Or Maybe
That’s pretty common in a yard, especially around a passenger station.
Assuming one had enough real estate to build such a layout I believe it would certainly put to test many large scale models. To avoid derailments an awful lot of ‘tweaking’ would be needed I think.
I d have to say, however, that looking at good trackwork, to me, is just as appealing a looking at locos or rolling stock.
The current scribble drawing for my maybe-later-this-year layout includes a single slip on something like a 4ft radius. And a gradient.
Not looking forward to trying to make the thing work, but it does have distinct space saving advantages.
J.
[Edit] PS: I do realise that the photos actually show double slips. Which are worse…
I’ve always liked this one to show the differences between Mainline and yard trackage…
This next one has an odd feature where a slip switch could be. I’m not sure if the main is opened, meaning crossing rails are moved away or it’s a derail.
I’m not sure if this is safety track or dual gauge; std/broad…
Fill my brain with knowledge!
John
That last pic, looks like they use stub switches, which is certainly a possibility, given the time represented. Is that Hotlanta?
Ken Brunt said:
That’s pretty common in a yard, especially around a passenger station.
I suppose it is common in large yards but it is some complex trackage none the less.
I can actually look for hours at Google earth and different rail yards. The facinate me. Kinda like a laser light amazes a cat. Simple minds ya know. (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-smile.gif)
I think so, Hotlanta, muggy too, that’s why I think broad ga.
Ya John that last one is interesting. If it was dual gauge why wouldn’t they share a rail? Seems like a lot of extra rail and more complexity than necessary. Not to mention the extra expense. As for safety rail I can see that but dang that’s a lot of insurance against a slow speed derailment.
Keeps the couplers centered without an idler… another thought might be flange less wheels in channels…
Crazy times of innovation…
John
Keep the couplers centered? In relation to what? Even sharing a rail the coupler is centered relative to the tracks being used. Maybe not centered over the tie but certainly centered between the rails.
Now the idea of wheels riding between the rails ya i could see that being given a go. Like you said in that day and age they would try any hair brain idea. And many times those hair brain ideas were giant successes.
I see what you are talking about. I think it is an optical delusion created by sun, shadows and primitive film. I can’t see them spending the shareholder’s dividends on unnecessary track.
Dennis Tetreault said:
For some reason, this makes me seasick.
Devon,
When there is a common rail, they no longer share the center line and couplers will not align. An idler had both attachment spots to accommodate either style.
The D&RGW used full size couplers on their NG, sometimes they’d change trucks under them. Other NG lines used 3/4 Janey couplers … another spur track of thought… fer ya.
John
Oh, I follow you now. I was not thinking in terms of the different gauges connecting to one another as would happen in a yard. I was thinking in terms of just sharing roadbed and the gauges staying autonomous. But certainly in a large yard you would have switchers and the likes moving equipment of both gauges.
It takes awhile for water to soak through stone.
Common Rail NG c/l is 1.5’ from common, std is 2’4" from common, see? Got wyes and reverse loops? eventually you’ll need the idler…(http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-surprised.gif)
edit; good to see ya see.
Not a morass of metal, but an interesting dual gauge layout.
http://www.railalbum.co.uk/early-railways/brunel-gwr-broad-gauge.htm
Interesting rail profile. Looks like B’mann rail and O gauge tinplate rail. Prototype for everything…
