Obviously since I posted this in the O gauge area of "Scale specific discussions", I am going to concentrate on O gauge or O scale as a definition. I've been told in the past that Gauge means one thing and Scale means another. I've also been told that both counter act one-another. One refers to track width, the other refers to sizing of the various items present in a layout. One starts with a G and the other starts with an S.
I have seen in person, not just YouTube, very few train layouts. My favorite so far is the Colorado Railroad Museum. Why? Size. The thing covers an entire warehouse. Along the way there are all kinds of displays involving lumber yards, lighted signs, tunnels that go east when you enter and west when you come out the other side, a lot of work went into this. Not to mention the electrical set up that had to be figured out to make it all work.
However. The dreaded however. Praise the layout then send it to its room for getting a B instead of an A. Scale integrity along the route, as I watched through the lens of a camera placed in the various cabs of the locomotives, seems to always take on an air of necessity, rather than an air of detail integrity. Lionel, MTH, Atlas, Bachmann, whoever makes Locomotives, Rolling Stock, Track, Buildings, People, Signs, and the various carnival rides and moving pieces props they wish to sell to the public, attempt to keep with scale integrity. O scale, as I have come to know it, unless I'm wrong or naive, is 1:48. 1 (inch) on a typical measuring device, equals 48 inches in the O scale system. So one inch equals four feet. Simple. I guess. Based on that, two inches equals eight feet. Yes? No? Maybe? In my experience, just throwing this out there, it appears to be more "guidelines". Model Railroaders in some situations can't possibly stick to the system due to sizing conflicts among the other scale model industries. The company's that make scale model tractors, backhoes, cars, trucks, motorcycles, etc. follow a similar doctrine, but not an exact doctrine. 1:43, 1:50, 1:64. Even when they do, the occassional 1:48 scale Trackhoe or Crane, they almost appear to be the same size as the flat car they would ride upon.
One layout I saw on YouTube, which was phenomenal, moving pieces I'd never seen before. Kid climbing a tree, welder repairing a track, smoke and all, guy unloading 4x8 sheets of plywood. Then I'd see a fire truck that was as big or bigger than a locomotive. I've never once seen an O gauge or O scale layout that had a Tonka dump truck sitting in the middle of it, but I have seen my share of layouts that obviously threw caution to the wind when it came to how big the car waiting at the crossing was in comparison to the train going by.
What's my end game in all this? I want to know if anyone else out there who has a train layout of whatever size attempts to stick to the O the same way I do. Granted my water tower is probably not to code, but I also do not have a G.I. Joe action figure working on my loading dock.
I have seen in person, not just YouTube, very few train layouts. My favorite so far is the Colorado Railroad Museum. Why? Size. The thing covers an entire warehouse. Along the way there are all kinds of displays involving lumber yards, lighted signs, tunnels that go east when you enter and west when you come out the other side, a lot of work went into this. Not to mention the electrical set up that had to be figured out to make it all work.
However. The dreaded however. Praise the layout then send it to its room for getting a B instead of an A. Scale integrity along the route, as I watched through the lens of a camera placed in the various cabs of the locomotives, seems to always take on an air of necessity, rather than an air of detail integrity. Lionel, MTH, Atlas, Bachmann, whoever makes Locomotives, Rolling Stock, Track, Buildings, People, Signs, and the various carnival rides and moving pieces props they wish to sell to the public, attempt to keep with scale integrity. O scale, as I have come to know it, unless I'm wrong or naive, is 1:48. 1 (inch) on a typical measuring device, equals 48 inches in the O scale system. So one inch equals four feet. Simple. I guess. Based on that, two inches equals eight feet. Yes? No? Maybe? In my experience, just throwing this out there, it appears to be more "guidelines". Model Railroaders in some situations can't possibly stick to the system due to sizing conflicts among the other scale model industries. The company's that make scale model tractors, backhoes, cars, trucks, motorcycles, etc. follow a similar doctrine, but not an exact doctrine. 1:43, 1:50, 1:64. Even when they do, the occassional 1:48 scale Trackhoe or Crane, they almost appear to be the same size as the flat car they would ride upon.
One layout I saw on YouTube, which was phenomenal, moving pieces I'd never seen before. Kid climbing a tree, welder repairing a track, smoke and all, guy unloading 4x8 sheets of plywood. Then I'd see a fire truck that was as big or bigger than a locomotive. I've never once seen an O gauge or O scale layout that had a Tonka dump truck sitting in the middle of it, but I have seen my share of layouts that obviously threw caution to the wind when it came to how big the car waiting at the crossing was in comparison to the train going by.
What's my end game in all this? I want to know if anyone else out there who has a train layout of whatever size attempts to stick to the O the same way I do. Granted my water tower is probably not to code, but I also do not have a G.I. Joe action figure working on my loading dock.
) 2-rail and 3-rail trains!
