The Hobby's Trashiest Technology

[Anonymous]

i have been using american switch and signal motors for several years with no problems. these are slow motion machines. they are extremely simple to install with a piece of piano wire and a 1/2 inch hole under the switch. switchmaster puts out a similar machine but the installation is a little different. all my mainline switches are powered but all aothers are hand throws. for these i use a system of simple piano bent in a l shape mounted in a tie and bent to fit into the switch throw. they are bent a little to tighten the tension to hold the switch tight against the stock rail. the article was in model railroader some years ago. these systems have worked for me for almost eight years without a failure.

[dknelson]

A friend of mine installed a number of choke cable levers to control some of his switching. It was very reliable, fairly low cost, and visitors enjoyed being asked to throw a switch and using the choke cable handle. A throw back to the 1930s!
Dave Nelson

[BRAKIE]

Mike,I agree that switch moters can be a pain,that is why I converted to ground throws and only use switch machines if I am unable to reach a switch..Another thing I love about ground throws is that one must fully stop to throw the switch in stead of simply pushing a button and reversing the engine without stopping which to my mind takes away from any realism of operating a locomotive...

[bfsfabs]

Dave,
Yes, a case certainly could be made that Atlas got it right. I had a bunch in the mid 50s, they worked well. Butt ugly though. In the 60s I figured if I had to have ugly why not use the TruScale jobbers with the closed frog. Switched, er ah "changed", over to the TruScale from then on. Never regretted it. TruScale costs more, but RARELY give any trouble. That is when I got the idea to make 'em all interchangable. Besides, there is no need to have some shanty/tiepile/wart right up tight to the track for camouflage.

Lowell
Pacific & Southwest Railroad Co. HO

[Anonymous]

Dave, you have a good point there.
I though the old wire-throw arm Atlas machines were great, and 'hid' quite a few of them with line-side stuff.
I do also remember back in the late 50's putting a switch machine [ a Pioneer, I think ] in a spot where I could hide it with a small trackside shanty. The machine was so powerful it broke the rails off the throwbar of a Tru-Scale switch...also you could see the little shanty actually shake when the button was pushed.
regards / Mike

[dknelson]

An amusing topic and thread.
Can't a case be made that Atlas got it right back in the late 1950s but that because the appearance was/is so crude (even by standards of the time) we have been struggling to equal that reliability ever since?
Dave Nelson

[bfsfabs]

Mike, I tend to agree and disagree at the same time. My observation is that the devices themselves are usually not the real culprit. It is the application/mounting/accessability side of things that cause the most heartache and swearing. Murphy is watching all the time, just waiting for the railroad constructor to build a problem into the layout that he can pounce on. I long ago decided the way to go is to use ABSOLUTELY interchangable turnout sections. Roadbed, ballast, track and turnout motor all in one removable chunk. With a plugable connector on the wiring. I can changout an entire turnout assembly in about 3 minutes, clock time. Just having this capability, I firmly beleive, keeps Murphy at bay. As Hunter used to say, "Works for Me".

Lowell
Pacific & Southwest Railroad Co HO

[Anonymous]

You are right Mike. Now that I reflect on it, I have replaced many turnout switches on the D&J Railroad because of appearance and unreliable function. I have replaced them with double pole double throw slide switches that are set into the layout surface. They are easier to operate than the switch throws for those last minute actions we all seem to stumble into. I have the tortoise switch machines on the cross overs so that both switches are thrown and the signals can be set all in one action, as if the operators really observe them for movement control.

Ken, D&J Railroad, Stafford, VA

[Anonymous]

Not long ago, I saw a quote from a well-known Model Railroader, I believe it was Ron Kuykendall,to the effect that electrical turnout control, in general, was the hobby's "trashiest technology".
This is so true, the recent Peco thread is but one example, there are installation, operation, and maintenance problems with every single electrically controlled device ever invented for the purpose of throwing switchpoints...from the crudest and cheapest, to the most expensive.
It might not be a reach to suggest that if the other electrical, and electro-mechanical aspects of the hobby had one tenth of these problems, we may have no hobby at all by now.
There are sound reasons why so many hobbyists ( myself included), reverted to ground throws or manual push-pull throws years ago, and why so many start out with them now.
regards / Mike