Dale Junction in HO Scale

[Keith Addenbrooke]

25 minutes ago, benjy14 said:

 

 

I have received a lovely email Andrew Burnham, editor of Continental Modeller. He has had a look through the index and can find no reference to any article about the layout in CM, so it must have been another magazine in which that the article you remember appeared. However, Andrew did mention that he had found a undated flyer that mentioned the layout in the shed above the carriage sidings and that is exactly as I remember it; it was at the north end of the site, next to to the second entrance that was used for coach parties. At some point, the layout was removed to make way for the Southern Exhibition, which was used to display John Southern's collection of wildlife fine artwork (which I can recall quite clearly, as some of the paintings were absolutely stunning). I will continue my search for any photos of the layout and perhaps somebody reading this might recall which magazine the article was published in...? Here's hoping anyway!

Hi Ben, thanks for letting us know.  Interesting that CM have a leaflet in their records if they didn’t feature the layout at some point.    It would fit my vague memory that the layout was upstairs.  
 

The other magazines we used to get regularly were Railway Modeller and Model Railroader, so you can see why I plumped for CM, but I wonder where I might have seen it?
 

If I could remember the layout name that would help, but other than that my only suggestion would be to test the encyclopaedic knowledge of RMweb users, either here or with a post on the broader Overseas Modelling Forum - I’ve not tried, but I’ve yet to ask any question on UK Prototype modelling (that I’m also interested in) in the other parts of RMweb that couldn’t be answered.

[Keith Addenbrooke]

1 hour ago, benjy14 said:

 

 

I have received a lovely email Andrew Burnham, editor of Continental Modeller. He has had a look through the index and can find no reference to any article about the layout in CM, so it must have been another magazine in which that the article you remember appeared. However, Andrew did mention that he had found a undated flyer that mentioned the layout in the shed above the carriage sidings and that is exactly as I remember it; it was at the north end of the site, next to to the second entrance that was used for coach parties. At some point, the layout was removed to make way for the Southern Exhibition, which was used to display John Southern's collection of wildlife fine artwork (which I can recall quite clearly, as some of the paintings were absolutely stunning). I will continue my search for any photos of the layout and perhaps somebody reading this might recall which magazine the article was published in...? Here's hoping anyway!

Sorry for the second posting, but a PS: apparently our trip to Dobwalls was most likely July 1982 (which would indeed be before CM).  It gives a probable date for the photos.

[benjy14]

1 hour ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Hi Ben, thanks for letting us know.  Interesting that CM have a leaflet in their records if they didn’t feature the layout at some point.    It would fit my vague memory that the layout was upstairs.  
 

The other magazines we used to get regularly were Railway Modeller and Model Railroader, so you can see why I plumped for CM, but I wonder where I might have seen it?
 

If I could remember the layout name that would help, but other than that my only suggestion would be to test the encyclopaedic knowledge of RMweb users, either here or with a post on the broader Overseas Modelling Forum - I’ve not tried, but I’ve yet to ask any question on UK Prototype modelling (that I’m also interested in) in the other parts of RMweb that couldn’t be answered.

 

If you took Model Railroader, then it is now possible to search their online archive, as they have digitised every single magazine since the very first one was published in 1934!  You can sign-up for  24 hours of free access, so I might well try that over the weekend. I have also put a post in the Overseas Modelling forum as you suggested to see if that turns up any information - fingers crossed!

 

Ben

[Keith Addenbrooke]

Just now, benjy14 said:

 

If you took Model Railroader, then it is now possible to search their online archive, as they have digitised every single magazine since the very first one was published in 1934!  You can sign-up for  24 hours of free access, so I might well try that over the weekend. I have also put a post in the Overseas Modelling forum as you suggested to see if that turns up any information - fingers crossed!

 

Ben

I’ve been told Railway Modeller might occasionally have included overseas layouts before the advent of CM, but I don’t remember any myself.  Sorry for the wild goose chase - but if there is something it’d be a shame for you to miss it.  Keith.

[Regularity]

1 hour ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

I’ve been told Railway Modeller might occasionally have included overseas layouts before the advent of CM, but I don’t remember any myself.

I remember a Swiss layout in Feb 76, and I believe they had Cliff Young’s DRG layout in the sixties.

 

[benjy14]

I have uploaded a new video of two trains crossing at Dale Junction to my YouTube channel:

 

 

#4014 and #3999 are working an eastbound manifest freight and have climbed from Laramie left-handed on Track 1 and at Dale Junction, they cross over for the more conventional right-handed run down the Hill to Cheyenne on Track 2. Coming the other way is #844 hauling a reefer freight on Track 3 and it will join Track 2 for the descent to Laramie. This video shows why there were two facing crossovers in the eastbound direction; #844 does not need to stop on Track 3 for the eastbound train to clear the junction.

Edited July 2, 2020 by benjy14
Corrected typos.

[298]

*Model Railroad Planning 2002. 

 

Modelling a hot spot in Wyoming on the famous Sherman Hill.

Edited July 3, 2020 by 298

[benjy14]

1 hour ago, 298 said:

*Model Railroad Planning 2002. 

 

Modelling a hot spot in Wyoming on the famous Sherman Hill.

 

Thank you!  I have that edition in my collection and it's a fabulous layout; something to which I can aspire!

[benjy14]

I reached a major milestone today, with construction of Helix A now completed and just the final 3/4 turn of track to lay. This is going to be a slightly complex task as there will be a cross-over in each direction. The reason for the cross-overs is as follows:

• Westbound trains can climb the outer track of the helix and then cross to the inner, right-hand track before emerging on the upper level (i.e. they will appear correctly on Track 1); this means that all trains leaving the storage yard, after running around the return loop, will ascend the helix on the outer track.
• Eastbound trains can leave the upper level on the outer, right-hand track (Track 2) and then cross to the inner track to descend the helix; this means all that all trains approaching the storage yard will descend the helix in the inner track.

So, not only will trains be able to climb the helix on the easier gradient but conflicts between ascending and descending trains will be eliminated in the helix. The track plan in the opening post does not show the cross-overs; I will try to update it to some them and incorporate the other tweaks that have been made to the plan since construnction started.

 

 

Above: A view of the completed Helix A with just the last 3/4 turn of track to lay. In the photo are the last two boxes of Peco track I will use; I have used 5 before these two (four of Code 100 and one of Code 83, as well as lot of recycled Code 100 in the storage yard from a previous layout). I worked out that the layout has a total of about 8.5 scale miles of track.

 

 

Above: I have placed the portals for Hermosa Tunnel in approximately their final position and I could not resist staging a couple of photos... Emerging from the Track 1 portal #4014 leads #3999, whilst in the helix #4023 nears the top of the climb. As noted above, trains ascending the helix will normally do so on the outer track with the (slightly!) easier gradient and gentler curvature. However, 4023 has been fitted with Bullfrog Snot liquid traction tyres and can easily handle its train on the inner track.

 

 

Above: A close-up of #4014 and #3999 emerging from Hermosa Tunnel.

 

To finish today, you may have noticed on the track plan that the lower level features a "scenic window". The purpose of this is two-fold; first, it allows me to practise building desert scenery and second, it gives a little bit of scenic interest on the lower level and, in due course, will be the only part of the layout where there will be scenery on all three levels. It is not intended to be anywhere specific and, as I have found out, I should not have planted cactii as they are native to Arizona (Wyoming is too far north). Whilst it is only 23" long, I have used it to take a few photos, so below is a portrait of #4014. 

 

 

Depending on the weather tomorrow, I hope to get the crossovers laid at the top of the helix and then, all that remains is to complete the upper level. Exciting times!

Edited May 12, 2022 by benjy14
Re-uploaded images

[benjy14]

I have made some small steps of further progress over this past week. First off, below is a photo I should have posted last weekend showing the last screw being driven home in Helx A, marking completion of its construction.

 

 

During the week. I have laid the dual cross-overs at the top of Helix A. The purpose of these is to avoid bottlenecks in the lower half of the helix. In particular, it will allow a train to leave the storage yard, run round the reverse loop and climb the whole height of the helix to the upper level on the outer track; at the top of the helix, the train can then cross over to the right-hand track to around the upper level and then descend Helix B to Dale Junction.

 

 

Above is a view of the two cross-overs; all that is required now is to install the point motors. The nearer chord is a little tighter than I would have liked at about 24" radius but everything happily negiotiates it and I have a similar radius in the double junction inside the helix, so it'll have to do!

 

 

Above: USRA Light Mikado 2-8-2 #2499 has reached the head of steel at the top of Helix A with its breakdown train. I have tried to find details about breakdown train consists but without any luck, so this is my best guess!

 

 

Above: This evening, I have installed the next baseboard section on the upper level. 

 

This weekend, I hope to make some further progress with the upper level baseboards, although with the lockdown restrictions being eased here in Wales and a nice weather forecast, we might well venture further afield than we've been able to do for weeks!

Edited May 12, 2022 by benjy14
Re-uploaded images

[benjy14]

I have reached a major milestonre this weekend with the completion of the baseboards for the upper level (well, nearly finished; I need to add some bracing). Following on from my previous post, below shows the next section of the upper level installed.

 

 

Next, I installed the supports and then the baseboards above Dale Junction, the next two photos below:

 

 

 

After the helixes, the long baseboard in front of the window was a part of the build I was concerned about. I wanted to avoid any supports from the baseboard beneath, so the solution was two 36mm steel "L" girders, which give a lot of rigidity for very little weight, As the photo below shows, they have worked perfectly; the rack of magazines in front of the window are actually blocking more light, so I need to move them!

 

 

To finish, the photo below shows the (nearly) completed upper level:

 

 

Once the bracing is installed, there is just the small matter of about 40' of tack to lay (20' on each track)...

 

 

Edited May 12, 2022 by benjy14
Re-uploaded images

[benjy14]

Sorry for the lack of updates recently. We were away last week celebrating a family birthday, the first time we have seen any of our immediate family for nearly four moths! However, work has been progressing and the track is now fully laid in the upper level below:

 

 

There are a couple of places that need sorting out. In particular, where the track levels the helix and heads across in front of the window is a bit awkward, as there the curve in the track is where the gradient changes. As this will be hidden, I think I am going to change it to be two curves with straight track between them on the graident change to ensure trouble-free running here (40' box cars seem fine but the 85' passenger carriages are not; the combination of the curve and gradient change are not a good combination!). I also need to install the point motors for the dual crossovers and wire in the droppers from the track. However, it does work and I have had trains running in both directions around the entire layout

 

I am currently focussed on getting iTrain working as I want it. It is quite a learning curve and I have found a few problems which I am slowly overcoming. For example, my streamliner trains have electrical pickups for interior lighting, and even though they are not fitted, the Digikeijs block detection fires (the DR4088 is incredibly sensitive to any current flow and I have had problems with capacitance) and this confuses iTrain. Fortunately, the sofware is so flexible that it is possible to overcome this by configuring each feedback with switch on and off delays. My aim is to get the routing in iTrain working to the point that the layout will run in full automatic mode and I will then do some filming...

[St Enodoc]

3 hours ago, benjy14 said:

the combination of the curve and gradient change are not a good combination!

Always tricky.

[benjy14]

Work on Dale Junction has slowed a little recently as the two railways on which I volunteer have both reopened and I have had my first footplate turns since February.

 

 

Above: First up was a day at the Bala Lake Railway driving George B; it is a delightful little engine and its restoration was done to an extremely high standard. I was lucky enough to drive it on its launch into revenue traffic on a photographic charter a couple of years ago.

 

 

Above: A few days later, I was on the footplate of this cracking engine, firing the first trip and driving the second. All the trains were full to (the safe!) capacity and it was a splendid day out.

 

The work I have done on the layout recently has mainly been focussed on operation because whilst I still have some outstanding jobs on the track, I was really keen to be able to watch the layout operating to its potential. I am still learning my way around iTrain but this evening, for the first time, I had three trains running around the layout totally automatically; it was quite a sight to behold! 

 

As part of configuring the routes in iTrain to make this possible, I have decided to keep the shortest track in the storage yard clear and allow it to act as a bypass track. By doing this, it struck me that with the three trains running, 50% of the storage yard was empty for a considerable time (well over 15 minutes) untill they finished their route and returned to the yard. This therefore confirmed something that I had realised a while ago during constructing and that is that I can have more trains on the layout that the storage yard can actually hold, which opens up some interesting possibilities.

 

As part of the work of working on the routes, I found one of the really impressive features of iTrain and that is the ability for the software to choose a siding in the storage yard based on train and siding length. This means that when a route stipulates a train to be held in the storage yard, it will run the train into the shortest siding that will accomodate it, making the most efficient use of the available space. This is called "optimal length" selection. I have therefore been thinking about how to take advantage of this feature and the capacity of the layout...

 

The first thing I will do is to extend the length of two of the trains. The first is streamliner train #102, which is currently a coach short as it would not fit into track 6 [in the storage yard]. This means that train #103 will move to track 4 and #102 to track 5; these will run much less frequently than the freight services and these tracks will be permanently allocated to these trains. This will free up track 6, in which I will probably put a local mixed train. These relatively short trains did work out of Cheyenne but headed south to Denver rather working over Sherman Hill, so it will be a bit of modeller's licence that allows it to run. I have a lovely Mountain 4-8-2 that will be perfect to haul this train, together with a couple Bachmann Heavywight coaches to put in the consist.

 

This decision means that tracks 4 to 6 [in the storage yard] will have permanently allocated trains but conversely, tracks 1 to 3 will become "dynamic" without a fixed train. Taking advantage of the "optimal length" selection feature, I will define the routes such that a train will leave storage and complete both a west- and eastbound run (or vice-versa) before retuning to storage, where the software will decide the best siding in which to store it until the start of its next run. And that means that the second train I can extend is the freight comprised of 50' box cars that is currently hauled by a GP7 and GP9 lash-up (this train represents the modernisation of the UP in the late 1960s); I will add a third road engine (another GP7) and a number of additional box cars. This is something I've wanted to do for a while as, simply put, it looks too short and will work because it will no longer be constrained by the length of track 4 to which it is currently allocated. All of this means that at any given time, at least one train must on the layout somewhere but that is fine; I have over 6 scale miles of track  

 

Looking further ahead, I think that I will have the scope to add another complete train to the layout. I have some additional locomotives available, although not much in the way of spare stock. Alternatively, what I may look at instead is developing operations by having locomotive swaps using the holding sidings at end A of the yard. The general idea is that a train will come around the return loop and stop directly infront of the control area, where it will be uncoupled and swapped with a waiting locomotive. All food for thought!

 

The next thing on my TODO list is to get the point motors installed on the crossovers at the top of helix A. The automatic operation has confirmed my suspicions about the bottom half of helix A being a bottle neck, so to help smooth that out, I need to get the points operational.

 

Finally, I have, totally by accident, made an improvement to the storage yard. I have wanted to find a small cube video camera to take footage "from the footplate/cab" of a locomotive traversing the layout. I found what I thought was a perfect cube camera on certain online site but when it arrived, it turned out not to be at suitable as it was totally geared to CCTV. However I have, for quite a while, wanted to add CCTV coverage to end B of the yard to monitor the siding that holds the breakdown train. I have therefore put the camera to good use below:

 

 

Not very high quality, despite being advertised as HD and, as the picture shows, alledgely running in HD mode, but it really does not matter; I can clear see the position of the breakdown train and watch trains wind their way out of the storage yard.

 

Once I have the operation a little more refined and completed the outstanding trackwork tasks, I will endeavour to take some photographs and a video showing the trains running. Thus far, I have not actually missed driving the trains myself and enjoy simply watching them work their way around the layout; there was a rather special moment when the three trains were stacked one above the other on the three levels...

 

TTFN! 

Edited May 12, 2022 by benjy14
Re-uploaded images

[Keith Addenbrooke]

On 30/06/2020 at 17:13, Keith Addenbrooke said:

I’ve been told Railway Modeller might occasionally have included overseas layouts before the advent of CM, but I don’t remember any myself.  Sorry for the wild goose chase - but if there is something it’d be a shame for you to miss it.  Keith.

Seeing your update (love the photo of the Bala Lake Rly) reminded me of something: my guess is that nothing turned up regarding the Forest Hills N Gauge Layout.  Did your enquiry to CM cover the quarterly publication that preceded them going full-time monthly in the early 1980s?  Just wondered - it might have been another option?  Keith.

Edited August 1, 2020 by Keith Addenbrooke

[benjy14]

12 minutes ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

Seeing your update (love the photo of the Bala Lake Rly) reminded me of something: my guess is that nothing turned up regarding the Forest Hills N Gauge Layout.  Did your enquiry to CM cover the quarterly publication that preceded them going full-time monthly in the early 1980s?  Just wondered - it might have been another option?  Keith.

 

Hi Keith,

 

Andrew Burnham's reply was pretty comprehensive and I'm sure it covered all of CM's history. It is a great shame that nothing has come to light about the layout but I think it unlikely now that I will find any information. I may subscribe to the Model Railroader online archive in due course to see if that turns anything up.

 

The BLR is a lovely little railway and was the first to re-open in Wales. I can vouch for the huge amount of work that has been put in both them and the FR to get everyhing safe for staff and visitors alike. It is going to be far from a normal year but it is great to see trains running again and to be out on the footplate.

 

Cheers,

Ben

[Keith Addenbrooke]

6 minutes ago, benjy14 said:

 

Hi Keith,

 

Andrew Burnham's reply was pretty comprehensive and I'm sure it covered all of CM's history. It is a great shame that nothing has come to light about the layout but I think it unlikely now that I will find any information. I may subscribe to the Model Railroader online archive in due course to see if that turns anything up.

 

The BLR is a lovely little railway and was the first to re-open in Wales. I can vouch for the huge amount of work that has been put in both them and the FR to get everyhing safe for staff and visitors alike. It is going to be far from a normal year but it is great to see trains running again and to be out on the footplate.

 

Cheers,

Ben

I believe you can get a 24 hour free trial with the MR Archive, btw.  I nearly took it out - but I then found what I was looking for in a Kalmbach book I have, so I don’t know how good the search facility is, sorry.

 

I don’t think I’ve ever been on the Bala Lake Rly - we’ve usually headed to the Llanberis Lake Rly (the photo on my RMweb profile page is at the Llanberis Lake Rly - it is the first photo I ever took, and it was on a Box Brownie handed down to me).

[benjy14]

19 minutes ago, Keith Addenbrooke said:

I believe you can get a 24 hour free trial with the MR Archive, btw.  I nearly took it out - but I then found what I was looking for in a Kalmbach book I have, so I don’t know how good the search facility is, sorry.

 

I don’t think I’ve ever been on the Bala Lake Rly - we’ve usually headed to the Llanberis Lake Rly (the photo on my RMweb profile page is at the Llanberis Lake Rly - it is the first photo I ever took, and it was on a Box Brownie handed down to me).

 

Yes, you can indeed get a free 24 hour trial, which I think would be well worth doing when I can devote some time to take a serious look at it!  Likewise with their Video+ service...

 

Please do drop by the Bala Lake one day, I don't think you'll be disappointed. The Heritage Centre won a very prestiguous award at the HRA ceremory earlier this year and there are advanced plans to extend the railway into Bala itself, which is a project spearheaded by the Trust. Exciting times  

[DanielB]

That helix is huge! Colour me intrigued by this layout.

[benjy14]

On 06/08/2020 at 02:17, DanielB said:

That helix is huge! Colour me intrigued by this layout.

 

Thanks! Indeed it is quite a big helix(!) and, in fact, there are two exactlty the same height at 7.5 turns each with 100mm climb per turn. It is a challenge for my locomotives to haul the trains up them but it is quite a sight when the computer is automatically driving four trains around the layout

 

Work has been slow but steady over the past week. The point motors are now installed on the cross-overs at the top of Helix A but as I found out this afternoon, I have rather stupidly mouned two of them slightly too close to track, so they will need to be moved outwards slightly.

 

With the track now all laid, I have been concentrating on testing that it works properly and starting to figure out the best way of operating it... I do not want to get to far with scenic work to find out there is a problem that will require things to be redone. Unfortunately, I am finding that my 85' streamliner carriages are having some issues in the helixes, especially the baggage cars, which for some reason have 6-wheel bogies (all other carriages, including those for passengers, only have 4-wheel bogies). I think the issue a combination of their length, the radius of the curves and the 3 axles. The first thing I have done is to fit Kadee couplers with extended shanks on to one end of each carriage and this has massively improved the running charastics and aside from the baggage cars, the trains now run without issue. To solve the baggage car problem, I can see one of two solutions:

 

1) Avoid the double-junction in the middle of Helix A and the cross-over the top of Helix A, both of which have unavoidable short lengths of 24" radius curves. This is easy to accomplish in iTrain by specifying that the streamliner trains are not permitted to use those sections of track; the automatic routing will then send the trains on the other track of the helix. Whilst this works, I am a bit concerned that this will cause a bottleneck in the lower part of Helix A that the crossovers were designed to eliminate!  Still, time will tell if that's the case.

 

2) Remove the centre wheels from the bogies. I think this would resolve the issues on the 24" curves and would hardly be noticable, especially as they are the only vehicles in the consist with 6-wheeled bogies.

 

I am going to pursue option (1) for the time being and see how it pans out.

 

Aside from that, I have a couple of track issues to resolve (not causing derailments but need fixing) and the droppers on the upper level track require connecting to the bus wires. And then, of course, more playing testing.

 

[mdvle]

16 hours ago, benjy14 said:

Unfortunately, I am finding that my 85' streamliner carriages are having some issues in the helixes, especially the baggage cars, which for some reason have 6-wheel bogies (all other carriages, including those for passengers, only have 4-wheel bogies).

 

Quite common for a while after the passenger cars had transitioned to 4 wheel trucks, presumably due to the weight that a baggage car could be carrying.

 

16 hours ago, benjy14 said:

I think the issue a combination of their length, the radius of the curves and the 3 axles. The first thing I have done is to fit Kadee couplers with extended shanks on to one end of each carriage and this has massively improved the running charastics and aside from the baggage cars, the trains now run without issue. To solve the baggage car problem, I can see one of two solutions:

 

 

The obvious first step (which you may have already done) is to get the relevant gauges and make sure the wheels are all correct, and the trackwork is correct.

 

The second step, either carefully watching on the helix or by creating a more convenient temporary test plank, would be to run the problem cars back and forth by hand with lots of lighting to check for anything that interferes with reliable operation - it is possible the problem isn't the middle wheel but instead the truck is bumping up against something on the under body and thus not able to swivel correctly.

[Andy Reichert]

A couple of separate fundamental geometry issues are often overlooked because they generally only become great enough to be come apparent on helixes.

 

1. All curved track on gradients cause a twist in the track.

 

So In the case of 85 ft cars, there is around twice the twist between the truck pivots than there is for 40 ft cars. So there needs to be a little freedom for one of the trucks to tilt sideways to prevent the track twist from reducing the weight on diametrically opposite wheels and increasing the likelihood of the car rocking on the curve and suffering wheel climbing.

 

2. Curve friction is proportional the total degree of turn over an entire length of train, regardless of radius.

 

For example if a train , or some part of train is turning through 90 degrees, Then the rolling friction is twice what it would be for a turn of 45 degrees and a quarter of a the friction for a turn of 360 degrees.

 

Andy

 

PS. Car Stabilizers might fix the 85 ft car problem. See:

 

http://www.proto87.com/HO_Proto87_car_stabilizer_help.html

 

for more info.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 9, 2020 by Andy Reichert
addition of probable solution

[benjy14]

Thank you both very much for your replies!

  

5 hours ago, mdvle said:

Quite common for a while after the passenger cars had transitioned to 4 wheel trucks, presumably due to the weight that a baggage car could be carrying.

 

That is very interesting to know, thank you!

 

5 hours ago, mdvle said:

The obvious first step (which you may have already done) is to get the relevant gauges and make sure the wheels are all correct, and the trackwork is correct.

 

The second step, either carefully watching on the helix or by creating a more convenient temporary test plank, would be to run the problem cars back and forth by hand with lots of lighting to check for anything that interferes with reliable operation - it is possible the problem isn't the middle wheel but instead the truck is bumping up against something on the under body and thus not able to swivel correctly.

 

Thank you for the advice; I have a set of NMRA gauges, so will check the wheels and trackwork. The cars in question run fine through all of the other pointwork and track on the layout, so I think it most likely that it's specific to the two locations causing problems.  

 

5 hours ago, Andy Reichert said:

A couple of separate fundamental geometry issues are often overlooked because they generally only become great enough to be come apparent on helixes.

 

1. All curved track on gradients cause a twist in the track.

 

So In the case of 85 ft cars, there is around twice the twist between the truck pivots than there is for 40 ft cars. So there needs to be a little freedom for one of the trucks to tilt sideways to prevent the track twist from reducing the weight on diametrically opposite wheels and increasing the likelihood of the car rocking on the curve and suffering wheel climbing.

 

2. Curve friction is proportional the total degree of turn over an entire length of train, regardless of radius.

 

For example if a train , or some part of train is turning through 90 degrees, Then the rolling friction is twice what it would be for a turn of 45 degrees and a quarter of a the friction for a turn of 360 degrees.

 

Andy

 

PS. Car Stabilizers might fix the 85 ft car problem. See:

 

http://www.proto87.com/HO_Proto87_car_stabilizer_help.html

 

for more info.

 

Thank you for advice Andy; I will chek there is some freedom for the truck to tilt as you suggest, as that could well be an explanation. If I wanted to purchase some of your stabilizers, can you ship to the UK?

 

I have now reached a point whereby both streamliner trains are running very well everywhere except the two "flash points" in the helix, both of which can be avoided by using just the inner track. I would like to solve this if I can but one place is buried half-way down the helix, so altering the track here would be almost impossible and it look a lot of time to get it working as well as it currently does... I will, however, try all of the tips given above to see if there is anything that I can do.

 

[Andy Reichert]

21 hours ago, benjy14 said:

Thank you for advice Andy; I will chek there is some freedom for the truck to tilt as you suggest, as that could well be an explanation. If I wanted to purchase some of your stabilizers, can you ship to the UK?

 

 

PM me an address and I'll send some in an envelope.

 

Andy

[St Enodoc]

On 09/08/2020 at 07:47, benjy14 said:

 

Thanks! Indeed it is quite a big helix(!) and, in fact, there are two exactlty the same height at 7.5 turns each with 100mm climb per turn. It is a challenge for my locomotives to haul the trains up them but it is quite a sight when the computer is automatically driving four trains around the layout

 

Work has been slow but steady over the past week. The point motors are now installed on the cross-overs at the top of Helix A but as I found out this afternoon, I have rather stupidly mouned two of them slightly too close to track, so they will need to be moved outwards slightly.

 

With the track now all laid, I have been concentrating on testing that it works properly and starting to figure out the best way of operating it... I do not want to get to far with scenic work to find out there is a problem that will require things to be redone. Unfortunately, I am finding that my 85' streamliner carriages are having some issues in the helixes, especially the baggage cars, which for some reason have 6-wheel bogies (all other carriages, including those for passengers, only have 4-wheel bogies). I think the issue a combination of their length, the radius of the curves and the 3 axles. The first thing I have done is to fit Kadee couplers with extended shanks on to one end of each carriage and this has massively improved the running charastics and aside from the baggage cars, the trains now run without issue. To solve the baggage car problem, I can see one of two solutions:

 

1) Avoid the double-junction in the middle of Helix A and the cross-over the top of Helix A, both of which have unavoidable short lengths of 24" radius curves. This is easy to accomplish in iTrain by specifying that the streamliner trains are not permitted to use those sections of track; the automatic routing will then send the trains on the other track of the helix. Whilst this works, I am a bit concerned that this will cause a bottleneck in the lower part of Helix A that the crossovers were designed to eliminate!  Still, time will tell if that's the case.

 

2) Remove the centre wheels from the bogies. I think this would resolve the issues on the 24" curves and would hardly be noticable, especially as they are the only vehicles in the consist with 6-wheeled bogies.

 

I am going to pursue option (1) for the time being and see how it pans out.

 

Aside from that, I have a couple of track issues to resolve (not causing derailments but need fixing) and the droppers on the upper level track require connecting to the bus wires. And then, of course, more playing testing.

 

This might be totally irrelevant but I have a 00 model of a GWR 12-wheeled 70-foot parcels van. Because of the long bogie wheelbase and the large bogie centre distance, it won't go round curves of less than about 30" radius as the outer faces of the outermost wheels foul the inside of the solebars. Now I know why the Dapol/Hornby LMS 12-wheel dining car has big cutouts in the solebars.