So heres a couple pics of my 'layout'. This is basically Phase I. Phase II will be a 2x9 rectangle off to the right, connecting with the far turnout (thats connected to the curved one) for a yard, with an elevated background connecting to the twisting grade, which will turnback around the far edge. Phase II.5 will be an as-yet-unplanned segment added onto the left side. I decided to do this because the space got crunched more than I thought when allowing easements and a wide-enough radius for the grade turnback. This would have left me with the dreaded stair-step predicament, and i really didn't want to create a whole segment of retaining wall-based scenery around the outside of the grade curve, where the curved turnout is located. This way I'll only have to make a small one where the track comes up along the grade where the mallet is laying. I'll probably just move it out a foot or two, but I'm stuck on whether I want to add some more operational interest, like making a 5x4 section with a town or something.
so anyway, heres what I've got so far
davidmbedard wrote: Those are tight curves mixed with heavy grades (effectivly doubling your grade).....expecially for those old Rivarossi articuleds.I would slow down and re-think your plan.David B
Those are tight curves mixed with heavy grades (effectivly doubling your grade).....expecially for those old Rivarossi articuleds.
I would slow down and re-think your plan.
David B
Yes it does look to be almost a 4% plus the radius. Could be trouble with some pieces.
Modeling B&O- Chessie Bob K. www.ssmrc.org
Greg, I have to add my voice to those going . It could very well be just the camera and angle that make it seem so, but your curve and grade combo, just by themselves, is going to mean a really tough slug for your engines. I suppose you could double them...that would be fine.
But if you are not married to anything just yet, it would be a solid use of your time to spend a couple of hours and think about another plan, and then mock it up as you are doing to give it a test.
-Crandell
A true friend will not bail you out of jail...he will be sitting next to you saying "that was friggin awesome dude!" Tim...Modeling the NYC...is there any other?
I'd take things a bit farther and pin down the track, etc. (temporarily) and run some trains to see how well you like it before making anything permanent. I learned that the hard way.
Overall, I think you're taking a great approach.
- Harry
Oops. haha, i didn't realize the photobucket descriptions wouldn't show up. Those Mallets are going on ebay... i just did the photos in the same session.
the inclines are just tacked down right now, they're 3%. 22" easements into 18" curves, 24" easements into S-curve, ~23" easement out of S-curve into 18" radius that I'm probably going to open up to 20". This will be the branch line going up to the mine thats going to be on the 2x9' section to the right; RS-1's hauling 5-6 70-ton 2-bay hoppers, maybe a few 3 bays occassionally.
Well I went home earlier and did some testing with the good 'ol eztrack stuff. I had to do a little shifting to make it all fit on the inclines, but i got it to work. I concluded that the grades and radii are sufficient... the engines didn't really have too many problems at all. The only issues were entering and exiting the S-curve, as these were the locations where the weight started to pull on the engine. It was very minor though; and when I hooked up the dual RS-1's, there wasn't any issue at all.
So heres some pics I took to prove it, haha. And no, I didn't set them up for the photos. I DROVE them up, so there. lol The RS-1's are Atlas models and the SD45 is an Athearn.
IMG]http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj151/Gumbo72203/000_0115.jpg[/IMG]
Haha yeah... I didn't think to copy the photobucket description. Even though, I think the mallets would be able to do it; they're articulated, and I know they work fine on 22" radii. Either way I won't be able to use them, because they don't run on Code 70.
Heres the other picture that didn't show up:
Anyone have an opinion on using Code 55 for the mine branch? My girlfriend bought me a bundle of the ME HO Code 55 non-weathered stuff at a LHS.
Thats a funny story in itself, because I took here there to show her how much better it was than Hobbytown, a local chain for all hobby stuff. When I was getting ready to pay for my rust and zinc chromate primer paints, we were talking about track because she didn't fully understand the differences between sizes. at the counter is where they have their tubes full of various ME flextrack and cork, and I pointed to the tube where their code 70 used to be and then went to pull my wallet out. As I was pulling my wallet out, my girlfriend pulled the one bundle in the tube, and she said "No its not, this is Code 55." I don't remember exactly what happened after that, but I got really excited and took one of those excited deep breaths when you're shocked, and was like "WHAT!??" My heart started racing, and after her initial shock at my reaction she asked if I wanted it for my birthday. The shop worker said that someone had them order it for them. From reading stuff on this board, I thought ME was in the process of making new molds for the stuff because they'd worn the old ones out, or something like that.
But anyway... I have 18 feet of Code 55 track now, haha. I know that I'm going to use it for spurs, but I was thinking about making the mine branch code 55 to make it look more rugged, and to differentiate it from the mainline. Is this something that would be acceptable/prototypical?