HO Scale scale?

[gfisher]

One of the minor annoyances of using plans published by Model Railroader magazine is that for the convenience of the HO scale modelers they publish the plans at HO scale, which is I believe, for historical reasons, 1/87 of full size. However most architectural plans (at least here in the USA) are done in 1/8"=1'-0", or 1/96 full size. In any case none of the various scales used by architects can be used on these HO scaled drawings, which usually only have a very few written dimensions on them. A solution of course is to use my printer-scanner to enlarge and reduce the plans to a scale I can read, but since it only works to the nearest whole percentage it is not always very accurate.

Has anyone ever heard of a scale (ruler) graduated to the 1/87 scale used by HO modelers? I would have thought this would have been done long ago, but a brief online search turned up nothing.

Nevermind guys, I just didn't look hard enough in the right places, but google once again was my friend. There are lots of them out there.

 

[mezzoprezzo]

Any good?

http://lhonings.home.xs4all.nl/rulers.html

 

[gfisher]

I saw that but I am not too sure about the printing out accuracy so I went ahead and got a stainless steel scale through Bachman. Thanks for the suggestion though.

 

[n8phu]

I bought a Model Railroad scale ruler marked for various gauges at the local hobby shop.....cost like $2. Mine was made by Mascot.

Could pick one up, and even scan it in and make a GMAX/3DS version.....

 

[bendorsey]

HO scale is 3.5 milli-meters to the foot giving 87 scale feet to a real foot.

My scale ruler has HO, S, and O scales on it and since it has a millimeter scale on the back I can use it on OO scale (4 mm/ft) and N scale (2 mm/ft) as well. OO scale isn't common in the USA.

Ben

 

[backyard]

...shrinkage...

Usually the RMC Layout Doctor plans have a grid appropriate to the gauge aimed at.

I built "Scenery & Operation in 5'x8'" from the December 1970 Railroad Model Craftsman. I wish someone would do a Trainz version.

However, I don't see the point in recreating a habitat that was scaled down to fit in a bedroom, when I can now host a 130-mile route!

 

[ray_whiley]

Historical note - here in the UK there used to be an excellent scale rule by ERG (E Rankine Grey) of Bournemouth - long defunct but I still have mine and it's invaluable. It is a rule for 2, 3.5, 4 and 7 mm scales - so I can cope with almost any model railway drawing. The only thing missing was British N Gauge scale as defined many years ago by Peco - 2.0625mm to the foot (try doing that with an ordinary rule!) But hey - Peco made a scale rule for this, and I have one of those.

I said this was a historical note - so hard luck to anyone looking for an ERG rule. But there is a way of making one to any scale by drawing a right-angled triangle and drawing lines across to show one scale on one edge and the conversion on another. I can't recall how to do it without trying to look it up - perhaps someone can describe the method?

Ray

 

[Red_Rattler]

By the way, it's only minor, but it is really 1:87.1

I saw that but I am not too sure about the printing out accuracy so I went ahead and got a stainless steel scale through Bachman. Thanks for the suggestion though.

Why not print it out, as described, and check with a ruler?

(Use the same HO scale with the Trainz default ruler arrows, and put them beside other rulers (that are not default), and see how "accurate" (accurate used loosely) the default arrow ruler is. "

HO scale is 3.5 milli-meters to the foot giving 87 scale feet to a real foot.

Oh Noo, the Yanks using millimetres? We can't have the USA using metric can we? (oh well at least their right in it's spelling of meters!). :hehe:

But then again, it's better than saying X/XXth inches to the foot.

PS: Most people know how HO got its name, but I wonder how they get either OO (double letter "O") from half O (letter "O") scale, or get OO (letter) from half Gauge 0 (as in Zero)?

PS-2: At Ray, wouldn't a scale ruler with only two sides, and 4 units of measurement be hard to read, and how can anyone be so accurate millimetres to the four decimal places (that's 1/10 thousand), especially without extremely accurate equipment?

 

[ray_whiley]

At Ray, wouldn't a scale ruler with only two sides, and 4 units of measurement be hard to read, and how can anyone be so accurate millimetres to the four decimal places (that's 1/10 thousand), especially without extremely accurate equipment?

I doi't find it hard to read. One side has combined 7mm and 3.5mm scales along one edge - marked from left for 7mm and from right (backwards) for 3.5mm. The opposite edge on that side has combined 4mm (from left) and 2mm for true scale 2mm users (from right). The reverse has 3mm scale (from left) along one edge and millimetres (from left) along the other.

2.0625mm to one foot - the British N scale devised by S C Pritchard of Peco to enable the small 12v motors which existed at the time (1960s) to fit in British outline. The same comnpromise as British OO, to enable motors which would fit in the larger outline Continental and American locos to be used in British outline. A source of much controversy over the years - perpetuated by the large toy makers such as Hornby and Triang. Of course no-one can read a rule to so many decimal places of a millimetre, that is why a scale rule marked in feet and 3 inch divisions to British N scale is invaluable.

Incidentally many model drawings here are published at 2mm to the foot (true scale) to enable them to fit on the page.

I will not mention the many drawings by Rev Edward Beale in the early days of railway modelling which included a scale showing inches for OO scale - with no consistency from one drawing to the next - a real headache! But I use them.

Ray

 

[Red_Rattler]

PS: Most people know how HO got its name, but I wonder how they get either OO (double letter "O") from half O (letter "O") scale, or get OO (letter) from half Gauge 0 (as in Zero)?

Underlined words should read: “but I wonder how they get either OO (double letter "O") from O (letter "O") scale, or get OO (letter) from Gauge 0 (as in Zero)?”

 

[narrowgauge]

Red Rattler

oh well at least their right in it's spelling of meters!).

As you brought the subject up, I must correct your comment. The correct spelling for the metric unit of length is 'metre', as in 'METRic, a 'meter' is an instrument to measure flow of a fluid or current.

I quote this from the Macquarie dictionary so it is correct Australian usage.

Peter

 

[simulatortrain]

But then again, it's better than saying X/XXth inches to the foot.

Really? Because I've heard many European teachers complain about students losing their ability to do anything beyond basic mental calculations based on anything but the number 10, and very low capability of using fractions.

 

[Howarded2]

(oh well at least they're right in its spelling of metres!). :hehe:

Speaking of spelling, I fixed some spelling for you but left your grammar untouched.

 

[sniper297]

Being a fossilized old Yankee Doodle I always have to convert these newfangled meters and centimeters to "real money" before I can visualize the actual size of anything. Biggest problem I had with the creation of the original Port Ogden & Northern route for MSTS was the measurements in the drawing from "101 Track Plans for Model Railroaders". The original layout was a bookshelf switchback, 16 feet long and one foot deep if built in HO scale, so it would fit along one wall of a fair sized room. Started it a couple times in real life, never got to finish it, so when I opened the MSTS route editor that was the first thing I tried.

16 feet times 87 = 1392 feet converted to furriner heathen meters is about 422 meters. MSTS route editor, like most game editors, uses meters so we're kinda stuck with them. Hardest part was elevations in inches above the floor - find the lowest elevation in the drawing and call that zero, so three inches elevation times 87 = 261 inches divided by 12 = 21.75 feet (now I can sink my teeth into that number to visualize overhead clearance) divide by 3.3 to get 6.59 meters, call it 6.6 and that's how high I set the bridge or whatever. And I really hate math of any kind. :hehe:

 

[Red_Rattler]

Speaking of spelling, I fixed some spelling for you but left your grammar untouched.

Probably because I only noticed that myself about an hour or so ago, and I'm not an octupus (Can't do too many things at once, like correcting every single spelling mistake!

And by the way, the spelling "meters" WAS NOT a spelling mistake.)

Now wat else waz I gonna say about this subject?

 

[Howarded2]

Yeah no worries, I was bored and having a bit of fun. Sorry about that! cheers