 Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC) Posts: 2,533 Location: VA
|
|
|
 7 users liked this useful post by BrandonVA
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 31/10/2009(UTC) Posts: 609 Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
Quite stunning. His backgrounds seem to transition seamlessly. This is also a great example of using prototypical approaches emphasized with 'less is more'.
|
2 users liked this useful post by jcrtrains
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Dear Brandon, Thank you very much for this topic! I have been following Mr.Danneman for years and his achievements are truly amazing! Especially when,like me,you have no insight knowledge about USA railways,this is a great eye opener. At an early age,i fell in love with the Marklin 3060/4060 models of the Santa Fe F7,and indeed i have a modest collection of Marklin USA models by now. I understand Mr.Danneman has been an editor for the magazine Model Railroader,which speaks for itself. I used to buy separate issues of the magazine,these are freely available in bookshops overhere,but they come at a price. The layout in this topic was in the December 2011 issue of Model Railroader. It measures 18 feet 6 inch times 24 feet 9 inch. No doubt the trackplan is there too. Mr.Danneman (a man from Denmark????) earlier appeared in the March 1996 issue of Model Railroader with a smaller Rio Grande layout size 5 feet times 7 feet,i do recall he custom built the Rio Grande cabooses. I have taken the liberty to ask the publisher of Model Railroader if i could buy the two issues from old stock,reply awaited. Usually,the postage from the USA to Europe is spoiling the party..... Thank you once again! P.S.: I just purchased my second Marklin 4572 tinplate Santa Fe boxcar. Why? Because each side has a different text and i want to see them both at the same time! Edited by user 23 March 2016 19:15:35(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
2 users liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC) Posts: 2,533 Location: VA
|
Originally Posted by: NS1200  these are freely available in bookshops overhere,but they come at a price.
The layout in this topic was in the December 2011 issue of Model Railroader.
It measures 18 feet 6 inch times 24 feet 9 inch.
No doubt the trackplan is there too.
Mr.Danneman (a man from Denmark????) earlier appeared in the March 1996 issue of Model Railroader with a smaller Rio Grande layout size 5 feet times 7 feet,i do recall he custom built the Rio Grande cabooses. Thank you, I didn't know about the 1996 issue. I actually just about the December 2011 issue on Ebay for less than $4 USD, which I was happy to spend...now to hunt the other. Originally Posted by: NS1200
P.S.: I just purchased my second Marklin 4572 tinplate Santa Fe boxcar.
Why?
Because each side has a different text and i want to see them both at the same time!
You can never have too many US boxcars! :) -Brandon |
|
2 users liked this useful post by BrandonVA
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
|
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
4 users liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Originally Posted by: jcrtrains Quite stunning. His backgrounds seem to transition seamlessly. This is also a great example of using prototypical approaches emphasized with 'less is more'. The backdrops are simply fantastic! |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
1 user liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 31/07/2013(UTC) Posts: 49 Location: Kentucky
|
I love that 5x7 layout. There are two MRR articles about that layout. (I forgot which issues. I have them in storage somewhere.  ) The 2nd article deals with an expansion of the 5x7 I believe. It's all beautiful work. Here's another nice video of the large layout. I apologize if you can't see it. You may need to be a MRR subscriber to view it. http://mrv.trains.com/vi...-the-n-scale-moffat-road
|
3 users liked this useful post by Rip Track
|
|
|
|
Joined: 31/07/2013(UTC) Posts: 49 Location: Kentucky
|
I found it. Sorry Paul. As you have already mentioned, it was the March 1996 issue. The 5x7 layout is also featured in a how to book, Scenery for Your Model Railroad.
|
1 user liked this useful post by Rip Track
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Mind you,the scale of both layouts is N (1/160). For H0(1/87), about 4 times more space will be needed (length 2 times,width 2 times). Edited by user 20 March 2016 09:13:10(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Triggered by this topic,i just bought Marklin 3062 and 4062,the F7 Rio Grande units.
Used but good condition,total Euro 150.-. |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
1 user liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
I have tried to find the trackplan of the 5 x 7 feet layout but that appears to be a well hidden secret. I donot have the March 1996 Model Railroader magazine,it is probably in there. What i did find is a very similar trackplan based on Mr.Dannemans design. The design is brilliant in its simplicity. The only difference seems to be the passing section in the background. The strenght of the design is that short leg of the L allows trains to emerge from the right hand rock formation thence make a left turn over the wild river and then into the station again. All in all a very balanced design. I reckon it can be build in scale H0 also with little adjustment. http://nscaleaddiction.b...road-best-practices.html |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
1 user liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 31/07/2013(UTC) Posts: 49 Location: Kentucky
|
|
1 user liked this useful post by Rip Track
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Rip Track,
I showed the video on 18th March,please go back in the topic above.
Paul |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 31/07/2013(UTC) Posts: 49 Location: Kentucky
|
I deleted the redundant link.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Originally Posted by: Rip Track I deleted the redundant link. No worries. I am just interested in the trackplan which must be contained in the March 1996 issue of MR. I think two trains can be operated on this layout,each going opposite directions,using the station as passing location. On the cover of the March 1996 issue it can be seen that the Rio Grande F7 units are coming towards the viewer. Cheers, Paul |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC) Posts: 2,533 Location: VA
|
Originally Posted by: NS1200 I have tried to find the trackplan of the 5 x 7 feet layout but that appears to be a well hidden secret.
I donot have the March 1996 Model Railroader magazine,it is probably in there.
I found the track plan, see attached. Excellent use of scenic divides to great many smaller but still "big enough" scenes. I like how simple this track plan is, yet excellent execution.  -Brandon |
|
5 users liked this useful post by BrandonVA
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Thanks Brandon.
As can be clearly seen there is a long overhauling track in the station/depot,allowing two trains to pass each other.
The scenery is doing the trick on this layout.
Great detail,like the riverrafts on Bolder Creek,and the snowplow on the sidetrack.
Two sharp turns are well hidden by the mountains,clever.
I would love to build it with Marklin C track in scale H0.
Can anything be said about the superb backdrops,were they purchased on photopaper or were they handpainted? |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
1 user liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 31/07/2013(UTC) Posts: 49 Location: Kentucky
|
I'm not sure about the mountains near the bottom, but I recall the clouds and sky were painted.
|
1 user liked this useful post by Rip Track
|
|
|
|
Joined: 31/07/2013(UTC) Posts: 49 Location: Kentucky
|
A couple of years ago I researched a number of corner layouts. Mike Danneman’s is probably my favorite. But here is another you might like. And it’s HO. It's based on a Finish railway.  mrr-e1007_a1.pdf (259kb) downloaded 77 time(s).
|
3 users liked this useful post by Rip Track
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
I have also started to realise that the 5 x 7 feet layout in H0 scale requires only a couple of Marklin C rail switches,which is cost efficient. Keeping it simple and sticking to R1 and R2 radius,it would require 2 pieces of 24612,1 piece of 24611,and 2 pieces of 24671. For the rest,i guess with 50 pieces 24188,50 pieces 24130,and 50 pieces 24230 you will come a long way to get the loop closed. European bumper track does not exist in the USA,i think Marklin 24001 (10 pieces) is a good alternative. All in all i think i will give it a go and see those Marklin Rio Grande F7 units run! Probably the highest expense goes into the countless trees on this layout! http://assets.catawiki.n...e4-96ab-96fe82c25a15.jpg |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
1 user liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 5,862 Location: Hybrid Home
|
Or you take the 24977 "Prellbock" and get rid of the European style buffer stop by removing the central screw: The "remaining" ballast heap looks prototypical and is strong enough to hold back cars. At least RELEX couplers of F7 locos and tin plate freight cars do not mind.  BTW to support your initiative: As BrandonVA pointed out in another thread, the dark Rio Grande ballast resembles the C-track. |
|
2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 31/07/2013(UTC) Posts: 49 Location: Kentucky
|
I thought someone asked about the other locomotive units used in the 5x7 layout. In case you're still interested they are EMD GP35's and 30's.
|
3 users liked this useful post by Rip Track
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Or you take the 24977 "Prellbock" and get rid of the European style buffer stop by removing the central screw: The "remaining" ballast heap looks prototypical and is strong enough to hold back cars. At least RELEX couplers of F7 locos and tin plate freight cars do not mind. BTW to support your initiative: As BrandonVA pointed out in another thread, the dark Rio Grande ballast resembles the C-track. 24977 is a good idea,you only need 3 of them as per layoutplan. Perhaps the "heap" needs some camouflage in the form of lumber,rocks,spare wheelsets,bushes,whatever. The strength of this layout is that it is not overloaded with tracks,trains,or buildings. Less is more so to speak. Two somewhat longer trains is sufficient,and some static cars on the sidings,one transformer,that is all it needs. Will start collecting C track now on the second hand market,a lot of starterset C track is being dumped. A good source for cheap pine trees would be nice. |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
2 users liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 5,862 Location: Hybrid Home
|
Originally Posted by: NS1200 A good source for cheap pine trees would be nice. Busch (article no. 6499) offers a low price package of 100 "Stecktannen" (ca. 60-110 mm tall) which sells for around EUR 35 (plus freight): http://www.busch-model.c...id=6499&sprach_id=deBy clipping the branches, the slim look of Rocky Mountains conifers can be matched with reasonable effort.  Tree trunks can be extended using round 3 of 4 mm dark wooden sticks from a DIY shop after - carefully - drilling a hole into one long end of the stick (processing at own risk of course) - see screenshot.  Source: http://www.modellbahn-do...n/Supern_400_Tannen.html |
|
2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 5,862 Location: Hybrid Home
|
Originally Posted by: Rip Track I thought someone asked about the other locomotive units used in the 5x7 layout. In case you're still interested they are EMD GP35's and 30's. Which MTH conveniently offered once in Rio Grande livery for Maerklin "AC" operations. According to a German owner of a MTH "AC" GP 35 (never mind that his is a Southern Pacific version), it is running on R1 curves, too (http://www.stummiforum.de/viewtopic.php?t=94589). :o) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Rio Grande Days at the Colorado Model Railroad Museum. I like the bridges! |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
3 users liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC) Posts: 2,533 Location: VA
|
Originally Posted by: NS1200
Can anything be said about the superb backdrops,were they purchased on photopaper or were they handpainted?
Paul, In the article Mr. Danneman states that the backdrops are hand painted. Apparently he mounts hardboard painted a sky blue prior to doing the landscape, but then paints the backdrop after the landscaping to ensure a good transition. He said in some cases he glued flocking into the backdrop itself it give it texture and further disguise the transition. -Brandon |
|
1 user liked this useful post by BrandonVA
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC) Posts: 2,533 Location: VA
|
Originally Posted by: NS1200
A good source for cheap pine trees would be nice.
Appearntly for the background trees on the Moffat Road layout, he used "bumpy brown chenille") to create trees (probably works better for N scale), by painting it and gluing ground cover to it. I didn't know what "bumpy brown chenille" was, but here it is:
https://www.amazon.com/C...ille-Stems/dp/B007FUGLX8In general with trees, one can find cheap trees that don't look very good. These work well in the background, or with additional groundcover glued to them to enhance the look. If you spend a little more for a few nicer trees in the foreground, it sells it better. -Brandon |
|
1 user liked this useful post by BrandonVA
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC) Posts: 2,533 Location: VA
|
Originally Posted by: NS1200 Rio Grande Days at the Colorado Model Railroad Museum. I like the bridges! It all depends on era. At one point, Rio Grande was the largest narrow gauge railroad in the world. These type of wonderful looking bridges tended to be very typical of the narrow gauge operations, but less so of the standard gauge operations, especially in the 1950s onward. However, a credible scene could be built, modern example still exist:    -Brandon |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC) Posts: 2,533 Location: VA
|
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Which MTH conveniently offered once in Rio Grande livery for Maerklin "AC" operations. According to a German owner of a MTH "AC" GP 35 (never mind that his is a Southern Pacific version), it is running on R1 curves, too (http://www.stummiforum.de/viewtopic.php?t=94589).
:o) MTH make 3e+ (tree rail models) of D&RGW F3s (two A units and 2 b units available), and also a D&RGW steam powered challenger. They made a number of GP35s, but unfortunately none in DRGW livery. However, they made a lot of liveries that were black, and would not need too much effort to convert to Rio Grande colours. I'm currently sitting on a MTH 3e+ GP35 for PRR, on which I am hoping to modify the livery for Rio Grande service soon. Generally with Rio Grade you don't see a lot of single engine trains, so 2 or more locomotives is more typical. However, the MTH models are powered on all axles and have four traction tires, so I am considering eventually adding some dummy GP units fit with Marklin wheels to complete the look. -Brandon |
|
1 user liked this useful post by BrandonVA
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 5,862 Location: Hybrid Home
|
True, for Rio Grande there is only a two-rail version: GP-35 Low Hood Diesel Engine w/Proto-Sound 3.0 (Hi-Rail Wheels) - Denver Rio Grande & Western http://mthtrains.com/20-20198-1Since they offer the GP-35 with various liveries for Maerklin "thee-rail", I thought one could select the shell freely, which is not the case. :o( |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Approx. costs of C track (used but good) for this layout is Euro 300 to Euro 350.-.
If i would decide to use 2 rail Trix C track,what would be your favorite USA brand for locomotives and rolling stock?
I mean a compromise between detail and reliability.
Would also like to know best options to obtain USA style signalposts.
Much obliged.
Paul |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 5,862 Location: Hybrid Home
|
The beauty of Maerklin/Trix is their "European living room friendly" track geometry plus locos and rolling stock that run on the former as if they were "glued" to the track. While more realistic in appearance, the US two-rail environment is a different league. Track sleepers, curve radii, wheel flanges, couplers, controllers etc. It has its merits, but you would not be able any more to recreate the N-scale layout in H0 scale within reasonable dimensions (or budget or time restrictions). Then, US railroad signaling is a science for itself, which in the era you intend to model was even more diverse than today. Different railroads had different rules. Different divisions or lines within the same railroad had different standards. Overview on Rio Grande signaling definition in 1965: http://jmri.sourceforge....nals/RG-1965/index.shtmlThere are various online dealers within the European Union - saving the hassle of importing oneself - which offer US prototype equipment, as signals. Here the ones in Germany I know of: http://www.rd-hobby.de/d...ontent/Search?t=signal#phttp://www.modellbahn-atelier-berlin.dehttp://www.moba24.de/catalog/index.php |
|
2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Upon second thought,better leave radius 1 out and use radius 2 only.
Work in progress. |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
2 users liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC) Posts: 2,533 Location: VA
|
I'm a little late to the party, but I agree with Ak, probably just stick to Marklin. Easy answer on a Marklin forum. :) The track geometry is good, and I think the availability in Europe will be better. While there are pros to 2 rail, I don't think they outweigh the ease of operation for Marklin. If you have your heart set on a really specific prototype, it should be 2 rail. Otherwise, Marklin have given us a lot of locomotives from certain US railroads over the year (UP: F7A/B, Mikado, Big Boy, Alco PA1, ATSF: F7A/B, Mikado, Alco PA-1, DRGW F7A, Alco PA-1). There have been more over the years, but that's a start. And then the MTH 3e+ models ;)
-Brandon |
|
1 user liked this useful post by BrandonVA
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC) Posts: 2,533 Location: VA
|
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek True, for Rio Grande there is only a two-rail version: GP-35 Low Hood Diesel Engine w/Proto-Sound 3.0 (Hi-Rail Wheels) - Denver Rio Grande & Western http://mthtrains.com/20-20198-1Since they offer the GP-35 with various liveries for Maerklin "thee-rail", I thought one could select the shell freely, which is not the case. :o( I wish =(. I have looked at the MTH models, they are not set up for "easy service" like most Marklin locomotives. It's possible to get them apart, but I think a shell swap done at home would be challenging and also expensive. As per my usual project backlog the MTH GP35 PRR to DRGW conversion will surface someday... -Brandon |
|
1 user liked this useful post by BrandonVA
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
The beauty of DC Trix C track is that it is identical to Marklin C track except for the middle pointcontacts. Trix is owned by Marklin and both types of C track are produced by Marklin. So,with DC Trix C track you could do the same as you would do with AC Marklin C track with the added advantage you could run other 2 rail DC locomotives on those tracks,right? Of course,Marklin AC locomotives cannot run on Trix C track. Hence,the idea was to use Trix C track and run DC USA locomotives on those tracks. Just an idea. But hey,i have the A-A F7 units Rio Grande from Marklin,the A-B-A Santa Fe F7 in blue from Marklin,the A-A F7 Santa Fe in red/silver,and the 26600 California Zephyr on the wishlist for next year,should be sufficient to keep DC outside the door............. Edited by user 01 April 2016 10:33:14(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
2 users liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 5,862 Location: Hybrid Home
|
Originally Posted by: NS1200 The beauty of DC Trix C track is that it is identical to Marklin C track except for the middle pointcontacts... with the added advantage you could run other 2 rail DC locomotives on those tracks,right? Let's say, not totally wrong, but for sure not right. US models have different wheel sets and - except for some four axle diesels - require larger curve radii than European models, which might be a toxic mix. Two rail equipment (Kato and Athearn) on my layout tends to have disagreements with turnouts. Only Frateschi of Brazil rolling stock runs flawlessly. Originally Posted by: NS1200 Of course,Marklin AC locomotives cannot run of Trix C track.
Hence,the idea was to use Trix C track and run DC USA locomotives on those tracks.
Just an idea. One could adapt (or rather mutilate) Maerklin C track for hybrid operations: By cutting with pliers the underneath connections between the two outer rails and thereby isolating them, one could use C track for both, two and "three" rail operations. Two rail controller feeds the isolated outer rails while Maerklin controller feeds middle spikes and one outer rail. This would require further treatment of turnouts and separate sessions for two rail and Maerklin equipment. Again, this would degrade the precious Maerklin C track. ;o) |
|
2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC) Posts: 2,533 Location: VA
|
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Originally Posted by: NS1200 The beauty of DC Trix C track is that it is identical to Marklin C track except for the middle pointcontacts... with the added advantage you could run other 2 rail DC locomotives on those tracks,right? Let's say, not totally wrong, but for sure not right. US models have different wheel sets and - except for some four axle diesels - require larger curve radii than European models, which might be a toxic mix. Two rail equipment (Kato and Athearn) on my layout tends to have disagreements with turnouts. Only Frateschi of Brazil rolling stock runs flawlessly. A lot of US two rail locos and stock require R3 or even larger as a minimum radius. The articulation of the trucks and/or couplers is often more limited. However, almost everyone in the US uses 2 rail DCC for HO these days, so it's not an usual thing... In Denver, Colorado ATSF, DRGW and UP could all be seen simultaneously. In Salt Lake City, DRGW, UP, and WP could all be seem simultaneously. In various places in California, it wouldn't be uncommon to see ATSF, SP, UP and even WP near each other. Add a slight bit of imagination to the scheme and one can really get things going :) -Brandon |
|
2 users liked this useful post by BrandonVA
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Originally Posted by: NS1200 The beauty of DC Trix C track is that it is identical to Marklin C track except for the middle pointcontacts... with the added advantage you could run other 2 rail DC locomotives on those tracks,right? Let's say, not totally wrong, but for sure not right. US models have different wheel sets and - except for some four axle diesels - require larger curve radii than European models, which might be a toxic mix. Two rail equipment (Kato and Athearn) on my layout tends to have disagreements with turnouts. Only Frateschi of Brazil rolling stock runs flawlessly. Originally Posted by: NS1200 Of course,Marklin AC locomotives cannot run of Trix C track.
Hence,the idea was to use Trix C track and run DC USA locomotives on those tracks.
Just an idea. One could adapt (or rather mutilate) Maerklin C track for hybrid operations: By cutting with pliers the underneath connections between the two outer rails and thereby isolating them, one could use C track for both, two and "three" rail operations. Two rail controller feeds the isolated outer rails while Maerklin controller feeds middle spikes and one outer rail. This would require further treatment of turnouts and separate sessions for two rail and Maerklin equipment. Again, this would degrade the precious Maerklin C track. ;o) I did not know that,learning all the time. In my mind 2 rail DC was pretty standardised so that all sorts of DC locomotives,having agreed wheelflanges,could run on Trix C track. I better stick to good old AC Marklin and hope that they will bring out more USA models in future. |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
1 user liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 31/07/2013(UTC) Posts: 49 Location: Kentucky
|
To expand on Brandon's comments regarding radius, I’ve noticed some online retail sites will include a minimum radius in the locomotive description. Usually I see an 18” (45.74 cm) minimum for the steam and diesel engines I look at. Sometimes I notice locs with the 18” minimum and 22” (55.88 cm) recommended.
|
2 users liked this useful post by Rip Track
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 5,862 Location: Hybrid Home
|
Here a photo comparing Maerklin (left) versus RP25 (right) wheels: Note the flanges. Maerklin looks pizza cutter-like in comparison to the more prototypical RP25 wheels, but that keeps the Maerklin ones on track.  My experience is that the RP25 "drop" into C track turnouts. |
|
1 user liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
I like Pizza's if they are baked fresh by Italian people.
Likewise,i like Marklin Pizzacutters too! |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
1 user liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 23/07/2014(UTC) Posts: 8,497 Location: ENGLAND, Didcot
|
Originally Posted by: NS1200 The beauty of DC Trix C track is that it is identical to Marklin C track except for the middle pointcontacts.
You are almost correct, Marklin C track uses code 90 rails, Trix C track uses code 83 (IIRC).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Originally Posted by: kiwiAlan Originally Posted by: NS1200 The beauty of DC Trix C track is that it is identical to Marklin C track except for the middle pointcontacts.
You are almost correct, Marklin C track uses code 90 rails, Trix C track uses code 83 (IIRC). I was referring to the geometry of the track parts. Surely,the rails are different because the DC wheelflanges are different from the Marklin pizzacutter flanges. |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 5,862 Location: Hybrid Home
|
My 6 x 7 ft H0 scale Maerklin C-track interpretation.  I introduced a hidden distribution level - interweaving two reversing loops using sprung turnouts - for reversing (and temporary layover) of a train; the curved turnouts at the gate to the pretzel underworld need motors and are to be remotely controlled - see lower level plan.  Like that trains can either circle into the same direction (by "ignoring" the underground pretzel) or reverse their direction, thereby pretending to depart to and arrive from a distant destination. Because of the underground pretzel, I could not match the original 5 x 7 N-scale dimensions...The pretzel arrangement is "long" enough to allow an EMD F7 A-B-B hauled six-coach California Zephyr or alternatively an EMD F7 A-B-A freight train with nine tin plate box cars plus caboose to turn around. Thanks to the Maerklin "three-rail" technology, the return loops do not cause a short circuit (unlike two-rail systems where "+" and *-" rails would touch each other). The visible passing sidings on the upper level accommodate the same train lengths as the underground pretzel, i.e. an EMD F7 A-B-B hauled six-coach California Zephyr or alternatively an EMD F7 A-B-A freight train with nine tin plate box cars plus caboose Assuming that the height distance between the two levels is 8 cm (7.5 cm clearance + 0.5 cm baseboard), the ramps stretching from lower level curved turnout to upper level turnouts have a gradient of 3%, respectively. From an aesthetic point of view that is acceptable and a piece of cake for Maerklin US locos. Lower level curved turnouts are on level ground, while the upper level curved turnouts are the last track segments on the ramp, respectively, i.e. the upper level station tracks are all on level ground. At the beginning of curves, there are wider radius "easement" for better looks of trains moving. No R1 curves used on visible mainline stretches. Here is the full track plan plus track inventory.   |
|
2 users liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
Great design on a limited space!
It all depends how much space you are allowed to have in your mancave!
My mancave can hold a L shaped layout of 14 x 10 feet,short sides of the L 4 feet.
I am in this luxury position because my wife does not like to climb the folding staircase! |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
2 users liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 16/11/2011(UTC) Posts: 5,862 Location: Hybrid Home
|
Well, then you had enough space for this proposed extension of the Mike Danneman N-scale layout. The two initial segments are kept at the respective ends (lower right and upper right).  The spirals between coal mine and power plant are by the way an application of the empties-in/loads-out arrangement described here: https://www.marklin-user...ecific-wagons#post514371 |
|
1 user liked this useful post by Alsterstreek
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/08/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,443
|
A bit too ambitious for me i think.
Will have a modest start early autumn,say early October.
First we should enjoy a long hot summer.
And we have Eurospoor at Utrecht in October,nice source for cheap C track! |
Have more than you show,speak less than you know (Shakespeare). |
2 users liked this useful post by NS1200
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/2011(UTC) Posts: 2,533 Location: VA
|
Originally Posted by: Alsterstreek Well, then you had enough space for this proposed extension of the Mike Danneman N-scale layout. The two initial segments are kept at the respective ends (lower right and upper right). The spirals between coal mine and power plant are by the way an application of the empties-in/loads-out arrangement described here: https://www.marklin-user...ecific-wagons#post514371 Ak, Do you know if this was ever built? -Brandon |
|
1 user liked this useful post by BrandonVA
|
|
|
|
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.
