De-Pecoing Points

[Miserable]

I'm building a small O gauge layout and despite having come up with a (well several) nice Templot layout I really couldn't face making any more points - but Peco (and I think Marcway) have those awful bent bearers on the exit roads. It was, to say the least, somewhat nerve-wracking to take a saw to £200 worth of brand new points and double slip, but worth it I think. Peco point timbers replace the cut away ones. Definitely worth the effort I think.

Edited April 23, 2020 by Miserable

[jim.snowdon]

It looks a lot better. A final touch would be to remove the extra sleeper top and bottom where the plain track buts up the crossing timbers. Two sleepers butted up side by side would normally be avoided on account of the difficulty in getting the ballast properly packed under them. 

 

Jim

[Miserable]

Really I should have extended the bearers right across all 4 tracks another 4 or 5 further to remove the clashes completely (for the reason you give) but on laying this out it looked ridiculous - prototypical doesn't always scale, to me anyway. The reason they are butted up is that without them the length of unsupported rail would be way beyond the max allowed - and look horrible! So it's a bit of a compromise really.

[jim.snowdon]

16 hours ago, Miserable said:

Really I should have extended the bearers right across all 4 tracks another 4 or 5 further to remove the clashes completely (for the reason you give) but on laying this out it looked ridiculous - prototypical doesn't always scale, to me anyway. The reason they are butted up is that without them the length of unsupported rail would be way beyond the max allowed - and look horrible! So it's a bit of a compromise really.

Very long bearers such as you propose are generally avoided as introducing too many problems with handling, packing and generally getting hold of such long lengths in the first place. The increased rail span between the last sleeper and the first bearer is within limits.

Timbering complex S&C is something of a black art. There are few rules and a common technique to avoid very long timbers is to put two timbers end to end, not joined together. It is permissible to have the left and right rails of a track on different bearers, so long as there are no more than (from memory) three broken bearers in a row, otherwise there is a risk of losing the gauge. One in two, or three, is better.

 

Jim

[Pete the Elaner]

Those 'bent bearers' look awful on crossovers.

On our OO club layout, we have narrowed the 6' to something more prototypical. In order to do this, we have had to shorten the points at crossovers beyond the bent bearer.

The remaining bearers even line up. It looks so much better.

[Miserable]

1 hour ago, jim.snowdon said:

Very long bearers such as you propose are generally avoided as introducing too many problems with handling, packing and generally getting hold of such long lengths in the first place. The increased rail span between the last sleeper and the first bearer is within limits.

Timbering complex S&C is something of a black art. There are few rules and a common technique to avoid very long timbers is to put two timbers end to end, not joined together. It is permissible to have the left and right rails of a track on different bearers, so long as there are no more than (from memory) three broken bearers in a row, otherwise there is a risk of losing the gauge. One in two, or three, is better.

 

Jim

 

Yep, that's pretty much what I found in my research, hence not wanting to do too many really long bearers because it just looks 'wrong' even if potentially technically correct.  There's a prototype for everything .... ;-)

[Miserable]

1 hour ago, Pete the Elaner said:

Those 'bent bearers' look awful on crossovers.

On our OO club layout, we have narrowed the 6' to something more prototypical. In order to do this, we have had to shorten the points at crossovers beyond the bent bearer.

The remaining bearers even line up. It looks so much better.

Indeed, I thought about doing this, but the line on the left is a headshunt so should have at least 10ft way - the point entry roads would have been exactly 6ft 6in apart if I had.