Hi folks,
Whilst my Peak project is ongoing with lengthy motor and gearbox selection and deciding what criteria I will use with traction motors and building techniques I would like something with a shorter building gestation to run as the Peak needs a lot of redesign work to start building.
"I used to be indecisive but now I can't make decisions!" :'(
I have known for some time of the existence of a set of G3 scale etchings for a HST Power Car and following some inquiries I now have some costings being prepared for me. Obviously the more etching sets ordered from the etchers will lower the cost, but in the meantime I thought I would ask what potential interest their would be.
The downside is that currently there are no Intercity-125 coaches to go with them, but I intend to change that situation.
The set of 'display model' etches is based around an updated HST cab which can be returned to its original light formation by removing some etch, and the roof radiator is a Marston cooling pack design which is used with the Paxman 'Valenta' engine. An etch is also included for the cabs drivers desk, the roofs exhaust deflector and parts for the bogie frames and a set of etches for the fuel tanks etc...
This is NOT a kit of parts and will require some metal work to create parts of the bogies, general detailing and the cab roof. The etches were designed for Brush Traction to display the finished loco in their boardroom.
Therefore anybody attempting to build one of these will need to have the ability to motorise the locomotive.
Just thought I'd share this...
Doddy, that is excellent and I hope people take it up.
Is this truly Gauge 3, or are they the ex-Dave Lowery half inch scale etches?
Mike
Dave Lowerys
I thought they were 2 1/2" gauge?
Is there a scale difference between 2 1/2" and G3?
If there is I can get Dave to size the etches differently.
Er yes there is!
2.5inch gauge locomotives are of any scale that run of 2.5inch gauge track
A G3 loco is 1:22.6 scale and runs on 2.5inch gauge track
regards
ralph
Doddy, its a bit pedantic but the scale was increased to 13.5mm/1ft around the second War period so if Dave can re-size them that would be great. However, if he has any castings to go with the etchings you may decide to stick with the slightly small scale so that they all fit.
Mike
P.S. Give my regards to Dave. Not seen him for many years!
There are a few castings, the fuel gauge, dampers, air cylinder caps and a few minor bits that any self respecting engineer could knock up.
So, this model is a 2.5"G model that runs on G3 scale track. :-[
Further to your comments Mike, David, the proposed new series of etches will be to G3 scale (13.5mm/foot).
Great. Well done. I actually wrote to Dave suggesting exactly this when his article appeared in a model magazine a few years ago. Don't know whether my letter was ever forwarded, but he didn't reply.
So, well done you!
Mike
Hi. I would be interested in some etchs at g3 scale.. Keith
Hi Doddy
Great stuff. Can I have some hi-res mages for the upcoming 'modern image' G3 newsletter please. Address is on the forum.
cheers
Ian
These lithographic plates turned out to be a premium price that is well out of my reach, that and the differential 29mm in length between 2.5"G (13mm/foot) and G3 (13.5mm/foot) was just too much effort for G3.
The plates can be easily produced in G3 scale but the castings could not. Developing fittings for my own 2.5"G version would not translate again for developing a completely separate set of castings for a G3 version.
Then there is the long term issue of licensing the artwork for the MKIII coaches for both the 2.5" G plates that are available or making new plates for G3. Developing two sets of castings for those also - no thanks.
Dave Lowery can be contacted at modernimagewagons for anybody who has a bigger wallet than me to pursue the matter.
Very sorry to hear that Doddy, after the work you have put in thus far.
Have you thought of developing your own version, from scratch? You now know how Dave Lowery's was designed and could use that or not as you wish, and just do it yourself - correctly.
There are plenty of people on here to give advice and maybe even some practical help.
Mike
I did not purchase Davids lithographic 2.5"G etches due to the cost.
In any case there is no need to be sorry as other locomotives types have a higher priority for me than the HST. Dave's model would have accelerated things as he has already done the design work.
No - I have other ideas already on my workbench, some of which won't be popular with G3 purists - others ideas will.
I am obtaining motors and gearboxs at the moment and will be looking to integrate a pulsed smoke system (designed for a variety of diesel engine types - 4, 6, 8, V12 and V16), together with a synchronised CD quality sound system and traction motion control.
The focus is to get this system working in a G3 scale Class 45 Peak. I think that lot is more than enough for me at the moment, based upon 'some' parts of the Chris Barron Peak design. David, Tim, Ralph and myself are exchanging many ideas between us, although I am the only only building an electric (battery) powered Peak with these features.
Although, I will say that the smoke system needs some etches done and I know nothing about CAD, which development programs and file formats to use etc...
"These lithographic plates turned out to be a premium price that is well out of my reach, that and the differential 29mm in length between 2.5"G (13mm/foot) and G3 (13.5mm/foot) was just too much effort for G3."
I'm sorry to be pedantic Doddy - but just to be clear, anyone who models a 2.5" standard gauge prototype at a scale of 13mm/ft has simply got the scale completely wrong. It's nothing to do with any difference between G3 and 2.5" - it's simply that someone didn't care enough about 'scale' to get it right! A standard gauge model built to run on 2.5" track should be built to a scale of 1:22.6 - not 1:23.4!
Ralph says below that "2.5inch gauge locomotives are of any scale that run on 2.5inch gauge track" and he is absolutely correct in the sense that you can build a model of any engine that ran on non-standard track gauges (e.g. 2ft, Metre, 3ft, 5' 3" etc.) to run on 2.5" track. But a 2ft N/G engine built to run on 2.5" track would clearly not be G3 - as G3 is by definition standard gauge (e.g. 4' 8.5").
So sorry about this 'Rant' but I see this (mis)information about 2.5" gauge and 'G3' so often that I must admit it bugs me - and there is also the danger that others see it and start to think that there is some kind of difference between 2.5" and G3. If you are modelling a standard gauge engine on 2.5" track, then there is not (or at least there shouldn't be!).
Regards
IanT
But - it is a great pity this bloke couldn't be bothered to get it right (or possibly just compromised the correct scale to fit the available etching machine and/or material size!).
Never mind - I'm sure someone can/will do it better (and cheaper)!
IanT
Quite so Ian.
I suspect Dave Lowery was commissioned to make the model a long time ago. He probably didn't know there was a Gauge 3 Society and I'm sure this pre-dated Slaters wheels and that sort of thing.
He started in 4mm and then moved into 7mm, so our scale will have been all new to him!
Mike
I did not NOT join this forum for yet another god damned pi**sing match over scale variations! I am here to try and learn from constructive minded people. I am new to this scale and "I do not know what I do not know!"
All the bitching I get is "I run G3 scale, but I also run it with my 2.5"G steam locos"
Well! Hey come on buddy! Where is the consistency of scale here? - Oh yes it's the track gauge of 2.5" WOW!
OK - I GET THE MESSAGE LOUD AND CLEAR . . . G3 = 13.5mm/foot!
But just remember, Dave designed the HST Power Car for Brush Traction as a display model for their boardroom NOT for G3 modellers to run in their garden.
And as for cost, Lithography printing and etching from commercial lithography printers is a damn site more expensive than regular brass etching processes.
I wasn't trying to have a go at you Doddy - so please accept my apologies if I caused any offence.
But people do get confused over this issue of Gauge & Scale and (especially) on this Forum I think it's right to be clear on the differences. It's not a Gauge '3' thing - it's simply about accuracy in scale. I own older models that are not to built to current scale standards (some are 1/2" for instance) but if I'm going to build something starting from scratch, then I'd at least try to build it to the correct scale. It wouldn't really make sense not to.
As for Dave, I assume he was paid to build an accurate "scale" model of the original prototype for Brush Traction. So, if he built it to 13mm/ft (to run on 2.5" track) then unless the original loco ran on a track of gauge 4ft 10.6" - then, for whatever reason quite frankly (as a professional model maker) he fudged it.
Regards,
IanT
I am more than happy to accept your apology Ian, but please get over the way Dave built the loco, the Power Car for Brush Traction was a boardroom trinket, an unpowered display model designed and built to sit, and look pretty on 2.5" track, and not to be run by, or with G3 aficionados in mind.
I would take a guess that anybody who has been asked to build a 2.5"G loco and looks at the 2.5"G website will read that their models are built to 13mm/foot and correspondingly do the same and not give G3 a second thought. We can speculate until the cows come home on that one.
Dave will likely use his remaining etches for other railway companies boardroom display models once the real HST trains start to be withdrawn.
As for the Slaters wheels Mike; Dave used Slaters 2.5"G spoked wheels and covered them with his own nickel silver etches to represent the brake disks mounted on the real power car. So of all the things on this model it is likely that the wheels that are the only things to scale for G3.
As for building in the correct scale of 13.5mm/foot, I totally agree with you, which is the other principle reason I did not buy the existing 2.5"G lithoplates from Dave.
They would not have sat well against my G3 Peak and I was told in no uncertain terms that any development of a 2.5"G loco at 13mm/foot would not be accepted by G3 members who require 13.5mm/foot. And IF I had built another pair of locos they would not sit together as one set would have been 2.5"G and the other at G3 scale - another reason not to purchase the 2,5"G version. As all these issues would also be present for any potential development of MKIII coaches to go with the power cars.
Scalewise, the difference is a 2.5"G power car length of 759mm against a G3 scale power car length of 788.4mm and 5mm narrower than the G3 version. I took that factor onboard when I was told about it by Mike Williams and others. I myself cringed at the idea of having to build two entire sets of castings for the two scales even with such a minute difference. Another reason for me not going with the 2.5"G lithographic plates.
As for the issue of scale and gauge on this forum:- It does state . . . Gauge 3 and 2.5 inch gauge
SO, in my mind you do raise a very valid point in that the misinterpretation of the two build scales is not prevalent in material related to G3 matters presented to the unknowing.
On The National 2 1/2" Association website homepage it clearly states that "Initially, the scale used for standard gauge locomotives was half inch, but this was changed to 17/32-ins. (about 13mm) very early on"
On THE GAUGE '3' SOCIETY website homepage - nothing!
I'm sorry Doddy,
I'm really not trying to get into point scoring here but I'm afraid your interpretation/understanding of 2.5" gauge is incorrect. I've been a member of both the Gauge '3' Society and the National 2.5" Gauge Association for some years and your statement about 13mm/ft for 2.5" gauge is just simply wrong - I'm sorry but it is.
If you convert 17/32nds to metric, you will find that it comes to 13.49375 mm. That seems pretty near to 13.5 mm to me.
Before you leap all over me, please remember that others (perhaps unfamiliar with the differences between Scale & Gauge) read these posts (and statements in them) on what is a Public Forum and any incorrect information published on it can be quite confusing for them.
Regards,
IanT
Doddy,
Gauge 3
Elegant, reasonably scale looking, recognisable prototypes, 64mm track with plastic or wooded sleepers & chairs of whitemetal or soldered staples & "rail like" section in bullhead or flat bottom which is quite reasonably lifelike.
2.5" gauge
Harks back to the days when Curly Lawrence alias LBSC popularised 2.5inch gauge to the masses for use in suburban gardens rather than aristocratic large country house estates. His legacy is valuable as a prolific designer & builder of excellent working miniature steam locomotives has often been unreasonably criticised for making them chunky & slightly out of scale. Reason being he favoured ride behind leg dangling & firing & driving one's own loco as the ultimate challenge. To this extent the tracks around the country tend to be Model Engineer Society tracks & raised too. With either heavy gauge rail section multi gauge 3.5 & 5 inch gauges shared with the 2.5. If not rail section heavy gauge then steel trip with welded or bolted spacers separating the rails or "runners".
You see Doody we are talking about 3 different things here.
1) Gauge 3 & how pretty it is, running through scenery with a trailing consist. Either under control or mostly, frighteningly out of control.
2) 2.5" gauge & how robust, heavy engineered so you can get your fingers into the cabs with hot metal wanting to burn your fingers while you shovel coal like crazy trying to keep up steam belting along at what seems warp speed & trying at the same time to avoid ramming the fellow in front whose poor loco has lost fire & pressure & stopped.
3) An arbitary scaled model to fit in a glass case in the boardroom.
Doddy I love em all. I don't care. Am a member of G3S & N2.5inch assoc. Also love to make & have fun models that make purists cringe.
If a pretty looking gauge 3 loco is run on a ME society track, due to unpopularity of 2.5" the rail head tends to be a bit corroded or rusty, then there is a risk that the model could derail & be damaged. This is due to the rusty rail & a nice polished rail due to the 3.5 & 5 being more popular. Some may think I am talking rubbish but I tell you this I will never put my Brit on a ME track for that reason alone.
Please chill & do your own thing like the rest of us do it is after all supposed to be fun we will gladly give you all the support & encouragement you need.
Come along to Ted's on Sunday & see how much fun we really do have.
Cheers
Dave
Quote from: IanT on Aug 23 2014 17:33
I'm sorry Doddy,
I'm really not trying to get into point scoring here but I'm afraid your interpretation/understanding of 2.5" gauge is incorrect. I've been a member of both the Gauge '3' Society and the National 2.5" Gauge Association for some years and your statement about 13mm/ft for 2.5" gauge is just simply wrong - I'm sorry but it is.
If you convert 17/32nds to metric, you will find that it comes to 13.49375 mm. That seems pretty near to 13.5 mm to me.
Before you leap all over me, please remember that others (perhaps unfamiliar with the differences between Scale & Gauge) read these posts (and statements in them) on what is a Public Forum and any incorrect information published on it can be quite confusing for them.
Regards,
IanT
HEY! READ THE WEBSITE AND SEE FOR YOURSELF:-http://www.n25ga.org.uk/
Second paragraph . . .
Why tell me to chill out when you don't read or investigate things!
Written in their words, you clubs words. If is wrong then tell them to get their website changed!
The term used by N2.5gA on their website is "about 13mm" no more precise than that, certainly last time I checked.
Dave
454
I think we've all understood the message. Can we cool the language a little please.
Mike
I've asked Gerald to change the 'about 13mm' to 13.5mm. I think it's something that got carried over from the old website. My apologies as it has obviously caused confusion.
John
Thanks John for coming to the rescue, suspect could hear the cavalry galloping over the horizon, I think that should be the end of the matter & we can get down to talking about HST's once more.
Cheers
Dave
454
Just to re-state the raison d'etre of this forum : It is for anyone with an interest in modelling/model engineering in Gauge 3 or 2.5 inch gauge to seek information and exchange ideas.
Whereas the majority of members are likely to follow a SCALE of 13.5mm to one Foot, there will be those whose interests may result in variations in scale.
Older 2.5 inch gauge models (including "vintage" products from the likes of Bassett-Lowke, Bing, etc.) are brought to G3 get-togethers, as well as more recently-built models to the designs of LBSC (Curly Lawrence....not the railway) and Henry Greenly.
Many of these 2.5 gauge models are not strictly to the scale quoted for Gauge 3 (i.e. 13.5 mm to one Foot) but none the less are welcomed and run without problems (so long as they are not so overscale as to demolish lineside items such as signals, etc.).
This forum was originally set up just for followers of "Gauge 3" but in recognition of a number of factors (which included the potential value of input from members of the National 2.5 Gauge Assocn. and the fact that several followers of our scale/gauge are members of both The Gauge 3 Society and N2.5GA)
the scope was widened to include all with 2.5 inch gauge interests.
The decision has been of benefit to Gauge 3 followers, since there has been valuable input from experienced N2.5GA members who are not members of The Gauge 3 Society.
The minor differences in interpretation of "scale" have been highlighted in this thread but in reality (so long as these are understood) have not been detrimental to harmonious interaction at Gauge 3 events where models varying from the currently accepted standards have been run together.
The last thing any of us want, is to deter any member from posting in this forum, simply because their model is not 100% to the current scale being quoted as "the standard" (after all, the standards have altered over the years.... even the Gauge 3 Society wheel profile standards and buffer height/spacing have been changed within the past couple of years).
John Candy
Doddy,
Is there any progress you can tell us about yet?
Mike
For a variety of reasons the HST project is not going any further.
However, several other opportunities have arisen to licence and produce several motorised models for G3 which are currently in discussion for construction and testing of the first prototypes over the next few months.