| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Power Stroke
|
|
|
Mike Kmetz
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 07:36:57
|
I wouldn't do it. Not only would it be difficult to make it look believable, but crossings were high maintenance pieces of track. That would mean traffic on the road would be blocked frequently during track maintenance. The road crossing would also complicate track repair work. Track work might even require rebuilding part of the road crossing.
Then there is the issue of signalling - that would be some kind of nightmare.
I'm not saying there was never a prototype for this kind of crossing, just highly unlikely.
The highway department and the railroad would both try to avoid such a situation.
Try realigning your road a little.
|
Modeling the  of the early 1950s. |
|
Country: Slovakia
| Posts: 690 |
 |
|
|
up1950s
|
 Posted - 11/01/2009 : 08:06:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mike Kmetz
I wouldn't do it. Not only would it be difficult to make it look believable, but crossings were high maintenance pieces of track. That would mean traffic on the road would be blocked frequently during track maintenance. The road crossing would also complicate track repair work. Track work might even require rebuilding part of the road crossing.
Then there is the issue of signalling - that would be some kind of nightmare.
I'm not saying there was never a prototype for this kind of crossing, just highly unlikely.
The highway department and the railroad would both try to avoid such a situation.
Try realigning your road a little.
I agree . It would be harder to clear out the flange-ways of road gravel and sand that traffic would deposit there . Then there is the public that doesn't bother to look both ways . Give them 4 ways and it's demolition derby time . But that gives you businesses for the 4 corners though , Junk Yard  , Coroners Office  , Cemetery  , and Railfan Viewing Stand with odd's maker taking bets  .
|
Richie Dost
Photos http://picasaweb.google.com/up1950s
 |
|
Country:
| Posts: 9941 |
|
|
|
ELNScale
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 08:13:53
|
As Mike says, these are high maintenance areas.
Especially this double main crossing double main in the GV & SS where you have cut 4 standard 90 degree crossings to make the track work. 4 diamonds with short legs.
My experience with this particular area of this layout this is that you have to get the tracks absolutely straight as well as absolutely flat. Otherwise you get engine stalls and uncoupling. Heat expansion exasperates the problem. As does expansions and contractions of the cork roadbed such as when you paint, ballast etc.
To couple all of that with a road across the middle would be asking for too much IMHO.
FWIW, although I didn't do it (and I have since given the layout away), I would advocate use of the Kato unitrack crossings for this one spot on this layout because they can provide a double main double main crossing by design and, with their locking together, I think many of the track issues at this spot can be more easily mitigated. Maybe then you could run a road across it. Here's what I am talking about: http://www.modeltrainstuff.com/v/vspfiles/photos/KAT-20320-2.jpg where you can see that the legs detach. You can connect it to the Atlas code 80 with this Unitrack part http://www.modeltrainstuff.com/v/vspfiles/photos/KAT-20045-2.jpg
|
Steve
Michigan  |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 516 |
|
|
|
Power Stroke
|
|
|
Brakie
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 08:26:10
|
The only place I ever seen a crossing diamond in the street(a access road to several industries.) was on a urban industrial branch.The 2 tracks went to 2 local industries-IIRC a foundry and a plating company.
I don't think I would want a grade crossing on a busy 2 track main line.
|
Atlas,Please do a N Scale SW1500.
Larry
Columbus & Hocking Valley Ry.
Serving The Industries Of The Hocking Valley. |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 6221 |
|
|
|
tomvitacco
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 09:48:55
|
Probably the most practical way to model the crossing is to use styrene strips cut to fit the track. I can't imaging trying to modify an existing product to fit that.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 444 |
|
|
|
C855B
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 10:12:52
|
Agree with the others. Yes, maybe you've found an example of crossings in a street, but it is atypical, and of very low usage - access to one or two industries getting a couple of cars a month. Definitely not mainline material. The highest-maintenance bit of trackage in our town are the diamonds where one moderately-trafficked line (25/day) crosses a lesser one (15/day). I see a crew once a month or more tweaking joints or replacing a frog.
In your defense, however, in towns I've seen which had very high track densities during "the heyday" - Chicago suburbs, for example - at-grade crossings of high-traffic lines in city streets were unavoidable. Crossing protection would typically be manual (a crossing attendant) because automated systems would work poorly in such a setting. Train speeds would be near or at restricted.
Railroads do not like diamonds due to the high maintenance factor. Highly acute diamonds are frequently replaced with a pair of turnouts. Heavily-trafficked lines are grade-separated when the funding is there. Redundant or minimally-used tracks with a diamond in the interlocking are removed.
Bottom line - it's your railroad. But do recognize that if your era is '30s through, say, the '50s, you could explain it with a straight face, just don't be running your 6:04 express limited through it at 60 mph. After that era it would be a major reality-stretch.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 1172 |
|
|
|
Power Stroke
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 12:18:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by tomvitacco
Probably the most practical way to model the crossing is to use styrene strips cut to fit the track. I can't imaging trying to modify an existing product to fit that.
I think this is the type of answer I am looking for. I mean seriously, if you look at this layout there is nothing really prototypical about it but that doesn't mean I don't want it look well done.
The overall feel is suppose to be a sleepy new england town or region, so on the upper section there really won't be anything zipping by at 60mph.
I certainly appreciate those who model certain decades or era but this area being what it is, I can change the era simply by changing my running stock.
Thanks,
Stephen
|
"You can do anything if you have enthusiasm. With it, there is acomplishment. Without it, there are only alibis." - Henry Ford
My Gulf Summit & Susquehanna Valley layout in progress.
http://s28.photobucket.com/albums/c224/snwbluebyyou/Guilford%20Rail%20System%20Layout/?albumview=slideshow
My N Scale locomotives slideshow
http://s28.photobucket.com/albums/c224/snwbluebyyou/My%20N%20Scale%20Locomotives/?albumview=slideshow |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 102 |
|
|
|
Brakie
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 12:50:37
|
C855B wrote:Yes, maybe you've found an example of crossings in a street, but it is atypical, and of very low usage - access to one or two industries getting a couple of cars a month.
---------------------
Actually the 2 industries I was talking about got several cars a week..The foundry averaged 7-10 per week.The plating company about 4-6 tank cars per week.Both was a royal pain to switch.
As far as crossing diamonds it was cheaper to cross at grade then using a incline-remember that incline is a grade which means larger and heavier locomotives or in some cases a pusher or double header on heavier tonnage trains..
Now the other railroad may be responsible for the maintenance which must be maintained according to the crossing agreement between the 2 roads..
|
Atlas,Please do a N Scale SW1500.
Larry
Columbus & Hocking Valley Ry.
Serving The Industries Of The Hocking Valley. |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 6221 |
|
|
|
ELNScale
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 14:47:13
|
The most troublesome point on the GV&SS layout when I did it was that double main crossing double main.
When you have it operating absolutely perfectly day after day, week after week, then I'd consider the grade crossing.
So assuming you are at (or get to) that point, you could also consider wooden products from Blair Line.
Two lane:
or one lane:
I also know BLMA (or someone similar) makes these products too, in fact, they have curved ones too.
|
Steve
Michigan |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 516 |
|
|
|
ELNScale
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 14:51:19
|
Actually, it's Blair Line that makes the curved ones:
Also, they make diagonal ones which might work better for your situation:
|
Steve
Michigan |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 516 |
|
|
|
skipgear
|
|
|
peteski
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 15:50:12
|
I think that he placed the road where it is specifically so it crosses the track at the diamonds. :-)
|
| Peteski |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1648 |
|
|
|
MichaelWinicki
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 16:24:13
|
I say go for it!
It a grade crossing at a diamond is what floats your boat in this hobby– then do it!
No doubt it can be done. And I'm sure that you'll learn a thing or two along the way.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1209 |
|
|
|
PAL
|
Posted - 11/01/2009 : 17:35:39
|
I also built an Atlas N-18 based layout. In my experience, the diamonds are a high-maintenance area. For one thing, they tend to pick those stupid little curly things on the couplers that are supposed to represent air hoses. After you take care of that they do tend to work OK.
Defying convention, I got out a sanding block and made certain that the rails and joints on all 8 pieces of track entering the double-diamond are ABSOLUTELY FLAT.
After you get the diamond functioning perfectly from all 8 directions, then dressing it up to look like a diamond in a roadway ought to work fine. And if it doesn't, then you will know where to start looking.
I say go for it. It's your railroad!
|
Regards,
Paul |
|
Country:
| Posts: 301 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Atlas Model Home
Forums
Events Calendar
Rules
FAQ
Register
