N Scale T-Trak

billmtx Oct 28, 2010

  1. DeaconKC

    DeaconKC TrainBoard Member

    232
    476
    8
    Hansel, I like that! I do have a question though. On the modules with trackage going at an angle to the edge, how does the Uni-track hold up to the connection/re-connection over time?
     
  2. Hansel

    Hansel TrainBoard Member

    282
    80
    16
    Great question, I was hoping one of you folks with more experience than I would be able to answer that. I have only worked with Peco track for the last 10+ years so I have no knowledge of Unitrack. If that is a non-starter then I will have to make significant changes to my plan. I could combine the 2x double modules into a quad but I would rather not at this point in time.
     
    MetraMan01 likes this.
  3. BoxcabE50

    BoxcabE50 HOn30 & N Scales Staff Member TrainBoard Supporter

    65,397
    15,271
    653
    I am thinking this would be an issue. I am looking at my T-Trak modules, and don't believe such a connection, even if it worked at the beginning, would not hold up well.
     
    MetraMan01 likes this.
  4. BoxcabE50

    BoxcabE50 HOn30 & N Scales Staff Member TrainBoard Supporter

    65,397
    15,271
    653
    I am curious about the designed purpose of two double crossovers, and so close together?
     
    MetraMan01 likes this.
  5. sidney

    sidney TrainBoard Member

    656
    655
    17
    they hold up well but do have some new connections with you just in case ........ same as any other track in use that's connected and disconnected a lot......my 2 cent.......
     
    MetraMan01 likes this.
  6. BoxcabE50

    BoxcabE50 HOn30 & N Scales Staff Member TrainBoard Supporter

    65,397
    15,271
    653
    Yes. Regular straight across an edge connections do hold up well. But he has at least two going at angles. Which could be problematic.
     
    MetraMan01 likes this.
  7. Hansel

    Hansel TrainBoard Member

    282
    80
    16
    The double cross overs would be for using the two mainlines as run around. However I could remove the cross overs and generate a run around elsewhere on the modules. I would like to keep at least one cross over so that I can use the outer loop for staging. Would the Kato single cross over be better?
     
  8. sidney

    sidney TrainBoard Member

    656
    655
    17
    would it not be the same for any kind of track ????? if not then what makes other track work better ????
     
    MetraMan01 likes this.
  9. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    1,852
    2,105
    44
    That's a very creative T-Trak plan!

    I agree, non-right-angle tracks across module boundaries are a no-go. Many of yours appear fairly easy to correct, but the one on the 15 degree crossing is gonna take some thought (= more creativity!)
    1. The inner/yellow/rear track should provide at least one through path that satisfies the minimum inner track radius of 282mm. Your upper modules do not appear to meet this. Violating this minimum radius creates problems with other participant's trains (at clubs and shows) that cannot negotiate the yellow line across your module. A club or show may not accept those modules for inclusion in their layout.
    2. I would use opposing single crossovers instead of doubles
      1. Two doubles really do not have any advantage over two opposing single crossovers.
      2. Singles are cheaper and shorter, giving you more run-around space between them.
      3. Singles have one manual control for both switches, always throwing them in unison, avoiding derailments on the mainlines.
    3. I would keep your custom modules confined to straight sections, and plan on them being arranged end-end at a show (so you don't have to run around the end to the other side, which may not be nearby, to get to your other modules).
    4. Using a custom end-cap that requires your straight modules be adjacent to it may create logistical problems when laying out shows (lots of competition for those sites.) Your straight modules can still be arranged back to back at home...
    5. S-curves: The 15 degree turn sections on the inner t-track, together with the switch diverting route, create an S-curve that is pretty severe. That's okay since the diverging route is not part of the (only) through path for the inner track across your modules.
     
    SD35 and MetraMan01 like this.
  10. Hansel

    Hansel TrainBoard Member

    282
    80
    16
    Modifications to lower half so far. Upper half in revision.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2022
    MetraMan01 likes this.
  11. Hansel

    Hansel TrainBoard Member

    282
    80
    16
    Modifications to lower half so far. Upper half being revised.

    upload_2022-8-22_20-57-48.png
     
    MetraMan01 and DeaconKC like this.
  12. BoxcabE50

    BoxcabE50 HOn30 & N Scales Staff Member TrainBoard Supporter

    65,397
    15,271
    653
    You would have the same problem with ANY type of track, on modules. Track is meant to be connected by shoving it straight together, not at an angle.
     
    DeaconKC likes this.
  13. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    1,852
    2,105
    44
    You will find that joint alignment at the module boundaries is difficult when you use standard length track sections at a 15 degree angle to the front edge. Note that your top track's joints do not align properly with the module boundaries. Also, the diagonal track on the 15 degree crossovers is 192mm (3x64mm), not the standard 188mm of the non-diagonal track.

    Straight track sections at 15 degree angles need to be in increments of 64mm, not the standard 62mm.

    Also, I would put the single-wide module in the middle, rather than on the end. That way, you have a double module at each end, which can use diagonal tracks to reach further back to the rear of those modules (and by extension, the single module could become an optional extender, omitted if space is not available at a show/club layout, etc.

    I assume you are planning a complementary single crossover on the mainlines on the other side of the loop? I would consider using two complementary single crossovers on each side or your layout. And generally, you want to use the inner track for temporary parking; otherwise you have to cross over the inner, through track to take a parked train into the industries. Therefore, the crossovers need to be arranged to allow running around on the outer tracks, and temporarily park trains (or cuts of cars) on the inner track, adjacent to the industries they will be serving. the parked train on the outer tracks.
     
    SD35, DeaconKC and MetraMan01 like this.
  14. SD35

    SD35 TrainBoard Member

    52
    18
    15
    Hi all,

    my smal T-Trak experiment , 4 x corner with superelevated and 2 triple on sides.
    :) I drive a Diesel car and I need fuel , there for built a smal refinery with many tanks ! :)

    Raff.nacht 6 Lager 2.jpg Raff. nacht 4.jpg
     
  15. SD35

    SD35 TrainBoard Member

    52
    18
    15
    My , Raff. von oben.jpg picture from a helicopter
     
    Hardcoaler, MK, BigJake and 4 others like this.
  16. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    1,852
    2,105
    44
    Many Tanks for the update!
     
  17. Hansel

    Hansel TrainBoard Member

    282
    80
    16
    upload_2022-9-2_17-47-47.jpeg

    Layout base made, modules made. Need to buy material for Sky Block. Now to order track! Since I model the 1920s I will have to change the NYC sign to read New York Central "Lines".
     
    MK, DeaconKC, BigJake and 3 others like this.
  18. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    1,852
    2,105
    44
    Nice benchwork and module bases!

    It will be easier to push track towards the back of the modules like you want, if you put the single module in the middle, in between double modules on either side of it. The double modules simply give more length to slant track further back on the module before having to straighten out to cross over to the next module.

    If your layout software allows simulating trains running over the planned layout, you can use that to inform your track plan choices WRT to lengths of sidings (between switches/crossovers), switch leads, industry stubs, etc.

    Otherwise I would place the track on the modules, wire it up temporarily and experiment that way.
     
    MetraMan01 and DeaconKC like this.
  19. Massey

    Massey TrainBoard Member

    1,482
    3,386
    46
    attaching tracks at angles is not an issue if you have a “floating” piece of track that bridges both modules and is removable for transport and storage. This works much better than having an oddly angled track sticking out off the edge. My club has a couple modules set up like this and we have had years of fun with no issues.
     
    DeaconKC likes this.
  20. BigJake

    BigJake TrainBoard Member

    1,852
    2,105
    44
    Such a floating piece needs to be long enough that it's angle does not change too much as the two modules are dis/assembled. Otherwise the rails ends may get bent. The closer to parallel to the front (or right angles to the ends) of the modules, the better.
     
    BoxcabE50 and DeaconKC like this.

Share This Page