Burlington Northern #24 track laying,far from my best MRRing skill . It's going to take a while for me to get my track perfect but this time around I will have power wires so I can test it before I glue it down.
track laying,far from my best MRRing skill . It's going to take a while for me to get my track perfect but this time around I will have power wires so I can test it before I glue it down.
I found the real secrete of good tracking laying is taking your time and keep eyeballing your progress.The eyeball and finger test over joints works wonders and cures the rework blues.
Another favorite is to push 2-3 cars over the track work and through switches.
My methods might be old school but,they still work..
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Brakie,
You are absolutely right. NOTHING is a better test of track laying than a "good eye", rubbing a finger (carefully) along the track, and rolling difficult cars/locos thru derailment prone situations.
Really, we can not overstate the importance of good solid trackwork. In my case, very, very few of the 80-90 locos I've owned over the last 15 years were problems into themselves. Difficulties were almost always due to faulty trackwork.
And that's the truth...............................
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
mobilman44Really, we can not overstate the importance of good solid trackwork.
Absolutely!
Carefully laid track.correct coupler and trip pin height plus wheels in gauge= derailment free operation.That's been my mantra over the years.I won't accept anything less then 100% derailment free operation and it isn't that hard to obtain.
BRAKIE Burlington Northern #24 track laying,far from my best MRRing skill . It's going to take a while for me to get my track perfect but this time around I will have power wires so I can test it before I glue it down. I found the real secrete of good tracking laying is taking your time and keep eyeballing your progress.The eyeball and finger test over joints works wonders and cures the rework blues. Another favorite is to push 2-3 cars over the track work and through switches. My methods might be old school but,they still work..
SP&S modeler, 1960's give or take a decade or two for some equipment.
http://www.youtube.com/user/SGTDUPREY?feature=guide
Gary DuPrey
N scale model railroader
Gary,I'm going to go against the gain and say to drop the track nails,caulk etc and give spikes a try..I use O Scale spikes for HO and HO spikes for N Scale since I want long spikes for better anchorage and the ballast glue will help hold the track..I spike every third or fourth tie.
Old school? You betcha but,it still works..
Part of the problems with steamers is that older designs had pretty poor electrical pick up. Quite often only from one side of the drivers and the other side of the tender.
By either the manufacturer or modeler adding power pickups on all drivers and all tender wheels, the reliability of steamer increases tremendously.
If you think about it, the rigid wheel base of most 6 coupled engines is the same or smaller than the rigid wheelbase of a 6 axle diesel. An 0-6-0 might have a wheelbase that's less than and RSC2. What's typically different is the power pick up.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
To me, the biggest problem with steamers, bar none, is the design of the pilot truck and trailing truck.
These two trucks, located at the front and rear of the engine, are much more prone to derailments than the drivers. There is often insufficient weight to hold them down on the rails, and they are mounted onto the chassis with a single screw, making them way too floppy.
Rich
Alton Junction
BRAKIE Gary,I'm going to go against the gain and say to drop the track nails,caulk etc and give spikes a try..I use O Scale spikes for HO and HO spikes for N Scale since I want long spikes for better anchorage and the ballast glue will help hold the track..I spike every third or fourth tie. Old school? You betcha but,it still works..
as for steamers, my northerns power pick ups are limited to lead and trailing trucks and it's kinda hard to work with which is why after adding weight to the tender I was considering adding pickups to the tenders trucks the problem there is that I think the trucks and wheels are slightly out of gauge as it doesn't roll smoothly.
Edit: nevermind I'm going to test the wheel gauges with my NMRA gauge.
BRAKIE I found the real secrete of good tracking laying is taking your time and keep eyeballing your progress.The eyeball and finger test over joints works wonders and cures the rework blues. Another favorite is to push 2-3 cars over the track work and through switches. My methods might be old school but,they still work..
I agree and would add
Make sure your roadbed is smooth before laying any track - fix any dips or humps.
Hook up some power with alligator clips and run some engines as part of your testing - your biggest and your shortest.
Only do a little at a time and test.
Fix or redo any part that's not 100% - multiple times if necessary.
Enjoy
Paul
Yes, similar to the original poster, I was not there during the end of steam, but my whole life I was fascinated by steam locomotives--as were my children when they were small.
I have owned and played with lots of fine HO brass steamers and also the more recent Genesis, BLI, Bachmann and MTH offerings (all heavy on the big articulateds).
Many of them were great. Some also had great sound. A few even smoked, too.
Eventually my children tired of the basic boring black paint jobs and wanted something more colorful and/or closer to what we commonly see--as did I myself. Eventually we grew tired of the "special care and feeding" always required with steam power--no matter how good my trackwork was.
So, yes I dieselized...did the "all Alco" thing for awhile, because I have also always liked Alco Centuries...
However, I have read enough of prototype railroad history to know the real history of Alco in the diesel era, and regardless of how a few very zealous Alco devotees who still operate and maintain them might want to spin the history, they did not hold up as well or run as economically as the EMD SD40 and SD45 series engines. If they had been truly competitive, they'd still be around...It is a classic, textbook lesson of how not to manage an American company (or any company).
So now in addition to having dieselized, I have purged to a 1970's-80's roster that is Alco-free, too. That doesn't mean I don't like Alcos--I still do--I just don't need them on my railroad. "My" railroad would have opted for EMD's during that era.
As for the steam power, I can love and appreciate all the big articulateds from so many railroads, and the 2-10-4's, can quote you all kinds of obscure statistics, the differences between an L-131 and an L-132, etc., but as far as I'm concerned it was all so long ago now, and I'm simply opting to leave steam to the history books. My last steam engines (ironically little updated Roundhouse 2-6-0 and 2-8-0 engines) are still out for consignment sale at a local train store. Even at very reasonable pricing, they are sitting there in the glass case with the better quality new diesels--the steamers are mint, like new--and unsold.
I think I'll never see the money out of them at this point.
John
Brunton Several folks acknowledged that their trackwork is why they can't get steam to stay on the rails, so they don't run it. Folks, track is the most basic element of a model railroad. If it's only so-so,everything else on your layout may be a craftsman's dream, but overall your layout will never be better than so-so. A few layouts (and too many years) ago I had derailment problems out the wazoo. One day I got fed up with rerailing things constantly, and made a promise to myself to never again consider mediocre trackwork to be "good enough." I started over on a new layout, and was pleasantly surprised to find that laying track that worked was not all that hard! For a couple of weeks I had to remind myself to be diligent in laying and checking track and turnouts, but very quickly that became second nature. The result is that derailments are rare in my model world, and steam shows no more propensity to leave the rails than my non-steam equipment. IF I CAN DO IT, IT CAN'T BE THAT HARD. If laying good track is difficult, go after it! Work on it and make trackwork one your basic, best modeling skills. Take it from someone who knows - laying good track can become easy to do, and it pays huge dividends in terms of increased enjoyment when the trains are runnign and yiou don't have to stop to rerail something every few minutes. Sorry - didn't mean to change the subject.
Several folks acknowledged that their trackwork is why they can't get steam to stay on the rails, so they don't run it.
Folks, track is the most basic element of a model railroad. If it's only so-so,everything else on your layout may be a craftsman's dream, but overall your layout will never be better than so-so.
A few layouts (and too many years) ago I had derailment problems out the wazoo. One day I got fed up with rerailing things constantly, and made a promise to myself to never again consider mediocre trackwork to be "good enough." I started over on a new layout, and was pleasantly surprised to find that laying track that worked was not all that hard! For a couple of weeks I had to remind myself to be diligent in laying and checking track and turnouts, but very quickly that became second nature. The result is that derailments are rare in my model world, and steam shows no more propensity to leave the rails than my non-steam equipment.
IF I CAN DO IT, IT CAN'T BE THAT HARD.
If laying good track is difficult, go after it! Work on it and make trackwork one your basic, best modeling skills. Take it from someone who knows - laying good track can become easy to do, and it pays huge dividends in terms of increased enjoyment when the trains are runnign and yiou don't have to stop to rerail something every few minutes.
Sorry - didn't mean to change the subject.
I feel that this thread has turned away from my assertion that steam is more maintenance prone, to problems with track work. Although I certainly agree that track-work should be as close to 100% imperfection free as possible, I don't see this as what is going on, on my layout!
My track work problems have been corrected where I found problems for multiple locos; or, rolling stock. My work on my track has been constant and on-going. My minimum radius is 22 inches and I feel this is generally too tight for all but the smallest steam locomotives. When I chose that radius, almost every steam locomotive for sale at that time (1988) advertised that it would do very well on 22 inches. On the mainline all my switches, are # 6s.
I've been involved in this hobby longer than most people have been in the hobby today. My mechanical background and abilities are likely as good as anyone involved in the hobby! I'm not taking offense at Brunton's suggestion that track work needs to be of the highest quality and would gladly take suggestions on what to check. To date, very little of it has been ballasted, so changing things would be fairly easy! So, if you have suggestions, I would really love to hear them, other than increasing the radius, as this would mean starting over (which might not be out of the question).
Here is how my track-work has been performed: My 22 inch radius curves all have spiral easements at each end. There is super-elevation on visible curves. I have found that some of my super-elevation was to much and caused the derailment of some cars and locos and it was decreased where I found this to be a problem. Since super-elevation in model railroads is really a scenic effect, I have not super-elevated track that is hidden. All vertical transitions have easements. My track is all code 100 Atlas flex track and Atlas Customline #6 switches. I started the layout previous to code 83,70 and 55 being as available as they are today. (Unimportant to the quality of my track-work) I painted all rail and ties with roof brown paint, thereby appearing to visually reduce the size of the rail. My road bed is 1/2 inch plywood and all risers and joints are screwed and glued together. The risers are no more that 16 inches on centers.
I have watched numerous videos of large and small layouts alike where the track work has numerous kinks and other imperfections. I have spent considerable time improving my track by simply eye-balling it, to make sure it is fair. My track-work does not have any of these types of imperfections.
So, if you can think of problems I should be looking for, by all means, I am very interested and thank you for taking the time to make suggestions!
NP 2626 "Northern Pacific, really terrific"
Northern Pacific Railway Historical Association: http://www.nprha.org/
"JaBear" NP2626 "JaBear" With the apparent reliability of modern HO steamers I'm half tempted to backdate my fleet to an all steam roster, except I like Baldwin Sharknoses too much, so guess I'll stick to the "transition era." Cheers, the Bear. We've already gone down the road arguing about the quality and reliability of modern steam equipment. I have no doubt those of you who believe that modern steam offerings are better, have your valid reasons for believing so. My opinion, based on my years in the hobby and my mechanical abilities is different; but, just as valid. Some of you claim to never have problems with anything, maybe thinking that espousing this position makes you look superior to all of the rest of us and for me at least, leaves me with the opinion that your opinions are really not worth reading. You,Sir, started an interesting post which has had a good response of varying but generally considered opinions, though I must admit while my offering was perhaps a little trite, I really am at a loss how it brought about this rant! I only hope that gun collecting is not one of your hobbies as I would be concerned that you'd probably shoot yourself in the foot. Yours humbly, the Bear.
NP2626 "JaBear" With the apparent reliability of modern HO steamers I'm half tempted to backdate my fleet to an all steam roster, except I like Baldwin Sharknoses too much, so guess I'll stick to the "transition era." Cheers, the Bear. We've already gone down the road arguing about the quality and reliability of modern steam equipment. I have no doubt those of you who believe that modern steam offerings are better, have your valid reasons for believing so. My opinion, based on my years in the hobby and my mechanical abilities is different; but, just as valid. Some of you claim to never have problems with anything, maybe thinking that espousing this position makes you look superior to all of the rest of us and for me at least, leaves me with the opinion that your opinions are really not worth reading.
"JaBear" With the apparent reliability of modern HO steamers I'm half tempted to backdate my fleet to an all steam roster, except I like Baldwin Sharknoses too much, so guess I'll stick to the "transition era." Cheers, the Bear.
With the apparent reliability of modern HO steamers I'm half tempted to backdate my fleet to an all steam roster, except I like Baldwin Sharknoses too much, so guess I'll stick to the "transition era."
Cheers, the Bear.
We've already gone down the road arguing about the quality and reliability of modern steam equipment. I have no doubt those of you who believe that modern steam offerings are better, have your valid reasons for believing so. My opinion, based on my years in the hobby and my mechanical abilities is different; but, just as valid. Some of you claim to never have problems with anything, maybe thinking that espousing this position makes you look superior to all of the rest of us and for me at least, leaves me with the opinion that your opinions are really not worth reading.
You,Sir, started an interesting post which has had a good response of varying but generally considered opinions, though I must admit while my offering was perhaps a little trite, I really am at a loss how it brought about this rant! I only hope that gun collecting is not one of your hobbies as I would be concerned that you'd probably shoot yourself in the foot.
Yours humbly, the Bear.
Although my comment on others speaking like they never have problems, occured in a response to your post, this part of my response was not directed at you. I appologize for this and understand how you could take it that way.
BRAKIE I found the real secrete of good tracking laying is taking your time and keep eyeballing your progress.The eyeball and finger test over joints works wonders and cures the rework blues.
The Mark I eyeball is the best track work tool there is. If it looks smooth it will run smooth.
Amen. The acid test Is to push a cut of cars through the track work at speed. It won't look pretty, but if you can push cars through trackwork at a scale 50-60 mph it will work fine under normal conditions.
By the way, those who say you can't run well with steamers, last night I had an op session with three Mantua 0-6-0's, two 4-4-0's (1 Spectrum, 1 Roundhouse), one Spectrum 4-6-0 and three Roundhose 2-8-0's. Ran 3 yard jobs, 4 passenger trains, a local, 4 through freights and cranked up an extra turn.
dehusman By the way, those who say you can't run well with steamers, last night I had an op session with three Mantua 0-6-0's, two 4-4-0's (1 Spectrum, 1 Roundhouse), one Spectrum 4-6-0 and three Roundhose 2-8-0's. Ran 3 yard jobs, 4 passenger trains, a local, 4 through freights and cranked up an extra turn.
Take note, that of the 9 steamers mentioned by Dave, none has a trailing truck and out of 18 possible trucks, both pilot and trailing, there are only six trucks on those 9 steamers.
That would seem to support the argument that I made earlier in this thread that the pilot trucks and trailing trucks are the leading cause of derailment on steamers. The relative absence of trucks on those 9 steamers may well be the reason for the lack of derailments.
My trackwork is certainly not "bulletproof" as I can see defects here and there, but.... IHC Mikado 2-8-2, Rivarossi 4-6-2 Pacific, two Rivarossi 0-8-0 yard goats, Athearn Genesis 4-6-6-4 Challenger, Bachmann 2-8-0 Consolidation and Bachmann 4-8-4. Minimum (and maximum due to size constraints) radius of 22", 3+% grades, turnouts are #4's= NO derailments
I have cured the "light tender" derailments when backing "long" cuts of cars, which has been my only issues. This has also contributed very positively to the Rivarossi's performance, ensuring better pickup from the tender.
I have a Bachmann Spectrum Shay that is finicky as all get out and will derail simply coming out of a turn and in places with no joints near. I can work issues out until that goes away, however as soon as cars are attached, derailments start again in new places. This all takes place on a seperate loop for that train.
I own no diesels or brass, nor have I yet to gt my hands on a gauge; to date I've used the Mark 1 eyeball, Mark 2 fingers, calipers, etc. These have been my experiences for what they are worth
Happy RR'ing, whether diesel, steam, or both
Duane
Marketing statements by manufacturers not withstanding, no competent model railroad authority, no well published author, not the NMRA, no track planning or model railroad "how to" book has ever suggested that that most steam locos would run on 22" radius.
Every long standing club, every NMRA RP, every book on track planning written in the last 6 decades on the subject suggests that 30" radius is a bare minimum for anything that resembles a "Class I mainline" steam locomotive and many recommend much larger than that - Paul Mallery suggested 48" as a minimum - I'm close to that.
This goes directly back to my original comments on this topic. You cannot expect steam locos to run well on small curves and tight turnouts.
And as to the assertion that pilot and trailing trucks are to blame, maybe so, but the real fault is still the track. Personally, I remove most of the pesky down pressure springs that are "supposed" to keep lead and trailing wheels on the track - and yet I still don't have derailments?
Why do I remove those springs? They reduce pulling power.
Sheldon
dehusman BRAKIE I found the real secrete of good tracking laying is taking your time and keep eyeballing your progress.The eyeball and finger test over joints works wonders and cures the rework blues. The Mark I eyeball is the best track work tool there is. If it looks smooth it will run smooth. Another favorite is to push 2-3 cars over the track work and through switches. Amen. The acid test Is to push a cut of cars through the track work at speed. It won't look pretty, but if you can push cars through trackwork at a scale 50-60 mph it will work fine under normal conditions. By the way, those who say you can't run well with steamers, last night I had an op session with three Mantua 0-6-0's, two 4-4-0's (1 Spectrum, 1 Roundhouse), one Spectrum 4-6-0 and three Roundhose 2-8-0's. Ran 3 yard jobs, 4 passenger trains, a local, 4 through freights and cranked up an extra turn.
Dave, I don't consider 0-6-0s, 4-4-0s, 4-6-0s or blind drivered 2-8-0s to be an addequate test of how well steam will run!
My MDC Roundhouse 0-6-0, 4-6-0s and 2-8-0 all work(ed) fine on my layout. It should be noted that these locomotives all have blind drivers in the middle (Drivers 2 on the 6 coupled and 2 & 3 on the 8 coupled. My assertion has been that it is the newer equipment that can give problems. Maybe I should clarify that by newer, I only mean stuff from 2000 tp 2003 as I have nothing newer. I feel that steam equipment now available, is too expensive.
As far as cost comparisons between what was available in the 1990s to what is available today, factoring inflation doesn't do an adequate enough job of explaining why things are more expensive, today. First of all, in my case, most of my locomotives were purchased as kits, which I put together and there are no currently available steam locomotive kits to compare with. Secondly, pushing the prices up are locomotives which include DCC and DCC with Sound, let alone that locomotives are far more detailed then they used to be.
In the end, it's up to the individual to decide what they can afford. I doubt that my considering the locomotives available today, as being too expensive, will influence anybody's decision to buy; or, not!
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Marketing statements by manufacturers not withstanding, no competent model railroad authority, no well published author, not the NMRA, no track planning or model railroad "how to" book has ever suggested that that most steam locos would run on 22" radius.
And that's not exactly true for some steam locomotives.
Actually small drivered engines like 4-4-0s, 2-6-0s, 2-6-2s,4-6-0s,2-8-0s and 2-8-2s will run on 18" radius curves since those are your basic steamers that came in train sets.IIRC AHM had a nice passenger set that featured their 4-6-2..
However,I don't think any of the above steamers would look good on anything less then a 26" curve but,that's just me.
100% derailment free? Whatever. I'd say that's unprototypical, because nothing is 100% in the real world. And even if your track is 100%, something else might not be, as we'll see in a moment.
I did my best to build bullet-proof track. It mostly is and that's a good thing, because there's plenty of it that is hidden. But it's a medium-sized layout (28x16) on a concrete floor in an area with relatively high ground water. It's just a fact that things shift a little over such large areas. I suspect if an ISL was that big, it'd probably not be quite 100% over time, either.
Since much of the layout is narrowgauge (HOn3), it's been another motivation for careful construction. HOn3 is a lot like running HO standardgauge on N scale track (at least within 1.5 mm close), so right there the bar is raised a little more on what works well and what just gets frustrating.
That said, in part due to solid benchwork (3/4" ply over 1x3 or larger framing) things have shifted remarkably little, but realistically I accept the fact that nothing is really perfect over time. I've always been careful to leave access, especially with hidden track. I've also been particularly careful with vertical curves, which are a particular problem for steam locos with their long driver wheelbase vs diesels. And I've been rewarded with what is probably 99+% trouble-free track.
So what happens with the other 1%? A good example was last night. I took a train out of staging and just wanted to watch it run. I had a Monon LO that derailed twice, once in hidden track and once out where I could see what was going on. Given it was the same car in two different places, that was a clue that it probably wasn't the track. I started checking it over and found a wheelset where the pressed-in insulation had loosened. OK, easy to solve popped a new wheelset in and...wait, what's this? Whether it was due entirely to wearing out while running or, more likely given the size of the defect when I found it, the journal had an air bubble right next to it that wore through. Now it was a big oval!
So track was 100%, but 2 derailments anyway.
And it's also the case that even track that is good may still cause an issue with certain equipment. Frequently that is steam, again because of the long driver wheelbase. I have a lot of Shinohara dual-gauge turnouts, which because of the way they're made permit a bit of a clunk/drop when rolling stock is passing through. Usually not a derailment, it is a little weird as cars shudder across the frogs. Where steam comes in is due to the long wheelbase again and the turnout geometry. If the points are not tweaked just right, my two big K-class Mikes will sometime move just enough going through the diverging route to stop if moving slow, because the lateral movement of one of the drivers is shifted just enough that it will bridge between the rail and the mid-backside of the point and short. So it's a 100% perfect turnout, except when things jostle just right. Solution? just use a finger nail to gently press against the point to give a bit more gap.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
mlehman100% derailment free? Whatever.
Mike,I have ran my trains during the week of the county fair for 45-50 hours with zero derailments and I have operated my past ISLs for months with zero derailments. I won't accept anything less.
I urge everybody to aim for that goal..Its not hard to obtain.
I simply refuse to put up with derailments. The oopses, sure...we all forget to line a turnout, or we don't throw the points completely. That kind of oops. But if a locmotive of any kind, diesel or steam, won't round a curve or go through a turnout without derailing, EVERYTHING stops. Full stop. I don't think about anything except getting that problem fixed. I have ripped up several feet of rails when I found that wetting the ballast and lifting a rail here and there won't solve the problem.
At some point, I get the locomotive to run through that spot in either direction at any speed. I heave a sigh, and return to enjoying derailment free running with an occasional oops. I will not put up with even occasional derailments due to track work. The big boys don't, and neither will I.
Crandell
selectorThe oopses, sure...we all forget to line a turnout, or we don't throw the points completely.
Crandell, I don't move till I'm sure the switch is lined for my move and the points fully closed but,for me that comes natural since I did that for 9 1/2 years..Not saying I'm perfect at all since my boo boos is fouling the switch on a double ended yard track and that's only because there isn't a wee brakeman signaling me to stop.In other words I "wabash" a yard track..
NP2626 Dave, I don't consider 0-6-0s, 4-4-0s, 4-6-0s or blind drivered 2-8-0s to be an addequate test of how well steam will run!
Dave models an era that doesn't have all that much big steam power. And if you are modeling a short line at the turn of the century like I do, you have even less reason to run anything bigger than a 2-8-0. For me, the small engines mentioned are indeed the test of how well steam will run.
Reality is that because model railroaders like to pay by the driver on steam models, it is actually harder to produce and sell a good running 4-4-0 than a 4-8-2 or articulated. But that's a rant for another day.
My MDC Roundhouse 0-6-0, 4-6-0s and 2-8-0 all work(ed) fine on my layout. It should be noted that these locomotives all have blind drivers in the middle (Drivers 2 on the 6 coupled and 2 & 3 on the 8 coupled. My assertion has been that it is the newer equipment that can give problems. Maybe I should clarify that by newer, I only mean stuff from 2000 tp 2003 as I have nothing newer. I feel that steam equipment now available, is too expensive. As far as cost comparisons between what was available in the 1990s to what is available today, factoring inflation doesn't do an adequate enough job of explaining why things are more expensive, today. First of all, in my case, most of my locomotives were purchased as kits, which I put together and there are no currently available steam locomotive kits to compare with. Secondly, pushing the prices up are locomotives which include DCC and DCC with Sound, let alone that locomotives are far more detailed then they used to be.
BRAKIE mlehman100% derailment free? Whatever. Mike,I have ran my trains during the week of the county fair for 45-50 hours with zero derailments and I have operated my past ISLs for months with zero derailments. I won't accept anything less. I urge everybody to aim for that goal..Its not hard to obtain.
Well, I only partially agree.
Aiming for zero derailments is a worthwhile goal. But it is very hard to attain.
Sheldon,
So, you actually have had problems, then? You've had to spend some time with new locomotives, fine tuning them! This blows your first assertions all to heck, that your stuff runs great, right out of the box!
I have only been a member of the NMRA for 6 months. I didn't find membership to seem worthwhile.
Now your also telling me that our wonderous manufacturers lie about the capibilities of their products. This is also a contradiction of what you's said before. Are they doing everything right, or not?
Back to the topic of this thread, although derailing has been one of the problems I've encountered with my newer steam locos, it is not the only one. Also, I don't have large steam locomotives. With 22 inch radius curves, large steam locomotives were never a part of my plan! My biggest steamer is a Rivarossi Mikado, kit bashed to a Northern Pacific W-3 Mike, which, by the way, operates just fine on my 22 inch radius curves.
What I seem to be seeing posed here is that some of you feel I am wrong about my findings with my layout and my equipment! I have to say that this really seems a foolish assertion! I would never doubt any of the problems you might have with the stuff you own, how could I possibly prevail with that opinion!
richhotrain Aiming for zero derailments is a worthwhile goal. But it is very hard to attain. Rich
Rich,Sorry,I don't understand that at all..I'm not the world's best track layer but, I can still obtain derailment free operation.
Anybody can obtain that goal since all it takes is careful track laying,correct wheel gauge and coupler and trip pin height.A NMRA gauge check of a switch should make you aware of any potential problems with the switch even before its laid..A belt sander ran across the cork roadbed will remove any potential problems in the cork.
How hards that?
A couple of thoughts on the subject:
IMHO: Modern steam models run very, very well. This is in comparison to steam models from the past and to modern diesels. When proto 2K came out with the ys in the early 2000’s, we entered a new era. I have one of these that creeps and runs smooth as glass. I also have spectrum and Bli locos (2-8-0s, 4-6-0s, shays, cab forwards). I have experience running Athearn genesis steam and the new hybrids from Sunset as well as Blackstone’s Hon3 offerings. They all run great out of the box.
I also run brass steam and have found that these locos generally require more work and maintenance. However, even in the finicky brass category, I have some models that ran perfect out of the box.
Regarding operations and derailments: I regularly operate on several layouts that are all steam (including my own). While there is an occasional problem, I would categorize the operation of these all steam layouts as nearly flawless. Problems that occur are usually a dirty section of track, derailments are very rare and usually operator induced. To get a layout to this level of reliability takes a lot of careful construction and decent skills. To keep it at this level takes a fair amount of maintenance.
Diesel layout owners also have the same issues regarding track work and reliability as well as having to maintain the layout.
To me the hobby is about what you like. I happen to like steam so that it what I run. If I liked diesels, I would run them. I have been fortunate to be alive at a time to take advantage of the advances in running reliability of all models, especially steam locos, that have taken place over the last 15 years or so…
My two cents,
Guy
see stuff at: the Willoughby Line Site
BRAKIE richhotrain Aiming for zero derailments is a worthwhile goal. But it is very hard to attain. Rich Rich,Sorry,I don't understand that at all..I'm not the world's best track layer but, I can still obtain derailment free operation. Anybody can obtain that goal since all it takes is careful track laying,correct wheel gauge and coupler and trip pin height.A NMRA gauge check of a switch should make you aware of any potential problems with the switch even before its laid..A belt sander ran across the cork roadbed will remove any potential problems in the cork. How hards that?
Larry, maybe it just comes down to a matter of semantics.
If it is not hard, your original statement that prompted my reply, then it must be easy.
Let's start there. Based upon my own experience over the past 7 years with my current layout, I can tell you that for me it is not easy - - - to attain zero derailments, that is.
Well, if it is not easy, as I would maintain, and if it is not hard, as you would contend, then it must not be very hard. But, for me, If it is not not very hard, then it must be very hard.
How's that? LOL
Look, try as I might, over the past 7 years to make my current layout bullet proof, track wise, I cannot claim zero derailments. And, from all the guys that we have heard from, neither can many others make that claim.
So, I will return to my original assertion. Aiming for zero derailments is a worthwhile goal. But it is very hard to attain. Not impossible, perhaps, but very hard.
The original post was articulate, informative, and asked a valid question. Somehow this thing has degenerated into a cat fight about who's dog is bigger than my dog.
Enough, already. let us continue with something else. May i suggest we choose from the following topics.
1-Kadee couplers are over rated.
2-N scale is for children.
3-Walthers has done something wrong.
4-Gleaming is a rumor.
5-Metal wheels are a waste of money.
Get my point???
Charlie
Dunno, charlie, if we have been digressing, and I don't think that we have been, since we are considering possible causes of dissatisfaction with steamers, isn't your suggestion going to take us even more off topic?