Grey One wrote: As a "Proof of Concept" I did the following. An extreme example under idea conditons (no one was watching): Unitrack - 3 x15" curves then 3 x19" curves then 3 x 28" then 5 feet of level straight. 4 percent grade 2 Atlas GPs followed by 10 Atlas 40 to 50 foot cars of mixed type followed by 2 more Atlas GPs followed by 10 short 70 ton ore cars. This took about 2 hours of trial and error testing. It included lots of stringlining. In the end it ran smoothly at least 6 times before I quit for the night. Triplex replied: That's strange; I would have expected that to work with no problems. 15" is not a tight curve; it's much more than individual GPs and 50' cars need. With not more than 10 cars in a single cut, I'm surprised you had trouble. Was this DC or DCC? Grey One, Triplex: Was the test done with 2 separate consists, each train comprised of 2 GPs and 10 cars run at separate times, or was it a single consist composed of 4 locos and 20 cars (one train made up of 2 GPs followed by 10 cars followed by 2 more GPs in the middle and followed by 10 ore cars)? It would seem very strange if Grey One had difficulty with stringlining in 2 separate consists. But DPUs (separating motive power so some units are at the front of the train and others at the middle or end of the train) are notoriously difficult to coordinate in N-scale so putting locos in the middle of a 20 car train could easily have resulted in several failures.
That was DC. It was a single consist with 2 engines, 10 cars, 2 engines and 10 cars. I expect it could have done: 2 engines, 15 cars, 2 engines and 10 to 15 cars but I did not want to push it since the longest train I’m likely to want to run is not that long. I did start with an extreme of 20+ cars between the engines and such and kept cutting it down till it got late and I just wanted to find what would work for sure. Yes, the DPUs did cause a lot of the problem. All 4 engines had at least 10 hours each of break in time and needless to say some problems occurred as the lead units crested the grade and started to accelerate. Yes, I know DCC would help with this. Putting heavier cars in between the engine sets and lighter cars following the DPUs helped a lot. I had been told categorically that it could not be done without DCC. Well, in a way “they” are right but not entirely.
Without knowing exactly what you mean by a "slant", and how that might be a problem... It seems to me that you could indeed put a reverse loop in the upper right area. You would insert an turnout on the outer track of your upward incline, (at the location where the track is the farthest over to the right in your plan). The loop would be a downward incline to the hidden track area, where it would connect to outer track in that loop. So the reverse would take a train from one main to the other, but that doesn't matter so much. The grade might be a little steeper than your current inclines, but I think it would still be very usable. The one nice thing that a loop does for you that can't do otherwise is change the direction of a train that's already out on the main with its motive power. Personally, I like the illusion that a train as "been somewhere" and is now coming back the other way. I didn't think of using the switcher that way, so I take back what I said about the yard being decoration ...I'm certainly not a stickler for proto operations Have fun!
Dave: Do you expect to produce the slant by cutting a cookie-cutter type ramp along the green elevation line? That would result in the right half of the layout slanting upward/downward along the incline on the right. Jagged Ben...were you thinking of cutting another cookie-cutter cut on the outside of the loop, so the reversing loop track could slant from the middle of the incline back and downards toward a connection in the hidden track area?
Sorry, I know that the plan at the top does not show allot of detail. The yellow inclines as shown will be made with foam risers. (The green line does not represent any specific elevation, rather it is just there to show where the elevation will begin to change from 0"). The surrounding terrain will probably then be built up with craft foam and/or plaster. I just don't like the idea of the cookie-cutter method. Especially since I will have track going under the mountain area.
ppuinn, Unfortunately no new news layout wise.... I decided that since I was going to dismantle the old layout and clean out the train room, I might as well rehab the entire room. The room is in the basement. There is no ceiling, just 100 year old joists, and old cruddy paneling on the walls. I decided to pull down the old wall paneling and finish the walls and ceiling with new drywall and install new lights. I have only had 1 or 2 afternoons per weekend to work on the room, so the progress has been slow. But I'm happy to report that the layout room is 95% done. Just some trim to install and a few shelves to hang. I plan to start building benchwork in a few weeks.
n scale easements and current flow dave, i respectfully disagree with you regarding porkypine52's advice. all the feeders in the world (one at every joint) STILL wouldn't be more current-conductive than a single NS rail running a similar distance. as for transitional and elevational easements, flex track is difinitely a better way to go. even with a larger radius curve section at the ends of your given-radius curve, you are STILL forcing the train to switch radii abruptly. flex track allows a true flowing (increasing or decreasing radii) easement. with turnouts adjacent to curves, your longer, larger radii turnouts are going to make it easiest on your train. particularly when backing through trackwork and especially when you're talking talgo trucks (truck-mount couplers). a little food for thought and i hope it helps. rob
Man, that was seven years ago. Half these guys are probably out of the hobby by now ;-) Cheers, -Mark
For what it is worth, in remembering a note about curves, I think John Armstrong's book said that a 24 inch radius curve had the equivalent drag of a 2% grade. So care needs to be taken when mixing and matching curves and grades. As for the stringing of derailing cars, is that due to truck mounted couplers? Does it also happen with body mounted couplers?
