
Track-Laying Questions 


ANSWER:
Here's what we've found:
The NMRA standard has you laying your rails over an inch
(prototype) wider than the wheel sets. This means you already have
enormous space for play. Curves ... straight ... whatever..
Now if you use a three point gauge and widen the rails just a bit
in the curves, your just increasing the slop. If your laying your
curves sharper than 18inch radius, then use the three point. But if
you are using any radius larger than 18, and you wish to run your
trains forward and backward with no length/weight limit, then I have
by absolute experience found that you don't want to widen anywhere.
As a matter of fact, you can narrow the track about .005 to .010
thru the frogs, and you will get much better performance.
In 1980 at the NMRA convention at Disneyland, I took a portable
railroad (HO) set it up and ran 65 car trains backward with three
four five units. Some on front.. ... some pushing ... etc. with my
back to the display for six (6) days with absolutely no derailments
using the narrow track standard to prove once and for all that the
wider gauge of the three point gauge just causes derailments. That's
all it does. Period.
By the way, I used both Athearn and Atlas units running together
with no problems. If the track is the right gauge, you have fewer
problems. Please understand that I don't care what gauge you use
and I make the two point gauges for those who want them. At 9.95
for four of the gauges plus the time to package and send them,
believe me I don't make any money from the gauges.
One last time ....... Don't widen your track anymore than you
have to. There's already too much play. Way more than is needed for
your curves. (by the way, the same ratio is in N scale as well)
A little insider info: John Allen didn't use a track gauge.
He used a wheel set for gauge and his
trains ran very well.
I have done all the research to prove this both theoretically as well
as physically. If you want to reduce your derailments..... this is
one way that works well.

QUESTION: #2
What's the best way to get wood ties level and straight?
ANSWER:
First of all, I prefer to spread about 4 or 5 inches of elmer's
glue (yellow aliphatic prefered over white) and then using a #11
exacto as a spear, place the ties individually on the roadbed.
Spear each tie .. place it .. then hold it down with your other
hand as you pull the blade out. Now do another 4 or 5 inches. Be carefull
to place the ties on their flat side. Most ties are wider than they are tall.
I've never had much luck getting
the ties flat and down snug using the strip tape method. The ties
pull up too much when you try to remove the tape. Also there is no
point in placing the ties in a jig to tape them. You might as well
place them on the roadbed in the glue. Saves a whole step.
After the glue has dried, sand the tops of the ties lightly to get them all even. Hold a ruler on edge across the ties and sight the gap to see where you need to sand. Touch up the tops with stain.

QUESTION: #3
Is there a way to get the rail smooth?
ANSWER:
Just like the Prototype Railroads, your track will come out much
smoother if you pre-curve or pre-straighten each rail before you lay it.
Also take a file and lightly kiss the corner edges of the end of the
rail to get rid of any irregularities. This makes a better joint.

QUESTION: #4
My spiked code 70 came out all irregular and bumpy... What happened?
ANSWER:
When your pushing in your spikes, be carefull that you don't push them in
too tight. The rail will end up roller-coaster..ish. If you get down
next to the rail and look at it sideways, you'll see that the rail humps up a
little in-between the spikes. Try easing off on the spikes to get the rail level.
Don't over do the tightness of the spikes. As a matter of fact, the
spike only needs to be up against the base of the rail to hold it in gauge. Then
snugged down to the top of the base without bending the rail down.
Most spike heads are too large and they push against the web of the rail if
installed against the base. So turn the spike sideways about 45degrees to allow the
length of the spike head to lay alongside the rail rather than pushing it out of gauge.
-Stephen Hatch

QUESTION: #5
Please send me or point me to correct specs. for track gauge.
ANSWER:
My problem in answering you is this:
The list for all gauges is quite extensive.
Do you want NMRA standards (which will derail your trains)?
or do you want specifications that work?
You see NMRA had two standards committees. One did the track
spacing and the other did the wheel spacing.
Now since the wheels on locos and such are very dificult to change
it seemed best to change the distance between the rails especially thru
turnouts to match the wheel gauge provided by NMRA.
By the way the heads of each commitee hated each other (jealosy) and never spoke to each other. Most commercial track including turnouts are a bastard compromise between these two dimensions.
What scale do you wish accurate specs for?
I/ll be happy to answer.
-Steve

QUESTION: #6
Is this statement based on empirical evidence, or some theory?
ANSWER:
Well Hi. Yes and yes.
Many years ago (1947) I wanted to be a member of an rr-club that only
accepted adult members. At 7 yrs/old they let me clean up and sweep
and lay track on the O-gauge and On3 but only after I read all the
spec sheets that they had in the library from Santa-Fe. When I was
taught (by the On3 Guys) to read a micrometer, in typical 7 yr/old
fashion I went around checking everything. OK!
The proto specs (I later (at 30 yrs old) got the specs from UP) from
Santa-Fe and Union Pacific Show a 4' 8&1/4" maximum through the
frog. They lay all track at 4' 8&1/4" and as it spreads to 1/2"
go back and regauge.
I noticed then as now that the wheel standards in all gauges as
put forth by the NMRA were narrow. Therefore the only way to lay
the track (at least through the frog) was narrow.
The theory in engineering is that when pushing a chain through a
trough the closer the tolerance the easier the push.
If the wheel sets are held straight for an inch or so before
and after the frog, they simply can not pick.
Rather than go through the attempt to regauge everyone's wheel sets, I opted for gauging to the existing wheel dimension.
Lastly, over forty years and at least one layout in virtually every scale (even TT) I found that derailments were non existant with this tighter gauge thru the frog.
There is so much slop in the "NORMAL" NMRA gauging that the wheels can turn slightly sideways and scrub the rail edge looking for flaws.
Does this help? Do you want more?
I'll be happy to answer.
-Stephen

QUESTION: #7
I'm working on the drawings and template to build my own N scale switches.
I have used the table from the civil engineering manual along with the NMRA gauge
for frog and heel clearances. Will this be a reliable turnout, or should I follow
another path.
I want to end up with decent looking and running code 55 and 40 turnouts.
Thanks for any suggestions you may offer.
ANSWER:
My only suggestion would be that we use .335 to .340 as the gauge
through the frog in N with exellent results.
Remember the optimum performance occurs when the wheels touch nothing
as they traverse the frog. Each wheelset holds the other in alignment
as they cross the frog as long as there isn't a lot of lateral play
between the flanges and the rail. With too much play, the wheels can
turn slightly sideways and scrub the rail looking for flaws.
The length of a turnout isn't criticle, however the best performance for both the prototype and the model is achieved by finding the perfect radius fron the tangent (stock rail) to the disection (frog) of the parallel.
Since frog angles are known (#6 = 1 in 6 angle) etc. and the parallel rail spacing for each gauge. Simple geometry will give you the optimum lengths.
Have fun. Good luck.
-Stephen

QUESTION: #8
Is it OK to use Flex-Track?
ANSWER:
Most flex track is a little bit wide and as such, isn't optimum, but it
will work fine under most circumstances. We obviously don't recommend flex
turnouts since the inherent "WIDE" gauge generally causes more problems than
most of us want to deal with.
On the ends of the joints in flex track (hand laid is better) be sure that you
narrow up the last ends just a bit. This tighter gauge where the rail joints
are will help to eliminate derailments. Remember to kiss the corners of the end
of the rails with a file to remove any unwanted burrs before you lay the track.
Hard to do after the track is layed.
Stay away from section track. It's too wide and ... all those joints .... egad.
Remember the real railroads have gone to ribbon rail to eliminate joints.

QUESTION: #9
I've weighted all my cars to NMRA specifications, I feel that with this
weight, all my cars are too heavy. Maybe I am wrong with my conversion to
the metric system. But I am thinking of a small Sunset C16 with 10 cars.
...............Hmmmmmmmmm...... Maybe I need a double or triple header.
>Thanks.....
ANSWER:
Whoa! ....... hold on a minute. Please hear me out. I have argued this
point for forty years.
1. weight is your enemy ... not your friend (prototype or scale)
2. fix the wiggle instead of throwing lead at it.
Imagine the full size railroads putting more weight in a car because it didn't
stay on the track. The NMRA is just plain wrong on this point. Idiotic at best.
Treacherous at worst. If someone tells you the models are different than the
real thing, you just laugh and move on.
Find a competent engineer to agree with adding weight as a "fix". Won't happen.
Now to the problem.
On the prototype, the truck swivel (against body) is free floating not tight. The side bolster on the truck rides on the body bolster to keep the car upright. The springs allow equalization movement to keep all the wheels on the track. This is impractical on the model but we want to simulate this effect.
| So on one truck screw, make it loose so it will flop in all directions. On the other end of the car, put two little shims on either side of the car bolster that will ride on the truck bolster. The truck can rock forward and back but not side to side. Leave this screw loose also. Now the two trucks are free to follow the track up-down-whatever and the car rides smooth and stable on the two side bolster shims. No weight needed at all. |
|
When you get one of these Carter cars, you'll see this bolstering, since I'm
milling it into the bottom of the cars.
Please, Please .... no additional weight. Fix the problem for once and for all.
At the very first NG convention in Denver many years ago, I set up a demonstrator railroad, HOn3, and ran 15-20-25 car trains with one or two c-16's for the entire convention with none of the cars weighted. I do the same in Sn3 with this bolstering.
If I've been a bit confusing here, please ask me and I'll try to explain it better. I really want to help you here .... as well as anyone else who's interested.
-Steve Hatch

QUESTION: #10
What is the best weight for my rr-cars?
ANSWER:
(Answered by Fred Dabney)
Thirty years of running on a club layout with track that ranges from
superb to wretched, using trains of every conceivable source, of lengths
from caboose hops to fourty to fifty cars long, with cars from real
shorties to modern piggy back and high cube boxes suggests that
individual car weights are not really all that important- as a
generalization!
What /is/ critical is the trucks, wheels, and that a given train be fairly consistent in its weight distribution.
Bad trucks will put a car on the ground faster than anything else. Trucks that are warped, or in which the wheels are a sloppy fit can derail on flat, straight track. Trucks that don't pivot freely about their center will derail when the track changes direction. Sprung trucks can be a devil if they aren't free to equalize, since (Murphy's Law) they always seem to bind when they are not level.
Then there are all the myriad of wheel problems. I have seen some nice cast wheels that had a casting gate on the edge of the flange. These little warts would catch switch points, even railhead on curves and derail. But they were almost imperceptable to the unaided eye.
Wheels that are not at right angles to the axle and parallel to each other don't track well. Wheels with straight, deep flanges and sharp flanges are more prone to find track flaws and derail.
But overall, a good set of trucks with decent wheels will track better through almost any trackage, while perfect track will not help bad trucks.
One of the biggest problems is Athearn trucks. Nearly all of them have the bearing holes too deep for the length of the axles, and many of the third party wheels have axles even shorter than stock Athearn. This lets the car sit low on the axles (this causes coupler height problems) and also lets the car rock sideways, shifting the center of gravity to one side and this in turn can cause cars to just fall off the track on curves, particuarly if they are super-elevated.
A great many trucks come with either wheels that are off center or where the metal axles are ground off center. Many of the wheelsets on MDC and Athearn have the latter problem. This makes the car wobble badly but of itself doesn't seem to affect tracking very much.
Weight is important, and the formula relating length to weight is useful, but if you have decent track, and the wheels/axles/trucks are good and properly installed, it isn't that important on most layouts.
I have rarely added weight to cars beyond what was supplied and can think of few cases where operation required I fix that. Those gorgeous Detail Associates GS gons are one exception- they really are too light to run in a train, even at the end. Some wood cars have the same problem.
The old NMRA standard was arrived at by testing and does work, and will work well if you have a wide range of rolling stock that needs to be freely mixed. But most modern (in the market sense) equipment will work with less weight because most of us tend to have most of our equipment pretty much from one era. I have recent plastic hoppers mixed with old cast Zamak hoppers, and I'm sure a few others have similar situations. But we're an exception.
If you are having tracking problems, added weight may indeed cause some improvment by forcing poor trucks to better conform to the track. But replacing the trucks might well do the same thing without adding weight.
Try, experiment and use what works.
Fred Dabney
Watching the action from BNSF MP 1112, El Paso sub

QUESTION: #11
I was looking over some of the information on your web page, and I'm curious how
you view the kadee spiker? As a note of comparison, Russ Simpson specifically
says to use a kadee spiker voids the warranty. Comments?
ANSWER:
I don't use it. It bends the rail down at the spikes since it hits so hard.
If it's set light.. then some of the spikes are left sticking up.
So we have warped rail and sticking up spikes. Not good for operation.
If you'll accept the unrealistic look of Kadee spikes then just use
flex-track. Much better operating trackage.

QUESTION: #12
Could you suggest a good source of small track spikes for code 55 rail?
I have tried micro-engineering small spikes, but the head's too large..
ANSWER:
Actually the best is to make your own. In the evening sitting 'round the
ol' tv or where-ever. Take some 15 thousandths spring wire (.015)(usually
in the K&S rack at your local hobby shop).
1. Bend a 90° angle 1/4 inch from the end.
2. put your diag cutter next to the bend away from the 1/4 inch
3. snip ..... one spike.
4. repeat .... they go real fast and you'll have great looking spikes
and you made them yourself. (I've made tens of thousands of them)
They push in just like regular spikes.
Make them a little longer if your roadbed is soft.
-Stephen Hatch

QUESTION: #13
I have a Sunset C-16, a Grant Line Box Cab, and a MDC 2 truck Shay which I
can't make run right.
It doesn't matter how great the rest of the layout looks if I can't run
trains. Please Help!!
Jeff Burch
ANSWER:
Hi Jeff.
You've just touched on the main culprit in Model Railroading. I don't
have time for an indepth answer at the moment, but I'll get you started here.
Your right that it makes no sense to do all the work of a pike if it won't run .... and believe me .... for one reason or another .... most don't run.
There are many reasons for a loco not running smoothly ... regardless of the
motor or gear combo ... but the main reason is that the crank pin centers are
off, not matched, in the drivers, and they create a slight bind in the
mechanism.
When these pins are off, all you can do is round out the holes in the side-rods
a little and "hope" that the additional play will allow the drivers to turn a
little smoother. I have built my own drivers on occasion because the play
was unacceptable. Also check the quartering of the drivers. This is almost
always a little off. (further explanation later if you want) It is best to
check this with one of NorthWest Shortlines quartering fixtures. I have one
modifyed just for HOn3 drivers.
Also check the gear mesh. If the gears, worm and gear, are too close, this will
cause binding since the gears are NEVER perfectly round. They are always a
bit egg shaped. Again NWSL's gears are much better than most.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that changing the gears and motor will fix
a bad running locomotive. You need to fix the running gear first and then check
the performance of the motor-gear combination.
You'll need calipers to check the spacing of the side rod holes and the frame
axle holes, as these need to be the same. They're usually off just a little.
Let me know how you do with this stuff and I'll answer any questions you have.
-Steve
Stephen Hatch
Railway Engineering

QUESTION: #14
Can the code 55 N scale rail be used to simulate HOn2 1/2?
THANX
ANSWER:
Code 55 is code 55 no matter what "scale". In other words code 55
is exactly .055 tall. The scale doesn't matter. I use code 55 in Sn3
and it does just fine.
In S code 55 represents 55lb. rail
In HO code 55 represents 75lb. rail
In N code 55 represents 130lb. rail
but in each case the rail is still .055 (fifty five thousandths) tall.
The "code" is simply the heighth of the rail which in all cases is the same.
Can it be used... ... of course.
I hope this helps.
-Steve

QUESTION: #15
I am looking for info on the basics of tracks and switchs.
For example what the heck is a frog point?. Also when looking at curves
that are 18" radius (HO) where is radius measured too: Center of track,
inside or what?
Thanks for your help,
Joe Clayton
ANSWER:
A frog point is the place in a track switch (called a turnout) that the two
closure rails cross each other. It's number such as 4 6 8 etc. is the angle
at which they cross each other. A number 6, as an example, is six to one.
That means it measures one inch apart at a point six inches away from the frog.
Radius of curves is determined as the center line of the track.
Hope this helps.
-Steve

QUESTION: #16
What's the difference between regular and DCC-friendly turnouts? Thank you very much.
-- brucej
ANSWER:
DCC turnouts have a gap that separates the frog rails from the point rails.
That way the point rails are the same polarity as the stock rail that they
sit beside. This insures that the back side of any wheels, drivers, etc.
cannot touch the point and cause a short. This also means that the modeler
must provide a switch or contacts that will switch the polarity of the
frog to match the alignment of the points. This can be done with switch
machine contacts or with contacts in the control switch itself on the panel.
With a regular turnout, the frog and points are connected and the points
switch the polarity to the frog depending on which stock rail they touch.
This eliminates a lot of extra wireing to the turnout if you use the points
to control polarity.
-Steve

QUESTION: #17
Do your Rotor Motor switch machines support a frog polarity control switch?
Looking at the pictures on your web page (which by the
way are excellent!), it doesn't look like there's a place to hook up
the switch. Thanks again! --Bruce Jones
ANSWER:
We use a double pole double throw (DPDT) switch to control the machine
and the frog. One single pole double throw contact in the DPDT controls
the machine and the other contols the frog. Over the years, our experience
has been that contacts in the switch are much more dependable. The switch
on the Rotor Motor simply turns it off. It is not suitable for frog polarity.
-Steve

QUESTION: #18
...this is a serious question...are metal wheelsets a lot better than
the standard Athearn ?...are they drop-in replacements for the Athearn
wheels ?...given the choice of plastic or metal, is the metal better ? J.D.
ANSWER: ANSWER:
The reason we make the turnouts to the narrower dimension, is that they
do not derail when the tolerances are right. They do when it's too
sloppy .... such as the track dimension on the NMRA gauge.
ANSWER:
One more point. Most 180 degree turns will take about 12 or so feet boards.
So if you use 8 foot lengths for your lams, they will come up short on the
curves. I strongly suggest you use twelve or even 14 foot lams if you can.
These make forming the curves much, much easier. ANSWER: ANSWER: ANSWER:
If you are interested in operation, then you should consider
non-insulated switches
and learn to wire the frog power routing the way you want it.
There are many fine books in your local hobby shop about wiring. Lynn
Wescott comes to mind. These books are easy to understand and you really
need to get one as a reference. That said, I'll try to explain without
pictures.
This method of gapping means the track only runs the train IF the turnout
is thrown to that track. So a train can sit on the siding not moving while
another train goes by on the main. Then when the turnout is thrown to the
siding, that train will run. This is called "POWER ROUTING"
ANSWER:
Check out the point throw-bar on any Railway Engineering turnout
(yes I'm prejudiced) (I own the Company) and you'll see all of the above
One last thing. I have a plastic injection machine and could make any
kind of throw-bar I wish. I have a full machine shop ..... yet I choose to
make my products this way ...... because they LAST.
Hope this helps
Stephen Hatch
Railway Engineering
-------------------------------
Some notes about actual narrow gauge curves
Jim notes the curvature that 2-8-0's could get around was 147 feet (40
degrees). On the main line of the D&RGW were wider curves. How much
wider?
I looked at the profiles for the D&RGW and the RGS. Maximum degree of
curvature is shown for the various portions of the system.
D&RGW - Salida to Gunnison
D&RGW - Gunnison to Montrose
D&RGW - Gunnison to Crested Butte
D&RGW - Poncha Jct. to Monarch
D&RGW - Mears Jct. to Alamosa
D&RGW - Alamosa to Chama
D&RGW - Chama to Durango
D&RGW - Durango to Silverton
RGS - Ridgway to Rico
RGS - Rico to Durango
RGS - Vance Jct. to Pandora
Notice that the curvature would not have precluded use of the K-28, K-36,
and K-37 class locomotives on the RGS - let alone the Silverton branch,
if bridges, rail weight, and clearance problems were resolved. What I
come away with is the realization that most model railroads are trying to
run big locos on curves that are way too tight to be prototypical. Mine
included - the 24 inch radius curves I have been able to squeeze my K-37
and K-36 class around are considerably sharper than the 25 degree 30
minute curvature on Marshall Pass. Model railroading is all a matter of
compromises, as we fussed, cussed, and discussed on the HOn3 list. Most
of us are living with running trains around much sharper curves than the
prototype. Anyone for modeling the Uintah? (it had REAL sharp curves 12" in HOn3)
Cheers!
Charlie Mutschler
If I had a dime for every time this question is asked, I'd be able to
afford not only the metal wheels I need, but Plano walkways too.
Get rid of plastic wheels. They get dirty because they attract the dirt.
It's not just that dirt sticks to them, they really pull it out of the
air. One of our club members was lubing trucks with powdered graphite,
and the graphite was flying to the wheel instead of puffing into the
journal from the needle.
Plastic wheels on metal axles can come out of the box out of gage, and
even if in gage when new, can shift.
Kadee wheels, which are metal on Delrin axles seem to be made so they
can't shift- in 30 odd years of using them I've had one set come wrong,
two sets drift.
If you want wheels suitable for cars in the post Korean war era, ribbed
back wheel are ilegal, so that bit of detail is not proper. That cut-off
date may be even earlier- I don't have my notes on that handy.
Kadee makes 33" wheels in both styles.
So far, limited tests suggest that the Intermountain wheels are the way to
go. I've got a couple of hundred sets coming to put in some covered
hoppers for a unit train, will put still more in other stuff for blind
testing.
I know- the cars /come/ with the d#@*& plastic stuff, but spend a buck or
so per car and improve their tracking, and watch as you have to clean the
track less when you get rid of all of them.
Fred D.
Watching the action from BNSF MP 1112, El Paso sub

QUESTION: #19
I recently installed four of your HOn3 code 55 turnouts in my layout.
When I made a test run with my engine I found that it always stopped
going through the turnout. After checking to be sure that there was no
electrical problem I check the gauge and found it to be a little to
narrow for the NMRA track gauge to pass through without binding. I took
the turnout to my local train shop (Bruces Train Shop) and everyone
agreed that the turnout appeared to be too narrow in gauge. Have you had
any other problems with this turnout?? Please advise. I purchased 10 of
these and all seem to have the same problem. I would appreciate hearing
from you right away.
Thanks, John Fowler
Hi. Did you check your wheels to see if they are a bit wide?
Also don't use the NMRA track end of the gauge. Turn it over and use the
end that says flangeways. The track end of the NMRA gauge is WAY too wide.
It's a scale inch to an inch and a half (prototype) too wide. The flangeway
end of the gauge matches the wheel set gauge on that piece of metal. If your
wheel sets are gauged to NMRA specks, they should run just fine through the
turnouts. I'm sorry you're encountering this problem. We deliberately make
the turnouts to fit the flangeway/wheel dimensions. Unfortunately not all
manufacturers are carefull to gauge their wheel sets properly.
Also please be assured that we will happily regauge the turnouts ... if you
want them wider. But I would respectfully urge you to check the wheel sets.
Be sure they fit all the way in the gauge ... This will result in low
maintenance derailment free operation.
If I can help you futher, please let me know.
-Stephen Hatch
-Railway Engineering

QUESTION: #20
From: "Jeffery Burch"
.... I cut the splines from 1x (1x4, 1x6, 1x12) whatever was cheap at
the lumber yard. Set your saw a little more than an eighth inch. 3/16ths
is OK for 28 inch radius and up. I use five splines each about 1/8th. The
roadbed comes out around 3/4 or so wide. You don't have to make the roadbed
anywider than the rails. In fact I recommend a bit smaller than the ties
since your scenery will look more natural with the ends of the ties slightly
exposed. What gauge/scale are you building? That makes a difference.
You said to build the curves first. Do you have a jig or do you just bend
the first and glue the second to it? It seems like one of those three handed
jobs. By any chance do you know of a good article on the subject so you
don't have to answer all these basic questions; maybe just an occasional
more techinical one?
Thanks again,
Jeff
I don't use a jig for the curves. I put a few nails in the framework on the
curve line to bend the lams around. Then lay out all five pieces of lam flat
on the bench. Spread glue on one side of four of the lams. place three glued
lams on the fourth one. Then place the fifth (unglued) lam on the top.
Remember to stagger (stair step) the lams. Put a clamp on the center of the
lams. Pick them all up ... and bend them in place (all together) around the
nail form you put on the bench-work. Put an outside nail at each end of the
lams to hold them in place. Now place your clamps all around the curve to
squeeze the lams together all the way. Once the clamps are in place, you can
wait for the glue to dry .... or go do the next curve, if you have more clamps.
I put the clamps about 6 inches apart. So make sure you have plenty.
I usually can't wait for the glue ... so I wrap masking tape (four times)
around the lams next to the clamp. Get it tight. Then remove the clamps.
The tape will hold the lams if you do it this way.
Hope this helps.
-Steve

QUESTION: #21
It seems that at slower speeds
(such as a crawl through a switchyard) my DCC locomotive(s) will
occasionally lose power when one of the trucks is directly over the frog.
The switches are Atlas and the locos are KATO C44-9W's so it shouldn't
be a question of the trucks being too short, should it? They didn't
have a problem before DCC.
Thanks for any input.
Jeff
One point to check. Most trucks do not allow all the wheels to touch
the track at the same time. This makes electrical pickup spotty at best.
When you assume the longer trucks will get through a frog, your
assuming that all the wheels are touching for pickup. They usually are not.
Athearns are notorious for this prblem, but any stiff frame truck
has the same potential problem. When the truck three corners, then only
one wheel is touching on one of the sides. If that one is over the insulated part
of the plastic frog ...... then nada ...... zip ...... shes'a'no-go.
We make solid rail frogs with full pickup because of this and other
problems. We also make point-stock-common DCC friendly turnouts to improve pickup.
-Stephen Hatch

QUESTION: #22
Steve, Thanks for the info on code 55 -70. I will go with 55- it
definitely looks better. Would you put cork Nscale road bed on the blue foam
to deaden sound? Andy
P.S. I can't get door skin in this part of the
country- Denver or Dallas would be the closest.
If you intend to ballast your roadbed ...... and use wood glue ...... then the
sound gets transmitted around the cork anyway. Everybody who says the foam
is or isn't quiet, is only judging by unballasted roadway. I've tried all
the corks and stuff .... 50 years worth..... I've seen cork ... homosote ...
upson board ... celutex ... tar (AMI) etc . etc ... They all make noise
unless ............... you use matte medium ..(latex glue) to fasten the
ballast. Latex contact cement to attach the track to "whatever" and then
matte medium for the ballast, is the quietest that I've ever heard or seen.
Most people build with plywood, and that is the noisiest. Sounds like a big
piano sound board... cork or no cork. Plywood has to be cut no bigger than
the track itself or excess noise is the result.
Glued ballast atttached to hardshell scenery, is also a large sound board.
The newer plaster gauzes do a better job of "killing" the sound.
-Steve

QUESTION: #23
> Rndeming wrote:
> Whats the advantage of using non-insulated switch frogs? They seem much more
> difficult to wire up. Any opinions?
All switch frogs must be isolated (insulated) to be wired for
electrical operation.
With metal frogs (all metal) the gaps are provided by the modeler and can be put
where the modeler deems appropriate. Also the frog can and will conduct current to
the wheels thus eliminating "stall spots".
With plastic frogs, they look attrocious (ugly) and the power routing and gaps
are pre-determined by the manufacturer. They can easily have "stall spots" since
the plastic does NOT conduct electricity to the wheels. Plastic frog turnouts are
more toy like than metal frogs. Plastic frogs wear out. If you run trains, you'll
probably have to replace the turnouts in a few years.
>In regard to question #23, how do you wire switches?
>Bill
Turnouts on your main line only need one gap. That gap is the mainline
rail that comes into the frog.
power-------------------------------------------------------------
\ frog Mainline
power-------------x--------||gap----------------------------------
\ \
\ \--------------
\ siding
\------------------
A blank siding does not need a gap. So most siding turnouts only need the one gap.
Now if the turnout comes back to the mainline, you still only need
the one gap in the mainline and put one more gap in the siding rail that
goes to the frog to keep the track from shorting when the turnout is thrown.
power--------------------------------------------------------------------------power
\ gap /
power------------------X-----------||-----------------X------------------------power
\ \ gap / /
\ \---------||---------------/ /
\ /
\-----------------------------------/
This is a passing siding and will get two gaps. Pick one end or the other
and put one gap on each rail that comes from the frog.(two gaps total)
Hope this helps.
Any additional questions go to:
[email protected]
-Stephen Hatch WTA

QUESTION: #24
Whilst on the subject of turnouts, Shinohara or others, I would like to know
the most common method is for making the tie rod which connects the tips of
the two switch blades such they are mechanically connected yet provides
electrically separated. I do know some people solder the tips to copperclad
and then cut the cladding between the tips to provide the electrical
separation but the problem with this is that the solder joints are usually
so solid that they do not allow the blades to pivot properly. Not only this,
the strip of copperclad tends to be enormously over-scale width thereby
detracting from its appearance. Does anyone have any other ideas?
Mark P. Baker
Mark .... the throw bar width should be the same as your ties. That way
it represents one of the ties and once painted disappears into the roadbed
along with the other ties. Have you done this? I think you'll find that
they DO disappear.
Second thing is to reinforce the copper clad (pc board) with a strip of
brass from point to point on top of the pc tie. This strengthens the
solder joints. I have some that are 45 years old .... still doing fine.
Third ....... if you leave the closure .... point rails ... at least
three inches long, not spiked down, they will pivot very nicely. They bend
minimally along the whole length and thus put very little pressure on the
point-tie rod-joints. This installation, if done with care, will not only
out last any other type of connector, but will give you smooth flowing,
uninterupted ...... no-joint point rails, eliminating power flow problems
(no joints) and eliminating one more source of derailments.
I respectfully hope you will re-think your opposition to PC throw-bars.
I think you'll see that you prefer them.

The answer is mostly 24 degrees or less - but the Marshall Pass
main line had the sharpest curves, with 25 degrees 30 minutes maximum
curvature between Marshall Pass and Shavano. This translates to 224 feet
radius.
In S scale, this would be a 42 inch radius curve; in HO scale,
approximately 31 inch radius. So the HOn3 models of K class locos made
by PSC are operating on prototypically sharp cuves when they run on 30
inch radius curves. Less than that is pushing the envelope.
More common
maximum curvature was 24 degrees (238.75 feet), or 20 degrees (286.5
feet).
24 degree curves scale out at 44.75 inch radius in S scale, or
32.93 inches in H-O scale.
20 degree curves scale out to 53.7 inch
radius in S scale, or 39.51 inch radius in H-O scale.
For O scalers, 25
degrees 30 minutes = 56 inch radius, 24 degrees = 59 inch radius, and 20
degrees = 71.5 inch radius.
25 degrees 30 minutes - Between Marshall Pass and Shavano.
24 degrees - between Shirley and Marshall Pass, and between Shavano and Buxton.
20 degrees - Between Gunnison and Cedar Creek.
16 degrees
24 degrees
20 degrees - Between Mears Jct. and Poncha Pass.
20 degrees - Between Big Horn and Lobato.
24 degrees - Between Monero and Amargo.
24 degrees - Between Hermosa and Cascade
24 degrees - Between Lizard Head and Ames
20 degrees - Between Millwood and Glencoe
24 degrees - Between Vance Jct. and Keystone.

Send a Question to Railway
We Will answer all your questions as time permits.
Stephen Hatch for
Railway Engineering