 Joined: 26/04/2022(UTC) Posts: 3 Location: Georgia, Augusta
|
Good afternoon- need some advice please - trying to find a track plan. I have a covered walk way and want to run two tracks under it - the space is 83mm - is this possible with C track - picture attached Thank you 
|
 2 users liked this useful post by Edmielck
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 17/12/2018(UTC) Posts: 127 Location: Kapiti Coast
|
Hi! It looks like 83mm is the total gap you have to use? I think anything is possible with C Track even before considering surgery as others have. Track spacing for parallel tracks doesn't normally go that narrow (normally) Marklin would quote the spacing if using turnouts between the centres at 64mm (2461x) and 77mm (2471x) for C Track. With the above i think you are looking at perhaps 45-50mm centre spacing which is not much on the width of the road bed (40mm) With those constraints in mind you may have to get creative to achieve this. Consider the following as two examples of perhaps how you could achieve this spacing, both can be extended with more straight pieces in parallel. The top using 2461x is about 84mm, the bottom 2467x 90mm. If it were me I'd want to hide the 2461x options transitions as much as possible.  The best bet might be to get some track planning software to play with if not already, you'd also want to try this in the real world and consider coach/locomotive overhang in the transitions to ensure collisions are avoided. If you have the space to transition off scene the curved option may be better suited however it is closer to 90mm and may just fit under those platform edges. Cutting track bed on the outer edges may also be another way to gain some precious mm. I'm sure others will have some suggestions (including cutting track) and also perhaps finding another covered walkway, but otherwise hopefully this is a helpful start and good luck!
|
6 users liked this useful post by nhumps
|
|
|
|
Joined: 26/04/2022(UTC) Posts: 3 Location: Georgia, Augusta
|
Thank you - I think that my work - appreciate your guidance
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/02/2021(UTC) Posts: 3,881 Location: Michigan, Troy
|
Welcome Edmielk! Also, when I planned my layout, I made extra space between adjoing curves even on wide radii for the newer longer cars when they pass each other. You can do it with the short C track pieces, etc. to make an R1, 2, or 3, etc. wider than standard geometry. Test run trains before screwing it dow, because just passing a couple of cars on each track doesn't compensate for drawbar swingin, which causes the corners of the car ends to swing out more at speeds. It's even different whith trains passing in the oposing direction.
Sometimes, like in a tunnel, or any curve, depending on the geometry, the only remedy is to splice in a flex K track section.
|
1 user liked this useful post by marklinist5999
|
|
|
|
Joined: 26/04/2022(UTC) Posts: 3 Location: Georgia, Augusta
|
Thank you - I would have forgotten that as I am hoping to run the longer passenger cars
|
1 user liked this useful post by Edmielck
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 23/07/2014(UTC) Posts: 8,464 Location: ENGLAND, Didcot
|
Originally Posted by: nhumps 
If it were me I'd want to hide the 2461x options transitions as much as possible.
I'm sure there will be some lamp standard or something that could be put in there to justify the track having to wiggle around it.  Originally Posted by: nhumps
If you have the space to transition off scene the curved option may be better suited however it is closer to 90mm and may just fit under those platform edges. Cutting track bed on the outer edges may also be another way to gain some precious mm.
The overhang on the platforms could certainly be sanded down, they do have quite large overhang.
|
1 user liked this useful post by kiwiAlan
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/02/2021(UTC) Posts: 3,881 Location: Michigan, Troy
|
Yes, and I even used a white ceramic tile scrap to fill in a platform overhang. NY city uses tiles, and I think the London Underground too. I know I've seen it in German stations and U bahns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 23/07/2014(UTC) Posts: 8,464 Location: ENGLAND, Didcot
|
Originally Posted by: marklinist5999 Yes, and I even used a white ceramic tile scrap to fill in a platform overhang. NY city uses tiles, and I think the London Underground too. I know I've seen it in German stations and U bahns. they are known as 'subway tiles' for a reason ...
|
2 users liked this useful post by kiwiAlan
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 18/02/2008(UTC) Posts: 1,334
|
Hello,
It also seems that the external side slopes of the C tracks can fit under the covered walkway, so you may get some extra millimeters if you place them under.
If you use K track with wide turnouts the spacing between tracks is 57mm. From what I remember the K track width is 30 mm.
57 (spacing) + 30/2 (half track width) + 30/2 (half track width) = 57 + 30 = 87mm that fits into your space without filling.
regards,
Miguel
|
Best regards,
Miguel
Mostly Märklin H0.
|
1 user liked this useful post by mbarreto
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 20/08/2020(UTC) Posts: 64
|
Good afternoon. Here is a picture of a part in my layout that may satisfy your need, better looking than "S" curves. In any case, it is not possible to connect directly a slim turnout (24711-2), very convenient for shortening tracks spacing, to a normal piece of track. You need a complementary 24071 piece, provided with detachable sides, but that implies a wider space. The way to overcome this problem is custom cutting the side of a normal piece. You may find further information in this thread, about cutting sides and shortening commercial tracks, it is easy with a Dremel or similar tool, I succeeded inmediately (navigate fowards and backwards from that page): https://www.marklin-user...--and-innovations/page5.Regards P.S.: The correct number is 8 Instead of 10mm, and the curve mentioned as 2224 is of course 24224. Shortening the straight 40mm piece will shorten as well the gap. 
|
3 users liked this useful post by PacoM
|
|
|
|
Joined: 18/11/2020(UTC) Posts: 89 Location: Georgia, Ball Ground
|
Hi there, I have the same overhang that I am using for my Friedrichstadt station. You should be able to move the tracks closer to the platform and then leave enough space between them. I am using m track, but there is not that much difference bewteen the two.  
|
1 user liked this useful post by Willem99
|
|
|
|
Joined: 20/08/2020(UTC) Posts: 64
|
I would suggest to run a vehicle along the track (both of them) place a person (or another object) at the edge of the platform, already at the real height you would like it to be, and watch what happens. If the vehicle or any if its accesories knocks down the person or is hindered by the platform, that means that the track has to be separated from it. You could then measure the distance between the centers of the tracks (pukos) and choose a suitable way to achieve it, at least in that straight stretch.
My best wishes
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Joined: 05/06/2022(UTC) Posts: 19 Location: Quebec, Montreal
|
One more thing about the spacing as a general consideration. As already mentioned, please test with your larger locomotives and long passenger cars. There are also special locos like the "Big Boy" which I had read up on. This is an oversized loco, and needs more spacing than usual and a wider turning radius than usual. I suggest that, if you haven't already settled and built your track or haven't bought all your curved tracks, always opt for wider, longer turning radii, like R4 and R5. I think Marklin even has an R6... The longer passenger cars, for example, would need a lot more gradual radius when turning. Some steam locomotives have a lot of "gizmos" sticking out from their sides and would need more width room.
Good luck with your setup building!
|
1 user liked this useful post by Pronto5
|
|
|
|
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.
