Welcome to the forum   
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

4 Pages<1234>
Share
Options
View
Go to last post in this topic Go to first unread post in this topic
Offline Timnomads  
#51 Posted : 31 October 2016 13:33:09(UTC)
Timnomads

Switzerland   
Joined: 16/09/2015(UTC)
Posts: 146
Location: Grandvaux - Lausanne - Switzerland
Originally Posted by: Hackcell Go to Quoted Post
Will you receive anyrail-based files?

I have not met the system anyrail before, can you email me a jpeg and I will put it into scarm and create a Jpeg from that ?
Offline Alsterstreek  
#52 Posted : 04 November 2016 00:04:06(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
Back on track:

How to squeeze four tracks of equal length on a 22 cm shelf with a 40 cm long throat. The double slip turnout on the right side can bet replaced by a simple 24611/2 turnout.

ablaufberg2kondensiert.png

Edited by user 04 November 2016 19:00:53(UTC)  | Reason: typo

thanks 9 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Timnomads  
#53 Posted : 04 November 2016 12:04:02(UTC)
Timnomads

Switzerland   
Joined: 16/09/2015(UTC)
Posts: 146
Location: Grandvaux - Lausanne - Switzerland
thanks Timnomads
Offline kimballthurlow  
#54 Posted : 04 December 2016 22:07:42(UTC)
kimballthurlow

Australia   
Joined: 18/03/2007(UTC)
Posts: 5,835
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Here is a useful explanation about a return loop, posted by Tom (HO) in another topic so I thought I would reproduce it here.

Tom says - There was an R1 turnout in the Alpha system.

Why is there no R1 turnout in the C track system? I don't know.
You can make 30° turnouts and the angle will define the track spacing.
You can define the track spacing and calculate the angle of the turnout. Then you will need another piece to bring the turnout to 30°.

The Alpha turnout was 180 mm and 30°. Ideal for reversing loops, but will need short track pieces as fillers when used for large (shadow) stations.
There is no 180 mm straight track with C track - having 172 mm and 188 mm avoids the need for short filler pieces when sticking to the 24.3° turnout angle.

To get a reversing loop with a 24611/2, add a 24206 to the turnout and use one 24230 in the reversing loop and it will fit without bending.

UserPostedImage
HO Scale - Märklin (ep III and VI, C Track, digital) - 2 rail (USA and Australia) - 3 rail (English Hornby Dublo) - a few old O gauge.
thanks 8 users liked this useful post by kimballthurlow
Offline Timnomads  
#55 Posted : 05 December 2016 10:33:19(UTC)
Timnomads

Switzerland   
Joined: 16/09/2015(UTC)
Posts: 146
Location: Grandvaux - Lausanne - Switzerland
Originally Posted by: kimballthurlow Go to Quoted Post
Here is a useful explanation about a return loop, posted by Tom (HO) in another topic so I thought I would reproduce it here.

Tom says - There was an R1 turnout in the Alpha system.

Why is there no R1 turnout in the C track system? I don't know.
You can make 30° turnouts and the angle will define the track spacing.
You can define the track spacing and calculate the angle of the turnout. Then you will need another piece to bring the turnout to 30°.

The Alpha turnout was 180 mm and 30°. Ideal for reversing loops, but will need short track pieces as fillers when used for large (shadow) stations.
There is no 180 mm straight track with C track - having 172 mm and 188 mm avoids the need for short filler pieces when sticking to the 24.3° turnout angle.

To get a reversing loop with a 24611/2, add a 24206 to the turnout and use one 24230 in the reversing loop and it will fit without bending.

UserPostedImage


noted - thanks Tim
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by Timnomads
Offline kiwiAlan  
#56 Posted : 05 December 2016 23:42:01(UTC)
kiwiAlan

United Kingdom   
Joined: 23/07/2014(UTC)
Posts: 5,143
Location: ENGLAND, Didcot
Originally Posted by: kimballthurlow Go to Quoted Post
Here is a useful explanation about a return loop, posted by Tom (HO) in another topic so I thought I would reproduce it here.


Thanks for doing that, i was going to add a note to the other thread suggesting the posts should be transferred here, but this post does just as well.

Offline Ramprasad S.V.R.  
#57 Posted : 06 December 2016 16:11:51(UTC)
Ramprasad S.V.R.

India   
Joined: 27/07/2014(UTC)
Posts: 12
Location: CHENNAI, INDIA
Hello!
I am using only C tracks in my layouts! all aspects are very good! But the tracks at the joining edges corner are breaking ! I think may be due to climatic and weather conditions in India?! Any suggestions and advice please!
Ramprasad.
06/12/2016.
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by Ramprasad S.V.R.
Offline Alsterstreek  
#58 Posted : 06 December 2016 17:09:50(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
thanks 4 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline RayF  
#59 Posted : 07 December 2016 10:25:40(UTC)
RayF

Gibraltar   
Joined: 14/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 15,694
Location: Gibraltar, Europe
Originally Posted by: Ramprasad S.V.R. Go to Quoted Post
Hello!
I am using only C tracks in my layouts! all aspects are very good! But the tracks at the joining edges corner are breaking ! I think may be due to climatic and weather conditions in India?! Any suggestions and advice please!
Ramprasad.
06/12/2016.


Hi Ramprasad,

This is a subject that has come up before many times. C-track can become brittle under certain conditions, and the older pieces from the early 2000s are the worst. Can I ask how old your track is? If it is from the early period you might want to start phasing it out, replacing broken pieces with newer ones that use a different plastic compound and is much more stable.

I am a great fan of C-track but I acknowledge that it has to be handled with a bit of care. My own layout is permanent so I don't have this problem.
Ray
Mostly Marklin.Selection of different eras and European railways
Small C track layout, control by MS2, 100+ trains but run 4-5 at a time.
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by RayF
Offline Ramprasad S.V.R.  
#60 Posted : 07 December 2016 14:36:11(UTC)
Ramprasad S.V.R.

India   
Joined: 27/07/2014(UTC)
Posts: 12
Location: CHENNAI, INDIA
Thank you all! Sorry Mr.Alsterstreek & Rey F, I am late and I did not know so much research had gone into "C" Track subject by the Forum and it was all useful and informative!
Ramprasad
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by Ramprasad S.V.R.
Offline Alsterstreek  
#61 Posted : 15 January 2017 18:07:14(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
A concept which is always on my mind, the "inverted return loop". It is an alternative to the the classic simple return loop (e.g. post no. 54) which is eating up 120 cm in terms of length. Depending on how clever it is incorporated, the inverted return loop can save vertical space while adding scenic interest. In addition, the inverted loop can accommodate longer trains than other arrangements, which is advantageous for somebody like your correspondent who wants to be able to run a 400 cm long freight (goods) drag. A spring switch (sprung point) is used which saves on electronics and maintenance, making a train enter the loop into the same direction. The returning leg can be positioned below or above the loop track, but I prefer the first option, allowing for a depressed scenery like a track bridging a river valley before graciously descending to the valley bottom (see last image). There are endless variations, as mirroring the setup, using wider curves or adding a station below the bridge. For simplicity, I focus on the minimalistic approach, but I allow myself the luxury of "easements“ with R9 curves at the beginning and end of the lower valley bottom curves which ensure that trains swing elegantly in and out of the curves. The basic concept fits on a 152 x 87 cm surface.
1a.png
In either direction, the ramp from the highest point at the turnout - we don´t want any turnout on an inclined ramp - to the lowest point below the bridge is 200 cm. For a bridge height of 8 cm this equals a 4% incline. Like that the loop could serve to turn around trains coming from and going to the adjacent leg of a L shaped layout and /or shelf layout.

Tilting the above figure, space requirements change to 140 x 120 cm - see left side of below image. This can serve a rectangular layout which is extending to the left. When tilted, the the straight section on the ramp behind the turnout can be extended to ease the slope. Now the ramps have different lengths. Further the bridge can be curved, here with R5 curves. Then the surface equals 160 x 98 cm - see right side of below image.
3b.png

When enforcing a against the clock running regime, thus descending on the shorter 220 cm and thus steeper ramp and climbing the longer and gentler 270 cm long ramp, the train has only to battle a 3% incline, which is quite generous. Here a scenicking proposal, mainly meant to conceal tight radius curves and the very nature of the return loop while at the same time creating a dramatic scenery.
4a.png
thanks 12 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline kimballthurlow  
#62 Posted : 16 January 2017 00:19:40(UTC)
kimballthurlow

Australia   
Joined: 18/03/2007(UTC)
Posts: 5,835
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Hi Ak,
Brilliant concept for a change in height return loop (CIHRL).

I have been thinking for some time of a layout re-design, and I will try this concept, except it will need be double track.
That does not mean it has to be precisely parallel, or even take the same route if it is inside a mountain, or behind a scenery block.
So long as the entrance/exit is at close proximity.

Kimball
HO Scale - Märklin (ep III and VI, C Track, digital) - 2 rail (USA and Australia) - 3 rail (English Hornby Dublo) - a few old O gauge.
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by kimballthurlow
Offline kiwiAlan  
#63 Posted : 16 January 2017 14:39:09(UTC)
kiwiAlan

United Kingdom   
Joined: 23/07/2014(UTC)
Posts: 5,143
Location: ENGLAND, Didcot
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post
A concept which is always on my mind, the "inverted return loop". It is an alternative to the the classic simple return loop (e.g. post no. 54) which is eating up 120 cm in terms of length. Depending on how clever it is incorporated, the inverted return loop can save vertical space while adding scenic interest. In addition, the inverted loop can accommodate longer trains than other arrangements, which is advantageous for somebody like your correspondent who wants to be able to run a 400 cm long freight (goods) drag. A spring switch (sprung point) is used which saves on electronics and maintenance, making a train enter the loop into the same direction. The returning leg can be positioned below or above the loop track, but I prefer the first option, allowing for a depressed scenery like a track bridging a river valley before graciously descending to the valley bottom (see last image). There are endless variations, as mirroring the setup, using wider curves or adding a station below the bridge. For simplicity, I focus on the minimalistic approach, but I allow myself the luxury of "easements“ with R9 curves at the beginning and end of the lower valley bottom curves which ensure that trains swing elegantly in and out of the curves. The basic concept fits on a 152 x 87 cm surface.
1a.png


I would be tempted to create a station or hidden storage yards (depending whether visible or not) on the underpass by having a 24671/2 pair of points each side - you could even use two pair to give three tracks with a bit of care.
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by kiwiAlan
Offline Minok  
#64 Posted : 17 January 2017 20:42:33(UTC)
Minok

United States   
Joined: 15/10/2006(UTC)
Posts: 2,152
Location: Washington, Pacific Northwest
Originally Posted by: kimballthurlow Go to Quoted Post
Hi Ak,
Brilliant concept for a change in height return loop (CIHRL).

I have been thinking for some time of a layout re-design, and I will try this concept, except it will need be double track.
That does not mean it has to be precisely parallel, or even take the same route if it is inside a mountain, or behind a scenery block.
So long as the entrance/exit is at close proximity.

Kimball


So what would that look like in real parts? I assume you would have the straight leg be double track and the loops and under/over section still be single track (so no turnouts used, just curves and straight sections)
Toys of tin and wood rule!
---
My Layout Thread on marklin-users.net: InterCity 1-3-4
My YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/Minok1217/
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by Minok
Offline LeoArietis  
#65 Posted : 17 January 2017 22:16:32(UTC)
LeoArietis

Sweden   
Joined: 07/02/2008(UTC)
Posts: 130
Location: Lindome, Sweden
R1-return-loops, the right one has the S-curve countered by a 24071 in the middle.

Current layout:
http://www.svensktmjforu.../index.php?topic=10990.0
The former project:
http://www.svensktmjforu...forum_posts.asp?TID=1097
With Pictures and trackplans, but in Swedish
Transitation-curves in C-track:
https://www.marklin-user...9-on-75-cm.aspx#post9281
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by LeoArietis
Offline kimballthurlow  
#66 Posted : 18 January 2017 12:19:46(UTC)
kimballthurlow

Australia   
Joined: 18/03/2007(UTC)
Posts: 5,835
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Originally Posted by: Minok Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: kimballthurlow Go to Quoted Post
..... I will try this concept, except it will need be double track.
That does not mean it has to be precisely parallel, or even take the same route if it is inside a mountain, or behind a scenery block.
So long as the entrance/exit is at close proximity.

Kimball


So what would that look like in real parts? I assume you would have the straight leg be double track and the loops and under/over section still be single track (so no turnouts used, just curves and straight sections)


Yes I guess that is how it would be.
Unless I continued both left and right hand tracks to a different level, using the concept of a loop inside a mountain.
That might make interesting viewing.
(From one who has only built a single-level layout.)

Kimball
HO Scale - Märklin (ep III and VI, C Track, digital) - 2 rail (USA and Australia) - 3 rail (English Hornby Dublo) - a few old O gauge.
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by kimballthurlow
Offline Alsterstreek  
#67 Posted : 22 January 2017 12:45:48(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
For smooth coach movements:
Somewhat condensed curved station throat without S-curves (and without curved turnouts), connecting each station track to either main line track, and creating room for wider passenger platforms.
winterbahn_einfahrtw4yoq.jpg
thanks 4 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline 5HorizonsRR  
#68 Posted : 22 January 2017 17:15:18(UTC)
5HorizonsRR

United States   
Joined: 05/12/2004(UTC)
Posts: 2,972
Location: NY, NY
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post
Back on track:

How to squeeze four tracks of equal length on a 22 cm shelf with a 40 cm long throat. The double slip turnout on the right side can bet replaced by a simple 24611/2 turnout.

ablaufberg2kondensiert.png


Wow! I feel this will be a dangerously useful set of geometry for me one day... (if I ever land a basement, the plan is a layout in one end/corner, but then a shelf layout parade route around the walls....
FS + SBB Era 2-5 and Vintage Marklin
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by 5HorizonsRR
Offline Alsterstreek  
#69 Posted : 18 February 2017 14:55:20(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
Space saver for simple fun or nucleus for things to come.
wendekreis.png
Add a short stub track to the left, and you have a test circle with a wye for turning around a loco.
Extend stub length and you have a small terminus to which trains can return after running one or more loops on the circle, before continuing the trip into the opposite direction (after having been "turned" in the terminal).
Leave the shortcut away and you have a return loop (or half a dogbone).
Conceal the rear half of the circle and you have a realistically looking layout.
etc.
thanks 7 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Timnomads  
#70 Posted : 20 February 2017 10:03:17(UTC)
Timnomads

Switzerland   
Joined: 16/09/2015(UTC)
Posts: 146
Location: Grandvaux - Lausanne - Switzerland
Originally Posted by: 5HorizonsRR Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post
Back on track:

How to squeeze four tracks of equal length on a 22 cm shelf with a 40 cm long throat. The double slip turnout on the right side can bet replaced by a simple 24611/2 turnout.

ablaufberg2kondensiert.png


Wow! I feel this will be a dangerously useful set of geometry for me one day... (if I ever land a basement, the plan is a layout in one end/corner, but then a shelf layout parade route around the walls....


Noted will be added to website collection
Offline Rwill  
#71 Posted : 20 February 2017 11:23:52(UTC)
Rwill

United Kingdom   
Joined: 04/05/2015(UTC)
Posts: 602
Location: England, London
Wrong place, wrong time, in advance I'm sorry - must have got out of bed the wrong side grumpy but that very excellent little piece shown above would cost at RRP in digital electric mode 230 Euros!!

That grump arose from my playing SCARM last night and a fairly simple thing worked perfectly but included quite a few 24206 and 24071 pieces and when I went to cost it up I nearly passed out.

Sorry again.
Offline Alsterstreek  
#72 Posted : 25 February 2017 15:07:46(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline river6109  
#73 Posted : 03 March 2017 12:07:19(UTC)
river6109

Australia   
Joined: 22/01/2009(UTC)
Posts: 13,071
Location: On 1965 Märklin Boulevard just around from Roco Square
my question hasn't been answered for years, why haven't we a sleek double turnout, or a three way sleek turnout, or a more wider curved track similar to the track which is used to counteract the sleek turnout curve. why can't we go away from the flimsy turnout lever when using it with a micro turnout motor and have a solid piece of plastic joining the inside mechanism

and besides that I don't have any initiatives or suggestions
https://www.youtube.com/river6109
https://www.youtube.com/6109river
5 years in Destruction mode
50 years in Repairing mode
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by river6109
Offline H0  
#74 Posted : 03 March 2017 14:37:52(UTC)
H0


Joined: 16/02/2004(UTC)
Posts: 13,749
Location: DE-NW
Originally Posted by: river6109 Go to Quoted Post
why haven't we a sleek double turnout
Märklin said that would be the next piece after the slim curved turnouts.

There were more than 10 years between the announcement of the 360mm straight track and its delivery.
Time was much shorter with the slim curved turnouts.
Regards
Tom
---
"In all of the gauges, we particularly emphasize a high level of quality, the best possible fidelity to the prototype, and absolute precision. You will see that in all of our products." (from Märklin New Items Brochure 2015, page 1) ROFLBTCUTS
UserPostedImage
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by H0
Offline Alsterstreek  
#75 Posted : 12 May 2017 23:51:29(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
My first contribution involving a large radius curved turnout: A "curved" station throat without S-curves, allowing to access all station tracks from either of the dual mainline tracks. The track planner shows minor gaps, but a reality check proves that it is possible - see images.

curved2017throat1.pngIMG_6043.jpg
thanks 10 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Alsterstreek  
#76 Posted : 17 June 2017 19:10:16(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
Fallout of discussions with 5HorizonsRR further to above posts 27 - 30 & 32, smoothening swings:

pretzel_alt.png
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Alsterstreek  
#77 Posted : 17 June 2017 19:15:53(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
And a flashback regarding my former Humbug-Dummtor layout:
Nesting curved 24671/2 turnouts "counter-balanced" with 24330 curve(s) for good looks and smooth coach swings.
H-D-rep v2.png
Alternatively, one could employ 24107 / 24207 track pieces instead of 24206 ones in order to create a slightly angled arrangement, avoiding straight tracks in parallel to the baseboard edge which looks less „static“. As standard Maerklin geometry rules are ignored, track spacing is to be tested with coaches to ensure smooth train passes.
thanks 5 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Alsterstreek  
#78 Posted : 18 June 2017 18:56:29(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
Actually quite simple, but it didn´t come to my mind before.
2017parallel24912-24130-24206x2.png
The track planner program shows a gap which doesn't exist in real life.

Edited by user 19 June 2017 12:39:08(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

thanks 3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Alsterstreek  
#79 Posted : 24 July 2017 23:31:15(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
Don´t ask.
dont2017ask.png
Blink
thanks 4 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Johnvr  
#80 Posted : 25 July 2017 08:56:09(UTC)
Johnvr

South Africa   
Joined: 03/10/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,178
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Don't join ! Confused Confused

One cannot make a circle out of the 24912 tracks - it overshoots the 360 degrees.
Also, the angle for the "Y" is not quite balancing using the 24912.
But hey, it's pretty close, and probably within tolerance.

C Track Ideas.jpg

Regards,
John
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by Johnvr
Offline Alsterstreek  
#81 Posted : 27 July 2017 23:34:48(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post
Alternative space-saving "Hosentraeger"-crossing for layout corner? Another idea for the undervalued R1 curved layouts 24671/2 in combination with a 24530 on the inside and a 24640 plus a 24206 on the outside. One day I might exploit this idea...
Can something similar be achieved with the 24771/2 wide radius turnouts? Yes, it can: A 24640 paired with a 24207 7.5 degree curve balances a 24430 R4 curve on the inner side. For obtaining the correct angle a 24306 5.7 degree would be ideal, but that one is too short. Luckily there is the magic C track slack.
hosentraeger2017redux2.pnghosentraeger2017redux2photo.jpg

Now, what could that be good for? A curved "Hosentraeger"-crossing.
hosentraeger2017redux1.pnghosentraeger2017redux1photo.jpg
Adding the outer portion: 24206 + 24215 on top and 24307 + 24206 + 24206 at the bottom of the crossing are joined by two narrow radius curved 24671/2 turnouts. The outermost gap is filled with 24064 + 24912 + 24064 pieces.

Just to prove that with the right dose of 24206 and 24224 pieces a full 180 degree 120 cm diameter curve can be achieved, thus good enough for a 4 x 8 ft table. Note: Floor tiles measure 20 x 20 cm.
hosentraeger2017photo.jpg.jpg
P.S.: Lacking a simple 24640 crossing I used a 24624 double slip turnout for the photographs.
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline clapcott  
#82 Posted : 28 July 2017 01:53:16(UTC)
clapcott

New Zealand   
Joined: 12/12/2005(UTC)
Posts: 2,321
Location: Wellington, New_Zealand
Geometry capability is one thing, but your final solution has totally lost me with the lack of practicality.

If I am entering at the bottom left I have 2 possible destinations!.
From the top I have one possible destination.

- Why would you want to add point work, with attendant cost, to give me 5 complicating part-routes (7 with your 24624 instead of 24640)
- Why would you enforce a tight radius (R1) with intermediate straights when a nicer (R3/R4 - R4/R5) could flow all round
- Why would you not run the tracks aesthetically parallel

Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post

hosentraeger2017photo.jpg.jpg
Peter
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by clapcott
Offline Alsterstreek  
#83 Posted : 28 July 2017 10:53:00(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
The entire posting was about the curved Hosentraeger core - see image. And I pride myself on developing the concept.
2017-07-28_11-29-18.png

Originally Posted by: clapcott Go to Quoted Post
Geometry capability is one thing, but your final solution has totally lost me with the lack of practicality.

If I am entering at the bottom left I have 2 possible destinations!.
From the top I have one possible destination.

- Why would you want to add point work, with attendant cost, to give me 5 complicating part-routes (7 with your 24624 instead of 24640)
You are missing the point: There is indeed no practicality regarding the "final solution", which ain't one; only brainstorming; slim turnouts just shown for illustrating achievable dual track distance; *not* meant to be used, never ever.

Originally Posted by: clapcott Go to Quoted Post
- Why would you enforce a tight radius (R1) with intermediate straights when a nicer (R3/R4 - R4/R5) could flow all round

- If you are referring to the 24672-24064-24912-24064-24671 sequence framed in red in below image:
2017-07-28_11-30-13.png
Well, on the outside any curved C track turnout has a straight section between frog and switch points. The 24671/2 equals on the outer side a 24077-24130. 24077 is slightly longer than 24064. Thus travelling over a short 24064 straight followed by a wide R9 24912 is much smoother than over the outer portion of any curved turnout. I would prefer to do away with the 24064, too. Thus, any constructive solution would be welcome.

- If you are referring to any other straights: irrelevant (see my "practicality reply" above).

Originally Posted by: clapcott Go to Quoted Post
- Why would you not run the tracks aesthetically parallel
This question has totally lost me.

Edited by user 28 July 2017 16:22:26(UTC)  | Reason: Grammar

thanks 3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline kiwiAlan  
#84 Posted : 28 July 2017 17:41:29(UTC)
kiwiAlan

United Kingdom   
Joined: 23/07/2014(UTC)
Posts: 5,143
Location: ENGLAND, Didcot
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post

Now, what could that be good for? A curved "Hosentraeger"-crossing.


Now hide that lot inside a tunnel with lots of single track entries, and have people guess which track the train is going to appear on ...

(Does that answer clapcotts question?)
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by kiwiAlan
Offline kimballthurlow  
#85 Posted : 29 July 2017 09:46:48(UTC)
kimballthurlow

Australia   
Joined: 18/03/2007(UTC)
Posts: 5,835
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post
Alternative space-saving "Hosentraeger"-crossing for layout corner? Another idea for the undervalued R1 curved layouts 24671/2 in combination with a 24530 on the inside and a 24640 plus a 24206 on the outside. One day I might exploit this idea... Can something similar be achieved with the 24771/2 wide radius turnouts? Yes, it can:.....hosentraeger2017redux1photo.jpg
..
P.S.: Lacking a simple 24640 crossing I used a 24624 double slip turnout for the photographs.


These ideas make a lot of sense if your railway replicates what they call CTC - Centralized Traffic Control where there are no rules for which way is the right of way - left side, middle side, right side on the main line, it does not matter.
However these double scissor cross overs make most sense when running two tracks into three, and vice versa - a lot of sense. (or even 3 into 4, or 4 into 5 etc etc.)

And in station environs and throats, they can make a lot of sense too, where the geometry creates loops so that trains can bypass stationary trains. In the real world, a plan like the one above would be appreciably elongated to whole train length loops.

regards
Kimball
HO Scale - Märklin (ep III and VI, C Track, digital) - 2 rail (USA and Australia) - 3 rail (English Hornby Dublo) - a few old O gauge.
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by kimballthurlow
Offline Alsterstreek  
#86 Posted : 29 July 2017 12:20:28(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
Or as an interchange between two single track main lines.

(I have a "mechanic automation" in mind going beyond the scope of this thread, feeding an interweaving (extended) reversing loop using sprung turnouts.)
thanks 3 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Alsterstreek  
#87 Posted : 29 July 2017 15:51:06(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
If somebody is interested in crosswords style riddles, I explained the mystery concept here:

https://www.marklin-user...les-and-ovals#post549968

;o)
Offline TrainIride  
#88 Posted : 10 August 2017 15:21:20(UTC)
TrainIride

France   
Joined: 23/10/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,629
Location: FRANCE
Following Kimball request,

here is the diagram of the double-end-loops-crossing-section
of my new twisted-doggy-bone layout :


double_loop.jpg


double_loop_a.jpg


Best Regards
Joël
thanks 4 users liked this useful post by TrainIride
Offline TrainIride  
#89 Posted : 10 August 2017 18:36:33(UTC)
TrainIride

France   
Joined: 23/10/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,629
Location: FRANCE
I know this is a basic that has been already showed by nice people,
but you can see this as a reminder that could help BigGrin :

R1 R2 curves with 64.3mm space

less_space_in_curve.jpg


R4 R5 curves with 77.5mm space

more_space_in_curve.jpg


Best Regards
Joël
thanks 4 users liked this useful post by TrainIride
Offline Alsterstreek  
#90 Posted : 13 September 2017 20:22:11(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post
A concept which is always on my mind, the "inverted return loop".
...
When enforcing a against the clock running regime, thus descending on the shorter 220 cm and thus steeper ramp and climbing the longer and gentler 270 cm long ramp, the train has only to battle a 3% incline, which is quite generous.....
Mock-up on 100x200 cm surface:
IMG_9186a.jpgIMG_9193a.jpg
thanks 6 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline LeoArietis  
#91 Posted : 31 January 2018 21:36:45(UTC)
LeoArietis

Sweden   
Joined: 07/02/2008(UTC)
Posts: 130
Location: Lindome, Sweden
I really like the innovative inverted return loop.

Here is another triangle / wye in R2 and one R3.

Current layout:
http://www.svensktmjforu.../index.php?topic=10990.0
The former project:
http://www.svensktmjforu...forum_posts.asp?TID=1097
With Pictures and trackplans, but in Swedish
Transitation-curves in C-track:
https://www.marklin-user...9-on-75-cm.aspx#post9281
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by LeoArietis
Offline Jabez  
#92 Posted : 01 February 2018 21:22:07(UTC)
Jabez

Belgium   
Joined: 30/08/2016(UTC)
Posts: 636
Location: Brussels
Originally Posted by: LeoArietis Go to Quoted Post
I really like the innovative inverted return loop.

Maybe it should be called the Immelmann loopBigGrin

I heard that lonesome whistle blow. Hank Williams
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Jabez
Offline kimballthurlow  
#93 Posted : 14 February 2018 23:49:39(UTC)
kimballthurlow

Australia   
Joined: 18/03/2007(UTC)
Posts: 5,835
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Here is a really useful table of distances up to 1 metre, showing the straight C track combinations you can use to achieve a particular length.
I am not sure of copyright, so my apologies to the author.

https://www.marklin-users.net/up...86_cgleislangerTABLE.pdf

Kimball
HO Scale - Märklin (ep III and VI, C Track, digital) - 2 rail (USA and Australia) - 3 rail (English Hornby Dublo) - a few old O gauge.
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by kimballthurlow
Offline federicofreundt  
#94 Posted : 26 February 2018 22:08:44(UTC)
federicofreundt

Peru   
Joined: 21/02/2013(UTC)
Posts: 24
Location: Lima
Originally Posted by: kimballthurlow Go to Quoted Post
I inadvertently created a short on my layout, when using C track.

The metal tongue for the overhead catenary mast in this location, just happened to bridge (and short) the wire connectors under the track.
The photos explain the solution.

http://www.qldrail.net/altkloster/electricalshort800.jpg

http://www.qldrail.net/altkloster/electricshortfix800.jpg

regards
Kimball


What do I need to do to make sure the turnouts obey the command of the command desk.
In some cases the green direction works in others the red, but both do not.
What is needed to be done?
Offline Minok  
#95 Posted : 26 February 2018 22:46:38(UTC)
Minok

United States   
Joined: 15/10/2006(UTC)
Posts: 2,152
Location: Washington, Pacific Northwest
Originally Posted by: federicofreundt Go to Quoted Post

What do I need to do to make sure the turnouts obey the command of the command desk.
In some cases the green direction works in others the red, but both do not.
What is needed to be done?


Check and see if the turnout motor's end-position-switches have been 'bridged'. If not, it may be worth doing that because that is a common source of failure when running digital.

When running analog - the higher voltage keeps the end-position switches contacts clean. In digital voltages and short switch times, carbon buildup on those end position switches builds up so the circuit no longer realizes the motor isn't in the end position. Bridging the switches would then get you back to working switches.

Of course this all assumes that this is actually the problem in your case.
Toys of tin and wood rule!
---
My Layout Thread on marklin-users.net: InterCity 1-3-4
My YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/Minok1217/
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by Minok
Offline federicofreundt  
#96 Posted : 05 March 2018 03:12:17(UTC)
federicofreundt

Peru   
Joined: 21/02/2013(UTC)
Posts: 24
Location: Lima
Originally Posted by: kimballthurlow Go to Quoted Post
Hi,
I want to be able to see a concentration of knowledge and ideas on Marklin C track in this forum.

It is such a marvellous product, it deserves a topic on its own.
And also, many members here have some innovative, bright, and unique ways to use C track.

I will start the ball rolling, by reference to a previous topic.
https://www.marklin-users.net/forum/yaf_postst9281_Transitation-curves--or-How-to-fit-R9-on-75-cm.aspx

Member LeoArietis had some good posts in that topic, and recently regarding the announcement of 2015 New Items from Marklin he says:
"Disapointing the expansion of C-track isn't there.
24906, 24032, 24724, and so on, where are they?"

Let us hope Marklin announce them sometime in the future.

regards
Kimball


Originally Posted by: kimballthurlow Go to Quoted Post
I inadvertently created a short on my layout, when using C track.

The metal tongue for the overhead catenary mast in this location, just happened to bridge (and short) the wire connectors under the track.
The photos explain the solution.

http://www.qldrail.net/altkloster/electricalshort800.jpg

http://www.qldrail.net/altkloster/electricshortfix800.jpg

regards
Kimball


Offline Alsterstreek  
#97 Posted : 03 August 2018 04:28:26(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
I stumbled over this in the “Märklin - Das Gleisplanbuch - Das C Gleis“ on page 16:

While the standard 24611/24612 turnout branch angle is 24.3 degrees (12.1 degrees for slim turnouts 24711/24712), it measures only 16 degrees at the frog (10 degrees for slim turnouts).

Cutting the curved section of a 24611/24612 turnout after 164 mm results in a poor man‘s slim turnout, matching the 64.3 mm track distance of the slim turnout geometry.
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline TEEWolf  
#98 Posted : 03 August 2018 17:28:41(UTC)
TEEWolf


Joined: 01/06/2016(UTC)
Posts: 2,408
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post
I stumbled over this in the “Märklin - Das Gleisplanbuch - Das C Gleis“ on page 16:

While the standard 24611/24612 turnout branch angle is 24.3 degrees (12.1 degrees for slim turnouts 24711/24712), it measures only 16 degrees at the frog (10 degrees for slim turnouts).

Cutting the curved section of a 24611/24612 turnout after 164 mm results in a poor man‘s slim turnout, matching the 64.3 mm track distance of the slim turnout geometry.


Do you know this brochure from Märklin?

http://www.ccbrailroad.c...nuales/marklin_via_c.pdf

Unfortunately the new curved turnouts 24771 and 24772 are not yet considered.
thanks 1 user liked this useful post by TEEWolf
Offline Alsterstreek  
#99 Posted : 03 August 2018 17:34:39(UTC)
Alsterstreek

Portugal   
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 4,779
Location: Southwesternmost
On page 17 the same Maerklin track planning book states that cutting the curved section already after 151 mm results in a 52 mm track distance. Then, there is an article (“C-Gleis-Variationen”) in the German MIBA magazine 1998 edition # 11 on pages 60 ff documenting the conversion (or mutilation). The curved section is removed right behind the frog, thereby reducing the branch angle to 16 degrees. A straight piece extension - seven sleepers long - is fitted to defuse the S curve. According to MIBA, the 24215 15 degree track piece serves as counter curve. The one degree difference is absorbed by the C track slack. The first article photo depicts an intricate station throat created with adapted turnouts.
thanks 2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
Offline Minok  
#100 Posted : 03 August 2018 18:11:21(UTC)
Minok

United States   
Joined: 15/10/2006(UTC)
Posts: 2,152
Location: Washington, Pacific Northwest
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Go to Quoted Post
On page 17 the same Maerklin track planning book states that cutting the curved section already after 151 mm results in a 52 mm track distance. Then, there is an article (“C-Gleis-Variationen”) in the German MIBA magazine 1998 edition # 11 on pages 60 ff documenting the conversion (or mutilation). The curved section is removed right behind the frog, thereby reducing the branch angle to 16 degrees. A straight piece extension - seven sleepers long - is fitted to defuse the S curve. According to MIBA, the 24215 15 degree track piece serves as counter curve. The one degree difference is absorbed by the C track slack. The first article photo depicts an intricate station throat created with adapted turnouts.


Is there some photos you can post? I understand the copyright issues but on such an old magazine issue it's not likely they are selling new issues.
Toys of tin and wood rule!
---
My Layout Thread on marklin-users.net: InterCity 1-3-4
My YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/Minok1217/
Users browsing this topic
OceanSpiders 2.0
4 Pages<1234>
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.

| Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2020, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 1.859 seconds.