Garden railways

Loading thread data ...
In message , Greg Procter writes
Actually, as I've been trying to say, there goes the worldwide model industry! ;-)
Reply to
Jane Sullivan
Hi Jane, I have no problems with your or other people's comptromises, so long as you/they don't insist I accept them for my own layout. Personally, I have a problem mixing scales on _my_ layouts - I keep my 1:87 and 1:24 scales quite separate. I cringe at 1:64 scale Matchbox toys mixed with 1:120 Matchbox toys on a layout and have done since I was about 10 years old. It also bothers me to see OO and HO together. My threshold appears to be around 5% in scale difference. For example, Fleischmann used to produce 1:82 scale where the likes of Roco produced 1:87 scale, or just over 5% difference. Rivarossi produced 1:80 at the same time. I still have very few Italian wagons in my collection, even though there should be a significant number, because there aren't any produced. A few old Fln models made it in to my roster but have slowly been replaced by newer models because they always niggled me. I'd love a Deans Goods 0-6-0, given that several stayed in Europe after WWI, but an OO one would look silly in my eyes. Having a Russian or British or French or out of era loco available to run doesn't bother me - I'm simply comparing different ways of achieving railways. Running out of scale models does bother me - it's a personal thing, and I know I'm not alone in that.
Regards, Greg.P.
Reply to
Greg Procter
Say that to those who model in such 'scales' (not the inverted comers) as P4 or S7...
Nothing, and that is exactly why we don't need to reinvent the wheel.
Reply to
:Jerry:
No, not at all, those who wish to model to as close to exact as possible will do so in P4. You simply can't find a clue or you're just trolling - so what are you, and clueless cretin or a clueless troll?...
I was pointing out that no one needs to reinvent the wheel so do what you keep suggesting vast numbers of people want to do what they already can.
Reply to
:Jerry:
Perhaps I'll go back to model aeroplanes! =8^)
Right now I'm taking a soggy brain break from CAD designing model kits for production, so I'm well aware of the compromises involved in "scale" models. My aim is to make the models as close to scale reproductions while making them suitable for model railway operation as well as suitable for production with the equipment I have available to me. Some of those compromises, such as wheel standards and clearances add together to cause obvious distortions from scale, while others such as couplings blow the whole appearance, but generally I aim at prototypical appearance. Narrowing the gauge by 12% (18.83>16.5) would blow the whole design!
Regards, Greg.P.
Reply to
Greg Procter
Trolling? Well, yes. =8^)> I realize that this discussion won't lead anywhere because the UK scale is 4mm:1ft. I've nothing against people doing ridiculous things so long as they recognise that they are.
Sure, and I'm pointing out that the UK model railway industry has painted itself into a corner, just as it did in the 1960s with Hornby Dublo/Trix/Tri-ang/mettatoy(?). The outcome of that situation was that all four comercial companies folded. It's easy to imagine that your way of modelling is the way everyone models. (I can say that because I've been there, done that) However, the model market is divided into (at least) three groups: - toy train operators. - scale modellers. - collectors.
Of the firms from the 1960s, only Tri-ang survived, with new owners but with the same products. That suggests to me that the first group is the biggest or most influential Judging by the present UK markets, with models that look superb but often won't survive real and long-term operating, the "collectors" are the second biggest group. That leaves you in the third or least popular group.
Reading manufacturers interviews in the model mags and perusing their catalogues, the logic behined their choices of models seems to be along the lines of: we need a big express loco, a smaller express loco, a small tank loco, a bigger tank loco, a medium goods loco ... not, we need an LMS + GWR + LMS + SR + BR heavy Goods locos. When modellers demand a specific type of loco the manufacturers appear to consider it in terms of their current range, because a seconf small tank loco might well take sales away from their current offerings. An L&YR 2-4-2T isn't a likely candidate if they already offer a GWR 2-4-2T but it might be if their competitor already has the GWR 2-4-2T.
Greg.P.
Reply to
Greg Procter
Hey, I'm a potential customer of British HO! I currently own the Fleischmann D800 and upgraded Lima locos, a couple of scratch built L&Y locos, four trains of coaches and around 50 goods wagons. Many of my wagons are scratch-built or based on Lima bits. I'd buy and own more if there were any HO manufacturers.
Regards, Greg.P.
Reply to
Greg Procter
If were likely to see more of such combinations if the UK changed to HO then theres an excellent reason for sticking to OO.
:-) cheers, Simon
Reply to
simon
I agree with Jerry completely on this. Must remember that you need a minimum number of models that would be seen together in terms of time and space before you can have a layout[1]. Consequently before I could consider dumping my 40 or so OO locos and purchasing HO then there must be sufficient models of LMS trains in 1935 livery and would have to be convinced the manufacturer(s) are going to continue supporting the new scale. This means until there is a critical mass of products the manufacturer isnt going to get any of my cash and theres probably a few other modellers that think the same.
Going to be a brave an rich manufacturer that sets off on that course knowing that me and a few others wont be interested for the first 10 years.
Cheers, Simon
[1] Do try to avoid the points about 'its my layout etc. They are correct but not relevent in this thread.
it seemed the
Reply to
simon
Glade to know that you know that you are being ridiculous, what do you not understand about the that there is no problem in the UK, those who want to model in P4 or EM can do so and still use 99pc of a RTR model if they so with, those who wish to model in 00 can do so, those who just want to play trains whilst mixing and matching their collection can do so - even to the extent that Bern loading gauge stock will fit through 4mm = 1ft bridges and tunnels etc.
Not because they sold 4mm = 1ft models though, Hornby-Doubo folded due to production costs and sticking with outmoded *technology* (3-rail), Trix folded in the UK because they tried - more or less - what you are suggesting, Tri-ang and Triang-Hornby folded due to their parent companies (ROVEX) failings - indeed their model/toy train business was still trading and as sold very quickly by the administrators, as for the last am not sure if you mean Playmobil or Palitoy (TA Mainline model railways) - the latter failed again due to the parent company and not due to the model railway division, indeed many of the models live on, although some have been retooled. To complete the picture, Airfix Model Railways (later called GMR) folded due to the failings of the parent company, again many of their 4mm model railway items live on in either the ranges of Bachmann or Hornby.
The UK model industry has never been so health as it is now!
As I keep saying, you really don't understand the UK model railway market... :~(
Reply to
:Jerry:
Those British products no longer exist.
The UK industry now barely exists! What you have is UK marketting divisions of Chinese manufacturers.
Sure, but I'm left wondering what it is that differs from the rest of the world, and also why it is that you think you can continue with such an oddity as OO when the rest of the world uses HO. It's as if you Brits carried on with Sinclair computers and BASIC when the rest of the World went IBM and Windows.
Reply to
Greg Procter

Site Timeline

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.