Narrow gauge scale kits

It uses OO mechanisms (unless you use 14mm gauge track) which are heavier and more reliable than their N gauge equivalents.

Wrightlines (Kay Butler):

"PC" wrote in news:cUNkj.232959$ snipped-for-privacy@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

Last year I started in earnest with 009 and it is at times a real PITA so much so that via home casting I've started to scratch build stock. The 009 society apparently supplies useful materials but you only get to buy them if you're a member. I mean for crying out loud, it's as though they don't want folks to model in their scale/gauge! And what a stupid, stupid, stupid business model!

As for other supplies with the exception of Nigel Lawton and Backwoods (both of who have a very good reputation) you have absolutely no idea what their products look like. Long lists with no images, then further long lists of what you need to buy elsewhere simply to finish their kit. It's absolute pants. "We supply body kits for such and such locomotive types ... but to get them to run you'll need some obsolete N gauge chassis made by a company now long out of business". Get effing real.

Anyway as I say I?ve taken a leaf out of Nigel?s book and now produce a range of 009 tubs, flats and wagons. All freelance in design and to be honest at this stage only fit for myself but it?s the only way I?ve been able to make any progress.

Your starting points would be:

Neil.

PC said the following on 20/01/2008 20:09:

If you're starting from scratch and have the space, go for for 5.5mm or

Whatever you do though, don't call your layout some pseudo-Welsh name. That novelty wore off 40 years ago :-)

Chris Wilson said the following on 20/01/2008 20:48:

One word - tax.

They probably take the view that this is a benefit of membership, and therefore an incentive for modellers in the scale/gauge to join. They're not alone, as I think other societies (2mm, 3mm, S ?) also only supply to their members (that statement being subject to corrections).

John

Chris,

The stupid business model would be to spend society funds developing products then allow any non-society member to purchase them. Members get to be the exclusive purchasers of the products because they effectively paid for the development with their subscriptions and they usually only pay for the costs of manufacture with little or no mark-up.

It is a business model that works well in a lot of other areas as well as model railways.

Jim.

Yes, tax is the a big reason. If the goods are just transferred within members of the club, then there is no taxation requirement to account for surpluses. And as its just re-arranging funds between club members, those surpluses are not *profits* and thus not liable for corporation tax. (I was once treasure of 2mm Scale Association, who have a similar policy).

The other reason is who paid for the research, sourcing and development of the items. It would be the members of the society. Putting those out at commercial terms changes the "club/business" from one of "helping the members" to "making a profit". That profit making would be on the back of years of development, so the difficulties in writing down investment costs becomes a huge headache. And most of the parts that small societies supply are completely uneconomic anyway (otherwise Bachmann or Mr Small-Bits-for-Model-Trade would be selling them). Being a commercial company is a huge step for a club, and one which most small volunteer run societies would not want to head down.

- Nigel

On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 07:51:41 +0000, Paul Boyd wrote

I still have an urge to build a 1970's 'retro-style' rabbit warren layout, set in a slate mine, with a pseudo-Welsh name.

I suspect it'll be a retirement project :-)

I saw a nice one years ago, built on four 4ft section IIRC. Pant-Ys-Gawn was its name, sir.

On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:04:20 +0000, Wolf K. wrote

Sadly a Google for that name only brings up references to an (admittedly very tasty) cheese.

Why don't you concoct an elaborate fictional history for your railway , then assemble a loco stud comprising Dolgoch and Earl of Merioneth looking exactly as they appeared on their own railways in the 1970's?

Andy

On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 19:37:03 +0000, Andy Kirkham wrote

I guess that, should I go the 'retro' route, that's what I'll have to do - along with the dreadful puns in the layout name.

The worst I remember was a 1970's rabbit warren with two stations - Aberbinear and Bayfore :-)

Rabbit warrens have indeed gone out of favour, but there seems to be a modern-day subversion of narrow gauge authenticity which I also find rather pernicious. It typically takes the form of a terminus which looks as if it has been set down on the village green at Lilliput Lane

Andy

On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:04:59 +0000, Andy Kirkham wrote

Excellent... Who needs to scratchbuild buildings when there's those little beauties :-)

If you want a slate quarry - were there any slate mines ? - with a difference why no go back a few years and set it in Leicestershire. At one time it was the slate capital of a very large area !

Cheers, Simon

I dint know that Lake district Cornwall and was it Mull in Scotland

On the assumption that a quarry is a pit open to the sky, while a mine is an underground working - yes. Most of the slate workings around Blaenau Ffestiniog were underground, as was Bryneglwys and those in the Corris area.

Andy

simon said the following on 21/01/2008 23:28:

Yes - many of the North Wales slate came from underground. See