Would you model in 21mm if RTR track and models were readily available?

[KMCE]

Really like the look of this.  Nice option to use the separate sleeper & chair which would be fine for most applicaitons - would it be suitable for P4 I wonder; he appears to be working on this though. 

The solution of printed chairs for the crossing vee of the point would make it easiser than the solution I am working with.   I have found with the fixed chairs printed to the sleeper is quite strong and the gauge is very accurate however it's a bit fiddly completing the vee.  Even so the copperclad solution I'm using allows me complete a point in c. 1 hour.

I do like the option that he can generate any track formation, whereas, my solution is fixed at the moment for a B6 point & straight lenghts - Must work harder  

I may partake in the templot option & see how it works; don't know about you guys, but I do find Templot rather challenging for anything other that the most basic patterns.

 

Worth a go!

Ken

[David Holman]

Used Templot for my 21mm, 7mm scale points, but only standard LH/RH formations. Likewise, takes about an hour to make one, plus copperclad sleepers make adjustments fairly easy. Not sure it would be the same for printed sleepers, though I know nothing about either process or tolerances...

[Mayner]

One significant point if you intend to 3D print track and point bases Templot uses two different gauges for modelling Irish 5'3" track in 4mm scale.

21mm gauge for P4 standards and 20.2mm if you use EMF or OO gauge standards, Martyn Wynne did much the same to achieve improved running with rtr OO rtr rolling stock reducing the gauge from 16.5mm to 16.2mm or EM-2.

I struggled with Templot for a small EM gauge layout and have gone back to blown up EM gauge paper templates for 21mm gauge track. 

3D printed point-bases are likely to be challenging particularly if there is no provision for adjustment in the location of crossing vee and switch assemblies.

Personally I have hand laid pointwork in 1:1, 1:24 and 1:76 scales using timber, copper clad and ABS sleepers, using fangbolts, spikes, and individual chairs and soldered assembly and did not find it particularly difficult or time consuming, the main difference was that I needed a lot more people and machinery in 1:1.

Chaired assembly either slide on or individually placed is a lot more time consuming and technically challenging than spiked or soldered assembly.

[murphaph]

I hope Martin allows the check rail clearances to be set manually to EM tolerances but keeping the 21mm track gauge of P4. It'll be interesting to see how the check rails are handled full stop 

[DiveController]

On 11/7/2021 at 6:02 AM, murphaph said:

I don't know if it's been mentioned already but Martin Wynne has been busy adding direct 3d printing export capabilities to Templot. The talk is of going straight from design to printing the sleepers and chairs to thread and lay directly. This is pretty awesome I think and I will have to reconsider using soldered PCB sleepers in the visible areas of my layout:

https://85a.uk/templot/club/index.php?threads/3d-printed-track-from-templot.218/post-1873

It is awesome and there's a lot involved. I read through the link last night and not having any real knowledge of 3D printing there was a lot to get my head around. As you said in your post, it looks like they have adopted the technique of printing the chairs directly and sliding them onto C&L bullhead rail, them fitting the rails onto a preprinted base of sleepers with plugs under the chairs press-fitted into preformed holes in the sleepers. The seems to be a lot easier than threading the rails into an entire preformed straight (or certainly a turnout) albeit more time consuming. One limitation they are running into seems to be not having a large enough 3D printer to print larger turnouts as a single piece.

Martin Wynne sells these kits commercially for N scale but it wasn't clear whether he was planning a file for 21mm although there was talk of OO. Personally I'd be much happier buying kits from him than printing and slicing chairs and trying to print larger turnouts in sections. One would needs ones own printer and slicer. 

Maybe someone might do a file for a coach bogies in 21mm that we could use as a drop-in replacement for the existing one on Lima & Murphy models coaching stock.

Edited July 17, 2021 by DiveController

[murphaph]

Yeah I have been considering the bogies as a major use case for a resin printer actually. It would be easy to print off several at a time even in a small desktop printer. Almost no work compared to making up brass bogies and fitting with cosmetic sides. There are decent 00 scale designs available on the web for small money (€3 or so) for non-commercial use (mk1, mk2, mk3 all covered). I think these designs could "easily" be widened out to 21mm and printed off (they are for Hornby coaches so the hub part might need modification for say Bachmann or MM coaches).

The more I read about 3d printing the more I like what I see.

[Mayner]

There are simpler & quicker ways to handlay track than using slide on plastic or 3D printed chairs or solder the rails to every sleeper!

Main Trunk tall steel viaduct scene with handlaid track on viaduct assembled using "Micro Engineers" parts.

S Scale NZR 3'6" gauge track (OO) with copper clad sleeper every 5th sleeper spacing, missing sleepers will be fitted using stripwood sleepers. Some NZR 3'6" gauge layouts use Peco or Atlas for hidden trackage and handlaid track in scenic areas.

Viaduct scene took 18 months to construct.

Layout was exhibited this weekend at Whitianga Train Show first time I have been to an exhibition in a long time!

I am planning to use spiked track for a planned 21mm gauge layout using stripwood sleepers spiked every 5th sleeper with soldered crossing wing rail assemblies.

 

 

 

 

 

[KMCE]

On 11/7/2021 at 9:54 PM, murphaph said:

I hope Martin allows the check rail clearances to be set manually to EM tolerances but keeping the 21mm track gauge of P4

It's already possible to change check rail clearances under the real tab, and scrolling down to "adjust check rails".  It's a bit fiddly, but possible.

 

 

I soldiered on with the development of the points and now have a short 1:6 point c. 260mm, an A6 (300mm) and a B6 (325mm) which have also been upgraded around the frog.   

The next iteration of the frog allowed for a small amount of copperclad to allow soldering of the vee.

 

However, this copperclad was not providing much benefit, so I elminated it and can now build with the only soldering needed is the crossing vee, which is done in situ, so no jigs are needed.  This also removes unnecessary cross bracing on the sleepers.

There are chairs for all sleepers except for one as it is both difficult to establish the exact position of the rail and threading in the canted check /crossing rail is rather difficult.  It will be possible to add a cosmetic chair later, but missing one chair is not a big deal.

 

Completed A6 point - some minor tweaking needed at the blades / rail for the diverging rail, as this is slightly under gauge - next iteration should sort that.  The B6 point is operating perfectly and all wagons & more importantly 6-wheelers glide through on the main and diverging way.

 

 

These are big points however.   For comparison, below is the B6 point vs a Peco SL92 OO small radius point.

 

Next up will be to look at a curved point / crossover as I need one for the extended Wicklow station layout.

 

Ken

[murphaph]

Beautiful Ken, absolutely beautiful stuff.

21mm modelling is getting a lot closer to a lot of people I feel. 

What printer are you creating these on?

Any problems with heat damaging the plastic during soldering in situ?

[KMCE]

Murph,

 

Printer is an AnyCubic Photon Mono X.

The vee is not touching the plastic diretly, the nearest contact being the chairs last timber back; thus with a quick solder, there does not appear to be any deformation from the heat.   Vee is soldered in before wing rails are added.

I was originally concerned with the lack of support for the vee & wing rails, but given the support from the chairs, there does not appear to be any deflection; then axle loading at 4mm is not huge. 

 

Hope that helps.

Ken

[DiveController]

That's a beautiful point Ken and very prototypical (althought, in truth, I don't have an in-depth understanding of Irish points). Very very impressed with that (even having it turned out in green, lol).

Shame this is not a commercial venture as I think you'd get a lot of interest after that. Again very impressive! keep posting. 

[Galteemore]

Brilliant stuff Ken. Also shows how important radius is in our efforts at conveying reality. I used a big radius crossover on my 7mm micro which consumed acres of space but I think looks more prototypical than a smaller radius and is worth the sacrifice. 

Edited July 27, 2021 by Galteemore

[jhb171achill]

On 27/7/2021 at 8:10 AM, Galteemore said:

Brilliant stuff Ken. Also shows how important radius is in our efforts at conveying reality. I used a big radius crossover on my 7mm micro which consumed acres of space but I think looks more prototypical than a smaller radius and is worth the sacrifice. 

Yes, indeed, it looks superbly realistic.

[James Regan]

If you build it they will come. Absolutely yes. Who would have thought there would be so much demand for Irish models.  Instead of looking like Australian narrow gauge imagine your Metrovick on scale track!

[DiveController]

That has been said repeatedly about the models and I'd say IRM's success has more than once proven that point.

However, it's not going to happen with an assessment of there being 'handful' of interested 21mm gauge modelers that are seemingly those more adept at modeling. In that train of thought, they rest of us would benefit having rtr 21mm track.

It's a shame really that Irish modeling will for the majority remain stuck on British outline track but I suppose that's life. 

[JohnMcGahern]

I do, even though it's a pain in the arse!  The problem is, unless you have an extraordinary amount of patience to build a larger layout you have to keep it small and simple.  I have been working on and off on a 6 x 2.5 foot shunting yard for years with wooden ply sleepers etc...  And it is tough!  

[David Holman]

I think it is all a matter of perspective. Hand made track and 21mm gauge requires the learning of new skills and clearly takes more time than just using ready to run. However, if something closer to fidelity is what you want, then that is the price you pay. Or indeed, invest in someone else's skills to do it for you.

 On the other hand, going the extra mile may not be your thing and with so many quality models now available anyone who is happy to compromise on track gauge can still create their own bit of Irish railway.

 I happen to like building things, so am happy going broad gauge, not least because it is a bit different from the norms of railway modelling and in 7mm scale there is not going to be a rtr model appearing just as I complete my next kit or scratchbuild. If operating is your thing, then the maybe rtr is better. However, if you want to develop your skills and aim for something more accurate, then 21mm gauge looks increasingly achievable. Like learning to play a musical instrument, things can seem daunting at first, but start simple and skills do develop.

[Horsetan]

On 26/7/2021 at 10:09 PM, KMCE said:

Murph,

 

Printer is an AnyCubic Photon Mono X.

The vee is not touching the plastic diretly, the nearest contact being the chairs last timber back; thus with a quick solder, there does not appear to be any deformation from the heat.   Vee is soldered in before wing rails are added.

I was originally concerned with the lack of support for the vee & wing rails, but given the support from the chairs, there does not appear to be any deflection; then axle loading at 4mm is not huge. 

That's very good. As there are traditional chairs on your sample track, will you be modifying their design to include keys?

[Auto-Train Original]

it is a great idea and would be a good product for some people - but it would be like EM; a kind of ghetto demanding full commitment.

While on a survey like this it costs people nothing to say 'bring it on' but that is not the same thing as this percentage answer actually buying it. Also the kind of people who really want this will just take something like Peco bullhead rail and cut it in two and fill in the sleeper gaps, as well as build their own points.
 

 

Edited November 3, 2022 by Auto-Train Original

[Auto-Train Original]

On 31/12/2020 at 11:46 PM, KMCE said:

Perhaps, these may help?

458 Class

 

 

DSER 13'6" Covered Wagon

 

 

Armoured Train

 

 

DSER Goods Brake

 

 

Latest to the Yard - DW&WR Ballast Wagon

 

Happy New Year to you all.

Sorry to change the subject but I love your ballast. What is is?

[Horsetan]

Anyone seen this Templot "PlugTrack" idea? It seems that this can work for 21mm gauge, although it won't give you the correct 1:20 canted rail.

Bullhead only so far, not flat-bottom rail.

[murphaph]

Yeah I have been following the topic quite keenly for several months now

I get the email updates and read them almost daily. Martin has put in a heroic effort with all this. He's "reasonably" close to getting a point to printable stage I would say. The common crossing is challenging him at the moment I think. I wouldn't worry about the lack of canted rail, sure soldering FB rail to PCB sleepers can't do that either.

Martin is a big 21mm fan so he will possibly some day look at FB rail. We have exchanged a few posts about the topic in those two threads. The main difficulty with FB rail is that the clips are so small that making them robust enough will be quite hard. Pandrol clips he reckons will not be doable. Some earlier types which would certainly pass the 2' rule but to be honest I would take his bullhead solution and run with it. Plenty of bullhead in Ireland as well. 

It is the way I now plan to make my layout's trackwork. I am probably going to go the laser cut sleeper route, though I may get an FDM printer to do the pointwork as some features like sole plates are printed into the sleepers themselves that way.

[Horsetan]

1 hour ago, murphaph said:

....I wouldn't worry about the lack of canted rail, sure soldering FB rail to PCB sleepers can't do that either.

Martin is a big 21mm fan so he will possibly some day look at FB rail. We have exchanged a few posts about the topic in those two threads. The main difficulty with FB rail is that the clips are so small that making them robust enough will be quite hard. Pandrol clips he reckons will not be doable. Some earlier types which would certainly pass the 2' rule but to be honest I would take his bullhead solution and run with it. Plenty of bullhead in Ireland as well. ....

I wonder if the software allows the whole chair (instead of the jaw) to be tilted to achieve the cant?

[murphaph]

I guess anything is possible but I think Martin will want to get the basics working first. It is a work in progress and still months away from a finished polished version I think. But it's all going in the right direction and for those requiring a custom gauge like 21mm it's extremely promising. 

[DiveController]

On 10/11/2022 at 3:05 PM, murphaph said:

I guess anything is possible but I think Martin will want to get the basics working first. It is a work in progress and still months away from a finished polished version I think. But it's all going in the right direction and for those requiring a custom gauge like 21mm it's extremely promising. 

Watching .....

[KMCE]

On 3/11/2022 at 7:49 PM, Auto-Train Original said:

Sorry to change the subject but I love your ballast. What is is?

Sorry for the delayed reply, but I use this ballast as it is more in keeping with that on the east coast line.

Ken

[David Holman]

That looks good stuff, not  least because it is a blend, rather than a single colour.

[MAL]

Unfortunately I have to say NO.

In the early 90ies when my interest in IR started and with the Baby GMs by Murphy I said 21mm for sure! An addition to my already exisitng US 1/87 collection.

I had ties, rails and nails to make US style hand laid track. No problems at that time. All I was afraid was making points(turnouts). Now nearly 30 years later I have not one inch hand laid track. But started to be interested in JNR (Japan, 1/80 on 16.5mm / prototypical 1067mm narrowgauge).

This lead to a collection of 1/80 narrow gauge JNR plus a collection of 1/76 wide gauge IR - both on 16.5mm tracks and in parallel to a collection of standard gauge US material (1/87-16.5mm). I noticed my lifetime seems not to be endless to regauge all rolling stock and prepare 3 separate layouts.

 

tounge in cheek: It equals if you take the average of JNR 1/80 track is too wide and IR 1/76 track is too narrow.

Edited December 9, 2022 by MAL
tounge in cheek added

[Junctionmad]

I personally don’t think switching to 21mm is worth. It. 

[connollystn]

29 minutes ago, Junctionmad said:

I personally don’t think switching to 21mm is worth. It. 

Have to agree with Junctionmad and MAL. At one stage would have been all for 21mm gauge but since getting my A class locomotives I realised that it doesn't matter. The models are so good to look at that I don't notice that the track isn't the correct scale width. I've an interest in continental European railways and American railroads so HO scale is the happy medium for me. 

[David Holman]

Recent layout posts have shown that track and gauge aren't necessarily important when all the other modelling comes together. As the post above says, you don't notice the compromises when everything else looks right.

 This is me, by the way 7mm scale, 21mm and 36.75mm gauge on my 4 Irish layouts. Nothing quite sets the scene like correct broad gauge track, but get the viewing angles right and it becomes far less of an issue. Get the scenics, colours and stock looking right and it all blends together.

 I'll stick with my broad gauge, but a recent conversation with one of our eminent posters here set me thinking - had I done all my stuff in 32mm/0 gauge, I could occasionally run much longer trains round the club's 32x15 test track. Broad gauge prevents that and likewise makes the option of selling stuff much more limited. Not that I want to do that, but food for thought all the same.

[jhb171achill]

I've been mulling over this issue too. Personally, I'd prefer to see 0 and 00 scale in the correct gauge - I do think the appearance makes the difference; but I'll agree that in terms of pricing and convenience, as well as flexibility, the idea that it "isn't worth it" carries a lot of weight.

A friend is making an 0 scale MGWR D16 for me; prinarily as a display item, so I had thought, why not put it on a 36.XXmm gauge bit of track - but I took the option of putting a motor in too, in case I ever have time to do an extremely simple mini-shunting layout with half a dozen trucks, or run it on someone else's layout. The jury is still out, but I'm veering towards the narrower 0 gauge just for convenience.

 

[Galteemore]

Horses for courses. Like Mr H, my only partial regret for going down the 36.75 route is that I can’t run my stock on an O gauge test track at a local club as I don’t have a layout right now. And would I really enjoy running it at shows as a guest on a GW branchline layout or LMS main line ? I don’t ever buy RTR stock and am happy building my own stuff.  It’s as easy to build that to 36.75 as it is to 32. I will have to learn how to churn out 36.75mm turnouts, and that’s about the only downside. I have no plans to build a large layout so 36.75 mm works for me. In any case, Peco o gauge track is bullhead so for authentic Irish FB I’d have to build my own anyway…..Got to say that planting my first 36.75 scratch loco on Belmullet 18 months ago was well worth all the effort!! 

Edited February 28, 2023 by Galteemore

[Mayner]

The incorrect track gauge for Irish Broad gauge is less noticeable in O than OO gauge. In 7mm (British O) the error in the gauge is approx 8"  against 13" in OO. 

Drew Donaldson disguised the gauge issue by placing loco guard irons in the correct position and using 'coarse scale" O gauge wheels which had a wider wheel thread than 'fine scale" O gauge wheels, a bit like modelling the Irish Broad Gauge on EM track with RP25 110 rather than the narrower EMF profile wheels.

I know of at least one modeler (in England) who models the Irish Broad gauge on EM track allowing his Irish models to run on friends and club layouts.

I model the Irish Broad and Narrow Gauge mainly for the challenge of building something different, very few people were modelling Irish railway when I started out in the 70s and enjoyed the challenge of building unusual models of buildings, structures, locos and stock and hand laying track.

The majority of Irish Broad Gauge layouts in 7mm and 4mm scales tend to be relatively small end-to end or cameo layouts, the two large layouts Richard Chown's Castlerackrent and Tony Miles Adavoyle were were collective rather than solo efforts, with large supporting groups who helped realise both Richard and Tony's visions for these layouts over the best part of 40 years. 

Edited March 1, 2023 by Mayner

[Angus]

Speaking personally it is the gauge that helps create the charm and challenge of modelling Irish railways. 

I accept the total scale approach isn't for everyone and there is some very effective modelling out there that proves you don't need an accurate gauge to produce some evocative scenes, however from my perspective the extra effort is worth it. 

If I want to run trains on someone else layout, surely that's a good excuse for more trains...... never a bad thing!