Don't get me wrong. The NMRA has done has great stuff. Especially standards (DCC... I believe that without the NMRA , standard DCC would not have happened.) But, like the World's Greatest Hobby (mmmm... outside the USA and certain parts of Canada we can't join in the sweepstake!) it's on the lines of the World Series and American Football World Chanpionships .... confined to USA only.
Does this really encourage international model railroading?
Anyway, I love American railroads, that's why I'm modelling Pennsy. British OO? No thank you! Boring!!!!! And US quality is excellent. Maybe I'm an offshore American!
Cheers
Barry
Barry, Dave and Chuck,
Wandering a little wide of the original topic about fishplates, but not a worry.
Barry, you mentioned a "World" organisation. Remember these guys have a "World Series" in baseball. Not a lot of teams from outside the US play.
In Australia we have an Australian branch of NMRA. No I am not a member.
I reckon you would have a hard time convincing your fellow modellers in the Old Dart to join in an American organisation.
Doesn't worry me. I refer to their standards and use them where I can. However, I am not a member. I appreciate their work, but I guess I could be described as a Free Loader. I suppose a man should join and subsidise their work.
IMRA? Actually, I don't think that's such a bad idea except I wouldn't want to see it replace the NMRA. I'd prefer an IMRA as an umbrella organization; developing international standards where applicable (DCC standards come to mind). That would allow the NMRA and the British Model Railroad Association (is there one?) to co-exist. OK, so we suffix NMRA with "(US)" or change it to NAMRA (for North American MRA). I could live with that.
The catch in this is that the NMRA already has enough trouble with membership. I don't think an IMRA would help; particularly if you folks on the east side of the pond split off into a BMRA.
Chuck
ChuckAllen, TX
Hi Dave the train........
I'm on the South Coast, north of Portsmouth. And yes, I AM that eccentric but, hey, this is an international forum with LOTS of Americans! Don't open that big bag of debates about NMRA. I'm one who believes the name should be changed to IMRA where I stands for International. I also think the Worlds Greatest Hobby should include the WORLD. (Ooops.................)
Take care
bsteel4065 wrote: (I maybe be English but I ain't THAT eccentric!!!!) Barry
(I maybe be English but I ain't THAT eccentric!!!!) Barry
I am! AND proud of it!
Where are you?
Do you think we need soemthing to replace the NMRA (OOPS! Heresy!)
MIKE0659 wrote:Generally speaking rail is 39' long. The next lower standard length is 33', which is what you get when you crop the ends of a 39' rail. When improperly maintained, or from age, the rail ends get bent down and the only way to fix that is crop it.
Wow! Thank you all from Dave the Train to Mike 0659. Who would have thought such a simple question would have brought forward such a great avalanche of information and discussion? Fish plates? OK, it's a British term, but I quoted it because the Walther's catalog uses that term too, so, naturally, I thought all you the US guys would know it.
My reason for the question is for detail close up in certain areas. I sure ain't going to do this on every stretch of rail! (I maybe be English but I ain't THAT eccentric!!!!) No, I've seen a few photos in the past in MR where 'fish plates' have been used and it looks pretty neat. What I would do is put them on up close track only, on selective stretches of rail for detailed effect.
Anyway, I'm in re-build mode at the moment having ripped out my old layout and now laying the foundations for my new double decker. Yep, I'll post photos as and when, (especially of the joint bars on sections selected) but you'll have to be patient, I've a way to go yet!
So, as usual the guys on the Prototype pages have come up with great information and made for great reading. I salute you all dear colleagues!!!! And thanks..............
Barry,
The guys have given you a lot of good information, at the risk of covering some ground again, here are some things I can contribute.
Generally speaking rail is 39' long. The next lower standard length is 33', which is what you get when you crop the ends of a 39' rail. When improperly maintained, or from age, the rail ends get bent down and the only way to fix that is crop it. Of course, this adds more joints, which means more maintenance. It's a vicious cycle. There is a machine out there called a rail straightener which sounds like a good idea. Unfortunately, after being straightened with one of these machines (And even while straightening), a fairly large percentage break.
After the 33' length you get the "shorts", which are anything needed to fill a gap.
FB or Flat Bottom rail must be a UK term, it's not a term used in the US.
Rail is designated by the weight per yard, 90, 100, 130, etc. There are also letters in that rail designation, PRR, PS, LV, RE, ASCE, etc. Many of these are the railroad that came up with this rail section, PRR, LV and RDG are pretty self-explanatory. PS is Pennsylvania Standard, I can't remember what RE means, but there are enough rail sections out there to give you a headache. Plus, they have many different spacings for the drillings on the ends, so the bars and rails have to match.
There are also numerous types and sizes of tie plates, rail anchors, and even track bolts (Nuts and washers too) that match the various rail sections. And that's not even getting into the plates and other jewelry that goes with welded rail on wood or concrete ties.
The only joint bars with inside/outside that I'm familiar with are Compromise (Comp) Joint bars. These are exactly what they sound like, they compromise the joints between different rail sections. They come in left and right hand versions due to the head of the rail being a different width and the need to keep the gage the same on the "gage" side. Railroads don't care about the "field" side (The outside that faces the field.
Insulated joints are pretty standard design with few variations, except for the material they are made of (Plastic, fibreglass, etc). They are used just like we use them on the model to insulate blocks for signalling, and also for the circuits at grade crossings. There is a type referred to as a "Glued Block Joint" that comes from the factory already assembled and epoxied into a length of rail. This joint is then either welded in place or holes are drilled to be bolted in place (They can be ordered pre-drilled too).
Even on welded rail you'll hear the click-clack of the wheels passing any block joint, it won't be as loud as on jointed rail, but you'll hear it.
Some manufacturer in the Walthers catalog lists bars, braces for turnouts and details for points that you can use. I can't remember who it is.
For the weathering, you have some options. When laid new, the rail, spikes, bars, nuts, bolts, washers and plates are generally the same color, shades of gray with rust. But it all weathers quickly to an almost uniform color.
Joints are always staggered on the railroad, unless an absolute necessity to do otherwise. Or the Roadmaster isn't too bright. The constant pounding of the wheels on the joints really beats up the rails, ties and roadbed, which causes it to sink. This increases maintenance and is hard on the track structure. That's why they are staggered.
Something else not modelled, but a big part of the track structure is rail anchors. These clamp on the base of the rail and grab the edge of the tie to prevent the rail from moving.
These are necessary because the rail moves, or "runs" due to expansion/contraction and the traffic moving over it. Anchors help stop this. When you don't have anchors, the rail will move, which moves the joints, which catch on the plates and spikes, which then drags the ties through the ballast. In extreme cases, the ties will move enough out of line (Diagonally, since the rail is only pulling one side at this joint - remember those staggered joints) and will pull the gage in.
And remember when ballasting to extend that ballast shoulder out from the end of the tie about 12"-18" before tapering the shoulder down. This keeps the track from displacing laterally from expansion and other forces.
Tie spacing varies between mainline, sidings, yards, and even industrial sidings. So do tie sizes, not length, but height and width (6"x9", 5"x8", etc.). There are also different grades of ties (Grade 5, IG, etc.) and end (Also known as "S") irons and end plates on ties.
The turning of rail from inside to outside is generally used in curves, but also in tangent track at times. The practice is referred to as "transposing" rail. Since the gage side is what wears under traffic, this transposing gives you a good surface again. It is a practice in use today on many roads.
Pulling used rail from a main and putting it in secondary or branch lines, sidings or yards is called "cascading" rail and is also still used today.
Like I said, some of this was covered, but not all.
Sorry for running on here, hope it helps.
We've kicked around using some of those bars and braces in some foreground places on the layout as an experiment to see how they look in photos, but haven't gettne there yet. If you try this, I would love to see pictures of your results.
cefinkjr
All sorts of things were done to try to get more life out of rail. Rails could also be turned end-for-end to use the 2nd gauge face. There is a distinct problem though that the wear and tear on rail in use in one position is enough to increase the risk of rail fracture so, generally, the practice has declined. Higher line speeds and heavy tonnage on the remaining roads plus the cost of stoppages and compensation claims have probaly done more to stop the practices than labour costs. Rail was swapped or turned back in the days of manual labour when renewing rail was more expensive. Now rail is changed by machine. There is also the cost of environmental impact to take into account both in changing rail and derailments.
1435mm
Thanks for the corrections on my earlier notes. I'm still under the impression that interchange car standards wer enforced by someone other than ARA/AAR (Never can recall which comes forst). Did they set the standards and someone else enforce them?
Weird and wacky couplers seem to have lasted to about 1900. I did once know the date that link and pin were banned. Sometime in the 1880s I think.
Harriman standards applied when Harriman was alive, sort of, but after WWI, SP and UP diverged completely in most practices.
I think you're confusing interchange with economic regulation. The requirement for standardization for interchange came from the railroads themselves, first via the MCB (Master Car Builders's Association), then ARA, then AAR. The Interstate Commerce Commission was formed for economic regulation and safety regulation, and while the IRR issued safety requirements for railroads engaged in interstate commerce it did not regulate, except indirectly, the interchange standards. The large railroads did not do this to squeeze out small railroads. Interchange standards did not apply to locomotives.
See! Just as soon as they could they standardised...differently!
The large roads may not have done it directly to squeeze out the little ones but I bet it helped!
I'm not disputing... initially putting forward my recall of what i've learnt from long range research... from there I would like clarification please. What's "IRR" please?
I have an MCB Cyclopedia!
tomikawaTT wrote: ... a large part of the PRR main line was laid with 152 pound rail - the only rail which can be accurately modeled with code 100 flex track in HO.
... a large part of the PRR main line was laid with 152 pound rail - the only rail which can be accurately modeled with code 100 flex track in HO.
That "large part" of the PRR main line was only the four tracks around Horseshoe Curve and a few hundred feet either side of the curve. That code 100 ...err, 152 pound rail was too durned expensive even for the Standard Railroad of the World!
It may also be of interest to note that rail on the NYC, the PRR, and probably many other roads was normally swapped from one side of the track to the other -- north rail moved to the south side of the track and vice versa -- when the rail was about half worn out. When this had been done once, the rail might be used yet again in yards or other secondary track. I don't know if this is still done though. Labor costs may have made this an obsolete practice.
Chuck(the former NYC-PC Chuck)
bush9245 wrote: 1435mm wrote: P.S. -- I have never heard anyone in the U.S. call them fish plates, not in my 30 years or so in the business. Sometimes angle bars, but almost always joint bars. S. Hadid Yep, across the English speaking world they are called fish plates, but in the US they call them joint bars. Joint bars are something altogether different in Amsterdam.
1435mm wrote: P.S. -- I have never heard anyone in the U.S. call them fish plates, not in my 30 years or so in the business. Sometimes angle bars, but almost always joint bars. S. Hadid
P.S. -- I have never heard anyone in the U.S. call them fish plates, not in my 30 years or so in the business. Sometimes angle bars, but almost always joint bars.
S. Hadid
Yep, across the English speaking world they are called fish plates, but in the US they call them joint bars. Joint bars are something altogether different in Amsterdam.
edkowal wrote:Hi John:You win the bet.
Dave-the-Train wrote: bush9245 wrote: Hello Barry, PS. The guys in the States will probably hammer me for writing "All railroads are different". They have standards across the many systems in the US, but betcha there were variations from the standards. They most certainly were different and haven't standardised yet... far too many miles to change it all just to standardise. Can you imagine telling an American how to build his railroad? Don't be silly! There were no standards in the early years ... When the ARA (or was it AAR that came first) started to bring out standards there was already a whole mass of equipment in use. They couldn't junk it all and start over.ARA came first. The AAR was formed in the 1930s. PRR was one of the most heavily built roads and a search of old professional journals -where I started to look at US RR - will show you lots of PRR drawings of their Standard cars... even these had modifications. The great PRR recognised that things had to be upgraded (or corrected). The Harriman Lines did a lot of standardising to keep costs down within their own system... but they weren't standard to anyone else. Who was going to dictate standards to them?Harriman standards applied when Harriman was alive, sort of, but after WWI, SP and UP diverged completely in most practices.The biggest pressure to standardise came from the Interstate Transport Commission (think that's correct) ITC regulated interchange traffic. The simple rule was that if you wanted to interchange your cars you conformed or your cars didn't interchnage... the $ ruled. Standardisation spread. To some extent the big-boys were able to use this to squeeze the little operators... who couldn't afford to upgrade their stock so fast. So non-standard locos would stay on line while the big boys cars carried the traffic. Home grown non-standard stock went to MoW or chicken shed use until it fell apart.I think you're confusing interchange with economic regulation. The requirement for standardization for interchange came from the railroads themselves, first via the MCB (Master Car Builders's Association), then ARA, then AAR. The Interstate Commerce Commission was formed for economic regulation and safety regulation, and while the IRR issued safety requirements for railroads engaged in interstate commerce it did not regulate, except indirectly, the interchange standards. The large railroads did not do this to squeeze out small railroads. Interchange standards did not apply to locomotives.Before you can standardise though you have to get something that works... and works well enough to go everywhere. There were all sorts of designs for almost everything. Couplers and brakegear were two huge issues. Westinghouse were by no means the only brake designs and buckeye Couplers were only one of many... and many were very similar except for details... which made for law suites. At one stage train crews had to carry adaptors to allow different couplers to work together. It was only legislation that made automatic brakes mandatory. Since the Kaddee patent ran out we seem to be heading back in the opposite direction with model couplers... but... it's everyone's right to do their own thing...Couplers of whatever manufacture had to meet the MCB standards for interchange. The non-standard designs were very early.When ARA and AAR brought in standards there were usually a whole sheaf of pages of "Alternate" designs... so many that they all had to have their own catalogue numbers. Just where to out the wiggle in a car stirrup made a bunch of alternates... for box cars of a class. Other classes had another set... gons sets per class... hoppers Yup the US standardise! You gone to buy parts for your auto lately? Ever seen how many models of Jeep the US armed forces ended up with? Oh, by the way... I did a calculation... in H0 you would need to shorten a yard of track a bit to fit to 39' lengths (6 per < 1yd) so you get 24 fishplates to apply to the yard. Should be fun How many yards do you figure before it's time? Back at standards (ignoring all my stuff on the colours of ballast for the moment)... different RR used different cuts from different parts of the tree and put the ties down different ways up as "standard" practice... they even had big proffessional meetings to discuss which was best... Just an NB... Short rails get used in yards and slow tracks... they are not supposed to be used except where essentil in fast tracks... but...Not so. There is lots, and lots, and lots of 79-mph track in the U.S. with shorter than 39-foot stick rail. Particularly common is cropped rail, where battered ends are cut off, making about a 37-foot rail.P.S. -- I have never heard anyone in the U.S. call them fish plates, not in my 30 years or so in the business. Sometimes angle bars, but almost always joint bars.S. Hadid
bush9245 wrote: Hello Barry, PS. The guys in the States will probably hammer me for writing "All railroads are different". They have standards across the many systems in the US, but betcha there were variations from the standards.
Hello Barry,
PS. The guys in the States will probably hammer me for writing "All railroads are different". They have standards across the many systems in the US, but betcha there were variations from the standards.
They most certainly were different and haven't standardised yet... far too many miles to change it all just to standardise.
Yup the US standardise! You gone to buy parts for your auto lately?
Ever seen how many models of Jeep the US armed forces ended up with?
Oh, by the way... I did a calculation... in H0 you would need to shorten a yard of track a bit to fit to 39' lengths (6 per < 1yd) so you get 24 fishplates to apply to the yard. Should be fun How many yards do you figure before it's time?
Back at standards (ignoring all my stuff on the colours of ballast for the moment)... different RR used different cuts from different parts of the tree and put the ties down different ways up as "standard" practice... they even had big proffessional meetings to discuss which was best...
Just an NB... Short rails get used in yards and slow tracks... they are not supposed to be used except where essentil in fast tracks... but...
Not so. There is lots, and lots, and lots of 79-mph track in the U.S. with shorter than 39-foot stick rail. Particularly common is cropped rail, where battered ends are cut off, making about a 37-foot rail.
bush9245 wrote: ... The guys in the States will probably hammer me for writing "All railroads are different". They have standards across the many systems in the US, but betcha there were variations from the standards.
... The guys in the States will probably hammer me for writing "All railroads are different". They have standards across the many systems in the US, but betcha there were variations from the standards.
TomikawaTT wrote:...American practice is to stagger the rail joints; i.e. the joint on one rail will fall at the (approximate) midpoint of the other rail....
Five out of four people have trouble with fractions. -AnonymousThree may keep a secret, if two of them are dead. -Benjamin Franklin "You don't have to be Jeeves to love butlers, but it helps." (Followers of Levi's Real Jewish Rye will get this one) -Ed K "A potted watch never boils." -Ed Kowal If it's not fun, why do it ? -Ben & Jerry
Do you want the bad news or the worse news?
The bad news is that few people bother to photograph track. Hence you have to search through many photographs to find track as a sideline (sorry if that has a double meaning).
The worse news? All railroads are different, and they change over time. So double away and look for photos of Pennsy in the 1950's.
Sorry if that sounds a bit pessimistic, but notice how there are many loco shots around, but far less good wagons? And nobody took photos of track back in those days.
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
John Busby wrote: Hi Fish plates come in pair's one for outside and one for inside the rail. they are set in square IE in line.
Hi
Fish plates come in pair's one for outside and one for inside the rail. they are set in square IE in line.
Beg pardon! The question referred to Pennsylvania Railroad standards. American practice is to stagger the rail joints; i.e. the joint on one rail will fall at the (approximate) midpoint of the other rail. Incidentally, a large part of the PRR main line was laid with 152 pound rail - the only rail which can be accurately modeled with code 100 flex track in HO.
Chuck (who models squared rail joints - standard Japanese practice)
Fish plates come in pair's one for outside and one for inside the rail. they are set in square IE in line
At signals the plates and signal are in line as well
As for rail length this works on railway standards every thing is standard as long as it is different
You will see plates in line, staggered spaced at anything from 6' up to the standard 39' maybe even a bit further apart.
regards John
What scale are you in???
You're just gonna hate this answer...
Fishplates are fitted at the rail ends as you suggest
A pretty standard US rail length is 40'. It seems to have stayed that way since 40' cars became common. Pennsy would almost certainly be 40'... but they are also one of the roads that experimented with 60' quite early ... partly because of the weight of the traffic they carried and because they were in the area of steel rail production. The next step longer in the US would be ribbon rail but that would be after your era.
The thing is... the planet doesn't come in units of 40'... curves and the inconvenient way people don't put towns and stuff in multiples of 40' apart mean that you end up needing odd lengths at times to get the length right. The common odd lengths are 20' and 30' (Helped move two of the latter a couple of weeks back).
Also... the odd length rails are often called "closures" because they close up the gaps. If a gap is less than 20' in a main track it will not be filled with one rail but the next 40' will be replaced by a short length as well... e.g a 10' won't be put in but a 30' then a 20'.
Next... you'll have to ask someone who knows the Pennsy this... did they normally join their rail ends square - 50/50 stagger them - or join them where they fell?
Mark, above has beaten me to it and said 39' rails. I've been told this was to get rails into 40'gons. I don't know whether this is true... evidence someone please? (Please don't mail me a full sized length of rail)!
Unless you are going to roll or extrude your own rail there is little point in researching masses of rail detail because you are stuck with what the suppliers offer.
For the US you want Flat Bottom (FB) rail spiked to the ties. In H0 for a heavy road like the PRR you could use code 100 for the main and code 83 for yards. Micro Engineering do about the best track - which you can also get weathered or unweathered. They do bottles of weathering liquid as well. Unfortunately they only do #6 switches so far. Walthers /Shinhara are good and do more switches and diamonds. Both of these are code 83 not 100 though as I recall.
You could install fishplates (rail bars) but I’ve never known them be anything but a nuisance… they are always glued and they always come unglued. Because they aren’t usually modelled none of us look for them so when they are there they tend to look oversized.
They are always fitted in pairs which should be matched. Some rail profiles required different inside and an outside rail bars. Rail bars also come in lots of designs. I don’t have a clue what the PRR used. The big choice was 4 hole or 6 hole--- which shows as a corresponding number of bolt heads one side and nut/thread the other… You are not going to model that in H0!
Some fishplates are insulated for signalling purposes (in your era for Track Circuits). I don’t know how the PRR did this. What would show on the track would be the wires from the relay boxes to the rail webs (that’s the vertical bit between the foot and the head). There would be at least one set adjacent to an IBJ (Insulated Block Joint). IBJs are squared across the track. IBJs seperate track circuits. You would find them in some interlocking territory, all Track circuit Block territory, a lot if not all CTC territory (not sure exactly) and anywhere else a TC is procided. They could also be used in connection with electric locks on remote switches in connection with TCs or proving the points. They would be set back from switches at least clear of the fouling point. (The fouling point is where the two near rails of converging tracks come within 6' of each other in the UK... don't know what it is in the US but 6' would be okay for models except possibly where you have very tight curves and the loading gauge is compromised in model form.
Whatever you do don’t cut nicks in the railhead to show the joints. They cannot be heard (probably not even by your dog) and they collect crud which comes out onto your loco wheels. They also look like a large cow if not an elephant has deposited on the rail at intervals.
Everything in the web of the rail gets dirty and, except for the odd new fitting, does not show up. I repeat… we don’t usually model them so no-one is looking for them. You would hardly see them anyway
You ask about switch yards… if you are asking about detailing switches you only have one way to go if you want detail at the level you are suggesting… S83 standard. That will mean changing all your wheelsets as well… and not running anywhere except other S83 layouts.
The simple fact is that all the suppliers work to NMRA standards and all commercially available switches are not replicas of the real thing and definitely not S83. you would have to build your own. It can be done. In the UK we have both S4 and S7. They are impressive. Most people stick with 00 (for UK) and H0 for the rest.
If your going for DCC you will have some interesting experimenting to do if you go for S83.
The one place that rail bars really do show up is on the ends of panels of track or rails that have been taken out. I have seen pics of a flatcar load of track panels on which the rail bars have been left in place on the mid and top panels and used as anchor points to chain the load down. I hope to model this myself some day.
You will get a lot more for your time and effort by paying attention to the ballasting… which is quite likely to hide/obscure the rail bars anyway. Joe Fugate has lots of good stuff on this and I have done miles of notes on ballast in the old forum. Good hunting!
I used to think that every detail should be there but eventually realised that
A railbar is between 15" and 21" long... 4.xmm to 6mm just enough to show and enough to derail trains and/or mess up your locos motors. You need a pair every 136mm (about 5.5") along the track... They are between 1" and 1.5" thick... that's less than 1/2mm. The only people that i can think of that made them are PSM here in the UK. They had to be glued in place.
What you might decide to do... if you model part of your track as a new le
Hi guys......... I'm looking at detailing my rail with fish plates. As they were used to bolt together rail, I assume the distance apart must be the length of a rail. Can anyone out there tell me how far apart they would go and are they inside AND outside the rail? (By the way, I'm modelling Pennsy 1955).
Also, anyone know of any good sources of detailed photos of switch yards and rail? I'm looking for all that detail along the track.
Thanks in adavance!