Wazzzy** Our models are not heavy enough to produce a realistic clickety-clack on the rail. It was barely audible. ** Scale sound?
** Our models are not heavy enough to produce a realistic clickety-clack on the rail. It was barely audible. **
Scale sound?
Not real. In this video you can hear it clearly. About 2:30 until 3:00 when the train runs over the bridge.
Wolfgang
Pueblo & Salt Lake RR
Come to us http://www.westportterminal.de my videos my blog
Would that be scale noise? Perhaps the roadbed being a noisier material (harder?) would work. I'd make a few test sections... Hey - who has scale fishplates?? Thanks -
Several years ago I tried this on an HO scale club layout by cutting a narrow groove into the top of the rail with a Dremel cutoff wheel, but the effect was disappointing. Our models are not heavy enough to produce a realistic clickety-clack on the rail. It was barely audible.
In the US (where I presume the poster is, not Germany or Japan) jointed rail was laid out so that whenever possible the joints were not directly opposite each other, since that could cause problems. There was AFAIK no set distance the joints needed to be apart so it wasn't that hard to maintain a separation (i.e. it wasn't like they joints had to be exactly 4.3 ft apart or something).
Anyway, I agree that just cutting a groove on the very top of the rails should be sufficient, I wouldn't cut all the way through. Don't forget to add rail joint castings on the outside of the "joints" that you're simulating.
Sir Madog Mark, believe it or not - it´s true! I have the "Tracklayer´s Guide book", published in 1909 by the former Royal Prussian Railway Administration, in which it is clearly stated that rail joints need to be aligned in parallel.
Mark,
believe it or not - it´s true! I have the "Tracklayer´s Guide book", published in 1909 by the former Royal Prussian Railway Administration, in which it is clearly stated that rail joints need to be aligned in parallel.
OK, I'll chalk it up as a Prussian fettish.
Mark (who looks like a Bavarian)
In my youth, I also remember the sound of cars going over the joints to be da-dang, da-dang, instead of being dang-dang-dang-dang.
How´s that!
Sir Madog Btw, staggered joints are only common in the US and Canada - good ol´ Europe had parallel joints / now, all is welded.
Btw, staggered joints are only common in the US and Canada - good ol´ Europe had parallel joints / now, all is welded.
There wouldn't be nearly as many joints with welded rail. Also, wouldn't it take more effort and expense to intentionally line up the rails to make any joints opposite each other? (Oh my god! This half-mile length of rail is 10 feet shorter than the other, dang that curve! Now we have to cut the longer rail!) Your saying so doesn't convince me. Isn't the world more rational than that?
Mark
tomikawaTT On less than perfectly maintained track, the rail joints sag. If the joints are staggered, this results in a rolling motion, especially if the car's suspension is stiff. Apparently the Japan National Railways preferred squared joints to seasick passengers...
On less than perfectly maintained track, the rail joints sag. If the joints are staggered, this results in a rolling motion, especially if the car's suspension is stiff. Apparently the Japan National Railways preferred squared joints to seasick passengers...
So, Chuck, I presume that means JNR preferred passengers and baggage to bounce rather than to roll.
If it adds to the realism that you want to capture - why not? If someone had told us 30 years ago, that steam locos would puff out smoke synchronized to theturning wheel, with realistic sound according to speed and load, we would have thought him to be crazy (yes, there was that PFM sound system - I know).
Grand CentralSooo, my question is, what do people think of this idea-good, bad, crazy? Anyone see any problems, besides electrical?
Just a tad crazy - but aren't we all. I find that even with a 500 sq foot layout room, my track has enough "special-work" to give sufficient noises (of varying sound) to be pretty loud with >20 car trains on the mains. Not the same as with 39' sections but enough for me. I can also tell when a train has gone sufficiently far into hidden staging by the clack over a single wide expansion joint. (There is also a $30 IR security camera for confirmation.)
The shallow groove is the way to go. It will help prevent both electrical and alignment problems.
I considered this idea for the mountain line which uses short trains, so let us know how it works out.
Karl
PS: Metal wheels are a must of course.
The mind is like a parachute. It works better when it's open. www.stremy.net
markpierce Stagger the rail joints so they aren't opposite the ones on the other rail. That's how the prototype does it since the track would be weaker if the joints are opposite. Mark
Stagger the rail joints so they aren't opposite the ones on the other rail. That's how the prototype does it since the track would be weaker if the joints are opposite.
Unless you're modeling a prototype that preferred squared joints to staggered joints...
I don't notch my railheads, but I DO simulate the rail joint pairs by having two ties almost touching each other every 20 scale meters. That's the Japanese technique for adding extra support at those weak points Mark mentioned.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
All you need to do is take a jeweler's saw with a very fine tooth blade a saw into the rail and only go as deep as the webbing. Them take those plastic rail plates and glue them on the webbing for a little bit more realizism. This way you don't have to worry about any electical connections at the joints.
It should take you less than 20 sec. to saw the rail head.
Glen
"Turning Out Turnouts"
A thin or pointed file or saw to just scratch the top would work. Don't forget the joint bars if your going this route. Details west had them a while back or proto 87 stores.
Pete
I pray every day I break even, Cause I can really use the money!
I started with nothing and still have most of it left!
Just a bit "crazy", but what the heck! You could use a Dremel tool circular file saw, to just make enough of a nick every 5 3/8in. to get the "clickety clak" without reducing the current carrying capacity of the rails. It's difficult, but one can slide N scale joiners onto code 83 track,(for every "nick"), if you want to go "whole hog" and show the rail joint connections "some-what to scale".
Bob Hahn
Oh hai!
In an effort to hear the clickty clack and see the jointed rail look, I was thinking of cutting my track into 5 3/8 " (39" in HO scale) sections for the straight areas.
Sooo, my question is, what do people think of this idea-good, bad, crazy? Anyone see any problems, besides electrical? I hope with good enough connections, the electrical problem won't be much of one.