I started modelling in N in the early 1980s before the internet and emails and in the beginning got into all sorts of trouble with track and getting trains to run reliably. With no local club to turn to for practical advice I decided to join the N Gauge Society. At that stage the journal was printed in black and white and had typewritten copy. They had a helpline which I wrote into for help. I wrote to the letters page as well but unfortunately have no record of those letters.
My main problems were caused by 9" radius set track and points and not realising the importance of good trackwork in general.
Help was at hand from a gentleman named Ted Broadhurst who posted me a copy of an article he had produced for the N Gauge Journal (which I kept) and which he followed up with letters.
Here is an excerpt from the article, it's interesting to note that some things haven't changed much since the 1980s!
N Gauge Engineering
"For N gauge engineers, precision is essential. Builders and farmers (scenery merchants that is) can get by without, as in real life, though even full size builders usually manage to get rooms square within a couple of inches, and that means something in thous at our scale. But a model house does not look too bad if it is 1/16" too high, whereas track with this sort of error might as well not be there. So let's look further at these "thous".
Each is one thousandth part of an inch. You cannot measure it with a ruler, you cannot see it. With a few exceptions you cannot feel it. Yet it is truly important. The average human hair is about 2 thou, or written more correctly 0.002". One in the gearing of an N gauge loco can snarl up the works thoroughly. 12 volt electricity will not even jump an air gap of 1 thou, so this sort of error on wheel or track alignment means no pick up on that wheel.
I do hope that I am not frightening newer members, nor indeed older members who have not considered this aspect of small scale modelling. If one is using rolling stock and track of proprietary makes, it might well be assumed that the manufacturers will look after the accuracy. After all, if one buys a cooker, one expects it too cook. One buys a watch, and does not anticipate the need for watch repairing skills to cause it to keep good time. Why isn't this true of model trains?
First, at least in our case of N gauge, because no-one has yet agreed what size things should be. But equally important , because the "train set" mentality persists, and only in recent years has the N gauge fraternity begun to make its voice heard. Train sets are presents for children (no age limits specified !) Provided that they last the holiday period before being trodden on /forgotten/given away/ passed over in favour of a cricket bat or bicycle then honour is satisfied.
This is not good enough for members of our society, and we have accepted too much of poor quality for too long. But even now I think that there is considerable doubt whether we are prepared to pay for the quality we say we need. Especially in what are small qualities by production standards, which ought to persuade British N gauge not to have a different scale from our foreign friends. Larger quantities of one product equals better quality and/or cheaper prices.
So for those of us who value good running above all, and those who expect mechanical and electrical contrivances to last forever, modification and repair work becomes essential. And with it the need for precision".
Ted Broadhurst
Regards
Veronica.
:NGaugersRule:
The biggest prompt to me to pen the Beginners Guide (found under NGF Links on the main toolbar) is the concern that far too many pitfalls exist for the beginner in the hobby which can ultimately result in the said set being abandoned as just too much trouble.
Having also started out in the early 80s myself, I was completely unaware of the NGS but did at least buy a couple of half decent books on model railways along with the excellent Peco starter guides.
I guess ours is like many a hobby - you cannot just jump in without some research or guidance. I wonder how many retailers suggest some sources at the point of sale :hmmm:
I thought the point about not wanting to pay for quality interesting too, we still have a similar quality vs price discussion today although now we seem to complain mainly about high prices and there are requests for a budget range.
I reckon that discussion will rumble on to eternity but the fact is the market in most countries cannot support more than one range and, IMHO, a danger of 'watering down' the end product is a distinct possibility. We've had it too good for too long and now it's time we started paying prices which give the folks who build our models a better wage than they used to get. The world has changed mightily since Ted's article. Whether for good or better is for each to decide.
I also started out in the 80's.
For that was when I was ejected from my mother's womb!
I digress...
The point on cost is true. You get what you pay for, but there's also an often misunderstood detail in the equation.
I often see people comparing prices today, to a decade or more ago. "Why is this locos now £125 instead of £75?!"
With regards to price, there are 3 key things at play - none of them are nostalgic:
1) Inflation is far greater than public records would have you believe, in fact they have been manipulated to appear 'better' than >25 years ago.
2) This inflation (particularly cost of goods) is pushed further when you source from a developing country, such as China, that has grown considerably over the past 1 or 2 decades. They caught up rather quickly. Workforce living conditions and expectations increase. As a nation develops, standards improve, workers demand more and wages naturally rise to suit.
3) Bachmann and Dapol aren't playing us for fools, they are pushing standards and building very detailed models in a tiny scale with a relatively modest demand. The pressure of the above inflation + supply cost exacerbates the situation.
Cost is relative.
Check your gas and electric bill from a decade or so ago, you'll probably find it more in line with modelling inflation than reported inflation numbers.
Anyway, for me the precision in the scale is part of the challenge. Frustrations aside, when things work ... they're beautiful. Laying an arrow straight track is an art you need to master. This is par for the course.
I'm prepared to pay for the precision because even if you do your part, if the model isn't up to scratch - it'll run like :censored: (changed by forum) regardless of your efforts. Then you question the point of it all (which would be a shame)!
Quote from: silly moo on March 02, 2020, 02:10:52 PM
the "train set" mentality persists,
Ted Broadhurst
Regards
Veronica.
:NGaugersRule:
This, to me, is the most important statement in that quote. And one which still holds true today.
Best
Scott
Yeah, 00 is to train sets, N is for precision.
You can quite happily throw an 00 together and run a train at full pelt with it rarely skipping a beat (just ask the 6 year old version of me) - easy! :D
Quote from: Ted on March 03, 2020, 12:19:08 PM
Yeah, 00 is to train sets, N is for precision.
You can quite happily throw an 00 together and run a train at full pelt with it rarely skipping a beat (just ask the 6 year old version of me) - easy! :D
I must admit one of the things which got me hooked on N gauge was the fact that I needed to spend years carefully engineering a precision layout.
Ah nope, scratch that, I found myself with a simple Kato Unitrack setup laid on a baseboard with nothing really to hold it in place and was fascinated to find I could run a (Tomix) train at increasingly high and unrealistic speeds including going over points and it failed to stall, uncouple or fly off the tracks. "Railsquid", I said to myself. "This stuff is good".
Not that I do that kind of thing normally you understand, I'm more of a "watch the trains trundling round" kind of person, but the great thing about modern N gauge is that there is a wide range of options for all skillsets and preferences, ranging from setting up a simple loop on the table for running stuff out of the box through to hand-building your own code 40 track for your kit-built/bashed stock.
Quote from: railsquid on March 03, 2020, 01:14:26 PM
Ah nope, scratch that, I found myself with a simple Kato Unitrack setup laid on a baseboard with nothing really to hold it in place ...
To be fair I've just received a run of Unitrack for my test/programming track (controlled by an Arduino + JMRI and fleebay 12v power pack). The Kato is really good, I can see why it's popular. Easy, stiff, strong connections and likely very reliable as a result.
A note about your speed, well I've gone uber-nerd and built myself a train speedo using an Arduino Mini and some IR sensors. Not got it quite right yet, but it will allow me to set prototypical speeds for each train.
Grimy and slow is the only way for a diesel! *IMO, of course :D
Quote from: Ted on March 03, 2020, 12:19:08 PM
Yeah, 00 is to train sets, N is for precision.
You can quite happily throw an 00 together and run a train at full pelt with it rarely skipping a beat (just ask the 6 year old version of me) - easy! :D
I wasn't quite thinking that, but that's possibly an interpretation.
Best
Scott.
Quote from: NGS-PO on March 03, 2020, 02:21:42 PM
Quote from: Ted on March 03, 2020, 12:19:08 PM
Yeah, 00 is to train sets, N is for precision.
You can quite happily throw an 00 together and run a train at full pelt with it rarely skipping a beat (just ask the 6 year old version of me) - easy! :D
I wasn't quite thinking that, but that's possibly an interpretation.
Best
Scott.
Don't worry, I was being a little flippant - dry humour doesn't come across very well in written form! :D
Quote from: Ted on March 03, 2020, 01:24:28 PM
Quote from: railsquid on March 03, 2020, 01:14:26 PM
Ah nope, scratch that, I found myself with a simple Kato Unitrack setup laid on a baseboard with nothing really to hold it in place ...
To be fair I've just received a run of Unitrack for my test/programming track (controlled by an Arduino + JMRI and fleebay 12v power pack). The Kato is really good, I can see why it's popular. Easy, stiff, strong connections and likely very reliable as a result.
A note about your speed, well I've gone uber-nerd and built myself a train speedo using an Arduino Mini and some IR sensors. Not got it quite right yet, but it will allow me to set prototypical speeds for each train.
One day when I have more time I will play around with this stuff, but one reason I stick with analogue is so I can get away from the day job.
Anyway what I want to say is that I disagree with the premise of this thread - things have changed, and modern N gauge (while it is still a small scale which requires some care) is very accessible even to those who are not precision engineers. Moreover I don't understand the invective against "train sets" - what better way to get people addicted? It's how I got started out, first as a child, and more recently with a bunch of Kato stuff (which I was delighted to find was much more reliable than the OO of childhood days).
Quote from: silly moo on March 02, 2020, 02:10:52 PM
"For N gauge engineers, precision is essential. Builders and farmers (scenery merchants that is) can get by without, as in real life, though even full size builders usually manage to get rooms square within a couple of inches, and that means something in thous at our scale. But a model house does not look too bad if it is 1/16" too high, whereas track with this sort of error might as well not be there. So let's look further at these "thous".
Each is one thousandth part of an inch. You cannot measure it with a ruler, you cannot see it. With a few exceptions you cannot feel it. Yet it is truly important. The average human hair is about 2 thou, or written more correctly 0.002". One in the gearing of an N gauge loco can snarl up the works thoroughly. 12 volt electricity will not even jump an air gap of 1 thou, so this sort of error on wheel or track alignment means no pick up on that wheel.
Mmmmhhhh... A thousandth of an inch is, if I'm calculating correctly, 0.025mm. That is over-exaggerating. OK, I agree with the hair bit (or more specifically carpet fibres, had a few cheap locos thanks to those :D ) but 0.025mm difference in wheel or track alignment is nothing to lose sleep over. 0.25mm maybe.
I don't think that there is anything at all wrong with train sets, far from it, they are an invaluable concept, and I wouldn't begin to deride them.
But my point, and what I think the OP's quoted author was alluding to, was that train sets and a model railways are not the same thing. A model railway, by definition, is a representation of a real railway on a smaller scale. Train sets with 9 - 12 inch curves on display in the visible scenic area do not mimic the real railway in that sense. Just as importantly, trains hurtling around a train set layout do not mimic the operation of the real railway.
There are a number of threads on here and RMWeb concerning n gauge round and round layouts on a 4ft by 2ft board. That's not a model railway, it just isn't.
To grow its popularity and market share, N Gauge needs good quality model railway layouts, in my opinion; and again I suspect that is what Ted Broadhurst is suggesting.
Best
Scott.
Quote from: NGS-PO on March 03, 2020, 03:21:56 PM
I don't think that there is anything at all wrong with train sets, far from it, they are an invaluable concept, and I wouldn't begin to deride them.
But my point, and what I think the OP's quoted author was alluding to, was that train sets and a model railways are not the same thing. A model railway, by definition, is a representation of a real railway on a smaller scale. Train sets with 9 - 12 inch curves on display in the visible scenic area do not mimic the real railway in that sense. Just as importantly, trains hurtling around a train set layout do not mimic the operation of the real railway.
There are a number of threads on here and RMWeb concerning n gauge round and round layouts on a 4ft by 2ft board. That's not a model railway, it just isn't.
To grow its popularity and market share, N Gauge needs good quality model railway layouts, in my opinion; and again I suspect that is what Ted Broadhurst is suggesting.
Sorry, I disagree.
N gauge needs layouts where the "average enthusiast" (to borrow a phrase from the Railway Modeller of my youth) can look at them and say "
hey, that looks nice, I could make one of those".
Train sets are great fun - just look at Poppingham and the link to Barrie's YouTube channel below. There are some wonderfully detailed layouts out there in all scales but very few of them are "model railways". Just because something looks "real" does not a model of a real railway make.
I refer people to Barrie's layout in a shed. There is next to no scenic development bar some classic Hornby buildings and a few Dinky cars. Even the rolling stock is a mismatch of eras yet Barrie (an ex Signal man) runs his railway to authentic practice. Which is more real?
We complain about "train set" curves, yet in reality how many of us have the space to mimic the real railway? It all comes down to the level of compromise that each of us are willing to accept.
I can admire and appreciate skilled modelling as much as the next person but sometimes it is great to see something "normal". I stopped subscribing to all the railway magazines as I got bored by the similar looking layouts they detail. Most of them are wonderfully modelled but in most cases they look/feel the same.
Personally, as I get older I find myself drawn to things like Hornby Dublo, Tri-Ang etc. A simpler time and possibly a wee bit more fun in the mix.
Today's N gauge models are amazing and I agree that prices should reflect the quality and detail supplied. I fear though that there is a line where ever increasing demands could run the risk of killing off the market.
For me, I think this could all be addressed by making PECO R2 the minimum and PECO backing this up by releasing an R2 Setrack point. This would remove the need for anyone to use R1 unless they chose to do so.
Kind regards
Paddy
Quote from: railsquid on March 03, 2020, 03:55:32 PM
Quote from: NGS-PO on March 03, 2020, 03:21:56 PM
I don't think that there is anything at all wrong with train sets, far from it, they are an invaluable concept, and I wouldn't begin to deride them.
But my point, and what I think the OP's quoted author was alluding to, was that train sets and a model railways are not the same thing. A model railway, by definition, is a representation of a real railway on a smaller scale. Train sets with 9 - 12 inch curves on display in the visible scenic area do not mimic the real railway in that sense. Just as importantly, trains hurtling around a train set layout do not mimic the operation of the real railway.
There are a number of threads on here and RMWeb concerning n gauge round and round layouts on a 4ft by 2ft board. That's not a model railway, it just isn't.
To grow its popularity and market share, N Gauge needs good quality model railway layouts, in my opinion; and again I suspect that is what Ted Broadhurst is suggesting.
Sorry, I disagree.
N gauge needs layouts where the "average enthusiast" (to borrow a phrase from the Railway Modeller of my youth) can look at them and say "hey, that looks nice, I could make one of those".
Then we shall agree to disagree.
Best
Scott.
The original letter that prompted the sending of the quoted article went along the lines of me expressing utter frustration at my inability to get Graham Farish locos to go round a layout built with Atlas track. The Atlas points were dreadful and combined with Farish pizza cutter wheels meant that locos derailed at every point. I couldn't understand why the different makes weren't compatible, after all they were all N!
Added to that was my 'train-set mentality' and ignorance of the precision required to lay track properly. I learned fast and the Atlas points were swiftly changed for Peco ones. The layout worked for years after that. I now spend a lot of time on careful track laying which has paid dividends.
Unfortunately despite the passing of the years I still have a bit of that 'trainset mentality' and as space is limited, am building a circular, roundy-roundy micro layout. I also have some Lone Star and 3 rail Dublo. So I'm probably beyond help. :no:
Apart from the ever recurring problem of 1st radius track and points that 'train-set mentality' can still crop up when beginners go from 00 to N and don't pay enough attention to track laying. I expect the locos are blamed and sent back to the retailers and someone else gives up N gauge.
Quote from: NGS-PO on March 03, 2020, 03:21:56 PMTo grow its popularity and market share, N Gauge needs good quality model railway layouts, in my opinion; and again I suspect that is what Ted Broadhurst is suggesting.
Quote from: railsquid on March 03, 2020, 03:55:32 PM
Sorry, I disagree.
N gauge needs layouts where the "average enthusiast" (to borrow a phrase from the Railway Modeller of my youth) can look at them and say "hey, that looks nice, I could make one of those".
Quote from: NGS-PO on March 03, 2020, 04:45:34 PMThen we shall agree to disagree.
And I will disagree (or perhaps agree) with you both!!
Surely there is a place and a need for both the "
achievable" and the "
aspirational" layout...
"Achievable" however doesn't mean deliberately done down to the lowest practical standards of reality, rather in the sense of showing that given a little thought at the planning stage something with a degree of prototype fidelity can be done with basic tools and readily available materials without needing higher level skills and knowledge.
"Aspirational" is those layouts with the 'wow-factor' that most could never achieve but we still like to stand and watch and admire.
Quote from: PLD on March 03, 2020, 09:18:40 PM
Quote from: NGS-PO on March 03, 2020, 03:21:56 PMTo grow its popularity and market share, N Gauge needs good quality model railway layouts, in my opinion; and again I suspect that is what Ted Broadhurst is suggesting.
Quote from: railsquid on March 03, 2020, 03:55:32 PM
Sorry, I disagree.
N gauge needs layouts where the "average enthusiast" (to borrow a phrase from the Railway Modeller of my youth) can look at them and say "hey, that looks nice, I could make one of those".
Quote from: NGS-PO on March 03, 2020, 04:45:34 PMThen we shall agree to disagree.
And I will disagree (or perhaps agree) with you both!!
Surely there is a place and a need for both the "achievable" and the "aspirational" layout...
"Achievable" however doesn't mean deliberately done down to the lowest practical standards of reality, rather in the sense of showing that given a little thought at the planning stage something with a degree of prototype fidelity can be done with basic tools and readily available materials without needing higher level skills and knowledge.
"Aspirational" is those layouts with the 'wow-factor' that most could never achieve but we still like to stand and watch and admire.
I agree. I never said there wasn't room for both. But for me, there is plenty of the lower end but not enough of the higher end.
To take things forward we need more of the higher end, in my opinion.
Best
Scott.
I used to love that Railway Modeller slogan, For the average modeller. Grew up with it. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Bealman on March 03, 2020, 10:41:13 PM
I used to love that Railway Modeller slogan, For the average modeller. Grew up with it. :thumbsup:
Me too!
And the one from
Model Railroader - 'Model Railroading is Fun'.
Taken together, these 'straplines' neatly describe my present attitude to model railways.
I'm off to the Train Set Room with a cup of Yorkshire tea...
Best wishes.
John
Exactly!
Yeah, the Americans used to have it....
Model railroading is fun!
Great stuff. The days of Cyril Freezer and Linn Wescott.
I think they actually met each other.
Enjoy your cup of tea! I'll finish this VB. :beers: