Subject:
|
Re: Max. Track Slope
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Sat, 2 Mar 2002 21:46:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
550 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Jason J. Railton writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Ahui Herrera writes:
> > I'm working on a new layout and want to have a track line that goes
> > 'underneath' my table like a subway. Has anyone done something like this
> > before?
I have exactly that set up on my 'permanent' Lego railway. I have built the
underpass to gradients at least as steep as those detailed in the Train
Depot site but I'm not sure of the exact 'plate per section' drop as the
track base itself (plywood) is on the incline. My estimate is about 2 plates
per section in the steeper central part of each incline, shallowing towards
the ends.
I'm interested to know what the max. slope is that I can have on
> > the up-ramp before the train (engine and 3-4 cars) will NOT make it up the
> > slope. I'm under the assumtion the that down-slope can be as step as the
> > tracks can handle since this won't put a strain on the engine. Is this correct?
I have 2 major ramps used for bi-directional travel. One features a long
straight for most of the rise (hidden in a tunnel) which can be climbed
quite easily by (say) a 3-car Metroliner with one motor. When you add extra
cars you do get siome slippage, but some of this is down to the location of
the motor bogie at one end which is prone to wheelspinning.
A better balanced loco such as the 4565 will have a better performance even
with the one motor - at the other extreme my 3225 steam engine tries to do a
wheelie when pulling a similar load uphill!
The second ramp is slightly less steep but features a 180 degree curve and
as a result all trains suffer more on this section, it's best used for
'down' traffic only. The best way around this is to use double-motored locos
or proptypical banking engines. My double-motored (and rather heavy) BR
class 37 diesel can pull about 10 bogie wagons up this incline and around
the 180 curve with some (prototypical)slippage.
> >
> > I'll be creating the slopes and underground baseplate from plywood and/or
> > foam particle board. Anyone use this before?
Yes - Plywood, No - Foam particle board.
4mm Plywood is easy enough to work and strong enough to lean on if
adequately braced with timber. I used the lightest possible construction as
I did not want to add additional tonnage to whats already stuffing up the
loft! Only issue with plywood is that it is noisy when the trains are
running, but some of us like that effect.
Thanks
> > -AHui
>
> A lot depends on how you'll control the train. If you're happy to put the
> power on going uphill and ease off going downhill, then most trains will
> climb a 2 plate/section incline. If you just want to be able to leave the
> train running, you'll have to do 1 plate/section.
Yes, as my inclines form part of a continuous circuit it would be nice to
have the option of leaving the controls set to an average speed but in
practice you really have to 'drive' the trains. As we are talking about
tracks running UNDER the baseboard, you can only imagine how much fun it is
trying to locate all the scattered remains if you get this bit wrong!
Jon
>
> Jason J Railton
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Max. Track Slope
|
| Hey Jon, (...) Any photos of this engine? I have some of my 24/5/6's (I have 2 of them) on my web page-I might be interested in a cl 37. James P (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Max. Track Slope
|
| (...) A lot depends on how you'll control the train. If you're happy to put the power on going uphill and ease off going downhill, then most trains will climb a 2 plate/section incline. If you just want to be able to leave the train running, you'll (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
