Sue, found out that the lead tracks for the table area exactley 2 ties removed from an Atlas code 83. Then I spike the track as close to the table as possible. I did not screw down the table. the chance of a warp from the wood would twist the pit. With the tracks nailed they hold the pit and allow for expansion.
Just a thought.
We installed the turntable. We had trouble with the screws being a little short, but managed to work through that. Now the next step is to lay down the rest of the yard.
Thanks, Sue
Anything is possible if you do not know what you are talking about.
George and others,
I ordered the 130' turntable from Walthers this morning. Thanks for the input.
Sue
rrinker wrote: Bet you just need to run the calibration routine. If it stops within a step of the actual point, it hans't lost its memory - if it forgot the programmed stop it wouldn;t stop anywhere near where it's supposed to. The whole thing works by 'knowing' how many steps from a fixed starting point you set the stop - so if it's close that just means the calibration has slipped and the start point is no longer where it's supposed to be. --Randy
So push the Zero button before each session? That will get it in the correct area? If that is all it is GREAT!!
I suppose the technology with optical readers is fairly well developed by now, although I am unsure of their method for this turntable. In any case, there will necessarily be incremental errors with each use, not from the digital side of things, but from the mechanical side of things. So, even though your calibration point has not changed in memory, it has slipped a tiny fraction of an inch each time you ask the device to align itself anywhere. Eventually, the error is sufficient that you can see it, and it is at this point that it must be re-calibrated. I believe, although I have not actually used one, that the computerized amateur telescopes available in the $3K-$15K range have this very issue. Your alignment with celestial coordinates might be fine for the first hour or so, but at some point you must recalibrate on bright stars whose coordinate positions are well known. This is very important because the fields of view in a telescope are very small, typically, and a cumulative error of even 30 arc seconds can put something out of the field of view. Once that happens, which way do you move the scope to find it? Up, down, right, left?
So, if I were to get one of these TT's, I suppose I would simply recalibrate it every other day or so.
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
As mentioned earlier they are worth the money. I own both the 130' and the 90' TT and think they are the greatest thing in the world. As for the memory being half tie off I heard thats a problem in the older versions. I di dhave it with mine but it cleared up after I reset it. Maybe try resetting it to zero point and redoing the settings again.
How well deos yours hold it's programming points? I Have (2) 130's and they forget by a half rail on a regulat basis. I probably need to reread the instrucations.
This are the twins:
This is the one in Ashley
old pictures shows it better, still Ashley
This is Nanticoke's:
another old picture of the Nanticoke table area
As atated they are worth the money. I have a Heljan 98' and the old Walthers 90ft that are going to become bridge trusses or something.
Dick
Thanks for the info. Great photo. Looks cold.
Larry
Larry,
The answer is yes, you can do all of that! As you can see, my table easily handles even my largest loco (H-8 Allegheny). And, so far, it's run like a champ. Well worth the investment.
I am about to give up trying to make my Heljan 100' turntable operate smoothley. Will the Walthers HO scale 130' turntable let a loco run on the bridge, turn, and run back off? Thanks.