Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Double Crossover with a Double-curve Turnout

3236 views
87 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January, 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 7,790 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Monday, April 01, 2019 7:51 PM

BigDaddy

Sheldon I thought the bottom house was yours, as you posted it many times.

The top house is definitely haunted. Wink

 

Yes it is, but the ghosts are friendly. We lived in that house for 23 years, and never had so much as one neighborhood trick or treater on Halloween, because all the neighbor kids know it is haunted......

And you too can be next keeper of the haunted house in Forest Hill. We will be putting it on the market soon. It comes with a 1000 sq ft heated and cooled train room above the 6 car capable garage/shop, in ground pool, 900 sq ft wrap around porch, 5 bedrooms and 4,000 sq ft of carefully restored original 1901 elegance.

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    December, 2015
  • 5,101 posts
Posted by BigDaddy on Monday, April 01, 2019 7:17 PM

Sheldon I thought the bottom house was yours, as you posted it many times.

The top house is definitely haunted. Wink

Henry

COB Potomac & Northern

By the Chesapeake Bay

  • Member since
    January, 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 7,790 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Monday, April 01, 2019 7:07 PM

railandsail

I know Havre de Grace,...old rivel of Aberdeen High where I graduated (1961) due to my father being career Army.

BTW, there is (or was) a gentleman there in Aberdeen that had a marvelous industrial layout and a steel mill scene that I believe had 3 blast furnances.

I also had a sailboat rental operation across the bay bridge on Kent Island and a retail & wholesale operation down in Eastport.

 

For 23 years we lived in Forest Hill near Bel Air, in this 1901 Queen Anne we restored:

Our new to us retirement house is in Webster Village, at the end of Paradise Rd, out by MD155.

Two of our adult children live in Havre de Grace proper, one of my recent high profile restoration projects was in Havre de Grace.

We really like this area, and found the perfect house for our needs. You will not be seeing us in sunny Florida.......

Seems you worked out the double crossover, very good.

Best of luck with your layout.

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,387 posts
Posted by railandsail on Monday, April 01, 2019 11:53 AM

I'm working on my outdoor helix track structure and the bridges that connect it with the interior layout. In that regards I have to jump back and forth with interior matters as well as those outside. One such item is that 'custom double crossover' and its connection with the helix tracks,....making sure I have the depths and sideways connections thoroughly thought out,...AND making sure I have the grade of the two in unison so as to not have vertical kinks/humps!

So I decided to concurrently finalize the track plan for that double crossover and build it on its alum bridge. I decided to investigate removing that little short section of curved track that I had been concerned about,...the one between the actual crossover piece and the dbl-curved turnout. WOW, it has worked out that I did NOT need that little curved piece.


To verify that things were still OK with fitting my overall plan for those spurs feeding the container yard, I laid this out roughly,..

Looks pretty smooth even with those medium size Pecos that follow up after the train exits the double crossover, (those Pecos will have to have their guard rails shimmed for the longer wheelbase steamers).

Now I need to fit that double crossover arrangement into my 6” wide alum base, and I need to provide a cut out in the side fence for the curved turnout to exit that alum bridge,..



Those round holes cut in the bottom of the base are for the Peco underneath style switch solenoids if so choosen.

 

With the turnouts taped in place to double check everything,..


Then with the whole structure in place,..

 

I have now glued a thin 1/8" layer of cork to that alum base and will like screw mount the turnouts in place with small #4 screws rather than gluing them down.

Interestingly I've discovered that these turnouts might even be manually operated via cable, but will wait until plywood decks are fitted into position to see if it makes any sense. Meanwhile I will go ahead and install the 4 turnouts with their Peco controls. 

 

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,387 posts
Posted by railandsail on Monday, April 01, 2019 11:50 AM

I know Havre de Grace,...old rivel of Aberdeen High where I graduated (1961) due to my father being career Army.

BTW, there is (or was) a gentleman there in Aberdeen that had a marvelous industrial layout and a steel mill scene that I believe had 3 blast furnances.

I also had a sailboat rental operation across the bay bridge on Kent Island and a retail & wholesale operation down in Eastport.

  • Member since
    January, 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 7,790 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Monday, April 01, 2019 10:34 AM

I grew up in Severna Park, I know Annapolis well, lived most of my life in central Maryland. For the last 24 years I have lived on the north side of Baltimore, in Harford County. The new retirement house where I will be starting on the next layout soon is in Havre de Grace.

A for the shims, the wing out idea is a good one, those guard rails have always appeared too short for me.

Always keep in mind, that in the ideal theory of rail travel, the flanges seldom touch the rail, the straight frog in an extension that theory.

Sheldon 

    

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,387 posts
Posted by railandsail on Monday, April 01, 2019 6:32 AM

Interesting Sheldon, I was in the sailboat business for a number of years there in Annapolis MD, Severna Park's neighbor. But at that time I had no interest in trains. I do have my times of 'challenging the norms'....ha...ha. So I had to reread your submissions several times for them to register.

The reason I am considering metal shims is the possibility to let them 'wing out' a little bit over the length of the plastic guard rails of the Pecos. And I thought they might be a little more durable.

  • Member since
    January, 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 7,790 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Sunday, March 31, 2019 1:21 PM

railandsail

Sheldon,
Thank you for being so persistent with you explainations of what I now consider the 'Peco flaw'. I have come to realize that for the most part the Peco larges do not present many problems, BUT those small and medium sizes do. Since I have designed my newlayout around the use of Pecos I am going to have to take a serious look at shimming those smaller ones.

Reference these Quotes:

 

 
BUT, there are other factors related to the curved frog that make them a non starter for me.

In theory (and in practice for the most part, other factors aside for a moment), when a railroad wheelset is traveling on straight track, the tapper of the wheels and the crown of the rail leave the flanges NOT in contact with the side of the railhead.

So a turnout with a straight path through the frog is less likely to have the flange loaded against the rail (or the back of the opposite wheel loaded on the guard rail) as it crosses the gap in the rail.

Yes, it is the job of the guard rail to pull it over to the other side, BUT, that too introduces more friction, more contact, and chances for conflict between the wheel and the rail if the route is curved.

Hence the number of modelers who have been known to modifiy PECO turnouts with styrene strips, etc, to improve performance. Sheldon

 

 

 
The bottom line is he’s saying wheels on a curve like to keep going in a straight line, so a frog on a curve increases the chance the wheels will go down the other route with a frog on a curve.

Straight frogs minimize that tendency, that’s all.

He's also saying to protect a curved frog better, modelers may add shims to the guard rails to keep the wheel flanges well away from a curved frog point.
Joe Fugate

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

Brian, you are welcome, I hope the information has truely been useful.

I was persistant to a point, then figured enough was enough, but since you have addressed me directly, I will respond.

If I seem blunt, or curt, it is not my intention to offend.

First, while it is not a choice I would make, I repect your efforts to build as much railroad as possible in your limited space.

There are a number of folks on this fourm who simply don't like the fact that I have strong opinions and make no apologies for my opinions. I have generally stopped offering opinions on some subjects, I simply don't have the time, and have grown tired of those who think I should be more "warm and fuzzy, politically correct" or whatever.

Most of my strong opinions are based on my own experiance, and the experiance of a number of outstanding modelers I have had the privledge of knowing over the last 50 years.

I was/am lucky to have been literally raised in this hobby, in a part of the country where model trains are very popular, many of the manufacturers are/were nearby, and where a fair number of modelers, some well known, live/lived.

For many years I enjoyed the priviledge of membership in the Severna Park Model Railroad Club, many times published here in MR.

So, I don't mean to sound like a self appointed expert, as many believe, I'm just sharing what I have learned.

But I don't have the time or the personality to dance around people who disagree. It's ok, they are welcome to disagree.

It has been my experiance that few people want to learn or understand things like track geometry - I am an engineering type person, I have made my living designing buildings, electrical and electronics, hydronic heating systems, etc.

I learned and understood the track geometry questions at play here when I was in high school, I'm 62 in May.........

PECO makes great products, but they made the turnouts in question for the UK and European markets, where model trains are simply designed for sharper curves and sharper turnouts. 

Will they work with North American trains? Well seems you have spent a lot of time learning what I already knew, yes, and no.

There are those who claim that the prototype geometry is not important for our models. Well it is true that it is less important, that the physics do not scale down exactly. But physics is physics and geometry is geometry. No North American railroad would build a real life PECO code 100 Streamlined turnout.......

I also read your other thread today. I don't think metal shims are necessary or a good idea at all. 

All the PECO users I know have shimmed their turnouts with styrene, and enjoyed decades of service without issue - BUT, they did have to shim them to get reliable operation of longer equipment......

I am long past trying to re-invent the wheel in this hobby. I know what works and what does not, I know what my own modeling goals and interests are. 

New ideas are not always better, sometimes they are just different.......

One other note, I notice that at some point you got some response from Joe Fugate regarding my comments. His comments are spot on. Understand, that unlike you, I do not spend time on multiple forums, I simply don't have the time or the interest. My interest in this one comes and goes......

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,387 posts
Posted by railandsail on Sunday, March 31, 2019 8:04 AM

Sheldon,
Thank you for being so persistent with you explainations of what I now consider the 'Peco flaw'. I have come to realize that for the most part the Peco larges do not present many problems, BUT those small and medium sizes do. Since I have designed my newlayout around the use of Pecos I am going to have to take a serious look at shimming those smaller ones.

Reference these Quotes:

BUT, there are other factors related to the curved frog that make them a non starter for me.

In theory (and in practice for the most part, other factors aside for a moment), when a railroad wheelset is traveling on straight track, the tapper of the wheels and the crown of the rail leave the flanges NOT in contact with the side of the railhead.

So a turnout with a straight path through the frog is less likely to have the flange loaded against the rail (or the back of the opposite wheel loaded on the guard rail) as it crosses the gap in the rail.

Yes, it is the job of the guard rail to pull it over to the other side, BUT, that too introduces more friction, more contact, and chances for conflict between the wheel and the rail if the route is curved.

Hence the number of modelers who have been known to modifiy PECO turnouts with styrene strips, etc, to improve performance. Sheldon

The bottom line is he’s saying wheels on a curve like to keep going in a straight line, so a frog on a curve increases the chance the wheels will go down the other route with a frog on a curve.

Straight frogs minimize that tendency, that’s all.

He's also saying to protect a curved frog better, modelers may add shims to the guard rails to keep the wheel flanges well away from a curved frog point.
Joe Fugate

 

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

  • Member since
    January, 2017
  • From: Southern Florida Gulf Coast
  • 4,298 posts
Posted by SeeYou190 on Tuesday, February 19, 2019 7:18 PM

railandsail
St Augustine does NOT have a local hobby shop to pick up some.

.

You are not very far from Roundhouse South in Port Orange. Also, it is not too far a drive to Colonial Photo and Hobby in Orlando, and then you can stop at Skycraft Parts on Fairbanks for some real fun.

.

-Kevin

.

Happily modeling the STRATTON & GILLETTE RAILROAD located in a world of plausible nonsense set in August, 1954.

  • Member since
    January, 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 7,790 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Tuesday, February 19, 2019 5:27 PM

railandsail

Fine Tuning Peco Code 100 Curved Switch Check Rails

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNQSIiZ5ob4

Using brass shim on guard rail,..pretty clean installation.

Interesting observation about backing thru the turnout verses forward picking of the frog.

 

I have known about these modifications for more than a decade, several of my friends did all that years ago to use PECO turnouts.

I have never had to do anything to an ATLAS Custom Line turnout except install it.....except maybe file down the occasional high frog.

The whole idea about the straight frog is that the flanges are not loaded against the rail as the wheel goes over the frog gap. The longer the wheelbase of the steam loco, and the sharper the curve, the more the flanges are loaded in the curve. It that really the time for a gap in the rail?

In theory, on a wheel set going straight, the flanges are not even touching the rail let alone being loaded against it under pressure.

It is an interesting theory to pay more for something and then have to do more work to use it?

Sheldon 

    

  • Member since
    December, 2008
  • From: In the heart of Georgia
  • 3,001 posts
Posted by Doughless on Tuesday, February 19, 2019 11:59 AM

railandsail

 

 
Doughless

Since the original configuration on page 1, you've expanded from small to large Peco's.

 

 

Actually when I looked it up, I started this project with Medium size Peco's, not smalls. And that was part of the surprise, that these failed to handle the larger wheelbase steam engines,...I needed to go to the large size.


Or switch to the same sized turnout that have North American geometry (Atlas)

Perhaps its semmantics, but I don't think it was a surprise to several that the original configuration with the original turnouts with the european geometry was going to cause problems for large steamers.  (I didn't notice the crossing itself originally but was focused on the curved turnout)

You took a different approach by switching to larger turnouts with a broader radius curve instead switching to different turnout with straighter geometry.  The large pecos probably use more overall space than the crossing made with #6 Atlas', but overall space consumption may not matter.

- Douglas

  • Member since
    May, 2010
  • 5,186 posts
Posted by mbinsewi on Tuesday, February 19, 2019 11:51 AM

railandsail
Interesting idea! Are those sign too thick?

I'm not sure how thick they are Brian.  According to the video you linked to, you want some about .010 in thickness, for what the guy in the video is doing.

Some hardware store also have a display case of K & S Brass stock.  You could also see what they have.

The guy in your video appears to be using .010 brass from Detail Associates, it's their part #2524.

Mike.

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,387 posts
Posted by railandsail on Tuesday, February 19, 2019 11:17 AM

Fine Tuning Peco Code 100 Curved Switch Check Rails

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNQSIiZ5ob4

Using brass shim on guard rail,..pretty clean installation.

Interesting observation about backing thru the turnout verses forward picking of the frog.

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,387 posts
Posted by railandsail on Tuesday, February 19, 2019 11:15 AM

mbinsewi

Look in your hardware store for plastic "For Sale" and other yard signs.  They work just as well.

Mike.

 

Interesting idea! Are those sign too thick?

 

 

  • Member since
    May, 2010
  • 5,186 posts
Posted by mbinsewi on Tuesday, February 19, 2019 10:36 AM

railandsail
Wish I had had some strip styrene to experiment with shimming those guard rails, but it turns out I could not find it, or I had not kept any during my move to FL. And St Augustine does NOT have a local hobby shop to pick up some.

Look in your hardware store for plastic "For Sale" and other yard signs.  They work just as well.

Mike.

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,387 posts
Posted by railandsail on Tuesday, February 19, 2019 7:59 AM

Doughless

Since the original configuration on page 1, you've expanded from small to large Peco's.

Actually when I looked it up, I started this project with Medium size Peco's, not smalls. And that was part of the surprise, that these failed to handle the larger wheelbase steam engines,...I needed to go to the large size.

Wish I had had some strip styrene to experiment with shimming those guard rails, but it turns out I could not find it, or I had not kept any during my move to FL. And St Augustine does NOT have a local hobby shop to pick up some.

Going to have to source out a supplier of styrene pieces,...and need to look up some videos on best method to put these shims in place. I know I did some of these a LONG time ago, but memory is not what it use to be. I'm really positive about the possibilities with this shimming action when I closely inspected the manner that the lead driver wheel would ride up over the very point of the frog. I believe it may take only a small thickness shim to make things better.

  • Member since
    September, 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 17,927 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Tuesday, February 19, 2019 6:29 AM

hon30critter
 
richhotrain
Critics? I'm not at all sure that I get that comment. This has been a 3-page long thread with over 1,600 views and 65 replies and counting. It is a public thread asking for advice and comment on what appears to be a noble but failed effort to make a too tight track configuration work consistently with all of his locomotives. So, there comes a time to say, nice try but it won't work as designed. If that is being critical, then so be it, but the OP is asking for advice, so why not give it as long as it is done in a civil manner? Rich

My bad!Embarrassed

 Dave

Dave, no apologies needed. I was neither offended nor rubbed the wrong way. I viewed my initial short reply to Brian as an observation, not a criticism, so I didn't want to leave him or others with the feeling that I was being critical.

Rich

 

 

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    July, 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 9,624 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Monday, February 18, 2019 9:29 PM

richhotrain
Critics? I'm not at all sure that I get that comment. This has been a 3-page long thread with over 1,600 views and 65 replies and counting. It is a public thread asking for advice and comment on what appears to be a noble but failed effort to make a too tight track configuration work consistently with all of his locomotives. So, there comes a time to say, nice try but it won't work as designed. If that is being critical, then so be it, but the OP is asking for advice, so why not give it as long as it is done in a civil manner? Rich

Sorry Rich, I didn't mean to offend. In hindsight I can certainly see how I have rubbed you the wrong way. My apologies. I respect your opinions very much. I just wanted to support the OP's efforts.

My bad!Embarrassed

Dave

  • Member since
    December, 2008
  • From: In the heart of Georgia
  • 3,001 posts
Posted by Doughless on Monday, February 18, 2019 6:57 PM

Since the original configuration on page 1, you've expanded from small to large Peco's.

And from initially placing the RH turnout directly after the curved turnout, it now looks like you have a short section of straight track in between.

You were able to expand the overall space for the entire array from the space that was assumed you had in the OP, and now your locos run fine.  This is not a surprising solution. 

 

- Douglas

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,387 posts
Posted by railandsail on Monday, February 18, 2019 10:33 AM

No problem with criticisums,..sometimes it helps break thru my 'thick skull'...ha...ha

So here is an overall pic of the proposed double crossover utilizing the 'lg size' Pecos.


I think it is quite presentable, and with that lg size turnout put in place of the sm one shown at the top, all of my locos go thru all the routes just fine, including the 2-10-4 steamer.

The double tracks at the bottom of the photo are the two mainlines coming up from the helix and entering the main room. I will likely put 2 rerailers there just before the dbl crossover.

I learned a few things doing the exercise:
1) Don't depend soley on the rail connecters for electrical continuity,...feeders for everything!
2) Don't rely on the 'radius quotes' for the turnouts to be adequate for the minimum radii the locos can negoitate, .....just because a loco has a minimum r designation DOES NOT mean it will negoiate that  minimum r Peco turnout.

I am going to have to review a number of videos about properly shimming the guard rails across from the frogs on these Peco turnouts,...particularly where they are utilized in a 'ladder situation' such as on my staging areas.

  • Member since
    September, 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 17,927 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Monday, February 18, 2019 12:20 AM

hon30critter

Hang in there Brian. Don't let the critics shut you down. 

Critics?

I'm not at all sure that I get that comment. This has been a 3-page long thread with over 1,600 views and 65 replies and counting.

It is a public thread asking for advice and comment on what appears to be a noble but failed effort to make a too tight track configuration work consistently with all of his locomotives. So, there comes a time to say, nice try but it won't work as designed.

If that is being critical, then so be it, but the OP is asking for advice, so why not give it as long as it is done in a civil manner?

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    September, 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 17,927 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Monday, February 18, 2019 12:12 AM

railandsail
 
richhotrain

Time to give up on that faulty track configuration and move on.

Rich 

I'm not sure what you are saying??

Are you speaking of this particular double crossover I'm workin on, or my whole plan??

Brian, I was referring to the double crossover piece of track work. Given the geometry of that particular track configuration, it just doesn't seem to be working for you. That's because it is too tight to handle the locomotives that you are trying to run through it. 

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    July, 2006
  • From: Bradford, Ontario
  • 9,624 posts
Posted by hon30critter on Sunday, February 17, 2019 10:45 PM

Hang in there Brian. Don't let the critics shut you down. You are doing enough testing and experimentation that you should be able to determine whether various parts of your layout will or will not work before things get locked down. And so what if they don't work? You can rip them up and try again.

Cheers!!

Dave

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,387 posts
Posted by railandsail on Sunday, February 17, 2019 8:32 PM

richhotrain

Time to give up on that faulty track configuration and move on.

Rich

 

I'm not sure what you are saying??

Are you speaking of this particular double crossover I'm workin on, or my whole plan??

If its just this particular dbl crossover, then I have it all working properly, even for the 2-10-4's, as long as I use a LG size turnout attached to the Peco curved turnout. Its only a questionable if I utilize a SM or MED turnout AFTERWARDS on the rt hand turn AFTER the Peco curved turnout.

Hope I have described that correctly.

  • Member since
    January, 2009
  • From: Maryland
  • 7,790 posts
Posted by ATLANTIC CENTRAL on Sunday, February 17, 2019 12:05 PM

richhotrain

Time to give up on that faulty track configuration and move on.

Rich

 

That's my view as well.

In my opinion, the PECO turnouts that are curved thru the frog provide an "illusion" of space saving that encourges trying to do the impossible.

But I have never been a fan of trying to pack too much in too little space.

I wish Brian well with his layout, but his goals are so far outside my way of thinking, and my experiances in this hobby, it is hard to offer much help.

Sheldon

    

  • Member since
    September, 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 17,927 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Sunday, February 17, 2019 11:58 AM

Time to give up on that faulty track configuration and move on.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,387 posts
Posted by railandsail on Sunday, February 17, 2019 10:26 AM

I decided to do another little experiment while I had this mock-up in place,...insert a SM radius right-hand turnout in there and see how that affected the locos. After all the SM radius Peco is quoted with a nominal radius of 24"r.

 

Naturally the 2-10-4 BL did not make it thru without derailing every time. My BL 2-8-4 did NOT make it thru. And now the Bachmann Northern 2-8-4 did NOT make it thru either.

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

Surprise, my older IHC 2-8-2 Mountain made it thru just fine. I think that is likely a result of its semi cookie cutter wheels on both the loco and the tender.

 

 

 

 

This IHC model came with 2 alternate tenders, the vandy and a rectangular. Both had those same wheels that had problems with those defective Peco X's I addressed earlier, but they sailed right thru this latest configuration with no problems.

 

 

All of my other engines, mostly 6 axle diesels had NO derailing problems with the SM rt-hand curved Peco that followed the curved Peco. Nor did the longer autoracks, or passenger car

  • Member since
    February, 2009
  • 1,387 posts
Posted by railandsail on Sunday, February 17, 2019 9:32 AM

Peco Turnouts need flangeway shim (code100)

 

I thought it better to make this observation while it was fresh in my mind.

I decided to once again try running my 2-10-4 C&O T-1 thru the Peco curved turnout of my custom double crossover arrangement. It has NO problems with the 4 turnouts that make up the crossover itself. Where it has a problem is when it tries to turn off to the right after exiting the curved Peco. IF I use a MED size Peco to affect this right hand turn, the front driver on the engine derails everytime. If I use a LG size Peco things are OK. Here is photo showing all three size Pecos lined up there.

 

I experimented with putting a small straight section of track to proceed the rt hand turnout. It did NOT produce any better result,...same result as without it.

 


I do realize that the Peco CODE 100 turnouts do have curved tracks thru, and after their frogs, so that made me want to look at the radii involved. The MED size nominal radius quoted for Peco is 36". If my BL steam engine can negotiate its quoted 24" minimum, why can't it negotiate this turnout??

I am now convinced that what is needed is an old time recommendation for the Peco turnouts,....shim up the guard rail opposite the frog. That flangeway is too wide over there, allowing the axle on the locomotive to shift over just enough to make that leading driver wheel want to bump up over the frog point and derail.

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!