This is the area that I am modeling:
http://www.pbase.com/tmak2654952/the_menasha_canal_module
The green track will be code 83 and I want to use code 70 and/or 55 on the rest.
So you then you guys feel I should build the crossings with code 83 and do the transition on either side of the crossings.
NorthEastern Wisconsin Free-mo
Total Membership of 3 and Growing!
tmak@new.rr.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/newifreemo/?yguid=183720262
North Eastern Wisconsin Free-mo Group
updated 9/19/07
http://www.pbase.com/tmak2654952/galleries
all galleries
BigRusty wrote:Why not build the crossing with Code 83 and make the transition aftwerwards?
When two prototype tracks cross, the crossing is built with a single weight and size of rail - the larger of the two in use (or, sometimes, even larger.)
An example would be industrial track on a Class 1 (115# rail) crossed by a light rail line (90# rail) on private right-of-way (not in the street.) The diamond would be either 115# rail or something heavier. The frogs are manganese steel castings and aren't adaptable to different rail heights. Also, if the rail bases aren't at the same level the shims and tie plates on the tie tops could get very messy. It's a lot simpler (and less expensive in the long run) to increase the rail weight (size) on the more lightly built line for a few rail lengths.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Has anyone here have had any experience building a Fast Track Crossing with a code 83 rail crossing a code 70 rail? I'd like to hear about your experience.
Tom Makofski
http://www.pbase.com/tmak2654952/my_work_bench
updated 2/15/07