Who has room for a 28" long turnout?

[FJ and G]

In the latest CTT (May04) which came in the mail yesterday, there are several items of interest, including a Product News item featuring a 28" long Ross #10 switch. Cost is a mere $100 if powered. That switch along is longer than an 027 loop of track!

Another interesting item in the magazine is Court TV's Forensic Files recreation of the 1993 derailment of an Amtrak train in Alabama that killed 47. Remember that disaster.

Well, I shouldn't say this because it sounds a bit morbid, but the recreation of the scene looks utterly fantastic. Obviously, CTT wisely chose not to show the carnage, but I'm speaking of the model itself that they built with the single track and forest surrounding it. IMO, the best photo in the entire magazine because it is a "minimalist" approach, not crowding lots of track. Looks so real!

Dave Vergun

[Big_Boy_4005]

Well Dave I have the room for that switch, but no desire to buy one. That's a little pricy for my taste these days. I wouldn't mind building one though.

For the money, I'll take their double slip, unpowered. That, I do NOT feel like building![swg]

How come everyone else gets their magazines before I do?????[V][:(][%-)][|(][;)]

[FJ and G]

B-B

I don't like to think about building a double slip switch.

Oh, I got an advanced copy because I have an article in it.

Dave Vergun

[Anonymous]

Trains ought to be able to go through the diverging route of a #10 switch without slowing down, correct? Isn't the smallest turnout used by the prototype something like a #6?

Tony

[FJ and G]

Tony, correct.

If I'm correct, a #6 switch has an even smaller radius (allowing for faster travel) than an 072. So, a #10 would more closely approximate turnouts on real mainlines. I would assume that the higher the number, the less chance there is of derailment. Can anyone confirm this? Also, it would seem like the higher the number, the less likelihood of a short engine stalling out. Can anyone comment on this.

[Big_Boy_4005]

No Tony, I think real railroads use much longer turnouts. This is a question better answered over on the Trains Magazine forum.

Remember that the number of the turnout represents a ratio. The formula is one unit of divergance per X units of distance from the frog down the straight leg.

Dave, technically turnouts with curved diverving legs don't have numbers. The angle of the frog could not be calculated against a curve as it keeps changing. I forget what an 022 frog would work out to if the diverging leg was straight. Maybe a 1.5 or 2 VERY SHARP!!!

[FJ and G]

#10 = 5.5 degree angle

[Anonymous]

Elliot:

I believe you're right, railroads do use longer turnouts in most applications. I think #12s are typical on mainlines. My question was what's the smallest one they use, like in a switching yard where trains aren't moving all that fast. I think I read it was a #6, but I'm not sure.

Tony

[Big_Boy_4005]

One problem with longer turnouts in modeling is power. I have some #8 Curtis switches, and because they are so long you need to have power routing because the rollers would short out against opposite closure rail if it was left live. Engines with short roller bases will have more trouble with longer tutnouts.

There is also a limit as to how long a turnout could get in 3 rail, because eventually you will pinch out near the frog, ie no room for the center rail!!!

[Big_Boy_4005]

Tony, I'm not sure, but industrial spurs can get pretty sharp. If I'm not mistaken the mainline turnouts have speeds associated with them as well as frog angle numbers. This question is getting better and better for the Trains forum.[;)]

[Anonymous]

During a open house at the former Santa Fe Barstow yard there was mention made of the new CTC work being done on the BNSF main line between Barstow and Belen. New #14 switches were being installed at all the crossovers that allow a train to change from one main line to the other.

The Z trains and Amtrak were going to be required to slow down to only 65 mph when making these crossovers, as opposed to the then current 55 mph maximum speed requirement of the existing switches. BNSF felt the extra speed would keep the line more fluid during busy times by allowing a fast freight to go around a slower manifest with a minimum of speed reduction.