The Patiala State Monorail Trainways

[runs as required]

I can't pretend I completely follow the physics of this account of the origins of the 'Maglev', but I do thoroughly recommend an article in Backtrack for July 2016 by Miles Magnair called Emille Bachelet and the Dawn of 'Maglev' (Part one).

 

There are reproductions of classic 1912 patent diagrams depicting arrangements of magnets on straight, curved and tubular tracks and a plan and cross section of the metal projectile.

EB raised money for his revolutionary project as a travelliing Vaudeville act across the US* - so please do take heart, your exploits with the PMST at MR exhibitions are firmly 'ontrack'

 

It seems EB originally thought of his maglev railway as a capsule for the transmission of urgently needed equipment at 300mph rather than a people carrier. Churchill while at the Admiralty visited EB's London demo of it twice.

The piece includes a fascinating what-might-have-been painting by Robin Barnes of a Sam Fay offer for a Neasden siding alongside the Met power station fitted out as a trial Maglev track. 

 

Who knows? It might be just what the PMST needs to square the circle; Good Luck

 

dh

 

Ed 

* The Vaudeville routines included a spooky levitating hand in a glass case. (I see I also mistyped Macnair but I've left it as sic; it seems more appropriate)

Edited July 11, 2016 by runs as required

[Stubby47]

Gracious me, there are other mad people out there too !!

 

Looking forward to your progress - and yes, even at such a large scale, it is still tiny.

[BG John]

Is this a replacement for the OO modular layout at Taunton developing? Standards need to be agreed before PSMT modelling really takes off, and everyone uses incompatible systems.

Edited July 11, 2016 by BG John

[peter220950]

Is this a replacement for the OO modular layout at Taunton developing? Standards need to be agreed before PSMT modelling really takes off, and everyone uses incompatible systems.

 

That's the Plan B, a DPDT switch to isolate the motor and switch in the remote control!

 

Peter

[Stubby47]

Peter,

If you are just using the loco wheels to pick up power, your track sections will be Very short. You will also need to isolate one wheel from the chassis, including any connecting rods.

If you intend to use the coach wheel as the other pick-up, the track sections can be longer, but the same isolation rules apply.

 

As for making the system compatible with others, who else is ever going to make such a layout ?

[Graham456]

As for making the system compatible with others, who else is ever going to make such a layout ?

Stu with all the interest shown in your efforts, once you have lead the way and sorted the glitches expect a flood of copy cat show stoppers

Perhaps Staplegrove 2020 ! Can have a patiala take over in the small room ?

Edited July 11, 2016 by Graham456

[Stuart Birks]

You could have a split wheel with each side picking up from the sides of the split rail. The sides (or one of them) would have to be insulated from the axle and have a wiper pickup. You could then pick up on all three loco wheels and both coach wheels.

 

 

Stuart

[peter220950]

Peter,

If you are just using the loco wheels to pick up power, your track sections will be Very short. You will also need to isolate one wheel from the chassis, including any connecting rods.

If you intend to use the coach wheel as the other pick-up, the track sections can be longer, but the same isolation rules apply.

 

As for making the system compatible with others, who else is ever going to make such a layout ?

 

 

I was intending to use one wheel on the loco, and another on the coach as you have, which I estimated at about 150-160mm for each track section, the only issue arising from that being the need to insulate the other two loco drivers from the chassis, for that I am considering turning them in Tufnol or Acrylic. this then brings in the issue of having a rigid 3 wheel wheelbase and the possibility of the middle one lifting if track laying is less than perfect. I want to drive the middle wheel, to sort the gear train from the outrigger axle, but may put some slop or compensation in either front or back wheels to ensure that the centre driver is always in contact with the rail. (See I have been thinking about it quite a lot!)

 

As for anyone else making a layout like it, it's your fault for bringing it to our attention! Anything as bizarre as that has to be modelled, I'm sure they said the same about the first broad gauge or Listowel and Ballybunion layouts, imitation being the sincerest form of flattery and all that, and for a modular system based on it how hard can it be? One piece of rail is to leave the end of the board, end of specification.

 

Peter

[peter220950]

You could have a split wheel with each side picking up from the sides of the split rail. The sides (or one of them) would have to be insulated from the axle and have a wiper pickup. You could then pick up on all three loco wheels and both coach wheels.

 

psmt_wheel1.JPG

 

Stuart

Stuart,

 

Two issues as I see it, one is to ensure absolute accuracy of contact for both halves of the wheel, bearing in mind the outrigger is 60mm away and would need to be billiard table accurate to stop it lifting one side or the other. Having multiple pick-ups would help with this but it still seemes quite an engineering challenge, as I mentioned before RC has to be the easiest solution in a world where normal people addressed the challenge of 1 rail.

 

And then the need to make the insulated rail, which scales out roughly to that of O gauge rail. It's probably beyond most of us.

 

Having drawn the loco to scale I'm of the opinion that live steam 16mm is a more achievable result than the path Stubby has embarked on.

 

Peter

[Simond]

Maybe the "two sided rail" would work ok if it were made with a very steep cone angle, and no appreciable tread

 

I'm reminded on my Minic Motorways from a very, very long time ago..,

 

For those who do not have such memories, this was a road system to go with Triang (series 3?) in which the road had s slot, maybe 1/8 inch across whose sides were conductive strips. The car pickup was a pair of shallow cones, made of copper or bronze, mounted base to base with an insulating layer & mounted on an insulating spindle. The pickups were made on the thin extensions of the cones

 

This gave a much lower friction than the scalextric brushes, and had the added advantage of no visible metallic strips on the road surface

 

The two-sided rail is the same thing "back to front" and if the cone angles are steep enough the additional angle generated by the road wheel won't matter

 

I still think an RC setup might be a better deal...

 

Best

Simon

[Stuart Birks]

Peter

 

I would have to disagree. With the necessary side play and possibly some light springing the wheels would self centre with no problems. I too have drawn the loco to scale and the track comes out at approx 1mm thick. It would be possible to cheat and make this 1.5mm. That would not be difficult to make. There are multiple ways that it could be done.

 

This is a very quick tilt on the diagram that I drew. It is not to any scale and in reality a thinner wheel would cope with a much larger angle. This is 2deg and equates to 2mm of lift on the outrigger.

 

 

Stuart

[BG John]

 As for anyone else making a layout like it, it's your fault for bringing it to our attention! Anything as bizarre as that has to be modelled, I'm sure they said the same about the first broad gauge or Listowel and Ballybunion layouts, imitation being the sincerest form of flattery and all that

I'm sure Mike Sharman had some influence on my desire to model the broad gauge! I must admit I'm tempted by the PSMT. It took me getting on for 20 years after I got interested in the broad gauge before I started modelling it, so you've got a few years to perfect the system, and get the PSMT MRS established.

[peter220950]

Peter

 

I would have to disagree. With the necessary side play and possibly some light springing the wheels would self centre with no problems. I too have drawn the loco to scale and the track comes out at approx 1mm thick. It would be possible to cheat and make this 1.5mm. That would not be difficult to make. There are multiple ways that it could be done.

 

This is a very quick tilt on the diagram that I drew. It is not to any scale and in reality a thinner wheel would cope with a much larger angle. This is 2deg and equates to 2mm of lift on the outrigger.

 

psmt_wheel2.JPG

 

Stuart

 

Point taken, the drivers are almost hidden anyway - looks like we might already have a third standard all you need to do now is to get building, I know I'm not up to making a sprung split insulated chassis, wheels, axles and the rail to go with it, but I'm always willing to learn from others.

 

You've obviously also been thinking about this as a technical challenge, and if you've done the scale drawing thing you're probably hooked by now!  There were at least 4 loco's and possibly several other monstrosities so it looks like there's plenty of room for builds. As long as everyone sticks to 1/35th.....................................................

 

 

I'm sure Mike Sharman had some influence on my desire to model the broad gauge! I must admit I'm tempted by the PSMT. It took me getting on for 20 years after I got interested in the broad gauge before I started modelling it, so you've got a few years to perfect the system, and get the PSMT MRS established.

 

Perfect the system my a*se, in 20 years time I'll be dead, the arguments over PSMT Genesis (the true Stubby way),PSMT DCC, PSMT DC, PSMT R/C, PSMT Infra Red, PSMT fine, PSMT coarse, PSMT split rail, PSMT solid rail and the spacing of rail gaps will fill several pages of RMWeb, and everytime it comes up for comment hordes of knowledgable 'experts' will wave their willies about to prove theirs is the one true way, and get very heated in the process. And that's before the purists who want to work to 9mm/ft at 1/33.86667.

 

So if you are going to have a go make sure it's before the experts gather to tell you you're doing it wrong, I recon you've got about twelve months. Make your own standards, after all anyone who makes O gauge  track by sawing 16.5mm gauge in half and widening it should find this a doddle, and you get twice the track for the same amount of saw cuts! You could start 'PSMT chopped up 16.5'

 

Anyway at the moment I'm only thinking about a loco build as a technical challenge, I'm waiting for Martin to develop a suitable Templot programme before I think about track laying.

 

Peter

Edited July 11, 2016 by peter220950

[BG John]

Perfect the system my a*se, in 20 years time I'll be dead, the arguments over PSMT Genesis (the true Stubby way),PSMT DCC, PSMT DC, PSMT R/C, PSMT Infra Red, PSMT fine, PSMT coarse, PSMT split rail, PSMT solid rail and the spacing of rail gaps will fill several pages of RMWeb, and everytime it comes up for comment hordes of knowledgable 'experts' will wave their willies about to prove theirs is the one true way, and get very heated in the process. And that's before the purists who want to work to 9mm/ft at 1/33.86667.

 

So if you are going to have a go make sure it's before the experts gather to tell you you're doing it wrong, I recon you've got about twelve months. Make your own standards, after all anyone who makes O gauge  track by sawing 16.5mm gauge in half and widening it should find this a doddle, and you get twice the track for the same amount of saw cuts! You could start 'PSMT chopped up 16.5'

 

Anyway at the moment I'm only thinking about a loco build as a technical challenge, I'm waiting for Martin to develop a suitable Templot programme before I think about track laying.

 

Peter

In 20 years time, if I live as long as most of my family, I'll have 10 years to go, and be starting to slow down, so RTR would be appreciated. I probably won't really be up to willy waving by then either, so will probably just go along with whatever standards RTR is produced to.

 

I've moved on from sawing up 16.5mm track to make O gauge. I'm currently building an EM single slip using good old fashioned code 75 bullhead and copperclad sleepers. I need the practice before fixing up some manky old copperclad O gauge that fell out of someone's loft!!

 

You'll probably get the same response from Martin as I did when I asked for broad gauge baulk road in Templot - create it yourself!

[Stuart Birks]

You've obviously also been thinking about this as a technical challenge, and if you've done the scale drawing thing you're probably hooked by now!  There were at least 4 loco's and possibly several other monstrosities so it looks like there's plenty of room for builds. As long as everyone sticks to 1/35th.......

 

 

Its already gone beyond that Peter. I have to own up to being the person who created the outrigger wheels for Stu which is why I have a scale drawing of it.

 

Stuart

[peter220950]

Its already gone beyond that Peter. I have to own up to being the person who created the outrigger wheels for Stu which is why I have a scale drawing of it.

wheel2.jpg

 

Stuart

 

Stuart,

 

Jealous already.

 

Peter

 

P.S. Now let's just get this straight, you've built the outrigger wheels, done the scale drawing, designed the pick-up system, what else aren't you telling us? That surely wasn't just for fun...............

[Stuart Birks]

Yes, just for fun. Its Stubbys project not mine. I have offered to help but all the design work and decisions are his.

 

Stuart

[Hesperus]

I've just found this thread and it is facinating,  I read the first couple of pages and came up with an idea of powering it on DC without reed switches so skipped to the end to see what Stu had decided on and it looks like you are still deciding so:

 

Rail sections of around 35mm (but all the same length)

 

6 groups of section so the loco passes over 1 then 2 then 3 then 4 then 5 then 6 then a different 1 etc with all the 1's wired together, all the 2's wired together etc.

 

 

Then find a clever person (not me) to create either an electronic circuit or a computer program that energises section 2 at 12v+ when it senses 12v+ from section 1.  It would sense this when the loco wheelbase bridges the gap between 1 and 2.  This action would also put 6 (just behind the loco to neutral) 5 (just ahead of the wagon pickup) to 12v- leave 4 (under the wagon pickup) on 12v- and turn 3 to neutral.  When the locos wheels hit 3 then the circuitry would skip the stages along one so 2 and 3 are 12v+ 5 and 6 are 12v- and 1 and 4 are neutral.

 

 

I'm guessing that someone else has suggested similar and there is a good reason it won't work.

[DonB]

Just seen an advert (watching The Tour) for Sam Miguel beer with a short sequence of street running Indian tram with market stalls canopies being lifted to clear the tram. Are S-M making a bid for Stubby's patronage?

[MGR Hooper!]

Just seen an advert (watching The Tour) for Sam Miguel beer with a short sequence of street running Indian tram with market stalls canopies being lifted to clear the tram. Are S-M making a bid for Stubby's patronage?

That's not Indian..That's Thailand

 

[DonB]

Shows what I know! (I was thrown out of Geography lessons at 15 -- school keeping pass-rates high !)

[CourthsVeil]

Hi Stu,

should it not work with one wheel per axle you might try the one-axle-per-loco system. Link

Regards

  Armin

[Stubby47]

Things might be a-stirring again...

[woodenhead]

Things might be a-stirring again...

You should get down to your doctor then 

[Northroader]

Good news. Love to Nellie.