Prototype for everything US style

[PhilH]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1119545184755645&set=gm.575590652599738&type=3&theater

[Talltim]

Another US weirdity, A stub triple slip, with one leg leading into a gantlett track
http://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47e0-9d04-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99
(I also posted it in the Unusual PW configurations thread)

Edited January 28, 2016 by Talltim

[CraigZ]

Another US weirdity, A stub triple slip, with one leg leading into a gantlett track

http://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47e0-9d04-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99

(I also posted it in the Unusual PW configurations thread)

Better than that - it's a pair of three way stubs facing each other...with that gantlet track.  Crazy!

[pH]

I hadn't realised there was a topic with this title for US railroads. This is one of those 'try running this at a show' situations:

 

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/709251/

[dave1905]

Triple stub switches are not that uncommon.  I know of a couple up in the mining regions of PA, coming out of a coal mine loading tipple over the scale.

 

The NJT picture is probably a "push-pull" set with the engine pushing (cab car leading) with another car tacked onto the rear of the train to be moved.

[rab]

On 08/09/2019 at 05:09, pH said:

I hadn't realised there was a topic with this title for US railroads. This is one of those 'try running this at a show' situations:

 

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/709251/

Last coach detached on the previous circuit of the

 roundy roundy and the loco's just caught up with it.

[pH]

2 hours ago, dave1905 said:

The NJT picture is probably a "push-pull" set with the engine pushing (cab car leading) with another car tacked onto the rear of the train to be moved.

 

There's an explanation of what's happening in the notes for the picture on Railpictures.

[pH]

No need to feel bad about your model tracklaying skills when the prototype can look like this:

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/785917/

 

 

[F-UnitMad]

28 minutes ago, pH said:

No need to feel bad about your model tracklaying skills when the prototype can look like this:

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/785917/

 

 

I don't. 

[F-UnitMad]

Oh and by the way, it's perfectly reliable - it's actually far from just shoddy track laying.

Of course, locos & cars being on trucks helps a great deal, too.

 

 

 

[laurenceb]

Anyone who can lay track that looks like that and runs as well as that can be justifiably be very proud

[Michael Hodgson]

18 hours ago, pH said:

No need to feel bad about your model tracklaying skills when the prototype can look like this:

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/785917/

 

 

That kind of track laying isn't confined to the USA - the NCB often laid track to that standard too.

[Pacific231G]

Isn't that the reason that US RRs adopted bogies (trucks) far earlier than any European railways did. They're just more forgiving of badly laid track and the distances involved in N. America simply didn't lend themselves to the sort of tracklaying where every sleeper was individually and very carefully levelled.  I can remember the first time I visited N. America and often saw trains at grade crossings and it just amazed me how much vertical movement there was in the rails as freight cars passed over them (passenger lines were far more careful)

Edited October 30, 2021 by Pacific231G

[F-UnitMad]

6 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

Isn't that the reason that US RRs adopted bogies (trucks) far earlier than any European railways did. They're just more forgiving of badly laid track

Absolutely. That siding on my layout just does not work for my UK O scale stuff, even the one or two items I have that have compensation in the chassis. I doubt any steam outline locos could negotiate it either.

My Atlas SD40, with rigid 3-axle trucks, also cannot negotiate the worst of it, as the centre axle causes one or other of the outer wheelsets to lift off the rails & derail, and the length of the loco means there isn't enough 'twist' between the trucks. In contrast my Atlas Plymouths are ok on it, though, partly because they are just a 'single' 3-axle unit, and possibly because their center wheels are blind (flangeless).

I must do an updated video of my 3 Plymouths lashed up, waddling up the line.

[Regularity]

10 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

Isn't that the reason that US RRs adopted bogies (trucks) far earlier than any European railways did. They're just more forgiving of badly laid track and the distances involved in N. America simply didn't lend themselves to the sort of tracklaying where every sleeper was individually and very carefully levelled.

They got around to improving the track later: the first priority was to open up the territory for the land grab of “manifest destiny” (the British agreement with the various tribes to go no further west than the Mississippi, along with growing sentiment towards the abolition of slavery, and the control of gun ownership being the three usually unspoken impulses behind the desire for “independence”, the fourth and valid reason being the desire to for self-governance amongst those of third, fourth and fifth generation birth in the “Colonies”).

This is also the reason for the “American” 4-4-0 (not all 4-4-0s) are Americans:

compensating beams between the inner spring hangers of the drivers, and a centrally pivoted leading truck provided 3-point suspension, and bar frames gave a degree of flexibility that plate frames deny.

All very sound engineering principles, with the long term benefit of establishing a pattern for efficient transportation of bulk goods, which is what railways are best at doing.

In my experience, everything in the USA makes some sort of historical or practical sense. Sometimes, though, the route is convoluted and the results slightly unexpected.

[F-UnitMad]

3 hours ago, Regularity said:

everything in the USA makes some sort of historical or practical sense.

Except baseball.    

 

Sprinting for exit....

[melmerby]

20 minutes ago, F-UnitMad said:

Except baseball.    

 

 

Invented in the UK...........

[Grimly Feendish]

On 28/10/2021 at 22:27, F-UnitMad said:

I don't. 

That's pretty spectacular track laying! How did you achieve that effect and still not have the trains derail?

 

Unfortunately my track can look like that without me trying!

[melmerby]

14 hours ago, Pacific231G said:

Isn't that the reason that US RRs adopted bogies (trucks) far earlier than any European railways did.

The trucks are also relatively short wheelbase and the use of Janney couplers means they can also negotiate tighter curves than rigid 4 wheelers with side buffers.

 

[dave1905]

One has to realize that that bad track is in industry tracks, industrial leads or branchlines/short lines that are one step above abandonment.  For every mile of that looks like that there are dozens of miles of higher speed (50-60-70 mph) main track.

[Pacific231G]

7 hours ago, dave1905 said:

One has to realize that that bad track is in industry tracks, industrial leads or branchlines/short lines that are one step above abandonment.  For every mile of that looks like that there are dozens of miles of higher speed (50-60-70 mph) main track.

That's true and even on that first visit in 1971 I saw double track mainlines such as the UP crossing th eplains with seemingly endless trains of Pacific Fruit Express cars running east from Californian and equally endless trains of new automobiles in the opposite direction. I did though see a lot of far less well laid track on Class 1 RRs particularly in New England like the Central Vermont and Maine Central handling 100 plus car trains so definitely not short lines. I also occasionally saw a seemingly abandoned line suddenly coming to life with the probably weekly freight train. I think it was a period when US RR's did seem to be in terminal decline with a lot of infrastructure in a fairly poor state. All that made a big impression on me and for a few years I did model a N. American short line/branch with trips to Victors to buy stock. The funny thing is that I always got good running from it even though my trackaying wasn't of the very best quality.

 

I always thought those early American 4-4-0s particularly beautiful locomotives ever since - as a yougster -I built the Kitmaster "General" as a static model.

Edited October 30, 2021 by Pacific231G

[peach james]

Loco's like the CP 173 (the Walt Disney design) make for beautiful looking locos, that are also quite functional for their size.  There are some most artful constructors of larger (live steam sized) older locomotives about- the one I follow is Jack Bodenmann https://www.jbodenmann.com

James

[F-UnitMad]

On 30/10/2021 at 08:13, F-UnitMad said:

I must do an updated video of my 3 Plymouths lashed up, waddling up the line.

As promised...

They are fitted with Zimo decoders, non-sound. They make enough racket already!! The 'flange squeal' late in the clip is actually one of the pick-up wipers scraping the back of a wheel on the caboose. I fitted them to power the roof beacon, controlled by a Digitrax decoder. I really should adjust it but I'm not entirely sure which pick-up it is!!

Edited October 31, 2021 by F-UnitMad

[F-UnitMad]

On 30/10/2021 at 16:58, dave1905 said:

One has to realize that that bad track is in industry tracks, industrial leads or branchlines/short lines that are one step above abandonment.  For every mile of that looks like that there are dozens of miles of higher speed (50-60-70 mph) main track.

In support of the above, I just found again a YouTube clip I watched a while back - plenty of long mainline trains at speed, and not a sway or shimmy in sight, even on the double-stackers...

 

So in the UK, we do know that US mainline track is as smooth and level as anywhere else. But watching the "rock'n'roll show" on your secondary track is much more exciting!!