Handlaying track question.

Wolf wrote:


Yeah!!! ------ But with the variation in flange depth due to wheel wear etc., it's a 'crap shoot' anyway. The "Real Railroads" don't operate with "Model" speeds, sharpness of curves, etc. so hey don't see the same sorts of problems that modelers do. The question of 'what will work' gets the same answer. WITH 'minimal care', ANY of the commercial flex tracks WILL work acceptably.
Chuck Davis
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think it is true that some streetcar lines, etc. had frogs at crossings that would support the car on the flange. However, they had a bit more flexibility in that area since the cars were quite a bit lighter. I think this was done to prevent the hammer-blow of the wheel pounding over the gap in the rail from causing the track to slowly sink into the street. It would be a maintenance headache because of the need to tear up the street to put more ballast in.
--
-Glennl
The despammed service works OK, but unfortunately
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

THAT may be the source of my info. When the 'ref.' is thirty to fifty years back in the stacks, some of the details get muddled. Chuck D.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
" snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com" wrote:

Strretcar lines tend to be much smaller and can therefore more easily have a single standard for flange depth. The usual reason for them using flange support is to eliminate one of the moving point rails at turnouts.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Greg Procter wrote:

A lot of the old street railway trade literature emphasises the minimisation of pounding and noise as the main benefit of using crossings that support the flange.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Wolf wrote:

Er, no, that's not so.
The AAR spec. for flange depth is 1.000in min. See http://www.nmra.org/standards/pdf/TN_1_1_2.pdf page 11-12.
Why all that guessing?
--
Venlig hilsen
Erik Olsen
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Erik Olsen DK wrote:

You're right about flange depth. I thunk I recalled the correct dimension. I hope I'll recall it correctly in future. :-)
However, real frogs are not designed to support the flange. You'd actually get very rough riding if you did that, as an "average" flangeway depth would be too deep for new wheels and too shallow for worn wheels.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Wolf wrote:
> However, real frogs are not designed to support the flange. You'd > actually get very rough riding if you did that, as an "average" > flangeway depth would be too deep for new wheels and too shallow for > worn wheels.
As someone else noted earlier in the thread, frogs that support the flange are usually confined to street railway special work - my local tramway museum has an excellent example of a scissors crossover of this type.
Becoming very common on the railway I work for are high-speed turnouts with moving frogs, know locally as "swing-nose crossing" turnouts. These close against the route set, providing a continuous path for the wheel throughout the turnout. The crossing motors are separate from the points - when they have to be wound manually you must remember to wind all four!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Most of the rusted track I have seen is usually pretty dark, and the rust colored paint just doesn't look the same as what seems to be the most common color. It looks closer to black to me than rust brown.
--
-Glennl
The despammed service works OK, but unfortunately
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Many thanks to Jerry, David Starr, Wolf, Ken, Steve, Chuck and others who responded. Especially the how-to details. Almost makes me want to give it a try. :) But I better get some experience with the regular track first.
As for all the codes, I'm not sure yet what to decide on that. The stuff I'll be doing is narrow gauge, backwoods stuff and I'm not sure what would be appropriate there.
Did get to look at some real track and realized that modern and steam era won't look the same. The new stuff has like brackets that rest below the rails on each tie with a spike on both sides through the bracket, per rail (4 total spikes per tie). I need to look at steam era track.
Thanks again!
~Brad fd64
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@webtv.net spake thus:

The smalla da betta. The smallest you can get away with.
--
Don't talk to me, those of you who must need to be slammed in the
forehead with a maul before you'll GET IT that Wikipedia is a
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@webtv.net says...

Since you were wondering, the proper term is "hand laid."
--
Ken Rice -=:=- kennrice (AT) erols (DOT) com
http://users.erols.com/kennrice - Lego Compatible Flex Track,
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I'm using Micro Engineerings pre weathered code 83 rail for my On30 layout and their spikes. This rail is more black than rust, but that depends on the age of the rail you're modelling. I'm cutting all my ties my self on a jig for my tablesaw. I've tried every where for On30 ties but all the companies that list them say they are not producing them any more. I used code 55 on my HOn3 logging layout years ago but my eyesight has deteriorated that it's hard for me to hand lay that stuff. It's why I changed to On30.
Dave C from BC
says...

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, don't feel bad about that. I've actually considered selling off most of my HO scale stuff and going into G for the ability to build better models (A small mistake on a G scale model is still a small mistake. A small mistake on an HO scale model is the size of a person.). If I didn't have so much invested already in HO and a severe limitation of space I might have done that change already.
--
-Glennl
The despammed service works OK, but unfortunately
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.