Ridiculous Detail

Talk about anything and everything!

Ridiculous Detail

Postby CSD » Mon Mar 29, 2010 11:39 am

I have been looking at the posts of a guy making a 1:35 scale model of an ex BR52 made into a 555.0. The level of detail is amazing. You can view all the posts by scrolling to the bottom and clicking the links.

http://magazin.modely.biz/view.php?naze ... 2010030001
http://magazin.modely.biz/view.php?naze ... 2009010001
http://magazin.modely.biz/view.php?naze ... 2008040001
Mark
//S
User avatar
CSD
 
Posts: 2270
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: St. Albert, Alberta, Canada

Re: Ridiculous Detail

Postby BTTB Fan » Mon Mar 29, 2010 11:50 am

Amazing... from the intentional imperfections in the sheet metal to the dials in the cab. And, the toolbox... well, I have no words...
Alexei
User avatar
BTTB Fan
 
Posts: 677
Images: 4
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 9:01 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Ridiculous Detail

Postby ConducTTor » Mon Mar 29, 2010 12:01 pm

Insane! But if you really want to impress me, do that in T gauge :shock:
What people think: "liberals/conservatives are ruining my country"
What the powerful know: divide and conquer
User avatar
ConducTTor
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8293
Images: 13
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 4:52 pm
Location: Atlanta GA USA

Re: Ridiculous Detail

Postby AstroGoat760 » Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:45 pm

ConducTTor wrote:Insane! But if you really want to impress me, do that in T gauge :shock:


I thought T-gauge was "just bugs" to you.....

That work on that engine only has one flaw..... It should have been a model of a Southern Railways Ps-4 4-6-2! :lol:
Course Set, Speed - Maximum Warp, PUNCH IT!
User avatar
AstroGoat760
 
Posts: 3473
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Lidgerwood, North Dakota, USA

Re: Ridiculous Detail

Postby ConducTTor » Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:07 pm

AngrySailor302 wrote:
ConducTTor wrote:Insane! But if you really want to impress me, do that in T gauge :shock:


I thought T-gauge was "just bugs" to you.....


It does. But I would impressed :grin:
What people think: "liberals/conservatives are ruining my country"
What the powerful know: divide and conquer
User avatar
ConducTTor
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8293
Images: 13
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 4:52 pm
Location: Atlanta GA USA

Re: Ridiculous Detail

Postby ConnRiver » Wed Mar 31, 2010 3:59 pm

Got a question or two, if I might:

What level of detail is desired for new TT scale products? Would N scale detail level be acceptable on new resin-cast rolling stock and locomotives? (I'm thinking North American prototypes from cottage businesses rather than established large companies such as Tillig.)

How about "good enough"? That is, kits with fine detail but, unlike many HO offerings, excluding detail not visible to the eye from "trackside." And, if certain details interfere with great operation, exclude them. This would, perhaps, create two advantages:

1) Less costly kit models
2) Kits available sooner rather than later.

Just hoping to explore opinions here. Thanks much!

-Brian

Brian Chapman
Evansdale, Iowa
Brian Chapman
Cedar Rapids, Iowa / USA
ConnRiver
 
Posts: 428
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 10:51 am
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa / USA

Re: Ridiculous Detail

Postby CSD » Wed Mar 31, 2010 6:37 pm

Hello, Brian. Welcome to the site.

Most TT modelers know that a fair amount of kit bashing and scratch building are required to make North American prototypes. I think that if all the major spotting features and correct proportion were included you would have a good amount of interest. With a good base individual modelers can add as much detail as they are comfortable with. I have a few cast resin kits from Europe. Most have the basic body details and are then supplemented by photo etched detail parts, either bought separately or included. Finally, my suggestion would be to focus on something other than a box car. If you did I'm sure many members here would go coo-coo crazy no matter what level of detail it had.

Mark
Mark
//S
User avatar
CSD
 
Posts: 2270
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: St. Albert, Alberta, Canada

Re: Ridiculous Detail

Postby Marquette » Wed Mar 31, 2010 6:53 pm

Well, I think the essential first step is to have new kits. So long as it is proportionally correct, and in the main features accurately representing a specific prototype, I think the level of detail is secondary; as CSD said, anyone can then add whatever level of detail they desire.

Essential kits needed now are a good tank car (my suggestion for the first would be a UTL Type X, which ran from the 20s into the 60s), a gondola (my suggestions would be the USRA and the 52' Greenville type), and a USRA hopper. Beyond that, there are still a few boxcar types which can be considered essential, as well as other gondolas, hoppers, tank cars and reefers. A caboose is also a big lack - though of course, that's the most difficult one to address, as there was so much variance from railway to railway.
http://espeett.blogspot.com - The SP in 1:120 - my attempt at a blog
#include <std/disclaimer.h>
User avatar
Marquette
 
Posts: 2061
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 8:16 pm

Re: Ridiculous Detail

Postby ConnRiver » Thu Apr 01, 2010 1:18 pm

Mark, Marquette, thanks much for your replies.

My thinking is one-piece body casting with add-on fret parts, cast/etched as need be. I'd avoid cast-on grabs and ladders; they would be separate parts to be added by the modeler.

A modular approach might be the quickest way for we TTers to assemble a freight car fleet. That is, if my CNC machining skills prove to be up to the task, create separate ends, sides, roofs (where applicable, of course ;-) for car types (box, gon, flat, etc.). Create a library of parts from which one-piece bodies can be assembled then cast. The 1932 ARA box car, for example (but, Mark, taking your comment to heart, after a few other car types.)

Gotta have a number of freight and passenger trucks, too. I wonder how well 3D printing might work here. I'd like to give this a try (I use 3D software as well as 2D). There's such an array of resins available today, some are rock-hard and nearly indestructible.

Marquette, got a flat car recommendation? I'd like to concentrate what was on the rails during the 1950s (I'm planning a circa 1955 layout in New England).

The caboose "problem" has come up elsewhere, too. I've got CBCs and have collected tons of model press drawings over the years, too. But, where to begin?

Couplers. What is available? (I've been in the TT camp only for a year or so, I've not dealt with all the basic issues yet.)

I'll stop. Just wanted to plug into the thinking here. Thanks!

-Brian

Brian Chapman
Evansdale, Iowa
Brian Chapman
Cedar Rapids, Iowa / USA
ConnRiver
 
Posts: 428
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 10:51 am
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa / USA

Re: Ridiculous Detail

Postby areibel » Thu Apr 01, 2010 4:23 pm

ConnRiver wrote:Couplers. What is available? (I've been in the TT camp only for a year or so, I've not dealt with all the basic issues yet.)

I'll stop. Just wanted to plug into the thinking here. Thanks!

-Brian

Brian Chapman
Evansdale, Iowa


Hi Brian,
Don't stop! The dark side has great power! MUAAA HAAAA HAAAA!

Your planning sounds great! I personally would rather have more of a "base" model without a lot of cast on details (ladders and grabs) to contend with.
Couplers- the Kadee 714's were the usual replacement for the old HP's. They're listed as HOn3 and TT on the package. They are oversize for TT though. A lot of gus have switched to to Microtrains N scale, which work really well. And the nice thing, if you set the coupler height right, the two versions will work together.
Al
areibel
 
Posts: 1700
Images: 7
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 10:12 am
Location: Cambridge Springs PA

Next

Return to Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests