That's very sharp of you  Pengi - very well spotted!

Sent me scurrying for my calculator ...................

I run on track set to 9.42mm gauge (adjusted to cope with N gauge wheels in the critical areas of pointwork) so I'm a bit closer at 1:152. 

But you're still right, there is a mismatch 

Hmmm .......... very good Pengi

Adrian

I have the same attitude as Ditape and am always on the look out for bargains. What I do try to do is get suitable coaches and wagons to match my loco's so hopefully the actual trains are prototypical.

I get round the wide variety of rolling stock by saying I'm modeling a preserved railway not that it's much of a problem here as rivet counters are very rare indeed.

We run a glorious mixture of stock on our club layout the only rule is that it must be N gauge 

Quote from: Adrian on July 27, 2015, 05:12:49 PM
That's very sharp of you  Pengi - very well spotted!

Sent me scurrying for my calculator ...................

I run on track set to 9.42mm gauge (adjusted to cope with N gauge wheels in the critical areas of pointwork) so I'm a bit closer at 1:152. 

But you're still right, there is a mismatch 

Hmmm .......... very good Pengi

Adrian

I would not be accepted to join the Distinguished Order of Rivet Counters as i run 1:160, 1:148 and also 1:150  - all at the same time 

What sometimes gives me pause for thought is grass!

Why do we model it the way we do?  Looking out of the window, just now, I can make out the detail close to but not further off in the garden.

So, from normal viewing distance, should we really see anything other than green hues etc etc on a layout?

How big is a rivet anyhow?  Are they visible at the distances we're talking about?

Adrian

All the rivets on my models are fake.  None of them actually hold two bits of metal together.  Does this mean they don't count?

Not yet got around to rivet counting as i am still counting the grains of ballast to ensure there are no more than 200 to the square inch...would welcome someone calculating if this is the correct scale size?

I cant see a problem with wishing to do things as right as one can make them.
Likewise if its your thing just to have a model railway...

If it makes you happy its all good stuff aint it

I like things to be pretty right, other wise I'm not making a time and place, Im just making a train set - not that that is a bad thing , its just not what  I want to do

Quote from: sparky on July 27, 2015, 09:03:55 PM
Not yet got around to rivet counting as i am still counting the grains of ballast to ensure there are no more than 200 to the square inch...would welcome someone calculating if this is the correct scale size?

Ballast should pass through a  3 inch grid in one plane

sorry I know that, but getting things right isnt a bad thing

We're all on a hiding to nothing with this rivet counting thing and getting overly uptight trying to get things as right as possible. I have never seen an N gauge diorama that could be mistaken for the real thing when it comes down to the nitty gritty - trees, grass, houses etc.. I'm happy with the objective of trying to create an overall impression of a scene which is what N scale (or N gauge for UK enthusiasts) is particularly good at. Attention to detail is great, but more attention to detail is not necessarily better.

As for era and railway modelled, I'm pretty eclectic. I've got North American rolling stock and locos that span 50 years, from 4 different railways (Canadian Pacific, British Columbia Railway, Union Pacific, and Santa Fe) as well as a modest amount of British outline from the 60s (4 locos + wagons +carriages). Don't run all the different eras and railways together though. I'm afraid that one day in a red wine haze I'll order a black and red German steam locomotive which will open up more spending opportunities which is the last thing I need.

Webbo

I set myself soft targets - a decade and a city - and want to go further with this as time goes by. It helps me focus and keeps me coming back to the layout ... and saves money.

If however I decided, tonight, that I was going to do one particular part of the real railway, in one particular year, the amount of research, scratch building, renumbering and repainting involved would put a stop to things instantly. Going for realism should be an interesting challenge rather than a graded exercise?

Some people can get N gauge spot on for time and place

exhibit A

http://small-but-perfectly-formed.blogspot.co.uk/

I think that is marvelous

Creating an overall impression (as Webbo suggests) is , to me, the single most important part of railway modelling. I want my scenes to look reasonably realistic without being perfect and to create an image of what a scene might have looked like.
I see many layouts at exhibitions which are truly fantastic, technically brilliant and pretty much perfect in every detail but they often lack that "lived-in" feel and appear cold and sterile.  To me it is important for a layout to look alive - no matter if some of the detail is far from perfect and doesn't  quite fit the era.

Oh, by the way, how many fence posts per yard do I need for the edge of a field ? 

Quote from: Webbo on July 28, 2015, 01:55:59 AM


As for era and railway modelled, I'm pretty eclectic. I've got North American rolling stock and locos that span 50 years, from 4 different railways (Canadian Pacific, British Columbia Railway, Union Pacific, and Santa Fe) as well as a modest amount of British outline from the 60s (4 locos + wagons +carriages). Don't run all the different eras and railways together though. I'm afraid that one day in a red wine haze I'll order a black and red German steam locomotive which will open up more spending opportunities which is the last thing I need.

Webbo

Oh. That black and red german steam, you know you want to, it doesn't take much wine!  Come join us in the dark world of running whatever the blazes you like .... We have cookies!


G

Port Perran you have just hit the nail on the head those are exactly the thoughts I have on model railways . I just love watching my trains going through the country side . While it's also nice to see these very highly detailed layouts with every thing looking perfect some people would be put off building a railway layout thinking they wouldn't be able to make it so perfect and so miss out on this wonderfully relaxing hobby.
My late mate Cyril and I went to Risborough show at Stoke Mandevile one year he wanted to see a layout in one of the railway magazines  the detail was absolutely brilliant it was about 30 ft long and was a seaside village BUT nothing was moving then some ding ding noises an engine moved about a yard then nothing a few minutes later dong dong and the engine moved into the station then nothing this was repeated several times Cyril then asked the operator when the train was departing ,the answer was in about ten minutes as they ran to the correct timetable .Cyril said he  was very annoyed that we had travelled to see this layout payed good money to go in just to see a man reading a magazine and hear some bells ringing now and thenthe operator just said tough luck that how the layout ran.
Bob

Quote from: JasonBz on July 28, 2015, 07:21:17 AM
Some people can get N gauge spot on for time and place

exhibit A

http://small-but-perfectly-formed.blogspot.co.uk/

I think that is marvelous

Can't argue with that. I couldn't build anything that good to save my life. Fortunately, I'm not a perfectionist, so I don't feel the need to chuck my efforts in the bin...

Chris