I'm feeling a sudden surge of interest in the UK and its railways lately - ever since Trains.com emailed me a link to a new marketing partner who was selling prints of all the great paintings Terence Cuneo did for BR in the 1950s. So a couple of questions for those who are modeling British prototypes:
1) Is the dominant scale OO or HO?
2) Is there much electrical and track standard compatibility between British-manufactured stuff and American stuff, or are the systems designed for radically different flange sizes and electrical specs?
http://mprailway.blogspot.com
"The first transition era - wood to steel!"
The dominant scale here in the UK is OO-4mm to the foot but the more recent models should run on smaller code track,say 75 or 83.Code 100 should allow anything OO to run.
Don't expect really detailed models like you get in the States,that has'ent really happened over here yet,one of the reasons I changed to HO American some 10 years back.
Regards
Steve
Will they run on the same 12V DC circuits that we use here, drawing an amp or so?
Simon Modelling CB&Q and Wabash See my slowly evolving layout on my picturetrail site http://www.picturetrail.com/simontrains and our videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/MrCrispybake?feature=mhum
Thanks - I'll have a look.
See also:
http://www.djhengineering.co.uk/loco/default.asp
The dominant scale is definitely OO. Like the ther said, don't expect 'life-like' models nor expect too much technology either! They just started really getting into DCC now...and everything aren't eactly standardised either! There is small variations in scale with different manufacturers such as Hornby and Markin even though everything all called 'OO'. Not much selection either...it's really old school...I would stick with HO if I were you...the OO school has a completely different trend of thoughts!
Not realistic?
These guys are looking at the toy market... same as looking at Mehano or some of the older stuff.
Look at DJH and many others and you are looking at incredible detail etched brass... the drawback (or good thing depending on your viewpoint) is that you have to put it together and paint it yourself. If you like building your own we have had things equivalent to japanes/korean brass since the 70s.
We also started on "P4" which became "S4" back in the 70s, if not the late 60s... the modelled track gauge is 18.83mm which is correct for 4mm to the foot. Never have worked out why let alone how to measure 0.03mm
The way the serious British modelling market is there isn't a large market for DCC or sound as ready to run... we would pretty much expect to buy our own preferance and fit it ourselves as we built.
Wheel profiles in RTR modles are finer than NMRA standard and S4 is close to actual scale.
trackwork... if using chaired track you can get 00 individual chairs to slide onto the rail... the bolt heads and keys are modelled... is that detailed enough?
You pays your money and takes your choice.
I like the shift to American because it's a whole new world for me to learn about.
...and the CNW rolled on the correct side of the tracks
You've put your finger on the source of my interest - British railroading and American railroading are very different. The differences are striking - particularly the signalling systems and the train density.
I'm building a half US diesel, half British steam layout in HO and OO respectively, with continuous running and a scenic backdrop to separate the two. Works fine and gives me plenty of modelling scope. No electrical or track compatibility problems at all.
My SD26 is just visible far right in this pic.
Mike
P.S. I'm using DC
Modelling the UK in 00, and New England - MEC, B&M, D&H and Guilford - in H0
To illustrate my point about the improvement in the Hornby locos, here is a British Rail class 8 0-6-0 shunter visiting my yard in Illinois. The model has factory applied piping, which in the past would have been molded on. A bag full of detail parts that I have not as yet applied. DCC socket. And I feel much better paint than I have seen on my older models. The wheel treads are also much finer. This was purchased in 2005 and represents I think current Hornby efforts.
British signalling practice is extremely specific as a result of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 and loads of stuff that followed. No major diversion from those practices occurred until probably the 1980s. That is not to say that there was no development. The big change from the 1980s is that you will see far more facing points, fewer trailing points and much more bi-directional working.
If you think of going ahead PM me your basic ideas / questions.
David
Thanks - I appreciate that. There are some excellent sites on British signalling out there.
I know there are a lot of hobbyists in the UK - are there any publishers who specialize in detailed books about specific railroads - books that would include information like diagrams of interesting junctions and stations, photographs of key points, that sort of thing? I was just reading L.T.C. Rolt's "Red for Danger" and the Settle-Carlisle line on the Midland seemed like a very interesting prototype - certainly sounded like a lot of scenery and heavy engineering work.
How much money do you have? Plus do you have a room big enough for your own library?
Settle Carlisle... David Jenkinson and Bob Essery may be said to have "covered" it way back in the late 60s / early 70s (Don't recall exactly, I'm getting ancient)... LOADS of articles in one of Model Railway News, Railway Modeller or Model Railway Constructor. I probably have them somewhere... that is "somewhere". STACKS of books on the S&C... text, pics, layout plans, signalling, riding the trains... ... ... There's videos as well... SNORE!
What is your specific area of interest? Rolling trains or station layouts? Era? Passenger or freight?
Um... there are also some rubbish sites on British Signalling...
Ian Allan do an excellent guide to British Signalling in several updated editions. You'd almost certainly find older ones on E bay and the latest at their own site. The problem for you (as for most UK modellers0 would be understanding how to apply the theory to the application. Especially with that big 1980s divide... our railways are getting to look less and less like they used to extremely fast... and that is on the ground not just the Disneyland paint schemes.
What sort of space do you have available?
The line(s) to Buxton might be more suitable / varied / not done so much. (Again there was an excellent model of one of the Buxton stations (the terminal) in MR (IIRC) years ago.
I'll go see if you PMed me... You haven't yet... can work here if people don't mind discussion of Railways instead of Railroads...
Anyone in North America interested in British modelling should look up the British Railway Modellers of North America website. They (we) have lists of dealers in North America that carry British trains. There are a large number around Toronto and a few around Vancouver. There are al;so lots of magazines, but they may be hard to get in the U.S.
Recent OO trains are quite compatible with NMRA track, although maybe not completely compliant. Older ones had their own ideas and might or might not fit through frogs. The major manufacturers make trains for 16.5mm track even though the rest of the stuff (bodies, structures) are to OO scale. And there are groups modify the wheels to scale distance.
--David
British tie (sleeper) spacing is completely different from US tie spacing for a start... so the simplest solution to whether UK prtotype stock in 00 will run on track is to buy Peco British 00 track. The two are designed to go together. Peco is industry standard.
All you have to do then is to decide all the usual criteria like era, traffic, location...
Dave,
I was thinking of something with a focus on the signalling - a stretch of line with a signal box (possibly two), and a pair of loops (in the American, rather than the British sense) or a rear connection with staging at either end - so something fairly long and narrow. The operational focus would be on the signal boxes. I was thinking it would be interesting to build a truly interlocked set of signals, passing loops (the British kind, this time), and crossovers - but even a small interlocking frame is a big job, so I would want to keep the trackage simple. The whole point would be to model operations from the signalman's perspective, rather than the driver's. I think with a smaller operation, and the frequent train movements, that this would be a lot more interesting in the UK than it is in America.
The era that interests me is pre-Grouping, roughly WWI. I find the motive power on a lot of the northern lines to be particularly pleasing - the Jones engines from the Highland Railway, the Caledonian, the Midland, and the North British. I gather from some of the reading I've done (the Board of Trade investigation into the Quintinshill wreck, for example) that fast and frequent operation was not limited to the south of England, but was a feature of most railways in England.
steveiow wrote: Code 100 should allow anything OO to run.Don't expect really detailed models like you get in the States,that has'ent really happened over here yet,one of the reasons I changed to HO American some 10 years back.
Code 100 should allow anything OO to run.
Not detailed? The latest Hornby is produced in the same factories as bachmann UK & US! The Hornby class 50's' 08's and 31's have opening doors, working fans in the roof etc. Admittedly DCC is a little slower than in the states but really only a year behind. I can't think of many locos produced in the last 2 years that aren't DCC ready. Bachmann is producing the 66 with sound for 25% less than an atlas dash8 and still £10 cheaper than an athearn sd45 and the 66 has an ESU chip in it not a slightly odd MRC one.
When it comes to steam locos from the early 1900's you are really in kitbuilding territory, look up Mainly Trains, www.mainlytrains.com that will give you some idea of what's available. There is so much produced by small cottage industries that you will have to hunt it out. Search for societies linked to the company you want to model on google and try this as a start point, http://www.ukmodelshops.co.uk/
For signalling bits try this, the quality is excellent. http://www.modelsignals.com/mse_home.htm
Have a look at what's available under Bachmann and Hornby on here, http://www.hattons.co.uk/productList/list_stock_linkpage.asp
Here's video clips of the recent models of British diesels fitted with ESU chips by South West Digital, which add about £95 to the price.
Cl 66http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCpxXMoNpuECl 50http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=686BciKrWPECl 37http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcB3sZ66IXMCl 31http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPEE3L5EtHcCl 47http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVQL_p_0sHA
Buy new stuff and you'll be impressed, just watch out for older stuff on ebay as it can be a nightmare to DCC equip and anything over 5 years old can have deep flanges that don't like code 75 track.
Thanks for responding - the links are very interesting.
Dave, I've kept my responses on the board, rather than PMing you, because I thought this might be of interest to a few other people, too.
Thanks for the link - those operating signal frames are very nice!
Do they make tiny lever collars, too? I ask because there won't be any firemen to carry out Rule 55 in my basement.
God save the Queen.
Bump.
rayw46 wrote:I visited the layout of an Engish modeller and he had what I am almost certain were Hornsby Dining Cars. Each table in the cars had a lighted lamp. That's pretty detailed.
Yup, those are pretty good - I've got a few myself.
##
Hornby may have updated thier locos and stuff but the landscaping range is appalling. A local craft store stocks Woodland Scenics and Hornby trees side-by-side - theres no comparison Hornbys still in the '70's with its bright green flock for leaves.
Thats why I was reluctant to start up the hobby, fearing that was all I was destined for - then I discovered the wonderful world of the North American side of the hobby - what a difference.
Extremely briefly before I head out to work...
The 1st World War and up to the Grouping in 1923 (that's when it became law - rather than "de-facto" in 1922) is a weird period in our railway history. An Act of Parliament in the 1870s provided for the rail system to be brought under central government control in time of national emergency. this was used in 1914 through to 1919 when the war ended (11/11/18 was only the Armistice) BUT... it took until 1922 to sort out the paperwork and reports with the result that the grouping became law in 1923. (Details you want already?)
You would find it easier to go pre 1914.
North of the border for that perod you will not find RTR that I know of. If there is anything it will be very specific items with little or nothing to go with it.
If you search for the rail companies you will almost certainky find their Historical Societies or similar groups.
English Companies didn't make it across the border very much... trying to think which ones did... . One thing... Scottish law is not the same as English and Welsh law. The Board of Trade was reponsible for Railway standards thoughout the UK though and they are common throughout.
Quintinshill, also known as Gretna, (I've read the BoT report) was a unique set of circumstances partly brought on by the war situation. The problem to model it would be to get suitable locos and stock in sufficient quantities. To be honest the idea of even modelling the location seems pretty gruesome to me. Most of the military survivors of the smash died in combat within weeks. It would be a bit like modelling the railways of Vietnam in 1969.
Modelling a Signalbox that is an Absolute Block Box can be done. For a through station you need to think in terms of three Block Posts although you would only need to do the scenic one as a complete thing.
Got to go for now.
PS. I was at Clapham Junction. The thought of modelling Quintinshill gives me the shudders. Feels like grave robbing. Sorry... but...
Oh, no, no, no - I have NO intention of modeling Quintinshill. I just came across the report and read through it; it was very instructive about signalling procedure and train makeup, that's all. I can see now how my references to Scots railways, the era, and my later comment about Rule 55 might suggest that idea, but it isn't my intention at all - that last was just a remark about how realistic the interlocking frames were.
My thought was I could probably model a single signal box, and find a way to simulate the telegraphic connections with the adjacent boxes, and worry about modeling the territory delineated by the distant, home and starting signals for the modeled box, and use a detector of some sort to report the "train on/train off" signals from adjacent boxes as they approached or departed from the block.
OOPS!
Just one of those situations where an impression gets legs and where they run to gives you a fright.
Anyway. Yes what you suggest is quite possible. With the assistance of computers, and possibly DCC, it would be quite possible to arrange either to effectively manually send yourself the Block Signals or to get the route setting to send them to you. What someone would need to do is to tie up the preperation of a route, identification of a loco and "ready to go". This would then start to trigger a sequence of signals which, when complete, would allow the loco to be sent through the selected route. Something similar - providing a suitable route mainly - would be needed to send the train on from your box.
The line from Distant Signal to Distant Signal is usually between about 1.5 miles and 2 miles... although it can be a lot shorter. If it is shorter the layout is usually more complex.
So.....let me see if I understand how this system worked:
The block had three sets of signals - a distant signal, which gave a driver entering the block an indication of whether the home signal would be "clear" or "danger," a home signal, which I presume performed the same functions in Britain as it does in the States, and a starting signal, which controlled egress from the block.
A signalman communicated with the adjacent blocks by "block telegraph" and "block instruments." The latter gave the boxes on either side an indication of his block's state. When a train arrived in a block, the signalman had to contact the next block (if the block instruments showed it to be unoccupied) and ask the signalman there whether he could accept a train. If he could, the signalman would be able to set the starting signal to clear, and the train could continue to the next block; he would presumably know to set his instruments to "train off the line" when the signalman in that block acknowledged that the train was "on" his line.
Where the boxes generally situated so that the signalman had a view of most of his block? If not, how did he know to notify the signalman at the next block that the train was entering - did he simply do it after the train passed his box with the starting signal at clear?
The signals that form a block are, as I understand it, just a distant signal and a home signal. I think you have your understanding of those two more or less right.
The starter signal is the signal at the end of a station platform that clears the train to leave the platform, up to the next home signal.
I'm sure those more expert with signalling will correct me, but I think that's generally correct.