PECO Announces Bullhead Track for OO

[KeithHC]

As a potential ham fisted modeller I am happy that this version is coming to the market place. I will also look forward to the development of points and crossings. Yes I know it is not 100% accurate but I can live with that. At the end of the day how many people have the space to be able to model at scale length of say a station or a viaduct. In my idea world I would love a model of the Ouse Viaduct but to scale it would be nearly 6m so I would have to compromise. 

As to onward development I would imagine that on the subject of points and crossings. As opposed to plain track the development of the other items it is a lot more complex and I would imagine that they would have to announce several items to come out at the same time.

 

However I look forward to that day hopefully soon.

 

Keith HC

[hayfield]

As a kid I always used to notice that. Generally in 'Junior Modeller' where 'track is a mixture of PECO and Hornby'. I felt it was very partisan and unfair, whilst not thinking through the commercial connections!

 

 

If you look at the layouts featured they do seem only to title 00 gauge layouts that use Peco track, hand built track in 4 mm scale rightly or wrongly is quoted as finescale, however other scales are not treated this way

 

Not having a go at either Peco or Railway Modeller as both are excellent supporters of our hobby and as far as price is concerned they seen not to abuse their near monopoly of the market

[Tom J]

The new issue of RM alludes more positively to the likelihood of S&C appearing...

[janner]

The new issue of RM alludes more positively to the likelihood of S&C appearing...

 

What is S&C please?

[hayfield]

Just been down to the local model shop for a yard of 009 track, now this must be a little nice market against mainstream 00 gauge, I was asked if I wanted main line or crazy track. Now this is a pleasant choice but I thought a bit ironic against the frustration 00 gauge modellers have felt for years in wanting a correct scale product. I wonder if they offer high speed turnouts for 009? (well I have mainline track !!)

 

Thinking about it what percentage of modellers use 009 against 00 gauge, it must be 10% or less, next is who is likely to buy more lengths of track ? and I guess quite a lot more. So all the arguments about cost of producing a new range etc are a bit hollow when (thankfully) they are happy to support niche markets

 

I think Peco have been pushed into providing this product by the thought of competition and loosing market share, or were they just oblivious to the fact that 00 gauge modellers have wanted 4 mm scale track for some time. Still they are to be applauded for doing something, lets hope that the turnouts and crossings will be of equal detail as the flexitrack with the proviso that it accepts a similar wide range of wheel standards that their code 75 range does to facilitate all 

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

What is S&C please?

 

Switches and Crossings

Settle and Carlisle

Sausage and Chips

[Coryton]

Just been down to the local model shop for a yard of 009 track, now this must be a little nice market against mainstream 00 gauge, I was asked if I wanted main line or crazy track. Now this is a pleasant choice but I thought a bit ironic against the frustration 00 gauge modellers have felt for years in wanting a correct scale product. I wonder if they offer high speed turnouts for 009? (well I have mainline track !!)

 

Thinking about it what percentage of modellers use 009 against 00 gauge, it must be 10% or less, next is who is likely to buy more lengths of track ? and I guess quite a lot more. So all the arguments about cost of producing a new range etc are a bit hollow when (thankfully) they are happy to support niche markets

 

 

Yes. I've wondered this for a while.

 

The market for specifically 00 gauge track was supposedly too small to be worthwhile for Peco, unlike the 009/HOe, HOm/TT/3 mm and O-16.5 markets. Now the narrow gauge/3 mm markets admittedly aren't largely confined to the UK, but I'd be somewhat surprised if worldwide there are more people buying 12 mm gauge track than using track for a 00 gauge layout.

[Jeff Smith]

Not to mention the introduction of the US code 83 range which you would think would cut into code 100 and 75 sales in the US, in fact probably completely replace it.

[Tom J]

One wonders what they might have in store in 'N' if this goes down well.... although one doesn't hold one's breath.

[phil-b259]

What is S&C please?

 

Pointwork.

 

On the real railway, the two rails that move are know as 'switch rails', the fixed rails are called 'Stock Rails' and where one rail intersects another, the resulting piece of metal is called a 'crossing' - the modellers tern for this (the 'frog') being an invention by them and never used on the real railway. Combining different quantities of these elements is how we end up with ALL points / crossings.

 

Thus the Permanent way engineers use the term 'Switches & Crossings (S&C) to describe pointwork. A bog standard end of points will consist of 2 switches and one crossing - while a bog standard diamond crossing actually consists of 4 crossings, but no switches.

[coachmann]

I thought I would make it clear why I hoped Peco would adopt their USA Code 83 point geometry. The '83' range also has 43" and 26" radius turnouts. I used the 43" on a layout a few years ago for a double junction and the angle of the resultant junction was shallower than when Code 75 was laid. There was an opportunity here to get away from the ages old set-track geometry, anyway I'm away to 0 gauge so happy dayz....

Edited October 13, 2016 by coachmann

[PaulRhB]

Just been down to the local model shop for a yard of 009 track, now this must be a little nice market against mainstream 00 gauge, I was asked if I wanted main line or crazy track. Now this is a pleasant choice but I thought a bit ironic against the frustration 00 gauge modellers have felt for years in wanting a correct scale product. I wonder if they offer high speed turnouts for 009? (well I have mainline track !!)

 

Thinking about it what percentage of modellers use 009 against 00 gauge, it must be 10% or less, next is who is likely to buy more lengths of track ? and I guess quite a lot more. So all the arguments about cost of producing a new range etc are a bit hollow when (thankfully) they are happy to support niche markets

 

I think Peco have been pushed into providing this product by the thought of competition and loosing market share, or were they just oblivious to the fact that 00 gauge modellers have wanted 4 mm scale track for some time. Still they are to be applauded for doing something, lets hope that the turnouts and crossings will be of equal detail as the flexitrack with the proviso that it accepts a similar wide range of wheel standards that their code 75 range does to facilitate all

Peco always said they didn't see the point in competing with smaller producers which is why they tended to incorporate appropriate ranges as they became available rather than doing them out of business. DCC concepts joining the fray was probably the tipping point as they were doing a directly comparable product and a much bigger concern than C&L etc and not a small uk operation. Peco have always been quite gentlemanly in their approach to the cottage manufacturers.

Not to mention the introduction of the US code 83 range which you would think would cut into code 100 and 75 sales in the US, in fact probably completely replace it.

There was a big demand to offer an actual US system as they weren't appealing to the more fastidious market as they tended to go for Micro Engineering or Atlas track. That was the only way to grow their market over there as the code 100 / 75 was pretty limited but enough to establish a good reputation over there.

The 009 is very strongly supported from within Peco and has been for years. The emergence of the Tillig ranges probably helped there too as it was taking sales from crazy track.

[PaulRhB]

Track by its nature has a much longer sales life than locos but not the initial scrum we've become used to with them either. Peco also doesn't have to satisfy a big parent company, just the family so it's easier to make ethical decisions but they are very good at knowing when they need to respond to competition too. If you look at the breadth of ranges they offer they aren't flashy but I bet they appear on a high percentage of layouts in all scales and subjects

[Budgie]

... where one rail intersects another, the resulting piece of metal is called a 'crossing' - the modellers tern for this (the 'frog') being an invention by them and never used on the real railway.

Now we've got that nonsense out of the way:

 

I refer you to AREMA, the American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association, and their publication 2014 Portfolio of Trackwork Plans. This is a "real railway" organisation, and it refers to frogs all the time.

 

I also refer you to voestalpine AG, whose website refers to frogs exclusively all the time.

 

Perhaps what you really meant to say was that the term "frog" is not used on the real railway in the UK. But I'm not sure that even that is true.

 

Have a nice day.

[PaulRhB]

. . . . that the term "frog" is not used on the real railway in the UK. But I'm not sure that even that is true.

.

If you talk frogs to the Pway they think you're talking about the other side of the channel

They are only ever talked about as crossings by the Pway unless the Pway are also modellers and know the term but even the couple I've known who are talk crossings at work.

[Pacific231G]

Pointwork.

 

On the real railway, the two rails that move are know as 'switch rails', the fixed rails are called 'Stock Rails' and where one rail intersects another, the resulting piece of metal is called a 'crossing' - the modellers tern for this (the 'frog') being an invention by them and never used on the real railway. Combining different quantities of these elements is how we end up with ALL points / crossings.

 

Thus the Permanent way engineers use the term 'Switches & Crossings (S&C) to describe pointwork. A bog standard end of points will consist of 2 switches and one crossing - while a bog standard diamond crossing actually consists of 4 crossings, but no switches.

I'm sorry Phil but never used is utter cobblers. Frog is the most commonly used term for the things worldwide especially by the companies that manufacture them. The cast steel frog was one of the first steel castings ever made in the world by no less than George Westinghouse

 

It's true that it was probably originally an Americanism but so was "turnout" (from the American term for what we would call a layby). The term frog has been used in US railroad practice- that's real railroad practice- since time immemorial and got its name from having a similar shape to the "frog" of a horse's hoof. If you Google something like "cast manganese steel frog"  you'll be inundated by companies all over the world who would like to sell them to you for your full sized railway.

I'm well aware that British PW engneeers now prefer to refer to Switches and Crossings but that's professional jargon and doesn't make everyone else, including manufacturers, wrong.

If the PW people you know see a manufacturer's advert referring to cast magnanese steel frogs they surely don't think they're making garden ornaments.

Edited October 13, 2016 by Pacific231G

[Izzy]

Although I understand the call for better pointwork designs to go with the new bullhead track, given that it is a mainly British used design I would have thought that sticking/matching with the current code 75 angles was a primary need. While many British Railway OO modellers will probably look forward to having the opportunity to lay this type of track it doesn't follow that they will also have more space available with which to do so.

 

Izzy

[PaulRhB]

Probably where the modelling term came from then

[AndyID]

Switches and Crossings

Settle and Carlisle

Sausage and Chips

 

Not to be confused with S&M. That's about building your own track.

[caradoc]

I have to agree with phil-b259 regarding terminology - In my 38 years (British) railway service I never once heard the word frog used to describe a crossing, by staff from any function or in any grade.

[phil-b259]

Now we've got that nonsense out of the way:

 

I refer you to AREMA, the American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association, and their publication 2014 Portfolio of Trackwork Plans. This is a "real railway" organisation, and it refers to frogs all the time.

 

I also refer you to voestalpine AG, whose website refers to frogs exclusively all the time.

 

Perhaps what you really meant to say was that the term "frog" is not used on the real railway in the UK. But I'm not sure that even that is true.

 

Have a nice day.

 

Let me assure you the term 'frog' does not appear in ANY UK track standards - past (Railtrack, British Rail, etc) or present (Network Rail), nor switch / crossing manufacturers catalogues / discussion papers / meetings or anything else to do with British Railway operations. I believe the same is true in the rest of Europe too - though I naturally am unable to check personally.

 

The fact that the USA may use the term 'frog' on its prototype is interesting (and may indicate how the term migrated itself into the vocabulary of British modellers), but the fact remains that in this thread we are discussing Peco's representation of British track. As such we should be referring to its components by their correct UK terms and not start applying Americanism where it is inappropriate.

[Dunsignalling]

If you talk frogs to the Pway they think you're talking about the other side of the channel

They are only ever talked about as crossings by the Pway unless the Pway are also modellers and know the term but even the couple I've known who are talk crossings at work.

I never heard the word turnout uttered by anyone who maintained or inspected track either, though I understand it is used by designers and manufacturers of the things.

 

It may thus be possible that it's a turnout until you install it, then it becomes a set of points.   

 

Years ago I was told that the term frog originated in the similarly shaped component used in tramway and trolleybus overhead equipment, though I've never seen any published reference to back it up.

 

John

Edited October 13, 2016 by Dunsignalling

[phil-b259]

I'm sorry Phil but never used is utter cobblers. Frog is the most commonly used term for the things worldwide especially by the companies that manufacture them. The cast steel frog was one of the first steel castings ever made in the world by no less than George Westinghouse

 

It's true that it was probably originally an Americanism but so was "turnout" (from the American term for what we would call a layby). The term frog has been used in US railroad practice- that's real railroad practice- since time immemorial and got its name from having a similar shape to the "frog" of a horse's hoof. If you Google something like "cast manganese steel frog"  you'll be inundated by companies all over the world who would like to sell them to you for your full sized railway.

I'm well aware that British PW engneeers now prefer to refer to Switches and Crossings but that's professional jargon and doesn't make everyone else, including manufacturers, wrong.

If the PW people you know see a manufacturer's advert referring to cast magnanese steel frogs they surely don't think they're making garden ornaments.

 

You will not see a company supplying points components to Network Rail referring to 'frogs'. The term means nothing to UK railway engineers and does not appear in any of the company standards. As such the reaction of most is that frogs are amphibians that live in ponds and have nothing to do with railways*. If a manufacturer comes along to NR and tries to sell them a "cast manganese steel crossing" on the other hand everybody will know exactly what the manufacturer is selling.

 

What they might be called in the USA - as interesting as it is has very little relevance to the UK prototype, which is what Peco are attempting to represent in this product.

 

*As an aside - you will not find any references to 'bulbs' in UK railway standards / catalogues either. Bulbs are things that you plant in your garden to grow flowers from - the things that emit light are always refereed to as lamps (be they LED, filament, paraffin, etc)

Edited October 13, 2016 by phil-b259

[sp1]

You will not see a company supplying points components to Network Rail referring to 'frogs'. The term means nothing to UK railway engineers and does not appear in any of the company standards. As such the reaction of most is that frogs are amphibians that live in ponds and have nothing to do with railways*. If a manufacturer comes along to NR and tries to sell them a "cast manganese steel crossing" on the other hand everybody will know exactly what the manufacturer is selling.

 

What they might be called in the USA - as interesting as it is has very little relevance to the UK prototype, which is what Peco are attempting to represent in this product.

 

*As an aside - you will not find any references to 'bulbs' in UK railway standards / catalogues either. Bulbs are things that you plant in your garden to grow flowers from - the things that emit light are always refereed to as lamps (be they LED, filament, paraffin, etc)

Do frogs live in ponds or across the pond?

[Pacific231G]

You will not see a company supplying points components to Network Rail referring to 'frogs'. The term means nothing to UK railway engineers and does not appear in any of the company standards. As such the reaction of most is that frogs are amphibians that live in ponds and have nothing to do with railways*. If a manufacturer comes along to NR and tries to sell them a "cast manganese steel crossing" on the other hand everybody will know exactly what the manufacturer is selling.

 

What they might be called in the USA - as interesting as it is has very little relevance to the UK prototype, which is what Peco are attempting to represent in this product.

 

 

I'd be more convinced by this if I didn't have the following in front of me

a) The turnout is laid piece by piece. Exisiting sleepers are first removed and replaced by crossing timbers, then the existing rails are cut in situ so that frog assembly, switches and stock rails can be dropped in, finally the lead curve is put in, points are connected up to lever or rodding, and the turnout is opened to traffic

This is from an official  British railway engineering manual from 1940. In its "nomenclature of turnout" diagram it does refer to 'Crossing or Frog' but mostly uses the term frog. So, if British PW engineers don't know what a frog is, their grandfathers certainly did.

 

The point is that in Britain frog was not a term invented or imported from America by railway modellers but was known and understand in the railway industry even if switch and crossing was preferred.

Edited October 14, 2016 by Pacific231G