Large Scale Central

April Garden RR mag: Tower pg. 47?

General Discussion
#1

Here’s where your input can be helpful in my understanding page 47 in April’s Garden Railways. For those who take the magazine, see if you can do better than myself in following the instructions for constructing the watchman’s tower after making a construction choice from five different scales. I think my problem in understanding is from a consistent way I visually evaluate scale size differences.

Visually, the scales shown on the page appear to be the opposite of what I am used to seeing. For example, the scale illustration for 1:32 in “actual four inches” is really just under an office ruler’s four inches. However, visually looking at the scale for 1:13 (7/8") representing four “actual inches” really measures 1 3/4 inches. Visually, my brain thinks the illustration should show the 1:13 (7/8ths) four-inch scale to be nearly twice as long as the 1:32. It isn’t, it is half the length visually.

Meanwhile, the inset box midway on the same page shows the percentage size differences. Such as the 1:13 (7/8ths) is 249% larger than 1:32. That makes sense. So how do I connect this percentage understanding with the how-to instruction: “To scale these drawings (of the tower) for your scale, enlarge them so the inch scale printed above exactly matches a ruler.” ( ? )

Again, for those who subscribe and want to take on my apparent misunderstanding and overt conspiracy of confusion, please do so! I welcome your help.

Thanks,

Wendell

#2

They expect you to blow up the figure in a copier.

When you blow it up and the 1:32 scale “tick marks” are in actual inches (i.e., 4 inches across the page), you’re there in 1:32 scale. Because these tick marks are already close to an inch apart, you are almost there already. So you are only blowing it up a little.

When you blow up the 1:13.7, you need to blow it up by over twice as much to get its tick marks to 4 inches across the page.

#3

My head hurts!

#4

Well yea. When you enlarge the thing for 1:13 scale so that bar is an actual 4 inches, the bar for 1:32 would be way over. You are enlarging the whole plan set to size, and that reference bar is there for reference while enlarging.

In other words, make this thing (reference bar for your scale) 4 actual inches long, and the plans are to the right size. The plans need to be bigger for scales other then 1:32.

#5

Don’t get me wrong (or not). I enjoy GR and the print medium in general because I spent most of my working life in the magazine business. But letting a contributor who is not knowledgeable about how the process of communication in any medium, works, is like letting the proverbial inmates run the asylum. I’m sure author Mike Garforth understood his graphic showing how to interpret the size of his structure in various scales. But like Wendell and David, I was confused. And the credo that good journalists live by (drummed into me by my wife and former managing editor of a medium-size, big-city newspaper), is to be clear–to the point of oversimplification.

#6

I read the article and thought that it was empirically clear to even the most casual observer. (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-tongue-out.gif)

#7

Well I want to join the conversation, but I do not subscribe to the magazine. If someone wants to scan it and put t into PDF and then send it to me I would be glad to evaluate its understandability.

Now I know what your all thinking… this guy just wants a free set of plans without buying the magazine…Honestly I just want to help… really.

OK no I want a free copy of the plans.

#8

No problem Devon. Go to the Garden Railways website and join (for free) and the plans are free to download for members.

#9

Devon Sinsley said:

Well I want to join the conversation, but I do not subscribe to the magazine. If someone wants to scan it and put t into PDF and then send it to me I would be glad to evaluate its understandability.

Now I know what your all thinking… this guy just wants a free set of plans without buying the magazine…Honestly I just want to help… really.

OK no I want a free copy of the plans.

Here you go…

Note from Bob: File deleted by request of GR. Do NOT post copyrighted material on this site.

#10

Todd Brody said:

No problem Devon. Go to the Garden Railways website and join (for free) and the plans are free to download for members.

Thanks Todd,

I am now a member.

#11

Joe Zullo said:

Devon Sinsley said:

Well I want to join the conversation, but I do not subscribe to the magazine. If someone wants to scan it and put t into PDF and then send it to me I would be glad to evaluate its understandability.

Now I know what your all thinking… this guy just wants a free set of plans without buying the magazine…Honestly I just want to help… really.

OK no I want a free copy of the plans.

Here you go…

Thanks Joe. I knew I could sucker someone into giving it to me(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-tongue-out.gif).

#12

Haven’t been to the mailbox since Friday. Thanks for the warning.

John

#13

OK and since Joe did give me a copy purely for the purposes of evaluating it for this conversation I can see the confusion. I would have figured it out but only because I have been doing a lot of this for my loco build. I blow up pictures or PDF files that have scales on them to match a ruler then I can take measurements. If I hadn’t been doing that I might have had to ask the same thing. The percentage things would have really lost me until I realized they were talking about a photocopier… I wonder if the local museum will let me borrow theirs.

#14

http://grw.trains.com/how-to/full-size-drawings/2007/04/pdf-build-a-1203-scale-watchmans-tower

Glad I joined this is nice. Like a kid in a candy store.

#15

I am not sure if this is the same tower that I built for last years Miks’ Challenge. It was a Garden Railways plan, Anyway it looks good and has survived outdoors for twelve months with little attention. My build was 1:29 as that is what most of my stock is.

http://www.largescalecentral.com/forums/topic/20606/a-new-ozaukee-tower-mik-s-challenge-2014

#16

Alan, photos are missing.

#17

OK, I’m making a comment.

I surely have no issue with someone saying “I’m confused on something”, like Wendell said.

I DO have an issue with equating the author to an inmate in an asylum, that’s uncalled for. I’d be pretty pissed as an author if it was me, and I’d probably say something I’d regret later if I was face to face. Joe, I think that comment was uncalled for.

I have to agree with Steve on the interpretation, I saw a page with several different “rulers”, each one had a different scale and said “enlarge so this is 4 inches”.

Also the percentage enlargement was stated for each scale too.

It seems straightforward about enlarging the ruler of choice until it measures 4 inches as stated.

Greg

p.s. if nasty comments get back to an author, maybe next time we won’t contribute to the hobby?

#18

Most likely, the scaling of the plan was done by the editors, for their convenience.

Curious, they left out 1:29.

#19

Very sorry about the loss of pics folks. Yet again they must have been deleted, by me, from my freight shed. I checked my pc: no pics there either. Most of the GR plans, are mostly 1:29 I believe and the scaling is provided for those working in other scales. The watchmans tower was one of my sucesses. The coaling stage, also as beautifully built by Bruce Chandler, was not a sucess for me. I forgot the aperture at the rear for coal deliveries. (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-surprised.gif)However all was not lost as it made a great barn.

#20

Thanks all for your help. I understand the process. My guess is the words “photocopier to enlarge” would have triggered the understanding Todd offered.

Meanwhile, Steve’s observation above - the omission of 1:29 - is a good one. Do modelers think in 1:29 or is it in our hobby as the manufacturer’s default scale?