Some Model Railway Questions... but Any Answers?
The pros and Cons of Proto87 (US) vs. Scale7 (UK)
This is an oddball blog entry from me, but the subject frequently emerges from the back of my mind when I'm struggling with photography... and I dabble in the hobby of scale model railways to relieve the frustration. As I said in yesterday's blog... I find the preparation and cooking of food more enjoyable that the eating... it gives me more to do. And so it is when constructing a scale model from hundreds of small pieces. But I sometimes think about what I will do with my box of toys. The obvious answer is to build a layout... but then more questions arise... such as trying US modelling for a change... so I've jotted down today's thoughts to help find a solution and perhaps elicit ideas from others...
How much space?
The BIG question... my major limitation is that I have no space for a permanent layout. Whatever I build will have to be transported to other locations (assuming I want to keep my hobby investment)... so the best idea would be to construct either a micro layout, a shunting puzzle, or a "modular diorama" which could be added to if operation is desired at a later stage.
But of where? The length and width of US freight cars compared with UK goods wagons is a major consideration... the typical length of a period 40' US freight car scales out to 5.5 inches, whereas a 16' UK goods wagon is 4.5 inches... the widths being 1.25 and 2 inches respectively. So US Proto87 (exact scale 1:87 on 16.5mm track) freight cars at half the actual modelled scale are not actually half the size of UK Scale7 (exact scale 1:43.5 on 33mm gauge) wagons... longer, though narrower, which would reduce the front-to-back depth of a comparable layout by around 40%.
Cost...
Costs are about equal from reading various comments in UK magazines and on internet forums written by modellers who have switched scales. However, for the same overall size layout much more Proto87 stock is needed compared to Scale7. Westerfield HO-scale (US) 40' freight cars, which are of the highest quality, are about the same price as Slaters S7 (UK) 16' wagons. But, US track work and cars have to be shipped from the USA and could have French import duties imposed so adding to the overall cost.
Starting from scratch with P87 featuring the Pennsylvania Railroad would involve a lot of cost... and selling all my GWR stock on eBay could be a big loss... having spent much time and money building UK S7 GWR kits the past's efforts would have gone for nothing! Plus, my "weathered" stock (see GWR Cattle Wagon above) would sell for a lot less than pristine "out-of-the-box" models that most modellers favour.
There again, in the Slaters catalogue a S7 50' SR/BR Parcels Utility Van (scaling out to 14 inches long) costs just over £100... or $180 plus postage in both cases. To "fill" the same length of track in P87 would take x2.5 40' cars which from Westerfield at a cost of, say, $100. Hmmm... S7 does look expensive.
Track work...
Super detailing is now available in both scales... but extra point rodding is much more lifelike, easier to construct and actually workable in S7. Points (switches) look great from any viewing distance. I really enjoy building 0-scale track work... steel rail is very nice, there are excellent C&L Finescale chairs and other details for bullhead rail, soldering is enjoyable, so making S7 track is all possible for my skills, hands, eyes and patience.
P87 track work is also superb if utilising products from Andy Reichert at the The Proto87 Stores... but is all the detail too small to see from a distance of three feet?
If adopting P87 (16.5mm gauge) I could, at a later stage, also run Sn30 (US), HO (UK) and HO (European outline) with changes of structures and backdrops. OK, track in the UK is bullhead but flat-bottom in the all other areas, but a snow covered scene would mask the details (not really desirable because I like track and the details so much). Is this possibility confusing my options and leading me down too many paths... best to concentrate on one "theme" and put all energy into that. Also, P87 track work for multi-gauge use would have to be spaced further apart to accommodate wider larger-scale stock... so there would be little saving in layout depth.
Already got...
Around 20 wagons mostly built from Slaters kits (a few to begin) but still in need of extra detailing and alteration of paint livery to GWR (last period pre-1948).
Needed in S7...
A locomotive, obviously... and having kept an unbuilt GWR Pannier Tank in a cupboard for 10 years (fearful of starting... and spoiling it) I doubt my capabilities to construct one.
Skills required...
I can cope with S7 but having tried Sn3 (superb kit detail from PBL for the D&RGW line) the level of P87 is probably beyond my skill and time available.
Overall look and feel...
There is no doubt that S7 looks best... it is tangible... it has mass and weight.
Scenery...
Lineside and railway structures in P87 are manageable... S7 is very big!
Size vs. Eyes...
Three feet rule... if your eyes can't see the detail from three feet away then don't add it to the model.
Operation...
Operation depends on whether I build a diorama (essentially a display for the models) or a switching layout (getting stock from A to B... involving automatic couplings which are far more realistic - and better - in US railroading. An acceptable automatic coupling for UK wagons is available from Dingham as a fold-up etch instead of using prototypical hooks and chains.
Operating qualities...
My recent experiences of how miniature layouts operate were not positive... at an exhibition in Wales I noted that trains on all HO layouts were very "jerky" at starting and stopping, whereas the gauge 1 logging layout using Bachmann Shays were as smooth as silk. A couple of years ago I was given a French style HOn (narrow gauge) layout... and the 9 locos took off like startled cats when the controller was advanced just a notch. Running qualities were very poor, and although the track work and points were proprietary, and looked reasonably well laid, the slightest jog in rail joins resulted in frequent derailments. Again, lack of mass and inertia in this small scale spoilt the effect created by the original builder... as a diorama it looked good - but as a "runner" it was a let down.
Overall conclusion is that small scales cannot run smoothly... if locos are fitted with a flywheel then smoother operation is possible - difficult on UK steam locos (which don't have much space inside the boiler) but more practical on US diesels which are much larger in the same scale.
Period and company...
UK would have to be GWR because I have a lot of stock (which has taken 100s of hours of time, and pleasure, to construct) plus some MR/SR (nice wood-framed wagons) vs. Pennsylvania for the US (huge amount of data available - The Keystone Modeler on-line magazine is downloadable as a .pdf file every month, and many kits are available). However, I don't like the unrealistic nature of steam power (no smoke or steam!), but having diesels would overcome this. Digital sound could (good question... how good is it?) add the the realistic effect.
As 1944 is my year of birth... and I well remember goods trains working between Chorlton-cum-Hardy and Manchester Central stations on the old LMS line, that could be the year I chose to model. Being at the end of WWII the period is one of depression and neglect on the railways. Most stock colours would be "bauxite" which I like (US stocks are generally "boxcar red" which I find very attractive too).
Another question about the "chosen company" is that I do like the look of the Adams Radial 4-4-2 and Drummond M7 0-4-4 Tank (both Martin Finney kits) used on the SR and LSWR railways... they are so graceful and workmanlike. GWR ("God's Wonderful Railway" to many) locos are less interesting and pleasing to my eye and are too common on layouts nowadays.
Most enjoyment from...
Building (still unfinished) two PBL Sn3 kits... a Drop Bottom Gondola and a Stock Car. There were over 200 pieces in each kit and at $35 or so each give an enormous amount of pleasure in that they take many evenings and weekends to construct, if done properly. This, compared to many UK kits which are literally "shake the box" assembly, means good value for money because of the time spent on them... there is no pleasure or sense of achievement when something can be assembled in less than an hour from half a dozen semi-scale pieces with exaggerated (or no) detail - that is not what a hobby should be about.
A close second was scratch-building a Double Slip in S7 from C&L products... filing-up point blades, soldering frogs and fitting check rails with fully detailed chairs so that it all worked smoothly, and, being steel rather than the more commonly used yellowish nickel-silver, looked superb, was very satisfying.
Third would be a well-on-the-way scratch-built 50' GWR Siphon H Diagram O.12 utilising Richard de Camin's resin-cast modular panels fixed to a basswood carcass running on soldered etched-brass and white-metal bogies which came with no instructions... adding to my sense of satisfaction.
Least enjoyment from...
Probably the unstarted S7 GWR Pannier Tank kit from Eric Underhill... it should not have been that difficult to construct, with several resin-cast parts (it was dubbed the "Milky Bar" engine), but the mental block of how to make the suspension work and how to paint it afterwards (fully assembled or in pieces beforehand) prevented me from starting it... and it was sold on eBay after a decade in a cupboard.
Being picky about details...
Probably too many to list... on another day I think
Conclusion?
Utilise what I already have in Scale 7... but more thoughts will follow when I've digested these ramblings...
P.S. For many UK manufacturers web sites go to the Gauge O Guild links page.
If you need help with prototypically accurate, as well as customised and computerised (PC only, not Mac) track planning software with full-size model layout printouts, visit Templot.
8:40:33 PM 
|
