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@}AvoidSpam{uswest.net}
Viewed: 
711 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 (...) (25 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
    

Custom Search

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