Sidings

[g-pa1]

I have two manual turnout switches and a siding attached to the mainline of an N Scale track. If I manually switch the first switch so that the loco takes the siding instead of the mainline do I need to switch the other turnout at the other end of the siding in order to have the loco stay on the track or does it matter?

[janesew]

Marc, If I remember correctly, you have some old rolling stock. The wheel flanges on some of these cars are too big for code 55 and you might bump along the ties. You'd have to switch out to lower profile wheels. Some of the new MT come with these extra sets of wheels included. Taller wheel flanges are more forgiving. The shorter, for code 55, are easier to de-rail... you just have to be more careful planning and laying track. Fred - Code 80 STAT !!!

[g-pa1]

Hey!!! Success... I just swapped out the manual left hand far turnout for the powered remote turnout and low and behold, and a coupla prayers, no circuit breakers were injured in the process. It is neat to throw a switch and press down and have that far end switch zap to attention. I know very little about larger scale wiring but boy were those N scale turnout wires small and short. I had to go out and get three conductor wire and solder red to red etc. Whew!! Makes me appreciate the large scale trains. I ran the sacrificial loco the LL GP 38 and it did well so I threw the Kato on and all is well. Next I am going to work on more scenery. The wife made some suggestions re the mine and also we liberated the bridges from some of the foam so you can see them a little better.I need to take a breather before I take isolating track. (I did leave the track I worked on unsoldered though in prepartion.) Thanks again Pete Fred and Mike for giving me the information and the courage. Gene

[janesew]

Yeah! You've opened up a whole new world of possibilities Gene... now, ON TO DCC!! F

[trmwf]

Guys, I have to be honest here. I have all code 55 and some code 40 and have never experienced the flanges bumping along the spike heads. All my track is Micro-Engineering flex track and turnouts except for the code 40 which is hand laid by glueing the rail to wood ties. All my rolling stock has M/T pizza cutter wheels. All the wheels that come with the smaller wheel flanges that come with the new stuff are still in the box except for 15 cars that I swapped just to test for reliability. I ran these 15 in a block in some forty car trains and have not had one of them derail. The same goes for the engines. I have LL, Bachmann (steam), Atlas and Kato and a couple of Arnolds and none of them have flanges that hit the spike heads. prof

[janesew]

Hmmmmm. That's interesting Mike. I wonder why they include the new wheelsets then. Maybe just for a more prototype look on the cars? Maybe it's because of some complaints from people who did have the problem but It was more likely caused by high ballast bits against the rails that weren't cleaned off properly. Oh well. I'll be using (re-using)code 80 anyway. Although I like prototypical modelling I'm not opposed to compromise either. I have to set a limit for my pike dreams somewhere. Certainly my dream layout would be 55 and as realistic as possible... you should see my dream house, wife, and car! What's that honey?... oh... she says I already have my dream wife. (Ya, no wonder I have insomnia!) What!?! Nothing sweetie! F

[trmwf]

Fred, I think you are right with the smaller flanged wheels being provided for the more protypical look. That seems to be the craze. I know people that have actually disassembled their loco's and hand ground the flanges to protypical proportions. I have no problem with the code 80 track as I used it for years. I just enjoy the look of the smaller code 55 but if there was a problem operationally it would be in the scrap heap in a heartbeat as there is nothing more important then reliable operation. But looks are also important or we wouldn't be buying those expensive M/T cars with the fine, more protypical detail would we. prof

[trmwf]

Fred, Just one more thought. I believe the peco track, even code 80, is recessed down in to the ties. If the peco code 55 is also handled in this fashion there could be a problem with the additional loss of height. I do not know as I have never used any peco track. Are there any experiences along this line in the group? prof

[ginzokid]

Mike and All, I used Peco track on other layouts. The only trouble I had with flanges was on the older Rivarossi steamers and this only occurred at the Peco turnout frogs. My "Pizza Cutter" MT wheels never hit the spikes either. I switched to Atlas track just because of the cost. On this layout it is interesting to note that the Peco On30 track, which is really code 100 HO rail translated to code 80 in O scale, is not recessed into the ties at all. If it weren't for the correct tie spacing which the Peco has and the Atlas does not, I would be using the Atlas flex this time too. And true to form, the flanges on the C-16s, Shay and all the cars which are RP25, low profile contour, do not bump at the frog of the Peco turnouts. I'm not sure about deep flanges in N scale and Atlas turnouts, but I have had the experience of frog bumping with the Peco code 80 turnouts. B-)

[jamajack]

Gene, Sometime back you were talking about switches that would be to far away to switch when you pushed the layout back against the wall. Folks here suggested using power operated switches. If you are interested in throwing your switches manually you can look at switch throws that are almost perfect copies of the throws used in switch towers back in the 50's when I worked with the CPR.These throws can be mounted at the front of your layout or any convenient location or on your control panel and will operate up to six feet away from the switch. That was a few years ago, I'm not even sure if they still use them or not with automation and such today. These switch throws are excellent; http://www.humpyard.com Jack

[janesew]

I remember that page from a looong while back. These look really nifty Jack. Thanks for bringing it up again... I lost the bookmark. F

[g-pa1]

Jack, Those are neat levers. If I someday put more than 2 switches into the layout I will considr them.I can't imagine the guy in that tower being responsible for remembering when to move those levers! Gene

[trmwf]

Jack, You would really have to scour the country side to find a control station that still has these old pipe connected levers. There are still some air operated switches around but most have gone to the electric strictly for the ease of maintenance. Gene, Operating those levers was really quite easy. They usually had a big diagram on the wall that showed just what lever(s) to throw and in what order for each available route. When a train approached a little bell would go ding to get the operators attention. He then looked at his "board" and would see a little light lit up on the track the train was approaching from. The dispatcher would tell him what route to line the train up for depending on how the dispatcher wanted to continue the train on past. As he moved the levers to the proper position a little light would show up on the board on the track the train was going to be switched to so as a double check all the operator had to do was follow the lights on his schmatic diagram. The levers and switches were all "interlocked" together so the operator could not make a mistake and line the wrong levers or line more than one train at a time thus the railroad term "interlocker" for control towers and junctions. prof

[beastranger]

Jack Cool levers. Prof thanks for the lesson. Punk

[ginzokid]

Here's another long forgotten thread full of information. Good stuff from some people who are no longer with us too. Makes you wonder if they are still active in modeling any more. B-)

[barrysfp45]

very interesting reading, did it make a difference I wonder;\ ]:)