December 1st, 2006, 07:26 PM #1
Single-Slip vs. Double-Slip Crossing- Difference?
I noticed Peco has both a double-slip and a single-slip crossover. Aside from price, what is the difference between the two? I'm working on a layout plan that uses a something-slip crossover, and I'm not sure which would be better
December 1st, 2006, 07:30 PM #2
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
- Calgary, Alberta
- Blog Entries
http://www.maj.com/gallery/SpaceCapt...mbiguation.jpg You can see which tracks you can or can't transfer between. There are three routes through a single-slip and four through a double-slip.Fan of late and early Conrail... also transition-era PRR, 70s Santa Fe, BN and SP, 70s-80s eastern CN, pre-merger-era UP, heavy electric operations in general, dieselized narrow gauge, modern EFVM and Brazilian railroads in general... why bother trying to list them all?
December 1st, 2006, 07:35 PM #3
December 1st, 2006, 07:47 PM #4
Thanks! :shade: Looks like a double-slip crossover will provide me with more versatile switching options. Oh, my aching wallet! :p
December 2nd, 2006, 03:07 AM #5
You can use a single/double slip on a main line, but I wouldn't. Too many issues of cars/engines picking points. It may save you a little space, but slip switches are a maintenance headache a lot of times.
You will see slips on trackwork leading into a big station just to save space and to be able to access any platform from any track. Usually slips are crossed at low/slow speed.
I cannot remember seeing single/double slips out on a working main line.DIESELS?!?!?! We don't need NO stinkin' Diesels!!!!
The INDIANA RAILWAY.......Still 100% Steam Powered in 2014
Don't look back. Something might be gaining on you.
December 2nd, 2006, 03:16 AM #6
Mine will be on an industrial siding where 2 tracks connect to a runaround track. A less complex solution would be nice, but I just don't have the space.
December 4th, 2006, 01:26 AM #7
Because, on the prototype, this is really expensive trackwork, the chances are that it wouldn't be used on industrial sidings unless absolutely necessary (and they are Really Good Customers).
You might want to post what you're trying to do and see if anyone can come up with an alternative. A more common solution might be to have the sidings cross each other after diverging from the runaround track using simple turnouts; again, if space permits.George in Ellison Park, NY
UMTRR, A1G, W&NY and more...IrwinsJournal.com
December 4th, 2006, 01:49 AM #8
A picture! Glad I thought of it! :embarassed:
Here's the track plan. The blue track is the loco runaround track:
The layout is 4x5 feet, so I'm trying to go with the most space-saving option I can. Not to mention double-slip switches are just plan neat :p
ATSF E8/9 questionBy NP/GNBill in forum Fallen FlagsReplies: 7Last Post: July 7th, 2006, 06:46 PM
By beast5420 in forum N ScaleReplies: 28Last Post: January 12th, 2006, 11:12 PM
By Krasny Strela in forum DCC & ElectronicsReplies: 4Last Post: July 17th, 2005, 11:12 PM
By rsn48 in forum N ScaleReplies: 3Last Post: December 10th, 2002, 03:09 PM
By mtaylor in forum Layout Design DiscussionReplies: 8Last Post: April 27th, 2001, 08:44 PM