RMweb Gold MarshLane Posted January 25 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 25 (edited) Ok, I am yet again playing with another idea. I really do need to stop thinking, but spurred on by @PaulRhB idea for a small return loop and small modular boards on his Nm9 layout (see the Swiss section I think) it has set me thinking about a little diorama board that would sit in the corner of my office. Looking around and Tillig track work looks better than Peco, and Code 83 for HO as well is a bit more finer scale. Has anyone any experience of Tillig? Given their range, I suspect it must be popular across the EU, and there appears to be a couple of well known UK stockists. If I did a small return loop, and used preformed curved sections for it, which isnt the best idea in my view, but would give a constant radii, does anyone know how their track work system actually works in terms of radius? Looking on the website under the Elite-trackwork it says fixed curve radii of 366, 425, 484 and 543, but various website seem to show those figures as the length. Does anyone know if 366, 425 etc.. are the actual radius? Ie a set of 366 track pieces in a 180 degree curve is 732mm diameter? Rich Edited January 26 by MarshLane Change of topic title Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted January 25 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 25 I’ve used their HOm and HOe and friends have used the HO stuff. The weak point is the point tiebar as its delicate and the blades can pop out. A soft stall motor is best, solenoids I’d avoid. Really nice track apart from that. The radio thing is a bit confusing, I’ll try to dig out the catalogue and see if there are better diagrams on there than the website. https://www.tillig.com/Standardgleissysteme.html 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted January 25 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 25 English pages https://www.tillig.com/eng/Standardgleissysteme_Gleise.html 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butler Henderson Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 The pointwork is slightly flexible so careful laying and pinning is advisable. The track is in Anyrail which is free to use up to a certain number of pieces so you could have a play with that to see how it fits together. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold MarshLane Posted January 25 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted January 25 Hi Paul, Thanks for the recommendation, and the thought about the point tie bar is noted. The English website pages suggest it is Radius, giving R380/22,5 which to me suggests 380mm radius at 22.5 degrees. Unfortunately none of the stated UK retailers either seem to have stock or anything on their website describing what is what. However, I have just looked on Modellbahnshop-lippe.com and their page clearly shows Radius 380mm, so I think that answers the question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butler Henderson Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 Also they use a different section of rail to other code 83 makers which I found joins code 100 in height far better. Tiling point to code 100 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold MarshLane Posted January 25 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted January 25 Interesting have dug about further tonight, the points seem to be 22.5 degree radius, but all of the diamond crossings appear to be 15 degrees, but there must be a way of making a double track cross over.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold MarshLane Posted January 26 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted January 26 Ok, so while the Tillig track work looks very nice, I cannot seem to solve the query of how to make a double track cross-over, the degree's of the diamonds and slips seem to be different. There is also the issue of cost. I am therefore looking at building my own track work, which I have done before in other scales. This small modular layout is only going to be simple and nothing elaborate, although the small station may need a couple of double slips in true German style! So a couple of further questions that somebody may know. I am drafting the track work up on Templot. Is German sleep spacing the same as UK? From looking at pictures it doesn't seem to be too different. A lot of station paintwork still looks to be wooden sleepered track work, but the plain line is concrete slippered, therefore, I am wondering - the Scalefour Society do some OO gauge concrete sleepers for Flat Bottomed Rail - would these work for a German layout? I dont see any reason why not, the only potential issue might be that the only FB rail the S4 Society do is Code 55 ... given the likes of Tillig use Code 83, I just wonder if Code 55 might be introducing issues with wheel flanges on EU HO Gauge models? In which case, maybe the idea will be to find some Code 83 rail and design some concrete sleepers for 3D printing. The layout will be very loosely based on the area I know and love, the Rhein Valley, but resembling a double-track main line station on the edge of a city to allow other aspects to be included, including a small depot (the first module to be built) and maybe even a very small section representing the City's tramway on a future module. But in terms of era it will be current 2015-2021 era. Through freights, through IC passenger and local stopping passengers, some loco-hauled some units. I am coming to this with very little stock, so basically a clean sheet! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted January 26 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 26 On 25/01/2024 at 22:03, MarshLane said: Interesting have dug about further tonight, the points seem to be 22.5 degree radius, but all of the diamond crossings appear to be 15 degrees, but there must be a way of making a double track cross over.... According to the details tag on the pages the angle of points varies from 9.5° to 12° and 15° https://www.tillig.com/eng/Elite_Gleissysteme_Weichen_Kreuzungen-Seite-3.html I assume if you go through there will be corresponding crossovers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted January 27 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 27 This might help, link to original of pic below. https://www.tillig.com/dateien/Bilder/Tipps und Tricks/H0-ELITE-Gleisentwicklungen.pdf Found from this page, https://www.tillig.com/eng/gleisentwicklungen3.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold MarshLane Posted January 27 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted January 27 Paul, Thanks for that - that last diagram seems to confirm that there is not a standard 'between track width' when diamond or slips are used. Point crossovers seem to run at 59mm between the tracks, but when you put a slip or diamond in to the layout it has to increase, which leads to uneven spacing. Maybe I am just too used to Peco in the past where everything work together! Having been playing about in Templot last night, tho I think I may have the beginning of a layout and using hand-built pointwork with those ScaleFour OO gauge concrete sleepers, it gives another challenge. I'll keep playing around with things! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold MarshLane Posted January 28 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted January 28 (edited) Looks like I may have slipped on the sloap today ... purchased an RTB Cargo-liveried Vectron model in HO ... Oops! Well just means ill have to push on with this and sort it out now :) Had a tweak around with a potential layout plan that I'll post on here when I am reasonably happy with it, but manage to do away with the single and double slips to get around the issue with Tillig track. Did some research and discovered that the differences between diamond crossings, slips and point work is reasonably well known - which seems a really odd state of affairs, but at least its not just me that couldn't make it come together with the longer points. Logically there must be some way, but hey. Having got down to just pure points I think it's now doable and reasonably quickly from a trackwork point of view. Edited January 28 by MarshLane 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now