Joined: 15/09/2023(UTC) Posts: 103 Location: Ely, England
|
Hi all. I'm just about to start erecting catenary.
I wasn't originally going to bother but I've just acquired quite a few Eshelle masts - I think they're French but they're modern and will be good enough for me. Unfortunately the 3- and 4-track spans don't line up with Marklin's or my track spacing but maybe they'll 'do' for 2- or 3-tracks. I don't like the way Marklin (and maybe other types) of catenary bend round curves so I'm wanting them 'straight' going around curves.
So. Has anyone any hints & tips they'd like to share with me before I start please?
|
|
|
|
Joined: 02/02/2017(UTC) Posts: 694 Location: England, South Coast
|
|
 1 user liked this useful post by Michael4
|
|
|
Joined: 04/02/2021(UTC) Posts: 480 Location: USA
|
Marklin recommends straight segments between masts, but i find that slight bend over curves works better with vintage pantographs. Catenary is cosmetic on my HO digital-M layout and functional on my Z layout. |
|
 2 users liked this useful post by BenP
|
|
|
Joined: 07/02/2023(UTC) Posts: 34 Location: BC
|
The 3rd Rail YouTube channel has an excellent tutorial on the M track catenary system. Not sure which kind of track you are using. ?si=xJwc_8qh6PlTg3re
|
 4 users liked this useful post by dlwestphalen
|
|
|
Joined: 04/02/2011(UTC) Posts: 3,555 Location: Paris, France
|
Hi Dave Certainly not a specialist here but I try to share my experience My choices:- to fit only a part of my layout to allow a credible operation of electric locos (allows me to operate steamers and diesel so more diverse traction means) - not to fit non-visible parts as it leads to added costs and reduced accessibility - not to operate with raised pantographs (I experienced firsthand how quick a pantograph can be destroyed by a misplaced catenary). - to use Viessman catenary as it is compatible with Märklin's with a wider choice and reduced prices My observations- catenary is nice to have but when stations are fitted with covered platforms, it becomes a nightmare (to be avoided at all cost in this situation) - catenary is normally well installed but the key thing is: during interventions, it is often displaced unavertently so keep it ONLY where accessibility is EXCELLENT otherwise forget it. - some train fans install the masts but NOT the catenary. It is not a bad idea as in my country (France) high voltage (25 kV) allows using thin wires that are not very visible and not having those wires simplifies a lot accessibility. - because I use Rocrail, each electric loco will not be proposed routes where the traction mode does not fit (no electrics when there is no catenary) - the idea of NOT FITTING the entire layout was indeed an excellent decision Here is a video about my layout with one mainline fitted with catenary and the others (branch lines, etc) being without Cheers Jean |
|
 7 users liked this useful post by JohnjeanB
|
|
|
Joined: 15/09/2023(UTC) Posts: 103 Location: Ely, England
|
Some excellent comments there Johnjean, thank you. Originally Posted by: JohnjeanB  - to fit only a part of my layout to allow a credible operation of electric locos (allows me to operate steamers and diesel so more diverse traction means)
Only the 'main' line will be electrified, the branch will remain diesel only. Originally Posted by: JohnjeanB  - not to fit non-visible parts as it leads to added costs and reduced accessibility
The fiddle yard (shadow station) will not be fitted with catenary. Originally Posted by: JohnjeanB  - not to operate with raised pantographs (I experienced firsthand how quick a pantograph can be destroyed by a misplaced catenary).
I'd like to have raised pantographs - we'll see how it goes. Originally Posted by: JohnjeanB  - to use Viessman catenary as it is compatible with Märklin's with a wider choice and reduced prices
Good point! Originally Posted by: JohnjeanB  - catenary is nice to have but when stations are fitted with covered platforms, it becomes a nightmare (to be avoided at all cost in this situation)
My platforms will not be covered - that was decided before I thought of having catenary. Originally Posted by: JohnjeanB  - catenary is normally well installed but the key thing is: during interventions, it is often displaced unavertently so keep it ONLY where accessibility is EXCELLENT otherwise forget it.
Fortunately, I planned the railway so that I could reach it - I have a centre operating space. Originally Posted by: JohnjeanB  - some train fans install the masts but NOT the catenary. It is not a bad idea as in my country (France) high voltage (25 kV) allows using thin wires that are not very visible and not having those wires simplifies a lot accessibility.
I can see the reason for not intalling the wires but to me it would look too wrong. Originally Posted by: JohnjeanB  - because I use Rocrail, each electric loco will not be proposed routes where the traction mode does not fit (no electrics when there is no catenary)
Manual driving for me :-) Originally Posted by: JohnjeanB  - the idea of NOT FITTING the entire layout was indeed an excellent decision
My branch line is longer than the visible part of the main line. And thanks for the video.
|
|
|
|
Joined: 26/07/2021(UTC) Posts: 635 Location: Sydney
|
Originally Posted by: dave55uk  I don't like the way Marklin (and maybe other types) of catenary bend round curves so I'm wanting them 'straight' going around curves. The way around this is to use realistic track radius. But most of us don't have the room. Even in Z gauge it's impossible to solve, unless you raise masts & leave off wires, but then masts look too tall. Something has to give somewhere. 
|
 4 users liked this useful post by Toosmall
|
|
|
Joined: 02/02/2017(UTC) Posts: 694 Location: England, South Coast
|
I enjoy catenary.
I use M track and the old fashioned masts that clip to the track (in most instances). The beauty of these is that you can shuffle them around without disturbing too much.
The electrical connectivity of the catenary seems better than the track, much of which is old and battered. Bending the catenary on curves is all but unavoidable. Masts clipped to tracks do not look good on inclines. Bridge masts for M track are expensive and hard to find.
The catenary is live but is confined to easy to reach circuits. Using contact tracks to control catenary makes for more wires. If you are an analogista this will be much appreciated.
In low light dirty catenary can cause sparks, add to this the ability to change coach lighting whilst on the move and the overall effect gets interesting.
For me, plenty of upsides but the downside is accesibility and the tendency for your sleeves to tangle with masts etc.
|
 5 users liked this useful post by Michael4
|
|
|
Joined: 15/12/2005(UTC) Posts: 3,589 Location: Spain
|
I want to run with the pantos raised, but I realize that it is unavoidable that it will fail OFTEN, and get tangled against masts and wires. So the pantos must be limited in movement, and run a millimeter lower that the wire. That way you still get the "compression" of the pantos going under/over bridges and entering tunnels. -But for the rest of the layout it should stay free of the wire!!! I think that will be the optimal solution -at least for me. |
|
 5 users liked this useful post by hxmiesa
|
|
|
Joined: 18/11/2020(UTC) Posts: 89 Location: Georgia, Ball Ground
|
Originally Posted by: hxmiesa  I want to run with the pantos raised, but I realize that it is unavoidable that it will fail OFTEN, and get tangled against masts and wires. So the pantos must be limited in movement, and run a millimeter lower that the wire. That way you still get the "compression" of the pantos going under/over bridges and entering tunnels. -But for the rest of the layout it should stay free of the wire!!! I think that will be the optimal solution -at least for me. Sounds great, but how do you keep the pantographs half raised without it showing up and messing up the effect of it ??
|
|
|
|
Joined: 15/12/2005(UTC) Posts: 3,589 Location: Spain
|
Originally Posted by: Willem99  Originally Posted by: hxmiesa  I want to run with the pantos raised, but I realize that it is unavoidable that it will fail OFTEN, and get tangled against masts and wires. So the pantos must be limited in movement, and run a millimeter lower that the wire. That way you still get the "compression" of the pantos going under/over bridges and entering tunnels. -But for the rest of the layout it should stay free of the wire!!! I think that will be the optimal solution -at least for me. Sounds great, but how do you keep the pantographs half raised without it showing up and messing up the effect of it ?? With a hair-thin fishing line. I think there are several ways of doing it... |
|
 1 user liked this useful post by hxmiesa
|
|
|
Joined: 15/09/2023(UTC) Posts: 103 Location: Ely, England
|
At long last I've started installing the masts and catenary. I'm using Marklin C-track, mostly Marklin masts (74101), and a variety of catenary wires.
I've only installed 4 masts so far but the biggest problem I have found is soldering the wires to the arms. I'm trying to solder, as it looks like there is solder already on the ends of the arms. But even at 485 degrees, my soldering iron just will not 'melt' the solder.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong - please!, or offer some advice.
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/05/2015(UTC) Posts: 567 Location: Tunbridge Wells, Kent, United Kingdom
|
Hi Dave,
No need to solder. It’s a push fit system. You should see on the lower arm there are two “lumps” where the overhead wire can be attached. By using the inner and outer the overhead can zig zag over the track as per the prototype.
What you need is the Marklin Catenary handbook. I am not sure of the catalogue number or if it is still available.
Adrian
|
 3 users liked this useful post by twmarklinfan
|
|
|
Joined: 15/09/2023(UTC) Posts: 103 Location: Ely, England
|
Originally Posted by: twmarklinfan  Hi Dave,
No need to solder. It’s a push fit system. You should see on the lower arm there are two “lumps” where the overhead wire can be attached. By using the inner and outer the overhead can zig zag over the track as per the prototype.
What you need is the Marklin Catenary handbook. I am not sure of the catalogue number or if it is still available.
Adrian Adrian - You're a star. Have been back in there and yes, exactly as you said. Wonderful! Many thanks. (video too big to post)
|
 1 user liked this useful post by dave55uk
|
|
|
Joined: 15/09/2023(UTC) Posts: 103 Location: Ely, England
|
So a picture instead 
|
 4 users liked this useful post by dave55uk
|
|
|
Joined: 27/07/2017(UTC) Posts: 36 Location: Northern Territory, Australia
|
If you are using Marklin 70### wires and 74### masts and you really want to solder them (rather than push fit), normal lead-tin solder won't stick to the metal I have found, and think it would have to be done with silver solder. Beware that this uses a gas torch and the associated fire risk.
Karl
|
 2 users liked this useful post by Kanga
|
|
|
Joined: 04/12/2013(UTC) Posts: 2,261 Location: Hobart, Australia
|
Originally Posted by: Kanga  If you are using Marklin 70### wires and 74### masts and you really want to solder them (rather than push fit), normal lead-tin solder won't stick to the metal I have found, and think it would have to be done with silver solder. Beware that this uses a gas torch and the associated fire risk.
Karl Hello Karl, You can "silver solder" with a soldering iron. In my ever-learning experience I have found this will bond most metals we encounter in model railways : https://www.marklin-user...last-question#post671306Regards, PJ
|
|
|
|
Joined: 15/09/2023(UTC) Posts: 103 Location: Ely, England
|
Originally Posted by: Kanga  If you are using Marklin 70### wires and 74### masts and you really want to solder them (rather than push fit), normal lead-tin solder won't stick to the metal I have found, and think it would have to be done with silver solder. Beware that this uses a gas torch and the associated fire risk.
Karl Thanks for that - I think I'll stick to push fitting. Seems to be going okay at the moment.
|
|
|
|
Joined: 22/09/2009(UTC) Posts: 2,073 Location: Edinburgh,
|
Hi I run standard old style catenary on my M track exhibition layout.
It runs over 3 main lines with covered platforms. Occasionally there are problems but generally the system is very useable. As with anything maintenance is always the key and checks on the joints etc help reduce incidents.
With it operational I can run 6 trains on the 3 main lines as it is analogue throughout.
Mike |
1957 - 1985 era What's digital? |
 1 user liked this useful post by hennabm
|
|
|
Joined: 02/02/2017(UTC) Posts: 694 Location: England, South Coast
|
I find the biggest problem with catenary is your own clothing. The damage that can be done by a loose sleeve or cuff can be quite depressing.
Best to wear a wetsuit!
|
 5 users liked this useful post by Michael4
|
|
|
Joined: 07/02/2008(UTC) Posts: 198 Location: Lindome, Sweden
|
My first layout had a Märklin catenary. Now, I won't and will use only the masts and no wire, which makes maintenance possible. Cleaning the tracks and clearing derailments are a pain with catenary wire and even more on double or multiple tracks.
The pantos are tied with a thin thread, either fishing line or sewing thread, in a similar color to the panto. That way locomotives stay clear of bridges and catenary masts.
The pantos are way too fragile and expensive to put at risk and spare parts are hard to come by.
|
|
 3 users liked this useful post by LeoArietis
|
|
|
Joined: 30/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 126 Location: Seattle area
|
Originally Posted by: Michael4  I find the biggest problem with catenary is your own clothing. The damage that can be done by a loose sleeve or cuff can be quite depressing.
Best to wear a wetsuit! Why wear anything then? 
|
 4 users liked this useful post by ccranium
|
|
|
Joined: 23/04/2019(UTC) Posts: 497 Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
|
I don't have catenary. (I admire people who do). If I want to run locomotives with raised pantographs I use very thin strands of copper wire to hold them down. Then I don't have to fiddle with making fine knots. The copper wire just needs a few twists to be secured. The strands are from stripped wires (not all household wiring will have adequately thin wires in them). Thin fishing line would probably be better but it would be hard for me to make it fit with knots and all.
... or would a thin copper wire be more prone to breaking or failing over time?
|
 2 users liked this useful post by Copenhagen
|
|
|
Joined: 23/10/2010(UTC) Posts: 2,061 Location: FRANCE
|
As for me, I love my vintage catenary. It is powered when the layout is positioned in analog mode, as in the picture below.  it covers practically the entire layout except two sidings. I never had any problems with this catenary, even in the many tunnels. The only rule is to have fun with our trains. Best Regards Joël |
|
 13 users liked this useful post by TrainIride
|
Bogenschütze, PJMärklin, Carim, marklinist5999, dave55uk, Copenhagen, dickinsonj, hennabm, ccranium, Willem99, dlwestphalen, Eurobahnfan, hermanvk
|
|
Joined: 04/12/2013(UTC) Posts: 2,261 Location: Hobart, Australia
|
Originally Posted by: TrainIride  … The only rule is to have fun with our trains. ... 
|
 3 users liked this useful post by PJMärklin
|
|
|
Joined: 23/10/2010(UTC) Posts: 2,061 Location: FRANCE
|
...just for information the curved catenary actually exists ! in the south of France :   Best Regards Joël |
|
 8 users liked this useful post by TrainIride
|
|
|
Joined: 30/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 126 Location: Seattle area
|
Originally Posted by: TrainIride  ...just for information
the curved catenary actually exists !
This is awesome; I'm firmly in the "functional catenary" camp with my analog M-track layout. It's tedious to set up but that's why it's fun for me.
@Joel: Do you know if the curved sections' wires wander from side to side to spread out the pantographs' wear?
|
|
|
|
Joined: 23/10/2010(UTC) Posts: 2,061 Location: FRANCE
|
Originally Posted by: ccranium  Originally Posted by: TrainIride  ...just for information
the curved catenary actually exists ! This is awesome; I'm firmly in the "functional catenary" camp with my analog M-track layout. It's tedious to set up but that's why it's fun for me. @Joel: Do you know if the curved sections' wires wander from side to side to spread out the pantographs' wear? Well, I don't have any documentation about this, but as it was a very old catenary design from the "Compagnie du Midi" train line, well before the creation of the SNCF, I think that the overhead wire had to follow exactly the tracks.  But I also read that with the heat of the south of France, the length of the cables changed, and the place of the overhead wire varied above the rails, which required the locomotives to have wide pantographs. Best Regards Joël |
|
 3 users liked this useful post by TrainIride
|
|
|
Joined: 15/12/2005(UTC) Posts: 3,589 Location: Spain
|
Originally Posted by: Michael4  I find the biggest problem with catenary is your own clothing. The damage that can be done by a loose sleeve or cuff can be quite depressing. Best to wear a wetsuit! Or one can do nude modelling... ;-) |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/09/2019(UTC) Posts: 151 Location: England, Chichester
|
Originally Posted by: TrainIride  Originally Posted by: ccranium  Originally Posted by: TrainIride  ...just for information
the curved catenary actually exists ! This is awesome; I'm firmly in the "functional catenary" camp with my analog M-track layout. It's tedious to set up but that's why it's fun for me. @Joel: Do you know if the curved sections' wires wander from side to side to spread out the pantographs' wear? Well, I don't have any documentation about this, but as it was a very old catenary design from the "Compagnie du Midi" train line, well before the creation of the SNCF, I think that the overhead wire had to follow exactly the tracks.  But I also read that with the heat of the south of France, the length of the cables changed, and the place of the overhead wire varied above the rails, which required the locomotives to have wide pantographs. Best Regards Joël Great illustrations, Joel. The “ogive” catenary masts of the Cie du Midi were very unusual and gave that company’s lines a unique appearance. Today, many have been replaced with conventional masts. The photo below shows that on straight lines, the contact wire did indeed zig-zag to minimise wear on the pantograph shoe. This was very necessary on the high-speed Bordeaux to Hendaye line, the so-called “Tunnel of Speed”. It was here that the SNCF set the world speed records in the 1950s. By contrast, on the Cie du Midi's "Ligne des Cevennes" through the mountainous Massif Central, the line was almost continuous sharp curves and so the engineers used the ogive frame to significantly off-set the messenger wire. This ensured the contact wire smoothly followed the severe radius of the track as illustrated in Joel's drawing above.  |
Marklin - "The train set I never had as a child."
Keith Bowman |
 5 users liked this useful post by Bogenschütze
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.