To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.trainsOpen lugnet.trains in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Trains / 2893
2892  |  2894
Subject: 
Re: Remote Switches & GMLTC main lines
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.trains
Date: 
Fri, 26 Nov 1999 23:37:14 GMT
Reply-To: 
johnneal@STOPSPAMMERSuswest.net
Viewed: 
2506 times
  
Mike Poindexter wrote:

> I am trying to get all the particulars worked out for my train station and was
> wondering a couple of things.
> 
> #1:  On the two mainlines the GMLTC uses, is one designated freight and one
> passenger?

Yes.  The third is a short mining loop in the quarry.

> I am curious, since I can't see how to (easily) get the outside
> track to cross the inside track, which would make it difficult to have a
> station be able to work for both sides of the track without having the main
> lines run through the middle of the loading tracks.
> 
> My assumption is that the passenger trains that pass from station to station
> would come from the inside loop, but then how would a loco pass from back side
> of a module to the far track without having the inside rail reroute itself
> around the back of the roundhouse, engine shed or whatever else hold the
> freight car?

The passenger line runs along the outside of the layout.  This leaves the freight
line on the inside and able to freely access the roundhouse and freight yard.

> #2:  I had heard that the GMLTC crew was working on a pneumatic system for
> remote point control, but it is not yet working.

Well, it's not that it isn't working, it's that we haven't gotten around to
hooking it all up:-p  It is completely wired (air hoses); we just need to hook up
the points.  We will be powering the train yard so that switching will be
possible; our final hurdle is to settle on an uncoupler design.

> I will be using remote
> points some time in the early part of next year and can't decide what type of
> system would be best.  With pneumatics, you don't strip gears, burn out mini-
> motors and get to make long runs with tubing, which is much cheaper than
> electrical runs.  Also, a switch and a ram are cheaper than a motor.  Of
> course, a motor would still be needed to flip the switch to use mindstorms for
> control, unless somebody creates an electric pneumatic switch.
> 
> Does anybody have any suggestions which way to look?

Pneumatics are pretty nifty....;-)

-John

> I think I can get either
> system to work, but I would prefer not to re-invent the wheel, so to speak.
> By the way, all my points are the new harder to switch ones.
> 
> Mike Poindexter



Message is in Reply To:
  Remote Switches & GMLTC main lines
 
I am trying to get all the particulars worked out for my train station and was wondering a couple of things. #1: On the two mainlines the GMLTC uses, is one designated freight and one passenger? I am curious, since I can't see how to (easily) get (...) (27 years ago, 26-Nov-99, to lugnet.trains)

6 Messages in This Thread:





Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR