Min. Radius for Super-Elevation?

[Anonymous]

I'm still working on track layouts, and some of them use rather sweeping curves, like in the 48" radius range. At what radius does superelevation look "right"? I assume at smaller radii, the CG shifts too far towards the center and could cause problems. Would super-elevation still look proportional on say a 30" to 36"R curve?

Also if two tracks are parallel to one another, would both inner rails be at the same elevation, or would the smaller radius line be at a lower height?

[johncolley]

42" to 48" radius is a good range to start superelevation. And then only 3/64 to 1/16"max. Taper off thru the easements so you are at grade on the tangent. For parallel tracks railroad spec sheets show both inside rails at the same height unless one is a dropped siding in which case it would be about 6- 12" lower, and you would probably not need to superelevate the siding as speeds are restricted and are much lower than the main. For a high speed double track main line both would be superelevated the same amount and same levels.

[ndbprr]

I had superelevation on a 30" radius double track main going around the side of a mountain and it was one of the best features of the layout. I just slipped extra ties under the outer end of the track.

[Leon Silverman]

One restriction regarding super elevated curves is turnouts - DON'T USE THEM THERE. The diverting track, out of necessity will be heading into the ground. Most triple plus axeled HO model trucks, even if they are sprung, will not have the flexibility to handle the necessary gyrations.