Model Railways On-Line - Littlehempston - Part 6
Littlehempston Part 6 - The Case for DCC and P4 By Paul Plowman Photo 1 - Above: A C10 turnout built from a kit supplied by the P4 Track Company. The quality of ready to run rolling stock has been steadily improving over the last few years. Many modellers are now calling for improved OO track to match. The problem is that OO models are made to a scale of 4mm to 1 foot while the track is to a scale of 3.5mm to 1 foot. I pondered the possibility of a change to EM during the 1970’s. I built a tandem turnout and a crossover in EM gauge using SMP code 65 rail soldered to copper clad sleepers. I also converted two steam locomotives, a diesel and two coaches. There was unquestionably a significant improvement in appearance over OO but the prospect of building my own track for a largish layout and converting an existing collection of rolling stock was daunting. With young Graham taking an interest in model railways and the constraint of only having enough room to build one layout in the household I reluctantly accepted I was “locked in” to OO. Some 30 years later I am retired and have commenced construction of a new layout. I now have an opportunity to make the change. There are many reasons why modellers argue against EM and P4. For example: I can’t tell the difference. I have too big a collection of rolling stock to be able to undertake conversion. It will be too costly. I don’t have the skills to build my own track. P4 requires rolling stock to be compensated. I already have a large OO layout and don’t want to start all over again. All my friends have OO layouts. I want to build a model railway in my lifetime. Whatever the argument the plain fact remains that mixing two scales is wrong. Some modellers will accept OO for the reasons above but will not necessarily be happy about it. Having had a career as a permanent way design engineer I find it very difficult to see any realism in OO track. Above: A Bachmann 45xx 2-6-2T, which has been converted to P4 with an Ultrascale convertion pack. Screw couplings and a DCC decoder have been added. Recently I started building some wagon and coach kits with EM wheels but was still unhappy with the idea. At the time I was publishing an on-line model railway magazine and was contacted by Andrew Jukes of the P4-track Company who offered me one of their C10 turnouts kits for review. Photo.1 was previously published with my review. Andrew argued that if I was going to work in EM then P4 was no more difficult. At first I wasn’t convinced by his argument but the ease with which the C10 kit went together sowed the seeds and set me thinking. At about this time the DCC issue raised its head. For the construction of a new layout DCC offered the advantage of greatly simplified logic to the wiring and I was in need of new controllers anyway. Railway modellers can be divided into a number of interest groups, principally collectors and layout builders. The anguish being caused by DCC and track standards is, I believe due to our trying to have feet in both camps. We collect models and we build layouts to run them on. If we can separate these two activities then most of our problems become manageable. Allow me to explain: In the extreme a serious collector might never take his models out of their boxes. At most they will find their way into a display case. He will never modify a model because it will no longer be a collectable in factory condition. It therefore follows that a true collector will not be concerned whether a model contains a decoder or what standards the wheels are other than as a variation of a catalogue item to be collected. At the other extreme a layout builder will only purchase sufficient rolling stock for the operation of his layout, conforming to the location and period chosen. The majority of us would place ourselves somewhere between these two extremes. We create problems for ourselves by trying to combine these two activities. We build layouts to enable us to run our collections of rolling stock, many items having been purchased without clear reasoning. Because we have so much stock we want complex layouts to provide storage and operational interest. Then when DCC or suggestions of new track standards come along we find it impracticable for us to embrace them. How many railway modellers have seriously, and I mean “SERIOUSLY” sat down and undertaken a proper assessment of their collection. I am not suggesting that such an assessment would persuade anyone to change their minds on the issues but it would give a measure of the problems, which these developments present. I have chosen to build a model railway, which can represent either of two periods on the South Devon Railway, the mid BR Steam era and the “Blue Period” up to 1984. The reason for choosing this date is because semaphore signals were still in use at that time and shortly after were replaced by colour lights in connection with the Exeter Area Resignalling Scheme. By choosing this date my layout can represent either of my chosen periods. The two major issues for me were firstly do I adopt DCC and secondly do I take the opportunity to change to P4? I began with a serious look at my locomotive collection. I put aside all models, which did not fit my chosen periods and location. Ignoring wrecks and unfinished kits I was left with eight steam locomotives and eight diesels including HST and DMU power cars. Of the steam locomotives three have Mainline type split frames, which are difficult to fit with a decoder and impossible to convert to P4. Bachmann has now retooled all three of these models and Hornby has introduced their version of one of them. In addition two of the diesels have been retooled and are not now worth bothering with. That leaves 5 steam and 6 diesels, which are not an unrealistic numbers to convert. Gibson offers a conversion pack for one of the steam locos and Ultrascale offer conversion packs for the remainder. Ultrascale also offer conversion packs for all but one of the diesels, an original Mainline Class 45 but they have however, provided me with suitable parts to complete my own conversion. Above: The Class 45 diesel is an original Mainline model converted to P4 with parts supplied by Ultrascale. The bogies have been detailed using a Westward kit. Screw couplings and a decoder have been added. So what becomes of all the models, which I put aside? Well, firstly I have to come to an understanding with myself that these are my collection and not part of the operational fleet for my layout. They need to be stored in a display cabinet or disposed of. Locomotives, which I purchase from now on, will have been operated on the South Devon main line in one of the two periods I am modeling and they will be easily convertible to P4 and DCC. Having assessed my loco fleet I turned my attention to my collection of coaches and parcels vans, which is vastly greater. By applying the same selection criteria as I had applied to my locos (ignoring regional numbers, which can be corrected) I was left with 23 in the steam period and 25 in the Blue Period. Now most of these vehicles have poor quality wheels and will need re-wheeling even if I was to stay with OO. So cost is not an issue. The Bachmann Colletts, Hornby MK2D’s, Hornby auto coach and B Set will take drop in P4 replacements. The Hornby MK3’s require the axle boxes filed down but otherwise take drop in replacements. Bachmann Mk1’s require filing on the inside of the bogie and need 26.5mm long axles, which can be supplied by Ultrascale. The Bachmann Bulleids have insufficient space to clear P4 wheels and need replacement bogies. I have yet to examine the Hornby Maunsells. Lima vehicles need new bogies and I have long ago acquired a number from Replica for the purpose. Goods and freight wagons present individual challenges but generally Bachmann, Dapol and Replica wagons do not present a problem only needing a little filing of the chassis. Hornby are somewhat variable while Lima wagons are impossible to convert with the exception of those, which can be fitted with replacement bogies. I have concluded that conversion of my rolling stock to DCC and P4 will be neither costly, difficult nor onerous. So far I have completed the conversion of one steam locomotive, three diesels, 22 coaches and ten wagons. Work on converting a second steam locomotive is in progress. In addition I have fitted decoders to three locomotives awaiting conversion to P4. Comparison with OO: The track on the left is loosely laid Peco Code 100 on which is standing a Hornby 'Grange' straight out of the box. The P4 track on the right is built from kits supplied by the P4 Track Co. The next issue to be addressed is that of track. I really do not want to be bothered with a time consuming task of building track for my layout. As mentioned before Andrew Dukes gave me the opportunity to try out one of their kits. I have to say that I was very impressed with both the quality and ease of assembly of their product. Indeed a track gauge was only required for adjusting the switches. At no other time is one needed. Flexi track is also available so I really don’t expect track laying to be any more difficult than laying say Peco Code 75, assuming it was laid with the same degree of care. The cost of track is admittedly greater than one would expect to pay for Peco products. At the time of writing an A7 turnout kit is £25, a B8 is £30 and a C10 is £35. But in comparison a C&L “bag of bits” is about £25 and that involves much more work to assemble.
The quality of ready to run rolling stock has been steadily improving over the last few years. Many modellers are now calling for improved OO track to match. The problem is that OO models are made to a scale of 4mm to 1 foot while the track is to a scale of 3.5mm to 1 foot.
I pondered the possibility of a change to EM during the 1970’s. I built a tandem turnout and a crossover in EM gauge using SMP code 65 rail soldered to copper clad sleepers. I also converted two steam locomotives, a diesel and two coaches. There was unquestionably a significant improvement in appearance over OO but the prospect of building my own track for a largish layout and converting an existing collection of rolling stock was daunting. With young Graham taking an interest in model railways and the constraint of only having enough room to build one layout in the household I reluctantly accepted I was “locked in” to OO.
Some 30 years later I am retired and have commenced construction of a new layout. I now have an opportunity to make the change. There are many reasons why modellers argue against EM and P4. For example:
Whatever the argument the plain fact remains that mixing two scales is wrong. Some modellers will accept OO for the reasons above but will not necessarily be happy about it. Having had a career as a permanent way design engineer I find it very difficult to see any realism in OO track.
Above: A Bachmann 45xx 2-6-2T, which has been converted to P4 with an Ultrascale convertion pack. Screw couplings and a DCC decoder have been added.
Recently I started building some wagon and coach kits with EM wheels but was still unhappy with the idea. At the time I was publishing an on-line model railway magazine and was contacted by Andrew Jukes of the P4-track Company who offered me one of their C10 turnouts kits for review. Photo.1 was previously published with my review. Andrew argued that if I was going to work in EM then P4 was no more difficult. At first I wasn’t convinced by his argument but the ease with which the C10 kit went together sowed the seeds and set me thinking.
At about this time the DCC issue raised its head. For the construction of a new layout DCC offered the advantage of greatly simplified logic to the wiring and I was in need of new controllers anyway.
Railway modellers can be divided into a number of interest groups, principally collectors and layout builders. The anguish being caused by DCC and track standards is, I believe due to our trying to have feet in both camps. We collect models and we build layouts to run them on. If we can separate these two activities then most of our problems become manageable. Allow me to explain:
In the extreme a serious collector might never take his models out of their boxes. At most they will find their way into a display case. He will never modify a model because it will no longer be a collectable in factory condition. It therefore follows that a true collector will not be concerned whether a model contains a decoder or what standards the wheels are other than as a variation of a catalogue item to be collected. At the other extreme a layout builder will only purchase sufficient rolling stock for the operation of his layout, conforming to the location and period chosen. The majority of us would place ourselves somewhere between these two extremes.
We create problems for ourselves by trying to combine these two activities. We build layouts to enable us to run our collections of rolling stock, many items having been purchased without clear reasoning. Because we have so much stock we want complex layouts to provide storage and operational interest. Then when DCC or suggestions of new track standards come along we find it impracticable for us to embrace them.
How many railway modellers have seriously, and I mean “SERIOUSLY” sat down and undertaken a proper assessment of their collection. I am not suggesting that such an assessment would persuade anyone to change their minds on the issues but it would give a measure of the problems, which these developments present.
I have chosen to build a model railway, which can represent either of two periods on the South Devon Railway, the mid BR Steam era and the “Blue Period” up to 1984. The reason for choosing this date is because semaphore signals were still in use at that time and shortly after were replaced by colour lights in connection with the Exeter Area Resignalling Scheme. By choosing this date my layout can represent either of my chosen periods.
The two major issues for me were firstly do I adopt DCC and secondly do I take the opportunity to change to P4? I began with a serious look at my locomotive collection. I put aside all models, which did not fit my chosen periods and location. Ignoring wrecks and unfinished kits I was left with eight steam locomotives and eight diesels including HST and DMU power cars. Of the steam locomotives three have Mainline type split frames, which are difficult to fit with a decoder and impossible to convert to P4. Bachmann has now retooled all three of these models and Hornby has introduced their version of one of them. In addition two of the diesels have been retooled and are not now worth bothering with. That leaves 5 steam and 6 diesels, which are not an unrealistic numbers to convert. Gibson offers a conversion pack for one of the steam locos and Ultrascale offer conversion packs for the remainder. Ultrascale also offer conversion packs for all but one of the diesels, an original Mainline Class 45 but they have however, provided me with suitable parts to complete my own conversion.
Above: The Class 45 diesel is an original Mainline model converted to P4 with parts supplied by Ultrascale. The bogies have been detailed using a Westward kit. Screw couplings and a decoder have been added.
So what becomes of all the models, which I put aside? Well, firstly I have to come to an understanding with myself that these are my collection and not part of the operational fleet for my layout. They need to be stored in a display cabinet or disposed of. Locomotives, which I purchase from now on, will have been operated on the South Devon main line in one of the two periods I am modeling and they will be easily convertible to P4 and DCC.
Having assessed my loco fleet I turned my attention to my collection of coaches and parcels vans, which is vastly greater. By applying the same selection criteria as I had applied to my locos (ignoring regional numbers, which can be corrected) I was left with 23 in the steam period and 25 in the Blue Period. Now most of these vehicles have poor quality wheels and will need re-wheeling even if I was to stay with OO. So cost is not an issue. The Bachmann Colletts, Hornby MK2D’s, Hornby auto coach and B Set will take drop in P4 replacements. The Hornby MK3’s require the axle boxes filed down but otherwise take drop in replacements. Bachmann Mk1’s require filing on the inside of the bogie and need 26.5mm long axles, which can be supplied by Ultrascale. The Bachmann Bulleids have insufficient space to clear P4 wheels and need replacement bogies. I have yet to examine the Hornby Maunsells. Lima vehicles need new bogies and I have long ago acquired a number from Replica for the purpose.
Goods and freight wagons present individual challenges but generally Bachmann, Dapol and Replica wagons do not present a problem only needing a little filing of the chassis. Hornby are somewhat variable while Lima wagons are impossible to convert with the exception of those, which can be fitted with replacement bogies.
I have concluded that conversion of my rolling stock to DCC and P4 will be neither costly, difficult nor onerous. So far I have completed the conversion of one steam locomotive, three diesels, 22 coaches and ten wagons. Work on converting a second steam locomotive is in progress. In addition I have fitted decoders to three locomotives awaiting conversion to P4.
Comparison with OO: The track on the left is loosely laid Peco Code 100 on which is standing a Hornby 'Grange' straight out of the box. The P4 track on the right is built from kits supplied by the P4 Track Co.
The next issue to be addressed is that of track. I really do not want to be bothered with a time consuming task of building track for my layout. As mentioned before Andrew Dukes gave me the opportunity to try out one of their kits. I have to say that I was very impressed with both the quality and ease of assembly of their product. Indeed a track gauge was only required for adjusting the switches. At no other time is one needed. Flexi track is also available so I really don’t expect track laying to be any more difficult than laying say Peco Code 75, assuming it was laid with the same degree of care.
The cost of track is admittedly greater than one would expect to pay for Peco products. At the time of writing an A7 turnout kit is £25, a B8 is £30 and a C10 is £35. But in comparison a C&L “bag of bits” is about £25 and that involves much more work to assemble.