Diddly-dum!

[coronach]

Many years ago at the York show, I was inspired by the sound of trains being operated on a huge 4 mm scale model of Alton (BR SR).  What made the layout so interesting to me was the fact that the track incorporated 60ft rail joints that were designed to cause the sound of wheels running on jointed track.  It is not something that I have come across very often.

 

There has been a lot of development in DCC to create the realistic sound of steam and diesel locomotives but surely the most significant sound resulting from a passing train is that of steel wheels on steel rails.

 

Over the last 10 years, I have been developing my layout 'Whinburgh and Slitrigg', which includes some fairly complex point-work and a 70ft double track circuit.  I have deliberately tried to create this sound by notching the rail heads every scale 60 ft in plain line and with additional joints through point-work.  The track-work is built using both SMP plastic based flexible track and hand-built track using copper clad sleepers (plain line and points).  It is mounted on cork sheet and ballasted with granite chippings secured with PVA glue.  The result is very solid and is not affected by the notches, despite significant temperature changes in the loft. 

 

The result is a wonderful sound of passing trains (diddly dum!), despite the fact that I have an analogue system and not DCC sound.  The sound varies depending on the speed of the train and the type of rolling stock.  For example, a 2-car DMU sounds different from a train made up of mk1 stock because of the different vehicle lengths (57 ft vs 65 ft).

 

Has anyone else had a go at this?

 

If I can work out how to upload a video, I will try and post some examples :-).  I'm not sure how well this would get across the effect though   

[DavidR]

Yes, I've had a go. Currently track laying and ballasting a layout. I just cut a minute notch in the rail, every 240mm and the effect is wonderful: the best being a Hornby 'Bubble Car', which makes a delightful sound. The best performers are undoubtedly metal-wheeled rolling stock.

[Ian Abel]

Hi, my name's Ian and I'm a track-notcher  

 

Indeed, I decided I'd do the very same thing on my layout, and I find the result perfect. Stock certainly varies based on the wheels/bogies it seems, my Bachmann 4-CEP and the Bachmann Mk1s all sound great, as does the 2 x 2BIL consist that runs the rails - Hornby MK1s not so much. Some of the wagon stock with older wheelsets (including some plastic STILL not retro-fitted) doesn't provide anywhere near the delightful sound.

 

I got somewhat "lazy" and used a MK1 coach as my yard-stick (60' stick?!?!?!) as it made it really simple running the coach along, notching, moving it along again. On complete lengths of flex I used the coach but "approximated" so that there are just two notches fairly evenly spaced on each full length...

Over complex pointwork (I've some scary stuff at the station/terminal throat, the natural gap from joiners allows for the typical clatter as trains negotiate the points.

[HLT 0109]

Well done chaps - I admire your dedication.  Some of the gaps at my rail joints are bigger than they should be and they also give a rather nice sound - provided that I do not have the sound of any of my locos switched on.  That is to say, I can't hear the rail noise in those circumstances.  Unfortunately it is a fact that the rail noises made by 00 gauge models (even with metal wheels) are not as loud or as deep as the real thing.  I have a Bachmann class 108 DMU with sound and one of the random sounds is the clackety-clack of the rail joints.

[DCB]

I have found one or two big rail joints on resonant pieces of track, such as on a bridge creates a pleasant click clack sound, trying for continuity of sounds by notching every 60 scale feet did not work when I tried it, though I suspect the reason is the click clack so beloved of old timers derived from 57 foot coaches which are almost exactly 60 feet over the buffers.

 

To get this effect on a model you need to notch the track to take account of the extra length of the couplings, several scale feet.  obviously 64 foot MK1s wont give the right sound, but I don't think the real thing did either.at least from the lineside.

[Gwiwer]

Not a track notcher but an outdoor modeller who therefore requires larger than normal expansion allowances at rail joins.  I find the normal yard lengths of Peco track give a very credible "diddly-dum" sound at just about the right intervals as trains of any appreciable length pass over them.  There are "pauses" with a single railcar but in general there is enough sound to be realistic without the need to notch rails or dive into sound chips.  The discerning ear can also pick the difference between the different wheelbases of Mk1 and Mk3 rolling stock and the distinctive beat of the closely-spaced wheels on the likes of Cargowaggon bogies.

[BR60103]

I like hearing the track noise just occasionally.  I find that a train with metal wheels going over a crossing gives enough noise but doesn't make a constant irritant.

[coronach]

An interesting range of replies so far :-).

 

I have 'notched' significant lengths of track in the areas around my controllers (I do not have a roaming facility) and have not done anything to track within tunnels or areas approaching or going away from the controllers.  That creates the rather pleasing effect of the sound increasing as the train approaches the operator, then the clatter of wheels through pointwork and finally the sound of the rear vehicles dying away as the train departs - a sort of Doppler effect without the mieow!!

 

I suppose the extent of notching depends on where the train is being observed from.  When the train is running at the other side of the loft about 14 ft away, I have tried to achieve the effect of hearing a train from a distance.  The fact that I have notched every scale 60 ft at that side of the layout does not create a cacophony of noise - in fact just having occasional joints would not sound right for me.  It also shows me when the train is running too fast.  Imagine standing on a hillside and observing a train on jointed track in the distance.

 

Interesting point about the effect of over-length couplings.  I do try to close couple my stock so I haven't really noticed this.

 

Any other views or suggestions out there?

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

The most evocative track joint sound for me is freight of mostly 9' or 10' wheelbase wagons, which makes a fairly regular beat when coupled up at scale distance, concluded by the roughly 50% longer interval between beats of the long wheelbase brake van. I find the joints between flexible track lengths are sufficient, as your ear 'locks on' to the one that is closest (free to wander control with a tethered handset).

[trisonic]

Of course over here it never sounded the same because of the penchant for American engineers to stagger their rail joints.

Is there a good reason for that, I wonder?

 

I remember long journeys on the West Coast mainline from Glasgow to Euston behind steam engines - the combinations of rhythm / sounds seemed simultaneously to lull me to sleep and produce music in my mind.

 

Best, Pete.

[Phil Bullock]

And a nice long train of 6 wheel milk tanks passing over rail joints sounds totally manic!

 

Phil

[Joseph_Pestell]

I have tried it in the past.  Not totally convinced by the results. I think that comes, as others have said, that we are neither on board the train or even close to lineside.

 

I have noticed at exhibitions that the effect is much better with 7mm scale and 10mm scale models. That is down to the greater weight of course and also to the fact that in scale terms one is closer to the lineside.

[Gwiwer]

And a nice long train of 6 wheel milk tanks passing over rail joints sounds totally manic!

 

Phil

 

To this day - from real life memory and on the layout - I hear those six-wheelers singing "giddy-up, giddy-up, giddy-up" rather than "diddly-dum".  Rather apt given the urgency of milk transport.

[TonyMay]

bigger models also give a lower-pitched noise which is closer to the prototype.

[BR60103]

Of course over here it never sounded the same because of the penchant for American engineers to stagger their rail joints.

Is there a good reason for that, I wonder?

Pete: (Slightly OT)

I heard that when we started building railways in Canada, the engineers looked at how the Brits did it, looked at how the Americans did it, then decided that since both systems worked, it didn't matter where the rail joints came, so they just laid the track and let the rails end where they wanted to.

[Silver Sidelines]

What a splendid thread

An interesting range of replies so far :-).

I find it very therapeutic listening to model trains clattering across electrofrog turnouts.  I hadn't contemplated notching the rail head - do rather think that there are enough joints on my layout to provide enough 'point sources'.  Have you thought of loading a video to YouTube?  I have loaded quite a noisy video of my Blue Pullman traversing a rather unfinished layout but you will get the idea. 

 

Regards

 

Ray

[RAF96]

My UK abode is a mere 50m from the MNR heritage line and I can tell what is coming down the line by the rail clacks. 2 Car DMUs really stand out from the rest.

[coronach]

What a splendid thread

I find it very therapeutic listening to model trains clattering across electrofrog turnouts.  I hadn't contemplated notching the rail head - do rather think that there are enough joints on my layout to provide enough 'point sources'.  Have you thought of loading a video to YouTube?  I have loaded quite a noisy video of my Blue Pullman traversing a rather unfinished layout but you will get the idea. 

 

Regards

 

Ray

I will ask my daughter how to do that!  I tried uploading a file directly onto RM web but it is too big

[ThaneofFife]

with dcc sound the best effect is at speed.

its an idea i had a few years ago but of course it came after laying yard lengths of peco flexi. i coukd notch butvid prefer to do it right and have the 60ft spacings to get as close to the correct sounds as possible.

 

you can indeed hear distinct differences between mk1/mk2 and mk3 stock.

 

probably less useful on slow speed short end to ends. more suited to fast roundys id say.

[Fat Controller]

When the Reverend had his garden line in Townhill Road, Swansea, some forty-plus years ago, we found that the occasional notched rail-head gave a useful warning of a train approaching the shed when operating on winter's evenings (no lights on models in those days). If no sound was heard, someone would be dispatched with a torch to find the train...

Regarding the staggered rail-joints in the USA; I wonder if it was originally an effort to reduce the number of rails that had to be cut, and holes for fishplates that had to be drilled?

[Silver Sidelines]

Hi Coronach

I will ask my daughter how to do that!  I tried uploading a file directly onto RM web but it is too big

If you are confident to load pictures onto RMweb loading a bigger file onto YouTube should be straightforward.  You might need to setup a Google / gmail account but that doesn't cost and you just follow the online instructions. 

 

If you have copper telephone wires like us uploading is a slow process - a two minute HD quality video taking perhaps a good hour to transfer.  Lower quality take less time.  Once loaded there is a 'tab' to share the video and you can copy the address and paste it into your Blog or Post.

 

Fingers crossed you might be able to surprise your daughter.

 

Regards

 

Ray

[ThaneofFife]

one of the great railway signature sounds.

sadly now becoming rare in the uk.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Pete: (Slightly OT)

I heard that when we started building railways in Canada, the engineers looked at how the Brits did it, looked at how the Americans did it, then decided that since both systems worked, it didn't matter where the rail joints came, so they just laid the track and let the rails end where they wanted to.

 

How would they get round the need to have more closely spaced sleepers (ties) to support joints? Or do they not need to do that anyway as they have closer sleeper spacing generallly?

[BR60103]

How would they get round the need to have more closely spaced sleepers (ties) to support joints? Or do they not need to do that anyway as they have closer sleeper spacing generallly?

Like this:

 

 

 

(Sorry: these pictures taken in USA. Cadillac, MI, if you've been reading the stories in Trains.)

[Pacific231G]

Of course over here it never sounded the same because of the penchant for American engineers to stagger their rail joints.

Is there a good reason for that, I wonder?

 

I've always assumed it was because European practice is to use fewer sleepers but to close them up at rail joints with the narrower spacing under both rail joints. American practice, with much longer lines to lay, seems to have been to use more ties with the rails attached more lightly to each by spikes rather than coach bolts or bolted shoes but to space the ties evenly. The closer spacing obviates the need for more ties under joints so there's no need to line up the joints and I assume that it was quicker to spike more ties than to screw bolts into pre drilled holes in fewer but more elaborately prepared sleepers.

I could of course be completely wrong!!

 

I've just consulted my copy of Military Railway Engineering from 1940 and in the field British military engineers seem to have used spikes for plain track and coachbolts for pointwork. It says "Rails may be laid with the joints square or staggered, Staggered joints are apt to set up oscillation at the higher speeds unless the line is well maintained; on the other hand the hammering effect which causes low joints is better distributed over the track and there is less difficulty in keeping up the joints" it then goes on to recommend for military railways "where ballast is likely to be poor and maintenance difficult", square joints for straight track but staggered joints on all curves. It would be interesting to know what approach US military railway engineers took.