Railroad Line Forums - The Coos Bay and Willamette Valley
Railroad Line Forums
Username:
Password:
Save Password


Register
Forgot Password?
  Home   Forums   Events Calendar   Sponsors   Support the RRLine   Guestbook   FAQ     Register
Active Topics | Active Polls | Resources | Members | Online Users | Live Chat | Avatar Legend | Search | Statistics
Photo Album | File Lister | File Library
[ Active Members: 6 | Anonymous Members: 0 | Guests: 113 ]  [ Total: 119 ]  [ Newest Member: brianrudko ]
 All Forums
 Model Railroad Forums
 Early Rail Forum
 The Coos Bay and Willamette Valley
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic |   Reply to Topic | 
Author Topic Next Topic: Projects in Progress on the Southern Central RR
Page: of 90

Dutchman
Administrator

Premium Member


Posted - 07/14/2013 :  09:50:06 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I'll take 'lucky' anytime, Bob.



Country: USA | Posts: 30644 Go to Top of Page

railman28
Fireman



Posted - 07/15/2013 :  4:04:27 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
while, I cut the hole in the backdrop and laid out the track and was happy to see it's going to fit like its suppose to. On the other side of the backdrop the missing roadbed is in place and its glue drying.



Now I can start laying track.



It's only make-believe

Country: USA | Posts: 4570 Go to Top of Page

masonamerican
Fireman



Posted - 07/15/2013 :  4:21:43 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi Bob, here sure things are happening when I have been away!

I read about the re-motoring project on the Bachmann 4-4-0. I would go for the PFM loco as it has so much better detailing. I'm not that sensitive about a see through cab so I think with adding weight in the cab roof and everywhere possible the loco can be made to pull even with a motor (small one though) in the loco. I was in contact with a Danish guy who also has a soft spot for American 4-4-0s who has done some conversions to the PFM Golden Spike locos. I'll email you the pictures I got from him hoping they can be of help. In an argument with him about the pros and cons on tender drive versus motor in the loco he said one thing and that is that a tender driven loco needs space for the drive shaft in the loco which is space which can't be used for adding weight. If a small motor is mounted in the loco it doesn't take up that much more room and also adds weight. It needs to be small though.

An idea I have is to use the tender for adding weight. The idea is to let the front of the tender rest on the back of the locomotive chassi adding weight. The tender front truck is just riding along.
Perhaps I test this in another future project. Here is a rough sketch:
Download Attachment: Sketch.jpg
59.41 KB

Another idea is to take one of the PFM loco drivers and get a machinist to turn a slot for a traction tire.

Some ideas that maybe can be of help.

Håkan



Country: Sweden | Posts: 1642 Go to Top of Page

railman28
Fireman



Posted - 07/15/2013 :  6:02:15 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi Håkan,
Well I certainly won't give you any argument about the PFM having better detail, that's a given. I do think the Backmann's detail can be brought up to acceptable standards with a lot of work. I certainly would want to see your Danish friend's work on his Promontory Set. The trouble with motors that are small enough to go into the engine is that the one that are sometimes available have high RPM speeds. 3x that of the motors that Harold and Denny are using. To get slow speeds from them you need a gearbox with a ration of about 50 to 1. Such gearboxs are hard to find for standard gauge axle sizes. Your idea for transferring tender weight to the drivers has merit too and deserves some investigating. I do fear that it might lead to derailments of the lead tender truck in turnouts however. I would be afraid of hiring a machinist to cut out a tire grove in a driver. If he kills it, it not like I can just order a replacement.


It's only make-believe

Country: USA | Posts: 4570 Go to Top of Page

masonamerican
Fireman



Posted - 07/16/2013 :  02:23:41 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi Bob,
Its just some crazy ideas I have had. The use of a small motor is based on using DCC and letting a good decoder somewhat taking care of the gearing problem with fine tuning. I'm searching for the photos as is some years ago I received them. If I remember correctly he fitted in a small Faulhaber or Maxon motor with the correct axle diameter for the worm. He then installed a sound decoder in the tender, I think a Esu lokselect micro.

Here is a youtube clip of one of his trains:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zhKXn5OFgTU

The idea to use the tender as weight perhaps is crazy
but I think it could work with weighting down the truck or distributing some of the weight on the tender with a light spring. Now I'm itching to try the idea.

Håkan



Country: Sweden | Posts: 1642 Go to Top of Page

railman28
Fireman



Posted - 07/17/2013 :  12:20:22 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Håkan,
You have notice? I kinda like crazy and 's. Besides like 007 says; "the difference between insanity and genus is success".

Six feet of track laid .

PS I like Classical Music too.


Oh! and how do you measure success?


It's only make-believe

Edited by - railman28 on 07/17/2013 12:22:35 AM

Country: USA | Posts: 4570 Go to Top of Page

railman28
Fireman



Posted - 08/02/2013 :  6:22:04 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Time for another boring update. Track laying has progressed well. I got about 20ft in now.
Here's some progress shots. This first is also a mock-up to check how the scene is shaping up;



Here one a little higher up;

The snap switch here is a template as a stub switch will go in it's place there. Above it you can see the code 83 transition track (all scenic track is code 70 and 55) that leads to the staging track (code 100). Shown here;


The unlaid route on the right will lead up a ramp to the storage/extension (we'll see) tracks. If you follow the latest posted track plan the laid track goes around and ends up here;


Coos Bay Yard. I, the executive made a executive decision! That switches that were not easily visible can be point switches. So we see a point switch on the right that will be hidden by the roundhouse. I now have to start laying switches. Something new to me. I have reviewed a lot of available information and I'm about ready to proceed.



It's only make-believe

Country: USA | Posts: 4570 Go to Top of Page

masonamerican
Fireman



Posted - 08/03/2013 :  2:05:54 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Sounds like the executive made a sound decision! Are you going to hand lay the point switches also or is it only the stub ones?

Håkan



Country: Sweden | Posts: 1642 Go to Top of Page

railman28
Fireman



Posted - 08/03/2013 :  4:59:27 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Thank you Håkan, I have used SHINOHARA code 70 #4's for years and have gotten good service out of them and will continue to use them for the visible track. For the hidden track I'm using Atlas code 100 until they prove unreliable.

It's only make-believe

Country: USA | Posts: 4570 Go to Top of Page

railman28
Fireman



Posted - 08/03/2013 :  9:52:39 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
This is my Yard Throat;
with templates glued in place.

These photos show the results I'm looking for:







It's only make-believe

Edited by - railman28 on 08/03/2013 9:58:26 PM

Country: USA | Posts: 4570 Go to Top of Page

dallas_m
Fireman

Premium Member


Posted - 08/03/2013 :  10:38:30 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Looks like some tricky business that should have a nice payoff!

Cheers,
Dallas

Chambers Gas & Oil -- structure build
Quality craftsmanship with a sense of humor!

Country: USA | Posts: 4674 Go to Top of Page

railman28
Fireman



Posted - 08/05/2013 :  5:39:59 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Damn,damn,damn, I forgot to get turnout ties.
That's going to put turnout building on hold a week or so. but I did start to layout the PC ties under the frogs;

The delay I guess will give me time to figure some things out. I used Fast Tracks free templates and as you can see the track pieces points don't line up on the templates. That's not a problem really because I'm making stub switches. the problem I have to figure out is where to locate my points and lay the stub points. The gap in the rails can not be wider than the throw of the switch stand and the rail have to align squarely.

Any Idea's


Dallas! Thanks for dropping by. It should be any trickier than making a Tiger appear from a hat.

Download Attachment: PICT1288.JPG
147.19 KB


It's only make-believe

Country: USA | Posts: 4570 Go to Top of Page

masonamerican
Fireman



Posted - 08/06/2013 :  05:10:55 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Looking good Bob!
If you havent already seen it. Fast Tracks has a guide for building stub switches with their assembly jigs. Perhaps it can have some useful info:
http://www.handlaidtrack.com/v/vspfiles/documents/ug20.pdf

Håkan



Edited by - masonamerican on 08/06/2013 05:13:01 AM

Country: Sweden | Posts: 1642 Go to Top of Page

George D
Moderator

Premium Member


Posted - 08/06/2013 :  08:16:57 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Håkan, thanks for the Fast Tracks link.

Bob, I'm interested in seeing how your stub switch turns out.

George




Country: USA | Posts: 14463 Go to Top of Page

Salty4568
New Hire

Posted - 08/06/2013 :  4:18:46 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
RE: Remotoring: I am wondering if anyone has tried using two small motors working together, rather than one. They'd have to be geared or belted to each other. I may have to give it a try.

Re: Stub Switch: I assume you are using Code 70? Wonder if 83 would work for a stub switch.

Through wondering for a while. Nice work on your layout!




Skip Luke
Retired Railroader

Country: | Posts: 11 Go to Top of Page
Page: of 90 Topic Next Topic: Projects in Progress on the Southern Central RR  
 New Topic |   Reply to Topic | 
Previous Page | Next Page
Jump To:
Railroad Line Forums © 2000-17 Railroad Line Co. Go To Top Of Page
Steam was generated in 0.42 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000