How frequent are derailments?

[n9]

I guess this might vary by scale, but I'm particularly interested in N.

 

The reason is that today, after 18 months of work on my layout,  I finally reached a point where I seriously contemplated ripping out all of my Peco Code 55 track and starting over with something distinctly less #@*! troublesome.

 

Why I think Peco Code 55 is so awful isn't the reason for this post. It's that some time later, it dawned on me that maybe my expectations are just not realistic. And I really don't have a baseline.

 

How often do trains derail on your layout?

 

And how often does the hand of god come out for other reasons?

[PMP]

Very rarely to either. I primarily work in OO but the principals of careful track laying and making sure  all electrical connections are robust is the same regardless of scale/gauge. The code 55 range is well established and not known to have any specific issues.
 

Next is ensuring that wheels and pickups are all adjusted to be compatible with the track being used, and electrical pick up is consistent.

[Michael Hodgson]

20 minutes ago, n9 said:

And how often does the hand of god come out for other reasons?

Rather too often in the case of OO tension lock couplings.

And far too often in any scale if you use 3-link!

[n9]

16 minutes ago, PMP said:

Very rarely to either. I primarily work in OO but the principals of careful track laying and making sure  all electrical connections are robust is the same regardless of scale/gauge. The code 55 range is well established and not known to have any specific issues.
 

Next is ensuring that wheels and pickups are all adjusted to be compatible with the track being used, and electrical pick up is consistent.

Indeed. The fact Code 55 is so well established is why I was so disappointed with it. Perhaps it's different in OO, but principles might also suggest that if you design track to cater for such disparate wheel proportions as Peco does with Code 55, you get the results you get - I don't think any amount of wheel tuning or electrical reliability will remove the pogo stick effect every axle adopts traversing every frog. That to me is an issue, and not a small one. And then there's 2FS, which I think is also quite well established and probably shares some of the reasoning behind why I've not been overly enthused by Peco's offerings.

 

But I don't want to digress. I know many people are perfectly happy with Peco. I'm really after a feel for how often mishaps occur on people's layouts because I only have my own experiences to go on right now. I'm glad you rarely have derailments!

[woodenhead]

I’ve never had an issue with N gauge track apart from shorting  from some Dapol b2b.

 

Where are you finding derailments are occurring?

[Paul H Vigor]

1 hour ago, PMP said:

Very rarely to either. I primarily work in OO but the principals of careful track laying and making sure  all electrical connections are robust is the same regardless of scale/gauge. The code 55 range is well established and not known to have any specific issues.
 

Next is ensuring that wheels and pickups are all adjusted to be compatible with the track being used, and electrical pick up is consistent.

Adding ballast to rolling stock should be considered. A little weight may help?

[YT-1300]

I haven't had a derailment in either N (using Unitrack) or HO and 4mm using Peco track in I don't know how many years.  Careful laying of track, and consistent back to backs go a long way to reliable operation.

 

Any derailments I have are down to being knocked off the track by sleeves

[tom s]

I found some wagons especially could have some issues with code 55 points, where the wheel would fall into the gap between the rails and the frog causing sometimes a derailment, but I filled the gap with a thin piece of plastic so the wheel flanges could roll over the plastic and stop the wheel falling in the gap. I don't have any old enormous flange stock though.

[Jim Martin]

1 hour ago, n9 said:

I guess this might vary by scale, but I'm particularly interested in N.

 

The reason is that today, after 18 months of work on my layout,  I finally reached a point where I seriously contemplated ripping out all of my Peco Code 55 track and starting over with something distinctly less #@*! troublesome.

 

Why I think Peco Code 55 is so awful isn't the reason for this post. It's that some time later, it dawned on me that maybe my expectations are just not realistic. And I really don't have a baseline.

 

How often do trains derail on your layout?

 

And how often does the hand of god come out for other reasons?

Are you talking about particular rolling stock, or is it just everything? I know a lot of n-gauge container wagons, for example,  being very light, have poor reputations for coming off the rails.

[The Johnster]

Trains, even model ones, derail for reasons, and preventing them from doing so will be much easier if you isolate the reason and eliminate it.  Reasons fall generally into categories as follows…
 

1) Baseboards.  Should be level and rigid, and made of material that will resist expansion, contraction, temperature variation, humidity, drying out, &c.  Framed ply, yes, chipboard/MDF no. 
 

2) Track.  Level and smoothly connected piece-to-piece.  Gentle transition curves if there are gradients, largest radii you can manage.  Try to avoid propelling movements through sharp curvature, esp. reverse curves, to prevent coupling bar override or buffer-lock.  Clean any crud preventing turnout blades from closing properly, and from flangeways. 
 

3) Locos and stock.  Eliminate plastic wheelsets and establish a standard back-to-back measurement and a standard wheel profile, also standard couplings, across the layout.  Ensure bogies can pivot freely and have the correct vertical play, and do not foul on the underframes.  Locos should run smoothly and controllably at low speeds; jerks cause derailments. Try and establish a standard axle load so that lighter wagons are not pulled off by heavier ones; about 10-12g per axle works for me!
 

4) Wiring.  See above comments about jerks. 
 

5) Hygiene.  Keep railheads, wheels, and pickups clean, and check nothing is fouling on the track. 
 

6) Driver error.  Not much anyone can do about this except be more careful next time.   Set the road and visually check it before each movement. 
 

Any model railway, irrespective of scale, gauge, or standard, will be frustrating if it does not operate reliably.  Even the real thing derails sometimes, but minimising derailments is worth the effort.  And if even a hamfisted bodgerigar like me can acheive reasonably reliable running…

[Davexoc]

I run code 55 and have canted the curves, which are fairly large radius, but I even have a degree of cant on some curved pointwork. I rarely see derailments, but if I do, it is usually down to a wagon related problem, or more commonly an auto-uncoupling for various reasons....

As pointed out, the flangeways are all accomodating for several eras of wheel profile. Light weight and kinematic couplings with too much spring force can be culprits...

[n9]

1 hour ago, tom s said:

I found some wagons especially could have some issues with code 55 points, where the wheel would fall into the gap between the rails and the frog causing sometimes a derailment, but I filled the gap with a thin piece of plastic so the wheel flanges could roll over the plastic and stop the wheel falling in the gap. I don't have any old enormous flange stock though.

Yes, I've been experimenting with shims. Looked like it could work, but I'm guessing at the right height. I've tried 0.3mm but I think that's too shallow. What height are yours?

[n9]

Okay... I'm getting very few people saying (or at least confessing!) they have derailments.

 

That's something, and that's good because if that's true it means I may need to take a closer look at my main culprits.

 

Regardless, the bounce I get from just about every axle on just about every piece of stock (Farish, Dapol, Rapido), some coaches (Dapol B sets), loco tenders, and my 03, when they cross any frog, be it point, slip, or crossing, is just daft. Going over a slip is a slalom. I cannot see that not impacting continuity with small locos. (And my 03 does suffer electrically on the slips.)

 

I get derailments on Peco's long crossings and their double slips. Maybe 1 in 10 or 1 in 20 times. Main culprits are a Dapol Brit and 9F, mostly at slow test speeds. Back to backs are correct on all wheels that aren't part of the motion. Haven't touched those yet because of how fragile those locos are. But it's the other wheels that are in gauge that seem to be leading the derailments.

 

I've had one diesel derail on a long crossing. But I test a lot less with diesels since they tend to handle frog bumps and other irregularities much better.

 

It's not trackwork. It's flat/eased/measured a squillion times/sleepers adjusted individually/redone every single time I've not been satisfied.

 

To test, I've removed slips from layout and mounted them flat with 4 straights leading into them. No improvement to derailments.

 

[The Johnster]

Check that your slips are not distorted, even slightly, by laying them on a mirror, firstly right way up to see that the sleeper base is sitting flat, then upside down to check that all the railheads are level with each other.  These can be a bit of a worry, as there are lot of them as separate pieces on a double slip, and slips are both where it it most important that everything is in exactly the right place and where they are least likely to be.  They are wonderful space savers, but there is no such thing as a free lunch... of course, some prototypical track plans demand them, but I have made a point (sorry, that was unforgivable) of not using them on any of my layouts.  

 

Incidentally, I join my track sections with rail joiners, because these hold each section's rail ends firmly in position with respect to the adjoining end.  They are not reliable for electrical connection, but the refusal of some flexible track rail ends to stay in the postition you want relative to each other no matter how much care you've taken in laying them is obviated by a physical joiner of this sort.

Edited December 24, 2023 by The Johnster

[Torper]

I suggest that you buy a couple of Finetrax points and see if your stock misbehaves on them. 

 

And to answer your question, I get quite a lot of derailments.  Mind you, I'm working in P4 and running largely kit built locos and stock I've built on track I've made and baseboards I've constructed, and at best I'm a very average modeller.

Edited December 24, 2023 by Torper

[n9]

3 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Check that your slips are not distorted, even slightly, by laying them on a mirror, firstly right way up to see that the sleeper base is sitting flat, then upside down to check that all the railheads are level with each other.  These can be a bit of a worry, as there are lot of them as separate pieces on a double slip, and slips are both where it it most important that everything is in exactly the right place and where they are least likely to be.  They are wonderful space savers, but there is no such thing as a free lunch... of course, some prototypical track plans demand them, but I have made a point (sorry, that was unforgivable) of not using them on any of my layouts.  

 

Incidentally, I join my track sections with rail joiners, because these hold each section's rail ends firmly in position with respect to the adjoining end.  They are not reliable for electrical connection, but the refusal of some flexible track rail ends to stay in the postition you want relative to each other no matter how much care you've taken in laying them is obviated by a physical joiner of this sort.

No, they are most certainly not flat. It's how they came out of the packet new, with two hills, one for each frog. I spent an inordinate amount of time, lifting them out, reinforcing the underlay (for better or worse, I chose foam on XPS) with wood instead of foam, and then nailing the little darlings flat. Still got the derailments. It's part of what made me question the sanity of continuing with Peco.

 

I reinforce areas with track joins with wood the same way, because Peco's insulating joiners often aren't strong enough to hold their shape, so that's solved too. I also reinforce all points in 3 places now: start, middle, and end. Why? Because Peco straight points aren't straight. The bend in the curved diverging rail causes the straight rail to bend because the webbing isn't strong enough to fully counteract that force. So reinforcing in the middle of the point provides a place to put a fulcrum to correct that.  Likely the same is true of their curved points, but it's a lot harder to spot a train that went around a bend a little less than it should. But string a few "straight" points together, and you'll see another slalom.

 

Excellent idea about the mirror. I will try that. Thank you!

[n9]

14 minutes ago, Torper said:

I suggest that you buy a couple of Finetrax points and see if your stock misbehaves on them. 

 

And to answer your question, I get quite a lot of derailments.  Mind you, I'm working in P4 and running largely kit built locos and stock I've built on track I've made and baseboards I've constructed, and at best I'm a very average modeller.

I think that's the best suggestion I've heard all year! It's also exactly what I've been thinking all day. What a brilliant mind you have! 😁

[Dungrange]

47 minutes ago, n9 said:

I'm getting very few people saying (or at least confessing!) they have derailments.

 

I've no experience of Peco Code 55, but we do get derailments on club layouts (mainly 00), but it's certainly not everything / all the time.

 

It's usually, say, the fourth wagon in a train that frequently derails (in which case there is obviously an issue with that wagon, so it's removed) or it's several trains derailing at one location (in which case it's the track or perhaps more commonly a baseboard joint that needs to be adjusted).

 

55 minutes ago, n9 said:

But it's the other wheels that are in gauge that seem to be leading the derailments.

 

Are you able to see the location at which the train starts to derail?  Can you push the offending locomotive through the point work and observe the issue. The bogie may come off the track first, but it doesn't mean that it's not an out of tolerance driving wheel hitting the frog that's causing the bogie to lift.

 

I have heard others say that diamond crossings are not the most reliable, but have no direct experience (in any scale).

[n9]

3 minutes ago, Dungrange said:

 

I've no experience of Peco Code 55, but we do get derailments on club layouts (mainly 00), but it's certainly not everything / all the time.

 

It's usually, say, the fourth wagon in a train that frequently derails (in which case there is obviously an issue with that wagon, so it's removed) or it's several trains derailing at one location (in which case it's the track or perhaps more commonly a baseboard joint that needs to be adjusted).

 

This is kind of what I was expecting most people to say, and I'd expect my layout to have such failures, so this is helpful to know.

 

5 minutes ago, Dungrange said:

Are you able to see the location at which the train starts to derail?  Can you push the offending locomotive through the point work and observe the issue. The bogie may come off the track first, but it doesn't mean that it's not an out of tolerance driving wheel hitting the frog that's causing the bogie to lift.

It could well be, and driving wheels are now firmly "persons of interest" in my investigations. Just need to muster up the courage to dismantle enough of two Dapol steamers to get at those wheels, because they break if you just look at them wrong.

 

10 minutes ago, Dungrange said:

I have heard others say that diamond crossings are not the most reliable, but have no direct experience (in any scale).

Would love more confirmation from others, because I can't see how they could ever be reliable. With the huge frog gaps, the slightest nudge on a wagon makes the diamond behave like a point. And such is the drop, Revolution tankers will have a wheel in the air.

[Davexoc]

20 minutes ago, n9 said:

No, they are most certainly not flat. It's how they came out of the packet new, with two hills, one for each frog. I spent an inordinate amount of time, lifting them out, reinforcing the underlay (for better or worse, I chose foam on XPS) with wood instead of foam, and then nailing the little darlings flat. Still got the derailments. It's part of what made me question the sanity of continuing with Peco.

 

I don't use underlay. I glue them down onto the baseboard (MDF) with PVA, an off-cut of MDF or wood on top and a 5 litre bottle of water on top of that while the glue dries. That goes for all pointwork, and once tested, ballasted in place. As for other track joints, screws that are either buried, or removed and ballasting patched afterwards to ensure it all stays true....

[n9]

3 minutes ago, Davexoc said:

 

I don't use underlay. I glue them down onto the baseboard (MDF) with PVA, an off-cut of MDF or wood on top and a 5 litre bottle of water on top of that while the glue dries. That goes for all pointwork, and once tested, ballasted in place. As for other track joints, screws that are either buried, or removed and ballasting patched afterwards to ensure it all stays true....

I'd do that if I was on wood. Would be better still if the track you bought for running trains actually didn't need to be made flat in the first place.

[Harlequin]

Obviously PECO don’t sell turnouts that are generally unreliable in the way you describe.

 

Can you post a video so we can all see what you’re seeing? Maybe something will become apparent.

 

[The Johnster]

1 hour ago, n9 said:

I'd do that if I was on wood.

 

What are you on?  A baseboard that is not wood is going to be suspect; in fact, some types of wooden baseboard are going to be suspect, and you've already identified an issue with your Peco double slips; any that are within warranty should be returned to Peco for replacement.  I've only ever had that sort of trouble with one turnout, and the shop replaced it; not worth messing about with that sort of thing.  I have no experience of code 55, though.  I use 00 streamline with medium turnouts, small for the loco release, and have had no such issues with them, but no company's output is always perfect...

 

Back to baseboard, the accepted wisdom is ply for the top surface,  light, strong, and rigid, soft enough to accept screws and track pins and hard enough to hang on to them.  I have heard of boards made of expanded polystyrene, but these present different problems.

[n9]

2 hours ago, Harlequin said:

Obviously PECO don’t sell turnouts that are generally unreliable in the way you describe.

 

Can you post a video so we can all see what you’re seeing? Maybe something will become apparent.

 

Maybe I've been very unlucky then. My layout is 2x1m, has about 20 points, two double slips, two crossovers (all Electrofrog or Unifrog). Both crossovers are as I've described, as are both long crossings, which also both came with one dead rail in the diamond.

 

I think the frog bounce will be evident from any video out there showing stock running across Peco Code 55 points, especially 4 wheel stock. I think one of the Dawlish videos on here had an example with clay wagons bouncing. It wasn't specifically about this, just a lovely train running. If I find it again, I'll post it. But here's a picture of my Revolution tanker stopped at a frog, in this case on a diamond. Note the raised rear wheel on the right. In fact, if it's rolled lightly, it will come to an abrupt stop there as the front wheel falls into what is, in effect, a pot hole. But pretty much all frogs and flangeways on Code 55 are far too large for the stock I have.

 

 

1 hour ago, The Johnster said:

 

What are you on?  A baseboard that is not wood is going to be suspect; in fact, some types of wooden baseboard are going to be suspect, and you've already identified an issue with your Peco double slips; any that are within warranty should be returned to Peco for replacement.  I've only ever had that sort of trouble with one turnout, and the shop replaced it; not worth messing about with that sort of thing.  I have no experience of code 55, though.  I use 00 streamline with medium turnouts, small for the loco release, and have had no such issues with them, but no company's output is always perfect...

 

Back to baseboard, the accepted wisdom is ply for the top surface,  light, strong, and rigid, soft enough to accept screws and track pins and hard enough to hang on to them.  I have heard of boards made of expanded polystyrene, but these present different problems.

Foam underlay on XPS (extruded polystyrene) boards that are 4cm thick mounted on a sturdy wooden frame. The only uneven surfaces on it are 3 joins in the XPS, which I've catered for, and the slips and crossings don't span them. I tried ply, twice. The ply boards each warped after about 3 months despite being nailed/glued or screwed to a sturdy frame. Gave up on it for lack of knowing any decent wood suppliers around these parts.

 

I have to order everything online, and if it comes from the UK expect at best 1 month delivery, at worst more than 4 months. This makes returns seldom worth the hassle and cost in import duties. In the last 18 months I've only returned things once.

 

That said, given my run of grievances, the lack of a local hobby shop is probably a very good thing for them! 🙂

[DCB]

Something very wrong with that slip or crossing.   The frog is raised right?  Not the flangeway blocked.     Peco have produced some rubbish at times  they seem to do batches and some batches are atrocious and  the next batch are modified but still bear the same  part numbers.   I model in 00 , I have  gauge 1 fingers so can't cope with N ( I did try Once briefly) A few years ago  we bought 3 new Peco live frog 2ft radius points, for "Ugleigh" they were rubbish and I got 3 broken ones from Cheltenham Model Centre which suitably bodged replaced the useless new ones.

My 00 Dapol Mogul constantly derailed until I turned its leading wheels in the lathe so it might be rubbish track plus rubbish wheels.  But the points, slips, crossings should be flat so that has to be number one change.  Maybe a mate has some you can borrow?

For track testing I have a number of very fast locos and if they have wont go through my points very fast then I fiddle with them till they do.   It's usually a dog leg or something similar, but its very noticeable how much better older wheels are at staying on the rails than 21st century ones.