# Does this structure figure out to HO scale?



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

The highest point, on top of the tower, is nine inches, which scales out to 63'. In N scale this would be 117'. This rather nice 3D printed model is by Goldrush Bay. Proportionately, it seems small next to these HO coaches (these are HO, not OO).


----------



## Severn (May 13, 2016)

Maybe check the doors n windows, human sized things...


----------



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

Severn said:


> Maybe check the doors n windows, human sized things...


An HO guy can get in without whacking his head, the height of the door is about 7'. But doors for this building I'd reckon would be more like 12', like really big cathedral doors.


----------



## OilValleyRy (Oct 3, 2021)

The chart is in accurate.

That aside, I think there’s 2 things going on. One is compression. Structures are always compressed in size, even while being to scale. What I mean is the width & length are probably much shorter than accurate. 
There’s illusion trickery in them moldings. I’m seeing a ton of windows. Giving the impression the place is 4 or 5 stories tall. The second floor windows in particular stand out to me. But it’s only 3 stories correct?


----------



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

Given the mid-level balcony, I am only seeing two stories. The interior "ceiling' would be vaulted. I'd like to keep this thing, it was only $45 and is nicely detailed, but it just seems so darn small! Sixty three scale feet from base to top of clock tower? 63 feet? Nah...


----------



## OilValleyRy (Oct 3, 2021)

It does look small, yeah. The floor to ceiling height windows are, I think, what makes it look small. The height being maybe a bit short is exacerbated by that. I think there’s too many. I guess my mind is looking for why it looks smaller than it should be, rather than if it is. It is. For certain. 

Could you make a “concrete” base foundation with the stairs to the main entrance?
If it were mine I’d be considering covering the bottom pane on most of the second floor & trying to do some sort of decorative relief work (raised squares etc). 
I could be sniffing up the wrong tree though. I’d like to hear other opinions though as I’m admittedly not cknfudent why it seems off.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

The doors do look like they would be about 8' at scale.

9" at 1:87 scale is 65'3", which is just about 4.7 stories tall. I'd say it's closer to HO scale than N scale.

9" at 160:1 scale is 120', or approximately 8.5 stories. I doubt a structure like that would be 120' tall.

I really like the products from Gold Rush Bay.

Here are some pics of the N scale Victorian Mansion and gazebo I bought for my town.

















After cleaning up the fibers and painting:


----------



## 65steam (Dec 18, 2019)

You can use forced perspective and put it farther back on your layout, if you have space to do so.


----------



## Severn (May 13, 2016)

maybe put it up on a 1" of foam or whatever you have laying around and have it you know a couple of inches all around ... maybe that'll make it look more imposing.


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

So first of all, as others have pointed out, whoever made that chart was either careless or signature really care about accuracy. HO is 1/87th scale, so 9" (0.75 feet) would scale out to 65-1/4'. And there is no 1/100 HO scale... per se. More on that later. 6" in N scale is 80'. I'd recommend doing the math yourself rather than trusting that chart.

That said, my experience with HO scale models is that most of them are just slightly undersized. Perhaps a concession to the limited space that most of us have. Perhaps 1/100 is closer to their actual scale.

If this is a file that you printed, you can always just scale up the size of the source file and print it again.


----------



## BigGRacing (Sep 25, 2020)

Chops said:


> The highest point, on top of the tower, is nine inches,


When I scaled my old train station, it came to about 9” high, I also compared the windows to your train windows, and they look comparable. It looks deceiving when placed, but I think it’s a beautiful structure you have for sure !

Here are dimensions of the old North street station similar to yours with the sizes of it helps. From pic 2, I believe that the train station at first held 5 tracks, (3 of one scale, 2 of the other) then went to 4 of the larger scale tracks

Sizes from Wikipedia

The station followed the Second Empire architectural style with a mansard roof, a large central clock tower and elaborately decorated dormers. The main station structure was 113' x 50' with walls of decorated pressed brick rising from a granite base. The first floor contained a general waiting room, a ladies’ waiting room (fitted with plush seats, a marble fireplace and a separate ticket office), a reading room as well as ticket offices for the Intercolonial Railway and the Windsor and Annapolis Railway as well as offices for the station master and passenger superintendent. The second floor contained more railway offices and a balcony where railway officials could observe operations in the large glass-covered passenger shed, the second glass railway canopy built in Canada. The shed was 400' by 87'



















I have reached out to Goldrush Bay to see if he would print this one out, but he hasn’t taken me up on it yet.


----------



## Severn (May 13, 2016)

I think it looks fine myself but if you want to be more imposing without replacing it with something more imposing... Besides the idea above about raising it on a platform... Big trees at the front or corners... Maybe a big flag on top of the dome ..


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

I’m afraid that building looks too small….to me, anyway….


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

No it doesn't look to "figure out to HO scale" . It looks closer to an N scale building next to HO track; the track gauge looking too wide for structure, and simulated ballast (+ rail head), too tall.
It may not be small as N scale at 1:160. But it definitely looks too small for HO...
If you ever have tall/deep mountains you still could put it atop of and toward rear where it will give the impression of being further away than really is.. But I would avoid keeping it where it is, right next to foreground track, IF you are concerned with 'scale'.

*PS*. I must disagree with CTValleyRR / HO structures: "most of them are just slightly undersized".
That would be the exception, not the rule...I've n't the faintest where he got that notion...
If a structure states on the box "HO scale", and/or "1:87 scale", it 99% of the time will be that, give or take measurement discrepancies for manufacturing purposes (molds, 1:1 fractions, stability concerns).


----------



## Mixed Freight (Aug 31, 2019)

Chops said:


> View attachment 585081
> 
> 
> View attachment 585082
> ...


To heck with the size chart (even though its right on for 1/24th and 1/48th scales, it's still reasonably close on the other scales). Based on just looking at your picture, I think the structure would look far more at home on an N-scale layout. Either that or else towards the back of an HO layout in forced perspective.

Just my 7 cents worth (used to be a nickel's worth, but inflation and all that stuff, ya' know ).


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

*MF*'s 2nd to last sentence is the same as my 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence...


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

Astute powers of observation.

(I'm sure someone has said that before too)

It's like deja Vu all over again.


----------



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

Very useful replies, and yes, as beautiful as it is, it scales out at a puny 63' as opposed to 114', which seems much more on target. I think I'm going to have to return this thing; just too small. Great for N, but for HO/OO it is just not working for me, no matter how I bend my head.


----------



## BigGRacing (Sep 25, 2020)

Chops said:


> Very useful replies, and yes, as beautiful as it is, it scales out at a puny 63' as opposed to 114', which seems much more on target. I think I'm going to have to return this thing; just too small. Great for N, but for HO/OO it is just not working for me, no matter how I bend my head.


Maybe they sent you the n scale one in error ?


----------



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

Nah, it measures out as 9 inches by 4 inches, and that is listed as HO. I was a little skeptical at that, so it would seem more likely the manufacturer of this unit really does have a solid grasp on scale. Going by the conversion table, this is really about spot on for N.


----------



## Severn (May 13, 2016)

Take some cardboard and add a little to its width, height and see if that does it. Then either use some styrene or fake it to enlarge. You could add something to the ends. Or insert a spacer at the dome or ... Well the sky's the limit. Alternatives include sledge hammer, or pyrotechnics... I mean not in the layout. Anyway I think it's fine.. once you paint, put it up maybe a little higher, add some trees, a flag...all that. To me if the windows and doors are scale then it's that scale. It may not be as large as imposing as you want.. but that's a different problem.


----------



## Mixed Freight (Aug 31, 2019)

telltale said:


> *MF*'s 2nd to last sentence is the same as my 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence...


That's 'cuz I was agreein' with ya'.

You owe me 7 cents (per my last sentence). Pay up, sucker!


----------



## OilValleyRy (Oct 3, 2021)

A return would be the easiest. Too bad because it is so ornate and not one that you see on nearly every layout.


----------



## J.Albert1949 (Feb 3, 2018)

That building isn't "HO" scale...


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

Can you measure an actual doorway so we can get "at scale" dimensions of those? Also, is it a copy of an actual building? If so, what are the real-life dimensions of the prototype?

Or, put some of your HO scale people as if they are entering or leaving through a door and let us see that. If the structure is N scale, it would be obvious... the HO scale people would look like 2x the right size.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

The picture is deceiving... Almost like a wide angle lens, as the right side of the building look sa good 50% larger than the left side. It's all perspective, but... Take a look at the person at ground level in the 4-story bldg. Then look at Chops' HO scale person on the foot bridge. That HO person is about the same distance apart (similar perspective) as the 2 sides of the building, and sure enough... that HO person is about 50% larger than the guy standing at ground level in front of the 4-story bldg.

OK, so I took Chops' original photo, and layered in a typical 4 story building that would be approximately 60 feet tall.

Sure looks like the same scale. Also looks like HO size person in the rendering of the 4-story bldg.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Actually, just look at the track gauge close to the building….the tracks are a scale 4’-8 1/2” between the rails….compare that with the main entrance of the building….that ain’t no HO scale building! As has been said, over and over….


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

This is the HO version of the house I bought. I bought N, so it is obviously smaller.

This one, being 8" tall is roughly 58 feet tall at HO scale. As you can see, it's roughly 4 stories tall including the spire. It's hard to tell from Chops' picture if his structure should be taller than this in real life, but it sure does look like Chops' structure should be a lot taller than this mansion.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

Old_Hobo said:


> Actually, just look at the track gauge close to the building….the tracks are a scale 4’-8 1/2” between the rails….compare that with the main entrance of the building….that ain’t no HO scale building! As has been said, over and over….


Using that logic, I'd say the structure is closer to Z scale, LOL You guys are probably right. I really want to see HO scale people milling about in close proximity to the doors.


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

dele


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Chops said:


> Nah, it measures out as 9 inches by 4 inches, and that is listed as HO. I was a little skeptical at that, so it would seem more likely the manufacturer of this unit really does have a solid grasp on scale. Going by the conversion table, this is really about spot on for N.


Well, not to nit pick, but you really can't tell whether the building isn't tall enough or not just by measuring it's height (unless you have an accurate measurement for the prototype. Ceiling heights, and thus the height of a storey, vary too much. The size of a door or window is a much better measurement.

That said, if the size doesn't feel right, there's really no fixing it.


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

*Hey ! Here's a novel idea !!:*
OPer, please take new shots of structure with either or both *HO figures* (people) and/or animals (an HO horse), and an *HO* *train car or engine* on *straight* HO track track 4-5 scale feet (4-5 x 3.5 mm or, 4-5 eighth inches = approx .5") away from and directly on side of building...(like a siding runs next to structure, looking down track to end of car or loco).
You took the first pics..Do it again in a way where we can clearly see the relationships the way we would if we were in your train room... Get camera 'scene' directly at eye level as if we are standing near the 1:1 scale, real thing; real up close-like capturing train and building along side one another..This would help end the discussion or title's 'question' *once and for all*...


----------



## David F (10 mo ago)

Chops said:


> Nah, it measures out as 9 inches by 4 inches, and that is listed as HO. I was a little skeptical at that, so it would seem more likely the manufacturer of this unit really does have a solid grasp on scale. Going by the conversion table, this is really about spot on for N.


If you’re happy with the look… try hiding it with some trees and bushes and just give it the illusion of being a building that fits perfectly… often I put some of my ( rougher) scratch buildings behind scenes just as a filler.


----------



## Severn (May 13, 2016)

Those kind of buildings are never at ground level. Instead they are on a rise with steps leading up to it and some kind of surrounding "patio" area as well.


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

Severn said:


> Those kind of buildings are never at ground level. Instead they are on a rise with steps leading up to it and some kind of surrounding "patio" area as well.


This has some merit to it..It's near what I suggest in # 14...But, just putting it up on a rise is not going to hide, and in fact may even emphasize its being out of scale ( If it's found to be ).
It'd be nice if OP did what I suggest in # 32 ....🏭🛤🏚🌵


----------



## scenicsRme (Aug 19, 2020)

From what I understand (I have about 6 of the Gold Rush buildings) They had some scale issues with some of their earlier buildings, scaling them to "architectural model " scale rather than to accurate MRR scales which made them oversized for N scale and/or undersized for HO scale. This "odd" scale may be what you have there. The proof in the pudding for me is always the height of a residential door on the structure, A standard residential door slab is 80" tall inside the frame not including trim in real life. That is equal to 0.50" (1/2") in N scale. or 0.919" (a little over 7/8") in HO scale. Those measurements are enough different and easy enough to measure with a basic ruler to be easily distinguished. Commercial entrance doors and "Grand" size front doors may be taller than the sizes given above, so measure a simple back door on an elaborate building like this. If yours comes out to be between 5/8 and 3/4" you may have one of their early buildings.


----------



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

Thanks. Using the conversion table above, it is most evident this thing is N, even though it is marketed as HO. Back it goes.


----------



## Longvallon (9 mo ago)

Definitely N scale for me.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

I agree it looks small... But I'm not sure it's N scale small.

Let's use some geometry to layer in an HO scale figure close to a door. The issue is perspective. Assuming the perspective is linear...

The black lines are the same length. When measuring the width of the larger HO scale car at each of the green lines, the one closer to the building is 2/3 the size of the green line that is closer to the camera... So, I copied the HO scale person on the bridge, reduced it to 2/3 the size, and pasted it next to the front steps. Doesn't look that far off to me.











Edit to add: Now.. take a look at the size of the HO person I pasted next to the building. Doesn't that person look too large to be able to fit into the door in the HO train car closest to him? So, I can deduce that this photo was originally taken using some form of wide angle lens. I can also deduce, that an HO person that is actually next the building where I pasted him, would be smaller than the one I pasted... making the structure too large for N scale.


----------



## Severn (May 13, 2016)

To me its windows and doors being "scale" which it roughly looks like to me... if person on the ground is roughly 5' to 6' then the first floor looks 10' to 12' tall (or the columns). The 2nd floor is even higher. A person standing on the lower "porch" or the 2nd floor "balcony" would look ok. BUT the railing would . It could be decorative in which case it's fine.. The center tower also looks a bit funny if you imagined someone standing on the lowest balcony of it. Perhaps what's happened is that some of its scale, and some of its not -- to fit the printer.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

It is important to note the perspective assumption. IF this picture was taken with a wide angle lens, then the horizon will not be linear from all foreground locations. In this case, the horizon would be non-linear, and the figure that I pasted in would be too large, even at 2/3 size, because the farther you get away from the camera, the faster the horizon moves away.

An image I stole from the interwebs to illustrate the wide angle lens effect on perspective









You can clearly see that the horizon lines are not at the same spot.


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

Those HO passenger cars clearly over-power the building….


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

Old_Hobo said:


> Those HO passenger cars clearly over-power the building….


I don't disagree. What do you have to say about the perspective? It's pretty hard to dispute mathematics.


----------



## SF Gal (11 mo ago)

I had a similar issue with a gas station and finally concluded it was just too small for HO scale. Things look close when your dealing with a structure by itself. Once you get a vehicle, a person figure next to it, it starts to force reality.
Can you make it work, sure...but you will always know and the more things like telephone poles, street lights, fences you add around the structure, the worse the perspective gets. I suggest you chalk it up to the price you pay for knowledge and move on. If you can resell it or return, all the better.


----------



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

Ahh. To fit the printer. Yeah, nice piece, but this scale mismatch is way too off.


----------



## Railtunes (Jun 19, 2012)

I'm thinking that what *scenicsRme wrote in reply #36 *about architectural scale may be more pertinent than we realize. The Gold Rush Bay Models website says this model was designed by a San Francsico architect, with design elements in various styles, but not following any specific prototype. (Their note about the San Francisco Ferry Building tower refers only to the style, not the height, which is 245 feet!). The website also lists the height of the model as 8.5 inches. 
One common architectural scale is 1:100. That would make an 8.5" tall building scale out at 850 inches or 70.8 feet.
Another possibility that we as model railroaders overlooked is TT scale at 1:120, between N scale and HO. That's 10 scale feet to the inch and would make the model a scale 1020 inches or 85 scale feet tall.
While the scale measurement chart in the replies is obviously a pretty sloppy approximation, I note that it shows HO scale as 1:87 and 1:100. This actually duplicates what some European manufacturers did with rolling stock to get it to run around toy train curves: The width and height were close to 1:87, but the lengths - especially on passenger cars - was 1:100. It's kind of like what the O tinplate companies like Lionel did with there rolling stock, which was often closer to S scale at 1:64 than O scale at 1:48.
And even today, some companies that make figures and vehicles for architectural models in those scales also try to sell them to model diorama builders and war gamers as suitable for their scales. 
I'd ask Gold Rush Models to check and see if something like this is going on with their advertising. I also noted the remark in the replies that some of their earlier models had the same "undersized" problem.


----------



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

😬 Yep. Beautiful concoction, affordable, the guy who cut it blew it. It goes back. Maybe he has one in O scale, which will approximate HO in his realm. Or maybe I'll bag my whole lot and do TT, or even N, just so I can keep this piece. Always thought TT was a better size than HO, but alas, I guess it was too hard to make motors small enough to work right, back in the early '50's. Which is why OO predominated in the UK; the slightly heftier dimension allowing for a slightly bigger motor.


----------



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

JeffHurl said:


> It is important to note the perspective assumption. IF this picture was taken with a wide angle lens, then the horizon will not be linear from all foreground locations. In this case, the horizon would be non-linear, and the figure that I pasted in would be too large, even at 2/3 size, because the farther you get away from the camera, the faster the horizon moves away.
> 
> An image I stole from the interwebs to illustrate the wide angle lens effect on perspective
> View attachment 585223
> ...


----------



## scenicsRme (Aug 19, 2020)

To muddy the waters a bit more: Here in the US we accept N scale as being 1:160, but in England and Japan 1:150 is considered N scale. doesn't sound like much, buf you buy the bulk Japanese (or Chinese made for the Japanese market) or British figures you will find them to be about a head taller than US or German figures, too tall to populate N scale passenger cars or vehicles without drastic surgery.


----------



## Railtunes (Jun 19, 2012)

*Reply to scenicsRme, 3 July Post: * Yes, the size of the N scale world varies depending on where you are. You a-l-m-o-s-t- got it right.
Referencing locations by countries that actually manufacture N scale models, N scale ratios break down to 1:148 in the UK (and Ireland), 1:150 in island Asia (Japan and Taiwan), and 1:160 in mainline China, Australia, Europe and North and South America). And then there is also the British fine scale 2mm Scale (2mm to the scale foot), which is 1:152.4.
Just for kicks, I did this little comparison of the height of a 6-foot tall person in each of the four "N scale" ratios.
6 feet = 72 inches / 1828.8 mm. At 1:148: .486"/12.34mm; At 1:150: .480"/12.19mm; At 1:152.4: .472"/11.98mm, and at 1:160: .450"/11.43mm. So the total difference over the whole ratio range is .035"/.9mm, which is a difference of about six scale inches / 152.4mm - close to the one head difference noted by *scenicsRme. *
Given the large range of heights among real live people, I don't see a serious problem mixing up figures from the whole range of ratios. Some military figures at 10mm scale (a 6-foot person is nominally 10mm tall, making the scale 1:182.8) can be used and architectural figures at 1:200 can pass as children. As for putting figures into passenger cars, it is often necessary to "trim" some limbs as the seats are nearly always too small for full size figures. Sometimes it's an acceptable hack to use Z scale (1:220) figures - especially for seated figures.
As for vehicles, there is a more noticable difference in mixing scales here, especially for interchangeable items like containers which, when stacked, will obviously be misaligned, and may not fit onto flat cars or into wells on stack cars of different scales.
As a modeler in N scale of all these prototypes and ratios and a former manufacturer of N scale intermodal models, I deal with this challenge all the time. It adds yet another level of fascination in this great hobby!
- Paul Ingraham


----------



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

Useful insight. The Mallard Pacific, which was actually rather diminutive compared to American Pacifics, dwarfed this station. Too bad, it really is a beautifully done model, but the manufacturer's impression of what works in HO scale was way, way off. Perhaps if he made one in O scale, I could use that for a better fit.


----------



## scenicsRme (Aug 19, 2020)

Paul, thanks for the correction and affirmation. My information was simply based on the results of buying "N scale" figures and accessories and finding they did not match up in a scene. I am very careful now to not accept something listed as N scale will work on my layout, but look for or request information on what actual 1:? scale it is. Even that doesn't always work, especially with vehicles and structure details. I find many structures, both plastic and wood kits, have way overscale details. Houses with corner and/or window trim that scales out to over 4" thick x over 8" wide, roof shingles that are way larger than anything in real life. I replace much of the stripwood and trim for my buildings with much more scale sized materials.


----------



## Railtunes (Jun 19, 2012)

*Reply to scenicsRme, Post 52:* Totally agree! I also adjust the details on kits and R-T-R models, as well as doing a fair amount of kitbashing and scratchbuilding to get things right - not to mention that I model some pretty esoteric stuff that isn't available even in crude off-scale versions! My favorite work around is that I make everything removable / interchangeable so I can match the prototype I'm currently running with appropriately-scaled scenery and structures. This also makes layout maintenance so much easier!
- Paul Ingraham


----------



## CTValleyRR (Jul 26, 2014)

Railtunes said:


> *Reply to scenicsRme, Post 52:* Totally agree! I also adjust the details on kits and R-T-R models, as well as doing a fair amount of kitbashing and scratchbuilding to get things right - not to mention that I model some pretty esoteric stuff that isn't available even in crude off-scale versions! My favorite work around is that I make everything removable / interchangeable so I can match the prototype I'm currently running with appropriately-scaled scenery and structures. This also makes layout maintenance so much easier!
> - Paul Ingraham


You know that by clicking the "reply" button just below any post, you can quote it, like I did yours, so there is no question what you're replying to and no need for the user to refer back, right?


----------



## scenicsRme (Aug 19, 2020)

I end up replacing the kit windows and doors with the few close to scale ones I find. The earlier cast metal parts are the biggest offenders, followed by the early plastic kits and 3D printed buildings. when was the last time you saw a real house with window sills made of 4x4's (at least since medieval stone castle times)? If you can't do anything else, paint the trim a dark color.


----------



## 65446 (Sep 22, 2018)

*Chops*.
If you don't mind, what is going on in the photo above your name ? It's so blurry I don't think anyone can figure it out..
The 2 amber dots might be headlights on Sharknose diesel. But then there are swirly dark lines above it which look like upside down tracks, or schematic of + some tiny red, white, and amber sort of teensy clown like object + some purple dots.
The pic looks out of focus..If you wish us to comprehend it you just may want to consider re-doing it.
At the same time it is so insignificant you could just leave it alone an keep us guessing for all eternity ! Or, maybe it's just me !


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

It is out of focus, but when you look at the image in his profile, you can see a Siamese cat with some colored bits on it.


----------



## BigGRacing (Sep 25, 2020)

Just to add to this scale discussion, I have been playing during some free time at work to get a scale representation of my train station. Mainly cut and paste from similar structures in Halifax, but I think I am getting close. It is probably about 3/4 inch wider than the 50 feet so I have to adjust and m6 windows might be to big as well. Getting close I think though. Just a better background then plain wood I think. Thoughts ? This is the side wall.



















and the historic one:


----------



## Gramps (Feb 28, 2016)

Looks good to me.


----------



## JeffHurl (Apr 22, 2021)

I agree with you, the windows and doors lookn a little too large, but overall, it looks great!


----------



## Old_Hobo (Feb 20, 2014)

telltale said:


> *Chops*.
> If you don't mind, what is going on in the photo above your name ? It's so blurry I don't think anyone can figure it out..
> The 2 amber dots might be headlights on Sharknose diesel. But then there are swirly dark lines above it which look like upside down tracks, or schematic of + some tiny red, white, and amber sort of teensy clown like object + some purple dots.
> The pic looks out of focus..If you wish us to comprehend it you just may want to consider re-doing it.
> At the same time it is so insignificant you could just leave it alone an keep us guessing for all eternity ! Or, maybe it's just me !


Really? Who cares, so I guess it’s just you….


----------



## Rich1853 (Jun 25, 2018)

Chops said:


> View attachment 585081
> 
> 
> View attachment 585082
> ...


TT the perfect scale, 1:120 (1 inch = 10 scale feet) engineering scale that is why I chose this scale.
I had to figure out the height of a Wasserturm (water tower) behind the Duisburg Wedau DB werkstatt that I modeling to pick the closest available model.
This is what I researched
I have a Kibri Wasserturm HO kit still unbuilt, it is too tall, 130 TT scale feet (94.3 HO scale feet). I do have an unbuilt Faller's 120143 HO kit (95 TT scale feet) and also one built from ebay that's missing the cupola, about 80 TT scale feet to the top of the dome). And finally I have a Vollmer 47543 N scale (68 TT scale feet) (90 N scale feet) that was from ebay already built.


Google Image Result for https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/Duisburg_Entenfang_abgestellte_Bahndienstfahrzeuge.JPG




Redirect Notice


----------



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

TT modelers have my greatest respect: so much they have to make out of thin air. TT is the perfect Goldilocks size, but I would not dare to attempt as my modeling skills are at best low average. I will search for your posts; I hope you have some photos of your TT work. TT is a marvel. 

The TT sized 3D printed station, that while beautifully done, is/was just to dang small. I sent it back for refund. Stunning model, but marketed as HO, and it is NOT.


----------



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

Old_Hobo said:


> Really? Who cares, so I guess it’s just you….


Apologies, what pic?

The avatar? I should probably change it, for it is rather clumsy. It is my Siamese cat, a lazy, fat ball of love, sleeping with a small pile of Tyco tractors spread upon him.


----------



## Chops (Dec 6, 2018)

Erratum, oops!


----------

