Reply to
Brian Whitehead

Tell that to the S7 boys! (and girls, of course). Or select from about 20 "standards", plus manufacturers whims.....

Tell that to the P4 boys! (and girls, of course)

Ditton the TT brigade.... 2mm Group etc etc

The trouble is, none of these "standards" *are* standards, they are just specifications made up by various groups without consultation with other groups and/or manuafctuers.

Like it or not, if ones choice is ready-to-run UK outline models then your choice of "standard" is effectively defined by Peco, and if you wish to be really accurate then P4, S7 etc set the standard, with points in between - EM, GOG-C, GOG-F, 0-FS etc etc. Some body setting itself up as a self-appointed standards authority is utterly pointless, and just confuses things even further, unless they have everybody on board. As no one has, then de facto standards rule the day.

As a punter modeling in 0, I just want to buy stuff that will work, and while I make my own track etc I don't want to go S7 for practical reasons (availablilty of kits with wheels included mostly), so I've gone for 0-FS, the next best thing. And that is effectively defined by Slaters, as their wheels have become the benchmark! When I was looking at Gauge 1, I'd have had to go 10mm as that's what's available for UK outline.

Were I wanting to model European, US or Japanese practice, I'd select other "standards" as appropriate - the Japanese having own flavour of HO, for example.

Cheers Richard

Reply to
beamendsltd

[...]
[...]

It was just such a mess of standards that prompted the formation of the NMRA just prior to WW2 (1936 IIRC). Many of the 30-some people who organised the NMRA gave up their standards in order to achieve two goals:

a) interoperability (called "interchange" by the NMRA), so that people could bring their NMRA-standard models to each other's layouts and operate them together; and b) common manufacturing standards so that parts from different manufacturers could be combined with a minimum of fuss.

They have achieved both, and continue to do so: the most widely used DCC standard is the one set by the NMRA. In fact, the de facto DCC standard includes NMRA recommended practices, too. Manufacturers have learned that the solid base of their business is the serious model railroader, not the trainset buyer. The latter have of course benefitted, since they can use all or most of a trainset when the bug bites.

The problem in Britain as I see it that there is an unwillingness by too many people to give up their "correct" specifications, coupled with an unwillingness to "waste all that good work", in order to change to some common standard. The result is a fragmented, fractured model railway scene, with the majority of _operators_ using thje de facto commercial standards, and a majority of _model builders_ using one or another of the oddball varieties.

BTW, the NMRA is reworking its standards in light of manufacturers' misreading of some of the specs, and is developing fine scale standards, too. Also, the DCC standard is being enlarged to accommodate the increased functionality of decoders.

Reply to
Wolf K.

Everyone, manufacturers and users, have far too much invested over the years to change - it's never going to happen. The NMRA never consulted outside the US as far as I can see, and as such is pretty much irrelevant to us over here (except DCC).

Why on earth are they developing new standards for fine scale? That's been well and truly covered already - more standards will just create even more problems! With P4 being as near prototype as possible, and S7 being exactly prototype they can hardy be improved upon[1]. I would imagine the 2mm and 3mm boys (and girls) have got those scales pretty well covered too.

Cheers Richard

[1] obvisouly we're talking UK prototype here.
Reply to
beamendsltd

Actually 'Gauge and Scale' are a little misleading since one can get many of the live steam engines in 32 or 45mm gauge. A number of the Accucraft engines are now sold out, but new ones are coming along. I was given a nice present for my birthday and xmas which is a 1:20.3 scale and 45mm gauge live steam engine and I'm saving up for some 20.3 scale carriages. These match the 3ft gauge Manx railway rather than main line stuff.

Some of the larger gauge 1 models do come in with rather a large price tag, so the Narrow gauge models are a reasonable compromise.

Reply to
Lester Caine

Wolf,

Britain did have the BRMSB - the British Railway Modelling Standards Bureau - which came into being just after WW2 and ceased to exist some years ago (I can't remember exactly when at the moment). But it did establish sets of standards for the popular scales in the UK although many would argue that these standards were not very good. This encouraged modellers to explore better standards which has given rise to the plethora of scale/gauge standards that we have now Also British proprietary manufacturers were renowned for sticking to their own standards which were incompatible with everything else. I think Graham Farish was the only one to use the BRMSB standards in their 4mm models. It's only in the past few years that proprietary wheel standards have got close to NMRA or the old BRMSB standards.

But looking on the bright side, it would be terribly boring if we all used the same track and wheel standards ;-)

Jim.

Reply to
Jim Guthrie

Bear in mind that "G" is a minority gauge. The major players in the RTR market are LGB and Bachmann with a few other smaller US brands. Beyond that comes the "cottage industries", an area where there appear to be numerous British firms. Generally the British models are labelled "16mm" representing 2' gauge on 32mm and 45mm gauge.

Reply to
Greg Procter

[...]

That was the argument back in 1936, too....

Of course they didn't consult outside the USA. Why should they? But what they did shows what can be done when people get together to solve a problem, instead of arguing endlessly about whose specs are purer.

Because the finescale modellers want one. IOW, there are people who model finescale and want to be sure that they will be able to operate their scratchbuilt locos etc on their friends' layouts, and vice versa.

Anyhow, the standards won't be new, they will be based on existing practice, and will be put to a vote. If adopted, then any product that describes itself as "finescale" will be expected to conform to those standards. If it doesn't, it won't gain much if any acceptance.

I don't think you fully realise that the NMRA is an organisation of modellers. What it does is membership driven. The effort to extend DCC standards (and RPs) has come about because the membership wants it. The fact that NMRA DCC standards and RPs have become a de facto worldwide standard is the result of early adoption by the US market. Manufacturers naturally saw no point in changing the specs when they added DCC in other markets.

These UK specs/standards did inspire the finescale movement here. I expect that the NMRA standard will be essentially the same, allowing for differences in scale.

Cheers.

Reply to
Wolf K.

Yes, attempts to create captive markets. Didn't work very well, almost destroyed Hornby and Triang/Hornby. Is doing in Maerklin. Did in Lionel and American Flyer, which were eventually resurrected by investors with loadsadough and a massive case of nostalgia.

No, it would be delightful. We could have fun operating our models on each other's layouts. Really! :-)

HTH

Reply to
Wolf K.

So? Does that make it any less valid? Perhaps the NRMA should change? Obviouskly thet won't, for exactly the same reasons.

It was done here too - looking at the huge range of "standards" on US it hasn't execlty resolved much - e.g. Aster havingtheir own private scale!

So just adopt existing standards. There's no point in re-inventing the wheel!

Calling any new standard "finescale" is not a good idea - there are already "finsecale" for all gauges under Gauge 1 (amd sometimes more than one, thought the are differentiated, e.g. 0-FS and GOG-Fine).

I'm fully aware of what it is, and the DCC status. However, you do keep assuming on posts to this groyp that all NMRA standards are applicable world-wide, and that is simply not true. Their standards ignore other world-wide de facto standards (e.g. Peco, Hornby). While all may be wonderful for in the US for manufactuers, UK outline models world-wide have their own very long established standards for both coarse and fine scale, ignoring those standards is not sensible, and would be commercial suicide for any UK outline manufactuer (as Jouef, Trix and Lima found out when they tried to push HO UK outline models here in the 70/80's).

Cheers Richard

Reply to
beamendsltd

...and is even more relevant today than it was back then!

Unless one consults in *all* the markets were such goods are made and sold how does one obtain international agreements and standards - or are you implying that because the US based NMRA decided to unilaterally draw up some standards all other countries around the world should do as they say, how frecking arrogant!

They have them...

IOW, there are people who

They can if they abide by the current standards!

They WILL me new is they are new standards, if they are going to use old standards why bother drawing up existing standards again?! Duh...

and will be put to a vote. If adopted, then any product that

They already are FFS, how many times have you go to be told this?

But that was a wholly new product, meaning one world wide standard could be adopted and it would have been stupid not to use the research that had already been done. The same is not true for existing technologies.

Reply to
:Jerry:

There are also 'finescale' standards in gauges *above* Gauge 1, up to

12 inch gauge, above that one is into 'real railways'.

Or in the case of Trix, who tried to push their own new standard that sat halfway between HO and OO, IIRC something like 3.7mm = 12 inches.

Reply to
:Jerry:

Hi Richard,

I accept all you say - however, there is an international standard/standards for HO. They all run together and although I mostly model old-time German I always end up with a US model or two, something French, Italian ... and a few bits of British. OO is no use to me because it is a different scale, so I have to collect the odd bits of British HO that have appeared on the market over the last 30 years and a few scratch built items. If you Brits went with HO then you'd have a bigger market as many collectors would buy. Remember, the UK is about 1% of the World's population so the other 99% might well buy as much again as Britain absorbs - double the market - double the models available :-)

Greg.P.

Reply to
Greg Procter

I'm convinced there is room for "everyday standards" and "finescale standards" for each scale. For my garden railway there is no way I would consider "prototype" standards and I don't think they are practical for "trainset/toy/beginners" On the other hand the NMRA showed that much finer standards than most proprietry manufacturers were producing were practical at the "rough end" of the market. Correct scale to gauge ratio is the logical way to go - the resulting compromises are IMHO preferable to having track spacing vs gauge compromises.

Given that there are three distinct major markets at present (Europe, Britain and the USA), it would make sense for all three groups to adopt the best of the others standards. (IMO generally the NMRA) Of course the NMRA has retreated to those silly, non-standard, Imperial measurements which make it impractical for others to follow

Regards, Greg.P.

Reply to
Greg Procter

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.