29 August 2008
A Look at T Flex
A newcomer to T sent me a link to a forum in the UK. This thread features a good look at the forthcoming flex track from Eishindo, as well as other products. There is a nice discussion going on, so naturally I jumped in. Hey, the water here in T Gauge is quite refreshing!
28 August 2008
Handlaid T Gauge Track!
As I write this, I'm working on the dimensions for handlaid T Gauge track. After having determined the flanges are roughly .010-inch deep, I selected .015-inch steel music wire for rail. It scales out nicely to about 6.5 inches in height, and it will keep the magnetic wheels happy.
The plan is to solder the "rail" to strips of solid PC board, the width of the strips matching tie length, and notched to simulate the ties. At 1:450, T Gauge ties are .225 inches long by .020 inches wide, and spaced .025 inches apart on .045-inch centers. Given that typical PC board is over two scale feet thick, I won't have to notch it all that deeply to arrive at the proper tie height—not that tie height is ever a critical dimension, particularly after ballasting.
My plan is to also develop a turnout, eventually. The first one may or may not be functional—it depends on how hard it is to make something that even resembles a turnout at three millimeter gauge. Steel wire is a very different material with which to work, as contrasted with nickel, and its properties may work for or against the possibility of operability.
The numbers appearing on the page as I typed them didn't really mean much to me until I measured out and cut the first piece of PC board, whereupon my first thought was, "Holy crap, this is small! What am I getting myself into?" I chided myself: even though I've been handling T Gauge track for a while now, it's roadbed style track, which has considerably more bulk than rail and ties alone.
Still, when I compared my freshly-cut tie strip to Eishindo's track, things looked all wrong. That's when I started to realize that, in order to make track that looked proportionally balanced to the eye, Eishindo had to take some dimensional liberties. Let's start with the rails: they're .030 inches wide across the head—which is over a foot! Multiply that times two, and space them 4 feet 8.5 inches apart, and you're approaching the length of a tie. So, in order to look right, Eishindo made ties that are nearly 12 scale feet long by well over a foot wide (versus 8.5 feet long by 9 inches wide for a typical real tie); they're also spaced out further—13 per inch, when there should be around 22.
This should in no way be taken as a slam against Eishindo. They faced some daunting challenges to make track that was both decent-looking and easily mass-produced, and I think they met the challenge surprisingly well. My challenge is quite different, since I'm not constrained by the limitations of manufacturing. That said, once I cut the tie strip, I began to wonder if my attempt to be accurate might somehow backfire; the only way to find out was to finish a length of track and see for myself.
To aid in the process of notching the tie strip, I made an illustration in CorelDraw with tie-width lines at the proper spacing. Once I printed this out, I took my second gulp of air for the evening. Look at them all! Shaking off that little shock, I went off to the garage with calipers in hand to search for a saw blade that would make the proper width cuts, and happened to find a fine-toothed coping saw that measured out just right.
After just two cuts, though, I quickly saw a fatal flaw in my thinking: a .025-inch thick blade does not produce .025-inch wide cuts; they're considerably wider. So I switched to a razor saw which, though much thinner than the target dimension, could be "finessed" with a little side-to-side action to produce the right cuts.
The next problem was hitting the mark reliably... over 120 times. After a while, I just went for "close enough," as otherwise I'd be at it all night. To entertain myself during this massively tedious process, I conjured up plans for some kind of custom tool that would produce a dozen or so perfectly-spaced cuts across an entire PC board all at once. I've no idea if any of my notions will lead to anything, but I can say that I won't be making much T Gauge handlaid track if I can't find a better way of making the cuts. (In hindsight, this seems like a ideal job for a CNC machine—especially considering the complexity of, say, a turnout. Perhaps I could find someone with a little CNC machine for hire...)
At any rate, I wasn't all that worried about precision; this was a proof of concept exercise, to test materials and methods; regardless of whether or not the outcome was a success or a failure, the exercise would have served its purpose.
With all of the ties cut and the copper sanded clean, I marked out the track gauge and began soldering the wire rails in place. Shortly into this exercise I hit one of those classic "duh" moments as I realized I didn't need to solder each tie individually; I could do them about two dozen at a time by simply running the iron along the inside of the rail. Excess solder—and the copper under it—would be peeled away in the next step, one that I've done many times for my handlaid Z scale track.
Within seconds of having the last tie cleaned off, I placed a car on the track and rolled it back and forth. Confidence in the process now boosted to new levels, I quickly painted the track so that I could get a sense of how good it might look finished. In my haste I forgot to clean off the waste flux, and the subsequent quick, heavy application of paint filled in most of the spaces between the ties. After a quick acetone bath, I applied a few light coats of paint and then immediately glued the strip to a scrap of Gatorboard in preparation for ballasting. I was going all the way!
On the subject of ballasting, scale ballast stone would be pretty much a powder. With nothing even close to scale on hand, I used the very finest Z scale minitec ballast I had. Although much too coarse, it nevertheless "suggested" the desired effect.
By the time I got the ballast in place and the glue down, the track was looking so good that I placed it under a heat lamp to accelerate drying. And even before it was dry, I sanded off the railheads so I could get the final effect sooner. Before long I was being flooded with layout ideas—I could actually envision a "real" T gauge layout as a distinct possibility. Not some little novelty display or a toy-like holiday decoration, but a real layout.
Oh, and in case anyone is wondering if trains will actually run on this track...
The plan is to solder the "rail" to strips of solid PC board, the width of the strips matching tie length, and notched to simulate the ties. At 1:450, T Gauge ties are .225 inches long by .020 inches wide, and spaced .025 inches apart on .045-inch centers. Given that typical PC board is over two scale feet thick, I won't have to notch it all that deeply to arrive at the proper tie height—not that tie height is ever a critical dimension, particularly after ballasting.
My plan is to also develop a turnout, eventually. The first one may or may not be functional—it depends on how hard it is to make something that even resembles a turnout at three millimeter gauge. Steel wire is a very different material with which to work, as contrasted with nickel, and its properties may work for or against the possibility of operability.
The numbers appearing on the page as I typed them didn't really mean much to me until I measured out and cut the first piece of PC board, whereupon my first thought was, "Holy crap, this is small! What am I getting myself into?" I chided myself: even though I've been handling T Gauge track for a while now, it's roadbed style track, which has considerably more bulk than rail and ties alone.
Still, when I compared my freshly-cut tie strip to Eishindo's track, things looked all wrong. That's when I started to realize that, in order to make track that looked proportionally balanced to the eye, Eishindo had to take some dimensional liberties. Let's start with the rails: they're .030 inches wide across the head—which is over a foot! Multiply that times two, and space them 4 feet 8.5 inches apart, and you're approaching the length of a tie. So, in order to look right, Eishindo made ties that are nearly 12 scale feet long by well over a foot wide (versus 8.5 feet long by 9 inches wide for a typical real tie); they're also spaced out further—13 per inch, when there should be around 22.
This should in no way be taken as a slam against Eishindo. They faced some daunting challenges to make track that was both decent-looking and easily mass-produced, and I think they met the challenge surprisingly well. My challenge is quite different, since I'm not constrained by the limitations of manufacturing. That said, once I cut the tie strip, I began to wonder if my attempt to be accurate might somehow backfire; the only way to find out was to finish a length of track and see for myself.
To aid in the process of notching the tie strip, I made an illustration in CorelDraw with tie-width lines at the proper spacing. Once I printed this out, I took my second gulp of air for the evening. Look at them all! Shaking off that little shock, I went off to the garage with calipers in hand to search for a saw blade that would make the proper width cuts, and happened to find a fine-toothed coping saw that measured out just right.
After just two cuts, though, I quickly saw a fatal flaw in my thinking: a .025-inch thick blade does not produce .025-inch wide cuts; they're considerably wider. So I switched to a razor saw which, though much thinner than the target dimension, could be "finessed" with a little side-to-side action to produce the right cuts.
The next problem was hitting the mark reliably... over 120 times. After a while, I just went for "close enough," as otherwise I'd be at it all night. To entertain myself during this massively tedious process, I conjured up plans for some kind of custom tool that would produce a dozen or so perfectly-spaced cuts across an entire PC board all at once. I've no idea if any of my notions will lead to anything, but I can say that I won't be making much T Gauge handlaid track if I can't find a better way of making the cuts. (In hindsight, this seems like a ideal job for a CNC machine—especially considering the complexity of, say, a turnout. Perhaps I could find someone with a little CNC machine for hire...)
At any rate, I wasn't all that worried about precision; this was a proof of concept exercise, to test materials and methods; regardless of whether or not the outcome was a success or a failure, the exercise would have served its purpose.
With all of the ties cut and the copper sanded clean, I marked out the track gauge and began soldering the wire rails in place. Shortly into this exercise I hit one of those classic "duh" moments as I realized I didn't need to solder each tie individually; I could do them about two dozen at a time by simply running the iron along the inside of the rail. Excess solder—and the copper under it—would be peeled away in the next step, one that I've done many times for my handlaid Z scale track.
Within seconds of having the last tie cleaned off, I placed a car on the track and rolled it back and forth. Confidence in the process now boosted to new levels, I quickly painted the track so that I could get a sense of how good it might look finished. In my haste I forgot to clean off the waste flux, and the subsequent quick, heavy application of paint filled in most of the spaces between the ties. After a quick acetone bath, I applied a few light coats of paint and then immediately glued the strip to a scrap of Gatorboard in preparation for ballasting. I was going all the way!
On the subject of ballasting, scale ballast stone would be pretty much a powder. With nothing even close to scale on hand, I used the very finest Z scale minitec ballast I had. Although much too coarse, it nevertheless "suggested" the desired effect.
By the time I got the ballast in place and the glue down, the track was looking so good that I placed it under a heat lamp to accelerate drying. And even before it was dry, I sanded off the railheads so I could get the final effect sooner. Before long I was being flooded with layout ideas—I could actually envision a "real" T gauge layout as a distinct possibility. Not some little novelty display or a toy-like holiday decoration, but a real layout.
Oh, and in case anyone is wondering if trains will actually run on this track...
New Couplers
Eishindo is obviously serious about keeping their act together. First they offered us the "floppy Rapido," something of a step backward in technology since the Rapido was introduced in N scale back in the 60s. Shrunk down to 1:450 and lacking any kind of spring, they were virtually impossible to couple together, and even harder to keep them coupled. Then they offered the sprung Rapido: a good try, but only marginally more reliable—assuming one was successful at installing them, that is!
Now Eishindo has taken an even bigger step back in model train history. Not that using ancient technology is a bad thing, since there's no denying the reliability of the old hook and loop. But that's what they've done, and I applaud them for it. Cosmetically they're no worse than Rapidos—perhaps even a tiny bit better, actually. They do introduce "polarity" to the cars, as they now cannot be turned end-for-end and still couple, but that's of no consequence in the grand scheme of things.
This came to my attention with a new trainset I just received. Enclosed with the set was a little plastic baggie with the sprue shown above, and the pictogram shown below. Not evident in the photograph are the pins in the top row of parts, which engage the holes in the bottom row. A couple of gripes: first, one must recycle the springs from the Rapidos (assuming one has them—early adopters are SOL); and second, there are no spares!
Despite the gripes, it's good to know that Eishindo is paying attention to performance issues. It goes a long way to bolstering confidence in the scale, even if the scale will forever remain a novelty.
Now Eishindo has taken an even bigger step back in model train history. Not that using ancient technology is a bad thing, since there's no denying the reliability of the old hook and loop. But that's what they've done, and I applaud them for it. Cosmetically they're no worse than Rapidos—perhaps even a tiny bit better, actually. They do introduce "polarity" to the cars, as they now cannot be turned end-for-end and still couple, but that's of no consequence in the grand scheme of things.
This came to my attention with a new trainset I just received. Enclosed with the set was a little plastic baggie with the sprue shown above, and the pictogram shown below. Not evident in the photograph are the pins in the top row of parts, which engage the holes in the bottom row. A couple of gripes: first, one must recycle the springs from the Rapidos (assuming one has them—early adopters are SOL); and second, there are no spares!
Despite the gripes, it's good to know that Eishindo is paying attention to performance issues. It goes a long way to bolstering confidence in the scale, even if the scale will forever remain a novelty.
27 August 2008
Meditation on a Layout
After having received several sets of T Gauge accessories, as well as some useful Herpa Wings 1:500 items, I got to thinking about a layout. Well, to be honest, "nearly obsessing over" is more like it. It's kept me awake some nights, despite my best efforts to contemplate other, more important things.
My original idea was to build a multi-level subway station, visible through a cross-section of the earth below a city scene. It should be evident that inspiration for this came from the vague resemblance between stock T Gauge car sets and domestic subway trains—particularly the new Hankyu 9000 sets supposedly on the way in December. I may still pursue this as an alternate project for the future.
But for the present, I've moved past that plan. Inspired by the possibility of Americanizing Eishindo's neat houses, I'm envisioning an urban landscape trisected by two railroad lines that cross one another. One line would be elevated, and would pass over another line on a long angle; the latter line would be at street level, possibly doing some street running, and possibly having an industrial siding or two.
Part of the reason for this approach is to give T Gauge more exposure—in several senses of the word. A conventional setting makes it more "approachable" by other modelers, whereas a novelty layout, like the subway station diorama, has less appeal. Thus the layout might help to generate some more interest in the scale. The above-ground setting also provides greater opportunity to observe the models, and to see they are running autonomously on track, as opposed to possibly being some sort of mechanical trick.
Speaking of track, I'm toying with the idea of going for handlaid. No, I wouldn't be using my custom Code 25 rail. For one thing, it's not steel, and I believe performance would suffer for not having rail that the magnetic wheels could grip. And, for another, it's probably bigger than it needs to be. I've not yet measured T Gauge flanges, but when I do, their depth will dictate what size of steel wire I'll use for rail—which I'll solder to solid strips of PC board notched to simulate ties.
As for research, I've already done the legwork—over the course of four decades, I've visited more north-central Jersey railroad towns than I can count. Lately I've started making regular "virtual field trips" using Live Search Maps, perhaps the most powerful railroad research tool to come along since Google. The layout would not represent a specific real place, but instead a composite based on several locales, plus a helping of imagination—necessary because a great many railroading spots I once frequented have been so utterly obliterated that I'm no longer able to locate any trace of them. So sad.
Anyway, as for rolling stock, I could see running a pair of (dummy) F40PHs with a few (powered) commuter cars each on the elevated line, and an RDC on the lower line. Alternatively, the lower line might get a short freight—if I can figure out a way to power such a thing, that is!
EDIT: The flanges are approximately .010 in. deep. So, .015 steel wire ought to be just about right for rail. It scales out to 6.5 inches high—how perfect can you get! By the way, I've added a handy list of dimensions in the permanent column to the right for us T Gauge tinkerers to reference.
My original idea was to build a multi-level subway station, visible through a cross-section of the earth below a city scene. It should be evident that inspiration for this came from the vague resemblance between stock T Gauge car sets and domestic subway trains—particularly the new Hankyu 9000 sets supposedly on the way in December. I may still pursue this as an alternate project for the future.
But for the present, I've moved past that plan. Inspired by the possibility of Americanizing Eishindo's neat houses, I'm envisioning an urban landscape trisected by two railroad lines that cross one another. One line would be elevated, and would pass over another line on a long angle; the latter line would be at street level, possibly doing some street running, and possibly having an industrial siding or two.
Part of the reason for this approach is to give T Gauge more exposure—in several senses of the word. A conventional setting makes it more "approachable" by other modelers, whereas a novelty layout, like the subway station diorama, has less appeal. Thus the layout might help to generate some more interest in the scale. The above-ground setting also provides greater opportunity to observe the models, and to see they are running autonomously on track, as opposed to possibly being some sort of mechanical trick.
Speaking of track, I'm toying with the idea of going for handlaid. No, I wouldn't be using my custom Code 25 rail. For one thing, it's not steel, and I believe performance would suffer for not having rail that the magnetic wheels could grip. And, for another, it's probably bigger than it needs to be. I've not yet measured T Gauge flanges, but when I do, their depth will dictate what size of steel wire I'll use for rail—which I'll solder to solid strips of PC board notched to simulate ties.
As for research, I've already done the legwork—over the course of four decades, I've visited more north-central Jersey railroad towns than I can count. Lately I've started making regular "virtual field trips" using Live Search Maps, perhaps the most powerful railroad research tool to come along since Google. The layout would not represent a specific real place, but instead a composite based on several locales, plus a helping of imagination—necessary because a great many railroading spots I once frequented have been so utterly obliterated that I'm no longer able to locate any trace of them. So sad.
Anyway, as for rolling stock, I could see running a pair of (dummy) F40PHs with a few (powered) commuter cars each on the elevated line, and an RDC on the lower line. Alternatively, the lower line might get a short freight—if I can figure out a way to power such a thing, that is!
EDIT: The flanges are approximately .010 in. deep. So, .015 steel wire ought to be just about right for rail. It scales out to 6.5 inches high—how perfect can you get! By the way, I've added a handy list of dimensions in the permanent column to the right for us T Gauge tinkerers to reference.
17 August 2008
T Gauge Bonanza
T Gauge is just starting to hit its stride. Aside from the fact that vendors are having trouble keeping up with demand, Eishindo is delivering the goods, from full train sets to a full range of accessories.
I've just received a shipment of structures and accessories, and I must say that Eishindo is doing things in T rarely if ever done in larger scales. Consider: structures with full interiors, including floors, furniture, and lighting fixtures ready for illumination; one multi-story building even comes with an etched stainless steel fire escape. The figures are surprisingly good-looking given their microscopic size, and include cows and horses—the latter featuring riders.
Owing to their bright colors, the buildings look rather cartoonish, but they're generally generic enough to work for almost any country, especially if one takes the time to paint them, say, brick or stone colors with nice bland roofs. I've been toying with the idea of making my own brick and shingle sheets and laminating the paper onto the buildings.
As for the trains, I'm hearing reports that performance issues have been addressed for the most part (I've not had a chance to fire up any new trains lately—soon, though!). This is good to hear, as my initial experience was not the best. But I wasn't about to give up on T just because my trains didn't stay on the track. Plus, the fact that Eishindo is addressing concerns is a tremendous confidence-booster. And the prospect of switches really opens up all kinds of possibilities.
Between a full product range and Robert Ray's progress on Americanizing the cars, I'm now starting to get really fired up to make a layout. I've already got a mechanism torn down in preparation for experiments in re-gearing and/or bashing into a locomotive. This does, of course, compete with my Z scale layout for the precious hobby minutes I've got per week. Despite how time seems so fleeting these days, retirement is so, so far away!
I've just received a shipment of structures and accessories, and I must say that Eishindo is doing things in T rarely if ever done in larger scales. Consider: structures with full interiors, including floors, furniture, and lighting fixtures ready for illumination; one multi-story building even comes with an etched stainless steel fire escape. The figures are surprisingly good-looking given their microscopic size, and include cows and horses—the latter featuring riders.
Owing to their bright colors, the buildings look rather cartoonish, but they're generally generic enough to work for almost any country, especially if one takes the time to paint them, say, brick or stone colors with nice bland roofs. I've been toying with the idea of making my own brick and shingle sheets and laminating the paper onto the buildings.
As for the trains, I'm hearing reports that performance issues have been addressed for the most part (I've not had a chance to fire up any new trains lately—soon, though!). This is good to hear, as my initial experience was not the best. But I wasn't about to give up on T just because my trains didn't stay on the track. Plus, the fact that Eishindo is addressing concerns is a tremendous confidence-booster. And the prospect of switches really opens up all kinds of possibilities.
Between a full product range and Robert Ray's progress on Americanizing the cars, I'm now starting to get really fired up to make a layout. I've already got a mechanism torn down in preparation for experiments in re-gearing and/or bashing into a locomotive. This does, of course, compete with my Z scale layout for the precious hobby minutes I've got per week. Despite how time seems so fleeting these days, retirement is so, so far away!
16 August 2008
Nevermind...
In the oddest of oddities, it never occurred to me to actually measure the gauge of T Gauge track. A member of the Yahoo Japanese Z Scale board posed this question, and to my amazement, I found that the actual track gauge was not only wider than 3 mm, but it also varied, from 3.14 to 3.25 mm. Take the average of 3.2 mm, and the gauge scales out to 56.7 inches, or 4 feet 8.7 inches, which is pretty darned close to standard gauge already! So, I'm packing up my paradigm shift and going home.
Regardless... I'm still going to use 1:480 architectural details as well as the Herpa Wings 1:500 airport stuff. As someone remarked, when you're down to a tenth of a millimeter in difference, it's not worth worrying about!
Regardless... I'm still going to use 1:480 architectural details as well as the Herpa Wings 1:500 airport stuff. As someone remarked, when you're down to a tenth of a millimeter in difference, it's not worth worrying about!
15 August 2008
Contemplating a Paradigm Shift
Problem. At T Gauge's scale of 1:450, 3 mm gauge track is equivalent to 4 feet 5 inches in the real world, give or take. This is a tad narrow for North American standard gauge, which is 4 feet 8-1/2 inches. So, working t'other way 'round, standard gauge track converted to 3 mm is about 1:480.
Using a ratio for North America different from that for Japan is not as strange as it sounds. N scale in North America is 1:160, but in Japan it's 1:150 because the track gauge is different, and rather than making different track, the Japanese made differently scaled models. Same thing for Z scale, actually (1:220 vs. 1:200).
So, let's establish a "North American T Scale" standard. Rather than stick with 1:450 as the scale ratio worldwide, let's declare it to be 1:480 for North America (and anywhere else using 4 foot 8-1/2 inch standard track gauge). This does a few things:
1. It lets modelers who are fussy about accurate track gauge off the hook.
2. 1:480 is a standard ratio for architectural products, expanding potential sources of models and supplies.
3. It also allows modelers to use Herpa Wings 1:500 airport accessories on their layouts, which will be closer to 1:480 than 1:450.
Since there are no American T Gauge products yet being made, if anyone out there is listening, perhaps we can settle on this as a standard for any potential new North American products going forward!
Using a ratio for North America different from that for Japan is not as strange as it sounds. N scale in North America is 1:160, but in Japan it's 1:150 because the track gauge is different, and rather than making different track, the Japanese made differently scaled models. Same thing for Z scale, actually (1:220 vs. 1:200).
So, let's establish a "North American T Scale" standard. Rather than stick with 1:450 as the scale ratio worldwide, let's declare it to be 1:480 for North America (and anywhere else using 4 foot 8-1/2 inch standard track gauge). This does a few things:
1. It lets modelers who are fussy about accurate track gauge off the hook.
2. 1:480 is a standard ratio for architectural products, expanding potential sources of models and supplies.
3. It also allows modelers to use Herpa Wings 1:500 airport accessories on their layouts, which will be closer to 1:480 than 1:450.
Since there are no American T Gauge products yet being made, if anyone out there is listening, perhaps we can settle on this as a standard for any potential new North American products going forward!
13 August 2008
T Gauge!
Regardless of whether or not it's here to stay, T Gauge is sure hot, so in order to create a more "permanent" presence on the Intenet than a freebie blog, I created a website devoted to T Gauge called, perhaps not surprisingly, T Gauge!
For now it's just a single home page—little more than a placeholder; eventually it will, like my other model railroading websites, feature a detailed accounting of my modeling efforts; with the second wave of products on the way, plus a quickly growing number of online retail sources, a T Gauge layout is a virtual certainty, and I'm already tinkering with a modified mechanism...
For now it's just a single home page—little more than a placeholder; eventually it will, like my other model railroading websites, feature a detailed accounting of my modeling efforts; with the second wave of products on the way, plus a quickly growing number of online retail sources, a T Gauge layout is a virtual certainty, and I'm already tinkering with a modified mechanism...
12 August 2008
Forging Ahead
Based in Germany, JapanModelRailways has created a new web page just for T Gauge. In addition to a fully-stocked (at least for the moment!) online shop, the informational page is loaded with nice photos that provide a good overview of the product range. One bit of news not yet on the new site is that switches may be on the way by the end of the calendar year!
04 August 2008
First US T Gauge Models
With his trusty laser cutter, Robert Ray has produced the world's first US-prototype T Gauge cars. Details posted on TrainBoard.
03 August 2008
T Gauge Now on eBay
This is what some T Gaugers have been waiting for: a reliable source of in-stock T Gauge. The seller is the very reputable Plaza Japan. I can attest to their reliability, having ordered from them many times before. They don't have much, and it might not last long, but at least there's no waiting for pre-orders to be filled. Have fun!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)