Trains.com

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!

For Those Who Think Their Curves Are Too Sharp for Scale...

6261 views
22 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2016
  • 554 posts
For Those Who Think Their Curves Are Too Sharp for Scale...
Posted by Shock Control on Sunday, November 11, 2018 7:28 PM

Check out the yard that is visible from the window between Chicago's Midway airport and the Orange Line.  It looks like an HO 18" radius 180" curve.  

I would post a pic but I need a third party server.  

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern CA Bay Area
  • 4,387 posts
Posted by cuyama on Sunday, November 11, 2018 8:00 PM

It's a city transit line (The "L"). Sharp curves aren't a suprise there -- or on models of transit cars. Scales out to about a 16" radius in HO. One may find similar, or even sharper, curves in other transit systems.

So if one is modeling a light rail or transit line, no, 16" radius is not too sharp. Many transit modelers successfully use even smaller radii in HO, depending on the equipment.

But that curve doesn't serve regular freight or passenger trains, if that's what you are suggesting.

  • Member since
    December 2015
  • From: Shenandoah Valley
  • 9,094 posts
Posted by BigDaddy on Sunday, November 11, 2018 8:02 PM

Shock Control
I would post a pic but I need a third party server.

Flickr and Imgur are free.  Hard to beat that price.

Henry

COB Potomac & Northern

Shenandoah Valley

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern CA Bay Area
  • 4,387 posts
Posted by cuyama on Sunday, November 11, 2018 8:03 PM

BigDaddy
Flickr and Imgur are free.

Trainboard/Railimages, too

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Sunday, November 11, 2018 8:31 PM

This here's the famous Bronx Terminal:

 The track surrounding the building is 15" radius, in HO.  In the foreground, you can see a classic B&O boxcar.  Over in the float yard, it looks like there might be a 50' box.

 

Here it's being switched by the first US commercial diesel locomotive:

I wonder what the car behind the locomotive is--maybe some sort of idler car.

 

Here's a photo of a little problem at the car floats:

 

I also turned up a shot of about the weirdest looking diesel I ever saw, a Mack model AY:

I'm not sure if the Mack worked at the Terminal or not.  It was certainly nearby.

 

In this photo, you can see what maybe is a 50' gon:

 

Ed

  • Member since
    March 2013
  • 427 posts
Posted by Colorado Ray on Sunday, November 11, 2018 8:43 PM

7j43k

This here's the famous Bronx Terminal:

 

The track surrounding the building is 15" radius, in HO.

 

Ed

 

 

i believe the Bronx Terminal tracks are the same as the Harlem Transfer.  The inner track radius is 90 ft and the outer track radius is 104 ft.  Thats 12.4 inch and 14.3 inch, respectively.  

Ray

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 2,775 posts
Posted by snjroy on Sunday, November 11, 2018 8:49 PM

Colorado Ray

 

 
7j43k

This here's the famous Bronx Terminal:

 

The track surrounding the building is 15" radius, in HO.

 

Ed

 

 

 

 

i believe the Bronx Terminal tracks are the same as the Harlem Transfer.  The inner track radius is 90 ft and the outer track radius is 104 ft.  Thats 12.4 inch and 14.3 inch, respectively.  

Ray

 

Awesome picture! That would be a cool site to model. And to scale! Thanks for sharing.

Simon

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Sunday, November 11, 2018 8:55 PM

I was scaling off of an aerial photo and got 111'.

I scaled off this map of the Harlem Terminal and got a radius of 103':

 

Ed

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern CA Bay Area
  • 4,387 posts
Posted by cuyama on Sunday, November 11, 2018 9:31 PM

I’ve read that longer cars had to be moved around those tightest freighthouse tracks with chains, they would not couple up.

  • Member since
    March 2013
  • 427 posts
Posted by Colorado Ray on Sunday, November 11, 2018 9:33 PM

7j43k

I was scaling off of an aerial photo and got 111'.

I scaled off this map of the Harlem Terminal and got a radius of 103':

 

Ed

 

The Bromley map excerp isn't an accurate representation of the track.  The track at Harlem Transfer wasn't circular.  It had 30 ft straight sections on two sides.  Those maps were intended for insurance purposes.  

The 90 ft and 104 ft radius are taken from the original plans published at the time of construction.  They can be found at Philip Goldstein's site: http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/ht.html

Ray

  • Member since
    February 2015
  • 869 posts
Posted by NHTX on Sunday, November 11, 2018 9:53 PM

    In the summer of 1964, I had a temporary job at the Boston Navy Yard in Charlestown Massachusetts.  The yard had its own trackage that connected with the Boston and Maine.  The track was mostly in the streets and patrolled by a side-rodded GE 45 tonner.  To get around some of the curves, they would remove the knuckles from the couplers and install steel links using the pins that would normally retain the knuckles.  Needless to say the speed was less than a mile per hour, and the squeal of the flanges would make your eyes water.  I think they were restricted to cars no longer than 50 feet ---no auto racks or centerbeams on this railroad!

  • Member since
    March 2013
  • 427 posts
Posted by Colorado Ray on Sunday, November 11, 2018 10:07 PM

NHTX

    In the summer of 1964, I had a temporary job at the Boston Navy Yard in Charlestown Massachusetts.  The yard had its own trackage that connected with the Boston and Maine.  The track was mostly in the streets and patrolled by a side-rodded GE 45 tonner.  To get around some of the curves, they would remove the knuckles from the couplers and install steel links using the pins that would normally retain the knuckles.  Needless to say the speed was less than a mile per hour, and the squeal of the flanges would make your eyes water.  I think they were restricted to cars no longer than 50 feet ---no auto racks or centerbeams on this railroad!

 

The GE-Alco-Ingersoll Boxcab #2 on the Harlem Transfer has extra long coupler shanks.  The early publications mentioned that "extra long links" were used to couple cars.  Since HT was built after the days of link and pin coolers, this must have referred to the system NHTX mentions.  I've collected a number of HT photos and can find none that show cars coupled on the inner track.  However the 1954 aerial on Historic Aerials shows two cars coupled on the southwest side of the freight house.  

The early articles also noted that there were no problems with up to 11 coupled cars on the outer track.

Ray

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 30,002 posts
Posted by rrinker on Monday, November 12, 2018 9:35 AM

 There were some really sharp curves along the Delware River waterfront at Port Richmond in Philadelphia as well, but the SW1 switcher assigned to the job had special couplers with a far wider than normal swing in order to push and pull cars on those curves.

                                   --Randy


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Monday, November 12, 2018 11:15 AM

 

See that slot in the knuckle?  That's where you put the link.  See the vertical hole through the knuckle?  That's where you put the pin.

Very handy concept, should the need arise.

 

 

Ed

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Collinwood, Ohio, USA
  • 16,367 posts
Posted by gmpullman on Monday, November 12, 2018 11:34 AM

B&O and PRR had some options for tight-radius switching, too.

 BnO_Mule by Edmund, on Flickr

This is different from the Whiting Trackmobile since it does not have flanged wheels but with those big tires it could traverse fairly flat terrain, and of course, street running.

Note the double-jointed coupler. I seem to recall seeing an article, maybe in MR, about the B&O Dockside switchers that mentioned a coupler that had extra swing for the tight curves at the Baltimore docks.

The early PRR "Road Switcher" had semi-hard wheels (and a ship's wheel to steer it) and had to stay on pavement. Later designs used baloon pneumatic tires.

http://prr.railfan.net/RubberTiredSwitchers.html

 

Cheers, Ed

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Monday, November 12, 2018 11:46 AM

And poling pockets--ready for anything!

 

Ed

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Reading, PA
  • 30,002 posts
Posted by rrinker on Monday, November 12, 2018 1:19 PM

 Don't forget, Tim Warris of Fast Tracks built a model of CNJ Bronx Terminal. It wasn't exactly easy.

http://www.bronx-terminal.com/

 Everything presented in this thread so far are very special cases, for very specific situations. One should not use any of this as the basis for the main line or even main yard planning on a model railroad. ANd most of that very tight waterfront trackage was constructed when 40 foot box cars were the bigger cars. There might be an odd 50 foot gon in some of those pics, but I highly doubt they ever positioned those around the loop of the freight house on the Bronx Terminal - there were other tracks for loading and unloading such cars.

 Modern 80+ foot cars like autoracks? Fuggetaboutit.

                            --Randy

 


Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's

 

Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern CA Bay Area
  • 4,387 posts
Posted by cuyama on Monday, November 12, 2018 2:14 PM

rrinker
Everything presented in this thread so far are very special cases, for very specific situations. One should not use any of this as the basis for the main line or even main yard planning on a model railroad.

+1

  • Member since
    December 2016
  • 554 posts
Posted by Shock Control on Monday, November 12, 2018 7:12 PM

rrinker
Modern 80+ foot cars like autoracks? Fuggetaboutit.                             --Randy

I suppose you mean "contemporary" 80-foot cars.  "Modern" cars were 40 or 50 feet in length.  

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 8,892 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Monday, November 12, 2018 8:16 PM

Shock Control

 

 
rrinker
Modern 80+ foot cars like autoracks? Fuggetaboutit.                             --Randy

 

I suppose you mean "contemporary" 80-foot cars.  "Modern" cars were 40 or 50 feet in length. 

"Modern" by what definition?

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    February 2009
  • 1,983 posts
Posted by railandsail on Tuesday, November 13, 2018 9:23 PM

How about a model of that complex,...with a lot of photos. Just a few

CNJ Bronx Terminal - It's been a while...

Fast Tracks's picture

Hi all,

It was asked of me in another thread about the current status of my CNJ Bronx Terminal layout. Admittedly it's been some time (OK, a few years...) since I have posted anything about it.

After Fast Tracks relocated in 2011 there really wasn't much space for the layout available, so for some time it sat in storage. In that time I did take it to a few train shows, but there was no progress on the layout at all as there simply wasn't anywhere to work on it.

Last year Fast Tracks relocated into a much larger facility, and there was room to finally set it back up on display.

Currently it has a nice bright location where it can be seen and operated. It all operates very well, I recently had the decoder changed in the CNJ 1000 loco as the QSI decoder originally installed failed. It now has a LOCsound decoder and sounds incredible! We had it open for a local layout tour in the spring, was a lot of fun to operate it again.

The location in our building allows for the proper displaying of the original CNJ Bronx Terminal painting Fast Tracks commissioned in 2013 to mark our 10th anniversary. 

more here:
https://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/27499

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: California - moved to North Carolina 2018
  • 4,422 posts
Posted by DSchmitt on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 8:56 AM

I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.

I don't have a leg to stand on.

  • Member since
    April 2011
  • 649 posts
Posted by LensCapOn on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 1:05 PM

7j43k

Here's a photo of a little problem at the car floats:

 

 

 

Ed

 

What problem? They're floating aren't they? (running away now..)

 

And 15" in HO would be 8" (close enough) in N. (insert jawdrop here)

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

There are no community member 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!