Suggestions Sought for Hornby Trakmat Extension 4 Layout

[RJS1977]

Yes, if the points are approached in a trailing direction, then they need to be set for the direction the train's coming from to avoid derailment.

[latestarter]

1 minute ago, RJS1977 said:

Yes, if the points are approached in a trailing direction, then they need to be set for the direction the train's coming from to avoid derailment.

Thank you again. I'm quite pleased that I (almost) worked that out for myself. I saw reference to 'trailing' points here but didn't know what they were. I've looked it up on Wikipedia since. There's another type (but the word escapes me.)

[RJS1977]

Facing points (i.e. ones that are approached from the narrow 'toe' end).

[The Johnster]

23 minutes ago, latestarter said:

My guess is that it's because the points were set against the direction of travel (I have no better way to put that and it's just my own 'feeling).

Is that a 'thing', do the points have to be set a certain way - according to the way the train is moving to avoid derailing? 

 

Yes, it's a thing.  The points have to be set correctly for the train to pass through them irrespective of the direction of travel.  The spring pressure that holds the blades in place is sufficient to derail the train otherwise, and has to be to prevent movement as the train passes over the point, which would also cause derailments.

[latestarter]

49 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

 

Yes, it's a thing.  The points have to be set correctly for the train to pass through them irrespective of the direction of travel.  The spring pressure that holds the blades in place is sufficient to derail the train otherwise, and has to be to prevent movement as the train passes over the point, which would also cause derailments.

That's another learning curve flattened, thank you again. The 'bypass wiring' you mentioned several hundred posts back, is my next 'Everest'. If you get time, I'd welcome a quick overview of what that is and if it will be easier than bus wires and droppers.

[The Johnster]

It’s much the same sort of thing.  What you do is to solder a length of wire (to the outside of the rail to keep the wire and any solder blob out of the way of flanges) between the rail on the ‘approach’, facing end of the point to the ‘same’ rail on the other, trailing end. The straight through rail and the curved rail are continuous through the point, and don’t need this, but the other two do.  
 

These are the point blade rail that leads in the straight direction across the crossing vee, and the curved blade rail that leads through the curved route through the vee.  You can ‘get away with not doing it, I do, but your layout has a lot more points than mine, and keeping them working electrically will become an increasing chore over time, which can be avoided by the bypass wiring. 
 

The problem is that carbon deposits, general crud, and wear in the point mechanism over time conspire to make the electrical contact between the blade ‘switch’ rails and the continuous through straight and curved ‘stock’ rails unreliable sooner or later, so you’ll probably have to do this eventually anyway. Doing it now, before the track is ballasted and he layout buried in scenery, is much easier than digging the points out later, and is therefore advised. 
 

If you have feed wire locations on both sides of points, you will have effectively done this already.  It’s one of those things that’s much easier to do than to try to explain, and more of a Hampstead Heath than an Everest!

 

[latestarter]

42 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

It’s much the same sort of thing.  What you do is to solder a length of wire (to the outside of the rail to keep the wire and any solder blob out of the way of flanges) between the rail on the ‘approach’, facing end of the point to the ‘same’ rail on the other, trailing end. The straight through rail and the curved rail are continuous through the point, and don’t need this, but the other two do.  
 

These are the point blade rail that leads in the straight direction across the crossing vee, and the curved blade rail that leads through the curved route through the vee.  You can ‘get away with not doing it, I do, but your layout has a lot more points than mine, and keeping them working electrically will become an increasing chore over time, which can be avoided by the bypass wiring. 
 

The problem is that carbon deposits, general crud, and wear in the point mechanism over time conspire to make the electrical contact between the blade ‘switch’ rails and the continuous through straight and curved ‘stock’ rails unreliable sooner or later, so you’ll probably have to do this eventually anyway. Doing it now, before the track is ballasted and he layout buried in scenery, is much easier than digging the points out later, and is therefore advised. 
 

If you have feed wire locations on both sides of points, you will have effectively done this already.  It’s one of those things that’s much easier to do than to try to explain, and more of a Hampstead Heath than an Everest!

 

Thanks again for taking the time and trouble to do this. I'm going to print it out and have a good read tomorrow.