Modelling Standards - a general discussion. Be nice, please

 
  NSWGR1855 Deputy Commissioner

Ron you and me and plenty of others must be doing something wrong then according to Terry. I do the same and have no problems at all and all my track and points are Peco Code 100 as well. Could we all be fluking the measurements you reckon, or is it just a furphy that he wants to get across just so his standards are adopted. I go with what works and like you in this case it works for me. And I know of a lot of others that use Peco Track and Points and never hear a word about constant derailments at points etc. I could probably scrape up about 20 people that have Peco track and modern Australian rollingstock and I doubt you would get a complaint out of any of them actually otherwise most would have got me in to find the problem but there is none, not one of those 20 have even so much as said that their trains derail somewhere let alone at a point or something. I am in a big association that has a large membership and all those into model trains within this group usually seek me out or other fellow modellers within the group for advice etc, eventually I get word of it. But the silence is deafening really.
David Peters
There is generally no problem because most wheels and track on todays RTR H0 Australian models comply with the AMRA standard. This has not always been the case. Yes, many have come up with the measurements by simple trial and error. The AMRA standard simply quantifies the limits of the allowable range where things work properly.  All of the 'fine scale'  RTR wheels do not comply with NMRA standards yet there is no derailment problem for these wheels on Peco track, which is consistent with my experience and is what I have been saying all along, post after post after post after post.
Like it or not, you are complying with AMRA standards, and not complying with NMRA standards.

Terry Flynn.

Sponsored advertisement

  FirstStopCentral Chief Train Controller

There is generally no problem because most wheels and track on todays RTR H0 Australian models comply with the AMRA standard. This has not always been the case. Yes, many have come up with the measurements by simple trial and error. The AMRA standard simply quantifies the limits of the allowable range where things work properly.  All of the 'fine scale'  RTR wheels do not comply with NMRA standards yet there is no derailment problem for these wheels on Peco track, which is consistent with my experience and is what I have been saying all along, post after post after post after post.
Like it or not, you are complying with AMRA standards, and not complying with NMRA standards.

Terry Flynn.
NSWGR1855

Terry,

I think I speak for most people here, but what the hell is your agenda?

You babble on with weasel words here, post after post, NMRA standards this, 'your' AMRA standards that, and in the end you reckon everyone is complying with AMRA standards anyway.

We're not interested!

None of us are having insurmountable problems with derailments and poor running. You stick up for certain manufacturers (read: "your friends"), to the detriment of others (read: "not your friends") and yet we've got to check and adjust their 'fine scale' wheelsets just as much as anyone elses.

You carry on in your standard university textbook style, preaching to those who do not wish to be converted.

You don't manufacture anything, sell anything, design anything or offer to help our modelling in any tangible way except to push theoretical standards to which we (apparently) already comply with, like it or not.

We run HO scale (amongst others), we plonk our Aussie prototypes on Pommy Peco stack and apart from the odd wonky Chinese wheel, the whole shebang goes where it's supposed to go.

And if I get a rocket up the proverbial for having a go at you, then it'll all be worth it. The forum was a nicer place whilst you were away.

All those in favour?

Paul
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
There is generally no problem because most wheels and track on todays RTR H0 Australian models comply with the AMRA standard. This has not always been the case. Yes, many have come up with the measurements by simple trial and error. The AMRA standard simply quantifies the limits of the allowable range where things work properly.  All of the 'fine scale'  RTR wheels do not comply with NMRA standards yet there is no derailment problem for these wheels on Peco track, which is consistent with my experience and is what I have been saying all along, post after post after post after post.
Like it or not, you are complying with AMRA standards, and not complying with NMRA standards.

Terry Flynn.
NSWGR1855
(1) Now the NMRA and AMRA standards are different am I right on this point. Yes or no.

(2) If the answer is yes to the above and most manufactures claim that their rollingstock is to NMRA standards and this includes wheels etc. Then how in the heck so far has AMRA come into it. Please explain in simple terms thanks.

(3) I use a NMRA metal gauge to reset any defect in track or wheels so how in the heck again am I using AMRA standards here. Please explain simply here again.

(4) You have been claiming in the past that AMRA standards are better than the NMRA standards and now you change your tune somewhat. I think all you have done now is confuse everyone again

(5) you claimed once that using modern Australian models on Peco track and points would result in derailments at the points, but in the post above you have contradicted yourself.

I have no idea at all about AMRA standards and use the NMRA standards almost as gospel but as long as it all works for me and others I cannot see the point in you flogging a dead horse almost to get a point across that is virtually null and void. Ok so I am fluking a measurement or two here which is possible but how come a lot of others and I mean a lot are fluking them as well we should all have a different measurement. I do not share my track and wheel setting measurement with anyone so the likely hood of a Modeller in Perth say and Adelaide and Brisbane all coming up with exactly the same measurement for something, without communicating to each other is a real long shot isn't it. What about all the others that do it though, we cannot all have mental telepathy or something and saying it is a fluke is a real stretch of the imagination a lot.

I tend to agree a lot with FirstStopCentral's post you seem to have a secret agenda or something.
  FirstStopCentral Chief Train Controller

We're going to setup a new self-help group for Terry and his followers.

The group shall be called "Those With Indeterminate Track Standards" or TWITS for short.

Terry shall be elected unopposed as Head Twit, although will be refereed to by his preferred Prof Twit.

The TWITS will follow Terry via Twitter (you could see that coming).

As the Railpage "Modelling Standards" discussion will be free of TWITS, we can all get on to discussing more important things.


Thanks for watching...

Paul
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
(1) Now the NMRA and AMRA standards are different am I right on this point. Yes or no.

(2) If the answer is yes to the above and most manufactures claim that their rollingstock is to NMRA standards and this includes wheels etc. Then how in the heck so far has AMRA come into it. Please explain in simple terms thanks.
"David Peters"
Did they teach you about Venn Diagrams in school? Not everything is exclusive to other things, there are intersections in this world. Standards can be intersecting, and they hence need not be exclusive.

Consider this, X is a standard that has a compliance between 10 and 15, Y is a standard that has a compliance between 9 and 12. Product A is made to 11, which standard does it comply with? Suppose B is made to 14 and C is made to 9 what do they comply with?
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
Explain that in plain English for those viewing at home Aaron, it sounds a lot like university gibberish to most of us.
  LaidlayM Chief Commissioner

Location: Research
Did they teach you about Venn Diagrams in school? Not everything is exclusive to other things, there are intersections in this world. Standards can be intersecting, and they hence need not be exclusive.

Consider this, X is a standard that has a compliance between 10 and 15, Y is a standard that has a compliance between 9 and 12. Product A is made to 11, which standard does it comply with? Suppose B is made to 14 and C is made to 9 what do they comply with?
Aaron
Thanks Aaron, I was trying to think of a way of explaining that in a way most people can understand.

Mark
  LaidlayM Chief Commissioner

Location: Research
..........

(3) I use a NMRA metal gauge to reset any defect in track or wheels so how in the heck again am I using AMRA standards here. Please explain simply here again.

................
David Peters
So David I now understand that you reset the flange ways at the crossing of your Peco universal turnouts so that they match the NMRA standard.

Mark
  sunnysa Junior Train Controller

Dear oh dear, if Terry was on the bridge of the Titanic, the water lapping his chin, he would have saluted the captain and said

"The ship is not sinking sir we only have a small leak. All is OK the boat was built to the only standard I recognize"

Cheers

Ian
  NSWGR1855 Deputy Commissioner

(1) Now the NMRA and AMRA standards are different am I right on this point. Yes or no.

(2) If the answer is yes to the above and most manufactures claim that their rollingstock is to NMRA standards and this includes wheels etc. Then how in the heck so far has AMRA come into it. Please explain in simple terms thanks.

(3) I use a NMRA metal gauge to reset any defect in track or wheels so how in the heck again am I using AMRA standards here. Please explain simply here again.

(4) You have been claiming in the past that AMRA standards are better than the NMRA standards and now you change your tune somewhat. I think all you have done now is confuse everyone again

(5) you claimed once that using modern Australian models on Peco track and points would result in derailments at the points, but in the post above you have contradicted yourself.

I have no idea at all about AMRA standards and use the NMRA standards almost as gospel but as long as it all works for me and others I cannot see the point in you flogging a dead horse almost to get a point across that is virtually null and void. Ok so I am fluking a measurement or two here which is possible but how come a lot of others and I mean a lot are fluking them as well we should all have a different measurement. I do not share my track and wheel setting measurement with anyone so the likely hood of a Modeller in Perth say and Adelaide and Brisbane all coming up with exactly the same measurement for something, without communicating to each other is a real long shot isn't it. What about all the others that do it though, we cannot all have mental telepathy or something and saying it is a fluke is a real stretch of the imagination a lot.

I tend to agree a lot with FirstStopCentral's post you seem to have a secret agenda or something.
David Peters

1. It's obvious the AMRA and NMRA standards are different.
2. The only Peco turnouts that complies with the NMRA standard is Peco code 83. No Australian manufacturer supplying 'finescale' wheels complies with NMRA standards and you cannot change this with your NMRA gauge. All Peco and all 'fines scale' Australian RTR wheels on the market today comply with AMRA standards, excepting duds within the production runs.
3. In an earlier post you said you used new Peco code 100 turnouts without modification, which is it? Do you modify them to the NMRA standard?  if you do not modify your code 100 turnouts you are complying with AMRA standards.
4. Both standards work, but as I and others have found around the world, you can do better than the NMRA standard, in a number of areas. Improvements include a better flange profile, greater compliance with RTR track work, closer to scale wheel and track clearances and easier tolerances for building complex track work to name a few.
5. I haven given examples of a number of Australian RTR models with NMRA compliant wheels that derailed on Peco track. These models came out a number of years ago, and those manufacturers have corrected their wheel check gauge problem on newer models. There current models now comply with AMRA standards.

There is nothing secret about my agenda. If you want derailment free running on Peco track use the appropriate standards which are the AMRA standards. Simple.

First stop centrals post is nothing more than a personal attack. What is his secret agenda? No facts about standards. No technical arguments, or examples of experience to back his stupid  argument.

Again, if are using unmodified Peco code100 or code 75 turnouts you are not using NMRA standard trackwork (check gauge difference).  If you have RTR fine scale wheels you are not using NMRA standard wheels (wheel width is narrower).

2 facts you are ignoring post after post. It's clear you no very little about the any standard.

Terry Flynn.
  NSWGR1855 Deputy Commissioner

Explain that in plain English for those viewing at home Aaron, it sounds a lot like university gibberish to most of us.
David Peters
More like basic school level maths.

terry Flynn.
  NSWGR1855 Deputy Commissioner

Terry,

I think I speak for most people here, but what the hell is your agenda?

You babble on with weasel words here, post after post, NMRA standards this, 'your' AMRA standards that, and in the end you reckon everyone is complying with AMRA standards anyway.

We're not interested!

None of us are having insurmountable problems with derailments and poor running. You stick up for certain manufacturers (read: "your friends"), to the detriment of others (read: "not your friends") and yet we've got to check and adjust their 'fine scale' wheelsets just as much as anyone elses.

You carry on in your standard university textbook style, preaching to those who do not wish to be converted.

You don't manufacture anything, sell anything, design anything or offer to help our modelling in any tangible way except to push theoretical standards to which we (apparently) already comply with, like it or not.

We run HO scale (amongst others), we plonk our Aussie prototypes on Pommy Peco stack and apart from the odd wonky Chinese wheel, the whole shebang goes where it's supposed to go.

And if I get a rocket up the proverbial for having a go at you, then it'll all be worth it. The forum was a nicer place whilst you were away.

All those in favour?

Paul
FirstStopCentral
What's your agenda?

If your not interested in standards don't read this thread. Facts are facts and with wheel and track standards measurements can be made, to confirm my statements.

How many model trains do you manufacture?
Years ago I produced a couple of etched brass kits.

How many models have you designed?
I have designed Auscissions fine scale wheels, and SDS have used my flange profile for their wheels. Both Eureka and Auscission have used my advice for Wheel back to back dimensions. I have also built my own track to the AMRA standards as have a number of others.

How many standards have you writen or contributed to?
Besides the AMRA standards I also contributed to the NMRA P87 standard.

That's a tangible contribution in my opinion, achieving improved model railway performance, something you are directly getting the benefit from.

Modellers around the world use the non NMRA check gauge of 15.2mm, the same as used in the AMRA H0 standards.   Hardly therotical. All very practical and long proven.

When you actually know something about standards, come back and post it here.

Terry Flynn.
  NSWGR1855 Deputy Commissioner

Dear oh dear, if Terry was on the bridge of the Titanic, the water lapping his chin, he would have saluted the captain and said

"The ship is not sinking sir we only have a small leak. All is OK the boat was built to the only standard I recognize"

Cheers

Ian
sunnysa
Don't misquote me, I believe the correct quote from another was

"The ship is not sinking sir we only have a small leak. All is OK, we believe the boat was built to the NMRA standards "

Terr Flynn
  hosk1956 Deputy Commissioner

Location: no where near gunzels
Careful you don't dislocate your shoulder whilst patting yourself on the back Terry.

Wayne
  linton78 Train Controller

Location: South Coast NSW
I find this subject very interesting. The relationship between flanged wheel and rail is probably the most important technical relationship on a model railroad. We can get away with quite a bit when dealing with model trains, however the quality in its performance will be completely related to how this wheel/track relationship is executed. Real railroads have a standard and if not followed the consequences are quite dramatic. We have the luxury of the front pony truck on a HO steam locomotive bouncing off the frog and 99% of the time returning to the track. This is not the case in the real world.

People may have no problems running what ever trains they have on what ever track they have. In saying that, I am sure that if the critical dimensions that affect a wheel running through a frog are both not conforming to a common standard the way in which it behaves may not be optimal.

I was lucky enough to visit a blokes layout recently, that's track and locomotives are built to 1/87 standard. He uses the standard to which full scale standard gauge track and wheels are manufactured/constructed. I have seen with my own eyes how well this layout performs. Wheels do not drop into frogs, there is no movement between wagons as they negotiate point work. This is the result of using a single standard and one that works in real life.

I do not have the skills to build a railway to this standard but am very keen to get similar results in performance. The only way to do this is by building the track work to a single standard and making sure the wheels also comply. I have a heap of Peco 83 points and can confirm that many finer Code 88 wheels do drop into the frog. This may be due to the Peco track conforming to one standard and the wheels another. I have recently built a point to the tighter tolerance AMRA standard and have found code 88 wheels, as supplied by many manufactures, including older brass manufactures seem to perform better. There is a fundamental reason to why real railroad wheels don't drop into a 1/1 frog and that's because the relationship is adhered too.

I am banging on a bit here but for me, as I am building a new layout, I want to build it to the best possible standard within my ability. I want the models to perform on the track like the real thing. I don't like watching models fall into frog pot holes. I can understand if someone's already built layout works with all kinds of track and standards and your happy with that. This thread is probably meaningless to those, until a problem arises that is

I was never too worried about wheel gauge, but when building more prototypical track with finer tolerances a more refined standard will be benificial. I see the AMRA standard being that, for me.

Wow, my longest post!

Linton
  FirstStopCentral Chief Train Controller

What's your agenda?

If your not interested in standards don't read this thread. Facts are facts and with wheel and track standards measurements can be made, to confirm my statements.

How many model trains do you manufacture?
Years ago I produced a couple of etched brass kits.

How many models have you designed?
I have designed Auscissions fine scale wheels, and SDS have used my flange profile for their wheels. Both Eureka and Auscission have used my advice for Wheel back to back dimensions. I have also built my own track to the AMRA standards as have a number of others.

How many standards have you writen or contributed to?
Besides the AMRA standards I also contributed to the NMRA P87 standard.

That's a tangible contribution in my opinion, achieving improved model railway performance, something you are directly getting the benefit from.

Modellers around the world use the non NMRA check gauge of 15.2mm, the same as used in the AMRA H0 standards.   Hardly therotical. All very practical and long proven.

When you actually know something about standards, come back and post it here.

Terry Flynn.
NSWGR1855

Mr Flynn,

My agenda is pointing out in no uncertain terms that your are pushing your own barrow trying to solve a problem that WE the modelling public DON'T HAVE.

We are all following AMRA standards except for those few using code 83 track.

SO WHAT.

You didn't design the standards, so why bang on trying to convince us that you're God's gift to modellers?

I have one of your beautifully designed brass kits from long ago, but they weren't your wheels in the package, were they?

Enough.

Paul
  FirstStopCentral Chief Train Controller

I have designed Auscissions fine scale wheels...

Terry Flynn.
NSWGR1855

Auscision repeatably refer to their wheels as:

  • Blackened metal disc wheels (RP25-110)


and as far as track is concerned:

  • Will operate on code 70, 83 & 100 rail


So, funny they don't mention AMRA standards and how can it run on code 83 AND 100 if they are different standards?

Aren't RP25-110 steam roller wheels?

Where's your standards now?

Paul

PS: Best if you can spell your 'employers' name, It's only got one 'S'
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
Auscision repeatably refer to their wheels as:

  • Blackened metal disc wheels (RP25-110)


and as far as track is concerned:

  • Will operate on code 70, 83 & 100 rail


So, funny they don't mention AMRA standards and how can it run on code 83 AND 100 if they are different standards?

Aren't RP25-110 steam roller wheels?

Where's your standards now?

Paul

PS: Best if you can spell your 'employers' name, It's only got one 'S'
"FirstStopCentral"
Repeat after me: Finescale... Finescale... Finescale...
  linton78 Train Controller

Location: South Coast NSW
Auscision repeatably refer to their wheels as:

  • Blackened metal disc wheels (RP25-110)


and as far as track is concerned:

  • Will operate on code 70, 83 & 100 rail


So, funny they don't mention AMRA standards and how can it run on code 83 AND 100 if they are different standards?

Aren't RP25-110 steam roller wheels?

Where's your standards now?

Paul

PS: Best if you can spell your 'employers' name, It's only got one 'S'
"FirstStopCentral"



Rail code i.e. Code 40, 55, 70, 83, 100 is purely rail height, measured in thousands of an inch. Code 40 is 0.040 inches high (about 1mm). This does not determine a standard. The standard applies to how far the rails are positioned apart on both straight track and within point work. The wheel then follows the same standard so as to run correctly within these track tolerances.

I may be wrong but I think some need to actually have a look at the discussed standards before commenting. If you don't understand one of the standards ask somebody that does, I did. Terry will help you with the AMRA one!
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
I may be wrong but I think some need to actually have a look at the discussed standards before commenting.
"linton78"
You've noticed too?
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
So David I now understand that you reset the flange ways at the crossing of your Peco universal turnouts so that they match the NMRA standard.

Mark
LaidlayM
No Mark only when I get a derailment caused by the point which is practically never, but on the older Insulfrog points I did. I made new Guard rails set to the NMRA standard, but I now do not use any of these points not even new ones anymore too much trouble for my liking, I use all Electrofog points  as they come out of the box, if it is at all possible Double slips and like I have to take second best on but I don't use them that often.  So really what I am actually doing is setting wheels to the NMRA standard and using track and points made to BRMB standards and yes it does work.
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
I honestly don't give a fig about AMRA standards or any other really, just as long as my trains will go over my track without derailing and they do. It could be XYZ's standards for all I know. Like most all I know is that it works for me and after all that is all I as a modeller am interested in, as long as it works. We don't need all this technical bull shoved down our throats, just admit it works and leave it at that, simple enough to do. Most on here over time have said that, but no one wants to admit we the seemingly uneducated are right. We are right though so what is the beef.

Take the AMRA standards back to the AMRA and use them and the rest of us will use Rafferty's rules like we have been doing for years and enjoying it and watching our trains go round.
  hosk1956 Deputy Commissioner

Location: no where near gunzels


I may be wrong but I think some need to actually have a look at the discussed standards before commenting. If you don't understand one of the standards ask somebody that does, I did. Terry will help you with the AMRA one!
linton78
I'm sure he would, he has told us countless times that he has supposedly designed the AMRA standards that Peco points conform to, I personally think he measured a Peco point and then wrote the standard claiming it as his own. But that is just my opinion.

Wayne
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
I'm sure he would, he has told us countless times that he has supposedly designed the AMRA standards that Peco points conform to, I personally think he measured a Peco point and then wrote the standard claiming it as his own. But that is just my opinion.

Wayne
hosk1956
You never know, you might be right Wayne!Laughing
  miktrain Deputy Commissioner

Location: Adelaide SA
Explain that in plain English for those viewing at home Aaron, it sounds a lot like university gibberish to most of us.
David Peters
Aaron wrote:
Consider this, X is a standard that has a compliance between 10 and 15, Y is a standard that has a compliance between 9 and 12. Product A is made to 11, which standard does it comply with? Suppose B is made to 14 and C is made to 9 what do they comply with?

Translation to first grade maths for David:

You like grapes that are between 10mm and 15mm Your friend who has a smaller mouth only likes them between 9mm and 12mm.
Shop A sells grapes that are 11mm Shop B sells 14mm grapes and shop C 9mm grapes.
If you buy from shop B then only you will be happy, from shop C only your friend will be happy but if you go to shop A then both of you can enjoy a feast of the same grapes.

Tony

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.