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!

reverse Loop

7238 views
43 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Sunday, July 21, 2013 10:17 AM

It appears that the OP has left the room.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    October 2005
  • From: Detroit, Michigan
  • 2,284 posts
Posted by Soo Line fan on Sunday, July 21, 2013 10:05 AM

A long passenger train with lighting can be an issue with the short sections so that is something to consider.

Jim

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Sunday, July 21, 2013 9:54 AM

doublehelix

I think the most simple and elegant solution is to only create a short (just longer than the longest loco running) reversing section in each loop (anywhere in the loop).

Just make sure the gaps wont allow bridging of metal wheels (and metal side frames if necessary).

In this way trains can run in either direction in the loops and there can be no shorts ( except if two lone engines straddle the reverse short section or two trains are nose to nose on that section) which is extremely unlikely in normal operations.

 

YesYesYes

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4 posts
Posted by doublehelix on Sunday, July 21, 2013 9:30 AM

I think the most simple and elegant solution is to only create a short (just longer than the longest loco running) reversing section in each loop (anywhere in the loop).

Just make sure the gaps wont allow bridging of metal wheels (and metal side frames if necessary).

In this way trains can run in either direction in the loops and there can be no shorts ( except if two lone engines straddle the reverse short section or two trains are nose to nose on that section) which is extremely unlikely in normal operations.

 

 

 

  • Member since
    October 2005
  • From: Detroit, Michigan
  • 2,284 posts
Posted by Soo Line fan on Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:48 AM

Too bad Tyco is gone, they would have made a zombie train similar to their GI JOE and Transformers offerings.

This is Lionels contribution.

Jim

  • Member since
    January 2010
  • From: Chi-Town
  • 7,712 posts
Posted by zstripe on Saturday, July 20, 2013 12:35 AM

WOW,!!

We have,''Dragon's and ''Godzilla'', on another Tread,now ''Zombie's'',how could we lose? LOL''.NICE one Jim..

Cheers,

Frank

  • Member since
    October 2005
  • From: Detroit, Michigan
  • 2,284 posts
Posted by Soo Line fan on Friday, July 19, 2013 9:26 PM

maxman
Wow, a couple guys on this forum potentially all agreeing on something.  Must be there's going to be a zombie apocalypse soon.

That's okay, we are ready for the zombies................................

Jim

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • 8,879 posts
Posted by maxman on Friday, July 19, 2013 8:50 PM

richhotrain

maxman

If the loops were gapped at the frog ends of the turnouts entering into them, would not the problem be solved by installing a reverser for each loop?

Yes, exactly, that is what I was building up to.

Rich

 
Wow, a couple guys on this forum potentially all agreeing on something.  Must be there's going to be a zombie apocalypse soon.
  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Friday, July 19, 2013 5:53 PM

floridaflyer

max and rich, good solution

You too, and Soo Line Fan as well.

I think we were all converging on a practical solution at the same time.

Rich

 

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Sebring FL
  • 842 posts
Posted by floridaflyer on Friday, July 19, 2013 5:29 PM

max and rich, good solution

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Friday, July 19, 2013 1:42 PM

maxman

If the loops were gapped at the frog ends of the turnouts entering into them, would not the problem be solved by installing a reverser for each loop?

Yes, exactly, that is what I was building up to.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • 8,879 posts
Posted by maxman on Friday, July 19, 2013 11:09 AM

If the loops were gapped at the frog ends of the turnouts entering into them, would not the problem be solved by installing a reverser for each loop?

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Sebring FL
  • 842 posts
Posted by floridaflyer on Friday, July 19, 2013 8:43 AM

If at any time there are two trains at the points of isolation, entering or exiting, there is the possibility of a short. maybe a house rule of one train at a time is needed. One train could enter, park on the inner track and let another train enter, park on the outer track or exit the loop, and then the first train could be moved. In any case both trains should not be at the exit or entrance points at the same time. 

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Thursday, July 18, 2013 11:24 AM

WardR

That is correct, so the issue comes into play , what happens if we have 2 engines going into the loop at the same time? I know that may be slim that they hit the same spot , but if we are using cars with metal wheel sets this becomes possible, if the trains enter and exit the loop at the same times would we not have a short? and if so how do we handle that sort of situation. all the diagram's for reverse loops show only one way into a reverse loop and the gaps are cut on the turnout going in, so the chances of 2 trains shorting cannot happen cause they would collide at the switch, so one has to wait, but when we have multiple ways into a reverse loop how do we control this situation?

Now that the track diagram has been explained more fully, I am not sure that we have answered the OP's question about two engines entering the loop at the same time.

If I understand the track diagram correctly, two trains can enter the helix at the same time, both moving from right to left and can only exit from left to right.  A head on collision can be avoided by having each engine use a separate "loop" on the helix.

Is this correct?

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Thursday, July 18, 2013 10:21 AM

Soo Line fan

richhotrain
But the exchange of ideas can be slowed by the need on both sides to perform the other duties of every day life.

WardR
Duties of everday life? Dude not for nothing but what are you talking about

I do not mean to speak for anybody else, but I took it as you, me, Rich and everyone here has, or should have, a life outside this forum which takes priority over discussions. Some time earning a buck, personal chores or responsibilities can cause responses to be slowed.

Jim,

Thanks for that support and, indeed, that it exactly what I meant.

I certainly hope that I did not offend the OP in any way because my comments were meant to be positive.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    March 2011
  • 152 posts
Posted by WardR on Thursday, July 18, 2013 9:01 AM

Yeah, that's what we came up with also, but tried to figure out a way to avoid the possible short . by maybe adding an addtional reverse loop unit outside the loop creating another loop. Well. thanks again for the input..

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Sebring FL
  • 842 posts
Posted by floridaflyer on Thursday, July 18, 2013 8:47 AM

So the bottom line is, gap both rails at the turnouts divergent track leading into and out of the loop  from the mains. One reversing unit will do the job. As mentioned, two trains in the loop at the same time could lead to shorting problems.  Have fun

  • Member since
    March 2011
  • 152 posts
Posted by WardR on Thursday, July 18, 2013 7:42 AM

Hey , If that the case than I totally agree!, I never expect anyone to get back right away, frankly I'm amazed at how fast people do respond. Sometimes things get lost in emails back and forth and I agree, its tough to drop our everyday life. I do appreciate everyone's input on this site and always have!! I've always found fellow model railroaders eager to help a fellow railroader and appreciate that. I'm sure my team will work this out either way, but there are so many amazing modelers out there who have great ideas. I had posted on this site a few years ago about a reverse loop situation and several guys amazed me with their ideas on reverse loops. So not to offend anyone, just not sure how much more we can layout as the most difficult part is sometimes relaying the information as these things can become complex.. Thanks again for any input anyone may have. This reverse loop is at the top of a 4 rack double helix the rest is as double helix has mentioned a two line track layout.

 

Thanks again for anyones ideas or input.

  • Member since
    October 2005
  • From: Detroit, Michigan
  • 2,284 posts
Posted by Soo Line fan on Thursday, July 18, 2013 7:26 AM

richhotrain
But the exchange of ideas can be slowed by the need on both sides to perform the other duties of every day life.

WardR
Duties of everday life? Dude not for nothing but what are you talking about

I do not mean to speak for anybody else, but I took it as you, me, Rich and everyone here has, or should have, a life outside this forum which takes priority over discussions. Some time earning a buck, personal chores or responsibilities can cause responses to be slowed.

Jim

  • Member since
    March 2011
  • 152 posts
Posted by WardR on Thursday, July 18, 2013 7:03 AM

I can understand how everyday life does hinder things, its hard sometimes to get the information over as no one actually sees the entire layout.

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Thursday, July 18, 2013 4:51 AM

Soo Line fan

At least we are making progress Laugh

LOL

Surely but slowly.

The power of these forums is to rapidly exchange ideas and advice on technical issues.

But the exchange of ideas can be slowed by the need on both sides to perform the other duties of every day life.

It will be interesting to see how this particular issue plays out.  The ball is in the OP's court.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    October 2005
  • From: Detroit, Michigan
  • 2,284 posts
Posted by Soo Line fan on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 3:28 PM

At least we are making progress Laugh

Jim

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 2:49 PM

All things considered, I think we need a fuller track diagram.

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    March 2011
  • 152 posts
Posted by WardR on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 2:25 PM

Thats correct

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 2:15 PM

OK, that makes more sense.

So, when reference is made to a double main line, are we just referring to the four horizontal lines in the middle of the diagram with the arrows on each end?

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4 posts
Posted by doublehelix on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 2:09 PM

each line represents a rail

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Dearborn Station
  • 24,281 posts
Posted by richhotrain on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 2:01 PM

Wait a minute.  Now, I am more confused than ever.

Does each line represent a track, not a rail?

Rich

Alton Junction

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Sebring FL
  • 842 posts
Posted by floridaflyer on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 1:32 PM

Once it was clear that there were two main lines not one, the loop in question is indeed a reversing loop and must be isolated. confusion occurred when it was unclear that there was two mains. The polarity is indeed correct for two main lines, that however was not clear at the outset. 

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 4 posts
Posted by doublehelix on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 1:10 PM

the upper track is a circle and the lower track is also a circle - they are concentric circles - in other words they are a double track main line. their polarity is correct because crossover polarity is correct.

there are crossovers before and after the polarity designated tracks.

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!